Professor reveals how Zika may have been genetically modified
JANUARY 30, 2016
International law professor Francis A. Boyle breaks down the federal government’s involvement in biowarfare and terrorism.
JANUARY 30, 2016
The sex attacks that took place in Cologne on New Year’s Eve were simply a “matter of public order” and had nothing to do with the refugee crisis, Jean-Claude Juncker’s inner circle believe.
The European Commission will be the “voice of reason” and tell the public that there is no link between the migration crisis affecting the continent and attacks on women in Germany, internal minutes disclose, amid growing fears of a “xenophobic” backlash.
The minutes of the European Commission’s weekly cabinet meeting from January 13 hint at officials’ fears that the events in Cologne could turn public opinion sharply against the million migrants who have entered Europe.
They spell out Mr Juncker’s frustration at the inaction of national governments under pressure from voters, and hint at panic that the inability to halt a growing volume of economic migrants could undermine the “credibility” of the European project. Dimitris Avramopoulos, the migration commissioner, said the EU is facing its “moment of truth”.
In events that shocked Germany, a crowd of around a thousand people surrounded and attacked women celebrating the New Year. More than 500 people filed criminal complaints, 40 per cent of which were for sexual assault. At least two cases of rape were reported.
Photo: Warren Allott/The Telegraph
The interior ministry, days after the attacks, said that “people with a migration background were almost exclusively responsible for the criminal acts”.
One perpetrator is alleged to have told police he was Syrian, adding: “You have to treat me kindly. Mrs Merkel invited me.”
German politicians and newspapers were accused of suppressing the events, while in Leipzig protesters from the Pegida movement marched with banners reading ‘Rapefugees not welcome’. Ukip have said the events show why Britain should vote to leave the EU.
The minutes document a presentation from Frans Timmermans, the first vice president of the European Commission and Mr Juncker’s trusted deputy.
Photo: Roland Weihrauch/EPA
“As far as the crimes in Cologne were concerned, he said that these were a matter of public order and were not related to the refugee crisis,” the minutes say.
He went on to set out how a growing proportion of the arrivals are economic migrants, rather than refugees.
“He also observed that the flow of migrants at EU borders was not slowing down and estimates suggested that only about 40 per cent of them, mostly Syrians, were fleeing war and therefore in need of international protection; meanwhile more and more third country nationals were slipping in who were driven by mainly economic reasons and did not qualify for such protection.”
During the discussion that followed, Mr Juncker’s team stressed “the importance of the Commission’s continuing to play its coordinating role and sounding the voice of reason to defuse tensions and counter populist rhetoric.”
They called for “the unconditional rejection of false associations between certain criminal acts, such as the attacks on women in Cologne on New Year’s Eve, and the mass influx of refugees.”
At the same time, they agreed that they must “respond to the concerns of European citizens, particularly by stressing that Europe was also a union of security and values.”
Mr Juncker, the Commission president, has been left exasperated by the refusal of eastern European countries to take part in his refugee relocation scheme, and angered at the criticism levelled at his handling of the crisis.
Following the Cologne attacks, Robert Fico, the Slovakian prime minister, said he would accept no refugees as they are “impossible to integrate” and have a “different relationship to women”.
The minutes go on: “The President wound up the debate, saying that he did not wish to downplay the current difficulties. The inaction by the Member States was a problem for the management of the refugee crisis in itself, but it also raised the question of the credibility of the Commission, which was struggling to provide political inspiration for Europe.
“In any event, he rejected as unworthy the accusations levelled at the Commission by the leaders of some Member States who impugned the reputation of an institution that was the guarantor of European integration and, in particular, the Schengen area.”
As the polls tighten between Clinton and her main rival for the Democratic nomination, Bernie Sanders, Wasserman Schultz is facing a first-ever primary challenge for her congressional seat.
Tim Canova is appealing to the progressive wing of the party and district by accusing her of bias against Sanders.
“She has tipped the scales in favor of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and made sure virtually no one would see the primary debates. She has stood in the way of the progressive movement, and she has consistently put her own political interests ahead of the Democratic Party,” he said.
