Tag: coronavirus

Pandemics for Profit: Jeffrey Epstein Was a Pandemic Power Broker

In the sordid underbelly of elite philanthropy, where altruism masks avarice and power brokers play god with global crises, the Jeffrey Epstein files have detonated a revelation that should outrage every thinking citizen. Buried amid the salacious headlines of Epstein’s depravity lies a damning blueprint: a two-decade financial colossus engineered to commodify pandemics, turning human suffering into a gilded revenue stream. Offshore vaccine slush funds, automated reinsurance payouts, and donor-advised facades masquerading as charity weren’t hasty reactions to COVID-19; they were premeditated mechanisms, forged in the fires of foresight by Bill Gates, JPMorgan Chase, and their convicted intermediary, the infamous Jeffrey Epstein. 

The DOJ’s release puts the smoking-gun documents in plain view, and they don’t whisper. They just scream complicity in a system where “preparedness” is just a polite word for predation.

This isn’t mere coincidence or benign planning, but a calculated hijacking of public health for private empire-building. As Sayer Ji meticulously dissects in his exhaustive Substack investigation, “The Epstein Files Illuminate a 20-Year ‘Architecture Behind Pandemics’” as a business model. With Bill Gates at the Centre of the network, the evidence paints a portrait of institutional rot. Ji’s piece, a forensic tour de force drawing on emails, agreements, and texts from 2011 to 2019, exposes how pandemics were pre-packaged as an asset class, with Gates’ fingerprints everywhere. For those unwilling or unable to plunge into the 5,000-plus words of granular detail, here’s the unvarnished truth: this was no noble quest to save humanity; it was a rigged game where the house, Gates and his cronies always win.

Let’s cut through the euphemisms. In 2011, JPMorgan’s top brass didn’t consult ethicists or public health experts for their Gates-tied donor-advised fund. Instead, they chose to grovel before Epstein, a registered sex offender fresh from his slap-on-the-wrist conviction. Emails reveal him dictating the architecture: “additional money for vaccines,” an “offshore arm, especially for vaccines,” and perpetual structures with arm’s-length profit laundering. Epstein wasn’t a bit player; he was the maestro, coaching executives on Gates’ “frustrations” and insisting vaccines be the seductive hook. Why? Because in this twisted calculus, vaccines aren’t lifesavers, they’re capital magnets, de-risked by philanthropic guarantees that socialise losses while privatising gains. The Global Health Investment Fund (GHIC), unveiled in 2013, promised 5-7% returns on drugs and vaccines, backed by Gates’ 60% principal shield. Public money absorbs the flops, and all that was left for the elites to do was to pocket the windfalls.

By 2017, the system had calcified. Internal emails reveal “pandemic” listed as a core category for Donor-Advised Funds (DAF), treated as a permanent, profit-generating vertical on par with energy. Epstein’s messages show him placing people into Gates’ inner office, Boris Nikolic’s venture fund Biomatics Capital, Merck’s vaccine operations, and Swiss Re’s pandemic reinsurance programs, where “parametric triggers” automatically pay out when a pandemic is declared. Simulation exercises were no civic duty—they were career currency, a credential in an insular, self-reinforcing network. Gates’ bgC3 office treated “strain pandemic simulation” alongside defense technology initiatives, while Epstein continued funnelling personnel and even offering connections to the incoming Trump administration. Meanwhile, the International Peace Institute’s 2015 pandemic convenings were formally coordinated with Gates but privately routed through Epstein’s social channels, including dinners with IPI’s president Rød-Larsen.

Keep reading

U.S. Healthcare Executive Arrested in Serbia Over Massive $300 MILLION COVID Fraud Scheme

A once-high-ranking executive at a major Chicago safety-net hospital has been taken into custody in Serbia, nearly two years after federal authorities accused him of orchestrating one of the biggest alleged COVID-19 fraud schemes in U.S. history.

