Global Research Editor’s Note

We bring to the attention of our readers the following text of Osama bin Laden’s interview with Ummat, a Pakistani daily, published in Karachi on September 28, 2001. It was translated into English by the BBC World Monitoring Service and made public on September 29, 2001.

The authenticity of this interview remains to be confirmed. It was available in recognized electronic news archives including the BBC. 

The interview tends to demystify the Osama bin Laden persona.

Osama bin Laden categorically denies his involvement in the 9/11 attacks.  Bin Laden’s statements in this interview are markedly different from those made in the alleged Osama video tapes.

In this interview, Osama bin Laden exhibits an understanding of US foreign policy. He expresses his views regarding the loss of life on 9/11. He focusses on CIA support to the narcotics trade.

He also makes statements as to who, in his opinion, might be the likely perpetrator of  the September 11 attacks.

This is an important text which has not been brought to the attention of Western public opinion.

We have highlighted key sections of this interview.

It is our hope that the text of this interview, published on 28 September 2001 barely a week before the onset of the war on Afghanistan, will contribute to a better understanding of the history of Al Qaeda, the role of Osama bin Laden and the tragic events of September 11, 2001.

I should be noted that on the day preceding the 9/11 attacks, Osama Bin Laden had been admitted for treatment in a Military Hospital in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

This was confirmed by Dan Rather in a CBS News Report. 

This interview is published for informational purposes only.

GR does not in any way endorse the statements in this interview. Nor are we in a position to confirm its authenticity.

Michel  Chossudovsky, September 2, 2023

---

Full text of September 2001 Pakistani paper’s “exclusive” interview with Usamah Bin-Ladin

translated from Urdu by the BBC World Monitoring Service

Karachi, 28 September 2001, pp. 1- 7.

Ummat’s introduction

Kabul: Prominent Arab mojahed holy warrior Usamah Bin-Ladin has said that he or his al-Qa’idah group has nothing to do with the 11 September suicidal attacks in Washington and New York. He said the US government should find the attackers within the country. In an exclusive interview with daily “Ummat”, he said these attacks could be the act of those who are part of the American system and are rebelling against it and working for some other system. Or, Usamah said, this could be the act of those who want to make the current century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. Or, the American Jews, who are opposed to President Bush ever since the Florida elections, might be the masterminds of this act. There is also a great possibility of the involvement of US intelligence agencies, which need billions of dollars worth of funds every year. He said there is a government within the government in the United States.

The secret agencies, he said, should be asked as to who are behind the attacks. Usamah said support for attack on Afghanistan was a matter of need for some Muslim countries and compulsion for others. However, he said, he was thankful to the courageous people of Pakistan who erected a bulwark before the wrong forces. He added that the Islamic world was attaching great expectations with Pakistan and, in time of need, “we will protect this bulwark by sacrificing of lives”.

Following is the interview in full detail:

Ummat: You have been accused of involvement in the attacks in New York and Washington. What do you want to say about this? If you are not involved, who might be?

Usamah [Osama bin Laden]: In the name of Allah, the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the earth as an abode for peace, for the whole mankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad for our guidance. I am thankful to the Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and Momin true Muslim people of Pakistan who refused to believe in lie of the demon.

I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people.

Such a practice is forbidden ever in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children, and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel.

There is also a warning for those Muslim countries, which witnessed all these as a silent spectator. What had earlier been done to the innocent people of Iraq, Chechnya, and Bosnia?

Only one conclusion could be derived from the indifference of the United States and the West to these acts of terror and the patronage of the tyrants by these powers that America is an anti-Islamic power and it is patronizing the anti-Islamic forces. Its friendship with the Muslim countries is just a show, rather deceit. By enticing or intimidating these countries, the United States is forcing them to play a role of its choice. Put a glance all around and you will see that the slaves of the United States are either rulers or enemies of Muslims .

The US has no friends, nor does it want to keep any because the prerequisite of friendship is to come to the level of the friend or consider him at par with you. America does not want to see anyone equal to it. It expects slavery from others. Therefore, other countries are either its slaves or subordinates.

However, our case is different. We have pledged slavery to God Almighty alone and after this pledge there is no possibility to become the slave of someone else. If we do that, it will be disregardful to both our Sustainer and his fellow beings. Most of the world nations upholding their freedom are the religious ones, which are the enemies of United States, or the latter itself considers them as its enemies. Or the countries, which do not agree to become its slaves, such as China, Iran, Libya, Cuba, Syria, and the former Russia as received .

Whoever committed the act of 11 September are not the friends of the American people. I have already said that we are against the American system, not against its people, whereas in these attacks, the common American people have been killed.

According to my information, the death toll is much higher than what the US government has stated. But the Bush administration does not want the panic to spread. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the US system, but are dissenting against it. Or those who are working for some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own civilization, nation, country, or ideology could survive. They can be any one, from Russia to Israel and from India to Serbia. In the US itself, there are dozens of well-organized and well-equipped groups, which are capable of causing a large-scale destruction. Then you cannot forget the American Jews, who are annoyed with President Bush ever since the elections in Florida and want to avenge him.

Then there are intelligence agencies in the US, which require billions of dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year. This funding issue was not a big problem till the existence of the former Soviet Union but after that the budget of these agencies has been in danger.

They needed an enemy. So, they first started propaganda against Usamah and Taleban and then this incident happened. You see, the Bush administration approved a budget of 40bn dollars. Where will this huge amount go? It will be provided to the same agencies, which need huge funds and want to exert their importance.

Now they will spend the money for their expansion and for increasing their importance. I will give you an example. Drug smugglers from all over the world are in contact with the US secret agencies. These agencies do not want to eradicate narcotics cultivation and trafficking because their importance will be diminished. The people in the US Drug Enforcement Department are encouraging drug trade so that they could show performance and get millions of dollars worth of budget. General Noriega was made a drug baron by the CIA and, in need, he was made a scapegoat. In the same way, whether it is President Bush or any other US president, they cannot bring Israel to justice for its human rights abuses or to hold it accountable for such crimes. What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who made the attacks.

Ummat: A number of world countries have joined the call of the United States for launching an attack on Afghanistan. These also include a number of Muslim countries. Will Al-Qa’idah declare a jihad against these countries as well?

Usamah: I must say that my duty is just to awaken the Muslims; to tell them as to what is good for them and what is not. What does Islam says and what the enemies of Islam want?

Al-Qa’idah was set up to wage a jihad against infidelity, particularly to encounter the onslaught of the infidel countries against the Islamic states. Jihad is the sixth undeclared element of Islam. The first five being the basic holy words of Islam, prayers, fast, pilgrimage to Mecca, and giving alms Every anti-Islamic person is afraid of it. Al-Qa’idah wants to keep this element alive and active and make it part of the daily life of the Muslims. It wants to give it the status of worship. We are not against any Islamic country nor we consider a war against an Islamic country as jihad.

We are in favour of armed jihad only against those infidel countries, which are killing innocent Muslim men, women, and children just because they are Muslims. Supporting the US act is the need of some Muslim countries and the compulsion of others. However, they should think as to what will remain of their religious and moral position if they support the attack of the Christians and the Jews on a Muslim country like Afghanistan. The orders of Islamic shari’ah jurisprudence for such individuals, organizations, and countries are clear and all the scholars of the Muslim brotherhood are unanimous on them. We will do the same, which is being ordered by the Amir ol-Momenin the commander of the faithful Mola Omar and the Islamic scholars. The hearts of the people of Muslim countries are beating with the call of jihad. We are grateful to them.

Ummat: The losses caused in the attacks in New York and Washington have proved that giving an economic blow to the US is not too difficult. US experts admit that a few more such attacks can bring down the American economy. Why is al-Qa’idah not targeting their economic pillars?

Usamah: I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom. This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is simply that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the US is not uttering a single word.

Ummat: Why is harm not caused to the enemies of Islam through other means, apart from the armed struggle? For instance, inciting the Muslims to boycott Western products, banks, shipping lines, and TV channels.

Usamah: The first thing is that Western products could only be boycotted when the Muslim fraternity is fully awakened and organized. Secondly, the Muslim companies should become self-sufficient in producing goods equal to the products of Western companies. Economic boycott of the West is not possible unless economic self-sufficiency is attained and substitute products are brought out. You see that wealth is scattered all across the Muslim world but not a single TV channel has been acquired which can preach Islamic injunctions according to modern requirements and attain an international influence. Muslim traders and philanthropists should make it a point that if the weapon of public opinion is to be used, it is to be kept in the hand. Today’s world is of public opinion and the fates of nations are determined through its pressure. Once the tools for building public opinion are obtained, everything that you asked for can be done.

Ummat: The entire propaganda about your struggle has so far been made by the Western media. But no information is being received from your sources about the network of Al-Qa’idah and its jihadi successes. Would you comment?

Usamah: In fact, the Western media is left with nothing else. It has no other theme to survive for a long time. Then we have many other things to do. The struggle for jihad and the successes are for the sake of Allah and not to annoy His bondsmen. Our silence is our real propaganda. Rejections, explanations, or corrigendum only waste your time and through them, the enemy wants you to engage in things which are not of use to you. These things are pulling you away from your cause.

The Western media is unleashing such a baseless propaganda, which make us surprise but it reflects on what is in their hearts and gradually they themselves become captive of this propaganda. They become afraid of it and begin to cause harm to themselves. Terror is the most dreaded weapon in modern age and the Western media is mercilessly using it against its own people. It can add fear and helplessness in the psyche of the people of Europe and the United States. It means that what the enemies of the United States cannot do, its media is doing that. You can understand as to what will be the performance of the nation in a war, which suffers from fear and helplessness.

Ummat: What will the impact of the freeze of al-Qa’idah accounts by the US?

Usamah: God opens up ways for those who work for Him. Freezing of accounts will not make any difference for Al-Qa’idah or other jihad groups. With the grace of Allah, al-Qa’idah has more than three such alternative financial systems, which are all separate and totally independent from each other. This system is operating under the patronage of those who love jihad. What to say of the United States, even the combined world cannot budge these people from their path.

These people are not in hundreds but in thousands and millions. Al-Qa’idah comprises of such modern educated youths who are aware of the cracks inside the Western financial system as they are aware of the lines in their hands. These are the very flaws of the Western fiscal system, which are becoming a noose for it and this system could not recuperate in spite of the passage of so many days.

Ummat: Are there other safe areas other than Afghanistan, where you can continue jihad?

Usamah: There are areas in all parts of the world where strong jihadi forces are present, from Indonesia to Algeria, from Kabul to Chechnya, from Bosnia to Sudan, and from Burma to Kashmir. Then it is not the problem of my person. I am helpless fellowman of God, constantly in the fear of my accountability before God. It is not the question of Usamah but of Islam and, in Islam too, of jihad. Thanks to God, those waging a jihad can walk today with their heads raised. Jihad was still present when there was no Usamah and it will remain as such even when Usamah is no longer there. Allah opens up ways and creates loves in the hearts of people for those who walk on the path of Allah with their lives, property, and children. Believe it, through jihad, a man gets everything he desires. And the biggest desire of a Muslim is the after life. Martyrdom is the shortest way of attaining an eternal life.

Ummat: What do you say about the Pakistan government policy on Afghanistan attack?

Usamah: We are thankful to the Momin and valiant people of Pakistan who erected a blockade in front of the wrong forces and stood in the first file of battle. Pakistan is a great hope for the Islamic brotherhood. Its people are awakened, organized, and rich in the spirit of faith. They backed Afghanistan in its war against the Soviet Union and extended every help to the mojahedin and the Afghan people. Then these are the same Pakistanis who are standing shoulder by shoulder with the Taleban. If such people emerge in just two countries, the domination of the West will diminish in a matter of days. Our hearts beat with Pakistan and, God forbid, if a difficult time comes we will protect it with our blood. Pakistan is sacred for us like a place of worship. We are the people of jihad and fighting for the defence of Pakistan is the best of all jihads to us. It does not matter for us as to who rules Pakistan. The important thing is that the spirit of jihad is alive and stronger in the hearts of the Pakistani people.

Copyright Ummat in Urdu, BBC translation in English, 2001

---

Read about Osama Bin Laden in Michel Chossudovsky’s international best-seller

Order Directly from Global Research

America’s “War on Terrorism”

by Michel Chossudovsky

According to Chossudovsky, the  “war on terrorism” is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

 

Nous faisons face présentement à une problème technique.

Pour accéder à la version mobile de mondialisation.ca, cliquez sur le Menu principal de Globalresearch.ca (version mobile), (en haut à gauche) et ensuite cliquez sur Mondialisation.ca.

 

A partir de la semaine prochaine le problème technique devrait être résolu.

Amitiés à tous nos lecteurs

 

The world is globalizing and information has become more accessible to more people than ever before. We are, indeed, in unprecedented times, and we face unprecedented challenges.

The aims of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Global Research are to battle the tidal waves of misinformation and propaganda washing our minds on a daily basis. We have separated ourselves from the corporate controlled mainstream news, whose only objective is to serve their corporate masters. We take no assistance from the major foundations such as Rockefeller, Ford, and MacArthur, who act as patrons (and thus pacifiers) of the alternative and critical voices challenging the forces of globalization.

We do this in order to remain an independent voice, challenging all that needs to be challenged and exposing all that remains in the dark. Bringing light to a dimly lit world is no easy task, and though the aim and method is “independence,” we are, in fact, entirely dependent upon YOU, our readers. Without your support, we cannot continue our operations nor expand our horizons and opportunities. Global Research is indebted to our readers, and we are here for you and because of you. If you would like Global Research to continue and to grow, we need your support now more than ever.

By making a donation  to Global Research, you  assist journalists, researchers and contributors who have either lost their jobs with the mainstream media or who have been excluded from employment opportunities as professional journalists for their pledge to the truth. We send our thanks to all who have contributed so far by donating or becoming a member!

The mainstream media is owned by bankers and corporate kingpins. Not only that, but it has been historically and presently infiltrated by covert government agencies, seeking to deceive and propagandize their agendas. The CIA has long had associations with major mainstream news publications. By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc. The CIA even ran a training program “to teach its agents to be journalists,” who were “then placed in major news organizations with help from management.”

At Global Research, we seek to not only expose and criticize the larger picture, but to point the finger at the media, itself, and examine who is lying, why they lie, and how they get away with it.

To continue in our endeavours, we need our readers to continue in their support.

One important and helpful thing that all of our readers can do is to help spread our name and information by “sharing and  “liking” our Facebook page here. We post articles daily that will appear in your news feed so that you don’t have to come to us, we can bring our information straight to you. “Like” our page and recommend us to your friends. Every bit helps! You can also subscribe to our RSS feed

You can also support us by continuing to send us your much needed donations which allow us to continue our day-to-day operations and help us expand our scope and content.

Supporting Global Research is supporting the cause of truth and the fight against media disinformation.

Thank you.

The Global Research Team

FOR ONLINE DONATIONS

For online donations, please click below:

VISIT THE DONATION PAGE

FOR DONATIONS BY MAIL

To send your donation by mail, kindly send your cheque or international money order, made out to CRG, to our postal address:

Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

PO Box 55019
11, Notre-Dame Ouest,

Montreal, QC, H2Y 4A7
CANADA

FOR DONATIONS BY FAX
For payment by fax, please print the credit card fax authorization form and fax your order and credit card details to Global Research at 514 656 5294

You can also support us by purchasing books from our store! Click to browse our titles.

A deluge of articles have been quickly put into circulation defending France’s military intervention in the African nation of Mali. TIME’s article, “The Crisis in Mali: Will French Intervention Stop the Islamist Advance?” decides that old tricks are the best tricks, and elects the tiresome “War on Terror” narrative.TIME claims the intervention seeks to stop “Islamist” terrorists from overrunning both Africa and all of Europe. Specifically, the article states:

“…there is a (probably well-founded) fear in France that a radical Islamist Mali threatens France most of all, since most of the Islamists are French speakers and many have relatives in France. (Intelligence sources in Paris have told TIME that they’ve identified aspiring jihadis leaving France for northern Mali to train and fight.) Al-Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), one of the three groups that make up the Malian Islamist alliance and which provides much of the leadership, has also designated France — the representative of Western power in the region — as a prime target for attack.”

What TIME elects not to tell readers is that Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is closely allied to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG whom France intervened on behalf of during NATO’s 2011 proxy-invasion of Libya – providing weapons, training, special forces and even aircraft to support them in the overthrow of Libya’s government.

As far back as August of 2011, Bruce Riedel out of the corporate-financier funded think-tank, the Brookings Institution, wrote “Algeria will be next to fall,” where he gleefully predicted success in Libya would embolden radical elements in Algeria, in particular AQIM. Between extremist violence and the prospect of French airstrikes, Riedel hoped to see the fall of the Algerian government. Ironically Riedel noted:

Algeria has expressed particular concern that the unrest in Libya could lead to the development of a major safe haven and sanctuary for al-Qaeda and other extremist jihadis.

And thanks to NATO, that is exactly what Libya has become – a Western sponsored sanctuary for Al-Qaeda. AQIM’s headway in northern Mali and now French involvement will see the conflict inevitably spill over into Algeria. It should be noted that Riedel is a co-author of “Which Path to Persia?” which openly conspires to arm yet another US State Department-listed terrorist organization (list as #28), the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) to wreak havoc across Iran and help collapse the government there – illustrating a pattern of using clearly terroristic organizations, even those listed as so by the US State Department, to carry out US foreign policy.Geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar noted a more direct connection between LIFG and AQIM in an Asia Times piece titled, “How al-Qaeda got to rule in Tripoli:”

“Crucially, still in 2007, then al-Qaeda’s number two, Zawahiri, officially announced the merger between the LIFG and al-Qaeda in the Islamic Mahgreb (AQIM). So, for all practical purposes, since then, LIFG/AQIM have been one and the same – and Belhaj was/is its emir. “

“Belhaj,” referring to Hakim Abdul Belhaj, leader of LIFG in Libya, led with NATO support, arms, funding, and diplomatic recognition, the overthrowing of Muammar Qaddafi and has now plunged the nation into unending racist and tribal, genocidal infighting. This intervention has also seen the rebellion’s epicenter of Benghazi peeling off from Tripoli as a semi-autonomous “Terror-Emirate.” Belhaj’s latest campaign has shifted to Syria where he was admittedly on the Turkish-Syrian border pledging weapons, money, and fighters to the so-called “Free Syrian Army,” again, under the auspices of NATO support.

LIFG, which with French arms, cash, and diplomatic support, is now invading northern Syria on behalf of NATO’s attempted regime change there, officially merged with Al Qaeda in 2007 according to the US Army’s West Point Combating Terrorism Center (CTC). According to the CTC, AQIM and LIFG share not only ideological goals, but strategic and even tactical objectives. The weapons LIFG received most certainly made their way into the hands of AQIM on their way through the porous borders of the Sahara Desert and into northern Mali.

It is no coincidence that as the Libyan conflict was drawing to a conclusion, conflict erupted in northern Mali. It is part of a premeditated geopolitical reordering that began with toppling Libya, and since then, using it as a springboard for invading other targeted nations, including Mali, Algeria, and Syria with heavily armed, NATO-funded and aided terrorists.

Algeria was able to balk subversion during the early phases of the US-engineered “Arab Spring” in 2011, but it surely has not escaped the attention of the West who is in the midst of transforming a region stretching from Africa to Beijing and Moscow’s doorsteps – and in a fit of geopolitical schizophrenia – using terrorists both as a casus belli to invade and as an inexhaustible mercenary force to do it.

Part I: Syria comes to the Russian Caucasus

On August 28 Sheikh Said Afandi, acknowledged spiritual leader of the Autonomous Russian Republic of Dagestan, was assassinated. A jihadist female suicide bomber managed to enter his house and detonate an explosive device.

The murder target had been carefully selected. Sheikh Afandi, a seventy-five-year old Sufi Muslim leader, had played the critical role in attempting to bring about reconciliation in Dagestan between jihadist Salafi Sunni Muslims and other factions, many of whom in Dagestan see themselves as followers of Sufi. With no replacement of his moral stature and respect visible, authorities fear possible outbreak of religious war in the tiny Russian autonomous republic.[1]

The police reported that the assassin was an ethnic Russian woman who had converted to Islam and was linked to an Islamic fundamentalist or Salafist insurgency against Russia and regional governments loyal to Moscow in the autonomous republics and across the volatile Muslim-populated North Caucasus region.

Ethnic Muslim populations in this region of Russia and of the former Soviet Union, including Uzbekistan, Kyrgystan and into China’s Xinjiang Province, have been the target of various US and NATO intelligence operations since the Cold War era ended in 1990. Washington sees manipulation of Muslim groups as the vehicle to bring uncontrollable chaos to Russia and Central Asia. It’s being carried out by some of the same organizations engaged in creating chaos and destruction inside Syria against the government of Bashar Al-Assad. In a real sense, as Russian security services clearly understand, if they don’t succeed in stopping the Jihadists insurgency in Syria, it will come home to them via the Caucasus.

The latest Salafist murders of Sufi and other moderate Muslim leaders in the Caucasus are apparently part of what is becoming ever clearer as perhaps the most dangerous US intelligence operation ever—playing globally with Muslim fundamentalism.

Previously US and allied intelligence services had played fast and loose with religious organizations or beliefs in one or another country. What makes the present situation particularly dangerous—notably since the decision in Washington to unleash the misnamed Arab Spring upheavals that began in Tunisia late 2010, spreading like a brushfire across the entire Islamic world from Afghanistan across Central Asia to Morocco—is the incalculable wave upon wave of killing, hatreds, destruction of entire cultures that Washington has unleashed in the name of that elusive dream named “democracy.” They do this using alleged Al-Qaeda groups, Saudi Salafists or Wahhabites, or using disciples of Turkey’s Fethullah Gülen Movement to ignite fires of religious hatred within Islam and against other faiths that could take decades to extinguish. It could easily spill over into a new World War.

Fundamentalism comes to Caucasus

Following the dissolution of the USSR, radical Afghanistani Mujahadeen, Islamists from Saudi Arabia, from Turkey, Pakistan and other Islamic countries flooded into the Muslim regions of the former USSR. One of the best-organized of these was the Gülen Movement of Fethullah Gülen, leader of a global network of Islamic schools and reported to be the major policy influence on Turkey’s Erdogan AKP party.

Gülen was quick to establish The International Dagestani-Turkish College in Dagestan. During the chaotic days after the Soviet collapse, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation officially registered and permitted unfettered activity for a variety of Islamic foundations and organizations. These included the League of the Islamic World, the World Muslim Youth Assembly, the reportedly Al-Qaeda friendly Saudi foundation ‘Ibrahim ben Abd al-Aziz al-Ibrahim.’ The blacklist also included Al-Haramein a Saudi foundation reported tied to Al-Qaeda, and IHH, [2] a Turkish organization banned in Germany, that allegedly raised funds for jihadi fighters in Bosnia, Chechnya, and Afghanistan, and was charged by French intelligence of ties to Al Qaeda.[3] Many of these charities were covers for fundamentalist Salafists with their own special agenda.

As many of the foreign Islamists in Chechnya and Dagestan were found involved in fomenting the regional unrest and civil war, Russian authorities withdrew permission of most to run schools and institutions. Throughout the North Caucasus at the time of the Chechyn war in the late 1990’s, there were more than two dozen Islamic institutes, some 200 madrassas and numerous maktabas (Koranic study schools) present at almost all mosques.

The International Dagestani-Turkish College was one that was forced to close its doors in Dagestan. The College was run by the Fethullah Gülen organization.[4]

At the point of the Russian crackdown on the spread of Salafist teaching inside Russia at the end of the 1990’s, there was an exodus of hundreds of young Dagestani and Chechyn Muslim students to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other places in The Middle east, reportedly to receive training with the Gülen movement and various Saudi-financed organizations, including Salafists. [5] It is believed in Russia that the students trained by Gülen supporters or Saudi and other Salafist fundamentalist centers then were sent back to Dagestan and the North Caucasus to spread their radical strain of Islam.

By 2005 the situation in the Caucasus was so influenced by this Salafist intervention that the Chechen Salafist, Doku Umarov, cited by the UN Security Council for links to Al-Qaeda,[6] unilaterally declared creation of what he called the Caucasus Emirate, announcing he planned to establish an Islamic state under Sharia law encompassing the entire North Caucasus region including Dagestan. He modestly proclaimed himself Emir of the Caucasus Emirate. [7]

*  *  *

*  *  *

 

Part II: Salafism at war with Sufi tradition

Salafism, known in Saudi Arabia as Wahhabism, is a fundamentalist strain of Islam which drew world attention and became notorious in March 2001 just weeks before the attacks of September 11. That was when the Salafist Taliban government in Afghanistan willfully dynamited and destroyed the historic gigantic Buddhas of Bamiyan on the ancient Silk Road, religious statues dating from the 6^th Century. The Taliban Salafist leaders also banned as “un-islamic” all forms of imagery, music and sports, including television, in accordance with what they considered a strict interpretation of Sharia.

Afghani sources reported that the order to destroy the Buddhas was made by Saudi-born jihadist Wahhabite, Osama bin Laden, who ultimately convinced Mullah Omar, Taliban supreme leader at the time to execute the act.[8]

Before and…After Salafist Taliban …

While Sufis incorporate the worship of saints and theatrical ceremonial prayers into their practice, Salafis condemn as idolatry any non-traditional forms of worship. They also call for the establishment of Islamic political rule and strict Sharia law. Sufism is home to the great spiritual and musical heritage of Islam, said by Islamic scholars to be the inner, mystical, or psycho-spiritual dimension of Islam, going back centuries.

As one Sufi scholar described the core of Sufism, “While all Muslims believe that they are on the pathway to God and will become close to God in Paradise–after death and the ‘Final Judgment’– Sufis believe as well that it is possible to become close to God and to experience this closeness–while one is alive. Furthermore, the attainment of the knowledge that comes with such intimacy with God, Sufis assert, is the very purpose of the creation. Here they mention the hadith qudsi in which God states, ‘I was a hidden treasure and I loved that I be known, so I created the creation in order to be known.’ Hence for the Sufis there is already a momentum, a continuous attraction on their hearts exerted by God, pulling them, in love, towards God.” [9]

The mystical Islamic current of Sufism and its striving to become close to or one with God is in stark contrast to the Jihadist Salafi or Wahhabi current that is armed with deadly weapons, preaches a false doctrine of jihad, and a perverse sense of martyrdom, committing countless acts of violence. Little wonder that the victims of Salafist Jihads are mostly other pacific forms of Islam including most especially Sufis.

The respected seventy-five year old Afandi had publicly denounced Salafist Islamic fundamentalism. His murder followed a July 19 coordinated attack on two high-ranking muftis in the Russian Volga Republic of Tatarstan. Both victims were state-approved religious leaders who had attacked radical Islam. This latest round of murders opens a new front in the Salafist war against Russia, namely attacks on moderate Sufi Muslim leaders.

Whether or not Dagestan now descends into internal religious civil war that then spreads across the geopolitically sensitive Russian Caucasus is not yet certain. What is almost certain is that the same circles who have been feeding violence and terror inside Syria against the regime of Alawite President Bashar al-Assad are behind the killing of Sheikh Afandi as well as sparking related acts of terror or unrest across Russia’s Muslim-populated Caucasus. In a very real sense it represents Russia’s nightmare scenario of “Syria coming to Russia.” It demonstrates dramatically why Putin has made such a determined effort to stop a descent into a murderous hell in Syria.

Salafism and the CIA

The existence of the so-called jihadist Salafi brand of Islam in Dagestan is quite recent. It has also been deliberately imported. Salafism is sometimes also called the name of the older Saudi-centered Wahhabism. Wahhabism is a minority originally-Bedouin form of the faith originating within Islam, dominant in Saudi Arabia since the 1700’s.

Irfan Al-Alawi and Stephen Schwartz of the Centre for Islamic Pluralism give the following description of Saudi conditions under the rigid Wahhabi brand of Islam:

“Women living under Saudi rule must wear the abaya, or total body cloak, and niqab, the face veil; they have limited opportunities for schooling and careers; they are prohibited from driving vehicles; are banned from social contact with men not relatives, and all personal activity must be supervised including opening bank accounts, by a male family member or “guardian.” These Wahhabi rules are enforced by a mutawiyin, or morals militia, also known as “the religious police,” officially designated the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (CPVPV) who patrol Saudi cities, armed with leather-covered sticks which they freely used against those they considered wayward. They raid homes looking for alcohol and drugs, and harassed non-Wahhabi Muslims as well as believers in other faiths.” [10]

It’s widely reported that the obscenely opulent and morally-perhaps-not-entirely-of- the-highest-standards Saudi Royal Family made a Faustian deal with Wahhabite leaders. The deal supposedly, was that the Wahhabists are free to export their fanatical brand of Islam around to the Islamic populations of the world in return for agreeing to leave the Saudi Royals alone.[11] There are, however, other dark and dirty spoons stirring the Wahhabite-Salafist Saudi stew.

Little known is the fact that the present form of aggressive Saudi Wahhabism, in reality a kind of fusion between imported jihadi Salafists from Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and the fundamentalist Saudi Wahhabites. Leading Salafist members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood were introduced into the Saudi Kingdom in the 1950’s by the CIA in a complex series of events, when Nasser cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood following an assassination attempt. By the 1960’s an influx of Egyptian members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Saudi Arabia fleeing Nasserite repression, had filled many of the leading teaching posts in Saudi religious schools. One student there was a young well-to-do Saudi, Osama bin Laden.  [12]

During the Third Reich, Hitler Germany had supported the Muslim Brotherhood as a weapon against the British in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East. Marc Erikson describes the Nazi roots of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood thus:

…as Italian and German fascism sought greater stakes in the Middle East in the 1930s and ’40s to counter British and French controlling power, close collaboration between fascist agents and Islamist leaders ensued. During the 1936-39 Arab Revolt, Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, head of German military intelligence, sent agents and money to support the Palestine uprising against the British, as did Muslim Brotherhood founder and “supreme guide” Hassan al-Banna. A key individual in the fascist-Islamist nexus and go-between for the Nazis and al-Banna became the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini.[13]

After the defeat of Germany, British Intelligence moved in to take over control of the Muslim Brotherhood. Ultimately, for financial and other reasons, the British decided to hand their assets within the Muslim Brotherhood over to their CIA colleagues in the 1950s. [14]

According to former US Justice Department Nazi researcher John Loftus,  “during the 1950s, the CIA evacuated the Nazis of the Muslim Brotherhood to Saudi Arabia. Now, when they arrived in Saudi Arabia, some of the leading lights of the Muslim Brotherhood, like Dr Abdullah Azzam, became the teachers in the madrassas, the religious schools. And there they combined the doctrines of Nazism with this weird Islamic cult, Wahhabism.” [15]

“Everyone thinks that Islam is this fanatical religion, but it is not,” Loftus continues. “They think that Islam–the Saudi version of Islam–is typical, but it’s not. The Wahhabi cult has been condemned as a heresy more than 60 times by the Muslim nations. But when the Saudis got wealthy, they bought a lot of silence. This is a very harsh cult. Wahhabism was only practised by the Taliban and in Saudi Arabia–that’s how extreme it is. It really has nothing to do with Islam. Islam is a very peaceful and tolerant religion. It always had good relationships with the Jews for the first thousand years of its existence.” [16]

Loftus identified the significance of what today is emerging from the shadows to take over Egypt under Muslim Brotherhood President Morsi, and the so-called Syrian National Council, dominated in reality by the Muslim Brotherhood and publicly led by the more “politically correct” or presentable likes of Bassma Kodmani. Kodmani, foreign affairs spokesman for the SNC was twice an invited guest at the Bilderberg elite gathering, latest in Chantilly, Virginia earlier this year.[17]

The most bizarre and alarming feature of the US-financed  regime changes set into motion in 2010, which have led to the destruction of the secular Arab regime of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muhammar Qaddafi in Libya, and the secular regime of President Ben Ali in Tunisia, and which have wreaked savage destruction across the Middle East, especially in the past eighteen months in Syria, is the pattern of emerging power grabs by representatives of the murky Salafist Muslim Brotherhood.

By informed accounts, a Saudi-financed Sunni Islamic Muslim Brotherhood dominates the members of the exile Syrian National Council that is backed by the US State Department’s Secretary Clinton and by Hollande’s France. The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood is tied, not surprisingly to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood of President Mohammed Morsi who recently in a meeting of the Non-Aligned in Iran called openly for the removal of Syria’s Assad, a logical step if his Muslim Brothers in the present Syrian National Council are to take the reins of power. The Saudis are also rumored to have financed the ascent to power in Tunisia of the governing Islamist Ennahda Party,[18] and are documented to be financing the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated Syrian National Council against President Bashar al-Assad. [19]

Part III: Morsi’s Reign of Salafi Terror

Indicative of the true agenda of this Muslim Brotherhood and related jihadists today is the fact that once they have power, they drop the veil of moderation and reconciliation and reveal their violently intolerant roots. This is visible in Egypt today under Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi.

Unreported in mainstream Western media to date are alarming direct reports from Christian missionary organizations in Egypt that Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood has already begun to drop the veil of “moderation and conciliation” and show its brutal totalitarian Salafist colors, much as Khomeini’s radical Sharia forces did in Iran after taking control in 1979-81.

In a letter distributed by the Christian Aid Mission (CAM), a Christian Egyptian missionary wrote that Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood “announced they would destroy the country if Morsi didn’t win, but they also said they will take revenge from all those who voted for [his opponent Ahmed] Shafiq, especially the Christians as they are sure we did vote for Shafiq. Yesterday they began by killing two believers in el Sharqiya because of this,” the missionary added, speaking on condition of anonymity.[20]

This report came only weeks after Egyptian State TV (under Morsi’s control) showed ghastly video footage of a convert from Islam to Christianity being murdered by Muslims. The footage showed a young man being held down by masked men with a knife to his throat. As one man was heard chanting Muslim prayers in Arabic, mostly condemning Christianity, another man holding the knife to the Christian convert’s throat began to cut, slowly severing the head amid cries of “Allahu Akbar” (“Allah is great”), according to transcripts. In the letter, the Egyptian missionary leader added that, “soon after Morsi won, Christians in upper Egypt were forcibly prevented from going to churches.” Many Muslims, the letter claimed, “also began to speak to women in the streets that they had to wear Islamic clothing including the head covering. They act as if they got the country for their own, it’s theirs now.” [21]

Already in 2011 Morsi’s Salafist followers began attacking and destroying Sufi mosques across Egypt. According to the authoritative newspaper Al-Masry Al-Youm (Today’s Egyptian), 16 historic mosques in Alexandria belonging to Sufi orders have been marked for destruction by so-called ‘Salafis’. Alexandria has 40 mosques associated with Sufis, and is the headquarters for 36 Sufi groups. Half a million Sufis live in the city, out of a municipal total of four million people. Aggression against the Sufis in Egypt has included a raid on Alexandria’s most distinguished mosque, named for, and housing, the tomb of the 13th century Sufi Al-Mursi Abu’l Abbas.[22]

Notably, the so-called “democratically elected” regime in Libya following the toppling of Mohamar Qaddafi by NATO bombs in 2011, has also been zealous in destroying Sufi mosques and places of worhip. In August this year, UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova expressed “grave concern” at the destruction by Islamic Jihadists of Sufi sites in Zliten, Misrata and Tripoli and urged perpetrators to “cease the destruction immediately.” [23] Under behind-the-scenes machinations the Libyan government is dominated by Jihadists and by followers of the Muslim Brotherhood, as in Tunisia and Egypt. [24]

The explosive cocktail of violence inherent in allowing the rise to power of Salafist Islamists across the Middle East was clear to see, symbolically enough on the night of September 11,^th when a mob of angry supporters of the fanatical Salafist group, Ansar Al-Sharia, murdered the US Ambassador to Libya and three US diplomats, burning the US Consulate in Bengazi to the ground in protest over a YouTube release of a film by an American filmmaker showing the Prophet Mohammed indulging in multiple sex affairs and casting doubt on his role as God’s messenger. Ironically that US Ambassador had played a key role in toppling Qaddafi and opening the door to the Salafist takeover in Libya. At the same time angry mobs of thousands of Salafists surrounded the US Embassy in Cairo in protest to the US film. [25]

Ansar Al-Sharia (“Partisans of Islamic law” in Arabic) reportedly is a spinoff of Al-Qaeda and claims organizations across the Middle East from Yemen to Tunisia to Iraq, Egypt and Libya. Ansar al-Sharia says it is reproducing the model of Sharia or strict Islamic law espoused by the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Islamic State of Iraq, a militant umbrella group that includes al-Qaeda in Iraq. The core of the group are jihadists who came out of an “Islamic state”, either in Afghanistan in the mid-1990s, or among jihadists in Iraq after the US-led invasion in 2003.[26]

The deliberate detonation now of a new round of Salafist fundamentalist Jihad terror inside Muslim regions of the Russian Caucasus is exquisitely timed politically to put maximum pressure at home on the government of Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Putin and the Russian Government are the strongest and most essential backer of the current Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, and for Russia as well the maintenance of Russia’s only Mediterranean naval base at Syria’s Tartus port is vital strategically. At the same time, Obama’s sly message to Medvedev to wait until Obama’s re-election to evaluate US intent towards Russia and Putin’s cryptic recent comment that a compromise with a re-elected President Obama might be possible, but not with a President Romney, [27] indicate that the Washington “stick-and-carrot” or hard cop-soft cop tactics with Moscow might tempt Russia to sacrifice major geopolitical alliances, perhaps even that special close and recent geopolitical alliance with China.[28] Were that to happen, the World might witness a “reset” in US-Russian relations with catastrophic consequences for world peace.

