Disease Outbreak Concerns Loom Over Proposed Lab Monkey Facility in Texas County
Residents of a Texas county are opposing the construction of a research facility that would house over 43,000 lab monkeys, citing fears the primates could spread viruses among the general public.
Charles River Laboratories is planning a 538-acre facility in Brazoria County that would house and breed 43,200 primates for biomedical research purposes.
Among other concerns, residents worry the primates could spread disease, especially if a lab monkey escapes, à la the 1995 Dustin Hoffman biological disaster film Outbreak.
In November, the Brazoria County Commissioners office passed a resolution asking the state and federal governments to block the company’s permit over concerns the facility could endanger the environment, wildlife and public health.
In a Wall Street Journal exposé Tuesday, residents wondered if the lab could lessen property values, cited worries over possible disease spread, and questioned “how dead animals and animal waste will be handled.”
“I thought this would be a place to get away from everything. Now a monkey farm is my neighbor,” said resident John Stern.
“How much racket does 43,000 monkeys make? I’m sure they’re not quiet,” commented another property owner.
Leftist group PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals), which was instrumental in raising awareness of the issue in Brazoria County, notes body fluids from lab monkeys could potentially contaminate nearby wetlands, lakes, creeks and soil, spreading viruses, parasites, and bacteria among wildlife and increasing the potential spread of harmful or deadly pathogens to humans.
Two of the monkeys that would be used by Charles River Laboratories, the long-tailed and rhesus macaques, also “have the greatest potential to transmit diseases,” notes PETA.
CDC docs also reportedly show “in recent years, there’s been a significant uptick in the arrival in the U.S. of monkeys infected with tuberculosis, malaria, and other deadly diseases.”
“Deadly pathogens and diseases such as herpes B virus, Ebola-like viruses, tuberculosis, and others that monkeys pick up overseas can spread to humans and other animals in Texas,” PETA writes, adding, “Charles River is supposed to screen for these, but they often go undetected.”
PETA also claims lab primate escapes happen often, and provided a list of recent monkey prison breaks:
At a closed-door meeting with Brazoria County officials in December, Charles River Laboratories reportedly proposed a scaled-back 8,600 monkey facility, and ultimately said it would “pause work to evaluate the flood risks.”
Speaking to the Wall Street Journal, Charles River Laboratories Chief Operating Officer Birgit Girshick said, “At the current time our plans are on hold.”
Survivors of Oct. 7 Music Rave Massacre Sue Israel For Negligence
Dozens of injured survivors of the Oct. 7 Hamas massacre at a music festival close to the Gaza Strip have filed a $56 million suit against the Israeli government, alleging various forms of negligence that resulted in unavoidable casualties.
Declaring that “the negligence and the gross oversight is beyond belief,” the 42 plaintiffs have targeted four government entities: the Israeli Defense Forces, the Shin Bet internal security service, the Defense Ministry, and Israel Police. According to the suit, 364 attendees were killed and 40 kidnapped and taken to Gaza.
#BREAKING Israel music festival-goers fled in hail of bullets
— IMedia (@imediaxyz) October 8, 2023
People tried to flee the site, running across the sand and getting into their cars to drive away. Partygoers said there were jeeps full of gunmen, shooting at the cars.
Over 260 bodies were found at the site of the… pic.twitter.com/RvgOuxAodr
The IDF conducted two security assessments over the night leading into Oct. 7, sparked by unusual observations on the border with Gaza. However, no warnings were given to the organizers of the Supernova rave — despite the fact that Shin Bet had taken the threat seriously enough that it deployed to the area soldiers from its unit responsible for thwarting abductions. It’s also been reported that military units put on alert didn’t know the festival was going on.
“A single phone call by IDF officials to the commander responsible for the party to disperse it immediately in view of the expected danger would have saved lives and prevented the physical and mental injuries of hundreds of partygoers, including the plaintiffs,” they say in their filed complaint.
In a particularly grim twist of fate, the festival was originally slated to last only two days — Oct. 5 and 6. However, earlier in the week of the event, organizers requested and were granted permission to extend it to Oct. 7. The “Gaza Division’s operations officer, Lt. Col. Sahar Fogel, opposed the extension, arguing it was a needless security risk, but was told by his superiors to approve it,” writes Antiwar’s Dave DeCamp, citing Israeli newspaper Haaretz.