Canova decided to run against Wasserman Shultz because her stance on issues like Wall Street reform, the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, and big corporations did not align with the progressive beliefs of some party members.
She also supported the anti-net-neutrality bill SOPA and voted to remove part of the Dodd-Frank law that stopped big banks from using deposits for speculative financial derivatives.
Wasserman Schultz denies the accusations of bias toward Clinton, saying she would not be DNC chair if she wanted to favor a candidate.
Perhaps the biggest suggestion of bias lies in the charges that the DNC purposely limited Democratic debates and held them on weekends and nights with low audience ratings, such as the weekend before Christmas and at the same time as an NFL football game.
Some feel this was an effort to limit the time voters would be exposed to both Sanders and O’Malley’s strengths, and Clinton’s shortcomings.
Clinton’s campaign had lobbied against an earlier proposal for eight debates.
The Democratic candidates had six debates, with only four held before the first of the caucuses in Iowa. The Republicans will have 12, and will have had seven before Iowa.
In 2008, there were 26 Democratic debates.
Unofficial debates have been banned by the DNC, with Wasserman Schultz threatening to ban any candidate that took part in an unsanctioned debate from the remaining debates.
This week, MSNBC and the Manchester Union Leader paper in New Hampshire organized an unscheduled debate for February 4.
Sanders and Clinton made statements that they would participate with the blessing of the DNC.
Wasserman Schultz released a statement Tuesday: “Our next DNC-sanctioned debate featuring our major candidates will be held in Milwaukee, Wisconsin hosted by PBS on February 11th, with another already scheduled for March 9th with Univision and the Washington Post. We have no plans to sanction any further debates before the upcoming First in the Nation caucuses and primary, but will reconvene with our campaigns after those two contests to review our schedule.”
Other accusations against the DNC chair include the controversial cutting off the Sanders campaign’s access to voter data following a data breach, due to an external firewall issue.
Both Sanders and his supporters blamed Wasserman Schultz for blocking them and making a statement without warning the campaign.
The DNC is also accused of packing the audience with Clinton supporters for the second debate in Iowa. Tom Fiegan told the Washington Times: “People are frustrated at how small the venue was and the lack of transparency from the DNC of how it was handled — the allocation of tickets was a total secret.”
Other party members have spoken out against the debate schedules.
DNC finance chair Henry Munoz III reportedly helped organize a fundraiser for Clinton, in violation of rules that state all DNC members must be impartial. Wasserman Schultz did not reprimand Munoz.
A petition to remove the DNC chair started by Roots Action called into question the choice of questions during the debates for failing to address important issues: “For example, climate change and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.”
“In Congress, [Wasserman Schultz] has served as a pro-militarist and corporatist tool of the high bidders,” Roots Action said. “Among recent disgraceful acts was her vote to enable racial discrimination in car buying. Enough is enough.”
Wasserman Schultz is seen by some as an establishment politician whose beliefs do not align with more progressive elements of the Democratic party, particularly the new, younger Sanders supporters.
In 2016 alone, she has received contributions from Goldman Sachs, Comcast, Google, and Lockheed Martin.
Wasserman Schultz is against legalizing medical marijuana for both medical and recreational purposes, and has received fundraising from alcohol lobbyists ($18,500) and private prisons.
She made comments about young women’s complacency on abortion rights when asked about young women and excitement surrounding Clinton’s campaign.
Some felt this was a dig at female voters supporting Sanders over Clinton.
A USA Today/Rock the Vote poll showed women under 35 support Sanders over Clinton by 20 points.
Writing on his blog Saturday, former Green Party and independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader warned Sanders of other “corporate” Democrats trying to derail the Vermont senator’s campaign.
In a piece titled “Hillary’s Corporate Democrats Taking Down Bernie Sanders“, Nader wrote: “Before announcing for President in the Democratic Primaries, Bernie Sanders told the people he would not run as an Independent and be like Nader—invoking the politically-bigoted words ‘being a spoiler’. Sorry Bernie, because anybody who challenges the positions of the corporatist, militaristic, Wall Street-funded Democrats, led by Hillary Clinton, in the House and Senate—is by their twisted definition, a ‘spoiler’.”