F. William Engdahl*  is the author of Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order

Notes:

Dear Readers,

Welcome to the newly redesigned Global Research website!

We are very proud to launch an updated version of our website, featuring the same timely and analytical content as before, in a display that will be easier for our readers to navigate so that you can get the information you need as quickly and easily as possible.

On this website, you will be able to access an archive of more than 30,000 articles published by Global Research.

We thank all of our readers for the feedback you have sent us over the years and hope you will enjoy your browsing experience.

These changes would not be possible without your support, and for that we extend our sincere appreciation.

To help us cover the costs of important projects and necessary upgrades like this, we kindly ask that you consider making a donation to Global Research.

We also take this opportunity to invite you to become a Member of Global Research

If we stand together, we can fight media lies and expose the truth. There is too much at stake to choose ignorance.

Be aware, stay informed, spread the message of peace far and wide.

Feedback and suggestions regarding our new website are most welcome. To post a comment, kindly visit us on the Global Research facebook page

Sincerely,

 

The Global Research Team

O regime de Kiev é absolutamente incapaz de manter o controle sobre o que acontece no país. Numa declaração recente, o Ministério do Interior anunciou que não possui informações sobre a localização de todas as armas que foram distribuídas à população ucraniana desde o estabelecimento da lei marcial – imediatamente após o lançamento da operação militar especial da Rússia. Isto significa que milhões de armas circulam livremente pelo país – ou mesmo no estrangeiro – e podem acabar nas mãos de criminosos e terroristas. Porém, mais do que isso, a verdadeira preocupação parece ser com a possibilidade de o povo ucraniano iniciar uma revolta contra o governo.

Igor Klimenko, Ministro do Interior da Ucrânia, afirmou em 12 de Abril que muitas das armas distribuídas aos cidadãos simplesmente já não estão sob controle governamental. Não existem dados que comprovem a localização das armas, impedindo assim qualquer tipo de controle sobre a circulação destes equipamentos. Isso tem causado preocupação ao governo, que tenta criar mecanismos para recuperar as armas – ou pelo menos localizá-las e monitorá-las.

“Quantas armas nossos cidadãos têm nas mãos? Entre 1 e 5 milhões (…) Quantas granadas? Bastante também (…) Nós (…) entendemos que deveriam tê-lo porque há uma guerra em curso”, disse o Ministro.

Os legisladores ucranianos estão atualmente a trabalhar num projeto de lei que estabelece um procedimento oficial que obriga os cidadãos a entregar ou registar as suas armas. No início das hostilidades com a Rússia, o Ministério do Interior distribuiu milhões de armas aos civis. O suposto objetivo era fortalecer a população e criar milícias populares para proteger as cidades ucranianas dos “invasores” russos.

Além de armas de fogo, também foram entregues granadas a cidadãos comuns, o que demonstra o elevado nível de irresponsabilidade por parte do governo ucraniano. Para piorar a situação, muitos veteranos regressam da linha da frente com armas capturadas que guardam como “troféus”, o que torna ainda mais difícil às autoridades terem controle sobre o equipamento militar que circula no país.

Obviamente, a distribuição irresponsável de armas às pessoas comuns pode ter consequências catastróficas. O governo afirma estar particularmente preocupado com o fato de muitos soldados regressarem a casa com problemas mentais devido ao stress no campo de batalha. Pessoas nestas condições de saúde não deveriam portar armas, pois poderiam representar um risco para a sociedade. Embora válido, o argumento não parece suficiente para explicar as preocupações do regime.

O governo ucraniano nunca demonstrou qualquer preocupação real com a saúde mental das suas tropas. Pessoas com problemas mentais estão até sendo enviadas para o front, além de os soldados serem obrigados a permanecer no campo de batalha por um longo período, ignorando quaisquer protocolos de saúde. O regime neonazista é bem conhecido pelo seu desrespeito pela vida dos cidadãos comuns e pela sua indiferença pela saúde dos soldados, razão pela qual tal preocupação não parece ser a verdadeira razão pela qual a Ucrânia quer recuperar o controle sobre as armas.

Além disso, é necessário recordar que, desde 2022, as autoridades russas têm relatado a presença de armas ucranianas fornecidas pelo Ocidente com grupos terroristas em todo o mundo, mesmo em África. Kiev sempre ignorou o fato evidente de que as suas armas estavam no mercado negro, razão pela qual esta não parece ser a verdadeira explicação por trás do desespero do regime em controlar a circulação de armas a partir de agora.

Certamente, Zelensky e a sua equipe estão particularmente preocupados com a crescente insatisfação popular e a possibilidade de uma revolta em massa. Apesar de ser uma medida perigosa e irresponsável, armar civis garante inevitavelmente maior poder de rebelião aos cidadãos comuns. Com armas nas mãos, os civis ucranianos poderiam criar milícias populares de autodefesa, não contra os russos (como planejou Kiev), mas também contra o próprio regime neonazista e as suas políticas ditatoriais.

Com pessoas armadas dispostas a proteger-se e a resistir às medidas do regime, pode tornar-se impossível para Kiev continuar a manter o sistema de recrutamento forçado a longo prazo, por exemplo. Estando o povo ucraniano cada vez mais insatisfeito com a guerra, parece que Kiev teme que haja revoltas populares contra as autoridades – o que, considerando a posse de armas pelo povo, poderá levar a uma guerra civil e ao colapso imediato do regime.

Na verdade, a Ucrânia encontra-se numa situação cada vez mais complicada. Será difícil recuperar o controle sobre as armas distribuídas, pois certamente o cidadão comum não aceitará obedecer à nova lei – e poderá se defender de represálias justamente por estar armado. Sem a confiança e o apoio do seu próprio povo, o regime não parece ter boas expectativas, sendo a derrota uma mera questão de tempo.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

 

Artigo em inglês : Kiev admite que não tem controle sobre as armas que foram distribuídas aos cidadãos comuns, InfoBrics, 16 de Abril de 2024.

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, jornalista, pesquisador do Center for Geostrategic Studies, consultor geopolítico.

Você pode seguir Lucas Leiroz em: https://t.me/lucasleiroz e https://twitter.com/leiroz_lucas

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

On April 17, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban spoke at this year’s National Conservatism (NatCon) conference, a gathering of conservative political parties in the European Union, as the name aptly suggests. Dubbed the “gathering of Europe’s far right” by the mainstream propaganda machine, NatCon is indeed opposed to the ultra-liberal ideology and policies of the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. Thus, it’s hardly surprising that Orban was quite critical of the troubled bloc’s numerous failures, as he openly urged voters to reject mainstream political parties in the upcoming EU elections. Orban even called on the political leadership in Brussels to resign, pointing out that all of their major projects and policies, such as the so-called “green transition”, sustainable development, migration, military and sanctions, etc. failed.

“The sense of this European election is: change the leadership,” he stated, adding: “If the leadership proves to be bad, it must be replaced. That’s so simple.”

For the Associated Press, this was “too much”, as the major mainstream propaganda machine outlet complained about the applause that Orban, a “right-wing populist leader” according to them, got for those words. He also criticized the EU’s suicidal climate policies and agriculture rules that make it impossible for farmers across the EU to stay in business. In addition, Orban warned that the ongoing migration crisis is getting out of hand and that the possible admission of the Kiev regime to the EU or NATO should not be allowed, primarily for economic and security reasons. He also criticized the European Commission, the bloc’s effectively unelected executive body, for using the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse to attack his country, slamming the EC for an attempt to “suffocate Hungary financially”.

And indeed, the Brussels bureaucrats illegally denied giving Budapest access to billions of euros in funds over alleged “concerns about democratic backsliding in the country”, as well as the “possible mismanagement of EU money”. In Orban’s view, this is nothing more than an attempt to blackmail the country due to his strong stance on all of the aforementioned policies and ideologies that the political West subscribes to nowadays. He also reiterated that the failures extend to the self-defeating sanctions on Russia. The mainstream propaganda machine usually accuses Orban of being a supposed “staunch ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin” for such a stance, particularly when it comes to his opposition to the change of Ukraine’s status as a potential geopolitical buffer zone between the EU/NATO and Russia.

In addition, Orban called the Neo-Nazi junta “just a protectorate relying on Western money and weapons, not a sovereign state anymore”. Expectedly, this wasn’t met with approval in Brussels, which even tried to prevent this year’s NatCon, citing alleged “security concerns” as the excuse for it. The AP called the conference “a gathering of strident nationalists and fundamentalist Christians”, complaining about the fact that it resumed after winning a legal challenge against Brussels city authorities which tried to prevent it under the pretext that it posed “a threat to public order”. Other prominent EU conservative figures, such as Eric Zemmour from France, were to attend the NatCon. However, Zemmour was held by the police, preventing his address about the EU’s immigration rules that can only be described as suicidal.

And while the mainstream propaganda machine is shrieking at the very idea someone would dare criticize and strongly oppose any (let alone all) of the aforementioned policies, the obvious question arises – is the so-called “far right” in the EU right (no pun intended)? Can anyone really refute Orban’s claim that the political leadership in Brussels is incompetent when they say things like “Russia is losing so badly that its military is forced to take chips out of washing machines“? Such ludicrous propaganda myths clearly indicate that the so-called “EU elites” are far more like flea market salesmen, rather than leaders who could ever be taken seriously. What’s more, Orban is certainly not alone in his criticism, as Prime Minister Robert Fico of the neighboring Slovakia expressed similar concerns, particularly about Ukraine.

As for the extremely controversial EU Asylum and Migration Pact recently approved by the European Parliament, which will effectively force member states to accept their “fair share of new immigrants” or pay a fine for every migrant they reject, the conservative parties are furious, and rightfully so, it should be noted.

While the EU, a mere geopolitical pendant of NATO at this point, is allocating hundreds of billions to the deeply corrupt Neo-Nazi junta, farmers across the bloc are faced with a plethora of issues that will soon spill over to other industries and sectors of fledgling European economies. The unelected Brussels bureaucrats believe that encouraging their (neo)colonialist policies through immigration might ameliorate some of those issues by essentially importing more cheap labor force.

However, the conservatives are (rightfully) concerned about the demographic and security consequences of such policies. The extremist ultra-liberal ideology that the political West increasingly subscribes to is incompatible with the more traditional values of both the immigrants and indigenous Europeans. This is already causing a plethora of societal and safety problems across the continent, so encouraging immigration will only exacerbate the situation. The ongoing deindustrialization of the EU’s most powerful economies is certainly not making things better, as the largely unskilled labor force that most immigrants belong to will not be able to contribute economically, which opens a lot of questions about potential security risks in the foreseeable future. However, asking about it is usually deemed too “far right”.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

Today April 7, 2024, we commemorate the April 7, 1994 Genocide. Thirty years ago. 

***

Originally written in May 2000, the following text is Part II of Chapter 7 entitled “Economic Genocide in Rwanda”, of the Second Edition of The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order , Global Research, 2003. 

This text updates the author’s analysis on Rwanda written in 1995 , which was published in the first edition.

To order  The Globalization of Poverty, click here .

***

This text is in part based on the results of a study conducted by the author together with Belgian economist and Senator Pierre Galand on the use of Rwanda’s 1990-94 external debt to finance the military and paramilitary.

***

The civil war in Rwanda and the ethnic massacres were an integral part of US foreign policy, carefully staged in accordance with precise strategic and economic objectives.

From the outset of the Rwandan civil war in 1990, Washington’s hidden agenda consisted in establishing an American sphere of influence in a region historically dominated by France and Belgium. America’s design was to displace France by supporting the Rwandan Patriotic Front and by arming and equipping its military arm, the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA)

From the mid-1980s, the Kampala government under President Yoweri Musaveni had become Washington’s African showpiece of “democracy”. Uganda had also become a launchpad for US sponsored guerilla movements into the Sudan, Rwanda and the Congo. Major General Paul Kagame had been head of military intelligence in the Ugandan Armed Forces; he had been trained at the U.S. Army Command and Staff College (CGSC) in Leavenworth, Kansas which focuses on warfighting and military strategy. Kagame returned from Leavenworth to lead the RPA, shortly after the 1990 invasion.

Prior to the outbreak of the Rwandan civil war, the RPA was part of the Ugandan Armed Forces. Shortly prior to the October 1990 invasion of Rwanda, military labels were switched. From one day to the next, large numbers of Ugandan soldiers joined the ranks of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA). Throughout the civil war, the RPA was supplied from United People’s Defense Forces (UPDF) military bases inside Uganda. The Tutsi commissioned officers in the Ugandan army took over positions in the RPA. The October 1990 invasion by Ugandan forces was presented to public opinion as a war of liberation by a Tutsi led guerilla army.

Militarization of Uganda

The militarization of Uganda was an integral part of US foreign policy. The build-up of the Ugandan UPDF Forces and of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) had been supported by the US and Britain. The British had provided military training at the Jinja military base:

“From 1989 onwards, America supported joint RPF [Rwandan Patriotic Front]-Ugandan attacks upon Rwanda… There were at least 56 ‘situation reports’ in [US] State Department files in 1991… As American and British relations with Uganda and the RPF strengthened, so hostilities between Uganda and Rwanda escalated… By August 1990 the RPF had begun preparing an invasion with the full knowledge and approval of British intelligence. 20

Troops from Rwanda’s RPA and Uganda’s UPDF had also supported John Garang’s People’s Liberation Army in its secessionist war in southern Sudan. Washington was firmly behind these initiatives with covert support provided by the CIA. 21

Moreover, under the Africa Crisis Reaction Initiative (ACRI), Ugandan officers were also being trained by US Special Forces in collaboration with a mercenary outfit, Military Professional Resources Inc (MPRI) which was on contract with the US Department of State. MPRI had provided similar training to the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) and the Croatian Armed Forces during the Yugoslav civil war and more recently to the Colombian Military in the context of Plan Colombia.

Militarization and the Ugandan External Debt

The buildup of the Ugandan external debt under President Musaveni coincided chronologically with the Rwandan and Congolese civil wars. With the accession of Musaveni to the presidency in 1986, the Ugandan external debt stood at 1.3 billion dollars. With the gush of fresh money, the external debt spiraled overnight, increasing almost threefold to 3.7 billion by 1997. In fact, Uganda had no outstanding debt to the World Bank at the outset of its “economic recovery program”. By 1997, it owed almost 2 billion dollars solely to the World Bank. 22

Where did the money go? The foreign loans to the Musaveni government had been tagged to support the country’s economic and social reconstruction. In the wake of a protracted civil war, the IMF sponsored “economic stabilization program” required massive budget cuts of all civilian programs.

The World Bank was responsible for monitoring the Ugandan budget on behalf of the creditors. Under the “public expenditure review” (PER), the government was obliged to fully reveal the precise allocation of its budget. In other words, every single category of expenditure –including the budget of the Ministry of Defense– was open to scrutiny by the World Bank. Despite the austerity measures (imposed solely on “civilian” expenditures), the donors had allowed defense spending to increase without impediment.

Part of the money tagged for civilian programs had been diverted into funding the United People’s Defense Force (UPDF) which in turn was involved in military operations in Rwanda and the Congo. The Ugandan external debt was being used to finance these military operations on behalf of Washington with the country and its people ultimately footing the bill. In fact by curbing social expenditures, the austerity measures had facilitated the reallocation of State of revenue in favor of the Ugandan military.

Financing both Sides in the Civil War

A similar process of financing military expenditure from the external debt had occurred in Rwanda under the Habyarimana government. In a cruel irony, both sides in the civil war were financed by the same donors institutions with the World Bank acting as a Watchdog.

The Habyarimana regime had at its disposal an arsenal of military equipment, including 83mm missile launchers, French made Blindicide, Belgian and German made light weaponry, and automatic weapons such as kalachnikovs made in Egypt, China and South Africa [as well as … armored AML-60 and M3 armored vehicles.23 While part of these purchases had been financed by direct military aid from France, the influx of development loans from the World Bank’s soft lending affiliate the International Development Association (IDA), the African Development Fund (AFD), the European Development Fund (EDF) as well as from Germany, the United States, Belgium and Canada had been diverted into funding the military and Interhamwe militia.

A detailed investigation of government files, accounts and correspondence conducted in Rwanda in 1996-97 by the author –together with Belgian economist Pierre Galand– confirmed that many of the arms purchases had been negotiated outside the framework of government to government military aid agreements through various intermediaries and private arms dealers. These transactions –recorded as bona fide government expenditures– had nonetheless been included in the State budget which was under the supervision of the World Bank. Large quantities of machetes and other items used in the 1994 ethnic massacres –routinely classified as “civilian commodities” — had been imported through regular trading channels. 24

According to the files of the National Bank of Rwanda (NBR), some of these imports had been financed in violation of agreements signed with the donors. According to NBR records of import invoices, approximately one million machetes had been imported through various channels including Radio Mille Collines, an organization linked to the Interhamwe militia and used to foment ethnic hatred. 25

The money had been earmarked by the donors to support Rwanda’s economic and social development. It was clearly stipulated that funds could not be used to import: “military expenditures on arms, ammunition and other military material”. 26 In fact, the loan agreement with the World Bank’s IDA was even more stringent. The money could not be used to import civilian commodities such as fuel, foodstuffs, medicine, clothing and footwear “destined for military or paramilitary use”. The records of the NBR nonetheless confirm that the Habyarimana government used World Bank money to finance the import of machetes which had been routinely classified as imports of “civilian commodities.” 27

An army of consultants and auditors had been sent in by World Bank to assess the Habyarimana government’s “policy performance” under the loan agreement.28 The use of donor funds to import machetes and other material used in the massacres of civilians did not show up in the independent audit commissioned by the government and the World Bank. (under the IDA loan agreement. (IDA Credit Agreement. 2271-RW).29 In 1993, the World Bank decided to suspend the disbursement of the second installment of its IDA loan. There had been, according to the World Bank mission unfortunate “slip-ups” and “delays” in policy implementation. The free market reforms were no longer “on track”, the conditionalities –including the privatization of state assets– had not been met. The fact that the country was involved in a civil war was not even mentioned. How the money was spent was never an issue.30

Whereas the World Bank had frozen the second installment (tranche) of the IDA loan, the money granted in 1991 had been deposited in a Special Account at the Banque Bruxelles Lambert in Brussels. This account remained open and accessible to the former regime (in exile), two months after the April 1994 ethnic massacres.31

Postwar Cover-up

In the wake of the civil war, the World Bank sent a mission to Kigali with a view to drafting a so-called loan “Completion Report”.32 This was a routine exercise, largely focussing on macro-economic rather than political issues. The report acknowledged that “the war effort prompted the [former] government to increase substantially spending, well beyond the fiscal targets agreed under the SAP.33 The misappropriation of World Bank money was not mentioned. Instead the Habyarimana government was praised for having “made genuine major efforts– especially in 1991– to reduce domestic and external financial imbalances, eliminate distortions hampering export growth and diversification and introduce market based mechanisms for resource allocation…” 34, The massacres of civilians were not mentioned; from the point of view of the donors, “nothing had happened”. In fact the World Bank completion report failed to even acknowledge the existence of a civil war prior to April 1994.

In the wake of the Civil War: Reinstating the IMF’s Deadly Economic Reforms

In 1995, barely a year after the 1994 ethnic massacres. Rwanda’s external creditors entered into discussions with the Tutsi led RPF government regarding the debts of the former regime which had been used to finance the massacres. The RPF decided to fully recognize the legitimacy of the “odious debts” of the 1990-94. RPF strongman Vice-President Paul Kagame [now President] instructed the Cabinet not to pursue the matter nor to approach the World Bank. Under pressure from Washington, the RPF was not to enter into any form of negotiations, let alone an informal dialogue with the donors.

The legitimacy of the wartime debts was never questioned. Instead, the creditors had carefully set up procedures to ensure their prompt reimbursement. In 1998 at a special donors’ meeting in Stockholm, a Multilateral Trust Fund of 55.2 million dollars was set up under the banner of postwar reconstruction.35 In fact, none of this money was destined for Rwanda. It had been earmarked to service Rwanda’s “odious debts” with the World Bank (–i.e. IDA debt), the African Development Bank and the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).

In other words, “fresh money” –which Rwanda will eventually have to reimburse– was lent to enable Rwanda to service the debts used to finance the massacres. Old loans had been swapped for new debts under the banner of post-war reconstruction.36 The “odious debts” had been whitewashed, they had disappeared from the books. The creditor’s responsibility had been erased. Moreover, the scam was also conditional upon the acceptance of a new wave of IMF-World Bank reforms.

Post War “Reconstruction and Reconciliation”

Bitter economic medicine was imposed under the banner of “reconstruction and reconciliation”. In fact the IMF post-conflict reform package was far stringent than that imposed at the outset of the civil war in 1990. While wages and employment had fallen to abysmally low levels, the IMF had demanded a freeze on civil service wages alongside a massive retrenchment of teachers and health workers. The objective was to “restore macro-economic stability”. A downsizing of the civil service was launched.37 Civil service wages were not to exceed 4.5 percent of GDP, so-called “unqualified civil servants” (mainly teachers) were to be removed from the State payroll. 38

Meanwhile, the country’s per capita income had collapsed from $360 (prior to the war) to $140 in 1995. State revenues had been tagged to service the external debt. Kigali’s Paris Club debts were rescheduled in exchange for “free market” reforms. Remaining State assets were sold off to foreign capital at bargain prices.

The Tutsi led RPF government rather than demanding the cancellation of Rwanda’s odious debts, had welcomed the Bretton Woods institutions with open arms. They needed the IMF “greenlight” to boost the development of the military.

Despite the austerity measures, defense expenditure continued to grow. The 1990-94 pattern had been reinstated. The development loans granted since 1995 were not used to finance the country’s economic and social development. Outside money had again been diverted into financing a military buildup, this time of the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA). And this build-up of the RPA occurred in the period immediately preceding the outbreak of civil war in former Zaire.

Civil War in the Congo

Following the installation of a US client regime in Rwanda in 1994, US trained Rwandan and Ugandan forces intervened in former Zaire –a stronghold of French and Belgian influence under President Mobutu Sese Seko. Amply documented, US special operations troops — mainly Green Berets from the 3rd Special Forces Group based at Fort Bragg, N.C.– had been actively training the RPA. This program was a continuation of the covert support and military aid provided to the RPA prior to 1994. In turn, the tragic outcome of the Rwandan civil war including the refugee crisis had set the stage for the participation of Ugandan and Rwandan RPA in the civil war in the Congo:

“Washington pumped military aid into Kagame’s army, and U.S. Army Special Forces and other military personnel trained hundreds of Rwandan troops. But Kagame and his colleagues had designs of their own. While the Green Berets trained the Rwandan Patriotic Army, that army was itself secretly training Zairian rebels.… [In] Rwanda, U.S. officials publicly portrayed their engagement with the army as almost entirely devoted to human rights training. But the Special Forces exercises also covered other areas, including combat skills… Hundreds of soldiers and officers were enrolled in U.S. training programs, both in Rwanda and in the United States… [C]onducted by U.S. Special Forces, Rwandans studied camouflage techniques, small-unit movement, troop-leading procedures, soldier-team development, [etc]… And while the training went on, U.S. officials were meeting regularly with Kagame and other senior Rwandan leaders to discuss the continuing military threat faced by the [former Rwandan] government [in exile] from inside Zaire… Clearly, the focus of Rwandan-U.S. military discussion had shifted from how to build human rights to how to combat an insurgency… With [Ugandan President] Museveni’s support, Kagame conceived a plan to back a rebel movement in eastern Zaire [headed by Laurent Desire Kabila] … The operation was launched in October 1996, just a few weeks after Kagame’s trip to Washington and the completion of the Special Forces training mission… Once the war [in the Congo] started, the United States provided “political assistance” to Rwanda,… An official of the U.S. Embassy in Kigali traveled to eastern Zaire numerous times to liaise with Kabila. Soon, the rebels had moved on. Brushing off the Zairian army with the help of the Rwandan forces, they marched through Africa’s third-largest nation in seven months, with only a few significant military engagements. Mobutu fled the capital, Kinshasa, in May 1997, and Kabila took power, changing the name of the country to Congo…U.S. officials deny that there were any U.S. military personnel with Rwandan troops in Zaire during the war, although unconfirmed reports of a U.S. advisory presence have circulated in the region since the war’s earliest days.39

American Mining Interests

At stake in these military operations in the Congo were the extensive mining resources of Eastern and Southern Zaire including strategic reserves of cobalt — of crucial importance for the US defense industry. During the civil war several months before the downfall of Mobutu, Laurent Desire Kabila basedin Goma, Eastern Zaire had renegotiated the mining contracts with several US and British mining companies including American Mineral Fields (AMF), a company headquartered in President Bill Clinton’s hometown of Hope, Arkansas.40

Meanwhile back in Washington, IMF officials were busy reviewing Zaire’s macro-economic situation. No time was lost. The post-Mobutu economic agenda had already been decided upon. In a study released in April 1997 barely a month before President Mobutu Sese Seko fled the country, the IMF had recommended “halting currency issue completely and abruptly” as part of an economic recovery programme.41 And a few months later upon assuming power in Kinshasa, the new government of Laurent Kabila Desire was ordered by the IMF to freeze civil service wages with a view to “restoring macro-economic stability.” Eroded by hyperinflation, the average public sector wage had fallen to 30,000 new Zaires (NZ) a month, the equivalent of one U.S. dollar.42

The IMF’s demands were tantamount to maintaining the entire population in abysmal poverty. They precluded from the outset a meaningful post-war economic reconstruction, thereby contributing to fuelling the continuation of the Congolese civil war in which close to 2 million people have died.

Concluding Remarks

The civil war in Rwanda was a brutal struggle for political power between the Hutu-led Habyarimana government supported by France and the Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) backed financially and militarily by Washington. Ethnic rivalries were used deliberately in the pursuit of geopolitical objectives. Both the CIA and French intelligence were involved.

In the words of former Cooperation Minister Bernard Debré in the government of Prime Minister Henri Balladur:

“What one forgets to say is that, if France was on one side, the Americans were on the other, arming the Tutsis who armed the Ugandans. I don’t want to portray a showdown between the French and the Anglo-Saxons, but the truth must be told.” 43

In addition to military aid to the warring factions, the influx of development loans played an important role in “financing the conflict.” In other words, both the Ugandan and Rwanda external debts were diverted into supporting the military and paramilitary. Uganda’s external debt increased by more than 2 billion dollars, –i.e. at a significantly faster pace than that of Rwanda (an increase of approximately 250 million dollars from 1990 to 1994). In retrospect, the RPA — financed by US military aid and Uganda’s external debt– was much better equipped and trained than the Forces Armées du Rwanda (FAR) loyal to President Habyarimana. From the outset, the RPA had a definite military advantage over the FAR.

According to the testimony of Paul Mugabe, a former member of the RPF High Command Unit, Major General Paul Kagame had personally ordered the shooting down of President Habyarimana’s plane with a view to taking control of the country.

He was fully aware that the assassination of Habyarimana would unleash “a genocide” against Tutsi civilians. RPA forces had been fully deployed in Kigali at the time the ethnic massacres took place and did not act to prevent it from happening:

The decision of Paul Kagame to shoot Pres. Habyarimana’s aircraft was the catalyst of an unprecedented drama in Rwandan history, and Major-General Paul Kagame took that decision with all awareness.

Kagame’s ambition caused the extermination of all of our families: Tutsis, Hutus and Twas. We all lost. Kagame’s take-over took away the lives of a large number of Tutsis and caused the unnecessary exodus of millions of Hutus, many of whom were innocent under the hands of the genocide ringleaders. Some naive Rwandans proclaimed Kagame as their savior, but time has demonstrated that it was he who caused our suffering and misfortunes…

Can Kagame explain to the Rwandan people why he sent Claude Dusaidi and Charles Muligande to New York and Washington to stop the UN military intervention which was supposed to be sent and protect the Rwandan people from the genocide? The reason behind avoiding that military intervention was to allow the RPF leadership the takeover of the Kigali Government and to show the world that they – the RPF – were the ones who stopped the genocide.

We will all remember that the genocide occurred during three months, even though Kagame has said that he was capable of stopping it the first week after the aircraft crash. Can Major-General Paul Kagame explain why he asked to MINUAR to leave Rwandan soil within hours while the UN was examining the possibility of increasing its troops in Rwanda in order to stop the genocide?44

Paul Mugabe’s testimony regarding the shooting down of Habyarimana’s plane ordered by Kagame is corroborated by intelligence documents and information presented to the French parliamentary inquiry.

Major General Paul Kagame was an instrument of Washington. The loss of African lives did not matter. The civil war in Rwanda and the ethnic massacres were an integral part of US foreign policy, carefully staged in accordance with precise strategic and economic objectives.

Despite the good diplomatic relations between Paris and Washington and the apparent unity of the Western military alliance, it was an undeclared war between France and America. By supporting the build up of Ugandan and Rwandan forces and by directly intervening in the Congolese civil war, Washington also bears a direct responsibility for the ethnic massacres committed in the Eastern Congo including several hundred thousand people who died in refugee camps.

US policy-makers were fully aware that a catastrophe was imminent. In fact four months before the genocide, the CIA had warned the US State Department in a confidential brief that the Arusha Accords would fail and “that if hostilities resumed, then upward of half a million people would die”. 45 This information was withheld from the United Nations: “it was not until the genocide was over that information was passed to Maj.-Gen. Dallaire [who was in charge of UN forces in Rwanda].” 46

Washington’s objective was to displace France, discredit the French government (which had supported the Habyarimana regime) and install an Anglo-American protectorate in Rwanda under Major General Paul Kagame. Washington deliberately did nothing to prevent the ethnic massacres.

When a UN force was put forth, Major General Paul Kagame sought to delay its implementation stating that he would only accept a peacekeeping force once the RPA was in control of Kigali. Kagame “feared [that] the proposed United Nations force of more than 5,000 troops… [might] intervene to deprive them [the RPA] of victory”.47

Meanwhile the Security Council after deliberation and a report from Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali decided to postpone its intervention.

The 1994 Rwandan “genocide” served strictly strategic and geopolitical objectives.

The ethnic massacres were a stumbling blow to France’s credibility which enabled the US to establish a neocolonial foothold in Central Africa.

From a distinctly Franco-Belgian colonial setting, the Rwandan capital Kigali has become –under the expatriate Tutsi led RPF government– distinctly Anglo-American. English has become the dominant language in government and the private sector. Many private businesses owned by Hutus were taken over in 1994 by returning Tutsi expatriates. The latter had been exiled in Anglophone Africa, the US and Britain.

The Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA) functions in English and Kinyarwanda, the University previously linked to France and Belgium functions in English. While English had become an official language alongside French and Kinyarwanda, French political and cultural influence will eventually be erased. Washington has become the new colonial master of a francophone country.

Several other francophone countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have entered into military cooperation agreements with the US. These countries are slated by Washington to follow suit on the pattern set in Rwanda. Meanwhile in francophone West Africa, the US dollar is rapidly displacing the CFA Franc — which is linked in a currency board arrangement to the French Treasury.

Notes (Endnote numbering as in the original chapter)

1. Written in 1999, the following text is Part II of Chapter 5 on the Second Edition of The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order. The first part of chapter published in the first edition was written in 1994. Part II is in part based on a study conducted by the author and Belgian economist Pierre Galand on the use of Rwanda’s 1990-94 external debt to finance the military and paramilitary.

• Africa Direct, Submission to the UN Tribunal on Rwanda, http://www.junius.co.uk/africa- direct/tribunal.html Ibid.
• Africa’s New Look, Jane’s Foreign Report, August 14, 1997.
• Jim Mugunga, Uganda foreign debt hits Shs 4 trillion, The Monitor, Kampala, 19 February 1997.
• Michel Chossudovsky and Pierre Galand, L’usage de la dette exterieure du Rwanda, la responsabilité des créanciers, mission report, United Nations Development Program and Government of Rwanda, Ottawa and Brussels, 1997.
• Ibid
• Ibid
• ibid, the imports recorded were of the order of kg. 500.000 of machetes or approximately one million machetes.
• Ibid
• Ibid. See also schedule 1.2 of the Development Credit Agreement with IDA, Washington, 27 June 1991, CREDIT IDA 2271 RW.
• Chossudovsky and Galand, op cit
• Ibid.
• Ibid.
• World Bank completion report, quoted in Chossudovsky and Galand, op cit.
• Ibid
• Ibid
• See World Bank, Rwanda at http://www.worldbank.org/afr/rw2.htm.
• Ibid, italics added
• A ceiling on the number of public employees had been set at 38,000 for 1998 down from 40,600 in 1997. See Letter of Intent of the Government of Rwanda including cover letter addressed to IMF Managing Director Michel Camdessus, IMF, Washington, http://www.imf.org/external/np/loi/060498.htm , 1998.
• Ibid.
• Lynne Duke Africans Use US Military Training in Unexpected Ways, Washington Post. July 14, 1998; p.A01.
• Musengwa Kayaya, U.S. Company To Invest in Zaire, Pan African News, 9 May 1997.
• International Monetary Fund, Zaire Hyperinflation 1990-1996, Washington, April 1997.
• Alain Shungu Ngongo, Zaire-Economy: How to Survive On a Dollar a Month, International Press Service, 6 June 1996.
• Quoted in Therese LeClerc. “Who is responsible for the genocide in Rwanda?”, World Socialist website at http://www.wsws.org/index.shtml , 29 April 1998.
• Paul Mugabe, The Shooting Down Of The Aircraft Carrying Rwandan President Habyarimama , testimony to the International Strategic Studies Association (ISSA), Alexandria, Virginia, 24 April 2000.
• Linda Melvern, Betrayal of the Century, Ottawa Citizen, Ottawa, 8 April 2000.
• Ibid
• Scott Peterson, Peacekeepers will not halt carnage, say Rwanda, rebels, Daily Telegraph, London, May 12, 1994.

First published on January 2, 2018, this article addresses the history of the U.S War on Iran project focussing on the insidious role of Israel, essentially acting on behalf of Washington. The original title was:

“US Winks, Israel Bites?  Shifting Middle East Alliances. The War on Iran is “On Hold”?

Author’s Update

In recent developments, in response to Israel’s bombing of Iran’s Consulate in Damascus, according to media reports:

Iran has launched more than 300 cruise and ballistic missiles and drones at Israel, IDF officials said, a retaliatory attack weeks after an Israeli strike on the Iranian consular building in Syria killed two of Tehran’s top commanders.

“There were explosions visible in the air over Jerusalem as air sirens rang throughout the country.”

“Iran said that after tonight’s attack, the “matter can be deemed concluded” unless there is more violence.”

“Doing the Dirty Work For Us”

The fundamental question is whether this retaliatory attack will lead to escalation, including an Israeli counter-attack on Iran.

In this regard, Israel is largely serving the strategic interests of  the U.S. acting on behalf of Washington. 

The dirty war concept is embedded in U.S foreign policy.

Let your allies do the Dirty Work for You. The Israeli attack against the Iran Consulate in Damas was conducted in consultation with Washington. 

The geopolitical and strategic implications as well as the probability of a retaliation by Iran had been carefully analyzed. 

Let’s be under no illusions. The use of nuclear weapons by Israel in response to Iran’s retaliation is being discussed behind closed doors both in Tel Aviv and in Washington. That does not mean that it is contemplated as an option. 

 

Déjà Vu

It is worth noting that at the outset of Bush’s Second Term, Vice President Dick Cheney dropped a bombshell, hinting, that Israel would, so to speak: be doing the dirty work for us (paraphrase) without US military involvement and without us putting pressure on them “to do it”.

