Arwen~ Click here to read what happened to Chris’s wife…Facebook
The EU’s unhinged behaviour in the vaccines crisis vindicates the 17.4million.
Martel ” As this article makes clear the European Union and its anti democratic narrative and raison d’etre has been laid bare for all to see over the last few days and one could hope that other nations will find the will and drive to leave this technocratic colonialist project”
We told you. We told you the European Union was not some hippyish, internationalist outfit but rather was a self-interested protectionist bloc. We told you it was a sclerotic bureaucracy whose centralisation of power made it more and more difficult for member states to behave as democratic nations and to respond sensitively and speedily to the needs of their own people. We told you the EU didn’t really give a damn about the Good Friday Agreement and was only using it as a weapon with which to beat Brexit Britain. We told you the EU was exploiting Ireland, cynically marshalling its concerns over a ‘hard border’ to try to further demonise Brexit, and that before long it would forget all about its concern for Ireland and relegate it once again to the status of a neo-colony. We told you all of this. And we were right.
The EU’s increasingly unhinged behaviour over vaccines has shocked even many Remainers. But too much of the discussion is positing the idea that the EU has simply made some mistakes, a few rash, desperate judgements. In truth, the behaviour of the EU over the past week – its failings on the vaccination front, its acts of desperate protectionism, its lashing out at Brexit Britain, and its cavalier, sinister mistreatment of the Republic of Ireland – have not been glitches in the system; this is the system. This is how the centralised, self-interested, neo-colonial power that is the European Union operates. And it is why 17.4million of us voted against it in the referendum in 2016.
Everything that is wrong with the EU has been on full and depressing display in recent weeks. Its bureaucratic, even byzantine nature, where regulation reigns supreme, meant it was slow to agree vaccine contracts and slow to approve vaccines. This has caused a shocking shortfall in vaccines on the continent, meaning member states have either had to roll out vaccines very slowly or halt vaccination altogether. The European Commission forbade member states from procuring their own stocks of vaccines. This wasn’t an ‘error of judgement’. This is how the centralised, sovereignty-diluting EU works. It requires member states to outsource their sovereign powers to Brussels and submit to rules and regulations that may or may not be in their national interest. The vaccines calamity is a consequence of the very idea of the European Union.
Then came the EU oligarchy’s protectionist lashing-out. It has taken increasingly stiff action to try to compensate for its bureaucratic failures on the vaccination question. It has declared a war of words on AstraZeneca and has threatened to take action to force the UK to hand over some of its stocks of AstraZeneca vaccines. It has imposed controls on the export of vaccines. This unilateral act of vaccine imperialism could have a harsh impact not only on the UK but on other nations that had agreed vaccine deals with European producers, including Japan and Australia. Again, this isn’t a glitch; it’s what the EU does. It is 50 years since the legendary Labour Eurosceptic Barbara Castle warned of ‘Euro jingoism’ – here’s that jingoism, once again.
We have also seen how ruthlessly the EU will protect its reputation and its power. One of the most alarming things in recent days has been the misinformation that Euro leaders have spread about the AstraZeneca vaccine. First in the German press and then from the actual president of France, there have been baseless claims that the AstraZeneca vaccine is not effective in over-65s. For French leaders in particular to cast doubt on a vaccine’s efficacy – given the already widespread vaccine scepticism in France – is genuinely disturbing. But again, this is what the EU does. It lashes out against perceived enemies – whether it’s Brexit Britain or the producers of certain vaccines – because its overarching aim is the preservation of its own authority. That comes before everything else, even before the important task of generating public trust in vaccination.
Then, to top it all off, we had the EU overriding the deal it agreed with the UK just a few weeks ago. As part of its vaccine protectionism the EU invoked Article 16 of the Northern Ireland Protocol, meaning that Northern Ireland, in this instance, would be treated differently to the Republic of Ireland and would be subject to the EU’s export controls on vaccines. Why? In case Northern Ireland were to become a backdoor way for Britain – nasty non-EU member that we now are – to receive vaccines produced in Europe. Vaccines we had already ordered, by the way.
This has exposed the cynicism and ruthlessness of the EU oligarchy. For years the EU and its cheerleaders said a ‘hard border’ in Ireland would be an outrage; now the EU has attempted to erect a hard border in Ireland on the vaccine front, so that the Republic would receive European vaccines but the north would not. The EU and its global backers said anyone who disrespected the Good Friday Agreement would essentially be inciting the return of terrorism in Northern Ireland; now the EU tramples over the Good Friday Agreement. The EU constantly claimed that it had Ireland’s best interests at heart; now it unilaterally backtracks on its commitment to Ireland, wilfully ignoring the concerns of the Irish government and Irish people and dividing the island up into those worthy of receiving vaccines (the south) and those not worthy of receiving vaccines (the north).