Anosh Ahmed, the former chief financial officer of Loretto Hospital, was arrested in Belgrade on Nov. 30, 2025, according to court filings.

Ahmed, who fled the United States after facing initial fraud charges, now remains in Serbian custody as federal prosecutors prepare a formal extradition request.

The CFO reported:

Per the latest court filing, the United States government first received notice of Ahmed’s arrest in Serbia on Nov. 30, 2025. Shortly after learning of his arrest, the American government told the eastern European country it intended to seek extradition and submitted a formal “extradition package” on Jan. 23.

U.S. officials said they learned on Dec. 30, 2025, that a Serbian court denied Ahmed’s petition to be released to a Belgrade hotel and ordered him to remain in Serbian custody.

As of now, Ahmed’s trial date is set for July 2026, though that’s subject to a pending request by Ahmed’s attorney to push the trial to September 2026, according to the filing.

Ahmed has been accused of orchestrating a “single, widespread scheme to submit more than $800 million in false claims to the United States Health Resources and Services Administration for reimbursement of COVID-19 testing of uninsured individuals,” the filing stated. The scheme unfolded from June 2021 through March 2022, according to the filing, which was submitted by the office of U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois Andrew Boutros.

Keep reading

Ex–Nonprofit Leader Who Championed Social Justice Sentenced for COVID Fraud

A former Bostonian of the Year was sentenced in federal court in Boston for using thousands of dollars in donations to Violence in Boston to pay personal expenses and defrauding taxpayers. 

Monica Cannon-Grant, 44, of Taunton, was sentenced by U.S. District Court Judge Angel Kelley to four years’ probation, with six months of home detention and 100 hours of community service. She was also ordered to pay restitution of $106,003 as well as forfeiture in an amount to be decided at a later date. The government recommended a sentence of 18 months in prison.

Cannon-Grant allegedly defrauded the City of Boston out of COVID-19 relief funds and rental assistance money, defrauded the Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office out of Community Reinvestment Grant funds, filed false tax returns and failed to file tax returns for two years.

The founder and former Chief Executive Officer of a Boston-based nonprofit was sentenced today in federal court in Boston.

In September 2025, Cannon-Grant pleaded guilty to 18 counts: three counts of wire fraud conspiracy; 10 counts of wire fraud; one count of mail fraud; two counts of filing false tax returns; and two counts of failing to file tax returns. In March 2023, Cannon-Grant was charged along with her co-conspirator and late husband, Clark Grant, in a 27-count superseding indictment. 

Clark Grant’s charges were dismissed in May 2023 due to his death. Cannon-Grant and Clark Grant had previously been charged in an 18-count indictment in March 2022.

In 2020, Cannon-Grant was lauded as a Bostonian of the Year and social justice advocate, recognized for being a “voice for the community” and social justice advocate.

Keep reading

How the Public Feels Post-Covid

Some people wonder why I look at the New York Times. It’s because I want to see what narratives the “newspaper of record” is pushing. I read an article about ten years ago by an ex-NYT editor, who said that at the beginning of the year, the editors were given a list of the themes to be followed that year. I think he was making clear that they were told which narratives they were intended to push.

Below, I critique an “Opinion Piece” by a journalist who knows nothing about the subject of pandemic countermeasures, except that it is his job to pan whatever the current administration is doing, especially if it will save taxpayers money and reduce the risks of Gain-of-Function research.

Let’s look at the NYT author first, best known for exaggerating the effects of global warming. No science background. But he did beat up RFK in an August 13 opinion piece—well, that probably trumps a PhD in the subject matter at the NYT.

His book and article on climate change are described as terrifying. And he attempts to terrify us with his straw man argument today. (FYI, a straw man argument misrepresents what the opposer actually said, and argues against the misrepresentation.)

Keep reading

Ex-CDC Director Bashes COVID Vaccine in Explosive New Statement

He says public health officials “totally misplayed” the rollout of the shot, which was “never meant to prevent transmission.” In fact, the shot is “more like medicine” than a vaccine because “it doesn’t stop infections,” Dr. Redfield explained.