According to Cheney: 

“The Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards,” 

“Israel would not be able to act unilaterally against Iran, without a green light from the Pentagon which controls key components of Israel’s air defense system.

In practice, a war on Iran, were it to occur would be a joint US-Israeli endeavor, coordinated by US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with America’s allies playing a key (subordinate) role.” (quoted from 2018 article)

Source: Council on Foreign Relations

Israel and the US-NATO Alliance

It is a complex military-intelligence undertaking, carefully planned over several years, in liaison and  coordination with US intelligence, the Pentagon, US Strategic Command and NATO. (See article below).

Israel’s  War ongoing against Palestine is currently conducive to a process of military escalation which potentially could engulf a large part of Middle East. 

Video Interview

 

Israeli Military Cooperation with the Pentagon and NATO

Military cooperation with both the Pentagon and NATO is viewed by Israel’s Defence Force (IDF) as a means to “enhance Israel’s deterrence capability regarding potential enemies threatening it, mainly Iran and Syria.”

Israel is a de facto member of NATO (with a special status) since 2004, involving active military and intelligence coordination as well as consultations pertaining to the occupied territories.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg confirmed (Press Conference, Brussels, October 12, 2023) that Israel is under attack and that U.S. military deployments in the Middle East are ongoing allegedly to avoid escalation:

There is always the risk that nations and/or organisations hostile to Israel will take try to take advantage. And that includes, for instance, organisations like Hezbollah or a country like Iran. So this is a message to countries and organisations hostile to Israel that they should not try to utilise the situation. And the United States have deployed, or has deployed more military forces in the region, not least to deter any escalation or prevent any escalation of the situation. (NATO Press Conference, Brussels, October 12, 2023, emphasis added)

Barely three days following the commencement of IDF’s bombing of the Gaza Strip, America’s largest Aircraft Carrier The USS Gerald R. Ford has come to the rescue of Israel, positioned itself in Israel’s territorial waters.

According is the CBS Report, The USS Gerald Ford is presented as a “show of force and a warning to bad actors”. It also points to escalation. The hideous crimes committed by the IDF against 2.3 million Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip are not mentioned.

According to media report: 

“[this] is part of the United States’ show of support after Hamas launched an unprecedented attack on the Jewish state”.

“CBS News national security correspondent David Martin says the aircraft’s presence is meant to signal a warning to bad actors in the region.”

The War on Iran is no longer on Hold? 

Below is the text of my January 2018 article focussing initially on the 2003 “Iran Theatre Near Term” (TIRANNT) project and the history of military alliances.

An earlier version of this text was published on August 22, 2010

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 14, 2023, April 14, 2024

 

 

US Winks, Israel Bites?

Shifting Middle East Alliances.

The War on Iran is “On Hold”?

By Michel Chossudovsky 

January 2, 2018

 

In 2003, the war on Iran project was already Déjà Vu. It had been on the drawing board of the Pentagon since the mid-nineties. 

Since the launching of the Theater Iran Near Term (TIRANNT) war games scenario in May 2003 (leaked classified document), an escalation scenario involving military action directed against Iran and Syria had been envisaged, of which Syria was the first stage in 2011.  

The initial invasion of Iraq under “Operation Iraqi Freedom” was launched on March 20, 2003, April 9 marks the Fall of Baghdad;  officially the invasion was completed on May 1st, 2003.

In May 2003, immediately following the invasion and occupation of Iraq, the TIRANNT (Theater Iran Near Term) war games scenario were carried out as revealed by William Arkin, a former US intelligence analyst:

“In early 2003, even as U.S. forces were on the brink of war with Iraq, the Army had already begun conducting an analysis for a full-scale war with Iran. The analysis, called TIRANNT, for “theater Iran near term,” was coupled with a mock scenario for a Marine Corps invasion and a simulation of the Iranian missile force. U.S. and British planners conducted a Caspian Sea war game around the same time. And Bush directed the U.S. Strategic Command to draw up a global strike war plan for an attack against Iranian weapons of mass destruction. All of this will ultimately feed into a new war plan for “major combat operations” against Iran that military sources confirm now exists in draft form. [This contingency plan entitled CONPLAN 8022 would be activated in the eventuality of a Second 9/11, on the presumption that Iran would be behind it]  (William Arkin, Washington Post, 16 April 2006)

Screenshot of WPo article, opinion section

“Theater Iran Near Term”, a scenario of waging a war against Iran following the defeat of Iraq was the unspoken concept. Under the auspices of US Central Command, TIRANNT focussed on both “Near Term” (i.e. following the Iraq war) as well “Out-Year” (signifying the subsequent year) scenarios for war with Iran ” …including all aspects of a major combat operation, from mobilization and deployment of forces through postwar stability operations after regime change.” (Ibid)

The core TIRANNT effort began in May 2003, when modelers and intelligence specialists pulled together the data needed for theater-level (meaning large-scale) scenario analysis for Iran. TIRANNT has since been updated using post-Iraq war information on the performance of U.S. forces. Meanwhile, Air Force planners have modeled attacks against existing Iranian air defenses and targets, while Navy planners have evaluated coastal defenses and drawn up scenarios for keeping control of the Strait of Hormuz at the base of the Persian Gulf.

A follow-on TIRANNT Campaign Analysis, which began in October 2003, calculated the results of different scenarios for action against Iran to provide options for analyzing courses of action in an updated Iran war plan. (Ibid)

Needless to say, the “Near Term” plans formulated in 2003 had been postponed.

USCENTCOM’s “Dual Containment”. First Iraq, then Iran

The 2003 decision to target Iran under TIRANNT  as well as all subsequent endeavors and “secret plans” were part of the broader Middle East military roadmap. Already during the Clinton administration, US Central Command (USCENTCOM) had formulated in 1995 under the doctrine of “Dual Containment” “in war theater plans” to invade first Iraq and then Iran:

“The broad national security interests and objectives expressed in the President’s National Security Strategy (NSS) and the Chairman’s National Military Strategy (NMS) form the foundation of the United States Central Command’s theater strategy. The NSS directs implementation of a strategy of dual containment of the rogue states of Iraq and Iran as long as those states pose a threat to U.S. interests, to other states in the region, and to their own citizens. Dual containment is designed to maintain the balance of power in the region without depending on either Iraq or Iran. USCENTCOM’s theater strategy is interest-based and threat-focused. The purpose of U.S. engagement, as espoused in the NSS, is to protect the United States’ vital interest in the region – uninterrupted, secure U.S./Allied access to Gulf oil.”

USCENTCOM, http://www.milnet.com/milnet/pentagon/centcom/chap1/stratgic.htm#USPolicy

emphasis  added, the original document of USCENTCOM is no longer available)

The Role of Israel. Doing the Bombing For Us?

The TIRANNT (2003) scenario was followed by a series of military plans pertaining to Iran. Numerous post 9/11 official statements and US military documents had pointed to an expanded Middle East war, involving the active participation of Israel.

Broadly, what characterizes U.S. foreign policy is to encourage America’s allies “to do the dirty work on our behalf”.

At the outset of Bush’s Second Term, Vice President Dick Cheney dropped a bombshell, hinting, in no uncertain terms, that Iran was “right at the top of the list” of the rogue enemies of America, and that Israel would, so to speak, “be doing the bombing for us” (paraphrase), without US military involvement and without us putting pressure on them “to do it”.

In contrast, under the Trump administration, according to Professor James Petras, Israel and the Zionist Lobby are playing an active role, pressuring President Trump to take the first step:

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Presidents of the 52 Major Jewish American Organizations are leading President Trump, like a puppy on a leash, into a major war with Iran. The hysterical ’52 Presidents’ and ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu are busy manufacturing Holocaust-level predictions that a non-nuclear Iran is preparing to ‘vaporize’ Israel, ,  The buffoonish US President Trump has swallowed this fantasy wholesale and is pushing our nation toward war for the sake of Israel and its US-based supporters and agents. (James Petras, Global Research, October 27, 2017)

Who are the Main Actors?

Political rhetoric is often misleading. Israel is America’s ally. Military operations are closely coordinated. Tel Aviv is however subordinate to Washington. In major military operations, Israel does not act without the Pentagon’s approval.

Barely acknowledged by the media, the US and Israel have an integrated air defense system, which was set up in early 2009, shortly after the Israel invasion of Gaza under “Operation Cast Led”.

The X-band radar air defense system set up by the US in Israel in 2009 would “integrate Israel’s missile defenses with the U.S. global missile detection network, which includes satellites, Aegis ships on the Mediterranean, Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and land-based Patriot radars and interceptors.”  (Sen. Joseph Azzolina, Protecting Israel from Iran’s missiles, Bayshore News, December 26, 2008). )

What this means is that Washington calls the shots. Confirmed by the Pentagon, the US military controls Israel’s Air Defense:

”This is and will remain a U.S. radar system,’ Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said. ‘So this is not something we are giving or selling to the Israelis and it is something that will likely require U.S. personnel on-site to operate.’” (Quoted in Israel National News, January 9, 2009, emphasis added).

At the outset of  Obama’s Second Term, the US and Israel initiated discussions pertaining to a “US personnel on site” presence in Israel, namely the establishment of a “permanent” and “official” military base inside Israel. And on September 17, 2017, a US Air Defense base located in the Negev desert was inaugurated. According to the Israeli IDF spokesperson, the objective is to send a “message to the region, ” including Iran, Lebanon, Syria and Palestine.

Israel would not be able to act unilaterally against Iran, without a green light from the Pentagon which controls key components of Israel’s air defense system.

In practice, a war on Iran, were it to occur would be a joint US-Israeli endeavor, coordinated by US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with America’s allies playing a key (subordinate) role.

The Evolving Structure of Military Alliances

Since the formulation of USCENTCOM’s “in war theater” plans in the mid-nineties, and more specifically since the onslaught of the war on Syria in 2011, the geopolitics of the broader Middle East Central Asian region has evolved dramatically with Russia and  China taking on a major role.

In this regard, the shift in the structure of military alliances has served to weaken US influence. Iran is now supported by a powerful China-Russia block. In turn, Pakistan and India have joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which has contributed to undermining US-Pakistani relations.

In turn, Iran’s bilateral relations with China including strategic oil, gas and pipeline deals (as well as military cooperation) have developed since President Xi Jinping took office in 2012.

Moreover, while Tehran has reached a “pact of convenience” with Ankara, the unity of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States is now in jeopardy, with Qatar, Oman and Kuwait building an alliance with Iran, to the detriment of  Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

Since the war on Syria, Iran has not only established a strong bilateral relationship with Syria, it has also reinforced its ties with Lebanon and Yemen.

In other words, US hegemony is threatened in the broader Middle East Central Asian region. The structure of alliances and “cross-cutting coalitions” in 2018 does not favor a US-led military operation against Iran.

• The Atlantic Alliance is in crisis and so is the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC).
• The US and Turkey are clashing in Northern Syria, where Turkey is fighting US sponsored Kurdish rebels.
• Turkey, which constitutes NATO’s heavyweight (in terms of conventional forces) has acquired Russia’s S400 air defense system. Does this signify that Turkey (as a member state of the Atlantic Alliance) no longer fully shares the US-NATO-Israel defense system?
• Another consideration is Turkey’s rapprochement with both Russia and Iran.

presidents Putin and Erdogan (right)

Demise of the “Triple Alliance”: US, Israel, Turkey

How does Turkey’s “pact of convenience” with Iran affect the Israel-Turkey  Security and Secrecy Agreement (SSA) launched by the Tansu Çiller government in 1994?

The SSA agreement was a carefully designed instrument of US foreign policy (sponsored by the Clinton administration) which set the stage for a firm and close Israel-Turkey relationship in military and intelligence cooperation, joint military exercises, weapons production and training.

The SSA largely served US strategic interests in the Middle East. The intent of the SSA Israel-Turkey bilateral military-intelligence agreement was to create a triangular relationship between the US, Israel and Turkey. This de facto (rather than de jure) “triple alliance”, under the helm of the Pentagon, was intended to integrate and coordinate military command decisions (as well as intelligence) between the three countries pertaining to the broader Middle East.

From a strategic standpoint, the Pentagon was intent upon “using” both Israel and Turkey in Middle East military operations (i.e to act on our behalf).

The “Triple alliance” was based on close (bilateral) military ties respectively between Israel and Turkey with the US, coupled with a strong bilateral military relationship between Tel Aviv and Ankara.

In turn, Israel signed a far-reaching military cooperation protocol with NATO in March 2005 in Jerusalem.  Under this agreement, Israel had become a de facto member of NATO. The 2005 Israel-NATO bilateral military cooperation agreement was viewed by the Israeli military as a means to “enhance Israel’s deterrence capability” against Iran, which has recently entered into an alliance of convenience with Turkey, a NATO member state.  Sounds contradictory?

It is also worth noting Israel’s longstanding membership in NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue together with six other non-NATO member states: Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia. Recently, these six countries have taken a stance against Israel in the wake of Trump’s decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem.

It was no coincidence that the Mediterranean Dialogue (MD) was launched in the same year as the Israel-Turkey SSA agreement (1994).

• Is the Israel-Turkey SSA agreement currently in jeopardy?
• Following Trump’s Jerusalem Statement, the Mediterranean Dialogue is also in crisis, to the detriment of Washington.
• How can joint military and intelligence operations directed against Iran be carried out when Turkey (a NATO member state and an ally of Israel) is  “in bed with the enemy”?
• Another consideration is the de facto demise of GUUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldova), a loose US-NATO sponsored military alliance of five former Soviet republics created in 1999, slated to be used against Russia and Iran.

For the above reasons, the Pentagon’s TIRANNT “Near Term” scenario of a conventional war against Iran at this juncture is unlikely.

While a conventional war on Iran is currently on hold, the US has indelibly opted for nonconventional warfare including destabilization, economic sanctions, infiltration, cooptation and regime change.

The Pentagon, nonetheless retains its longtime strategic option of inducing its closest allies including Saudi Arabia and Israel to “wage war on its behalf”.

We are nonetheless at a dangerous crossroads in our history. While Pentagon analysts are fully aware that the US cannot win a conventional war against Iran, a first strike tactical nuclear weapons attack is still “on the table”. So are intelligence ops, the recruitment of hired “jihadist” terrorists, the funding of insurgencies, etc. (not to mention the use of a panoply of nonconventional weapons systems including electromagnetic, chemical and biological weapons).

***

War is a criminal undertaking which is supported by the US media.

Global Research is committed to revealing the nature of this military agenda as well as fostering a broad counter-propaganda campaign which serves to undermine the fake legitimacy of Washington’s “humanitarian” wars.

Spread this article far and wide.

We Need Your Support.  To Donate to Global Research Click Here  

Video (2007)

---

Order Directly from Global Research Publishers

 

Michel Chossudovsky

The US has embarked on a military adventure, “a long war”, which threatens the future of humanity. US-NATO weapons of mass destruction are portrayed as instruments of peace. Mini-nukes are said to be “harmless to the surrounding civilian population”. Pre-emptive nuclear war is portrayed as a “humanitarian undertaking”.

While one can conceptualize the loss of life and destruction resulting from present-day wars including Iraq and Afghanistan, it is impossible to fully comprehend the devastation which might result from a Third World War, using “new technologies” and advanced weapons, until it occurs and becomes a reality. The international community has endorsed nuclear war in the name of world peace. “Making the world safer” is the justification for launching a military operation which could potentially result in a nuclear holocaust.

.

.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

The New York Times instructed journalists covering Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip to restrict the use of the terms “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” and to “avoid” using the phrase “occupied territory” when describing Palestinian land, according to a copy of an internal memo obtained by The Intercept.

The memo also instructs reporters not to use the word Palestine “except in very rare cases” and to steer clear of the term “refugee camps” to describe areas of Gaza historically settled by displaced Palestinians expelled from other parts of Palestine during previous Israeli–Arab wars. The areas are recognized by the United Nations as refugee camps and house hundreds of thousands of registered refugees.

The memo — written by Times standards editor Susan Wessling, international editor Philip Pan, and their deputies — “offers guidance about some terms and other issues we have grappled with since the start of the conflict in October.”

While the document is presented as an outline for maintaining objective journalistic principles in reporting on the Gaza war, several Times staffers told The Intercept that some of its contents show evidence of the paper’s deference to Israeli narratives.

“I think it’s the kind of thing that looks professional and logical if you have no knowledge of the historical context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict,” said a Times newsroom source, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisal, of the Gaza memo. “But if you do know, it will be clear how apologetic it is to Israel.”

First distributed to Times journalists in November, the guidance — which collected and expanded on past style directives about the Israeli–Palestinian conflict — has been regularly updated over the ensuing months. It presents an internal window into the thinking of Times international editors as they have faced upheaval within the newsroom surrounding the paper’s Gaza war coverage.

“Issuing guidance like this to ensure accuracy, consistency and nuance in how we cover the news is standard practice,” said Charlie Stadtlander, a Times spokesperson. “Across all our reporting, including complex events like this, we take care to ensure our language choices are sensitive, current and clear to our audiences.”

Issues over style guidance have been among a bevy of internal rifts at the Times over its Gaza coverage. In January, The Intercept reported on disputes in the Times newsroom over issues with an investigative story on systematic sexual violence on October 7. The leak gave rise to a highly unusual internal probe. The company faced harsh criticism for allegedly targeting Times workers of Middle East and North African descent, which Times brass denied. On Monday, executive editor Joe Kahn told staff that the leak investigation had been concluded unsuccessfully.

WhatsApp Debates

Almost immediately after the October 7 attacks and the launch of Israel’s scorched-earth war against Gaza, tensions began to boil within the newsroom over the Times coverage. Some staffers said they believed the paper was going out of its way to defer to Israel’s narrative on the events and was not applying even standards in its coverage. Arguments began fomenting on internal Slack and other chat groups.

The debates between reporters on the Jerusalem bureau-led WhatsApp group, which at one point included 90 reporters and editors, became so intense that Pan, the international editor, interceded.

“We need to do a better job communicating with each other as we report the news, so our discussions are more productive and our disagreements less distracting,” Pan wrote in a November 28 WhatsApp message viewed by The Intercept and first reported by the Wall Street Journal. “At its best, this channel has been a quick, transparent and productive space to collaborate on a complex, fast-moving story. At its worst, it’s a tense forum where the questions and comments can feel accusatory and personal.”

Pan bluntly stated:

“Do not use this channel for raising concerns about coverage.”

Among the topics of debate in the Jerusalem bureau WhatsApp group and exchanges on Slack, reviewed by The Intercept and verified with multiple newsroom sources, were Israeli attacks on Al-Shifa Hospital, statistics on Palestinian civilian deaths, the allegations of genocidal conduct by Israel, and President Joe Biden’s pattern of promoting unverified allegations from the Israeli government as fact. (Pan did not respond to a request for comment.)

Many of the same debates were addressed in the Times’s Gaza-specific style guidance and have been the subject of intense public scrutiny.

“It’s not unusual for news companies to set style guidelines,” said another Times newsroom source, who also asked for anonymity. “But there are unique standards applied to violence perpetrated by Israel. Readers have noticed and I understand their frustration.”

“Words Like ‘Slaughter’”

The Times memo outlines guidance on a range of phrases and terms.

“The nature of the conflict has led to inflammatory language and incendiary accusations on all sides. We should be very cautious about using such language, even in quotations. Our goal is to provide clear, accurate information, and heated language can often obscure rather than clarify the fact,” the memo says.

“Words like ‘slaughter,’ ‘massacre’ and ‘carnage’ often convey more emotion than information. Think hard before using them in our own voice,” according to the memo. “Can we articulate why we are applying those words to one particular situation and not another? As always, we should focus on clarity and precision — describe what happened rather than using a label.”

Despite the memo’s framing as an effort to not employ incendiary language to describe killings “on all sides,” in the Times reporting on the Gaza war, such language has been used repeatedly to describe attacks against Israelis by Palestinians and almost never in the case of Israel’s large-scale killing of Palestinians.

In January, The Intercept published an analysis of New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times coverage of the war from October 7 through November 24 — a period mostly before the new Times guidance was issued. The Intercept analysis showed that the major newspapers reserved terms like “slaughter,” “massacre,” and “horrific” almost exclusively for Israeli civilians killed by Palestinians, rather than for Palestinian civilians killed in Israeli attacks.

The analysis found that, as of November 24, the New York Times had described Israeli deaths as a “massacre” on 53 occasions and those of Palestinians just once. The ratio for the use of “slaughter” was 22 to 1, even as the documented number of Palestinians killed climbed to around 15,000.

The latest Palestinian death toll estimate stands at more than 33,000, including at least 15,000 children — likely undercounts due to Gaza’s collapsed health infrastructure and missing persons, many of whom are believed to have died in the rubble left by Israel’s attacks over the past six months.

Touchy Debates

The Times memo touches on some of the most highly charged — and disputed — language around the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The guidance spells out, for instance, usage of the word “terrorist,” which The Intercept previously reported was at the center of a spirited newsroom debate.

“It is accurate to use ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist’ in describing the attacks of Oct. 7, which included the deliberate targeting of civilians in killings and kidnappings,” according to the leaked Times memo. “We should not shy away from that description of the events or the attackers, particularly when we provide context and explanation.”

The guidance also instructs journalists to “Avoid ‘fighters’ when referring to the Oct. 7 attack; the term suggests a conventional war rather than a deliberate attack on civilians. And be cautious in using ‘militants,’ which is interpreted in different ways and may be confusing to readers.”

In the memo, the editors tell Times journalists:

“We do not need to assign a single label or to refer to the Oct. 7 assault as a ‘terrorist attack’ in every reference; the word is best used when specifically describing attacks on civilians. We should exercise restraint and can vary the language with other accurate terms and descriptions: an attack, an assault, an incursion, the deadliest attack on Israel in decades, etc. Similarly, in addition to ‘terrorists,’ we can vary the terms used to describe the Hamas members who carried out the assault: attackers, assailants, gunmen.”

The Times does not characterize Israel’s repeated attacks on Palestinian civilians as “terrorism,” even when civilians have been targeted. This is also true of Israel’s assaults on protected civilian sites, including hospitals.

In a section with the headline “‘Genocide’ and Other Incendiary Language,” the guidance says, “‘Genocide’ has a specific definition in international law. In our own voice, we should generally use it only in the context of those legal parameters. We should also set a high bar for allowing others to use it as an accusation, whether in quotations or not, unless they are making a substantive argument based on the legal definition.”

Regarding “ethnic cleansing,” the document calls it “another historically charged term,” instructing reporters: “If someone is making such an accusation, we should press for specifics or supply proper context.”

Bucking International Norms

In the cases of describing “occupied territory” and the status of refugees in Gaza, the Times style guidelines run counter to norms established by the United Nations and international humanitarian law.

On the term “Palestine” — a widely used name for both the territory and the U.N.-recognized state — the Times memo contains blunt instructions: “Do not use in datelines, routine text or headlines, except in very rare cases such as when the United Nations General Assembly elevated Palestine to a nonmember observer state, or references to historic Palestine.” The Times guidance resembles that of the Associated Press Stylebook.

The memo directs journalists not to use the phrase “refugee camps” to describe long-standing refugee settlements in Gaza. “While termed refugee camps, the refugee centers in Gaza are developed and densely populated neighborhoods dating to the 1948 war. Refer to them as neighborhoods, or areas, and if further context is necessary, explain how they have historically been called refugee camps.”

The United Nations recognizes eight refugee camps in the Gaza Strip. As of last year, before the war started, the areas were home to more than 600,000 registered refugees. Many are descendants of those who fled to Gaza after being forcibly expelled from their homes in the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, which marked the founding of the Jewish state and mass dispossession of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.

The Israeli government has long been hostile to the historical fact that Palestinians maintain refugee status, because it signifies that they were displaced from lands they have a right to return to.

Since October 7, Israel has repeatedly bombed refugee camps in Gaza, including Jabaliya, Al Shati, Al Maghazi, and Nuseirat.

The memo’s instructions on the use of “occupied territories” says, “When possible, avoid the term and be specific (e.g. Gaza, the West Bank, etc.) as each has a slightly different status.” The United Nations, along with much of the world, considers Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem to be occupied Palestinian territories, seized by Israel in the 1967 Arab–Israeli war.

The admonition against the use of the term “occupied territories,” said a Times staffer, obscures the reality of the conflict, feeding into the U.S. and Israeli insistence that the conflict began on October 7.

“You are basically taking the occupation out of the coverage, which is the actual core of the conflict,” said the newsroom source. “It’s like, ‘Oh let’s not say occupation because it might make it look like we’re justifying a terrorist attack.’”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from FAIR

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

Two COVID nurses shared their testimonies about what transpired at the outset of the mass vaccine mandates. 

Click here to watch the video

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

---

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page. 

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

Citizenship as a Concept

The term “citizenship” is usually used either in academia or news as a synonym of nationality and national affiliation (from the Anglo-Saxon, West European perspective followed by the New World, in fact, as a synonym of state). However, “citizenship” as a concept is essentially a product of and used in political philosophy and jurisprudence. In practice, the majority of governments in the world concerned with giving or not giving citizenship to someone follow either the so-called:

1. The French model, based on the “right of soil” (ius soli) or 
2. The German model, founded on the principle of “right of blood” (ius sanguinis).

Actually, “citizenship” is not part of the terminology established by sociology and anthropology as in these two academic fields of research the notion of citizenship has come up only recently, basically, with the research of Roger Brubaker, Louis Dumont, or Immanuel Todd. The notion of citizenship is particularly interesting for sociologists and anthropologists as a phenomenon that structures collective representations and social relations among individuals and groups (to have certain rights as well as certain duties). 

The status of being a citizen is decided by the law. In the traditions linked to republican political features, qualifications to have or not citizenship have been linked to particular rights and duties of citizens as well as to a commitment to equality between citizens is compatible with considerable exclusivity in the qualifying conditions (Ancient Greece, Rome, and Italian republics excluded women followed by some certain classes of labor men from the concept of citizenship).   

During the last decades, basically since the end of the Cold War 1.0 in 1989, there are three crucial reasons for the popularity of dealing with the issue of citizenship:

1. Re-establishment of national states in East-Central, Eastern, and Southeastern Europe;
2. Re-emerging the problem of the status of historical, ethnic, and territorial minorities;
3. The problem of immigrants’ condition (for instance, in West Europe).

In principle, social science is concerned with the concept of citizenship mainly as an “imagined construction” that is applied in social life. According to a short definition and understanding of citizenship, it is juridical status, granting a sum of rights and duties to members of a specific political entity (state). Concerning the issue of legal rights and duties, one can possess 1) citizenship (participating in state elections for the president and parliament); 2) permanent residence permission (participation in only local elections for the assembly); and 3) temporal resident permission (no electoral rights).

Historically, during the time of feudalism, for instance, full citizenship possessed only aristocracy having political rights followed by certain duties to the state. In modern times, citizenship is understood as a pillar of a modern/contemporary state resembling, in fact, loyalty to the political unity that grants citizenship (it includes above all mandatory military service/conscription to defend the “motherland” – a country of citizenship). Nevertheless, in the past, there was a commonly accepted notion of citizenship that is very similar to the contemporary one (like the polis in ancient Greece, republican Rome, or in Italian medieval comuni/communities).

Today, there are notions of even supranational/transnational citizenship as it was, for instance, in the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (double citizenship: of the republic and Yugoslav federation but a single passport) or the EU (double citizenship: of the national state and the EU with a single passport). Nevertheless, there were/are problems of supranational identity and transnational citizenship like in socialist Yugoslavia, USSR, or today in the EU where an overwhelming minority of inhabitants support supranational identity (of being Yugoslav, Soviet, or European) but have transnational citizenship (of Yugoslavia, USSR, or the EU).

What is very important to stress, the notion of (modern) citizenship is unlike the notion of (feudal) subjection. In other words, to possess citizenship means to be a member of a political entity having certain rights but to be a subject means being subjected to sovereignty (ruler) without rights having only heavy obligations. The notion of citizenship involves a relation of reciprocal loyalty between an impersonal institution (state) and its members (but not subjects). The notion of subjection, in fact, implies a personalized relation of obedience and submission of subjects to the sovereign. However, since the modern (anti-feudal) times, different types of rights (civil, social, political, minority…etc.) have differentiated citizenship from subjection which was historically founded on privileges (for aristocracy) and obligations (for taxpayers).

What Weberians (followers of Maximilian Karl Emil Weber, 1864−1920) would say is that citizenship is a typical phenomenon of legal-bureaucratic political systems. According to them, subjection belongs to traditional (feudal) and charismatic political systems and social relations. In addition, the concept of citizenship fits to “institutionalized state” while subjection fits to “personalized state”.

Rights of Citizenship

The concept of citizenship understands four rights for the citizenship holders:

1. Civil rights concerning individual freedoms (personal freedom, freedom of thought, and freedom of religion) and the right to fair and equal justice for all. They stemmed from the ascent of the middle class in the 18^th century;
2. In the 19^th century, political rights concerning the exercise and control of political power, to vote, and to create political parties were established;
3. Social rights (rights ensuring a degree of welfare and safety through welfare and education services) were guaranteed in the 20^th century;
4. Cultural rights (rights to maintain and hand down to one’s descendant’s cultural identity, ethnic affiliation, and religious background) are introduced in the 1970s.

Dealing with the concept of citizenship, the relations between citizenship, politics of recognition, and multiculturalism is essential. Citizenship is a social process that takes place under specific historical conditions. We have to keep in mind that the concept of citizenship involves both the rights and the duties. 

Citizenship as a concept is in the Western world very much founded on the principle of staatsnation (ein sprache, ein nation, ein staat), a German term of French origin. This principle has characterized the old content’s history from the 19^th century on. According to the principle of staatsnation = each nation (ethnocultural-linguistic group) must have its state with its territory and each state must comprise one nation. According to common sense and most theoretical representations, a staatsnation is, in fact, kulturnation which is a community whose members share the same cultural traits. 

The concept of kulturnation corresponds to both: 

1. The Herderian idea of “volk”/people (whose main characteristic is a shared language for all its members); and to
2. The original French concept of nation, in which the linguistic criteria is also a major feature.

The original French concept of nation was defined in 1694 by the Académie Française. In essence, the German romanticist model is based on the formula of language-nation-state, while the modern French model after the 1789−1794 Revolution is founded on the opposite formula of state-nation-language (this formula, however, in the practice in many cases results in the assimilation and even ethnic cleansing of the minorities).  

The staatsnation principle postulates the formation of politically sovereign monocultural and/or monoethnic territorial spaces. This principle is based on cultural and/or ethnic purity. From the 19^th century on, i.e. since the staatsnation principle was applied in Europe, there have been repeated efforts to make the single national territories both ethnically and culturally more homogeneous. The politics of ethnocultural re-composition in the name of staatsnation principle influenced both in some cases 1) ethnic cleansing, 2) boundary revisions, 3) forced assimilation, 4) banishments, 5) planned immigration, 6) deportations, etc. 

Dealing with the question of citizenship, today has to deal with minority rights and minority protection (regarding in many cases with civic state and society). Globally, human rights were accepted after 1945 while minority rights after 1989. The fact is that the national state has far too often been understood exclusively as a geographic expression. In addition, the national state is a political association of citizens who belong to it even because of their cultural traits are often disregarded. 

We and the Rest

Not everyone can indiscriminately belong to a specific national state. According to Max Weber, the national state is an association partially open to the outside. In many cases, historically, there were examples of limited opening towards the “others” or the foreigners (like Japan up to 1867). Such a view entails the creation of institutional mechanisms of social selection that regulate affiliation and exclusion. It has to be stressed that both citizenship and nationality represent the fundamental tools that define who has the complete right to belong to a national state and who is excluded from it. 

A drastic example of the policy of ethic-based citizenship can be mentioned in the case of Estonia and Latvia (to eliminate the influence on domestic politics of the local Russian minority) immediately after the dismemberment of the USSR but contrary to the case of Lithuania (in Lithuanian case just for the reason that Russian minority was not so numerous compared to Estonian and Latvian cases). In other words, in 1991 Estonia and Latvia introduced a model of citizenship following the staatsnation doctrine that tends to stamp out any form of cultural difference within its national territory. However, neighboring Lithuania after the Soviet time or Malaysia after the end of the British colonial domination in 1956, has given itself a model of multicultural citizenship, which is based upon differences amongst the country’s various ethnic components.

Specific institutions are established in order to support a strict logic of either inclusion or exclusion from the national state according to the principle of staatsnation. For instance, according to the post-Soviet constitution of Lithuania, in fact, only ethnic Lithuanians can be elected as the president of the country (The 78 paragraph: “Respublikos prezidentu gali būti renkamas lietuvos pilietis pagal kilmę…“ [For the President of the Republic can be elected only Lithuanian citizen according to the origin…]). 

Nevertheless, these restrictive institutions are:

1. Naturalization;
2. Assimilation;
3. Entitled nation;
4. Minorities.

Practically, a foreigner can obtain citizenship through naturalization and assimilation. We have, however, to keep in mind that in many countries around the world double citizenship is not allowed (like in Germany or Austria). The acculturation process results in a cultural affiliation change. This is a more or less voluntary process. Usually, the foreigner has to forsake his previous citizenship. However, today, dual citizenship is becoming juridically more widespread as a more democratic option. However, it is still in major cases regarded as dangerous for the preservation of national identities (for instance, controversial debate in Germany).

Practically, in the majority of states exists the problem of the citizenship of the minorities based on the difference between the entitled nation and the rest of the population (minorities) (cases of Slovenia and Croatia). Such attitude implies a structural asymmetry and it conceals a partial exclusion and a demarcation between first and second-class citizenships with their minority rights (example of the Socialist Yugoslavia). In many cases, the citizenship is ethnocentrically oriented which raises the question of citizenship and cultural plurality. Another connected question is the relationship between citizenship and the right to difference.

To focal questions concerning citizenship:

1. Does citizenship have a unifying and inclusive function?
2. Citizenship as the expression of a harmonious political community?

From the very sociological viewpoint, citizenship must be perceived as an agonistic process with competition, tensions, conflicts, permanent negotiations, and compromises between the groups involved in the struggle for the recognition of their rights. 

Final Words

The concept of citizenship is in most cases understood as a research issue within the political science framework.

Therefore, the usual definition of citizenship is provided in political terms as referring to the terms of membership of the nation-state which secure certain rights and privileges to those who fulfill particular obligations.

Citizenship is a political concept but not developed and academically as such recognized theory.

It, nevertheless, is formalizing the conditions for full participation in a certain community (in fact, a nation-state). Originally, the political definition of citizenship stresses the inclusive nature of the term (concept) as it implies that anyone within the territory of a nation-state who meets certain obligations can be included as a citizen, with corresponding rights and privileges.  

Qualifications for citizenship, in fact, reflect a conception of the purposes of the political community and a view about which persons are allowed to enjoy the benefits of rights (and duties) of the political unity (state). Shortly, the concept of citizenship applied certain moral and legal rights and obligations to those who possess it. We have all the time to keep in mind that citizenship on the one hand gives certain rights but on the other hand, requires as well as certain obligations.  

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović is a former university professor in Vilnius, Lithuania. He is a Research Fellow at the Center for Geostrategic Studies. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.  

Featured image is from the author

Introductory Note and Update

Fidel Castro was both an incisive analyst as well a powerful voice against nuclear weapons. 

In the light of recent developments in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, we bring to the attention of our readers Fidel’s powerful October 15, 2010 statement on the dangers of nuclear war, 

Today, the dangers of military escalation in both the Middle East and Eastern Europe are beyond description. 

“In a nuclear war the collateral damage would be the life of all humanity”

Israel is a nuclear power.

Let’s be under no illusions. The use of nuclear weapons by Israel in response to Iran’s attack is being discussed behind closed doors both in Tel Aviv and in Washington. That does not mean that it is going to be implemented. 

 

Fidel Castro’s Message to the World against Nuclear War. Calling for World Peace

“The conventional war would be lost by the US and the nuclear war is no alternative for anyone.  On the other hand, nuclear war would inevitably become global”

“I think nobody on Earth wishes the human species to disappear. 

And that is the reason why I am of the opinion that what should disappear are not just nuclear weapons, but also conventional weapons.  We must provide a guarantee for peace to all peoples without distinction

“In a nuclear war the collateral damage would be the life of all humanity. Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!”

“It is about demanding that the world is not led into a nuclear catastrophe, it is to preserve life.”

 

TRANSCRIPT

The use of nuclear weapons in a new war would mean the end of humanity. This was candidly foreseen by scientist Albert Einstein who was able to measure their destructive capability to generate millions of degrees of heat, which would vaporize everything within a wide radius of action. This brilliant researcher had promoted the development of this weapon so that it would not become available to the genocidal Nazi regime.