He highlighted comments by centrist Democratic California Congressman Adam Schiff about Sanders’s electability, who suggested he could have “very significant downstream consequences in House and Senate races”.
Nader also referenced the “poisoned darts” thrown by former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi this week at Sanders, distancing her wing of the party from his call to raise taxes to pay for Medicare-for-all, single-payer health care.
“He’s talking about a single-payer, and that’s not going to happen,” she said. “I mean, does anybody in this room think that we’re going to be discussing a single-payer?”
Nader concluded in his piece: “Pelosi doesn’t expect the Democrats to make gains in the House of Representatives in 2016. But she has managed to hold on to her post long enough to help elect Hillary Clinton – no matter what Clinton’s record as a committed corporatist toady and a disastrous militarist (e.g., Iraq and the War on Libya) has been over the years.”
Berlin has been adding specific “Readmission Agreements” to development aid accords with African countries in order to deport asylum seekers to these countries – regardless of their actual country of origin, “Pro Azyl” (For Asylum), a German refugee rights organization, alleges.
“These agreements commit the African countries to readmitting their own citizens who have had asylum turned down by Germany, but it also allows them to readmit rejected asylum seekers from other countries, who travelled through these transit states,” Max Pichl, a member of Pro Azyl, told The Local.
According to the relief organization’s data, if German authorities are unable to deport a rejected asylum seeker because they lack sufficient information and documents to determine or confirm their country of origin, they address a third nation’s embassy and pay for documentation to be issued “confirming” such a person’s nationality as their citizen so that the migrant can eventually be deported to that country.
“It is difficult to say how many people it affects. The cases only come to light on an individual basis when someone who has been sent back to Africa reports it,” Pichl told The Local, adding that there is “a very long list of countries with whom Germany has such agreements,” according to which “countries are obliged to take back migrants, but nothing more is specified.”
At the same time, the data provided by the German Federal Office for Migration (BAMF), which is specifically responsible for deporting rejected asylum seekers, suggests that Germany has 13 such agreements, with only two countries from the list – Morocco and Algeria – actually being African.
Apart from Morocco and Algeria, the BAMF’s list includes Albania, Syria, Kosovo, Serbia, and Macedonia.
BAMF has not revealed how many people have been deported under these agreements, stating only that “these arrangements make it possible for foreigners to return or be returned via the contracting Member State without the need of a transit visa.”
Similar issues were reported by German weekly Der Freitag on Tuesday, claiming that the rejected refugees whose country of origin cannot be determined are sent to meetings with the employees of some of the countries they could be potentially legally be sent back to.
In 2014, German federal authorities ordered 720 “stateless” asylum seekers to attend 50 such meetings with representatives from 18 different African countries, the weekly claims, adding that “an indefinite number of such meetings organized by the regional authorities” had taken place during the same period.
Germany allegedly pays the embassies for these “refugee hearings.” According to Der Freitag, Berlin also gives them additional money if they subsequently issue relevant documentation for the rejected asylum seekers – so-called emergency travel certificates – which allow German authorities to deport a person “within days.”
The meetings with the embassy employees take “several minutes,” and are therefore insufficient to determine a person’s actual country of origin, Der Freitag claims, implying that they are only a formality used by Germany to deport unwanted asylum seekers.
At the same time, some countries are said to be rewarded more generously for their efforts than the others. Benin, which issues identification documents for “stateless” refugees in three quarters of the cases, receives €300 for every such “identification,” while Nigeria, which “accepts” only one in two, gets €250, according to Der Freitag.
The weekly wonders whether giving asylum seekers identification documents without their consent and against their will is a regular practice, citing an example of a man who claimed he was from Sierra Leone, but was eventually given Nigerian identification documents.
