Harvard's Kulldorff: How Did the Public Health Authorities Get Things So Wrong?

Harvard epidemiologist says "focused protection", not lockdowns or mandates, is best for public health.

https://globalcovidsummit.org/news/harvards-kulldorff-how-did-the-public-health-authorities-get-things-so-wrong

@KanekoaTheGreat

ABC: Chicago City Council Criticizes Sequoia Voting Systems Ties To Venezuela (2006)

Chicago City Council Member Edward Burke suggest that the controversial voting machinery could be part of a Venezuelan conspiracy to subvert American elections.

Though Sequoia is based in the U.S., Burke hammered away in his questioning about a series of offshore "shell" companies that are Sequoia parents and, at the end of a circuitous trail, Venezuelan nationals who are the firm's ultimate owners.

https://rumble.com/vn6dkm-abc-chicago-city-council-criticizes-sequoia-voting-systems-ties-to-venezuel.html

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2006-04-08-0604080149-story.html

@KanekoaTheGreat

CNN: Voting Machines Are Vulnerable To Hacking (2008)

Princeton Professor Andrew Appel shows how easy it is to hack a voting machine.

"He programmed the replacement to cheat in favor of one party by 10% forever without leaving a trace."

https://rumble.com/vn6da2-cnn-voting-machines-are-vulnerable-to-hacking-2008.html

@KanekoaTheGreat

Los Angeles Times: Ballot Firm’s Ties to Venezuela Criticized (2006)

An Oakland company that provides electronic voting machines in California and 19 other states is drawing scrutiny over its acquisition last year by a group of Venezuelan investors with past business ties to the government of President Hugo Chavez.

Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) last month wrote U.S. Treasury Secretary John W. Snow asking whether the Bush administration had weighed the national security implications of “a company with possible ties to the Venezuelan government” selling touch-screen voting machines for U.S. elections.

Sequoia, founded in Jamestown, N.Y., in the late 1890s, was acquired in March 2005 by Smartmatic Corp., a private company owned by Venezuelan investors through a series of holding companies based in Europe and the Caribbean.

Smartmatic emerged from obscurity the year before when it won a $100-million contract to supply touch-screen voting machines for an ultimately unsuccessful recall effort against Chavez in 2004.

Before the election, Smartmatic was part of a consortium that included a software company partly owned by a Venezuelan government agency.

The company markets optical scanners, which electronically tabulate ballots marked by voters, and touch-screen machines, on which votes are recorded using technology similar to that found in automated teller machines.

Concerns about Smartmatic’s offshore ownership are fueling broader worries that computerized voting systems are vulnerable to hackers and political manipulation.

Chicago Alderman Edward Burke cited Sequoia’s Venezuelan ownership in his complaint about the company’s performance during March primary elections in his city and surrounding Cook County. Problems with merging results from two new types of voting machines supplied by Sequoia led to a days-long delay in posting final results.

Burke, who chaired an investigation into the incident, said he was bothered by reports that Venezuelan technicians and engineers “were in the Chicago tabulating rooms counting votes” on election night.

Burke contends that Sequoia’s complex ownership “is designed to make it difficult to learn who the real controlling interests are.”

Sequoia’s parent company, Boca Raton, Fla.-based Smartmatic, is controlled by Smartmatic International Holdings of Amsterdam. The holding company is owned by Smartmatic International Group of Curacao in the Dutch Antilles, a string of Caribbean islands near the Venezuelan coast.

Antonio Mujica, a citizen of Venezuela and Spain who lives in Caracas, Venezuela, founded the parent company in 2000 and, along with his family, owns a 75% stake.

The company’s Venezuelan owners made “extra efforts to make it appear that Smartmatic is purely a [U.S.] company,” said Lowell Finley, co-director of Voter Action, an electronic voting watchdog group in Berkeley.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2006-jun-03-fi-sequoia3-story.html

@KanekoaTheGreat

Published memo by a great Delaware patriot named Jennifer Cooke. We did a zoom meeting a month ago, and I had no idea if it would go anywhere or not. Lo and behold, they are doing fantastic work and making us all proud. She has kept me updated on her findings and I want you all to see “if not you, who?” in motion.

https://nationalfile.com/massive-fraudulent-votes-and-apparent-nursing-home-vote-fraud-found-in-delaware-in-2020-election/