Each and every government in the world has the obligation to respect the right to life of each and every nation and of the totality of all the peoples on the planet.

Today there is an imminent risk of war with the use of that kind of weapon and I don’t harbour the least doubt that an attack by the United States and Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran would inevitably evolve towards a global nuclear conflict.

The World’s peoples have an obligation to demand of their political leaders their Right to Live. When the life of humankind, of your people and your most beloved human beings run such a risk, nobody can afford to be indifferent; not one minute can be lost in demanding respect for that right; tomorrow will be too late.

Albert Einstein himself stated unmistakably: “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones”. We fully comprehend what he wanted to convey, and he was absolutely right, yet in the wake of a global nuclear war, there wouldn’t be anybody around to make use of those sticks and stones.

There would be “collateral damage”, as the American political and military leaders always affirm, to justify the deaths of innocent people.

In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.

Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!

Fidel Castro Ruz, October 15, 2010

 

The Legacy of Fidel Castro Lives

Michel Chossudovsky, April 18, 2024

***

From October 12 to 15, 2010, I had extensive and detailed discussions with Fidel Castro at his home in Havana, pertaining to the dangers of nuclear war, the global economic crisis and the nature of the New World Order. These meetings resulted in a wide-ranging and fruitful interview.

The first part of this interview published by Global Research and Cuba Debate focuses on the dangers of nuclear war.

The World is at a dangerous crossroads. We have reached a critical turning point in our history.

This interview with Fidel Castro provides an understanding of the nature of modern warfare: Were a military operation to be launched against the Islamic Republic of Iran, the US and its allies would be unable to win a conventional war, with the possibility that this war could evolve towards a nuclear war.

The details of ongoing war preparations in relation to Iran have been withheld from the public eye.

How to confront the diabolical and absurd proposition put forth by the US administration that using tactical nuclear weapons against Iran will  “make the World a safer place”? 

A central concept put forth by Fidel Castro in the interview is the ”Battle of Ideas”.

The leader of the Cuban Revolution believes that only a far-reaching “Battle of Ideas” could  change the course of World history. The  objective is to prevent the unthinkable, a nuclear war which threatens to destroy life on planet earth.

The corporate media is involved in acts of camouflage. The devastating impacts of a nuclear war are either trivialized or not mentioned. Against this backdrop, Fidel’s message to the World must be heard;  people across the land, nationally and internationally, should understand the gravity of the present situation and act forcefully at all levels of society to reverse the tide of war.

The “Battle of Ideas” is part of a revolutionary process. Against a barrage of media disinformation, Fidel Castro’s resolve is to spread the word far and wide, to inform world public opinion, to “make the impossible possible”, to thwart a military adventure which in the real sense of the word threatens the future of humanity.  

When a US sponsored nuclear war becomes an “instrument of peace”, condoned and accepted by the World’s institutions and the highest authority including the United Nations, there is no turning back: human society has indelibly been precipitated headlong onto the path of self-destruction.

Fidel’s “Battle of Ideas” must be translated into a worldwide movement. People must mobilize against this diabolical military agenda.

This war can be prevented if people pressure their governments and elected representatives, organize at the local level in towns, villages and municipalities, spread the word, inform their fellow citizens regarding the implications of a thermonuclear war, initiate debate and discussion within the armed forces.

What is required is a mass movement of people which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of war, a global people’s movement which criminalizes war. 

In his October 15, 2010 message (see video below), Fidel Castro warned the World on the dangers of nuclear war:

“There would be “collateral damage”, as the American political and military leaders always affirm, to justify the deaths of innocent people. In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity. Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!”

The “Battle of Ideas” consists in confronting the war criminals in high office, in breaking the US-led consensus in favor of a global war, in changing the mindset of hundreds of millions of people, in abolishing nuclear weapons.  In essence, the “Battle of Ideas” consists in restoring the truth and establishing the foundations of World peace.

The interview was conducted in Spanish. It was translated into English by Global Research and Cuba Debate.

The original Spanish version as well as translation into English were published by Cuba Debate and Global Research. 

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, November 2010 

 

Conversations on the Dangers of Nuclear War. 11-15 October 2011

Professor Michel Chossudovsky: I am very honored to have this opportunity to exchange views concerning several fundamental issues affecting human society as a whole. I think that the notion that you have raised in your recent texts regarding the threat against Homo sapiens is fundamental.

What is that threat, the risk of a nuclear war and the threat to human beings, to Homo sapiens?

Commander in Chief Fidel Castro Ruz: Since quite a long time –years I would say- but especially for some months now, I began to worry about the imminence of a dangerous and probable war that could very rapidly evolve towards a nuclear war.

Before that I had concentrated all my efforts on the analysis of the capitalist system in general and the methods that the imperial tyranny has imposed on humanity.  The United States applies to the world the violation of the most fundamental rights.

During the Cold War, no one spoke about war or nuclear weapons; people talked about an apparent peace, that is, between the USSR and the United States, the famous MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) was guaranteed.  It seemed that the world was going to enjoy the delights of a peace that would last for an unlimited time.

 

 

Notice the Book by Bob Woodward entitled Obama’s Wars. Fidel had ordered a copy when it was launched, delivered to him in the UN diplomatic pouch. He had read it cover to cover when I met up with him on October 12, 2010

Michel Chossudovsky: … This notion of “mutual assured destruction” ended with the Cold War and after that the nuclear doctrine was redefined, because we never really thought about a nuclear war during the Cold War.  Well, obviously, there was a danger –as even Robert McNamara said at some point in time.

But, after the Cold War, particularly after September 11 [2001],  America’s nuclear doctrine started to be redefined.

Fidel Castro Ruz: You asked me when was it that we became aware of the imminent risk of a nuclear war, and that dates back to the period I talked to you about previously, barely six months ago.  One of the things that called our attention the most regarding such a war danger was the sinking of the Cheonan during a military maneuver. That was the flagship of the South Korean Navy; an extremely sophisticated vessel.  It was at the time when we found on Global Research the journalist’s report that offered a clear and truly coherent information about the sinking of the Cheonan, which could not have been the work of a submarine that had been manufactured by the USSR more than sixty years ago, using an outdated technology which did not require the sophisticated equipment that could be detected by the Cheonan, during a joint maneuver with the most modern US vessels.

The provocation against the Democratic Republic of Korea added up to our own earlier concerns about an aggression against Iran.  We had been closely following the political process in that country. We knew perfectly well what happened there during the 1950s, when Iran nationalized the assets of the British Petroleum in that country- which at the time was called the Anglo Persian Oil Company.

In my opinion, the threats against Iran became imminent in June [2010], after the adoption of Resolution 1929 on the 9th of June, 2010, when the United Nations Security Council condemned Iran for the research it is carrying out and the production of small amounts of 20 per cent enriched uranium, and accused it of being a threat to the world.  The position adopted by each and every member of the Security Council is known: 12 member States voted in favor –five of them had the right to veto; one of them abstained and 2 –Brazil and Turkey- voted against. Shortly after the Resolution was adopted –the most aggressive resolution of of them all– one US aircraft carrier, embedded in a combat unit, plus a nuclear submarine, went through the Suez Canal with the help of the Egyptian government.  Naval units from Israel joined, heading for the Persian Gulf and the seas nearby Iran.

The sanctions imposed by the United States and its NATO allies against Iran was absolutely abusive and unjust.  I cannot understand the reason why Russia and China did not veto the dangerous Resolution 1929 of the United Nations Security Council.  In my opinion this has complicated the political situation terribly and has placed the world on the brink of war.

I remember previous  Israeli attacks against the Arab nuclear research centers.  They first attacked and destroyed the one in Iraq in June 1981.  They did not ask for anyone’s permission, they did not talk to anybody; they just attacked them and the Iraqis had to endure the strikes.

In 2007 they repeated that same operation against a research center that was being built by Syria.  There is something in that episode that I really don’t quite understand:  what was not clear to me were the underlying tactics, or the reasons why Syria did not denounce the Israeli attack against that research center where, undoubtedly, they were doing something, they were working on something for which, as it is known, they were receiving some cooperation from North Korea.  That was something legal; they did not commit any violation.

I am saying this here and I am being very honest: I don’t understand why this was not denounced, because, in my opinion, that would have been important. Those are two very important antecedents.

I believe there are many reasons to think that they will try to do the same against Iran:  destroy its research centers or the power generation centers of that country.  As is known, the power generation uranium residues are the raw material to produce plutonium.

 

Michel Chossudovsky:  It is true that that Security Council Resolution has to some extent contributed to cancelling the program of military cooperation that Russia and China have with Iran, especially Russia cooperates with Iran in the context of the Air Defence System by supplying its S-300 System.

I remember that just after the Security Council’s decision, with the endorsement of China and Russia, the Russian minister of  Foreign Affairs said: “Well, we have approved the Resolution but that is not going to invalidate our military cooperation with Iran”. That was in June.  But a few months later, Moscow confirmed that military cooperation [with Iran] was going to be frozen, so now Iran is facing a very serious situation, because it needs Russian technology to maintain its security, namely its [S-300] air defence system.

But I think that all the threats against Russia and China are intent upon preventing the two countries from getting involved in the Iran issue. In other words, if there is a war with Iran  the other powers, which are China and Russia, aren’t going to intervene in any way; they will be freezing their military cooperation with Iran and therefore this is a way [for the US and NATO] of extending their war in the Middle East without there being a confrontation with China and Russia  and I think that this more or less is the scenario right now.

There are many types of threats directed against Russia and China. The fact that China’s borders are militarized –China’s South Sea, the Yellow Sea, the border with Afghanistan, and also the Straits of Taiwan- it is in some way a threat to dissuade China and Russia from playing the role of powers in world geopolitics, thus paving the way and even creating consensus in favour of a war with Iran which is happening under conditions where Iran’s  air defence system is being weakened.   [With the freeze of its military cooperation agreement with Russia] Iran is a “sitting duck” from the point of view of its ability to defend itself using its air defence system.

Fidel Castro Ruz:  In my modest and serene opinion  that resolution should have been vetoed.  Because, in my opinion, everything has become more complicated in several ways.

Militarily, because of what you are explaining regarding, for example, the commitment that existed and the contract that had been signed to supply Iran with the [Russian] S-300, which are very efficient anti-aircraft weapons in the first place.

There are other things regarding fuel supplies, which are very important for China, because China is the country with the highest economic growth.  Its growing economy generates greater demand for oil and gas.  Even though there are agreements with Russia for oil and gas supplies, they are also developing wind energy and other forms of renewable energy. They have enormous coal reserves;  nuclear energy will not increase much, only 5% for many years. In other words, the need for gas and oil in the Chinese economy is huge, and I cannot imagine, really, how they will be able to get all that energy, and at what price, if the country where they have important investments is destroyed by the US.  But the worst risk is the very nature of that war in Iran.  Iran is a Muslim country that has millions of trained combatants who are strongly motivated.

There are tens of millions of people who are under [military] orders,  they are being politically educated and trained, men and women alike.  There are millions of combatants trained and determined to die.  These are people who will not be intimidated and who cannot be forced to changing [their behavior]. On the other hand, there are the Afghans –they are being murdered by US drones –there are the Pakistanis, the Iraqis, who have seen one to two million compatriots die as a result of the antiterrorist war invented by Bush.  You cannot win a war against the Muslim world; that is sheer madness.

Michel Chossudovsky:  But it’s true, their conventional forces are very large,  Iran can mobilize in a single day several million troops and they are on the border with Afghanistan and Iraq, and even if there is a blitzkrieg war, the US cannot avoid a conventional war that is waged very close to its military bases in that region.

Fidel Castro Ruz: But the fact is that the US would lose that conventional war. The problem is that nobody can win a conventional war against millions of people; they would not concentrate their forces in large numbers in a single location for the Americans to kill them.

Well, I was a guerrilla fighter and I recall that I had to think seriously about how to use the forces we had and I would never have made the mistake of concentrating those forces in a single location, because the more concentrated the forces, the greater the casualties caused by weapons of mass destruction….

From left to right: Michel Chossudovsky, Randy Alonso Falcon, Fidel Castro Ruz

Michel Chossudovsky: As you mentioned previously, a matter of utmost importance: China and Russia’s decision in the Security Council, their support of Resolution 1929, is in fact harmful to them because, first, Russia cannot export weapons, thus its main source of income is now frozen.  Iran was one of the main customers or buyers of Russian weapons, and that was an important source of hard currency earnings which supported Russia`s consumer goods economy thereby covering the needs of the population.

And, on the other hand China requires access to sources of energy as you mentioned. The fact that China and Russia have accepted the consensus in the UN Security Council, is tantamount to saying: “We accept that you kill our economy and, in some ways, our commercial agreements with a third country”.  That’s very serious because it [the UNSC Resolution] not only does harm to Iran; is also harms those two countries, and I suppose –even though I am not a politician –that there must be tremendous divisions within the leadership, both in Russia and in China, for that to happen, for Russia to accept not to use its veto power in the Security Council.

I spoke with Russian journalists, who told me that there wasn’t exactly a consensus within the government per se; it was a guideline.  But there are people in the [Russian] government with a different point of view regarding the interests of Russia and its stance in the UN Security Council.  How do you see this?

Fidel Castro Ruz: How do I see the general situation? The alternative in Iran –let me put it this way –the conventional war would be lost by the US and the nuclear war is not an alternative for anyone.

On the other hand, nuclear war would inevitably become global.  Thus the danger in my opinion exists with the current situation in Iran, bearing in mind the reasons you are presenting and many other facts; which brings me to the conclusion that the war would end up being a nuclear war.

Filming of Fidel’s message on October 15.2010. From left to right: Fidel Castro, TV crew, Michel Chossudovsky, Randy Alonso Falcon

Michel Chossudovsky: In other words, since the US and its allies are unable to win the conventional war, they are going to use nuclear weapons, but that too would be a war they couldn’t win, because we are going to lose everything.

Fidel Castro Ruz: Everyone would be losing that war; that would be a war that everyone would lose. What would Russia gain if a nuclear war were unleashed over there? What would China gain?  What kind of war would that be? How would the world react? What effect would it have on the world economy? You explained it at the university when you spoke about the centralized defence system designed by the Pentagon.  It sounds like science fiction; it doesn’t even remotely resemble the last world war.  The other thing which is also very important is the attempt [by the Pentagon] to transform nuclear weapons into conventional tactical weapons.

Today, October 13th, I was reading about the same thing in a news dispatch stating that the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were drawing up strong protests about the fact that the US had just carried out subcritical nuclear tests.  They’re called subcritical, which means the use of the nuclear weapon without deploying all the energy that might be achieved with the critical mass.

It reads:  “Indignation in Hiroshima and Nagasaki because of a United States nuclear test.”…

 “The Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that suffered a nuclear attack at the end of WW II, deplored today the nuclear test carried out by the US on September last, called sub critical because it does not unleash chain nuclear reactions.

“The test, the first of this kind in that country since 2006, took place on September 15th somewhere in Nevada, United States.  It was officially confirmed by the Department of Energy of that country, the Japan Times informed.”

What did that newspaper say?

“I deeply deplore it because I was hoping that President Barack Obama would take on the leadership in eliminating nuclear weapons”, the governor of Nagasaki, Hodo Nakamura, stated today at a press conference.

A series of news items related to that follows.

“The test has also caused several protests among the citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, including several survivors of the atomic bombs attacks that devastated both cities in August of 1945.

“We cannot tolerate any action of the United States that betrays President Barack Obama’s promise of moving forward to a world without nuclear arms, said Yukio Yoshioka, the deputy director of the Council for the Victims of the Hiroshima Atomic Bomb.

“The government stated that it has no intention of protesting.”  It relegates the protest to a social level and then said: “With this, the number of subcritical nuclear tests made by the United States reaches the figure of 26, since July 1997 when the first of them took place.”

Now it says:

“Washington considers that these tests do not violate the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) since they do not unleash any chain reactions, and therefore do not release any nuclear energy, and so they can be considered to be laboratory tests.”

The US says that it has to make these tests because they are necessary to maintain the “security of its nuclear arsenal”, which is the same as saying: since we have these great nuclear arsenals, we are doing this in order to ensure our security.

Michel Chossudovsky:  Let us return to the issue of the threat against Iran, because you said that the US and its allies could not win a conventional war.  That is true; but nuclear weapons could be used as an alternative to conventional warfare, and this evidently is a threat against humanity, as you have emphasized in your writings.

The reason for my concern is that after the Cold War the idea of nuclear weapons with a “humanitarian face” was developed, saying that those weapons were not really dangerous, that they do not harm civilians, and in some way the nuclear weapons label was changed.  Therefore, according to their criteria, [tactical] nuclear weapons are no different from conventional weapons, and now in the military manuals they say that tactical nuclear weapons are weapons that pose no harm to civilians.

Therefore, we might have a situation in which those who decide to attack Iran with a nuclear weapon would not be aware of the consequences that this might have for the Middle East, central Asia, but also for humanity as a whole, because they are going to say: “Well, according to our criteria, these [tactical] nuclear weapons [safe for civilians] are different from those deployed during the Cold War and so, we can use them against Iran as a weapon which does not [affect civilians and] does not threaten global security.”

How do you view that?  It’s extremely dangerous, because they themselves believe their own propaganda.  It is internal propaganda within the armed forces, within the political apparatus.

When tactical nuclear weapons were recategorized in 2002-2003, Senator Edward Kennedy said at that time that it was a way of blurring the boundary between conventional and nuclear weapons.

But that’s where we are today; we are in an era where nuclear weapons are considered to be no different from the Kalashnikov. I’m exaggerating, but somehow nuclear weapons are now part of the tool box –that’s the word they use, “tool box” –and from there you choose the type of weapon you are going to use, so the nuclear weapon could be used in the conventional war theatre, leading us to the unthinkable, a nuclear war scenario on a regional level, but also with repercussions at the global level.

Fidel Castro Ruz: I heard what you said on the Round Table [Cuban TV] program about such weapons, presumably harmless to people living in the vicinity of the areas where they are to be targeted,  the power [explosive yield] could range from one-third of the one that was used in Hiroshima up to six times the power [explosive yield] of that weapon, and today we know perfectly well the terrible damage it causes.  One single bomb instantly killed 100,000 people.  Just imagine a bomb having six times the power of that one [Hiroshima bomb], or two times that power, or an equivalent power, or 30 per cent that power.  It is absurd.

There is also what you explained at the university about the attempt to present it as a humanitarian weapon that could also be available to the troops in the theatre of operations.  So at any given moment any commander in the theatre of operations could be authorized to use that weapon as one that was more efficient than other weapons, something that would be considered his duty according to military doctrine and the training he/she received at the military academies.

Michel Chossudovsky:  In that sense, I don’t think that this nuclear weapon would be used without the approval, let’s say, of the Pentagon, namely  its centralised command structures [e.g. Strategic Command]; but I do think that it could be used without the approval of the President of the United States and Commander in Chief.  In other words, it isn’t quite the same logic as that which prevailed during the Cold War where there was the Red Telephone and…

Fidel Castro Ruz: I understand, Professor, what you are saying regarding the use of that weapon as authorized by the senior levels of the Pentagon, and it seems right to me that you should make that clarification so that you won’t be blamed for exaggerating the dangers of that weapon.

But look, after one has learned about the antagonisms and arguments between the Pentagon and the President of the United States, there are really not too many doubts about what the Pentagon decision would be if the chief of the theatre of operations  requests to use that weapon because he feels it is necessary or indispensable.

Michel Chossudovsky: There is also another element.  The deployment of tactical nuclear weapons now, as far as I know, is being undertaken by several European countries which belong to NATO.  This is the case of Belgium, Holland, Turkey, Italy and Germany.  Thus, there are plenty of these “little nuclear bombs” very close to the theatre of war, and on the other hand we also have Israel.

Now then, I don’t think that Israel is going to start a war on its own; that would be impossible in terms of strategy and decision-making.  In modern warfare, with the centralization of communications, logistics and everything else, starting a major war would be a centralized decision.  However, Israel might act if the US gives Israel the green light to launch the first attack.  That’s within the realm of possibilities, even though there are some analysts who now say that the war on Iran will start in Lebanon and Syria with a conventional border war, and then that would provide the pretext for an escalation in military operations.

Fidel Castro Ruz: Yesterday, October 13th, a crowd of people welcomed Ahmadinejad in Lebanon like a national hero of that country.  I was reading a cable about that this morning.

Besides, we also know about Israel’s concerns regarding that, given the fact that the Lebanese are people with a great fighting spirit who have three times the number of reactive missiles they had in the former conflict with Israel and Lebanon, which was a great concern for Israel because they need –as the Israeli technicians have asserted – the air force to confront that weapon.  And so, they state, they could only be attacking Iran for a number of hours, not three days, because they should be paying attention to such a danger.  That’s the reason why, from these viewpoints, every day that goes by they are more concerned, because those weapons are part of the Iranian arsenal of conventional weapons. For example, among their conventional weapons, they have hundreds of rocket launchers to fight surface warships in that area of the Caspian Sea.  We know that, from the time of the Falklands war, a surface warship can dodge one, two or three rockets.  But imagine how a large warship can protect itself against a shower of weapons of that kind.  Those are rapid vessels operated by well-trained people, because the Iranians have been training people for 30 years now and they have developed efficient conventional weapons.

You yourself know that, and you know what happened during the last World War, before the emergence of nuclear weapons.  Fifty million people died as a result of the destructive power of conventional weaponry.

A war today is not like the war that was waged in the nineteenth century, before the appearance of nuclear weapons.  And wars were already highly destructive.  Nuclear arms appeared at the very last minute, because Truman wanted to use them.  He wanted to test the Hiroshima bomb, creating the critical mass from uranium, and the other one in Nagasaki, which created a critical mass from plutonium.  The two bombs killed around 100,000 persons immediately.  We don’t know how many were wounded and affected by radiation, who died later on or suffered for long years from these effects. Besides, a nuclear war would create a nuclear winter.

I am talking to you about the dangers of a war, considering  the immediate damage it might cause.  It would be enough if we only had a limited number of them, the amount of weapons owned by one of the least mighty [nuclear] powers, India or Pakistan.  Their explosion would be sufficient to create a nuclear winter from which no human being would survive.  That would be impossible, since it would last for 8 to 10 years.  In a matter of weeks the sunlight would no longer be visible.

Mankind is less than 200,000 years old.  So far everything was normalcy.  The laws of nature were being fulfilled; the laws of life developed on planet Earth for more than 3 billion years.  Men, the Homo sapiens, the intelligent beings did not exist after 8 tenths of a million years had elapsed, according to all studies.  Two hundred years ago, everything was virtually unknown.  Today we know the laws governing the evolution of the species.  Scientists, theologians, even the most devout religious people who initially echoed the campaign launched by the great ecclesiastical institutions against the Darwinian Theory, today accept the laws of evolution as real, without it preventing their sincere practice of their religious beliefs where, quite often, people find comfort for their most heartfelt hardships.

I think nobody on Earth wishes the human species to disappear.  And that is the reason why I am of the opinion that what should disappear are not just nuclear weapons, but also conventional weapons.  We must provide a guarantee for peace to all peoples without distinction, to the Iranians as well as the Israelis.  Natural resources should be distributed.  They should!  I don’t mean they will, or that it would be easy to do it.  But there would be no other alternative for humanity, in a world of limited dimensions and resources, even if all the scientific potential to create renewable sources of energy is developed. We are almost 7 billion inhabitants, and so we need to implement a demographic policy.  We need many things, and when you put them all together and you ask yourself the following question:  will human beings be capable of understanding that and overcome all those difficulties? You realize that only enthusiasm can truly lead a person to say that he or she will confront and easily resolve a problem of such proportions.

Michel Chossudovsky:  What you have just said is extremely important, when you spoke of Truman.  Truman said that Hiroshima was a military base and that there would be no harm to civilians.

This notion of collateral damage; reflects continuity in [America’s] nuclear doctrine ever since the year 1945 up until today.  That is, not at the level of reality but at the level of [military] doctrine and propaganda.  I mean, in 1945 it was said: Let’s save humanity by killing 100,000 people and deny the fact that Hiroshima was a populated city, namely that it was a military base.  But nowadays the falsehoods have become much more sophisticated, more widespread, and nuclear weapons are more advanced.  So, we are dealing with the future of humanity and the threat of a nuclear war at a global level. The lies and fiction underlying [US] political and military discourse would lead us to a Worldwide catastrophe in which politicians would be unable to make head or tails of their own lies.

Then, you said that intelligent human beings have existed for 200,000 years, but that same intelligence, which has now been incorporated in various institutions, namely the media, the intelligence services, the United Nations, happens to be what is now going to destroy us.  Because we believe our own lies, which leads us towards nuclear war, without realizing that this would be the last war, as Einstein clearly stated. A nuclear war cannot ensure the continuation of humanity; it is a threat against the world.

Fidel Castro Ruz: Those are very good words, Professor.  The collateral damage, in this case, could be humanity.

War is a crime and there is no need for any new law to describe it as such, because since Nuremberg, war has already been considered a crime, the biggest crime against humanity and peace, and the most horrible of all crimes.

Michel Chossudovsky.-  The Nuremberg texts clearly state: “War is a criminal act, it is the ultimate act of war against peace.” This part of the Nuremberg texts is often quoted. After the Second World War, the Allies wanted to use it against the conquered, and I am not saying that this is not valid, but the crimes that they committed, including the crimes committed against Germany and Japan, are never mentioned.  With a nuclear weapon, in the case of Japan.

Michel Chossudovsky.-  It is an extremely important issue for me and if we are talking about a “counter-alliance for peace”, the criminalization of war seems to me to be a fundamental aspect. I’m talking about the abolition of war; it is a criminal act that must be eliminated.

Fidel Castro Ruz –  Well, who would judge the main criminals?

Michel Chossudovsky.- The problem is that they also control the judicial system and the courts, so the judges are criminals as well. What can we do?

Fidel Castro Ruz   I say that this is part of the Battle of Ideas.

It is about demanding that the world not be spearheaded into a nuclear catastrophe, it is to preserve life.

We do not know, but we presume that if man becomes aware of his own existence, that of his people, that of his loved ones, even the U.S. military leaders would be aware of the outcome; although they are taught in life to follow orders, not infrequently genocide, as in the use of tactical or strategic nuclear weapons, because that is what they were taught in the [military] academies.

As all of this is sheer madness, no politician is exempt from the duty of conveying these truths to the people. One must believe in them, otherwise there would be nothing to fight for.        

Michel Chossudovsky .- I think what you are saying is that at the present time, the great debate in human history should focus on the danger of nuclear war that threatens the future of humanity, and that any discussion we have about basic needs or economics requires that we prevent the occurrence of war and instate global peace so that we can then plan living standards worldwide based on basic needs;  but if we do not solve the problem of war, capitalism will not survive, right?          

Fidel Castro Ruz.– No, it cannot survive, in terms of all the analysis we’ve undertaken, it cannot survive. The capitalist system and the market economy that suffocate human life, are not going to disappear overnight, but imperialism based on force, nuclear weapons and conventional weapons with modern technology, has to disappear if we want humanity to survive.

Now, there something occurring at this very moment which characterizes the Worldwide process of disinformation, and it is the following: In Chile 33 miners were trapped 700 meters underground, and the world is rejoicing at the news that 33 miners have been saved. Well, simply, what will the world do if it becomes aware that 6,877,596,300 people need to be saved, if 33 have created universal joy and all the mass media speak only of that these days, why not save the nearly 7 billion people trapped by the terrible danger of perishing in a horrible death like those of Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

Michel Chossudovsky. -This is also, clearly, the issue of media coverage that is given to different events and the propaganda emanating from the media.

I think it was an incredible humanitarian operation that the Chileans undertook, but it is true that if there is a threat to humanity,  as you mentioned, it  should be on the front page of every newspaper in the world because human society in its totality could be the victim of a decision that has been made, even by a three-star general who is unaware of the consequences [of nuclear weapons].

But here we are talking about how the media, particularly in the West, are hiding the most serious issue that potentially affects the world today, which is the danger of nuclear war and we must take it seriously, because both Hillary Clinton and Obama have said that they have contemplated using nuclear weapon in a so-called preventive war against Iran.

Well, how do we answer? What do you say to Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama regarding their statements pertaining to the unilateral use of nuclear weapons against Iran, a country that poses no danger to anyone?      

Fidel Castro Ruz.- Yes, I know two things: What was discussed. This has been revealed recently, namely far-reaching arguments within the Security Council of the United States.  That is the value of the book written by Bob Woodward, because it revealed how all these discussions occurred. We know the positions of Biden, Hillary, Obama, and indeed in those discussions, who was firmer against the extension of the war, who was able to argue with the military, it was Obama, that is a fact.

I am writing the latest reflection, actually, about that. The only one who got there, and gave him advice, who had been an opponent because of his Republican Party membership, was Colin Powell. He reminded him that he was the President of the United States, encouraging advice.

I think we should ensure that this message reaches everybody; what we have discussed. I think many read the articles you have published in Global Research.  I think we need to disclose, and to the extent that we have these discussions and harbor the idea of disclosure. I am delighted every time you argue, reasonably, and put forth these issues, simply, in my opinion, there is a real deficit of information for the reasons you explained.

Now, we must invent. What are the ways to make all this known? At the time of the Twelve Apostles, there were 12 and no more, and they were given the task of disseminating the teachings a preacher transmitted to them. Sure, they had hundreds of years ahead of them. We, however, we do not have that. But I was looking at the list of personalities, and there are more than 20 prominent people who have been working with Global Research, prestigious people, asking the same questions, but they do not have hundreds of years, but, well, very little time.

Michel Chossudovsky. –  The antiwar movement in the United States, Canada and Europe is divided. Some people think the threat comes from Iran, others say they [the Iranians] are terrorists, and there is a lot of disinformation in the movement itself.

Besides, at the World Social Forum the issue of nuclear war is not part of the debate between people of the Left or progressives. During the Cold War there was talk of the danger of nuclear conflict, and people had this awareness.

At the last meeting held in New York on non-proliferation, under the United Nations, the emphasis was on the nuclear threat from non-state entities, from terrorists.

President Obama said that the threat comes from Al Qaeda, which has nuclear weapons.  Also, if someone reads Obama’s speeches he is suggesting that the terrorists have the ability of producing small nuclear bombs, what they call “dirty bombs”. Well, it’s a way of [distorting the issues] and shifting the emphasis.

Fidel Castro Ruz. – That is what they tell him [Obama], that is what his own people tell him and have him believe.

Look, what do I do with the reflections? They are distributed in the United Nations, they are sent to all governments, the reflections, of course, are short, to send them to all the governments, and I know there are many people who read them. The problem is whether you are telling the truth or not. Of course, when one collects all this information in relation to a particular problem because the reflections are also diluted on many issues, but I think you have to concentrate on our part, the disclosure of essentials, I cannot cover everything.

Michel Chossudovsky. – I have a question, because there is an important aspect related to the Cuban Revolution. In my opinion, the debate on the future of humanity is also part of a revolutionary discourse.  If society as a whole were to be threatened by nuclear war, it is necessary in some form, to have a revolution at the levels of ideas as well as actions against this event, [namely nuclear war].

Fidel Castro Ruz .- We have to say, I repeat,  that humanity is trapped 800 meters underground and that we must get it out, we need to do a rescue operation. That is the message we must convey to a large number of people. If  people in large numbers believe in that message, they will do what you are doing and they will support what you are supporting. It will no longer depend on who are those who say it, but on the fact that somebody [and eventually everybody] says it.

You have to figure out how you can reach the informed masses. The solution is not the newspapers. There is the Internet, Internet is cheaper, Internet is more accessible. I approached you through the Internet looking for news, not through news agencies, not through the press, not from CNN, but news through a newsletter I receive daily articles on the Internet . Over 100 pages each day.

Yesterday you were arguing that in the United States some time ago two thirds of public opinion was against the war on Iran, and today, fifty-some percent favored military action against Iran.

Michel Chossudovsky .- What happened, even in recent months, it was said: “Yes, nuclear war is very dangerous, it is a threat, but the threat comes from Iran,” and there were signs in New York City  saying: ” Say no to nuclear Iran, “and the message of these posters was to present Iran as a threat to global security, even if the threat did not exist because they do not have nuclear weapons.

Anyway, that’s the situation, and The New York Times earlier this week published a text that says, yes, political assassinations are legal.

Then, when we have a press that gives us things like that, with the distribution that they have, it is a lot of work [on our part]. We have limited capabilities to reverse this process [of media disinformation] within the limited distribution outlets of the alternative media. In addition to that, now many of these alternative media are financed by the economic establishment.            

Fidel Castro Ruz.- And yet we have to fight.

Michel Chossudovsky .- Yes, we keep struggling, but the message was what you said yesterday. That in the case of a nuclear war, the collateral damage would be humanity as a whole.

Fidel Castro Ruz.- It would be humanity, the life of humanity.

Michel Chossudovsky.-   It is true that the Internet should continue to function as an outreach tool to avoid the war.

Fidel Castro Ruz.- Well, it’s the only way we can prevent it. If we were to create world opinion, it’s like the example I mentioned: there are nearly 7 billion people trapped 800 meters underground, we use the phenomenon of Chile to disclose these things.

Michel Chossudovsky .- The comparison you make with the rescue of 33 miners, saying that there are 33 miners below ground there to be rescued, which received extensive media coverage, and you say that we have almost 7 billion people that are  800 meters underground and do not understand what is happening, but we have to rescue them, because humanity as a whole is threatened by the nuclear weapons of the United States and its allies, because they are the ones who say they intend to use them.        

Fidel Castro Ruz.- And will use them [the nuclear weapons] if there is no opposition, if there is no resistance. They are deceived; they are drugged with military superiority and modern technology and do not know what they are doing.

They do not understand the consequences; they believe that the prevailed situation can be maintained. It is impossible.

Michel Chossudovsky. – Or they believe that this is simply some sort of conventional weapon.           

Fidel Castro Ruz. – Yes, they are deluded and believe that you can still use that weapon. They believe they are in another era, they do not remember what Einstein said when he stated he did not know with what weapons World War III would be fought with, but the World War IV would be fought with sticks and stones. I added there: “… there wouldn’t be anyone to handle the sticks and stones.” That is the reality; I have it written there in the short speech you suggested I develop.

Michel Chossudovsky .- The problem I see is that the use of nuclear weapons will not necessarily lead to the end of humankind from one day to the next, because the radioactive impact is cumulative.

Fidel Castro Ruz. – Repeat that, please.

Michel Chossudovsky. – The nuclear weapon has several different consequences: one is the explosion and destruction in the theater of war, which is the phenomenon of Hiroshima, and the other are the impacts of radiation which increases over time.           

Fidel Castro Ruz.- Yes, nuclear winter, as we call it. The prestigious American researcher, University of Rutgers (New Jersey) Professor Emeritus Alan Robock irrefutably showed that the outbreak of a war between two of the eight nuclear powers who possess the least amount of weapons of this kind would result in “nuclear winter”.

He disclosed that at the fore of a group of researchers who used ultra-scientific computer models.

It would be enough to have 100 strategic nuclear weapons of the 25,000 possessed by the eight powers mentioned exploding in order to create temperatures below freezing all over the planet and a long night that would last approximately eight years.  Professor Robock exclaims that it is so terrible that people are falling into a “state of denial”, not wanting to think about it; it is easier to pretend that it doesn’t exist”.  He told me that personally, at an international conference he was giving, where I had the honor of conversing with him.

Well, but I start from an assumption: If a war breaks out in Iran, it will inevitably become nuclear war and a global war. So that’s why yesterday we were saying it was not right to allow such an agreement in the Security Council, because it makes everything easier, do you see?

Such a war in Iran today would not remain confined to the local level, because the Iranians would not give in to use of force. If it remained conventional, it would be a war the United States and Europe could not win, and I argue that it would rapidly turn into a nuclear war. If the United States were to make the mistake of using tactical nuclear weapons, there would be consternation throughout the world and the US would eventually lose control of the situation.

Obama has had a heated discussion with the Pentagon about what to do in Afghanistan; imagine Obama’s situation with American and Israeli soldiers fighting against millions of Iranians. The Saudis are not going to fight in Iran, nor are the Pakistanis or any other Arab or Muslim soldiers. What could happen is that the Yanks have serious conflicts with the Pakistani tribes which they are attacking and killing with their drones,  and they know that. When you strike a blow against those tribes, first attacking and then warning the government, not saying anything beforehand;  that is one of the things that irritates the Pakistanis. There is a strong anti-American feeling there.