“The problem is not the science of creating the vaccine. The problem was the public policy and how to use the vaccine. The vaccine should have never been mandated. It was never meant to prevent transmission. It didn’t prevent transmission. It probably was a misnomer to call it a vaccine.

“It’s really more like a medicine. It doesn’t stop infection. Children should have never been vaccinated. People shouldn’t have been mandated to be vaccinated to go to school and work. So the policy side was totally misplayed,” Dr. Redfield said.

Keep reading

Three Maryland Cousins Charged in $3.5M Tax Fraud and COVID-19 Unemployment Scheme

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland unsealed a superseding indictment today, charging three cousins in connection with a tax-fraud scheme.

Daiwor “Mark Brown” Woah-Tee, 52, of Belcamp, Maryland; Dekwii Woah-Tee, 47, of Baltimore, Maryland; and Laiworpaye Woah-Tee, 49, of Nottingham, Maryland, are charged with conspiracy to submit false, fictitious, and fraudulent claims.  

The superseding indictment also charged Daiwor Woah-Tee and Dekwii Woah-Tee with wire fraud conspiracy, wire fraud, and aggravated identity theft stemming from a scheme to fraudulently obtain unemployment insurance benefits during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Beginning in January 2018 and continuing until December 2024, Daiwor Woah-Tee, Dekwii Woah-Tee, and Laiworpaye Woah-Tee knowingly and willfully conspired to defraud the United States and the Department of the Treasury by filing fraudulent Form 1040s seeking tax refunds from the IRS through fictitious claims based on fraudulent material representations.  

The co-conspirators identified and recruited individuals willing to become customers of their tax return business and obtained tax documentation and personal identifiable information from those individuals seeking tax return preparation assistance.

Daiwor Woah-Tee used the information obtained from individuals to prepare tax filings with the IRS. Then the co-conspirators filed, or caused to be filed, false tax returns that contained fabricated information regarding the taxpayer’s dependents, income, education expenses, and eligibility for the Earned Income Tax Credit.

The co-conspirators caused the IRS to deposit funds into bank accounts that they controlled and then caused the IRS to deliver treasury checks to addresses they controlled.  As a result, the co-conspirators obtained tax refunds they were not entitled to in connection with submitting tax returns in which they illegally sought at least $3.5 million in refunds.

Keep reading

‘Long COVID’ or COVID-19 Vaccine Injury?

The study is titled “Circulating Microclots Are Structurally Associated With Neutrophil Extracellular Traps and Their Amounts Are Elevated in Long COVID Patients”. It’s by Alain R. Theirry et al. and was published in the Journal of Medical Virology on October 2, 2025.

To be clear, the authors of the study do not suggest that the patients’ symptoms had been caused by vaccination.

In fact, it was funded in part by the Novo Nordisk Foundation, which owns a holding company that is the majority voting shareholder in the pharmaceutical company Novo Nordisk and has investments in vaccine companies.

(This is documented by Dr. Brian Hooker, Dr. Jeet Varia, and me in our May 2025 paper in the Journal of Biotechnology and Biomedicine, in which we show how a Danish study by Anders Hviid et al. 2019 was effectively designed to find no association between the measles, mumps, and rubella [MMR] vaccine and autism. See the section of our paper on the authors’ conflicts of interest.)

Given that funding source, you wouldn’t expect this study’s authors to draw attention to a connection between COVID‑19 vaccines and the syndrome labelled “Long COVID”.

You can imagine how scientists wouldn’t want to risk future funding by doing such a thing. Nobody wants to destroy their own career.

Consider, for instance, how Dr. Marcus Zervos, an infectious disease specialist at Henry Ford Health in Michigan, agreed to do a study comparing rates of chronic illnesses between vaccinated and unvaccinated children on the grounds it would help put to rest widespread parental concerns about vaccine safety, but then he refused to publish the study because it found that the unvaccinated children were healthier.