The festival was held just outside the Gaza Strip, where 2 million Palestinians have lived under an Israeli blockade since 2008
An expert cited by the plaintiffs said the IDF shouldn’t have approved the festival at all, given its location: “The event was held a small distance from the Strip’s border. The noise from the party was heard by Gazan residents and revelers were an easy target for the terror attack.”
The plaintiffs also fault the police for positioning only 27 officers to secure the festival, with the great majority armed only with pistols, in an alleged failure to comply with regulations requiring long arms when deployed so close to Gaza.
According to Haaretz, the permit signed by an IDF colonel said “the northern brigade is responsible for regional security during the event in the fence space across from the Gaza Strip.” However, attendees say no soldiers were positioned there. In the most damning fact of the day, the festival came under attack at around 6:30am and the IDF didn’t arrive until 3pm.
Some of the civilian casualties from the music festival were caused by IDF Apache helicopter fire which was directed at vehicles driving into Gaza, as well as people getting out of vehicles and walking through nearby fields.
Vivek Ramaswamy Issues Emergency Warning: Southern Border Is Now A UN Invasion Frontier
US National Debt Rises Above $34 Trillion in Historic First-Ever
US national debt has surged over $34 trillion for the first time in history, according to fiscal data published by the Department of the Treasury.
As of December 29, 2023, the US national debt reached $34,001,493,655,565.48 for the first time in the history of the United States, the data showed on Tuesday.
On December 28, the US national debt stood at $33,911,227,723,170 and the Biden administration took just one day to increase the national debt by almost $100 billion, according to the data.
However, earlier findings by the Congressional Budget Office indicated that the national debt would nearly double in scale over the next 30 years.
Michael Peterson, the CEO of Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a financial firm founded by the Nixon-era secretary of commerce, noted in a statement that regardless of the new year, the US’ national debt standing “remains on the same damaging and unsustainable path.”
“Following last year’s debt ceiling deal, we quickly crossed $32 trillion in June, $33 trillion in September, and now we are soaring past $34 trillion,” he said.
“Looking ahead, debt will continue to skyrocket as the Treasury expects to borrow nearly $1 trillion more by the end of March. Adding trillion after trillion in debt, year after year, should be a flashing red warning sign to any policymaker who cares about the future of our country.”
The latest comes months after the Biden administration managed a deal with Republicans to raise the US’ national debt ceiling as a means to avoid a default, a bid that will last through January 2025. The debt level further comes on the heels of Congress’ efforts to clear additional bills to fund the government.
Forecasters had previously underscored that the national debt surpassed the $34 trillion mark years earlier than expected as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent economic fallout.
Vivek Ramaswamy Issues Emergency Warning: Southern Border Is Now A UN Invasion Frontier
Argentina Pulls Out of BRICS While Iran, Russia Abandon U.S. Dollar
Argentina has formally declined an invitation to become a member of the BRICS group of nations, as per various news media outlets on Friday, December 29, quoting an official letter they have seen which was distributed to the leaders of Russia, China, India, Brazil, and South Africa. While new Argentinian President Javier Milei had hitherto opposed joining the alliance before being elected, the latest move signified a complete U-turn from the stance of his predecessor, Alberto Fernandez.
Fernandez had welcomed the invitation to join BRICS in August, maintaining that such a move would give the Latin American nation a “new scenario” for its development. Milei, who won the presidency in November, declared at that time that he would not “push for deals with communists because they don’t respect the basic parameters of free trade, freedom, and democracy.”
The media published one of Buenos Aires’ letters on Friday that was apparently addressed to Brazilian President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva. The letter said that the policy of the new Argentinian government would “differ in many cases from that of the previous government” and that some of its decisions, including “active participation in BRICS,” would be “reviewed.” None of the BRICS nations has officially verified receiving the letter so far.
Argentina’s foreign minister Diana Mondino, who was Milei’s senior economic advisor, also said that her government did not “see any advantage” in becoming a member of the group and would thus “not join BRICS.”
The letter stated at the same time that Milei’s government hopes to “intensify” bilateral relations with BRICS members, especially in the sectors of trade and investments. Formerly, the president said that, while he was not going to “align with the communists,” his government would still not prevent the Argentinian private sector from doing business with “whoever it wants.”