This has shone an unforgiving light on the contempt of the Brussels oligarchy towards nation states. It has engaged in an act of hostility against the UK with its threats to renege on the Brexit deal with the express intention of preventing Britain from securing more vaccine supplies. And its treatment of Ireland has been despicable. It didn’t even alert the Irish government to the fact that it was invoking Article 16 and dividing Ireland along Covid lines. It clearly views the island of Ireland as its territory, its little colony, a piece of land it can make major decisions about without even consulting its elected representatives. Again, we told you. We told you the EU views Ireland – and many other non-powerful European nations – as colonial outposts, as playthings of the new empire, as territories whose own interests are subordinate to the interests of the capitalist elites in Brussels.
That the Commission has now backtracked on its invoking of Article 16 doesn’t improve things. On the contrary, it means we have seen both that the EU views British and Irish democracy with contempt and that it is a badly governed, increasingly rash institution. So much for technocracy being the cooler, more reasoned way of doing politics. Everyone now knows, surely, how untrue that is.
These are the EU’s true colours. This protectionism, this preservation of power at all costs, this demeaning of nations – this is what the EU does; this is what the EU is. If the Remainer elites have the capacity to be honest with themselves, they will currently be engaging in a real-life version of that Mitchell and Webb meme: ‘Are we the baddies?’ At the very least they will open their minds to the possibility that the 17.4million of us who voted to leave the EU were on to something. Some of them, eventually, I hope, will realise that in fact we were completely right.
Author of the article:Roman BaberPublishing date:Jan 28, 2021 • 1 hour ago • 2 minute read
Let’s talk. Let’s talk about kids’ mental health.
I hear from many parents that school closures and the inability to lead a normal life have caused their children to develop anxiety. Several parents have told me that they don’t recognize or are estranged from their children. Some parents are also concerned about trauma induced by lockdown or PTSD.
The toll on children’s mental health is compounded by the abject failure of distance learning. Children are desperately missing in-person interaction with their friends. They cannot sit in front of a computer screen for six hours a day. Parents do not substitute the role of educators. Teachers who are also parents of current students are struggling to balance their virtual class with the daily needs of their own children.
Frustration is boiling over while our kids are regressing by the day.
In early December 2020, Sick Kids hospital released preliminary findings of its own study, conducted by four leading child mental health research teams. The study examined how the spring lockdown affected the mental health and well-being of children and families. According to preliminary findings, during the spring lockdown 70% of children and youth reported worse mental health. “Greater stress from social isolation was the most significant risk factor for worse mental health.”
In a Jan. 25, 2021, news release, the Pediatricians Alliance of Ontario expressed strong support for reopening of schools as soon as possible. The Pediatricians Alliance wrote that “school closures are having a major and immediate effect on the emotional functioning and physical health of children and families.”
“Pediatricians are seeing a sharp increase in suicidal attempts, depression, anxiety, substance abuse, overdoses, eating disorders, obesity, and late presentation of a host of medical conditions in patients,” the Pediatricians Alliance wrote.
Not a single child died in the province of Ontario from COVID-19. Not one. Yet we are scaring children into believing that coming in close proximity to another child may result in death. Two weeks ago, I wrote to Premier Doug Ford that this generation of children may be afraid of normal life. We should stop this. Government, educators and parents must make every attempt to refrain from scaring children.
Worse, the lockdown is causing children an untold health and mental health catastrophe. The crisis is in long-term care and retirement homes, not schools. We must let kids be kids again. They need to be back in school, learning, socializing, active and unafraid.
Nothing else will do — we need to immediately reopen Ontario’s schools.
— Roman Baber is an Independent Member of Provincial Parliament for York Centre.
BY NEWS STAFF
Posted Jan 27, 2021 7:58 pm EST
The Interim Medical Director of Critical Care at William Osler Health System claims he was terminated from the role due to his “outspoken, public statements about Ontario’s pandemic response.”
Dr. Brooks Fallis said he was deeply disappointed in the decision by the hospital to terminate his contract, considering he says he had already received an offer to extend it.
Dr. Fallis claims he learned of the reversal of this decision in mid-January when he was told by senior officials that he was being let go as Interim Medical Director.