It’s a mistake to think that the Iranians would give up if they used tactical nuclear weapons against them, and the world really would be shocked, but then it may be too late.

Michel Chossudovsky .- They cannot win a conventional war.          

Fidel Castro Ruz .- They cannot win.

Michel Chossudovsky. – And that we can see in Iraq; in Afghanistan they can destroy an entire country, but they cannot win from a military standpoint.          

Fidel Castro Ruz. – But to destroy it [a country] at what price, at what cost to the world, at what economic costs, in the march towards catastrophe? The problems you mentioned are compounded, the American people would react, because the American people are often slow to react, but they react in the end. The American people react to casualties, the dead.

A lot of people supported the Nixon administration during the war in Vietnam, he even suggested the use of nuclear weapons in that country to Kissinger, but he dissuaded him from taking that criminal step. The United States was obliged by the American people to end the war; it had to negotiate and had to hand over the south. Iran would have to give up the oil in the area. In Vietnam what did they hand over? An expense. Ultimately, they are now back in Vietnam, buying oil, trading. In Iran they would lose many lives, and perhaps a large part of the oil facilities in the area would be destroyed.

In the present situation, is likely they would not understand our message. If war breaks out, my opinion is that they, and the world, would gain nothing. If it were solely a conventional war, which is very unlikely, they would lose irretrievably, and if it becomes a global nuclear war, humanity would lose.

Michel Chossudovsky.- Iran has conventional forces that are …significant.

Fidel Castro Ruz.-   Millions.

Michel Chossudovsky.-  Land forces, but also rockets and also Iran has the ability to defend itself.

 Fidel Castro Ruz.-   While there remains one single man with a gun, this is an enemy they will have to defeat.

Michel Chossudovsky.-  And there are several millions with guns.

 Fidel Castro Ruz.-   Millions, and they will have to sacrifice many American lives, unfortunately it would be only then that Americans would react, if they don’t react now they will react later when it will be too late; we must write, we must divulge this as much as we can.   Remember that the Christians were persecuted, they led them off to the catacombs, they killed them, they threw them to the lions, but they held on to their beliefs for centuries and later that was what they did to the Moslems, and the Moslems never yielded.

There is a real war against the Moslem world.  Why are those lessons of history being forgotten?  I have read many of the articles you wrote about the risks of that war.

Michel Chossudovsky.-  Let us return to the matter of Iran.  I believe that it is very important that world opinion comprehends the war scenario.  You clearly state that they would lose the war, the conventional war, they are losing it in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran has more conventional forces than those of NATO in Afghanistan.

 Fidel Castro Ruz.-   Much more experienced and motivated.  They are now in conflict with those forces in Afghanistan and Iraq and one they don’t mention: the Pakistanis of the same ethnic group as those in the resistance in Afghanistan. In White House discussions,  they consider that the war is lost, that’s what the book by Bob Woodward entitled “Obama’s Wars” tells us.  Imagine the  situation if in addition to that, they append a war to liquidate whatever remains after the initial blows they inflict on Iran.

So they will be thrust into a conventional war situation that they cannot win, or they will be obliged to wage a global nuclear war, under conditions of a worldwide upheaval.  And I don’t know who can justify the type of war they have to wage; they have 450 targets marked out in Iran, and of these some, according to them, will have to be attacked with tactical nuclear warheads because of their location in mountainous areas and at the depth at which they are situated [underground].  Many Russian personnel and persons from other nationalities collaborating with them will die in that confrontation.

What will be the reaction of world opinion in the face of that blow which today is being irresponsibly promoted by the media with the backing of many Americans?

Michel Chossudovsky.-  One issue, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, they are all neighbouring countries in a certain way.  Iran shares borders with Afghanistan and with Iraq, and the United States and NATO have military facilities in the countries they occupy.  What’s going to happen? I suppose that the Iranian troops are immediately going to cross the border.

Fidel Castro Ruz.-   Well, I don’t know what tactic they’re going to use, but if one were in their place, the most advisable is to not concentrate their troops, because if the troops are concentrated they will be victims of the attack with tactical nuclear weapons. In other words, in accordance with the nature of the threat as it is being described, the best thing would be for them to use a tactic similar to ours in southern Angola when we suspected that South Africa had nuclear weapons; we created tactical groups of 1000 men with land and anti-air fire power.  Nuclear weapons could never within their reach target a large number of soldiers. Anti-air rocketry and other similar weapons was supporting our forces.  Weapons and the conditions of the terrain change and tactics must continuously change.

Michel Chossudovsky.-  Dispersed.

Fidel Castro Ruz.-   Dispersed, but not isolated men, there were around 1000 men with appropriate weapons, the terrain was sandy, wherever they got to they had to dig in and protect themselves underground, always keeping the maximum distance between components.  The enemy was never given an opportunity to aim a decisive blow against the 60,000 Cuban and Angolan soldiers in southern Angola.

What we did in that sister country is what, a thousand strong army, operating with traditional criteria, would have done.  Fine, we were not 100 000, in southern Angola there were 60,000 men, Cubans and Angolans; due to technical requirements the tactical groups were mainly made up of Cubans because they handled tanks, rockets, anti-aircraft guns, communications, but the infantry was made up of Cuban and Angolan soldiers, with great fighting spirit, who didn’t hesitate one second in confronting the white Apartheid army supported by the United States and Israel.  Who handled the numerous nuclear weapons that they had at that moment?

In the case of Iran,   we are getting news that they are digging into the ground, and when they are asked about it, they say that they are making cemeteries to bury the invaders. I don’t know if this is meant to be ironic, but I think that one would really have to dig quite a lot to protect their forces from the attack which is threatening them.

Michel Chossudovsky.-  Sure, but Iran has the possibility of mobilizing millions of troops.

Fidel Castro Ruz.-   Not just troops, but the command posts are also decisive.  In my opinion, dispersion is very important.  The attackers will try to prevent the transmission of orders.  Every combat unit must know beforehand what they have to do under different  circumstances.  The attacker will try to strike and destabilize the chain of command with its radio-electronic weapons.  All those factors must be kept in mind.  Mankind has never experienced a similar predicament.

Anyway,  Afghanistan is “a joke” and Iraq, too, when you compare them with what they are going to bump into in Iran: the weaponry, the training, the mentality, the kind of soldier…  If 31 years ago, Iranian combatants cleaned the mine fields by advancing over them, they will undoubtedly be the most fearsome adversaries that the United States has ever come across.

***

The interview was conducted in Spanish.

Our thanks and appreciation to Cuba Debate for the transcription as well as the translation from Spanish.

***

Fidel’s Message on the Dangers of Nuclear War

Recorded on the last day of the Conversations, October 15, 2010 the original Global Research/Cuba Debate video (our copyright) was removed on alleged copyright infringements alongside many other Youtube postings.

TRANSCRIPT

The use of nuclear weapons in a new war would mean the end of humanity. This was candidly foreseen by scientist Albert Einstein who was able to measure their destructive capability to generate millions of degrees of heat, which would vaporize everything within a wide radius of action. This brilliant researcher had promoted the development of this weapon so that it would not become available to the genocidal Nazi regime.

Each and every government in the world has the obligation to respect the right to life of each and every nation and of the totality of all the peoples on the planet.

Today there is an imminent risk of war with the use of that kind of weapon and I don’t harbour the least doubt that an attack by the United States and Israel against the Islamic Republic of Iran would inevitably evolve towards a global nuclear conflict.

The World’s peoples have an obligation to demand of their political leaders their Right to Live. When the life of humankind, of your people and your most beloved human beings run such a risk, nobody can afford to be indifferent; not one minute can be lost in demanding respect for that right; tomorrow will be too late.

Albert Einstein himself stated unmistakably: “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones”. We fully comprehend what he wanted to convey, and he was absolutely right, yet in the wake of a global nuclear war, there wouldn’t be anybody around to make use of those sticks and stones.

There would be “collateral damage”, as the American political and military leaders always affirm, to justify the deaths of innocent people.

In a nuclear war the “collateral damage” would be the life of all humanity.

Let us have the courage to proclaim that all nuclear or conventional weapons, everything that is used to make war, must disappear!

Fidel Castro Ruz

October 15, 2010

---

Michel Chossudovsky Book’s published in 2011, following his October 2010 meeting with Fidel Castro

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

Papers reviewed: 

• (2023 July, Seraphin et al) – The impact of vitamin D on cancer: A mini review
• (2023 June, Kuznia et al) – Efficacy of vitamin D₃ supplementation on cancer mortality: Systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
• (2023 Mar, Nemeth et al) – Interplay of Vitamin D and SIRT1 in Tissue-Specific Metabolism—Potential Roles in Prevention and Treatment of Non-Communicable Diseases Including Cancer
• (2022 Oct, Henn et al) – Vitamin D in Cancer Prevention: Gaps in Current Knowledge and Room for Hope

2023 July, Seraphin et al – The impact of vitamin D on cancer: A mini review

• “Vitamin D deficiency has been linked to the development and progression of a number of cancer types.”
• Vitamin D continues to show positive anti-cancer effects against many types of cancer.
• Demographic studies recommend vitamin D supplementation to prevent cancer.
• In general, the normal range for circulating 25(OH)D is 30–50 ng/mL
• deficiency is defined as < 20 ng/mL

Summary of recent advancements in vitamin D cancer research: 

• Breast cancer
  • Vit.D deficiency common in breast cancer patients, younger and obese patients are more susceptible
  • Vit.D Deficiency linked to higher grade and ER-subtypes
• Ovarian cancer – people with high Vit.D levels had 37% lower risk of ovarian cancer
• glioblastoma – induced apoptosis, cytotoxic autophagy and inhibited migration and invasiveness, and stemness
• melanoma – people on Vit.D supplements had lower risk of melanoma, low levels associated with reduced melanoma patient survival
• multiple myeloma – Vit.D treatment overcomes cancer drug resistance
• prostate cancer – Vit.D can inhibit tumor progression by negatively regulating androgen receptor signalling
• Head and neck SCC – patients with aggressive cancers had lowest Vit.D levels
• bladder cancer – Vit.D improved chemo efficacy
• osterosarcoma – Vit.D suppressed tumor growth and metastasis
• Colorectal cancer – Higher Vit.D intake resulted in 17% lower risk, suppresses colorectal cancer stem cells

Conclusions

• there were about 904 articles on relationship between Vitamin D and cancer during 2022-2023 (Vit.D cancer research has increased substantially)
• “low circulating vitamin D levels are associated with an increased risk of cancers”
• “supplementation alone or in combination with other chemo/immunotherapeutic drugs may improve clinical outcomes even further”

2023 June, Kuznia et al – Efficacy of vitamin D₃ supplementation on cancer mortality: Systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials 

• Analysis of 14 RCTs revealed a 12 % lower cancer mortality in the vitamin D₃ group compared with the placebo group in 10 trials with a daily dosing regimen (no mortality reduction was seen in 4 trials using a bolus regimen)
• Cancer survival improved when daily vitamin D₃ was started before cancer diagnosis.
• Meta-analyses of observational studies reported elevated risks of lung cancer, colorectal cancer, breast cancer, bladder carcinoma, and lymphoma in people with low serum 25(OH)D concentration
• Systematic reviews further concluded that sufficient 25(OH)D levels (≥50 nmol/L) are associated with better prognosis in patients with breast and colorectal cancers, whereas there have been too few studies for other cancer sites to draw conclusions
• Moreover, low 25(OH)D levels were substantially related to increased cancer mortality in the general population.

2023, Mar, Nemeth et al – Interplay of Vitamin D and SIRT1 in Tissue-Specific Metabolism—Potential Roles in Prevention and Treatment of Non-Communicable Diseases Including Cancer

• Vitamin D decreases cancer cell proliferation and induces apoptosis of cancer cells
• Vitamin D reduces the expression of HIF-1, VEGF, as well as IL-8, which are all important angiogenic factors (tumors need new blood vessels to grow)
• prospective and retrospective epidemiological studies reported an association between a 25(OH)D₃ level below 20 ng/mL and a 30–50% increased risk of colon, prostate, and breast cancer and higher mortality
• systematic review found that vitamin D supplementation induced a shift in colon microbiome composition and increased its diversity

2022 Oct, Henn et al – Vitamin D in Cancer Prevention: Gaps in Current Knowledge and Room for Hope

• “observational studies consistently showed that low vitamin D levels are associated with increased cancer incidence and mortality”
• “The potential of vitamin D for cancer prevention and add-on treatment has long been bolstered by several discovered mechanisms involving the regulation of cell growth and differentiation, apoptosis, intercellular contacts, angiogenesis, immune function, and interaction with the gut microbiome”
• “results show stronger relations between 25(OH)D and cancer mortality than cancer incidence, suggesting an impact on outcome after tumor onset. It might be explained by a gain in the relevance of 25(OH)D concentrations to counteract tumor progression to a more aggressive tumor grade, growth, and metastatic spread after initial carcinogenesis, lowering the malignancy level.”
• “The negative association between 25(OH)D plasma levels and cancer mortality is more substantial than cancer incidence. That is why vitamin D might also be considered an add-on treatment for tumor patients.”
• Vitamin D and Omega-3 Trial (VITAL) – The VITAL study investigated the effect of 2000 IU of vitamin D₃ per day, combined with 1 g of marine n-3 fatty acids per day, on an invasive cancer of any type and major cardiovascular events over a median follow-up of 5.3 years.
  • there was a 24% decrease in cancer incidence if your BMI was < 25
  • there was a 25% decrease in cancer mortality (if you exclude first 2 years of follow-up where cancer may have existed but was undiagnosed)
• Finnish Vitamin D trial with 1600 IU/day or 3200 IU/day vs placebo in > 60 year olds showed no difference in incidence of cancer

My Take… 

I’m often asked by COVID-19 mRNA Vaccinated individuals how to either prevent cancer from developing or once diagnosed, how to best treat a Turbo Cancer, given that Oncologists have no idea how to deal with this new vaccine phenomenon.

Ivermectin and Fenbendazole (or Mebendazole) have emerged as the leading options for an alternative treatment approach to mRNA Induced Turbo Cancers, however, a comprehensive treatment plan will involve several other elements.

One of these is Vitamin D.

Supplementing Vitamin D is easy and cheap.

Having high Vitamin D levels or supplementing daily with Vitamin D gives you the following potential cancer-related benefits:

• immune system support and numerous anti-cancer effects (cell cycle arrest, increased apoptosis, decreased angiogenesis, decreased cancer stem cells, decreased metastasis)
• a 10-30% decrease in the risk of getting certain cancers such as breast, ovarian, melanoma, colorectal, prostate, lung
• a 10-30% decrease in cancer mortality once diagnosed.

These are substantial benefits that cannot be ignored.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.

---

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page. 

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

Nuclear Only Option for Israel 

But there is a catch: And that is, that Israel does simply not possess the capability, the air power to hit back hard at Iran  – EXCEPT if Israel goes nuclear.

But while Israel hasn’t got the thousands of drones and missiles for a long-range air campaign which Iran has, Israel does possess a smaller number of long range of nuclear capable missiles (some on submarines) which can hit anywhere.

And that is undoubtedly what Bezalel Smotrich wants – an Israeli nuclear attacks all over Iran.

The Middle East is about to become the nuclear focus of the world.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

---

“Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
–John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
–Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute   

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

While once running in competitions over long distances — a “very athletic” man, James unexpectedly died in December 2023 after receiving multiple COVID shots and a flu vaccine.

It was a few days after one of his races, while decorating the Christmas tree, when he was found unresponsive.

“We’re all in shock,” his mother explains. Discover the details of this heartbreaking narrative on CHD.TV.

Click here to watch the video

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

---

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

You may also access the online version of the e-Book by clicking here.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page. 

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Referral Drive: Our Readers Are Our Lifeline

***

Israel’s Minister of War, Yoav Gallant, told his troops the Iranian attack was not successful; that of about hundred drones and rockets, Israel downed them all but four, thanks to their good preparation. This is a lie on many levels.

Both Netanyahu and Gallant expressed their determination to retaliate after a well thought-out plan. Netanyahu qualified, it needs to be a “clever response”.

Likewise, army chief Herzi Halevi is crystal clear in his attempt at launching a response for Iran’s retaliatory attack on Israel, but he does not want to cause a war.

The Israeli Cabinet is also “mulling” over what they call a “political offensive” – whatever that may mean.

Interesting is that both sides, Israel and Iran, do not seem to want war, or better a HOT WAR, where saber-rattling could surreptitiously convert into a mushroom cloud. They know when NATO gets involved, Russia and China may get involved – and then the sky is open and Armageddon is on the table, or rather all over Mother Earth.

If indeed, Israel goes ahead with such a counter-attack, however benign or non-benign it may be, it is like giving Biden the finger because, according to the latest news, Biden backtracked from his earlier limitless commitment to support Israel and to always fight for Israel’s security. Biden’s “back-stoppers“ must have told him otherwise: “America is not going to war with Iran for Israel.” Israel – you are on your own, so to speak.

That was a smart decision. Will they stick to it? The US is divided. There are the Zionists, who so far have called the shots in Washington and the Pentagon. But the balance is gradually shifting in favor of the more level-headed thinkers, those who do not want to risk WWIII which could become nuclear – and global.

Similar messages of “caution” seem to emanate from British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, a strong supporter of Zionism. He called Benjamin Netanyahu, suggesting prudence in any further action he may take. An escalation that could spin out of control is in nobody’s interest.

Nevertheless, PM Sunak assured Netanyahu of UK’s support to “guarantee Israel’s security”.

If this sounds like a game of words, probably it is a game of words. Maybe hiding a surprise – and perhaps during the days of “thinking about prudence” — something much bigger may be under preparation. Knowing the Israel-Zionist’s own supremacy concept, they will not let the Iranian attack, even if well justified, go unanswered.

Just to refresh memories, because they are systematically wiped out by the bought mainstream media: Iran launched a measured, but well calculated retaliatory attack on Israeli military targets in the early hours of 14th April. The drone and ICBM missile assault of some 300 projectiles was a response for Israel’s unprovoked attack of 1st April on Iran’s Consulate in Damascus, leaving seven people dead, including two high-ranking Iranian military officers.

By the multitude of rockets Iran fired on Israel in sequence, first the drones then the missiles, Iran suppressed Israel’s and their allies air defense system that concentrated on intercepting drones and was unable to intercept the subsequently launched hypersonic missiles.

Tehran having entered a new stage of political and military stature beyond the Middle Eastern boundaries, had to react to Israel’s Damascus provocation of 1st April, in terms of a clear message, “Don’t mess with Iran – or else”.

Iran, now militarily speaking, one of the three key members of the newly ten BRICS nations, must assure the West that sanctions and threats and random unprovoked attacks will not cut it anymore.

The 14th April attack by Iran was not just a retaliatory strike, but has established a new order, depriving Israel of her absolute impunity, which until recently had been guaranteed by the US.

Important to note is that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Commander-in-Chief Hossein Salami said that from now on, if Israel attacks the interests of Iran and Iranian citizens, Tehran will strike it again (RT News – 16 April 2024).

This means that if Israel now hits back, Iran will not just swallow whatever Israel does to harm Iran. And there is the danger – a real risk of escalation out of control.

One might ask, was this “out-of-control” situation planned and prepared by the Zionist-dominated West?

Let us not forget, whatever Zionist-Israel does in pursuit of her ultimate goal, the establishment of Greater Israel, is to control the Middle East’s inexhaustible energy resources.

Achieving Greater Israel depends very much on Israel conquering Iran, not only because Iran is literally in “command” of the oil and gas rich Middle East, but also a Greater Israel needs control over the Strait of Hormuz, now controlled by Iran.

Currently about 30% or more of the world’s total oil and gas consumption is shipped through the Strait of Hormuz. See this.

With a Greater Israel, the bulk of Middle Eastern hydrocarbons would be under Zionist-Israeli control and with the Strait of Hormuz under Israeli control, shipments of the energy resources, how much and to whom, would be under Zionist command.

Not to forget, Zionist-Israel is already in the process of appropriating the enormous gas reserves off-shore of Gaza – conservatively estimated already some 20 years ago at about a trillion cubic-feet, worth between two and three billion dollars, depending on the market price. And as we know, he, who controls the resource, decides its “market” price.

An updated assessment of the Gaza off-shore reserves may be exponentially higher. Of course, kept secret, given the current war and expropriation scenario by Zionist-Israel.

The huge port that is rumored to be planned just outside Gaza – maybe construction has already begun — has little to do with food delivery to Gaza (certainly not), or “exporting” the remaining Gazans to unknown destinations.

Much more likely will this be the port for handling the Gaza off-shore hydrocarbons through a yet to be built (but planned since 1971) Ben-Gurion Canal, all the way to the Red Sea. The new canal would probably bankrupt the Suez Canal, a possession of Egypt, an Arab state.

The Suez Canal is already suffering due to lack of transshipments of at least 20 European countries, who are afraid the Yemeni-Houthi attacks on US- and Israeli-controlled merchandise vessels could also target their ships.

This Big Picture speaks for Israel not letting go. From their point of view, they MUST conquer Iran. The Zionists may be so blinded by their delusion of “grandeur”, that they may not see the Mushroom Cloud that may wipe them out along with much of the rest of the world.

The reality is that Iran is no longer alone. Iran wants to make sure that their power and presence is accounted for by Israel, the US, its European vassals, and the West-at-large, because they are now a member of the new BRICS which is not just an economic association.

Their membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) – a strategic and economic China-Russia initiative, protects them from outside attacks, the same way NATO members are protected. (Collective Defense Doctrine under Art, 5) 

Attack One BRICS state, you attack them all.

Retaliation in the case of an attack on Iran can come from all or selected members of the ten BRICS countries, especially from Russia and China; which would pretty much mean WWIII.

This may be the reason for Iran’s relatively benign retaliation against Israel. It was a warning.

Iran does not want war. They may follow the Tao philosophy, as expressed by Sun Tzu in ancient times,

“To fight 100 battles and win 100 battles is not the height of skill. The best way to win is not to fight at all.”

This is Iran’s strategy. Its strike against Israel was not so much a military response as a grandmaster’s move in a big chess game. And the game is not over yet (RT News, 16 April 2024).

May President Putin’s words resonate and be taken seriously, “I hope WWIII can be avoided”; meaning that an Israeli assault on Iran would not remain unanswered by Russia, which would bring in NATO and WWIII could explode overnight.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Featured image source

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (only available in desktop version).

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Big Tech’s Effort to Silence Truth-tellers: Global Research Online Referral Campaign

 

 

---

Price: $11.50 FREE COPY! Click here (docsend) and download.

We encourage you to support the eBook project by making a donation through Global Research’s DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page. 

 

 

---

 

 

 

The Worldwide Corona Crisis 

Global Coup d’État Against Humanity 

by

Michel Chossudovsky

Global Research, 2022

---

---

Reviews

This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized, Dr. Mike Yeadon

In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. -Peter Koenig 

Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy. –David Skripac

A reading of  Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late.  You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin

 仕組まれたコロナ危機:「世界の初期化」を目論む者たち

Reviewed in Japan 🇯🇵 on November 18, 2022

“It’s a great book that I want people all over Japan to read. When I read this book, the various events explained in chronological order all fall into place and context, and they came close with a sense of reality. It’s terrifying. My heart became pounding and painful as I read on. We must carefully determine the reverse side of the goodwill of the people who organized the COVID-19 pandemic. What can we do as a grassroots person? It’s a tough question.

… そのあとに本書を読むと、時系列に説明されている様々な出来事が、ことごとく腑に落ち、現実味をもって迫ってきました。恐ろしいです。読み進めるうちに胸がドキドキ苦しくなりました。コロナ禍を仕組んだ人びとの善意の裏の顔をしっかりと見極めなければなりません。私自身はワクチンを一度も打ちませんでしたが、だから良かったという単純な話ではありません。個人的には、打った仲のよい友達との話に断絶を感じていますし、多くの方々が不幸を味わっています。これこそ、コロナ禍を仕掛けた人々の狙いなのです。草の根の一人として、何ができるでしょうか？難しい問題です。

 

---

Acknowledgements

I am indebted to Jezile Torculas for her support and advice pertaining to the editing and production of the book. My thanks to Tatuo Uwama who took the initiative of translating the manuscript into Japanese. Credits also to Teresa Balisacan for assisting in the layout and design of the book cover.

A debt of gratitude to Felicity Arbuthnot, who has been a source of inspiration for many years; to my daughter Maya, who has provided me with an understanding and insight on the devastating impacts of the COVID-19 crisis on the younger generation; to Ariel Noyola Rodríguez, my thanks for his video productions; Michael Welch for outstanding Global Research radio programs.

I am also indebted to the collective of Global Research authors and friends who, in the course of the last few years, have contributed to a detailed understanding of the corona crisis which is affecting people’s lives worldwide.

My thanks to Peter Koenig, Manlio Dinucci, David Skripac, Dr. Denis Rancourt, Dr. Stephen Frost, F. William Engdahl, Christine Massey, Dr. Rudolf Haensel, Edward Curtin, Richard Gale, Dr. Gary Null, Colin Todhunter, Michael Whitney, Prof. Anthony J. Hall, Dr. Pascal Sacré, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Prof. Raul Villegas, Shane Quinn, Stephen Lendman, Mark Taliano, Dr. Jacques Pauwels, Prof. Claudia von Werlhof, Caoimhghin Ó Croidheáin, Carla Stea, Bonnie Faulkner, Timothy A. Guzman, Robert Burrowes, Dr. Gary G. Kohls, Dr. Nicole Delépine, Richard Delgado, Emanuel Pastreich, Mathias Chang, Stephen Sefton, Dr. Chandra Muzzafar, for their writings, support and encouragement.

I remain indebted to the late Padre Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann for having provided me with a critical understanding on the contradictions prevailing within the United Nations system.

 

---

 

Table of Contents

 

Preface 

 

Chapter I

Introduction. Destroying Civil Society. The Fear Campaign

Chapter II

The Corona Timeline

Chapter III

What Is COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2: How Is It Tested? How Is It Measured? 

Chapter IV

Engineered Economic Depression

Chapter V

The Enrichment of the Super Rich. The Appropriation and Redistribution of Wealth 

Chapter VI

The Impacts on Mental Health

Chapter VII

Corrupt Science: “There Is No Cure”. Suppression of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a Cheap and Effective Drug 

Chapter VIII

Big Pharma’s COVID “Vaccine”

Chapter IX 

The 2009 H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic. Was It a Dress Rehearsal?

Chapter X

Freedom of Expression. Categorizing The Protest Movement as “Anti-Social Psychopaths”

Chapter XI

The Worldwide CoVax Operation and the Nuremberg Code. Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide

Chapter XII

“Global Coup d’État” and the “Great Reset”. Global Debt and Neoliberal “Shock Treatment”

Chapter XIII 

“Digital Tyranny” and the QR Code 

Chapter XIV

The COVID-19 Endgame: Eugenics and the Depopulation Agenda

Chapter XV

The Road Ahead: Building a Worldwide Movement Against “Corona Tyranny”

 

---

 

Preface 

 

“Hell is empty, and all the demons are here.” —William Shakespeare, Tempest, 1610

 

The COVID-19 crisis is destroying people’s lives. My responsibility as an author is to reveal the truth, break the tide of media disinformation and reach out worldwide to as many people as possible.

We are dealing with an exceedingly complex process. In the course of the last two and a half years, I have analyzed almost on a daily basis the timeline and evolution of the COVID-19 crisis.

From the very outset in January 2020, people worldwide were led to believe and accept the existence of a rapidly progressing and dangerous epidemic. Media disinformation was instrumental in sustaining the COVID-19 narrative.

At the time of writing, protest movements have erupted in numerous countries. The entire planet is in state of economic and social chaos. A worldwide crisis in food and agriculture is unfolding with famines erupting in all major regions of the world (see Chapter IV). 

From the very outset in January 2020, scientific lies and falsehoods have been used to sustain the legitimacy of the COVID-19 policy mandates including lockdowns, the imposition of the face mask, social distancing and the suppression of fundamental human rights. 

The decision-making process is controlled by the financial establishment. A structure of “Global Governance” is unfolding which undermines democracy and the institutions of civil society. The same instructions are transmitted simultaneously to corrupt politicians in a large number of countries. The United Nations system is also complicit in the conduct of this diabolical endeavor.

The pandemic was announced on March 11, 2020. On that same day, lockdown instructions were transmitted to 193 member states of the United Nations, essentially requiring the confinement of the labor force and the “closure” of the economic and social  landscape as a means to “combating the virus”. 

More than 7 billion people worldwide are directly or indirectly affected by the corona crisis and the destructive mandates implemented by morally depraved national governments.  

The mRNA Vaccine

Starting in late 2020, people worldwide were led to believe that Big Pharma’s COVID-19 vaccine injections were the “solution”. And that “a new normal” would be restored once the entire population of the planet of almost 8 billion people had been fully vaccinated with several doses. 

How is it that a vaccine for the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus, which under normal conditions would have taken years to develop, was promptly launched in early November 2020? The mRNA “vaccine” announced by Big Pharma — with Pfizer in the lead — is based on an experimental gene-editing mRNA technology which has a bearing on the human genome.¹  

Were the standard animal lab tests using mice or ferrets conducted?

Or did Pfizer “go straight to human “guinea pigs”“? Human tests began in late July and early August 2020.² “Three months is unheard of for testing a new vaccine. Several years is the norm.”³

 

Copyright Large + JIPÉM, permission to use

This caricature by Large + JIPÉM  explains our predicament:

Mouse No. 1: “Are You Going to Get Vaccinated”

Mouse No. 2: “Are You Crazy, They Haven’t Finished the Tests on Humans”

The COVID-19 vaccine project is profit-driven. It is supported by corrupt politicians serving the interests of Big Pharma. It is by far the largest vaccination programme in world history geared towards injecting (in several doses) the entire population of planet Earth (7.9 billion people). 

The evidence amply documented is that the mRNA vaccine has resulted in an upward worldwide tide in mortality and morbidity. 

Reports confirm that the COVID-19 vaccines are killing our children. In the UK, “the worst figures in terms of all-cause deaths are among double-vaccinated teenagers.”⁴

 

Book Description and Outline

The introductory chapter focuses on the fear campaign, the deliberate destabilization of civil society and the insidious role of media propaganda.  

A detailed review of the history of the COVID-19 crisis, examining the timeline of major events is outlined in Chapter II. 

Chapter III focuses on the nature of the SARS-CoV-2 virus as well as on the flawed Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Test which from the outset was established by national governments to generate “fake data” with a view to justifying excessive and socially repressive policy mandates. 

The broad economic and social consequences of this crisis including the process of worldwide impoverishment and redistribution of wealth in favor of the super rich billionaires are examined in Chapters IV and V. Economic chaos has been instrumental in triggering the most serious global debt crisis in world history. 

The devastating impacts of the lockdown policies on mental health including the rise in suicides and drug abuse are examined in Chapter VI. 

Chapter VII examines the suppression of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a cheap and effective drug.

Big Pharma’s vaccination programme was envisaged already months before the alleged outbreak of the novel coronavirus in Wuhan in late 2019. Chapter VIII reviews what is best described as “a killer vaccine”.  The latter part of the chapter focuses on the ID2020 Digital Identity Project and the imposition of the so-called vaccine passport.

Chapter IX recalls the circumstances of the 2009 H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic, which turned out to be a scam. Was it a “dress rehearsal” for things to come? 

Chapter X focuses on the derogation of freedom of expression and the authoritarian policies used to repress the protest movement and ensure social compliance. 

Chapter XI focuses on crimes against humanity and the Nuremberg Code. 

Chapter XII analyses the World Economic Forum’s proposed “Great Reset” which if adopted would consist in establishing a system of global governance, scrapping the welfare state and imposing massive austerity measures on an impoverished population. The official emblem of the WEF’s “Great Reset” is “Own Nothing, Be Happy”.

Chapter XIII entitled Digital Tyranny focuses on the worldwide QR Verification Code project which lays the groundwork for the establishment of a global digital data bank of almost 8 billion people. Peter Koenig describes the QR code as “an all-electronic ID – linking everything to everything of each individual (records of health, banking, personal and private, etc.).”

Chapter XIV focusses on Eugenics and Depopulation Agenda

Chapter XV entitled The Road Ahead: Building a Worldwide Movement Against Corona Tyranny formulates the contours of a worldwide movement which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of the financial elites, Big Pharma, et al., as well as the corrupt structures of political authority at the national level. 

A word on methodology: our objective is to refute the “Big Lie” through careful analysis consisting of:

• a historical overview of the COVID crisis with precise data, concepts and definitions; 
• quotations from official documents and peer-reviewed reports, numerous sources and references are indicated;
• scientific analysis and detailed review of “official” data, estimates and definitions; and
• analysis of the impacts of WHO “guidelines” and government policies on economic, social and public health variables.

My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a pretext and a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”.  

This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people.

We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children Worldwide. 

Truth is a powerful instrument. 

Michel Chossudovsky,

Global Research, Montreal, August 2022

 

Endnotes

1 F. William Engdahl, November 15, 2020. What’s Not Being Said About the Pfizer Coronavirus Vaccine. “Human Guinea Pigs”? https://www.globalresearch.ca/what-not-said-pfizer-coronavirus-vaccine/5729461

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid. 

4 The Expose, July 29, 2022.  Shocking: UK Government Admits COVID Vaccinated Children Are 4423% More Likely to Die of Any Cause & 13,633% More Likely to Die of COVID-19 Than Unvaccinated Children. https://www.globalresearch.ca/print-version-of-covid-book/5780283

 

---

 

Chapter I

Introduction

Destroying Civil Society. The Fear Campaign

 

“It is time for everyone to come out of this negative trance, this collective hysteria, because famine, poverty, mass unemployment will kill and destroy the lives of many more people than SARS-CoV-2!” —Dr. Pascal Sacré¹

“I’m seeing patients that have facial rashes, fungal infections, bacterial infections.  … In February and March [2020] we were told not to wear masks. What changed? The science didn’t change. The politics did. This is about compliance. It’s not about science…” —Dr. James Meehan²

“Once the Lie becomes the Truth, there is no moving backwards. Insanity prevails. The world is turned upside down.”  –Michel Chossudovsky

“We’re being locked-down for an infection fatality rate of less than 0.2%.” —Dr. Richard Schabas³

We are at the crossroads of one of the most serious crises in world history. We are living history, yet our understanding of the sequence of events since January 2020 has been blurred. Worldwide, people have been misled both by their governments and the media as to the causes and devastating consequences of the COVID-19 “pandemic.”

The unspoken truth is that the novel coronavirus provides a pretext and a justification to powerful financial interests and corrupt politicians to precipitate the entire world into a spiral of mass unemployment, bankruptcy, extreme poverty and despair. 

This is the true picture of what is happening. It is the result of a complex decision-making process. 

“Planet lockdown” is an encroachment on civil liberties and the “right to life”.

Entire national economies are in jeopardy. In some countries, martial law has been declared.

Small and medium-sized capital are slated to be eliminated. Big capital prevails.

A massive concentration of corporate wealth is ongoing. 

It’s a diabolical “New World Order” in the making.  

Red zones, the face mask, social distancing, the closing down of schools, colleges and universities, no more family gatherings, no birthday celebrations, music, the arts; no more cultural events, sports events are suspended, no more weddings, “love and life” is banned outright.

And in several countries, Christmas and New Year family reunions (2021-2022) were illegal.

Closing down the global economy is presented to us as a means to combating the virus. That’s what they want us to believe. If the public had been informed that COVID-19 is “similar to seasonal Influenza”, the fear campaign would have fallen flat.

The pandemic was officially launched by the WHO on March 11, 2020 leading to the lockdown and closure of the national economies of 190 (out of 193) countries, member states of the United Nations. The instructions came from above, from Wall Street, the World Economic Forum (WEF), the billionaire foundations.

The March 11, 2020 pandemic was preceded by a WHO Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on January 30, 2020 which was followed in February 2020 by the destabilization of financial markets.

The video below was initially published by Vimeo more than a year ago, prior to the launching of the vaccine. It was taken down on March 5, 2022 as an act of censorship directed against Global Research. Watch below or click here.

 

 

On January 30, there were 83 “COVID-19 confirmed cases” outside China, out of a total population of 6.4 billion. In the days preceding the February financial crash, there were 1,076 “COVID-19 confirmed cases” outside China (see our analysis in Chapter II).

This diabolical project based on scanty and flawed estimates is casually described by the corporate media as a “humanitarian” endeavour; the “international community” has a “responsibility to protect” (R2P).  

