"Looking back, I’ve been researching this UFO crew since at least 2007, very directly. UFO cultist Steven Greer met his wife Emily in Israel studying with meditation guru Maharishi. This is all tied to David Lynch and the related transcendental meditation (TM) groups. 🧵
This relevant now because his UFO cultist cohort Dennis Kucinich is now managing RFK Jr’s presidential campaign. Kucinich ran for POTUS in 2007 on a UFO platform based out of none other than… Sheldon Adelson’s Las Vegas, NV.
John Hagelin runs the Maharishi meditation organization out of LA. Hagelin "is a theoretical physicist who ran for the U.S. presidency three times on the Maharishi-backed Natural Law Party" (1992, 1996, 2000).”
In 2000 race he was backed by the Perot faction and disrupted Pat Buchanon. In 2004 he handed the ropes over and endorsed Kucinich.
This same culty, meditation, UFO crew has been trying to run for POTUS for nearly 20 years. It continues through today with RFK Jr.
Is it a coincidence that people threatening President Biden via his son Hunter, suggesting he is “stealing the election” per a hooker they know? I don’t think it is at all. This group is assaulting the US democracy and the integrity of the office of the President.
I think they’ve been storming the US Presidential position since the fall of the Soviet Union, using propaganda, cults, misinformation, and sadly via trying to compromise the sons of US presidents from JFK to Hunter Biden.
Maharishi seems like Indian intelligence. A lot of these 1970s new age space gurus interacted with these “space love sex LSD” guru types for decades. Is it a coincidence that Howard Bloom has worked with Modhi on space initiatives for DECADES?
Is it a coincidence that I know Howard Bloom and that he and Moonie NEWT GINGRICH were advocating for a moon colony during the Trump Admin? Can I sound any… crazier? 🤣 Reality is stranger than any fiction.
Newt Gingrich trying to sell Trump on a cheap moon plan A general, Gingrich and Michael Jackson's publicist are proposing a $2 billion contest to return Americans to the moon.
Why is Jeff Bezos pushing this UFO propaganda with Harvard and the Luis Elizondo guy? See the L5 Society hippy space cult shit. Both Bezos and Newt were part of that since teenagers (I think, find the reference.) L5 Society is connected to Timothy Leary and the usual suspects.
This all looks to me like a BRICS assault on the US Presidency and space industry since literally JFK challenged us to go to the moon. End thread."
Kukral even knew these 🌙 cults would try this. What is it with all of these cults? I'll just take a wild guess the Moonies came from yet another Freemasons group and no surprise that it considers Democracy Satanic. Projection as big as the Empire State building. I can't believe it hasn't occurred to people these objects probably came from some mad scientist and his billionaire backers. That's where we are, now.
1 note
·
View note
Uncle Sam paid to develop a cancer drug and now one guy will get to charge whatever he wants for it
Today (Oct 19), I'm in Charleston, WV to give the 41st annual McCreight Lecture in the Humanities. Tomorrow (Oct 20), I'm at Charleston's Taylor Books from 12h-14h.
The argument for pharma patents: making new medicines is expensive, and medicines are how we save ourselves from cancer and other diseases. Therefore, we will award government-backed monopolies – patents – to pharma companies so they will have an incentive to invest their shareholders' capital in research.
There's plenty wrong with this argument. For one thing, pharma companies use their monopoly winnings to sell drugs, not invent drugs. For every dollar pharma spends on research, it spends three dollars on marketing:
https://www.bu.edu/sph/files/2015/05/Pharmaceutical-Marketing-and-Research-Spending-APHA-21-Oct-01.pdf
And that "R&D" isn't what you're thinking of, either. Most R&D spending goes to "evergreening" – coming up with minor variations on existing drugs in a bid to extend those patents for years or decades:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3680578/
Evergreening got a lot of attention recently when John Green rained down righteous fire upon Johnson & Johnson for their sneaky tricks to prevent poor people from accessing affordable TB meds, prompting this excellent explainer from the Arm and A Leg Podcast:
https://armandalegshow.com/episode/john-green-part-1/
Another thing those monopoly profits are useful for: "pay for delay," where pharma companies bribe generic manufacturers not to make cheap versions of drugs whose patents have expired. Sure, it's illegal, but that doesn't stop 'em:
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/competition-enforcement/pay-delay
But it's their money, right? If they want to spend it on bribes or evergreening or marketing, at least some of that money is going into drugs that'll keep you and the people you love from enduring unimaginable pain or dying slowly and hard. Surely that warrants a patent.
Let's say it does. But what about when a pharma company gets a patent on a life-saving drug that the public paid to develop, test and refine? Publicly funded work is presumptively in the public domain, from NASA R&D to the photos that park rangers shoot of our national parks. The public pays to produce this work, so it should belong to the public, right?
That was the deal – until Congress passed the Bayh-Dole Act in 1980. Under Bayh-Dole, government-funded inventions are given away – to for-profit corporations, who get to charge us whatever they want to access the things we paid to make. The basis for this is a racist hoax called "The Tragedy Of the Commons," written by the eugenicist white supremacist Garrett Hardin and published by Science in 1968:
https://memex.craphound.com/2019/10/01/the-tragedy-of-the-commons-how-ecofascism-was-smuggled-into-mainstream-thought/
Hardin invented an imaginary history in which "commons" – things owned and shared by a community – are inevitably overrun by selfish assholes, a fact that prompts nice people to also overrun these commons, so as to get some value out of them before they are gobbled up by people who read Garrett Hardin essays.