He claims those senior officials told Dr. Fallis because of his actions, “the hospital was under pressure from the provincial government, leading to concern about the possible loss of funding for the hospital.”
William Osler Health System released a statement, saying, “At no time has the provincial government given any direction or advice relating to HR matters at Osler. Any suggestion otherwise is absolutely false.”
They added they were unable to comment on human resources matters and that the role as Medical Director of Critical Care was an interim one and they are currently recruiting a physician for this position permanently.
A group of doctors at William Osler Health System also wrote a letter to senior officials, saying they were shocked and saddened by this news and said they couldn’t support the Senior Leadership’s decision to terminate Dr. Fallis.
“We feel strongly that this decision does not serve the best interests of our patients, staff, or the institution,” read the letter. “We urgently request the opportunity to discuss this with you, by videoconference, given the limitations imposed by the pandemic.”
Dr. Fallis says he will remain a critical care physician at William Osler Health System.
- Why did Brennan leave out communists?
- We have every reason to suspect Schiff’s motives and the law enforcement legitimacy of his proposal. Combined with Brennan’s theories – this sort of thinking comprises the dark fantasies of people seeking to destroy liberty in the name of defending the Constitution.
- The Biden administration, its allies, advocates, and television sock puppets are advancing a Constitution-threatening series of initiatives disguised as “safety and security” measures. This, combined with the Big Social Media-backed suppression of free speech, and not-so-subtle “shaming,” are all aimed at crushing opposition and stopping people from questioning decisions, motives and authority. The pressure is palpable. Our liberties are in grave danger.
|Pictured: Former CIA Director John Brennan. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)|
In a shocking moment of honesty and clarity, Obama CIA Director John Brennan gave the rest of America keen insight into The Washington DC Establishment’s plans and actions for the Trumpsters and other “Deplorables” populating the land.
In an interview, Brennan lies and exaggerates to the public about a supposed domestic terrorist insurgency across the country that is gaining strength and threatening the republic. Brennan asserts that he knows that members of the Biden team:
“… are now moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can about what looks like insurgency movements that we’ve seen overseas, where they germinate in different parts of the country, and they gain strength, and it brings together an unholy alliance, frequently, religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians. And, unfortunately, I think there has been this momentum that has been generated as a result of, unfortunately, the demagogic rhetoric of people that just departed government, but also those that continue in the halls of Congress. And, so, I really do think that law enforcement, homeland security, intelligence, and even defense officials are doing everything possible to root out what seems to be a very, very serious and insidious threat to our democracy and our republic.”
How do libertarians and authoritarians fit in the same rhetorical political basket? Very tough to reconcile those positions, unless you really do not care about the “logic” of your assertion. Why did Brennan leave out communists? Brennan reportedly voted for Communist Party presidential candidate Gus Hall in 1976, while a student at Fordham University. What about Islamic supremacists? Why did Brennan leave them out of the “unholy alliance?”
Answer: Because it STILL is really all about Trump, Trumpism, and Trumpsters, and destroying any remnant of the MAGA movement. Anyone outside the Uniparty is suspect. In case you still do not get it yet – The Establishment holds staged Uniparty events like a solidarity and bipartisanship wreath-laying. Political cowards stage this sort of propagandistic thing at Arlington National Cemetery – using real heroes as props. It is not a pretty sight.
The proposed solution for the threat Brennan and The Establishment see is Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-CA) new domestic terrorism law proposal. Schiff, who cannot be trusted given his documented track record on his “proof” of President Trump’s “collusion” with Russia, and his failed effort to impeach Trump out of the secretive meetings of the House Intelligence Committee, made the following statement in conjunction with his new proposed law:
“When violence fueled by homegrown, hateful ideology poses a more immediate threat to the safety and security of Americans on American soil than an international terrorist organization, it’s time for our laws to catch up.”
We have every reason to suspect Schiff’s motives and the law enforcement legitimacy of his proposal. Combined with Brennan’s theories – this sort of thinking comprises the dark fantasies of people seeking to destroy liberty in the name of defending the Constitution.
Thankfully, not everyone in Washington, DC is buying the nonsense. Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) spoke intelligently in opposition to the Schiff, Brennan, and the “deprogramming Trumpsters” mania. Like Gabbard, there are some who have clearly articulated the truth: These overreactions are an unconstitutional over-reach that threaten our individual liberties
You will recall that Brennan once tweeted at President Trump:
“When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America… America will triumph over you.”