In the meantime, payments to the Nigerian embassy have been suspended “to extract a bit of the smell of corruption,” the paper adds, citing Ulla Jelpke, a member of the German Die Linke (the Left Party).
In view of the unending refugee inflow, German public opinion, as well as the sentiments of the country’s political establishment, has gradually turned against the German government’s open arms refugee policy.
According to one recent poll, 40% of Germans want German Chancellor Angela Merkel to resign over her refugee policy, while small arms sales in the country skyrocketed after a wave of New Year’s Eve assaults in the German city of Cologne.
At the same time, the German Chancellor’s Bavarian allies are threatening her with a lawsuit over her migration policy, and a member of the European Parliament from Alternative for Germany (AfD), a German anti-immigration Eurosceptic party, has even suggested that she should flee to South America in exile to escape retribution for allowing over a million immigrants to enter Germany.
Facing intense public pressure, the German government announced another package of tougher asylum regulations on Friday that included expedited deportations and a delay in family reunifications.
German authorities have previously had to defend their questionable policy of requesting foreign embassies to “conduct nationality checks.” According to an official reply to a parliamentary question from Die Linke (the Left party) in 2011, the government regarded such procedures as “often the only possibility to establish the nationality of the person to be deported.”
BY TYLER DURDEN
The World Health Organization announced it will convene an Emergency Committee under International Health Regulations on Monday, February 1, concerning the Zika virus ‘explosive’ spread throughout the Americas. The virus reportedly has the potential to reach pandemic proportions — possibly around the globe. But understandingwhy this outbreak happened is vital to curbing it. As the WHO statement said:
“A causal relationship between Zika virus infection and birth malformations and neurological syndromes … is strongly suspected. [These links] have rapidly changed the risk profile of Zika, from a mild threat to one of alarming proportions.
“WHO is deeply concerned about this rapidly evolving situation for 4 main reasons: the possible association of infection with birth malformations and neurological syndromes; the potential for further international spread given the wide geographical distribution of the mosquito vector; the lack of population immunity in newly affected areas; and the absence of vaccines, specific treatments, and rapid diagnostic tests […]
“The level of concern is high, as is the level of uncertainty.”
Zika seemingly exploded out of nowhere. Though it was first discovered in 1947, cases only sporadically occurred throughout Africa and southern Asia. In 2007, the first case was reported in the Pacific. In 2013, a smattering of small outbreaks and individual cases were officially documented in Africa and the western Pacific. They also began showing up in the Americas. In May 2015, Brazil reported its first case of Zika virus — and the situation changed dramatically.
When examining a rapidly expanding potential pandemic, it’s necessary to leave no stone unturned so possible solutions, as well as future prevention, will be as effective as possible. In that vein, there was another significant development in 2015.
Oxitec first unveiled its large-scale, genetically-modified mosquito farm in Brazil in July 2012, with the goal of reducing “the incidence of dengue fever,” as The Disease Daily reported. Dengue fever is spread by the same Aedes mosquitoes which spread the Zika virus — and though they “cannot fly more than 400 meters,” WHO stated, “it may inadvertently be transported by humans from one place to another.” By July 2015, shortly after the GM mosquitoes were first released into the wild in Juazeiro, Brazil, Oxitec proudly announced they had “successfully controlled the Aedes aegypti mosquito that spreads dengue fever, chikungunya and zika virus, by reducing the target population by more than 90%.”
Though that might sound like an astounding success — and, arguably, it was — there is an alarming possibility to consider.
Nature, as one Redditor keenly pointed out, finds a way — and the effort to control dengue, zika, and other viruses, appears to have backfired dramatically.
The particular strain of Oxitec GM mosquitoes, OX513A, are genetically altered so the vast majority of their offspring will die before they mature — though Dr. Ricarda Steinbrecher published concerns in a report in September 2010 that a known survival rate of 3-4 percent warranted further study before the release of the GM insects. Her concerns, which were echoed by several other scientists both at the time and since, appear to have been ignored — though they should not have been.