You’ll be told by public vaccine policy apologists that the reason the study was never published is because it was so fatally flawed, but the arguments used to support that conclusion are wholly spurious, as I detailed in my December 8 article “Scientific Data Show Unvaccinated Children Are Healthier”. All the lame excuses for the study being suppressed are designed to deflect attention from the fact that Zervos himself said he didn’t want to publish it because it could end his career.

While Theirry et al. do not say anything explicitly about it, their study does implicate COVID‑19 vaccines as a potential cause of patients’ “Long COVID” symptoms.

For context, remember that the mRNA COVID‑19 vaccines were designed to deliver messenger RNA into human cells to cause cellular production of the spike protein of SARS‑CoV‑2. The aim was to cause the immune system to mount a protective response to this protein.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), along with the rest of the so-called “public health” establishment, lied that the mRNA would remain at the injection site and would be eliminated from the body within days.

Keep reading

OSU study: Compounds in hemp block COVID-19 from entering human cells

Compounds found in hemp “show the ability to prevent the virus that causes COVID-19 from entering human cells,” Oregon State University says.

New OSU research on hemp and COVID-19 was published Tuesday in the Journal of Natural Products.

Richard van Breemen, a researcher with Oregon State’s Global Hemp Innovation Center in the College of Pharmacy and Linus Pauling Institute, led the study.

According to OSU:

Hemp, known scientifically as Cannabis sativa, is a source of fiber, food and animal feed, and multiple hemp extracts and compounds are added to cosmetics, body lotions, dietary supplements and food, van Breemen said.

Van Breemen and collaborators, including scientists at Oregon Health & Science University, found that a pair of cannabinoid acids bind to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, blocking a critical step in the process the virus uses to infect people.

The compounds are cannabigerolic acid, or CBGA, and cannabidiolic acid, CBDA, and the spike protein is the same drug target used in COVID-19 vaccines and antibody therapy. A drug target is any molecule critical to the process a disease follows, meaning its disruption can thwart infection or disease progression.

“These cannabinoid acids are abundant in hemp and in many hemp extracts,” van Breemen said. “They are not controlled substances like THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana, and have a good safety profile in humans. And our research showed the hemp compounds were equally effective against variants of SARS-CoV-2, including variant B.1.1.7, which was first detected in the United Kingdom, and variant B.1.351, first detected in South Africa.”

OSU said those two variants are also known as alpha and beta.

According to OSU:

Characterized by crown-like protrusions on its outer surface, SARS-CoV-2 features RNA strands that encode its four main structural proteins – spike, envelope, membrane and nucleocapsid – as well as 16 nonstructural proteins and several “accessory” proteins, van Breemen said.

“Any part of the infection and replication cycle is a potential target for antiviral intervention, and the connection of the spike protein’s receptor binding domain to the human cell surface receptor ACE2 is a critical step in that cycle,” he said. “That means cell entry inhibitors, like the acids from hemp, could be used to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection and also to shorten infections by preventing virus particles from infecting human cells. They bind to the spike proteins so those proteins can’t bind to the ACE2 enzyme, which is abundant on the outer membrane of endothelial cells in the lungs and other organs.”

Keep reading

‘Tip of a Very Damaging Iceberg’: COVID Vaccines Linked to Several Cancer Types in New Review

A systematic review of 69 studies and reports on COVID-19 and cancer identified a possible safety signal linking COVID-19 vaccines and SARS-CoV-2 to certain types of cancer.

The study identified safety signals for leukemia, lymphoma, breast and lung cancer. The authors of the paper, published last week in the journal Oncotarget, said their findings suggest the need for further research.

The paper identified mechanisms — including the spike protein and DNA contamination found in some COVID-19 vaccine types — that might be responsible for triggering cancer.

The authors also addressed “several recurrent themes” in the studies they examined:

  • The “unusually rapid progression, recurrence, or reactivation” of preexisting conditions.
  • The “atypical” appearance of cancers near the point of vaccination.
  • The reactivation of dormant tumors.