Now, your government has doubled-down on Brennan’s dark fantasies of insurgent guerrilla forces germinating in different regions of the country, seeking to overthrow the government. The Department of Homeland Security just issued a bulletin alerting the public about a growing risk of attacks by “ideologically-motivated violent extremists” agitated about President Biden’s inauguration and “perceived grievances fueled by false narratives.” Troops, apparently without credible threat, will reportedly be remaining in Washington DC until the end of March.
Purportedly, the bulletin aims to warn the public about a “heightened threat environment” across the United States “that is likely to persist over the coming weeks.” [Read: years]. Who are these people behind the “threat?” Homeland Security has an obligation to name names and identify groups. Give us a “Most Wanted” list of 10 people. We just had 25,000 National Guard troops protecting a few politicians in an empty city during the Biden inauguration. What are we reacting to now?
Pay close attention here:
“DHSFo does not have any information to indicate a specific, credible plot; however, violent riots have continued in recent days and we remain concerned that individuals frustrated with the exercise of governmental authority and the presidential transition, as well as other perceived grievances and ideological causes fueled by false narratives, could continue to mobilize a broad range of ideologically-motivated actors to incite or commit violence.” [Emphasis added.]
The Biden administration, its allies, advocates, and television sock puppets are advancing a Constitution-threatening series of initiatives disguised as “safety and security” measures. This, combined with the Big Social Media-backed suppression of free speech, and not-so-subtle “shaming,” are all aimed at crushing opposition and stopping people from questioning decisions, motives and authority. The pressure is palpable. Our liberties are in grave danger.
Chris Farrell is a former counterintelligence case officer. For the past 20 years, he has served as the Director of Investigations & Research for Judicial Watch. The views expressed are the author’s alone, and not necessarily those of Judicial Watch.
“A statement from the head of Ontario’s Science Advisory Table reveals that a conflict-of-interest on the part of one of the table’s most vocal members was only properly declared after the conflict was first reported by the Toronto Sun. David Fisman, an epidemiologist and professor at University of Toronto, was retained by the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario (ETFO) to offer an argument against the Ontario government’s school reopening plans at an Ontario Labour Relations Board hearing. This work was taken on at the same time Fisman was serving on the science table, which advises the government on matters including school reopenings.
‘I understand that Prof. Fisman has updated his declaration of interest statement on the normal six-month cycle,’ said Prof. Adalsteinn Brown, the head of the table, in an email to the Sun Tuesday evening. ‘This should be posted on our website shortly. In the meantime, Prof. Fisman’s work for the ETFO has been publicly visible for months.’
Fisman’s updated disclosure — noting the addition of his paid work for both the ETFO and the Ontario Nurses Association — did appear online Tuesday evening after the Sun first contacted Fisman and Brown for comment and after the story went live. ‘The science table has asked all of its volunteer members to disclose their conflicts on a form that we aim to update every six months,’ wrote Brown, who is also colleagues with Fisman at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health. The previous disclosure statement was made, according to an email from Fisman to the Sun, on July 17. The day the disclosure notice went public falls just a week beyond six months after that.
But according to medical experts interviewed by the Sun, the six-month disclosure structure is not necessarily the typical standard followed by the medical profession.
‘I was surprised that a conflict of interest is only being declared every six months,’ says Martha Fulford, a professor at McMaster and infectious diseases physician at Hamilton Health Sciences. ‘Every committee I’ve been on like this, including a provincial advisory committee I was on, begins every meeting asking if there are any conflicts to declare.’
Dr. Neil Rau, an infectious diseases specialist and medical microbiologist based out of Oakville, sees it similarly. ‘When I was on the committee to evaluate drugs for the province, we had to make a declaration at every single monthly meeting,’ he told the Sun. The request to declare conflicts was the opening line spoken at most meetings, according to Rau.
‘A conflict of interest can exist even if the physician is confident that their professional judgment is not actually being influenced by the conflicting interest or relationship,’ explains guidelines produced by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario. The guide was focused on relationships with industry and did not cover specific insights into paid relationships with unions and advocacy groups.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s office said in a statement released Tuesday evening that the news of Fisman’s conflict was ‘deeply concerning. Our expectation is that anyone involved in providing advice to the government in this capacity would do so absent of agenda or bias, and therefore this paid relationship raises legitimate concerns,’ the statement continued.
