06/21/21

Outside View: Specter of Tuskegee Returns

By: Rand H. Fishbein, Ph.D. | CCNS

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in 2005 by CCNS member, Rand H. Fishbein, Ph.D.

It has been more than 70 years since the U.S. Public Health Service began its study into the effects of syphilis on 399 human test subjects — all of them black, all of them poor and most of them illiterate. When the infamous Tuskegee experiments finally came to light in 1972, the public, at last, learned the horrible truth.

The men in the Tuskegee study were never told they had syphilis, nor were they told the real purpose behind their participation in the experiment. Worse, they were systematically denied treatments that would have eased their suffering. In the annals of U.S. medical history, the Tuskegee experiments have become synonymous with ethical misconduct at its worst. The federal government assured the public that malpractice of this sort would never happen again. Sadly, however, it has.

Beginning in 1997, a team of researchers from The Johns Hopkins University, generously sponsored by the National Institutes of Health, conducted a clinical trial of the drug nevirapine in Uganda. Known as HIVNET 012, the researchers sought to prove that the anti-retroviral drug was safe and effective in preventing the transmission of the deadly AIDS virus from pregnant mothers to their newborn babies. According to the NIH, approximately 800,000 children worldwide became infected with the human immunodeficiency virus — the organism that causes AIDS — through mother-to-child transmission in 2002.

In 1999, the researchers published their findings: One dose of the drug nevirapine, given to a mother shortly before delivery, and once to her newborn, significantly reduced the incidence of HIV transmission to the child. The World Health Organization affirmed its support of this simple and inexpensive regimen. The medical community quickly adopted nevirapine as the drug of choice for pregnant HIV-infected women in resource-poor countries.

Yet, as with the Tuskegee experiments, something went horribly wrong. In 2002, an audit of the HIVNET 012 trial raised questions about the validity of the study data. According to independent auditors, medical records of study participants could not support the published results, and numerous violations of the study protocol occurred without written explanation.

Continue reading

06/21/21

Godfather of Color Revolutions: Is George Soros the Most Dangerous Man Alive?

By: Sam Jacobs | Ammo.com

godfather of color revolutionOf course, you’ve heard the name “George Soros,” often invoked as a sort of folk demon on the American and international right, it’s likely that you have some vague notion of why you think he’s a bad guy, or maybe you think the whole thing is a bunch of hype.

However, if you’re a freedom lover, there’s nothing “hype” about the influence that George Soros has around the world attacking your freedom. Indeed, you probably vastly underestimate the influence that he has on politics.

From the perspective of someone who values life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, there is no more dangerous man today than George Soros. This is not hyperbole, it is the simple truth. While we don’t plan to paint a picture of a man standing behind the scenes, rubbing his hands together and cackling as he plays puppet master over each and every attack on freedom around the world, Soros acts as a strawman and a caricature of what is actually going on in the world.

George Soros, his money, and his NGOs are bankrolling and influencing public policy and opinion from the local level all the way up to the national level. Entire nations have been made to bow to the Soros agenda, but perhaps more importantly for our purposes, key local officials in government are increasingly wholly owned subsidiaries of the Soros machine.

Ever wonder why urban terrorists can burn down cities with no consequences but the McClaskys are prosecuted for defending their home against the same? The answer is George Soros, his money, and his influence.

Do You Know Who Your District Attorney Is?

American political culture focuses almost entirely on Presidential elections, with Congressional and gubernatorial races getting much less attention from the general public. When it comes to local politics, unless you live in a large city, chances are good that you don’t know much about city politics. For example: Who is your local district attorney or county prosecutor?

Most people have no idea. It’s a low-key office, generally staffed by someone looking to do public service, not advance their career. There is little glamor, low pay, and lots of thankless work to be done at this level, which means that for the most part, this is not where social climbers begin their careers.

That being said, these elected officials have enormous amounts of power because they decide who gets prosecuted, who doesn’t, and what charges are levied against them. If your DA decides that the local band of looters are actually peaceful protesters, they won’t ever see the inside of a courtroom. Similarly, if the local DA isn’t a fan of the right to self-defense, one must consider this when choosing whether or not to pull your firearm if a mob of them shows up on your lawn.

George Soros understands this and has been quietly funding a campaign to place district attorneys amenable to his agenda across the United States.

Continue reading

06/21/21

Putin Is Impressed by the American Gestapo

By: Cliff Kincaid

CNN reports that the Biden administration is preparing to impose additional sanctions on Russia over the poisoning of imprisoned opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Who will impose sanctions on the Biden Administration for letting the killer of Ashli Babbitt go free?

In Russia, poison is the preferred method of assassination. In America, an unarmed Trump supporter by the name of Ashli Babbitt can be shot and killed inside the Capitol, and the assassin’s identity is covered up and he goes free. Which is worse?

Navalny is alive; Babbitt is dead.

The Capitol Police let Ashli Babbitt inside the Capitol on January 6 and then one of its members killed her, as other members of the Capitol Police were in close proximity to her. In most cases, however, assassination is not the preferred option, Instead, the FBI has been deployed to harass and arrest Trump supporters who take seriously the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

A publication called the Progressive Review is ecstatic, carrying an article under the headline, “Biden unveils plan to step up fight against domestic terrorism.” It proclaims that the plan “seeks $100 million to add key personnel in the departments of justice and homeland security,” in order to monitor dissidents, and also “calls for monitoring federal employees who could pose an inside threat.”

If you can’t defeat them through a legitimate election, the subject of the January 6 protests, the federal modus operandi seems to be to harass and crush them by developing a secretive intelligence operation that targets and uses lethal force against them.

Continue reading