Wafik El-Deiry, M.D., Ph.D., one of the co-authors, told The Defender that the paper “is the first most comprehensive presentation summarizing the world‘s literature on the subject matter of COVID vaccines, COVID infection and cancer.”

He said some of the review’s findings “look like a smoking gun” linking COVID-19 shots to cancer.

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., senior research scientist for Children’s Health Defense, said the review’s findings may represent “the tip of a very damaging iceberg.”

“It is not remotely surprising that a gene-therapy rebranded as a vaccine, never tested for oncogenic safety, with severe immune dysregulating effects, injected into a billion people would correlate with an increased risk of cancers worldwide,” Jablonowski said.

El-Deiry said the review may provide insights into rising cancer rates in recent years, including an increase in so-called “turbo cancers.”

“I believe there is a risk of cancer associated with COVID vaccination,” El-Deiry said. “The magnitude of the risk remains to be more precisely defined, including the risk of hyperprogression.” Hyperprogression refers to cases where “a pre-existing tumor grows more aggressively.”

“The paper doesn’t say that COVID vaccines cause cancer, but it does argue that when the same pattern of aggressive cancer keeps appearing across different cancers and different countries, they can no longer be brushed aside,” investigative journalist Maryanne Demasi, Ph.D., said in a video posted Monday on Substack.

Keep reading

How A Techno-Optimist Became A Grave Skeptic

Before Covid, I would have described myself as a technological optimist. New technologies almost always arrive amid exaggerated fears. Railways were supposed to cause mental breakdowns, bicycles were thought to make women infertile or insane, and early electricity was blamed for everything from moral decay to physical collapse. Over time, these anxieties faded, societies adapted, and living standards rose. The pattern was familiar enough that artificial intelligence seemed likely to follow it: disruptive, sometimes misused, but ultimately manageable.

The Covid years unsettled that confidence—not because technology failed, but because institutions did.

Across much of the world, governments and expert bodies responded to uncertainty with unprecedented social and biomedical interventions, justified by worst-case models and enforced with remarkable certainty. Competing hypotheses were marginalized rather than debated. Emergency measures hardened into long-term policy. When evidence shifted, admissions of error were rare, and accountability rarer still. The experience exposed a deeper problem than any single policy mistake: modern institutions appear poorly equipped to manage uncertainty without overreach.

That lesson now weighs heavily on debates over artificial intelligence.

The AI Risk Divide

Broadly speaking, concern about advanced AI falls into two camps. One group—associated with thinkers like Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares—argues that sufficiently advanced AI is catastrophically dangerous by default. In their deliberately stark formulation, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies, the problem is not bad intentions but incentives: competition ensures someone will cut corners, and once a system escapes meaningful control, intentions no longer matter.

A second camp, including figures such as Stuart Russell, Nick Bostrom, and Max Tegmark, also takes AI risk seriously but is more optimistic that alignment, careful governance, and gradual deployment can keep systems under human control.

Despite their differences, both camps converge on one conclusion: unconstrained AI development is dangerous, and some form of oversight, coordination, or restraint is necessary. Where they diverge is on feasibility and urgency. What is rarely examined, however, is whether the institutions expected to provide that restraint are themselves fit for the role.

Covid suggests reason for doubt.

Covid was not merely a public-health crisis; it was a live experiment in expert-driven governance under uncertainty. Faced with incomplete data, authorities repeatedly chose maximal interventions justified by speculative harms. Dissent was often treated as a moral failing rather than a scientific necessity. Policies were defended not through transparent cost-benefit analysis but through appeals to authority and fear of hypothetical futures.

This pattern matters because it reveals how modern institutions behave when stakes are framed as existential. Incentives shift toward decisiveness, narrative control, and moral certainty. Error correction becomes reputationally costly. Precaution stops being a tool and becomes a doctrine.

Keep reading