Image: copyright CODEPINK, permission to use

In the words of Diana Johnstone, it’s “the global pretext”. An unelected “public-private partnership” under the auspices of the World Economic Forum (WEF) has come to the rescue of planet Earth’s 7.9 billion people. The closure of the national economies of 193 member states of the United Nations is presented as a means to “killing the virus”.

Sounds absurd. Closing down the real economy of planet Earth is not the “solution” but rather the “cause” of a diabolical process of worldwide destabilization and impoverishment. 

The national economy combined with political, social and cultural institutions is the basis for the “reproduction of real life”: income, employment, production, trade, infrastructure, and social services.

Destabilizing the economy of planet Earth cannot constitute a “solution” to combating the virus. But that is the imposed “solution” which they want us to believe in. And that is what they are doing.

It’s the destruction of people’s lives. It’s the destabilization of civil society. 

The lies are sustained by a massive media disinformation campaign — 24/7, incessant and repetitive “COVID alerts” in the course of more than two and a half years. It’s a process of social engineering. 

What they want is to hike up the numbers so as to justify the lockdown. COVID death statistics are “fabricated” (see Chapter III).

COVID-19 is portrayed as the “killer virus”. 

Destroying Civil Society 

People are frightened and puzzled. “Why would they do this?”

Empty schools, empty airports, bankrupt grocery stores.

In France, “churches were threatened with Kalashnikovs over COVID-19 outbreak” (April 2020).⁴

At the same time, starting in March 2020, the worldwide closure of national economies was accompanied by a cultural lockdown affecting music and artistic events. Empty museums, no more operas, no more symphonies, concert halls are closed down worldwide. So-called digital stay at home platforms were put forth. In the US, museums announced closure on March 12, 2020 starting with the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art. In France, the Louvre, Versailles and the Eiffel Tower were closed down on March 13, 2020, two days after the lockdown.

Free Speech Is Suppressed

The lockdown narrative is supported by media disinformation, online censorship, social engineering and the fear campaign.

Medical doctors who question the official narrative are threatened. They lose their jobs. Their careers are destroyed. Those who oppose the government lockdown are categorized as “anti-social psychopaths”.⁶

Peer-reviewed psychological “studies” are currently being carried in several countries using sample surveys. Accept the “big lie” and you are tagged as a “good person” with “empathy” who understands the feelings of others.

Express reservations regarding social distancing, the wearing of face mask and the mRNA vaccine, and you will be tagged (according to “scientific opinion”) as a “callous and deceitful psychopath” (see Chapter XI).

In colleges and universities, the teaching staff is pressured to conform and endorse the official COVID narrative. Questioning the legitimacy of the lockdown or the vaccine in online “classrooms” could lead to dismissal.

Numerous medical doctors and scientists who have opposed the COVID consensus or the vaccine have been arrested. In December 2020, “Jean-Bernard Fourtillan, a retired university professor known for his opposition to the COVID-19 vaccine was arrested “by law enforcement officers under military command, and forcibly placed in solitary confinement at the psychiatric hospital of Uzès.” Fourtillan is known as a  “longtime critic of vaccines that use dangerous adjuvants””.⁷

Google, Facebook and Twitter: Marketing the Big Lie

The opinions of prominent scientists who question the lockdown, face mask or social distancing are “taken down” by Google:

Similarly, Twitter has confirmed that “it will remove all posts that suggest there are ‘adverse impacts or effects of receiving vaccinations'” …

Twitter will “memory-hole any posts that “invoke a deliberate conspiracy” or “advance harmful, false, or misleading narratives” about vaccines.”

Screenshot from Twitter

 

March 11, 2020: Engineered Economic Depression. Global Coup d’Etat?

Clade X was described by its organizers as a day-long pandemic tabletop exercise the purpose of which “was to illustrate high level strategic decisions in the United States and the world … to prevent a pandemic” (emphasis added).¹³  It was “played by individuals prominent in the fields of national security or epidemic response”.  

Bill Gates Had Foreknowledge 

“In the case of biological threats, that sense of urgency is lacking… The world needs to prepare for pandemics in the same serious way it prepares for war.” (Bill Gates quoted in Business Insider, April 17, 2018)

 

The October 2019 “Event 201”

Some of the key players in Scenario 201; from left to right: Dr. Gao Fu (by 中国新闻网, licensed under CC BY 3.0), Jane Halton (by WHO/Peter Williams), and Dr. Stephen Redd (by U.S. Government, licensed under the Public Domain)

 

“The Global Pretext” 

Confirmed by prominent scientists as well as by official public health bodies including the World Health Organization (WHO) and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), COVID-19 is a public health concern but it is NOT a dangerous virus.

The COVID-19 crisis is marked by a public health “emergency” under WHO auspices which is being used as a pretext and a  justification to trigger a worldwide process of economic, social and political restructuring. The tendency is towards the imposition of a totalitarian state.

Social engineering is being applied. Governments are pressured into extending the lockdown despite its devastating economic and social consequences.

There is no scientific basis for implementing the closing down of the global economy as a means to resolving a public health crisis. Both the media and the governments are involved in spreading disinformation.

The fear campaign has no scientific basis. Your governments are LYING. In fact, they are lying to themselves. 

 

Endnotes

1 Dr. Pascal Sacré, August 7, 2020. COVID-19: Closer to the Truth: Tests and Immunity. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-closer-to-the-truth-tests-and-immunity/5720160

2 John C. A. Manley, October 6, 2020. Medical Doctor Warns that “Bacterial Pneumonias Are on the Rise” from Mask Wearing. https://www.globalresearch.ca/medical-doctor-warns-bacterial-pneumonias-rise-mask-wearing/5725848

3 Dr. Richard Schabas, January 19, 2021. We’re Being Locked-down for an Infection Fatality Rate of Less than 0.2%? Dr. Richard Schabas to Ontario Premier Doug Ford. https://www.globalresearch.ca/were-being-locked-down-infection-fatality-rate-less-than-0-2/5734799

4 Lucy Williamson, April 22, 2020. Coronavirus: The church threatened with Kalashnikovs over Covid-19 outbreak. https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-52389953

5 WHO, September 9, 2020. Tracking COVID-19: Contact Tracing in the Digital Age. https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/tracking-covid-19-contact-tracing-in-the-digital-age

6 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 6, 2020. The Vaccinated vs. the Unvaccinated: Those Who Refuse the Vaccine and the “Official” Covid-19 Narrative are Categorized as “Psychopaths”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/collective-narcissism-and-the-dark-triad-those-who-protest-against-the-official-covid-19-narrative-are-categorized-as-psychopaths-is-it-a-witch-hunt/5722151

7 Jeanne Smits, December 11, 2020. Accomplished pharma prof thrown in psych hospital after questioning official COVID narrative. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/accomplished-pharma-prof-thrown-in-psych-hospital-after-questioning-official-covid-narrative/

8 Youtube Help, n.d. COVID-19 medical misinformation policy. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9891785?hl=en

9 Will Kesler, August 15, 2011. Beware New World Order. https://www.aspentimes.com/news/beware-new-world-order/

10 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 1, 2020. Global Capitalism, “World Government” and the Corona Crisis. https://www.globalresearch.ca/global-capitalism-world-government-and-the-corona-crisis/5712312

11 The Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Business Network, May 2010. Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development. https://www.nommeraadio.ee/meedia/pdf/RRS/Rockefeller%20Foundation.pdf

12 Helen Buyniski, February 5, 2020. VIDEO: The “Lock Step” Simulation Scenario: “A Coronavirus-like Pandemic that Becomes Trigger for Police State Controls”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/all-sectors-us-establishment-lock-step-deep-states-latest-bio-war/5702773

13 Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, n.d. CLADE X EXERCISE. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/events/2018_clade_x_exercise/

14 Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, n.d. Event 201. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/

15 Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, January 24, 2020. Statement about nCov and our pandemic exercise. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/news/center-news/2020/2020-01-24-Statement-of-Clarification-Event201.html

16 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 1, 2020. COVID-19 Coronavirus: A Fake Pandemic? Who’s Behind It? Global Economic, Social and Geopolitical Destabilization. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-coronavirus-a-fake-pandemic-whos-behind-it-global-economic-and-geopolitical-destabilization/5705063

17 Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, n.d. Event 201 Players. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/players/

18 Shibo Jiang, Zhengli Shi, et al., February 19, 2020. A distinct name is needed for the new coronavirus. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30419-0/fulltext

19 Ibid.

20 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, November 12, 2020. The Covid “Pandemic”: Destroying People’s Lives. Engineered Economic Depression. Global “Coup d’Etat”? https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-second-wave-destroying-peoples-lives-global-coup-detat/5728207

---

 

Chapter II

The Corona Timeline

 

This chapter provides a detailed timeline and history of the corona crisis starting in August 2019.

August 1, 2019: Glaxo-Smith-Kline (GSK) and Pfizer announced the establishment of a corporate partnership in Consumer Health Products including vaccines. 

September 19, 2019: Meeting of the ID2020 Alliance

The ID2020 Alliance held their summit in New York entitled “Rising to the Good ID Challenge”. The focus was on the establishment of a vaccine with an embedded digital passport under the auspices of GAVI (Alliance for Vaccine Identity). The stated objective was the creation of a global digital database.¹

“With the opportunity for immunization to serve as a platform for digital identity, the program harnesses existing birth registration and vaccination operations to provide newborns with a portable and persistent biometrically-linked digital identity. The program will also explore and assess several leading infant biometric technologies to offer a persistent digital identity from birth … 

“We are implementing a forward-looking approach to digital identity that gives individuals control over their own personal information, while still building off existing systems and programs.”²

October 18, 2019: Event 201. The 201 Pandemic Simulation Exercise

The coronavirus was initially named 2019-nCoV by the WHO, the same name (with the exception of the placement of the date) as that adopted at the October 18, 2019 201 simulation exercise under the auspices of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Health, Center for Heath Security (an event sponsored by the Gates Foundation and World Economic Forum). Event 201:

“In October 2019, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted a pandemic tabletop exercise called Event 201 with partners, the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. …  For the scenario, we modeled a fictional coronavirus pandemic, but we explicitly stated that it was not a prediction. (emphasis added, see Chapter I).”³

December 12, 2019: The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission

When the advisory claims this date to be the earliest original onset date of the 59 patients with unexplained viral pneumonia.(Timeline and Early Chronology)⁴

December 31, 2019: First cases of pneumonia of unknown cause detected in Wuhan, Hubei Province and reported to the WHO.  “A total of 44 cases were reported: 11 patients are severely ill, while the remaining 33 are in stable condition.”⁵

January 1, 2020: Chinese health authorities closed the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan following Western media reports claiming that wild animals sold there may have been the source of the virus. This initial assessment was subsequently refuted by Chinese scientists.

January 7, 2020: The Chinese authorities (allegedly) “identified a new type of virus” which (according to reports) was isolated on January 7, 2020. No specific details were provided regarding the process of isolation of the virus. According to scientific reports, the identity as well as the process of isolation of the virus had not been undertaken (for further details, see Chapter III). The number of cases was exceedingly low. “44 cases of pneumonia even though viral-specific nucleic acids were found on only 15 patients”. No evidence of an unfolding epidemic in China.⁶

January 11, 2020: The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission announces the first death caused by the coronavirus.

January 22, 2020: WHO — Members of the WHO Emergency Committee “expressed divergent views on whether this event constitutes a PHEIC [Public Health Emergency of International Concern] or not”. The Committee meeting was reconvened on January 23, 2020, overlapping with the World Economic Forum meetings in Davos (January 21-24, 2020). The small number of cases in China did not justify a PHEIC.⁷

The meeting of the Emergency Committee convened by the WHO Director-General under the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005) expressed divergent views on whether this event constitutes a PHEIC or not. At that time, the advice was that the event did not constitute a PHEIC, but the Committee members agreed on the urgency of the situation and suggested that the Committee should be reconvened in a matter of days to examine the situation further. (WHO, Statement on the meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV))⁸

January 21-24, 2020: Consultations at the World Economic Forum, Davos, Switzerland

The consultations were held under the auspices of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) for the development of a vaccine program. CEPI is a WEF-Gates partnership. With support from CEPI, Seattle-based Moderna will manufacture an mRNA vaccine against 2019-nCoV:

“The Vaccine Research Center (VRC) of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of NIH, collaborated with Moderna to design the vaccine.”⁹ 

The evidence suggests that the 2019-nCoV vaccine project was already underway in 2019 (see Chapter VIII). It was officially announced at Davos, two weeks after the January 7, 2020 announcement by the Chinese authorities, and barely a week prior to the official launching of the WHO’s worldwide Public Health Emergency on January 30, 2020.

The WEF-Gates-CEPI vaccine announcement precedes the WHO’s Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). See WEF video. 

Dominant financial interests, billionaire foundations and international financial institutions played a key role in launching the WHO PHEIC.

In the week preceding this historic WHO decision, the PHEIC was the object of “consultations” at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos (January 21-24). The WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros was present at Davos. Were these consultations instrumental in influencing the WHO’s historic decision on January 30? 

Was there a conflict of interest as defined by the WHO? The WHO’s largest donor is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which, together with the WEF and CEPI, had already announced in Davos the development of a COVID-19 vaccine prior to the historic January 30 launching of the PHEIC.¹⁰

The WHO Director-General had the backing of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Big Pharma and the World Economic Forum (WEF). There are indications that the decision for the WHO to declare a Global Health Emergency was taken on the sidelines of the WEF in Davos (January 21-24) overlapping with the January 22 meeting of the Emergency Committee in Geneva.

January 28, 2020: The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed (without firm evidence) that the novel coronavirus had been isolated (see Chapter III).¹¹

January 30, 2020: The WHO’s Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)

The worldwide population outside China is of the order of 6.4 billion. On January 30, 2020, outside China there were:

“83 cases in 18 countries, and only 7 of them had no history of travel in China.” (See WHO, January 30, 2020)¹²

On January 29, 2020, the day preceding the launching of the PHEIC (recorded by the WHO), there were five cases in the US, three in Canada, four in France, and four in Germany.¹³

There was no “scientific basis” to justify the launching of a worldwide public health emergency.

 

Screenshot from WHO, January 29, 2020

 

Those low numbers (not mentioned by the media) did not prevent the launching of a worldwide fear campaign.

 

January 31, 2020: President Trump’s Decision to Suspend Air Travel with China

On the following day (January 31, 2020), Trump announced that he would deny entry to the US of both Chinese and foreign nationals “who have traveled in China in the last 14 days”. This immediately triggered a crisis in air travel, transportation, US-China trade relations as well as freight and shipping transactions.

Whereas the WHO “[did] not recommend any travel or trade restrictions,” the five so-called “confirmed cases” in the US were sufficient to “justify” President Trump’s January 31st, 2020 decision to suspend air travel with China while precipitating a hate campaign against ethnic Chinese throughout the Western world.

This historic January 31st decision paved the way for the disruption of international commodity trade as well as for the imposition of worldwide restrictions on air travel. It was eventually instrumental in spearheading the bankruptcy of major airlines. 

“Fake media” immediately went into high gear. China was held responsible for “spreading infection” worldwide.

Early February 2020: The acronym of the coronavirus was changed from nCoV-2019 (its name under the October Event 201 Johns Hopkins Simulation Exercise) to SARS-CoV-2. COVID-19 indicates the disease triggered by SARS-CoV-2.

February 20-21, 2020: Worldwide COVID data outside China. The Diamond Princess cruise ship

While China reported a total of 75,567 cases of COVID-19 (February 20), the confirmed cases outside China were abysmally low and the statistics based, in large part, on the RT-PCR test used to confirm the “worldwide spread of the virus” were questionable to say the least. Moreover, out of the 75,567 cases in China, a large percentage had recovered. And recovery figures were not acknowledged by the media.

On the day of Dr. Tedros’s historic press conference (February 20, 2020), the recorded number of confirmed cases outside China was 1,073 of which 621 were passengers and crew on the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship (stranded in Japanese territorial waters).

From a statistical point of view, the WHO decision pointing to a potential “spread of the virus worldwide” did not make sense.

On February 20th, 57.9% of the worldwide COVID-19 “confirmed cases” were from the Diamond Princess, hardly representative of a worldwide “statistical trend”. The official story is as follows:

• A Hong Kong-based passenger who had disembarked from the Diamond Princess in Hong Kong on January 25 developed pneumonia and was tested positive for the novel coronavirus on January 30.
• He was reported to have travelled on January 10 to Shenzhen on mainland China (which borders on Hong Kong’s new territories).
• The Diamond Princess arrived in Yokohama on February 3. A quarantine was imposed on the cruiser, see NCBI study.¹⁴
• Many passengers fell sick due to the confinement on the boat.
• All the passengers and crew on the Diamond Princess undertook the PCR test.
• The number of confirmed cases increased to 691 on February 23.¹⁵

Source: Nakazawa, E., Ino, H., et al. (Published on NCBI)

 

Read carefully: From the standpoint of assessing worldwide statistical trends, the data doesn’t add up. Without the Diamond Princess data, the so-called confirmed cases worldwide outside China on February 20, 2020 were of the order of 452, out of a population of 6.4 billion. 

Examine the WHO graph below. The blue indicates the confirmed cases on the Diamond Princess (international conveyance which arrived in Yokohama on February 3, 2020), many of whom were sick, confined to their rooms for more than two weeks (quarantine imposed by Japan). All passengers and crew took the RT-PCR test (which does not detect or identify SARS-CoV-2).

Needless to say, this so-called data was instrumental to spearheading the fear campaign and the collapse of financial markets in the course of the month of February 2020 (see Chapter IV).

 

Source: WHO, February 2020

Source: WHO, February 2020

 

February 20th, 2020: Director General of WHO intimates that the COVID-19 pandemic is imminent 

At a press conference on the 20th of February, Thursday afternoon (CET), in a briefing in Geneva, the WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that he was

February 28, 2020: A WHO vaccination campaign was announced by WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus:¹⁸

“More than 20 vaccines are in development globally, and several therapeutics are in clinical trials. We expect the first results in a few weeks”. 

It is worth noting that the campaign to develop vaccines was initiated prior to the decision of the WHO to launch a Global Public Health Emergency. It was first announced at the WEF meeting at Davos (January 21-24) by CEPI.

Early March 2020: China. More than 50% of the infected patients recovered. A total of 49,856 patients had recovered from COVID-19 and were discharged from hospitals in China. 

The WHO recorded a total of 80,304 confirmed cases in China on March 3, 2020. What this means is that the total number of “confirmed infected cases” in China was at 30,448. Namely, 80,304 minus 49,856 = 30,448. No evidence of a pandemic in China.

These developments concerning “recovery” were not reported by the Western media.

March 5, 2020: WHO Director-General confirmed that, outside China, there were 2,055 cases reported in 33 countries. Around 80% of those cases were from three countries (South Korea, Iran and Italy).¹⁹

March 7, 2020: USA. The number of “confirmed cases” (infected and recovered) in the United States in early March was of the order of 430, rising to about 600 (March 8). A rapid rise in COVID positive cases was recorded in the the course of the month of March. 

Compare these figures to those pertaining to Influenza B virus. The CDC estimated for 2019-2020 (for the US) “at least 15 million virus flu illnesses… 140,000 hospitalizations and 8,200 deaths”. (The Hill)²⁰

March 7, 2020: China. No pandemic in China. Reported new cases in China fell to double digit. 99 cases recorded on March 7. All of the new cases outside Hubei province were categorized as “imported infections” (from foreign countries). The reliability of the data remains to be established:

99 newly confirmed cases including 74 in Hubei Province, … The new cases included 24 imported infections — 17 in Gansu Province, three in Beijing, three in Shanghai and one in Guangdong Province.²¹

“We don’t know whether this vaccine will induce an immune response, or whether it will be safe. That’s why we’re doing a trial,” Jackson stressed. “It’s not at the stage where it would be possible or prudent to give it to the general population.” (AP, March 16, 2020)²⁵

March 18, 2020: Lockdown in the United States

November 8, 2020: The COVID-19 mRNA “vaccine” was launched. (Chapter VIII)

Mid to late December 2020: Worldwide implementation of the mRNA vaccine program.

January 2021 (onwards): Rising trend in vaccine-related deaths and adverse events documented by official data as well as by the Pfizer Confidential Report (see Chapter VIII).

Two of the participants of the Johns Hopkins Event 201 October 2019 Tabletop Simulation of a novel coronavirus were present: Dr. George Gao Fu, head of China’s CDC and Dr. Chris Elias, President of the Global Development Division of the Gates Foundation.²⁶

May-June 2021: The Delta Variant and “a Fourth Wave” were announced.

The alleged dangers of the Delta variant were used to speed up the vaccination program as well as the imposition of the vaccine passport.

August-September 2021: The Imposition of a Vaccine Passport in Several Western countries

October 2021: Release of the Pfizer Confidential Report under freedom of information (FOI)

This report confirms the impacts (death and adverse events) of the Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine (see Chapter VIII).²⁷

November 2021: The Omicron variant was allegedly detected in South Africa. The fear campaign triggered a renewed crisis in air travel, coupled with disruptions in commodity trade.

November 2021-January 2022: Distribution of billions of COVID antigen and home test kits worldwide which contributed to doubling the number of so-called “COVID-19 confirmed cases” in the course of six months. More than a billion home and antigen tests in the US, 291 million in Canada.²⁸ 

December 24, 2021: The COVID-19 Christmas Omicron lockdown

No large Christmas reunions, the imposition of stay at home mandates, partial closure of bars and restaurants (leading to more bankruptcies), cancellation of sports and cultural events. The unspoken objective is to isolate human beings — prevent people from socializing and meeting up with their loved ones. 

January-February 2022: Partial Lockdowns. Discriminatory Practices directed against the Unvaccinated

In many countries, the unvaccinated were confined to their homes, prevented from traveling, fired from their jobs, prevented from attending schools and universities. They were accused of being extremists and psychopaths. These social divisions are creating conflicts within families and local communities, literally contributing to the disruption of social life, with devastating impacts on economic activity (see Chapter XI).

Canada’s Freedom Convoy 2022 

January-Early February 2022: Mass protest movement in Canada against the vaccine mandate.

 

Freedom Convoy 2022, Ottawa, February 2022. (Copyright Global Research)

Starting on March 28, 2022: The COVID Zero Tolerance Mandate was imposed on Shanghai, a port city of 26 million people. Initially in Shanghai then extended to major Chinese cities in the course of the following months (April-July 2022) (see Chapter IV).

May 13, 2022: The WHO announces a Monkeypox Outbreak

According to the WHO:

June-July 2022: The seventh wave. Alleged “imminent danger” of the Omicron BA-4 and BA-5 sub-variants.

July 23, 2022: The Monkeypox Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC)

The WHO Director-General declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) pertaining to the monkeypox virus. 

Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus took this decision unilaterally against a majority vote of International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR) Emergency Committee.

“We have an outbreak that has spread around the world rapidly through new modes of transmission… Although I [Tedros] am declaring a public health emergency of international concern, for the moment this is an outbreak that is concentrated among men who have sex with men, especially those with multiple sexual partners.”²⁹    (See Chapter XIII)

 

Endnotes

1 PYMNTS, September 18, 2019. How To Build A Global Digital Identity Network. https://www.pymnts.com/news/consumer-authentication/2019/how-to-build-a-global-digital-identity-network/

2 PYMNTS, September 19, 2019. ID2020 Alliance Unveils Digital ID Program. https://www.pymnts.com/news/biometrics/2019/id2020-alliance-unveils-digital-id-program/

3 Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, n.d. Event 201. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/

4 Chiron Return, September 30, 2021. Timeline and Early Chronology of Covid-19 “Pandemic”, PCR Assay and Sequencing. https://www.globalresearch.ca/early-chronology-covid-pcr-assay-sequencing/5757189

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid.

7 WHO, January 23, 2020. Statement on the first meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). https://www.who.int/news/item/23-01-2020-statement-on-the-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)

8 Ibid.

9 National Institutes of Health, March 16, 2020. NIH clinical trial of investigational vaccine for COVID-19 begins. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-clinical-trial-investigational-vaccine-covid-19-begins

10 WHO, January 30, 2020. Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). https://www.who.int/news/item/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)

11 CDC, December 29, 2020. SARS-CoV-2 Viral Culturing at CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/lab/grows-virus-cell-culture.html

12  WHO, January 30, 2020. Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). https://www.who.int/news/item/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)

13 WHO, January 29, 2020. Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Situation Report – 9. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200129-sitrep-9-ncov-v2.pdf?sfvrsn=e2c8915_2

14 Eisuke Nakazawa, Hiroyasu Ino, et al., March 24, 2020. Chronology of COVID-19 Cases on the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship and Ethical Considerations: A Report From Japan. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7156812/

15 Ibid.

16 WHO, February 20, 2020. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 on 20 February 2020. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19-on-20-february-2020

17 WEF, February 13, 2020. Update: Coronavirus (COVID-19) | DAVOS 2020. https://www.weforum.org/videos/update-wuhan-coronavirus-covid-19-davos-2020

18 WHO, February 28, 2020. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 – 28 February 2020. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19—28-february-2020

19 WHO, March 5, 2020. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 – 5 March 2020. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19—5-march-2020

20 Joseph Guzman, January 27, 2020. Coronavirus is spreading — but the flu is a greater threat to Americans. https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/longevity/480089-coronavirus-sparks-panic-as-flu-poses-greater-threat-to

21 Xinhua, March 7, 2020. Xinhua Headlines: China’s new COVID-19 cases drop to double-digit figures since Jan. 21. http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-03/07/c_138853686.htm

22 WHO, February 21, 2020. Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Press Conference. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who-audio-emergencies-coronavirus-full-press-conference-21feb2020-final.pdf?sfvrsn=954f8ec7_2

23 WHO, March 11, 2020. WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 – 11 March 2020. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19—11-march-2020

24 WHO, March 12, 2020. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report – 52. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200312-sitrep-52-covid-19.pdf

25 The Associated Press, March 16, 2020. COVID-19 vaccine test begins as volunteer patient administered 1st shot. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-vaccine-1.5499244

26 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, August 4, 2022. Worldwide Monkeypox Health Emergency (PHEIC): For Bill Gates, It’s “Moneypox”: Simulation of Fictitious Monkeypox Virus Pandemic in March 2021, Goes Live in May 2022. https://www.globalresearch.ca/bill-gates-warns-smallpox-terror-attacks-urges-leaders-use-germ-games-prepare/5781195?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm_medium=related_articles

27 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, August 13, 2022. Bombshell Document Dump on Pfizer Vaccine Data. https://www.globalresearch.ca/bombshell-document-dump-pfizer-vaccine-data/5763397

28 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, July 19, 2022. Biggest Lie in World History: There Never Was A Pandemic. The Data Base is Flawed. The Covid Mandates including the Vaccine are Invalid. https://www.globalresearch.ca/biggest-lie-in-world-history-the-data-base-is-flawed-there-never-was-a-pandemic-the-covid-mandates-including-the-vaccine-are-invalid/5772008

29 WHO, July 23, 2022. WHO Director-General’s statement at the press conference following IHR Emergency Committee regarding the multi-country outbreak of monkeypox – 23 July 2022. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-statement-on-the-press-conference-following-IHR-emergency-committee-regarding-the-multi–country-outbreak-of-monkeypox–23-july-2022

 

---

 

Chapter III

What Is COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2:

How Is It Tested? How Is It Measured?

 

“The PCR is a process. It does not tell you that you are sick.”  —Dr. Kary Mullis, Nobel Laureate and Inventor of the RT-PCR, passed away in August 2019.

“…All or a substantial part of these positives could be due to what’s called false positives tests.” —Dr. Michael Yeadon, distinguished scientist, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer

“This misuse of the RT-PCR technique is applied as a relentless and intentional strategy by some governments to justify excessive measures such as the violation of a large number of constitutional rights, … under the pretext of a pandemic based on a number of positive RT-PCR tests, and not on a real number of patients.” —Dr. Pascal Sacré, Belgian physician specialized in critical care and renowned public health analyst.

“I have seen massive efforts made to deliberately inflate Covid death numbers by relabelling cancer patients and stroke victims and all manner of normal regular deaths as Covid, in fact virtually anyone getting into an ambulance. The methods used to do so were totally flawed, PCR tests for example being run on 45 cycles we all know to be worthless, yet people are being euthanised on this basis and sometimes only on the basis of a chest x-ray alone.” —John O’Looney, Funeral Director, Milton Keynes, U.K.

 

Introduction

Media lies coupled with a systemic and carefully engineered fear campaign have sustained the image of a killer virus which is relentlessly spreading to all major regions of the world. 

Several billion people in more than 190 countries have been tested (as well as retested) for COVID-19.  

At the time of writing, more than 500 million people worldwide have been categorized as “COVID-19 confirmed cases (“cumulative cases”).

The alleged pandemic is said to have resulted in more than 5.8 million COVID-19-related deaths.

Both sets of figures — morbidity and mortality — are invalid. A highly organized COVID testing apparatus (part of which is funded by the billionaire foundations) was established with a view to driving up the numbers of “COVID-19 confirmed cases”, which are then used as a justification to impose the “vaccine” passport coupled with the repeal of fundamental human rights. 

From the outset of this crisis in January 2020, all far-reaching policy decisions upheld and presented to the public as a “means to saving lives” were based on flawed and invalid RT-PCR positive cases.

These invalid COVID-19 “estimates” have been used to justify confinement, social distancing, wearing of the face mask, the prohibition of social gatherings, cultural and sports events, the closure of economic activity, as well as the enforcement of the mRNA “vaccine” launched in November 2020. 

There is no such thing as a “COVID-19 confirmed case”. Firmly acknowledged both by scientific opinion and the World Health Organization, the RT-PCR test used to “detect” the spread of the virus (as well as its variants) is not only flawed but TOTALLY INVALID. 

The fear campaign is relentlessly spearheaded by political statements and media disinformation. A closer examination of official reports from national health authorities as well as peer-reviewed articles provides a totally different picture. 

In this chapter, we will be focusing on the following issues:

1.  The features of the SARS-CoV-2 virus as outlined by the WHO, the CDC and peer-reviewed reports. Is it a dangerous virus?

2. The Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Test used to “detect/identify” SARS-CoV-2.

3. The reliability of the estimates of mortality and morbidity pertaining to the alleged COVID-19 infection.

 

The Features of SARS-CoV-2

Lies through omission: the media has failed to reassure the broader public.

Below is the official WHO definition of COVID-19 followed by that of the CDC:

Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses which may cause illness in animals or humans.  In humans, several coronaviruses are known to cause respiratory infections ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). The most recently discovered coronavirus causes coronavirus disease COVID-19.

“The most common symptoms of COVID-19 are fever, dry cough, and tiredness. … These symptoms are usually mild and begin gradually. Some people become infected but only have very mild symptoms. Most people (about 80%) recover from the disease without needing hospital treatment. Around 1 out of every 5 people who gets COVID-19 becomes seriously ill and develops difficulty breathing.”¹

 

Similar to Influenza According to the CDC

COVID-19 versus Influenza (Flu) Virus A and Virus B (and subtypes) 

Rarely mentioned by the media or by politicians: The CDC (which is an agency of the US government) confirms that COVID-19 is similar to Influenza:

If the public had been informed and reassured that COVID is “similar to Influenza”, the fear campaign would have fallen flat.

The lockdown and closure of the national economy would have been rejected outright.

According to Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, pneumonia is “regularly caused or accompanied by coronaviruses”.³

Immunologists broadly confirm the CDC definition. COVID-19 has similar features to a seasonal influenza coupled with pneumonia.

According to Anthony Fauci (Head of NIAID), H. Clifford Lane, and Robert R. Redfield (Head of CDC) in the New England Journal of Medicine:

“…the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”⁴

How convenient: The above article was first published in the NEJM on March 26, 2020, exactly ten days after the declaration of a national emergency by President Trump on March 16, 2020. Had this authoritative peer-reviewed text been brought to the attention of the American public, the lockdown mandate would have fallen flat. 

Fauci speaks to the White House press corps on COVID-19 in April 2020, watched by President Donald Trump (left) and Vice President Mike Pence (right). (By The White House, licensed under the Public Domain)

Dr. Anthony Fauci is lying to himself. In his public statements, he says that COVID is “ten times worse than seasonal flu”.⁵

He refutes his peer-reviewed report quoted above. From the outset, Fauci has been instrumental in waging a fear and panic campaign across America.⁶ 

 

The Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) Test

The slanted methodology applied under WHO guidance for detecting the alleged spread of the virus is the Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test, which has been routinely applied all over the world since February 2020.

The RT-PCR test has been used worldwide to generate millions of erroneous “COVID-19 confirmed cases”, which are then used to sustain the illusion that the alleged pandemic is real.

This assessment based on erroneous numbers has been used in the course of the last two and a half years to spearhead and sustain the fear campaign.

And people are now led to believe that the COVID-19 “vaccine” is the “solution”. And that “normality” will be restored once the entire population of planet Earth has been vaccinated.

“Confirmed” is a misnomer. A “confirmed RT-PCR positive case” does not imply a “COVID-19 confirmed case”.

Positive RT-PCR is not synonymous with the COVID-19 disease! PCR specialists make it clear that a test must always be compared with the clinical record of the patient being tested, with the patient’s state of health to confirm its value [reliability]. (Dr. Pascal Sacré)⁷

The procedure used by the national health authorities is to categorize all RT-PCR positive cases as “COVID-19 confirmed cases” (with or without a medical diagnosis). Ironically, this routine process of identifying “confirmed cases” is in derogation of the CDC’s own guidelines:

“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms. The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019-nCoV infection. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”⁸ (emphasis added)

The methodology used to detect and estimate the spread of the virus is flawed and invalid.

 

False Positives

The PCR Test Does Not Detect the Identity of the Virus

The RT-PCR test does not identify/detect the virus. What the PCR test identifies are genetic fragments of numerous viruses (including influenza viruses types A and B and coronaviruses which trigger common colds).

The results of the RT-PCR test cannot “confirm” whether an individual who undertakes the test is infected with SARS-CoV-2.

According to Dr. Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR technique, 

“The PCR detects a very small segment of the nucleic acid which is part of a virus itself.”

Image: Dr. Kary Mullis, American biochemist and Nobel laureate. (By Dona Mapston/Flickr, licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

According to renowned Swiss immunologist Dr. B. Stadler:

So if we do a PCR corona test on an immune person, it is not a virus that is detected, but a small shattered part of the viral genome. The test comes back positive for as long as there are tiny shattered parts of the virus left. Even if the infectious viri are long dead, a corona test can come back positive, because the PCR method multiplies even a tiny fraction of the viral genetic material enough [to be detected].¹¹

Dr. Pascal Sacré concurs, “These tests detect viral particles, genetic sequences, not the whole virus.”¹²

 

The WHO’s “Customized” RT-PCR COVID-19 “Test” 

 

We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing.

Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records.¹⁷ (emphasis added)

The above study (quotation above as well as other documents consulted) suggests that China’s health authorities did not undertake an isolation/purification of a patient’s specimen. Using “laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR” (as quoted in their study) is an obvious misnomer, i.e. the RT-PCR test cannot under any circumstances be used to identify the virus. The isolate of the virus by the Chinese authorities is unconfirmed.¹⁸

 

Freedom of Information Pertaining to the Isolate of SARS-CoV-2

A detailed investigative project by Christine Massey entitled Freedom of Information Requests: Health/Science Institutions Worldwide “Have No Record” of SARS-COV-2 Isolation/Purification provides documentation concerning the identity of the virus. The responses to these requests from 127 entities in 25 countries confirm that there is no record of isolation/purification of SARS-CoV-2 “having been performed by anyone, anywhere, ever.”¹⁹

 

The Threshold Amplification Cycles. The WHO Admits that the Results of the RT-PCR “Test” Are Totally Invalid

The number of amplification cycles [should be] less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles. In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture…(Critique of Drosten Study)²¹

The World Health Organization (WHO) tacitly admits one year later that ALL PCR tests conducted at a 35 cycle amplification threshold (Ct) or higher are INVALID. But that is what they recommended in January 2020, in consultation with the Virology team at Charité Hospital in Berlin.

If the test is conducted at a 35 Ct threshold or above (which was recommended by the WHO), genetic segments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected, which means that ALL the so-called “COVID-19 confirmed cases” tabulated worldwide in the course of the last two and a half years are invalid.

According to Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, et al., the Ct > 35 has been the norm “in most laboratories in Europe & the US”.²²

 

The WHO’s Mea Culpa

Below is the WHO’s carefully formulated “retraction”.

“WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology. (emphasis added)

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.”²³

 

“Invalid Positives” Is the Underlying Concept 

This is not an issue of “weak positives” and “risk of false positive increases”. What is at stake is a “flawed methodology” which leads to invalid estimates of “COVID-19 confirmed cases”.

What this admission of the WHO confirms is that the estimate of COVID positive from a PCR test (with an amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher) is invalid. In which case, the WHO recommends retesting, “a new specimen should be taken and retested…”

The WHO calls for “retesting”, which is tantamount to saying “we screwed up”.

That recommendation is pro-forma. It won’t happen. Several billion people worldwide have already been tested, starting in early February 2020.

From the outset, the PCR test has routinely been applied at a Ct amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher. What this means is that the PCR methodology as applied worldwide has in the course of the last two and a half years led to the compilation of faulty and misleading COVID-19 estimates, which according to the WHO (January 20, 2021) are based on an invalid methodology.  

And these are the statistics which are used to measure the progression of the so-called “pandemic”. Above an amplification cycle of 35 or higher, the test will not detect fragments of the virus. Therefore, the official “COVID numbers” (COVID-19 confirmed cases) are meaningless.

It follows that there is no scientific basis for confirming the existence of a pandemic, which in turn means that the lockdown/economic measures which have resulted in social panic, mass poverty and unemployment (allegedly to curtail the spread of the virus) have no justification whatsoever. According to scientific opinion:

“if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%  

…

3. The number of amplification cycles (less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles);

In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture [reviewed in 2]; if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%” (emphasis added) (Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, Clare Craig, Kevin McKernan, et al. Critique of Drosten Study)²⁴

As outlined above, “the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%”, it follows that using the >35 cycles detection will indelibly contribute to “hiking up” the number of “fake positives”.

The WHO’s mea culpa confirms that the COVID-19 PCR test procedure as applied is meaningless.

 

The CDC Orders the Withdrawal of the PCR Test

The WHO’s historic retraction is followed six months later by a mea culpa on the part of the CDC. On July 21, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) calls for the withdrawal of the PCR test as a valid method for detecting and identifying SARS-CoV-2: 

“After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only.”

In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test.

CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. (emphasis added)²⁵

Read carefully: what this CDC directive tacitly admits is that the PCR test does not effectively differentiate between “SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses”. We have known this from the outset.

As of January 1, 2022, the CDC has withdrawn its endorsement of the RT-PCR test in the US.

 

The Falsification of Death Certificates 

Inasmuch as the PCR test is invalid, it follows that the estimates of “COVID-19 confirmed cases” including the detection of variants of SARS-CoV-2 are totally invalid. This in turn means that the methodology pertaining to establishing COVID-19-related deaths worldwide is also invalid.

It is worth noting that in a December 2020 report, the CDC reported that 94% of the deaths attributed to COVID have “comorbidities” (i.e. deaths due to other causes).²⁶

For six percent of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups.

“They’re writing COVID on all the death certificates,” according to Michael Lanza, Funeral Director at Staten Island, NY.

“Funeral directors doubt legitimacy of deaths attributed to pandemic, fear numbers are ‘padded.'” (Project Veritas)²⁷

Moreover, had the CDC used the criteria in its Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003: 

” … the COVID-19 fatality count would have been approximately 90.2% lower” (See H. Ealy, M. McEvoy, and et al., August 09, 2020)²⁸

 

COVID-19: The “Underlying Cause of Death” and the CDC’s “More Often Than Not” Clause 

While the CDC acknowledged the issue of comorbidities, it nonetheless enacted totally invalid instructions with regard to the death certificates.

Barely a week following the historic March 11, 2020 lockdown, specific guidelines were introduced by the CDC pertaining to  death certificates (and their tabulation in the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS)).²⁹

1. The “underlying cause of death”
2. The “More Often than Not” clause which falsifies the cause of death 

And these criteria are imposed despite the fact that the RT-PCR test used to corroborate the “cause of death” provides misleading results as acknowledged by both the WHO and the CDC.

In practice, as outlined above, “probable COVID-19” or “likely COVID-19” will be considered as the “underlying cause of death” without the conduct of a PCR test and without performing an autopsy. 

---

Endnotes

1 WHO, March 8, 2020. Media Statement: Knowing the risks for COVID-19. https://www.who.int/indonesia/news/detail/08-03-2020-knowing-the-risk-for-covid-19

2 CDC, n.d. Similarities and Differences between Flu and COVID-19. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/symptoms/flu-vs-covid19.htm#table

3 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 5, 2020. Fake Coronavirus Data, Fear Campaign. Spread of the COVID-19 Infection. https://www.globalresearch.ca/fake-coronavirus-data-fear-campaign-spread-of-the-covid-19-infection/5708643

4 Anthony Fauci, Clifford Lane, et al., March 26, 2020. Covid-19 — Navigating the Uncharted. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387#

5 Ronald Bailey, March 11, 2020. COVID-19 Mortality Rate ‘Ten Times Worse’ Than Seasonal Flu, Says Dr. Anthony Fauci. https://reason.com/2020/03/11/covid-19-mortality-rate-ten-times-worse-than-seasonal-flu-says-dr-anthony-fauci/

6 Ibid.

7 Dr. Pascal Sacre, November 5, 2020. The COVID-19 RT-PCR Test: How to Mislead All Humanity. Using a “Test” To Lock Down Society. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-rt-pcr-how-to-mislead-all-humanity-using-a-test-to-lock-down-society/5728483

8 CDC, July 21, 2021. CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel. https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

9 Dr. Pascal Sacre, November 5, 2020. The COVID-19 RT-PCR Test: How to Mislead All Humanity. Using a “Test” To Lock Down Society. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-rt-pcr-how-to-mislead-all-humanity-using-a-test-to-lock-down-society/5728483

10 Joseph Hadaya, Max Schumm, et al., April 1, 2020. Testing Individuals for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2764238

11 Beda M Sadler, July 2, 2020. Coronavirus: Why Everyone Was Wrong. It is Not a “New Virus”. “The Fairy Tale of No Immunity”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/coronavirus-why-everyone-wrong/5718049

12 Dr. Pascal Sacre, August 7, 2020. COVID-19: Closer to the Truth: Tests and Immunity. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-closer-to-the-truth-tests-and-immunity/5720160

13 Victor M Corman, Olfert Landt, et al., January 23, 2020. Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045

14 Ibid.

15 Ibid.

16 Christine Massey, August 4, 2021. The Identity of the Virus: Health/Science Institutions Worldwide “Have No Record” of SARS-COV-2 Isolation/Purification. https://www.globalresearch.ca/foi-reveal-health-science-institutions-around-world-have-no-record-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification-anywhere-ever/5751969

17 Chaolin Huang, Yeming Wang, et al., January 24, 2020. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7159299/

18 Fan Wu, Su Zhao, et al., February 3, 2020. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2008-3

19 Christine Massey, August 4, 2021. The Identity of the Virus: Health/ Science Institutions Worldwide “Have No Record” of SARS-COV-2 Isolation/Purification. https://www.globalresearch.ca/foi-reveal-health-science-institutions-around-world-have-no-record-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification-anywhere-ever/5751969

20 WHO, January 20, 2021. Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2. https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

21 Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, et al., November 27, 2020. Review report Corman-Drosten et al. Eurosurveillance 2020. https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/

22 Ibid.

23 WHO, September 11, 2020. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/diagnostic-testing-for-sars-cov-2

24 Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, et al., November 27, 2020. Review report Corman-Drosten et al. Eurosurveillance 2020. https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/

25 CDC, July 21, 2021. Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing. https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html

26 CDC, January 20, 2022. Conditions Contributing to COVID-19 Deaths, by State and Age, Provisional 2020-2021. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Conditions-Contributing-to-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Stat/hk9y-quqm

27 Project Veritas, April 30, 2020. BREAKING: Funeral Directors in COVID-19 Epicenter Doubt Legitimacy of Deaths Attributed to Pandemic, Fear Numbers are ‘Padded’. https://www.projectveritas.com/news/breaking-funeral-directors-in-covid-19-epicenter-doubt-legitimacy-of-deaths/

28 H. Ealy, M. McEvoy, et al., July 24, 2020. Covid-19: Questionable Policies, Manipulated Rules of Data Collection and Reporting. Is It Safe for Students to Return to School? https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-fatalities-wer-90-2-lower-how-would-you-feel-about-schools-reopening/5720264

29 National Vital Statistics System, March 24, 2020. New ICD code introduced for COVID-19 deaths. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2XckyC93jfKqvOue5EdPlNA8LlKKgz4vPZTU1whI4vXLSOADSjsL9XY-M

30 Ibid.

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid.

33 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 14, 2021. Quebec: Falsification of Mortality Data Pertaining to Covid-19. https://www.globalresearch.ca/quebec-falsification-of-mortality-data-pertaining-to-covid-19/5737290

34 See this: https://amol.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/19_avril_20-AU-00603_LET_Opatrny-Codirecteurs_Orientations_ministerielle….pdf

35 Ibid.

36 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, July 19, 2022. Biggest Lie in World History: There Never Was A Pandemic. The Data Base is Flawed. The Covid Mandates including the Vaccine are Invalid. https://www.globalresearch.ca/biggest-lie-in-world-history-the-data-base-is-flawed-there-never-was-a-pandemic-the-covid-mandates-including-the-vaccine-are-invalid/5772008

37 WHO, January 20, 2021. Nucleic acid testing (NAT) technologies that use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for detection of SARS-CoV-2. https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

 

---

 

Chapter IV

Engineered Economic Depression

 

Introduction

Economics 101. The March 11, 2020 lockdown applied simultaneously in 190 countries has resulted in: 

“The confinement of the labor force” coupled with

“The paralysis of the workplace”.  

The predictable impact: 

The most serious economic crisis in world history.

The Economics Profession

The economics profession  focusing on the “market mechanism” has casually ignored this fundamental causal relationship. 

The consensus among both neoclassical as well as “progressive” political economists and social scientists is that “V the virus”, namely SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for the downfall of economic activity.

A similar position was adopted by trade union organizations including the AFL-CIO: the confinement of the labor force was viewed as a means to “protect” labor rights. 

When workers are confined in their homes, prevented from going to their workplace, “the common sense impact” is obvious: the lockdown is conducive to worldwide economic and social chaos. 

According to mainstream economists and financial analysts, the economic crisis commenced in early March 2022 coinciding with the onslaught of the war in Ukraine.  

That position is mistaken.

The ongoing economic and social crisis which is affecting humanity worldwide has its roots in January 2020 following the WEF meetings in Davos and the launching of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by the WHO (January 30, 2020). 

Distinct Phases and Consequences

There are several distinct phases in the engineered destabilization of the global economy which are examined in this chapter:

 

The Shanghai 2022 COVID Zero Tolerance Mandate. The Destabilization of China’s Export Economy?   

Source: Institute for Policy Studies

 

Billionaire wealth growth (March 2020 – March 2021) resulting from the implementation of the March 2020 lockdown, Chuck Collins (in an incisive study published by Inequality.org) estimates billionaire wealth growth over a full year, based on Forbes data compiled in this report by ATF and IPS.^6,7

March 18 [2020] is used as the unofficial beginning of the crisis because by then most federal and state economic restrictions responding to the virus were in place. March 18 was also the date that Forbes picked to measure billionaire wealth for the 2020 edition of its annual billionaires’ report, which provided a baseline that ATF and IPS compare periodically with real-time data from the Forbes website. PolitiFact has favorably reviewed this methodology.⁸

Source: Forbes data analyzed by Americans for Tax Fairness and Institute for Policy Studies

Source: Institute for Policy Studies

Source: Forbes data analyzed by Americans for Tax Fairness and Institute for Policy Studies

 

The Enrichment of Big Pharma

The Forbes report underscores the enrichment of the CEOs of both Western and China’s Big Pharma conglomerates involved in the COVID vaccine as well as in the lucrative sale (worldwide) of face masks and medical supplies.⁹

These include Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel and BioNTech co-founder Uğur Şahin.

China’s Big Pharma is a full-fledged partner in this process of enrichment. The CEOs of several China-based pharmaceutical companies include Tianjin’s CanSino Biologics, Inco, Shenzhen’s Contec Medical Systems, and Sansure Biotech, which makes COVID-19 tests, as well as China’s vaccine conglomerate Sinovac. 

Among China’s Big Pharma multi-billionaires is Li Jianquan, president of Chinese medical products manufacturer Winner Medical. Several of the products related to the COVID pandemic, including face masks, are produced by Winner Medical. 

Li Jianquan has a net worth of 6.8 billion (for details, see Forbes Report).¹⁰

For the complete list of billionaires in 2020-2021, consult the Forbes list.¹¹

 

The Geopolitics of Global Wealth

In 2022, Forbes reported a reshuffle of worldwide billionaire wealth to the detriment of Russia and China. 34 fewer billionaires in Russia (compared to 2021) and “87 fewer Chinese billionaires on the list”:

America still leads the world, with 735 billionaires worth a collective $4.7 trillion, including Elon Musk, who tops the World’s Billionaires list for the first time. China (including Macau and Hong Kong) remains number two, with 607 billionaires worth a collective $2.3 trillion.”

For the full list of the 2022 world’s billionaires, see Forbes real-time billionaires rankings.

 

Billionaire Enrichment and the Demise of the Family Farm 

The ongoing demise of family-owned agriculture has been exacerbated by the lockdown policies.

Bill Gates is using the money appropriated during the financial crisis to extend his corporate control in a variety of economic activities, “buying devalued assets at fire-sale prices” including the acquisition of farmland (see Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on Neo-feudalism).¹²

According to The Land Report (February 2021), Bill and Melinda Gates are now America’s largest farm owners to the detriment of family farming, which over the years has been driven into bankruptcy.

The Gates portfolio consists of “242,000 acres of American farmland and nearly 27,000 acres of other land across Louisiana, Arkansas, Nebraska, Arizona, Florida, Washington and 18 other states” (see the analysis by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.).¹³

See the map below indicating a total of 268,984 acres accruing to the Gates. This is tantamount to the de facto expropriation of thousands of family farms over a vast area of the United States.

This process spearheaded by mounting debts and bankruptcies commenced prior to the pandemic and will in all likelihood continue under the so-called “new normal”.

 

 

Billionaire Wealth Is Not the Result of Economic Growth

This enrichment of a social minority is not based on the creation of  “new wealth” resulting from real economic growth. Quite the opposite. It is the result of an engineered global economic depression.

The process of billionaire enrichment feeds on economic and social chaos. It relies heavily on the “fear campaign” and the worldwide destabilization of both financial markets and the real economy.

It has been instrumental in triggering an unprecedented process of redistribution of income and wealth. Large sectors of the world population have been driven into extreme poverty. 

Billionaire enrichment involves the acquisition of economic and financial assets at rock bottom prices, the takeover of bankrupt enterprises in major sectors of economic activity, the manipulation of markets (bonds, equities, commodities, currency markets, etc.) including the use of speculative instruments, derivative trade, involving “foreknowledge” and “inside information” (see Chapter IV).

Endnotes

1 Chuck Collins, October 8, 2020. U.S. Billionaire Wealth Is Up $850 Billion Since March 18th. https://ips-dc.org/u-s-billionaire-wealth-up-850-billion/

2 UBS, 2020. Riding the storm: Market turbulence accelerates diverging fortunes. https://www.ubs.com/content/dam/static/noindex/wealth-management/ubs-billionaires-report-2020-spread.pdf

3 Ollie A. Williams, October 6, 2020. Billionaire Wealth Hits $10 Trillion For First Time Ever Thanks To Government Stimulus: UBS. https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverwilliams1/2020/10/06/billionaire-wealth-hits-10-trillion-for-first-time-ever-thanks-to-government-stimulous/?sh=49cd0e6549ba

4 Chuck Collins, October 8, 2020. U.S. Billionaire Wealth Is Up $850 Billion Since March 18th. https://ips-dc.org/u-s-billionaire-wealth-up-850-billion/

5 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, November 7, 2020. The Covid-19 Roadmap: Towards Global Economic Chaos and Societal Destruction. https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-covid-19-roadmap-towards-economic-chaos-and-societal-destruction/5725602

6 Chuck Collins, March 23, 2021. Who Are the 10 Biggest Pandemic Profiteers? https://inequality.org/great-divide/10-biggest-pandemic-profiteers/

7 Americans for Tax Fairness and IPS, March 18, 2021. Billionaires Data. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15n35QH3mq7jxxLmOnrcn2LGtMSssi-x1aCU9_2V9YVM/edit#gid=1259834744

8 Nusaiba Mizan, October 12, 2020. Biden says billionaires gained $800 billion, but study looks at growth since market bottomed out. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/12/joe-biden/biden-says-billionaires-gained-800-billion-study-l/

9 Giacomo Tognini, April 6, 2021. Meet The 40 New Billionaires Who Got Rich Fighting Covid-19. https://www.forbes.com/sites/giacomotognini/2021/04/06/meet-the-40-new-billionaires-who-got-rich-fighting-covid-19/?sh=278895b117e5

10 Ibid. 

11 See this: https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/

12 Robert F. Kennedy Jr., February 4, 2021. Bill Gates and Neo-Feudalism: A Closer Look at Farmer Bill. https://www.globalresearch.ca/bill-gates-neo-feudalism-closer-look-farmer-bill/5736504 

13 Ibid.

 

“If we don’t stand up against this lockdown madness right now, we are complicit in the soul murder of our children! Yet the majority of parents and educators in kindergartens and schools … silently accept that corrupt governments are driving their children into madness or even suicide and thus strangling the future of all of us. –Rudolf Haensel,  September 2021

“Smiling as a facial expression has existed since the dawn of mankind. It is an inherent feature of human beings. Coupled with mandatory social distancing, the Covid mask hides our faces and prevents us from expressing our feelings while meeting and interacting with our fellow human beings. The mandates create an aura of social despair. Smiling and laughter reduces stress, encourages dialogue, exchange, solidarity, conflict resolution. Smiling also constitutes a means to confronting the Covid-19 fear campaign.” –Michel Chossudovsky, May 2022

“There has been another cost that we’ve seen, particularly in high schools. We’re seeing, sadly, far greater suicides now than there are deaths from COVID. We’re seeing far greater deaths from drug overdose,” –Dr. Robert Redfield, former director of the CDC, July 14, 2020

 

Introduction

The coronavirus mental health predicament of several billion people worldwide is the result of

Suicides Among Japan’s Schoolchildren

A 2021 report by Japan’s Ministry of Education confirms that suicide among Japanese schoolchildren had hit a record high during the 2020 school year.

“Japan recorded 415 suicides among schoolchildren aged 6 to 18 during the 2020 school year — the highest number since records began in 1974…. The figure was 31% higher than the previous school year, when 317 schoolchildren died.”¹⁵ 

The report from the Ministry of Education suggests that “the pandemic has caused changes in the school and family environment and had an impact on children’s behavior”.

Endnotes

1 Stefania Chiappini,  Amira Guirguis, et al., July 29, 2020. COVID-19: The Hidden Impact on Mental Health and Drug Addiction. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7403495/

2 American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, n.d. Suicide Statistics. https://afsp.org/suicide-statistics/

3 National Institute of Mental Health, n.d. Suicide. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide#part_154969

4 Mark É. Czeisler, Rashon I. Lane, et al., August 14, 2020. Mental Health, Substance Use, and Suicidal Ideation During the COVID-19 Pandemic — United States, June 24–30, 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6932a1.htm

5 Ibid.

6 Mark A. Reger, Ian H. Stanley, et al., April 10, 2020. Suicide Mortality and Coronavirus Disease 2019—A Perfect Storm? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2764584?guestAccessKey=c40eefb2-c634-47ed-b3c3-f00b005e3cf2&utm_

7 Jon Miltimore, November 24, 2020. Suicide Claimed More Lives in October Than 10 Months of COVID-19 in Japan, Report Shows. https://fee.org/articles/suicide-claimed-more-lives-in-october-than-10-months-of-covid-19-in-japan-report-shows/

8 Mark A. Reger, Ian H. Stanley, et al., April 10, 2020. Suicide Mortality and Coronavirus Disease 2019—A Perfect Storm? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2764584?guestAccessKey=c40eefb2-c634-47ed-b3c3-f00b005e3cf2&utm_

9 Times Now Digital, September 14, 2020. Amid COVID-19 outbreak, India’s suicide epidemic remains unaddressed – these graphs show how. https://www.timesnownews.com/india/article/amid-covid-19-outbreak-indias-suicide-epidemic-remains-unaddressed-these-graphs-show-how/652188

10 Carol Graham, November 17, 2020. The human costs of the pandemic: Is it time to prioritize well-being? https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-human-costs-of-the-pandemic-is-it-time-to-prioritize-well-being/

11 Statista, March 2021. Total number of suicides committed in Japan from 2011 to 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/622065/japan-suicide-number/

12 L. Kettenhofen, November 30, 2021. Suicide in Japan – statistics & facts. https://www.statista.com/topics/5259/suicide-in-japan/

13 Lucy Craft, November 13, 2020. Suicide claimed more Japanese lives in October than 10 months of COVID. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/japan-suicide-coronavirus-more-japanese-suicides-in-october-than-total-covid-deaths/

14 Ibid.

15 Emiko Jozuka, October 14, 2021. Child suicides in Japan are at a record high. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/14/asia/suicide-children-japan-intl-hnk/index.html

16 CDC, December 17, 2020. Overdose Deaths Accelerating During COVID-19. https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/p1218-overdose-deaths-covid-19.html

17 Laura Santhanam, December 28, 2020. What’s behind the historic spike in drug overdose deaths under COVID-19. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/whats-behind-the-historic-spike-in-drug-overdose-deaths-under-covid-19

18 CDC, January 12, 2022. Provisional Drug Overdose Death Counts. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/drug-overdose-data.htm#data-tables

19 Ibid.

20 Deidre McPhillips, November 17, 2021. Drug overdose deaths top 100,000 annually for the first time, driven by fentanyl, CDC data show. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/11/17/health/drug-overdose-deaths-record-high/index.html

21 Ontario Drug Policy Research Network, The Office of the Chief Coroner for Ontario/Ontario Forensic Pathology Service, et al., November 2020. Preliminary Patterns in Circumstances Surrounding Opioid-Related Deaths in Ontario during the COVID-19 Pandemic. https://www.publichealthontario.ca/-/media/documents/o/2020/opioid-mortality-covid-surveillance-report.pdf?la=en

22 Ibid.

23 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 14, 2005. The Spoils of War: Afghanistan’s Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade. https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-spoils-of-war-afghanistan-s-multibillion-dollar-heroin-trade/91

24 MarketWatch, January 13, 2022. Opioids Drugs Market Size, Share 2022 Global Analysis Covers COVID-19 Impact | Detailed Insights on Upcoming Trends, Growth Rate and Future Forecast to 2025. https://www.marketwatch.com/press-release/opioids-drugs-market-size-share-2022-global-analysis-covers-covid-19-impact-detailed-insights-on-upcoming-trends-growth-rate-and-future-forecast-to-2025-2022-01-13

25 BBC, February 4, 2021. McKinsey agrees $573m opioid settlement in US. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55939224

26 KHN Morning Briefing, November 6, 2020. 4 Drug Companies Agree To $26 Billion Opioid Settlement. https://khn.org/morning-breakout/4-drug-companies-agree-to-26-billion-opioid-settlement/

27 Jef Feeley, February 4, 2021. McKinsey to Pay $573 Million to Resolve U.S. Opioid Claims. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-04/mckinsey-said-to-agree-to-550-million-opioid-claim-settlement-kkq6xumb

28 Liz Braun, October 1, 2020. Drug and alcohol use rising during COVID. https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/drug-and-alcohol-use-rising-during-covid

29 NielsenIQ, May 7, 2020. Rebalancing the ‘COVID-19 effect’ on alcohol sales. https://nielseniq.com/global/en/insights/analysis/2020/rebalancing-the-covid-19-effect-on-alcohol-sales/

30 RAND, September 29, 2020. Alcohol Consumption Rises Sharply During Pandemic Shutdown; Heavy Drinking by Women Rises 41%. https://www.rand.org/news/press/2020/09/29.html

31 Sasha Pezenik, September 30, 2020. Alcohol consumption rising sharply during pandemic, especially among women. https://abcnews.go.com/US/alcohol-consumption-rising-sharply-pandemic-women/story?id=73302479

32 Ibid.  

---

 

Chapter VII

Corrupt Science: “There Is No Cure”

Suppression of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), 

A Cheap and Effective Drug 

 

There was an ongoing battle to suppress hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a cheap and effective drug for the treatment of COVID-19. The campaign against HCQ was carried out through slanderous political statements, media smears, not to mention an authoritative peer-reviewed “evaluation” published on May 22 by The Lancet, which was based on fake figures and test trials.

The study was allegedly based on data analysis of 96,032 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020 from 671 hospitals worldwide. The database had been fabricated. The objective was to kill the hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cure on behalf of Big Pharma.

While The Lancet article was retracted, the media casually blamed “a tiny US-based company” named Surgisphere whose employees included “a sci-fi writer and adult content model” for spreading “flawed data” (Guardian). This Chicago-based outfit was accused of having misled both the WHO and national governments, inciting them to ban HCQ. None of those trial tests actually took place.

 

Screenshot from The Lancet

 

While the blame was placed on Surgisphere, the unspoken truth (which neither the scientific community nor the media has acknowledged) is that the study was coordinated by Harvard professor Mandeep Mehra under the auspices of Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), which is a partner of the Harvard Medical School.

When the scam was revealed, Dr. Mandeep Mehra, who holds the Harvey Distinguished Chair of Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, apologized:

“I have always performed my research in accordance with the highest ethical and professional guidelines. However, we can never forget the responsibility we have as researchers to scrupulously ensure that we rely on data sources that adhere to our high standards.

It is now clear to me that in my hope to contribute this research during a time of great need, I did not do enough to ensure that the data source was appropriate for this use. For that, and for all the disruptions – both directly and indirectly – I am truly sorry.” (emphasis added)

Mandeep R. Mehra, MD, MSC (official statement on BWH website)¹

But that “truly sorry” note was just the tip of the iceberg. Why?

The studies respectively on Gilead Sciences’ remdesivir and on hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) were conducted simultaneously by Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH).

While The Lancet report (May 22, 2020) coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra was intended “to kill” the legitimacy of HCQ as a cure of COVID-19, another important (related) study was being carried out (concurrently) at BWH pertaining to remdesivir on behalf of Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Dr. Francisco Marty, a specialist in Infectious Disease and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School, was entrusted with coordination of the clinical trial tests of the antiviral medication remdesivir under Brigham’s contract with Gilead Sciences, Inc²:

… If the results are promising, this could lead to FDA approval, and if they aren’t, it gives us critical information in the fight against COVID-19 and allows us to move on to other therapies.”

While Dr. Mandeep Mehra was not directly involved in the Gilead Remdesivir BWH study under the supervision of his colleague Dr. Francisco Marty, he nonetheless had contacts with Gilead Sciences, Inc:

“He participated in a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April 2020 as part of the Covid-19 debate” (France Soir, May 23, 2020)³

What was the intent of his (failed) study? To undermine the legitimacy of hydroxychloroquine?

According to France Soir, in a report published after The Lancet retraction:

The often evasive answers produced by Dr Mandeep R. Mehra, … professor at Harvard Medical School, did not produce confidence, fueling doubt instead about the integrity of this retrospective study and its results. (France Soir, June 5, 2020)⁴

Was Dr. Mandeep Mehra in conflict of interest? (That is a matter for BWH and the Harvard Medical School to decide upon)

 

Who Were the Main Actors? 

Dr. Anthony Fauci, portrayed as “America’s top infectious disease expert,” played a key role in smearing the HCQ cure which had been approved years earlier by the CDC as well as providing legitimacy to Gilead’s remdesivir.

Dr. Fauci has been the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since the Reagan administration. He is known to act as a mouthpiece for Big Pharma.

Dr. Fauci launched remdesivir in late June (see details below). According to Fauci, remdesivir is the “corona wonder drug” developed by Gilead Sciences, Inc. It’s a $1.6 billion dollar bonanza.

 

Gilead Sciences, Inc: History

Gilead Sciences, Inc is a multi-billion dollar bio-pharmaceutical company which is now involved in developing and marketing remdesivir. Gilead has a long history. It has the backing of major investment conglomerates including the Vanguard Group and Capital Research & Management Co, among others. It has developed ties with the US government.

In 1999, Gilead Sciences, Inc developed Tamiflu (used as a treatment of seasonal influenza and bird flu). At the time, Gilead Sciences, Inc was headed by Donald Rumsfeld (1997-2001), who later joined the George W. Bush administration as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). Rumsfeld was responsible for coordinating the illegal and criminal wars on Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003).

Rumsfeld maintained his links to Gilead Sciences, Inc throughout his tenure as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). According to CNN Money (2005): “The prospect of a bird flu outbreak … was very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld [who still owned Gilead stocks] and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences.”⁵

Anthony Fauci has been in charge of the NIAID since 1984, using his position as “a go-between” the US government and Big Pharma. During Rumsfeld’s tenure as Secretary of Defense, the budget allocated to bio-terrorism increased substantially, involving contracts with Big Pharma including Gilead Sciences, Inc. Anthony Fauci considered that the money allocated to bio-terrorism in early 2002 would:

“accelerate our understanding of the biology and pathogenesis of microbes that can be used in attacks, and the biology of the microbes’ hosts — human beings and their immune systems. One result should be more effective vaccines with less toxicity.” (Washington Post, February 7, 2022)⁶

In 2008, Dr. Anthony Fauci was granted the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President George W. Bush “for his determined and aggressive efforts to help others live longer and healthier lives.”⁷

Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, listens Thursday, June 19, 2008, as he is announced as a recipient of the 2008 Presidential Medal of Freedom, at ceremonies in the East Room of the White House. (White House photo by Shealah Craighead)

 

The 2020 Gilead Sciences, Inc. Remdesivir Project

We will be focusing on key documents (and events).

Chronology (February-June 2020)

February 21, 2020: Initial release pertaining to NIH-NIAID remdesivir placebo test trial

April 10: The Gilead Sciences, Inc study published in the NEJM on the “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir”

April 29: NIH released study on remdesivir (report published on May 22 in NEJM)

May 22: The BWH-Harvard Study on Hydroxychloroquine coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra published in The Lancet

May 22: Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) 

June 5: The (fake) Lancet Report (May 22) on HCQ is retracted

June 29: Fauci announcement. The $1.6 billion remdesivir HHS agreement with Gilead Sciences, Inc

 

April 10, 2020: The Gilead Sciences, Inc study published in the NEJM on the “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir”

A Gilead-sponsored report was published in New England Journal of Medicine in an article entitled “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe COVID-19”. It was co-authored by an impressive list of 56 distinguished medical doctors and scientists, many of whom were recipients of consulting fees from Gilead Sciences, Inc.

Gilead Sciences, Inc. funded the study which included several staff members as co-authors.

“The testing included a total of 61 patients [who] received at least one dose of remdesivir on or before March 7, 2020; 8 of these patients were excluded because of missing postbaseline information (7 patients) and an erroneous remdesivir start date (1 patient) … Of the 53 remaining patients included in this analysis, 40 (75%) received the full 10-day course of remdesivir, 10 (19%) received 5 to 9 days of treatment, and 3 (6%) fewer than 5 days of treatment.” (NEJM, April 10, 2020)⁸

The NEJM article states that “Gilead Sciences, Inc began accepting requests from clinicians for compassionate use of remdesivir on January 25, 2020.”

From whom, from where? According to the WHO (January 30, 2020), there were 86 cases in 18 countries outside China of which 5 were in the US, 5 in France and 3 in Canada.

Several prominent physicians and scientists have cast doubt on the Compassionate Use of Remdesivir study conducted by Gilead, focusing on the small size of the trial. Ironically, the number of patients in the test is less than the number of co-authors: “53 patients” versus “56 co-authors.”

Below we provide excerpts from scientific statements on the Gilead NEJM project (Science Media Centre) published immediately following the release of the NEJM article⁹:

“‘Compassionate use’ is better described as using an unlicensed therapy to treat a patient because there are no other treatments available. Research based on this kind of use should be treated with extreme caution because there is no control group or randomisation, which are some of the hallmarks of good practice in clinical trials.” (Prof Duncan Richard, Clinical Therapeutics, University of Oxford)

 “It is critical not to over-interpret this study. Most importantly, it is impossible to know the outcome for this relatively small group of patients had they not received remdesivir.” (Dr Stephen Griffin, Associate Professor, School of Medicine, University of Leeds)

 “The research is interesting but doesn’t prove anything at this point: the data are from a small and uncontrolled study.” (Simon Maxwell, Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Prescribing, University of Edinburgh)

“The data from this paper are almost uninterpretable. It is very surprising, perhaps even unethical, that the New England Journal of Medicine has published it. It would be more appropriate to publish the data on the website of the pharmaceutical company that has sponsored and written up the study. At least Gilead have been clear that this has not been done in the way that a high quality scientific paper would be written.” (Prof Stephen Evans, Professor of Pharmacoepidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine)

“It’s very hard to draw useful conclusions from uncontrolled studies like this particularly with a new disease where we really don’t know what to expect and with wide variations in outcomes between places and over time. One really has to question the ethics of failing to do randomisation – this study really represents more than anything else, a missed opportunity.” (Prof Adam Finn, Professor of Paediatrics, University of Bristol)

To review the complete document of Science Media Centre pertaining to expert assessments, click here.

 

April 29, 2020: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Study on Remdesivir

On April 29 following the publication of the Gilead Sciences, Inc study in the NEJM on April 10, a press release of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on remdesivir was released. The full document was published on May 22, by the NEJM under the title: Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report (NEJM). 

The study had been initiated on February 21, 2020. The title of the April 29 press release was: “Peer-reviewed data shows remdesivir for COVID-19 improves time to recovery.”

It’s a government-sponsored report which includes preliminary data from a randomized trial involving 1,063 hospitalized patients. The results of the trial labelled Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT) are preliminary, conducted under the helm of Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID):

An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) overseeing the trial met on April 27 to review data and shared their interim analysis with the study team. Based upon their review of the data, they noted that remdesivir was better than placebo from the perspective of the primary endpoint, time to recovery, a metric often used in influenza trials. Recovery in this study was defined as being well enough for hospital discharge or returning to normal activity level.

Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received placebo (p<0.001). Specifically, the median time to recovery was 11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who received placebo. Results also suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo group (p=0.059). (emphasis added)¹⁰

In the NIH’s earlier February 21, 2020 report (released at the outset of the study), the methodology was described as follows:

… A randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the investigational antiviral remdesivir in hospitalized adults diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) …

Numbers. Where? When? 

The February 21 report confirmed that the first trial participant was “an American who was repatriated after being quarantined on the Diamond Princess cruise ship” that docked in Yokohama (Japanese Territorial Waters) (see Chapter II). “Thirteen people repatriated by the US State Department from the Diamond Princess cruise ship” were selected as patients for the placebo trial test.

Ironically, at the outset of the study, 58.7% of the “confirmed cases” worldwide (542 cases out of 924) (outside China) were on the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship from which the initial trial placebo patients were selected.

Where and When: The trial test in the 68 selected sites? That came at a later date because on February 19 (WHO data), the US had recorded only 15 positive cases (see table below).

“A total of 68 sites ultimately joined the study—47 in the United States and 21 in countries in Europe and Asia.” (emphasis added)

In the final May 22 NEJM report entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report: 

There were 60 trial sites and 13 subsites in the United States (45 sites), Denmark (8), the United Kingdom (5), Greece (4), Germany (3), Korea (2), Mexico (2), Spain (2), Japan (1), and Singapore (1). Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either remdesivir or placebo. Randomization was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrollment.¹¹

The Washington Post applauded Anthony Fauci’s announcement (April 29)¹²:

“The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony S. Fauci, …  fall short of the magic bullet or cure… But with no approved treatments for Covid-19,[Lie] Fauci said, it will become the standard of care for hospitalized patients …

The data shows that remdesivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery,” Fauci said. 

“The government’s first rigorous clinical trial of the experimental drug remdesivir as a coronavirus treatment delivered mixed results to the medical community Wednesday — but rallied stock markets and raised hopes that an early weapon to help some patients was at hand.

The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony Fauci, chief of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which led the placebo-controlled trial found that the drug accelerated the recovery of hospitalized patients but had only a marginal benefit in the rate of death.

… Fauci’s remarks boosted speculation that the Food and Drug Administration would seek emergency use authorization that would permit doctors to prescribe the drug.