The South American nation is presently grappling with its worst economic crisis in decades. Inflation has skyrocketed 160 percent over the past year alone. The gravely devalued peso compelled the country to refinance its $44-billion debt with the IMF. Besides, Milei’s government is also encountering widespread protests over its radical deregulation and austerity-based reform program.
Experts Claim Global Heart Failure Pandemic Caused by New COVID Strain
Scientists are warning that a new COVID variant will cause a global “heart failure pandemic.” Many are skeptical of the claim, believing it to be a COVID vaccine injury coverup.
The globalists are increasing their attacks on Infowars and the stakes have never been higher!
Please consider donating and visit InfowarsStore.com for merch, nutraceuticals and survival gear.
Media Outlets Are Already Calling for Online 2024 Election Censorship
The page has only just been turned on 2023 and already the narrative that much policing of online speech will be vital for 2024, an election year, has already stirred.
The legacy media outlet The Guardian, in its piece about Kate Starbird, has already complained that there may be less censorship ahead of the 2024 elections, and claimed that Rep. Jim Jordan’s committee’s reports on Big Tech-government censorship collusion are based on “outlandish claims.” This is ignoring the fact that an injunction was successfully placed on the Biden administration for its censorship pressure on Big Tech, a case that will be ruled on by The Supreme Court this year.
In an era where the policing of online speech is increasingly contentious, Kate Starbird’s role in combating what she terms election misinformation has placed her squarely in the midst of a heated debate. As a leading figure at the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, Starbird has actively engaged in documenting what she and her team perceive as misinformation during the 2020 elections, particularly focusing on claims of voter fraud.
However, Starbird’s approach and her team’s actions have not been without controversy. Critics argue that their efforts amount to a form of censorship, infringing upon free speech. This criticism extends beyond Starbird’s team to a broader national trend, where researchers engaged in similar work face accusations of partisanship and censorship, challenging the principles of free expression.
Jim Jordan, chair of the House judiciary committee, has emerged as a key figure in opposing what he views as the overreach of these researchers. He has focused on investigating groups and individuals involved in counteracting misinformation, especially in the context of elections and Covid-19. Central to the controversy is the practice of working with government entities and flagging content to social media platforms, which some argue leads to undue censorship and violates First Amendment rights.
The debate over the role of anti-misinformation efforts has escalated beyond Congress, evidenced by lawsuits from the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana and from the state of Texas, along with two rightwing media companies. These legal actions challenge the alleged collaboration between the Biden administration, the Global Engagement Center, and social media companies, showing it as a constitutional breach.
Critics of Starbird’s and similar researchers’ work argue that labeling right-wing entities as primary purveyors of election lies is a biased approach that neglects the complexity of online discourse. They contend that such claims of misinformation often serve to silence dissenting voices rather than foster a balanced and open dialogue.
According to The Guardian piece, Starbird’s shift in terminology from “misinformation” to “rumors” could be seen by some as a strategic move to distance her work from the increasingly politicized nature of the term but one that could be even more contentions. The idea that rumors should be policed isn’t likely to go over well with those that are already tired of online censorship.
In a similar vein to The Guardian piece, in a New Year’s Eve episode of “Face The Nation,” CBS’s Senior Business and Technology Correspondent Jo-Ling Kent took her time to criticize Elon Musk’s X for allowing free speech. Kent notably highlighted the limitations placed on censorship due to the “arguments and protections of free speech.”
Kent criticized X for enabling figures like Alex Jones to regain a platform. “Elon Musk and his team have basically allowed the return of conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones, and they’ve also dramatically reduced the size of their Trust and Safety team,” Kent stated.
Kent also stated that, on platforms like Meta’s Facebook, “the reality here is that taking down all of this bad information has always been an impossible task on platforms of that size.” Despite describing it as impossible, Kent appears to suggest they should still try.
As has always been the case, false information during an election cycle is often rife. But in the online world, where most speech runs through a handful of Big Tech giants, the power and control over online discourse that these companies have is immense. A handful of companies have the power to affect elections and the play of democracy itself.
While even Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has admitted that the companies’ online censorship has been heavy-handed, and has resulted in truthful speech being suppressed, tech giants and largely legacy media outlets that once had a monopoly on information, continue to push for online censorship.