To give you an idea of how heinous Neustar's overreach is —- not only do they manage the entire telecommunications infrastructure, they aggregate the data, and sell it off to anyone who wants it. That data also includes DELTA meta data, which means when calling patterns change. This allows law agencies to track down suspects who may abandon one phone, and use another. Why let good data go to waste? That same technology is also being sold to debt collectors for a premium cost!

https://mainline.com/case-studies/neustar/

We’re there:

https://twitter.com/jaasak/status/1443811815348076548?s=21

If you voted in the Maricopa County in the November 2020 election, please take a few minutes and read these questions:

1) Did you vote in person at a Maricopa County voting center in the November 2020 election?
2) Were you given a provisional ballot that was later rejected?
3) Did you receive written notice stating why your provisional ballot was rejected?
4) Did you disagree with the reason given for the rejection of your ballot?

Call to Action:
If your answer to all the above questions is YES, please text 1-833-742-4062.
In the message, state that you cast a provisional ballot in Maricopa County which was rejected and you do not agree with the reason provided.
Please include your name and phone number in the text.

Just passing this along from someone in the military. I've covered this before, but it's worth another mention. Soldiers and servicemembers across the country need to be made aware of their rights: THIS IS FOR ALL UNVACCINATED SOLDIERS, SAILORS, MARINES, AIRMAN, COAST GUARD, HEALTH SERVICE, and ALL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES: You have the right to refuse vaccination under the mandate if they are not offering you FDA Approved COMIRNATY which is the only vaccine the FDA has approved.
Brian,
I am a physician in the Army, but have to advise I am not representing the DOD or Army and I am only speaking as a concerned citizen. I would like to make certain that the following information is put out for all Soldiers and servicemembers as well as federal workers, so they understand their rights under the law. After reading the excellent article from the EPOCH Times last week that discussed that COMIRNATY is the only actual approved vaccine, and is "legally distinct" from Pfizer BioNTech, I also found out from that same article that the FDA approved version of COMIRNATY is not even available in the United States, and may not be available until October at the earliest. I did further research and in the same location where the FDA publishes the Vaccine Recipient Fact Sheet… there is also the FDA BLA (Biologics License Application) approval letter outlining what Pfizer needs to do before manufacturing the approved version of COMIRNATY. On page 2 under “FDA Lot Release” it states “Please submit final container samples of the product in final containers together with protocols showing results of all applicable tests. You may not distribute any lots of product until you receive a notification of release from the Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)” Only future versions of COMIRNATY manufactured with the approved ingredient and manufacturing approval from the FDA will carry the official “approved by the FDA” package insert. Furthermore, on the Vaccine Recipient Fact Sheet for Pfizer BioNTech and COMIRNATY, on page 1, the FDA clearly states that COMIRNATY is “legally distinct” from Pfizer BioNTech (bottom of the page – small writing). Therefore that means that although a mandate has been approved by the Secretary of Defense, and although the Assistant Secretary of Defense released a memo yesterday which has similar language to the top of page 1 of the Vaccine Recipient Fact Sheet, they fail to mention, and it is failed to be mentioned anywhere in Army information that I have seen, that the two are “legally distinct” as stated at the bottom of page one of the Vaccine Recipient Fact Sheet… Which means that the mandate is unenforceable under the law with the current available vaccines.
BOTTOM LINE: The current mandate by the DOD is not enforceable under the law with the currently available vaccinations. Under EUA authority, until the actual FDA approved COMIRNATY has been manufactured, and that version verified by the FDA for release and is then available for distribution and use, and also accessible to the servicemember, a service member is authorized to refuse any non-FDA approved COVID vaccination. This is a black and white issue. Which is also why no enforcement operating procedures have been released. They legally cannot enforce this mandate with the currently available vaccines. Servicemembers have the right to refuse an EUA vaccine.

Susan Rice. Now you begin to understand who’s really running the White House. 👇

🎩TIP @BigRfaze https://twitter.com/SophiaCai99/status/1443719917434441729?s=20

Oh. A criminal politician. There’s a shocker!!!

“Katrina Robinson, a Democrat, was found guilty of wire fraud Thursday in federal court. She had been acquitted Sunday on 15 other charges.”

https://justthenews.com/nation/states/tennessee-state-senator-convicted-4-counts-wire-fraud

Former Green Beret Jeremy Brown who refused to be an informant for the feds has been arrested in connection with January 6th. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/breaking-fbi-arrests-retired-green-beret-jeremy-brown-attending-jan-6-protests-standing-outside-capitol-refused-informant/