ETFO president Sam Hammond released a statement acknowledging the paid relationship and said that the union stands with Fisman because he is ‘holding this government to account.’ Fisman’s document that he was retained to draft specifically clarifies that his comments critiquing the government’s reopening plan were meant to be ‘fair, objective and non-partisan.’
Fisman defiantly took to social media Wednesday morning with a series of posts that began labelling the Sun’s previous report as a ‘hit piece,’ criticized Ford for what he described as ‘his many failures,’ and concluded with: ‘I’m not going anywhere’.”
The Clintons are producing a TV drama celebrating the Kurds. The same Kurds they attacked as ‘terrorists’.
Martel ” an example of the shameless hypocrisy of the entitled and progressive classes”
Having royally botched its vaccine programme, the EU is now threatening Brexit Britain’s supplies.
The vaccine race has turned ugly. Really ugly. German government sources have used the German press to brief fake news about the efficacy of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, and the EU has threatened to block exports of the Pfizer vaccine to Britain.
Until these bombshells were dropped, you could have been forgiven for wondering if the EU was even taking part in the vaccine race, as Brexit Britain has vastly outpaced the rollout on the continent.
In fact, defenders of the EU (apparently such people still exist) have been assuring us that there was nothing wrong with the slower pace. ‘What’s so great about going first?’, sneered one writer in the Guardian on the day the first Brits received their vaccines. Fewer deaths, perhaps? An end to lockdown? A spokesman for Belgium’s Covid-19 crisis centre suggested that his country (which has suffered the highest Covid deaths per capita in the entire world) could afford a slower rollout because the restrictions were working just fine. One MEP, apparently convinced that the rollout needed more hurdles, has petitioned the European Commission to make sure that all vehicles and boxes delivering the vaccines are emblazoned with the EU flag.
You can see why supporters of the EU would want to deflect the issue. The EU took charge of two key aspects of the vaccine process – the procurement and the approval – and both of these have created pointless (and deadly) delays.
Britain’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) was the first agency in the world to approve the Pfizer vaccine, on 2 December – 20 days before the European Medicines Agency (EMA), giving the UK a huge headstart. Then, on 30 December, the MHRA approved the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine – it has still not been approved by the EU.
Procurement has consistently run into trouble, too. At the end of last year Der Spiegel warned that supplies could fall short. The EU had secured just 300million doses of the Pfizer vaccine, the only one at the time to have been approved in the world. And despite the fact that EU member states had agreed to pool the procurement process, earlier this month it was revealed that Germany had bought an extra 30million doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, behind everyone’s backs. Then, last week, AstraZeneca announced that it would not be able to fulfil its order to the EU. The EU was due to receive 100million doses in the first quarter of 2021, but one senior EU official fears it could be just 31million doses.
The EU has blamed AstraZeneca for the supply issues, but in truth this is a catastrophe made in Brussels. As ITV’s Robert Peston has pointed out, the UK secured a deal with AstraZeneca in May, three months before the EU did, giving AstraZeneca an additional three months to sort out problems with the UK supply chain (of which there were many). In June, AstraZeneca reached preliminary agreements with the Inclusive Vaccine Alliance – made up of Germany, the Netherlands, France and Italy. But then, the European Commission took over the negotiations on behalf of the whole of the EU, adding an extra two months of talks which resulted in ‘no material changes’. The EU is now paying for that wasted time.
It is in this context of failure that the EU and Germany are now throwing their toys out of the pram. German government sources briefed the financial newspaper, Handelsblatt, on Monday night, that the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine was only eight per cent effective on older people. This would be devastating for Germany’s planned rollout – but even more so for Britain’s, which has already vaccinated millions of vulnerable people using the home-grown jab.
AstraZeneca denied this immediately. And – after letting the news spread overnight – the German health authorities made clear that the sources had muddled the figures: ‘Around eight per cent of participants in the AstraZeneca efficacy trials were aged between 56 and 69 years old… This does not result in an efficacy of only eight per cent among seniors.’
Today, a day after the Handelsblatt bombshell, the EU has told Pfizer that it must secure EU permission before exporting doses from its Belgian factory to Britain. Germany has even suggested that vaccine exports could be blocked to secure the EU’s supply. The UK government says it is confident that it will meet its target of vaccinating the vulnerable by mid-February. And the UK’s own supplies of the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab are unaffected. Nevertheless, the EU’s intervention has thrown the later stages of the rollout into doubt.
Having royally screwed up its own vaccination programme, the EU now wants to take it out on Brexit Britain.