Those genetically-modified mosquitoes work to control wild, potentially disease-carrying populations in a very specific manner. Only the male modified Aedes mosquitoes are supposed to be released into the wild — as they will mate with their unaltered female counterparts. Once offspring are produced, the modified, scientific facet is supposed to ‘kick in’ and kill that larvae before it reaches breeding age — if tetracycline is not present during its development. But there is a problem.
According to an unclassified document from the Trade and Agriculture Directorate Committee for Agriculture dated February 2015, Brazil is the third largest in “global antimicrobial consumption in food animal production” — meaning, Brazil is third in the world for its use of tetracycline in its food animals. As a study by the American Society of Agronomy, et. al., explained, “It is estimated that approximately 75% of antibiotics are not absorbed by animals and are excreted in waste.” One of the antibiotics (or antimicrobials) specifically named in that report for its environmental persistence is tetracycline.
In fact, as a confidential internal Oxitec document divulged in 2012, that survival rate could be as high as 15% — even with low levels of tetracycline present. “Even small amounts of tetracycline can repress” the engineered lethality. Indeed, that 15% survival rate was described by Oxitec:
“After a lot of testing and comparing experimental design, it was found that [researchers] had used a cat food to feed the [OX513A] larvae and this cat food contained chicken. It is known that tetracycline is routinely used to prevent infections in chickens, especially in the cheap, mass produced, chicken used for animal food. The chicken is heat-treated before being used, but this does not remove all the tetracycline. This meant that a small amount of tetracycline was being added from the food to the larvae and repressing the [designed] lethal system.”
Even absent this tetracycline, as Steinbrecher explained, a “sub-population” of genetically-modified Aedes mosquitoes could theoretically develop and thrive, in theory, “capable of surviving and flourishing despite any further” releases of ‘pure’ GM mosquitoes which still have that gene intact. She added, “the effectiveness of the system also depends on the [genetically-designed] late onset of the lethality. If the time of onset is altered due to environmental conditions … then a 3-4% [survival rate] represents a much bigger problem…”
As the WHO stated in its press release, “conditions associated with this year’s El Nino weather pattern are expected to increase mosquito populations greatly in many areas.”
Incidentally, President Obama called for a massive research effort to develop a vaccine for the Zika virus, as one does not currently exist. Brazil has now called in 200,000 soldiers to somehow help combat the virus’ spread. Aedes mosquitoes have reportedly been spotted in the U.K. But perhaps the most ironic — or not — proposition was proffered on January 19, by the MIT Technology Review:
Every day there are more stories like this –mindless savagery is rampant now in Europe. The denial by media and the political elites continues. And they it will continue until the unthinkable happens, when reality drops a MOAB on their fantasy.
The authorities are blocking these news reports in Sweden and Germany with the help of Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg.
Tensions rise in Sweden as teen migrants go on the rampage with makeshift weapons at child refugee centre – just days after female worker was brutally murdered
Group of men attacked staff with makeshift weapons at a refugee centre
Staff forced to barricade themselves inside a room at the children’s shelter
Incident follows the death of Swedish aid worker, Alexandra Mezher, 22
By Jenny Stanton For Mailonline, 29 January 2016
In the latest incident, the Swedish newspaper Expressen, quoting Ingela Crona from the local police in Kalmar, reported that a violent riot broke out at the centre.
‘They broke loose, and a total of 19 people banded together and did this,’ she told the newspaper, which reported that the men were carrying makeshift weapons.
The violence started after staff refused a request for a resident at the refugee centre to buy sweets, John Nilsson, from the local police force, told Barometern newspaper.
‘[They] became furious with the staff member,’ he added. ‘He collected together around 15 friends and the staff were forced to shut themselves in while they broke windows and did what they liked.’
According to RT, police arrested two of the young men. The 16-year-old suspected of starting the riot is in custody and another person has been released.
Sweden took in around 35,400 unaccompanied minors in 2015, nine times more than in 2014.
Tensions are rising in the country and on Thursday, Swedish Interior Minister Anders Ygeman said Sweden could send back 60,000-80,000 asylum seekers in the coming years.