Hardin asserted this as a historical fact, but he cited no instances in which it happened. But when the Nobel-winning Elinor Ostrom actually went and looked at how commons are managed, she found that they are robust and stable over long time periods, and are a supremely efficient way of managing resources:
https://pluralistic.net/2023/05/04/analytical-democratic-theory/#epistocratic-delusions
The reason Hardin invented an imaginary history of tragic commons was to justify enclosure: moving things that the public owned and used freely into private ownership. Or, to put it more bluntly, Hardin invented a pseudoscientific justification for giving away parks, roads and schools to rich people and letting them charge us to use them.
To arrive at this fantasy, Hardin deployed one of the most important analytical tools of modern economics: introspection. As Ely Devons put it: "If economists wished to study the horse, they wouldn’t go and look at horses. They’d sit in their studies and say to themselves, ‘What would I do if I were a horse?’"
https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/27/economism/#what-would-i-do-if-i-were-a-horse
Hardin's hoax swept from the fringes to the center and became received wisdom – so much so that by 1980, Senators Birch Bayh and Bob Dole were able to pass a law that gave away publicly funded medicine to private firms, because otherwise these inventions would be "overgrazed" by greedy people, denying the public access to livesaving drugs.
On September 21, the NIH quietly published an announcement of one of these pharmaceutical transfers, buried in a list of 31 patent assignments in the Federal Register:
https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2023-20487.pdf
The transfer in question is a patent for using T-cell receptors (TCRs) to treat solid tumors from HPV, one of the only patents for treating solid tumors with TCRs. The beneficiary of this transfer is Scarlet TCR, a Delaware company with no website or SEC filings and ownership shrouded in mystery:
https://www.bizapedia.com/de/scarlet-tcr-inc.html
One person who pays attention to this sort of thing is James Love, co-founder of Knowledge Ecology International, a nonprofit that has worked for decades for access to medicines. Love sleuthed out at least one person behind Scarlet TCR: Christian Hinrichs, a researcher at Rutgers who used to work at the NIH's National Cancer Institute:
https://www.nih.gov/research-training/lasker-clinical-research-scholars/tenured-former-scholars
Love presumes Hinrichs is the owner of Scarlet TCR, but neither the NIH nor Scarlet TCR nor Hinrichs will confirm it. Hinrichs was one of the publicly-funded researchers who worked on the new TCR therapy, for which he received a salary.
This new drug was paid for out of the public purse. The basic R&D – salaries for Hinrichs and his collaborators, as well as funding for their facilities – came out of NIH grants. So did the funding for the initial Phase I trial, and the ongoing large Phase II trial.
As David Dayen writes in The American Prospect, the proposed patent transfer will make Hinrichs a very wealthy man (Love calls it "generational wealth"):
https://prospect.org/health/2023-10-18-nih-how-to-become-billionaire-program/
This wealth will come by charging us – the public – to access a drug that we paid to produce. The public took all the risks to develop this drug, and Hinrichs stands to become a billionaire by reaping the rewards – rewards that will come by extracting fortunes from terrified people who don't want to die from tumors that are eating them alive.
The transfer of this patent is indefensible. The government isn't even waiting until the Phase II trials are complete to hand over our commonly owned science.
But there's still time. The NIH is about to get a new director, Monica Bertagnolli – Hinrichs's former boss – who will need to go before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee for confirmation. Love is hoping that the confirmation hearing will present an opportunity to question Bertagnolli about the transfer – specifically, why the drug isn't being nonexclusively licensed to lots of drug companies who will have to compete to sell the cheapest possible version.
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/19/solid-tumors/#t-cell-receptors
My next novel is The Lost Cause, a hopeful novel of the climate emergency. Amazon won't sell the audiobook, so I made my own and I'm pre-selling it on Kickstarter!
547 notes
·
View notes
Nancy Pelosi’s daughter has been caught on a hidden camera admitting that January 6 was the greatest hoax ever pulled off by Democrat operatives.
According to Alexandra Pelosi, the events at the U.S. Capitol and the subsequent prosecutions were a marketing gimmick to propagandize the public into believing Trump supporters are dangerous.
The campaign sought to destroy Donald Trump’s chances of ever becoming President again.
In the video, Nancy Pelosi’s daughter is seen engaging in conversation with a defendant from the January 6th incident, who she is considering featuring in her documentary about the event.
She discusses the potential political consequences of the January 6th hearings, particularly in relation to the 2022 mid-term elections. Pelosi is heard saying that interest might wane after the Democrats potentially lose the House and the committee is dissolved.
“After the Democrats lose the House and then they get rid of the committee, people may lose interest,” Pelosi declares.
“The first trials are gonna get a lot of attention.”
“It’s like [an] anniversary; the first one is a big deal.”
“No one’s gonna care after the Democrats are out of power.”
“And then take Biden out of office, then who cares?”
“I know you’re not the bad guys [to the J6 defendant]”
“If it was an insurrection… you were supposed to have a plan”
“You’re going to be able to laugh about this one day.”
130 notes
·
View notes
With a central informant who provided evidence backing the Biden impeachment investigation arrested for lying to the FBI, House Republicans are scrambling to justify their ongoing probe. The House Oversight Committee, led by Rep. James Comer (R-KY), put out a statement on Friday evening distancing itself from any claims that the informant, Alexander Smirnov, had made.
"We can clear this up for you," wrote the Committee's official X account in a reply to criticism from Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY). "1) We never knew the informant's name 2) We never talked to the informant 3) The FBI never gave us his name and redacted the FD-1023 because they said he was so important to an ongoing investigation 4) The FBI told the committee, including Democrats, the informant was highly credible; No one is falling for this Russia Hoax 2.0 you're peddling."
It didn't take long for Goldman, a Democratic Oversight member who previously served as the attorney prosecuting the first of former President Donald Trump's impeachments, to clap back.
46 notes
·
View notes