In addition to clinical trials, remdesivir has been given to more than 1,000 patients under compassionate use. [Also refers to the Gilead study published on April 10 in the NEJM]

The study, involving [more than] 1,000 patients at 68 sites in the United States and around the world [??], offers the first evidence [??] from a large [??], randomized [??] clinical study of remdesivir’s effectiveness against COVID-19.”

The NIH placebo test study provided “preliminary results.” While the placebo trial test was “randomized”, the overall selection of patients at the 68 sites was not fully randomized. See the full report.¹³

 

May 22, 2020: The Controversial (Retracted) Lancet Report on Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

It is worth noting that the full report of the NIH-NIAID entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report was released on May 22, 2020 in the NEJM, on the same day as the controversial Lancet report on hydroxychloroquine.

Immediately following its publication, the media went into high gear, smearing the HCQ cure, while applauding the NIH-NIAID report on remdesivir released on that same day.

Remdesivir, the only drug cleared to treat COVID-19, sped the recovery time of patients with the disease, … “It’s a very safe and effective drug,” said Eric Topol, founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute. “We now have a definite first efficacious drug for Covid-19, which is a major step forward and will be built upon with other drugs, [and drug] combinations.”¹⁴

When the Lancet HCQ article by Bingham-Harvard was retracted on June 5, it was too late, it received minimal media coverage. Despite the retraction, the HCQ cure “had been killed.”

 

June 29, 2020: Fauci Green Light. The $1.6 Billion Remdesivir Contract with Gilead Sciences, Inc

Dr. Anthony Fauci granted the “green light” to Gilead Sciences, Inc. on June 29, 2020.

The semi-official US government NIH-NIAID-sponsored report (May 22) entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of COVID-19 — Preliminary Report (NEJM) was used to justify a major agreement with Gilead Sciences, Inc. (A final report was released on November 5, 2020)

The report was largely funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

On June 29, based on the findings of the NIH-NIAID report published in the NEJM, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on behalf of the Trump Adminstration an agreement to secure large supplies of the remdesivir drug from Gilead Sciences, Inc. for the treatment of COVID-19 in America’s private hospitals and clinics.

The earlier Gilead study based on scanty test results published in the NEJM (April 10) of 53 cases (and 56 co-authors) was not highlighted. The results of this study had been questioned by several prominent physicians and scientists.

Who will be able to afford remdesivir? 500,000 doses of remdesivir are envisaged at $3,200 per patient, namely $1.6 billion (see the study by Elizabeth Woodworth).¹⁵

The drug was also approved for marketing in the European Union under the brand name Veklury.

If this contract is implemented as planned, it represents for Gilead Sciences, Inc. and the recipient US private hospitals and clinics a colossal amount of money.

According to the Trump Administration’s HHS Secretary Alex Azar (June 29, 2020):

 

Remdesivir versus Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

Careful timing:

The Lancet study (published on May 22, 2020 and subsequently retracted) was intended to undermine the legitimacy of hydroxychloroquine as an effective cure to COVID-19, with a view to sustaining the $1.6 billion agreement between the HHS and Gilead Sciences, Inc. on June 29. The legitimacy of this agreement rested on the May 22 NIH-NIAID study in the NEJM which was considered “preliminary.”¹⁶

What Dr. Fauci failed to acknowledge is that chloroquine had been “studied” and tested 15 years ago by the CDC as a drug to be used against coronavirus infections. And that hydroxychloroquine has been used in the course of 2020 in the treatment of COVID-19 in several countries.

According to the (2005) Virology Journal, “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread.”¹⁷ It was used in the SARS-1 outbreak in 2002. It had the endorsement of the CDC. 

HCQ is not only effective, it is “inexpensive” when compared to remdesivir at an estimated “$3,120 for a US patient with private insurance.”

 

Concluding Remarks

 

Endnotes

1 Brigham and Women’s Hospital, May 22, 2020. No Improvement in Death Rate for COVID-19 Patients who Received Hydroxychloroquine. https://www.brighamandwomens.org/about-bwh/newsroom/press-releases-detail?id=3592

2 Brigham and Women’s Hospital, March 30, 2020. Two Remdesivir Clinical Trials Underway at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. https://www.brighamhealthonamission.org/2020/03/26/two-remdesivir-clinical-trials-underway-at-brigham-and-womens-hospital/

3 Xavier Azalbert & Eric Gyssler, June 5, 2020. From coincidences to coincidences, the Boston connexion serves Remdesivir? https://www.francesoir.fr/politique-monde/coincidences-coincidences-boston-connexion-serves-remdesivir

4 Ibid.

5 Nelson D. Schwartz, October 31, 2005. Rumsfeld’s growing stake in Tamiflu Defense Secretary, ex-chairman of flu treatment rights holder, sees portfolio value growing. https://money.cnn.com/2005/10/31/news/newsmakers/fortune_rumsfeld/

6 George F. Will, February 7, 2002. War and Health. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2002/02/07/war-and-health/c1e5dfb2-c373-45ef-87d1-eb89f0db557c/

7 George W Bush Library, March 30, 2020. https://twitter.com/gwblibrary/status/1244601539227942914?lang=en

8 Jonathan Grein, Norio Ohmagari, et al, June 11, 2020. Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007016#article_references

9 Prof. Stephen Evans & Prof. Adam Finn, April 11, 2020. Expert reaction to a study about compassionate use of remdesivir for patients with severe COVID-19. https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-a-study-about-compassionate-use-of-remdesivir-for-patients-with-severe-covid-19/

10 National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, February 25, 2020. NIH Clinical Trial of Remdesivir to Treat COVID-19 Begins. https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/nih-clinical-trial-remdesivir-treat-covid-19-begins

11 John H. Beigel, Kay M. Tomashek, et al., November 5, 2020. Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Final Report. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764?query=recirc_mostViewed_railB_article

12 Laurie Mcginley & Christopher Rowland, April 29, 2020. Gilead’s remdesivir improves recovery time of coronavirus patients in NIH trial. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/gileads-remdesivir-improves-recovery-time-of-coronavirus-patients-in-nih-trial/

13 Ibid.

14 Matthew Herper, May 22, 2020. Covid-19 study details benefits of treatment with remdesivir, and also its limitations. https://www.statnews.com/2020/05/22/covid-19-study-details-benefits-of-treatment-with-remdesivir-and-also-its-limitations/

15 Elizabeth Woodworth, August 27, 2020. Remdesivir for Covid-19: $1.6 Billion for a “Modestly Beneficial” Drug? https://www.globalresearch.ca/remdesivir-covid-19-1-6-billion-modestly-beneficial-drug/5717690

16 Mandeep R. Mehra, Sapan S. Desai, et al., May 29, 2020. Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis. https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6.pdf

17 Martin J. Vincent, Eric Bergeron, et al., August 22, 2005. Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/

 

 

Chapter VIII

Big Pharma’s COVID “Vaccine”

 

Our Children Are the Victims

Student at the Lycée Valabre de Luynes-Gardannem, Aix-en-Provence, 16 years old Sofia Benharira  passed away on September 21 [2021] yes, 7 days after having received the deadly Pfizer vaccine. Two Heart Attacks, Thrombosis. May She Rest in Peace.

***

“Her daughter’s 13-year-old friend who did not want to take the COVID-19 vaccine. “Her Heart Stopped. She is in Critical Care. This is happening here right now in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Because she wanted to play soccer. 

She did not want to take the Vaccine. But when our Premier mandated the vaccine for children playing sport.  …. 

“I am disgusted with our government.”

(Powerful voice of a Canadian mother)

***

“Yesterday evening, we got news from France of a young man, 22 years old who died nine hours after having being vaccinated. He wanted to travel on a holiday to Greece. “He just wanted to live said his father. … he was my only son, and he died, killed by a crap vaccine that was never validated or properly tested”. 

The mainstream media provided its own interpretation quoting “authoritative medical sources”.

“It  wasn’t the vaccine which triggered Maxime Beltra‘s death. He died from an allergic reaction, they said: “a probable serious food allergy, according to medical sources”.

Now isn’t that a piece of authoritative fake news, quoting hospital officials. Today Our thoughts are with Maxime Beltra and his family.

***

“If you permit this to go ahead [vaccine], I guarantee, there will be avoidable deaths of perfectly healthy children and severe illnesses in ten times as many. And for no possible benefit. Knowing what I know from 40 years training and practice in toxicology, biochemistry and pharmacology, to participate in this extraordinary abuse of innocent children in our care can be classified in no other way than Murder.” —Dr. Michael Yeadon, prominent scientist, former Vice President of Pfizer

“Three doctors from Ontario died after the hospital where they worked started administering the fourth booster shot to their staff. Is it a coincidence or are they victims of this diabolical worldwide vaccination campaign?” —Mark Taliano, author, Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization

“This vaccine campaign will go down as the biggest scandal in medical history, … moreover, it will be known as the biggest crime ever committed on humanity.” —MP Christine Anderson, Member of the European Parliament, July 2022

 

Yes, It’s a killer vaccine. That message should be loud and clear. This is happening all over the world: children and adolescents are dying. Crimes against humanity, crimes against our children. 

Health authorities are routinely instructed to categorize vaccine-related deaths and injuries to COVID-19: “The vaccinated are dying of COVID.” It’s a boldface lie. 

 

Introduction

The vaccine was launched on November 9, 2020, barely six months after the March 11, 2020 lockdown. These two interrelated policy mandates constitute the strategic pillars of the COVID crisis:

• The lockdown was an act of economic and social warfare directed against all humanity.
• Amply documented (starting in early 2021) the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine is a poisonous substance which has resulted in a sustained upward trend in vaccine-related mortality and morbidity.

Peer-reviewed reports confirm the causes of vaccine-related deaths and injuries including, among others, blood clots, thrombosis, myocarditis and fertility.

The impacts of the vaccine are also documented by a secret Pfizer report which was released under freedom of information (see analysis below).

Video: Impact of COVID vaccinations on mortality (December 2020 – April 2021, selected countries), click here to watch.

The latest official figures at the time of writing (April 3, 2022) point to approximately: 

69,053 COVID-19 injection-related deaths and 10,997,126 injuries for the EU, US and UK combined for a population of 830 million people.¹

But only a small fraction of the victims or families of the deceased will go through the tedious process of reporting vaccine-related deaths and adverse events to the national health authorities. 

Moreover, the health authorities are actively involved in obfuscating the deaths and injuries resulting from the “unapproved” and “experimental” COVID-19 “vaccine”.

Based on historical data (Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESPH-VAERS) p. 6): 

These are official statistics based on a formal process of registration of deaths and injuries. The actual number of deaths and injuries triggered by the mRNA vaccine is much higher.

Multiply the figures by the relevant parameter to get the REAL numbers; we are talking about very high numbers.

 

The mRNA “Vaccine”. Hidden Agenda? 

The vaccine does not save lives nor does it contain the pandemic because there is no pandemic. It’s a money-making operation for Big Pharma in the hundreds of billions of dollars.

Moreover, it’s not a one-time vaccine jab. Several doses are contemplated over several years.

It is applied worldwide and enforced by powerful financial Interest. Not a single country, with the exception of Burundi, Tanzania and Haiti, had the courage to refuse the mRNA vaccine.

While there is no reliable evidence, it is worth noting that the presidents of Tanzania and Burundi died under mysterious circumstances.

Haiti was the only country in the Western hemisphere which categorically refused to implement the mRNA vaccine.

In a bitter irony, immediately following president Jovenel Moise’s assassination on July 7, 2021, president Joe Biden promptly sent half a million vaccine doses (and more to come, courtesy of Uncle Sam) delivered by COVAX to Port-au-Prince six days after Moise’s passing.³

This first shipment to Haiti was part of a US Aid Program consisting of 500 million doses of the “killer vaccine” which was slated to be sent to a large number of developing countries.  

 

Big Money for Big Pharma

The US government ordered 100 million doses of the vaccine in the immediate wake of the March 11, 2020 lockdown. The EU purchased more than 1.8 billion doses, which represents four times the population of the European Union. It’s Big Money for Big Pharma, generous payoffs to corrupt politicians at the expense of taxpayers.

The objective is ultimately to make money, by vaccinating the entire planet of 7.9 billion people for SARS-CoV-2.

The COVID vaccine requires at least three doses. This is the largest vaccine project in world history and the biggest money-making operation for Big Pharma.

Worldwide, people are led to believe that the corona vaccine is a solution. And that “normality” will then be restored.

 

The mRNA Vaccine Is “Unapproved” and “Experimental” 

How is it that a vaccine for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which under normal conditions would take years to develop, was promptly launched on the 9th of November 2020?

Moreover, the vaccine announced by Pfizer, Moderna Inc, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is based on an experimental gene-editing mRNA technology which has a bearing on the human genome.

Coupled with the mRNA vaccine initiative is the development of a so-called digital passport which is currently being imposed on entire populations (see analysis below).

And why do we need a vaccine for COVID-19 when the WHO, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as well as numerous scientists have confirmed unequivocally that COVID-19 is “similar to seasonal influenza”? (See analysis in Chapter III)

Four major companies including Pfizer Inc, Moderna Inc, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson (J&J) are involved in marketing the experimental mRNA vaccine with the relentless support of national governments.  

In the US, the “green light” to market the experimental mRNA vaccine was granted back in December 2020, despite the fact that according to the FDA, the vaccine is an “unapproved product”.

The FDA, in an ambiguous statement, has provided a so-called Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, namely “to permit the emergency use of the unapproved product, … for active immunization…”⁴ (See below)

 

 

To view the C-Span video, click here.

 

Déjà Vu: Flash Forward to 2020-2022

How on earth can you trust a Big Pharma vaccine conglomerate which pleaded guilty to criminal charges by the US Department of Justice including “fraudulent marketing” and “felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act”?

I should mention, however, that in 2009, Pfizer was so to speak “put on probation” by the US Department of Justice.⁷ It was obliged to enter into “a corporate integrity agreement” with the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). That agreement provided for “procedures and reviews to … avoid and promptly detect” misconduct on the part of Pfizer Inc.  

Johnson & Johnson and “the Opioid Epidemic” 

At the height of the corona crisis, barely covered by the media, coinciding with the launch of the COVID-19 vaccine in early November 2020, Johnson & Johnson (and its three distributors) (involved in the marketing of prescription opioids)  “reached a tentative multi-billion settlement with counties and cities that sued them for damages”.⁸ The class action lawsuit was “the largest federal court case in American history” (for further details, see Chapter VI pertaining to “The Impacts on Mental Health”).

Are these legal antecedents relevant to an understanding of Big Pharma’s vaccine initiative?

Johnson & Johnson is currently involved in the production and marketing of a COVID adenovirus viral vector vaccine which also entails genetic therapy (the above J&J class-action lawsuit is one among several lawsuits against J&J).

 

Human Guinea Pigs

In relation to the COVID vaccine, “fraudulent marketing” is an understatement. The mRNA vaccine announced by Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca is an “unapproved drug” based on the “experimental” gene-editing mRNA technology which has a bearing on the human genome.⁹

Moreover, the standard animal lab tests using mice or ferrets were not conducted. Pfizer “went straight to human ‘guinea pigs’.”¹⁰

“Human tests began in late July and early August [2020]. Three months is unheard of for testing a new vaccine. Several years is the norm.” (F. William Engdahl, Global Research, November 2020)¹¹

Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Vice President of Pfizer, has taken a firm stance: 

“All vaccines against the SARS-COV-2 virus are by definition novel. No candidate vaccine has been… in development for more than a few months.”

“If any such vaccine is approved for use under any circumstances that are not EXPLICITLY experimental, I believe that recipients are being misled to a criminal extent.”¹²

In early December 2020,  Dr. Michael Yeadon together with Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg “filed an application with the EMA“, the European Medicines Agency responsible for EU-wide drug approval, for the immediate suspension of all SARS-CoV-2 vaccine studies, in particular the Pfizer-BioNtech study on BNT162b (EudraCT number 2020-002641-42).¹³

 

History of the SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Project 

There are many contradictions. The analysis below addresses the earlier stages of the vaccine project as well as the role of the 201 simulation of a coronavirus pandemic under the auspices of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine held in New York on October 18, 2019 (see Chapter I).

The COVID vaccine is a multi-billion dollar Big Pharma operation which will contribute to increasing the public debt of more than 150 national governments.

Supported by the fear campaign, money — rather than public health — is the driving force behind this initiative.

The GSK-Pfizer Partnership 

Five months before the onset of the COVID-19 crisis, two of the largest worldwide Pharma conglomerates decided to join hands in a strategic relationship. In August 2019, GSK confirmed the formation of a major partnership with Pfizer entitled the Consumer Health Joint Venture.¹⁴

The coronavirus was initially named nCoV-19 by CEPI and the WHO — exactly the same name as that adopted in the WEF-Gates-Johns Hopkins Event 201 (2019-nCov) pertaining to a coronavirus simulation exercise held in mid-October 2019. It was only later that COVID-19 was identified by the WHO not as a virus but as a disease: coronavirus disease (COVID-19), the virus was identified as “severe acute respiratory syndrome” coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). 

The Event 201 Johns Hopkins simulation (examined in Chapter I) addressed the development of an effective vaccine in response to millions of cases in the October 2019 simulation of an outbreak of a novel coronavirus entitled 2019-nCoV. The simulation announced a scenario in which the entire population of the planet would be affected:

“We ran a massive viral pandemic simulation.., 65 million deaths worldwide.”

“During the initial months of the pandemic, the cumulative number of cases [in the simulation] increases exponentially, doubling every week. And as the cases and deaths accumulate, the economic and societal consequences become increasingly severe.”

The scenario ends at the 18-month point, with 65 million deaths. The pandemic is beginning to slow due to the decreasing number of susceptible people. The pandemic will continue at some rate until there is an effective vaccine or until 80-90 % of the global population has been exposed. From that point on, it is likely to be an endemic childhood disease.¹⁶

To watch the World Economic Forum video, The 201 Johns Hopkins Simulation, click here.

 

The Central Role of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI)

The lead entity for the novel coronavirus vaccine initiative is the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), an organization sponsored and financed by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Two weeks after the virus had been formally identified by the People’s Republic of China (Jan 7, 2020), a vaccine for the novel coronavirus was announced by CEPI at the Davos World Economic Forum on January 20-24, 2020.

Note the chronology: The development of the 2019-nCoV vaccine was announced at the Davos World Economic Forum (WEF) a week prior to the official launching by the WHO of a Worldwide Public Health Emergency (January 30, 2020) at a time when the number of “confirmed cases” worldwide (outside China) was 83 (see Chapter II).

The pandemic was launched by the WHO on March 11, 2020. And five days later, barely covered by the media, the first tests involving human volunteers were conducted by Moderna in Seattle on March 16, 2020.

The evidence suggests that the vaccine project was initiated at a much earlier stage. According to Richard Hatchett, CEO of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), the project to develop a vaccine commenced not only prior to the discovery and identification of the coronavirus (January 7, 2020) but several months prior to the October 2019 simulation exercise (see interview with Richard Hatchett below).¹⁷

CEPI, on behalf of the Gates Foundation and the WEF, was seeking a “monopoly” role in the vaccination business the objective of which was a “global vaccine project”, in partnership with a large number of “candidates”.

The CEO Stéphane Bancel of Moderna Inc. described the features of the mRNA vaccine at a World Economic Forum press conference in Davos (January 2020). “We inject instructions … mRNA is a platform.” He confirmed that research was already well underway in collaboration with the NIS and CEPI. Click here to view the video.

Image: Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel (Licensed under GFDL, free to use)

On January 31, 2020, the day following the WHO’s official launching of the global public health emergency (PHEIC) and Trump’s decision to curtail air travel with China, CEPI announced its partnership with CureVac AG, a German-based biopharmaceutical company.

A few days later, in early February 2020, CEPI “announced that major vaccine manufacturer GSK would allow its proprietary adjuvants — compounds that boost the effectiveness of vaccines — to be used in the response” (the pandemic was officially launched on March 11, 2020).¹⁸

There were many “potential vaccines in the pipeline” with “dozens of research groups around the world racing to create a vaccine against COVID-19”.

 

The COVID-19 Global Vaccination Program 

CEPI (on behalf of Gates-WEF, which funded the 201 simulation exercise) played a key role in a large-scale worldwide vaccination program in partnership with biotech companies, Big Pharma, government agencies as well as university laboratories.  

Screenshot from CEPI’s Twitter

 

The foregoing statement by CEPI was made nearly two months prior to the official declaration of a pandemic on March 11, 2020. The number of confirmed cases outside China on January 30, 2020 was 83. 

“We’re having conversations with a broad array of potential partners”. And critical to those conversations is: What’s the plan to make very large quantities of vaccine within a time frame that is potentially relevant to what people seem to be increasingly certain will be a pandemic, if it isn’t already there? …” [Richard Hatchett, CEPI CEO in an interview with stat.news.com] (emphasis added)¹⁹ 

 

Prior Knowledge of the COVID Pandemic. The mRNA Vaccine Was Already in the Pipeline

Of significance, Hatchett confirmed that the project to develop a vaccine commenced not only prior to the discovery and identification of the coronavirus (January 7, 2020) but several months prior to the October 2019 201 simulation exercise.

“We did that in the last year or so [early 2019]…  We are using the information that we have collected and have that team now thinking about opportunities for scaling vaccines of various different types. That is a work in progress. For some of the technologies the tech transfer [to a manufacturer] may be something that could be done in a time frame that was pertinent to the epidemic, potentially.

I think it is going to be really important to engage those folks who have access to really substantial production capacity. And having the big producers at the table — because of their depth, because of their experience, because of their internal resources — would be very, very important.

The candidate vaccines will be very, very quick. Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of NIAID [who has been spreading panic on network TV], is out in public as saying he thinks the clinical trial for the Moderna vaccine may be as early as the spring [2020]. (emphasis added)²⁰

Did CEPI Director Richard Hatchett, Dr. Anthony Fauci who heads NIAID, and Moderna’s CEO Stéphane Bencel have “prior knowledge” of the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic? 

Hatchett’s statements suggest that they had already been working on an mRNA vaccine in early 2019. Moreover, on December 12, 2019, two weeks prior to the official confirmation of the existence of a so-called “novel coronavirus” by the Chinese health authorities, Moderna Inc. together with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) had already “sent mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates” to a lab investigator at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (see Joseph Mercola, July 10, 2021).²¹

The CEPI-sponsored vaccine conglomerates had already planned their investments well in advance of the global worldwide health emergency (declared by the WHO on January 30, 2020).

Moderna announced on February 24, 2020 the development of “an experimental (messenger) mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, known as mRNA-1273″. “The initial batch of the vaccine has already been shipped to US government researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)” headed by Dr. Antony Fauci.

In the words of Fauci:

“Finding a safe and effective vaccine to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2 is an urgent public health priority…This Phase 1 study, launched in record speed, is an important first step toward achieving that goal.”²²

Below are excerpts from the statement by Moderna which indicates “foreknowledge” as well as its collaboration with Anthony Fauci’s NIAID as early as January 13, 2020:²³

Moderna’s Work on a Potential Vaccine Against COVID-19

Moderna is proud to be among the many groups working to respond to this continuing global health emergency. This page summarizes key milestones in our work to advance our vaccine candidate (mRNA-1273) and responds to frequently asked questions.

Timeline of our response through March 16, 2020

On January 11, 2020, the Chinese authorities shared the genetic sequence of the novel coronavirus.

On January 13, 2020, the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Moderna’s infectious disease research team finalized the sequence for mRNA-1273, the Company’s vaccine against the novel coronavirus. At that time, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of NIH, disclosed their intent to run a Phase 1 study using the mRNA-1273 vaccine in response to the coronavirus threat and Moderna mobilized toward clinical manufacture.  Manufacture of this batch was funded by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).

On February 7, 2020, the first clinical batch, including fill and finishing of vials, was completed, a total of 25 days from sequence selection to vaccine manufacture. The batch then proceeded to analytical testing for release.

On February 24, 2020, the clinical batch was shipped from Moderna to the NIH for use in their Phase 1 clinical study.

On March 4, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) completed its review of the Investigational New Drug (IND) application filed by the NIH for mRNA-1273 and allowed the study to proceed to begin clinical trials.

On March 16, 2020, the NIH announced that the first participant in its Phase 1 study for mRNA-1273 was dosed, a total of 63 days from sequence selection to first human dosing.

While Moderna Inc. initially stated that the first clinical trials would commence in late April (2020), tests involving human volunteers started in mid-March 2020 in Seattle (bear in mind the pandemic was officially launched on March 11, 2020).²⁴ 

Screenshot from WHO

 

Hidden COVID-19 Vaccine Injuries: The Microscopic Blood Clots

Many people who are vaccinated will not be immediately aware of the injuries incurred. The latter in many cases of “adverse events” are not discernible nor are they recorded. While “big blood clots” resulting from the vaccine are revealed and reported by those vaccinated, an important study by Canada’s Dr. Charles Hoffe suggests that the mRNA vaccine generates “microscopic blood clots”.

“The blood clots we hear about which the media claim are very rare are the big blood clots which are the ones that cause strokes and show up on CT scans, MRI, etc.

The clots I’m talking about are microscopic and too small to find on any scan. They can thus only be detected using the D-dimer test.” 

“These people have no idea they are even having these microscopic blood clots. The most alarming part of this is that there are some parts of the body like the brain, spinal cord, heart and lungs which cannot re-generate. When those tissues are damaged by blood clots they are permanently damaged.

“These shots are causing huge damage and the worst is yet to come.”²⁹

Watch below his interview with Laura Lynn Tylor Thompson (also available on Rumble channel).

 

Do We Know What’s Inside the Pfizer Vaccine Vial?

The causes of vaccine-related deaths and injuries have not been addressed by the health authorities.

What is inside the vaccine vial? National health authorities have not made public the results of their lab exams. It is unclear as to whether those lab exams of the vaccine vials have been conducted.

Below is a review of the analysis and laboratory research conducted by the independent La Quinta Columna Spanish team.

Graphene Oxide Nano-particles

According to lab exams conducted by the Spanish La Quinta Columna research team, graphene oxide nano-particles have been detected in the vial of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.³⁰

The preliminary results of their research (analysis by electron microscopy and spectroscopy) are far-reaching. Graphene oxide is a toxin which triggers thrombi and blood coagulation. It also has an impact on the immune system. Graphene oxide accumulated in the lungs can have devastating impacts.

Watch the interview with Ricardo Delgado Martin of La Quinta Columna.

 

The results of the Spanish study, yet to be fully confirmed and ascertained, suggest that the recorded vaccine-related deaths and “adverse events” could be the result of graphene oxide nano-particles contained in the COVID vaccine vial.

Similarly, we call upon the national health authorities of the 193 member states of the UN which are currently vaccinating their people to conduct their own study and analysis of the vaccine vial. And if graphene oxide is detected, the vaccination program should immediately be discontinued.

See summary of their report entitled “Graphene Oxide Detection in Aqueous Suspension, Observational study in Optical and Electron Microscopy”. Read the full study (English).³¹

Also of significance (acknowledged by national health authorities), graphene oxide nano-particles are also contained in face masks.³²

 

The Electromagnetic Properties of the mRNA Vaccine

What is triggering the electromagnetic effects which have been detected in people who have been vaccinated?

These effects have been amply documented and confirmed by independent sources including those vaccinated. The national health authorities have failed to provide an explanation.

See the study conducted by the European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance.³³

Below are two videos produced by the Spanish Research team at La Quinta Columna.

Watch the video below.

 

Big Pharma. Pfizer’s Near Global Monopoly

Hundreds of billions of dollars are at stake. This is the largest and most dangerous and expensive vaccine project in world history which is slated to be financed by tax dollars worldwide, putting an obvious strain on the public debt of numerous countries.

The vaccine program is accompanied by a “timeline” consisting of recurrent mRNA inoculations over several years. As documented above, it will have devastating impacts on mortality and morbidity worldwide.

What is at stake is a multi-billion dollar Big Money operation for Big Pharma with Pfizer in the lead.

Pfizer-BioNTech (allied with Moderna Inc.) is in the process of consolidating its worldwide (near monopoly) position by pushing out its major competitors including AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

Pfizer has been pressuring politicians to endorse their mRNA vaccine. Its political lobbying is also directed against its Big Pharma competitors. According to The Bureau of Investigative Journalism report:

One official who was present in the unnamed country’s negotiations described Pfizer’s demands as “high-level bullying” and said the government felt like it was being “held to ransom” in order to access life-saving vaccines.³⁴

Ironically, in the EU, the reported deaths and injuries were used by the European Commission to cancel the renewal of the contract with AstraZeneca, despite the fact that there were substantially more deaths and injuries associated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

In April 2021, the EU Commission confirmed that it would “end AstraZeneca and J&J vaccine contracts at expiry”. “The Pfizer shot will take precedence”. Never mind your followup dose with AstraZeneca, the health authorities have instructed people to get their second or third jab with Pfizer or Moderna (thereby visibly violating medical norms).

Having sidelined its competitors, Pfizer-BioNTech has jacked up the price of the vaccine vial. Pfizer has literally cornered both the EU and US markets.

A near global vaccine monopoly is in the making by a company which has a criminal record with the US Department of Justice. 

The Secret Pfizer Report 

The confidential Pfizer Report released as part of a freedom of information (FOI) procedure provides data on deaths and adverse events recorded by Pfizer from the outset of the vaccine project in December 2020 to the end of February 2021, namely a very short period (at most two and a half months).

“By February of 2021, Pfizer had already received more than 1,200 reports of deaths allegedly caused by the vaccine and tens of thousands of reported adverse events, including 23 cases of spontaneous abortions out of 270 pregnancies and more than 2,000 reports of cardiac disorders.”³⁵

The Pfizer BioNTech vaccine was launched in the US on the 14th of December after the granting of Emergency Use Authorization on December 11, 2020.

In a twisted irony, the data revealed in this “insider report” refutes the official vaccine narrative peddled by the governments and the WHO. It also confirms the analysis of numerous medical doctors and scientists who have revealed the devastating consequences of the mRNA “vaccine”.

What is contained in Pfizer’s “confidential” report is detailed evidence on the impacts of the “vaccine” on mortality and morbidity. This data which emanates from the “horse’s mouth” can now be used to confront as well as formulate legal procedures against Big Pharma, the governments, the WHO and the media.

In a court of law, the evidence contained in this Big Pharma confidential report (coupled with the data on deaths and adverse events compiled by the national authorities in the EU, UK and US) is irrefutable: because it is their data and their estimates and not ours.

Bear in mind: its data is based on reported and recorded cases, which constitute a small percentage of the actual number of vaccine-related deaths and adverse events.

This is a de facto mea culpa on the part of Pfizer (Yes, it is a killer vaccine).

Pfizer was fully aware that the mRNA vaccine which it is marketing worldwide would result in a wave of mortality and morbidity. This is tantamount to a crime against humanity on the part of Big Pharma.

Pfizer knew from the outset that it was a killer vaccine.³⁷

It is also a mea culpa and treason on the part of corrupt national governments worldwide which are being threatened and bribed by Big Pharma.

At the time of writing, no attempt has been made by the governments to call for the withdrawal of the killer vaccine.

People are told that the vaccine is intended to save lives.

“Killing is good for business”: It is a multi-billion dollar operation worldwide. And Pfizer already has a criminal record (2009) with the US Department of Justice on charges of “fraudulent marketing”.

 

Concluding Remarks: The Vaccine Passport

The data from official sources as well as those quoted in the Pfizer report confirm unequivocally that the COVID-19 “vaccine” has resulted in an upward trend in vaccine-related mortality and morbidity.

The studies of Dr. Charles Hoffe, the Spanish research team (La Quinta Columna), the confidential Pfizer Report as well as numerous other studies unequivocally confirm that the mRNA “vaccine” is a “killer vaccine”.

So why are governments pressuring people to get vaccinated?

Heads of state and heads of government worldwide are being pressured, bribed, co-opted and/or threatened by powerful financial interests into accepting the COVID vaccine consensus.

The vaccine passport is the endgame, which constitutes a transition towards digital tyranny and depopulation (see Chapters XIII and XIV).

 

Endnotes

1 Doctors for COVID Ethics, June 22, 2022. J’Accuse! The Gene-based “Vaccines” Are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve. https://www.globalresearch.ca/jaccuse-governments-worldwide-lying-you-people-populations-they-purportedly-serve/5750650

2 The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010. Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS). https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf

3 Captaindaretofly, August 26, 2021. Several Anti-Covid-19 Vaccine Presidents Assassinated, Mainstream Media Silent, COVID-19 Jabs “Coincidentally” Rolled Out Just Days Later. https://www.globalresearch.ca/several-anti-covid-19-vaccine-presidents-assassinated-mainstream-media-silent-covid-19-jabs-coincidentally-rolled-out-just-days-later/5754040

4 FDA, January 3, 2022. Comirnaty and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/comirnaty-and-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine#additional

5 US Department of Justice, September 2, 2009. Justice Department Announces Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History: Pfizer to Pay $2.3 Billion for Fraudulent Marketing. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 KHN Morning Briefing, November 6, 2020. 4 Drug Companies Agree To $26 Billion Opioid Settlement. https://khn.org/morning-breakout/4-drug-companies-agree-to-26-billion-opioid-settlement/

9 F. William Engdahl, October 17, 2021. What’s Not Being Said About the Pfizer Coronavirus Vaccine. “Human Guinea Pigs”? https://www.globalresearch.ca/what-not-said-pfizer-coronavirus-vaccine/5729461

10 Ibid.

11 Ibid. 

12 See this: threadreaderapp.com/…/1302725167588798467

13 Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and Dr. Michael Yeadon, December 1, 2020. Petition/Motion For Administrative/Regulatory Action Regarding Confirmation Of Efficacy End Points And Use Of Data In Connection With The Following Clinical Trial(S). https://2020news.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Wodarg_Yeadon_EMA_Petition_Pfizer_Trial_FINAL_01DEC2020_EN_unsigned_with_Exhibits.pdf

14 GSK, August 1, 2019. GSK completes transaction with Pfizer to form new world-leading Consumer Healthcare Joint Venture. https://www.gsk.com/en-gb/media/press-releases/gsk-completes-transaction-with-pfizer-to-form-new-world-leading-consumer-healthcare-joint-venture/

15 Ibid.

16 Center for Health Security, n.d. The Event 201 scenario. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/scenario.html

17 Helen Branswell, February 6, 2020. In effort to develop coronavirus vaccine, outbreak expert sees ‘hardest problem’ of his career. https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/06/cepi-coronavirus-vaccine-development/

18 GSK, February 3, 2020. CEPI and GSK announce collaboration to strengthen the global effort to develop a vaccine for the 2019-nCoV virus. https://cepi.net/news_cepi/cepi-and-gsk-announce-collaboration-to-strengthen-the-global-effort-to-develop-a-vaccine-for-the-2019-ncov-virus/

19 Helen Branswell, February 6, 2020. In effort to develop coronavirus vaccine, outbreak expert sees ‘hardest problem’ of his career. https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/06/cepi-coronavirus-vaccine-development/

20 Ibid. 

21 Joseph Mercola, July 11, 2021. NIAID, Moderna Had COVID Vaccine Candidate in December 2019. https://www.globalresearch.ca/niaid-moderna-covid-vaccine-candidate-december-2019/5749713

22 National Institutes of Health, March 16, 2020. NIH clinical trial of investigational vaccine for COVID-19 begins. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-clinical-trial-investigational-vaccine-covid-19-begins

23 Moderna, Inc. 2020. Moderna’s Work on a Potential Vaccine Against COVID-19. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1682852/000119312520074867/d884510dex991.htm

24 Mark Prvulovic, February 24, 2020. Moderna’s New COVID-19 Vaccine Ready for Human Trials; Stock Up 15%. https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/02/24/modernas-new-covid-19-vaccine-ready-for-human-tria.aspx

25 Associated Press, March 16, 2020. Coronavirus vaccine test opens as volunteer in Seattle gets 1st shot. https://www.q13fox.com/news/coronavirus-vaccine-test-opens-as-volunteer-in-seattle-gets-1st-shot

26 Peter Koenig, March 12, 2020. The Coronavirus Vaccine: The Real Danger is “Agenda ID2020”. Vaccination as a Platform for “Digital Identity”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/coronavirus-causes-effects-real-danger-agenda-id2020/5706153

27 Ibid.

28 Makia Freeman, November 13, 2021. The mRNA COVID Vaccine Is Not a Vaccine. https://www.globalresearch.ca/mrna-covid-vaccine-not-vaccine/5734464

29 Brian Shilhavy, July 14, 2021. Canadian Doctor: 62% of His Patients Vaccinated for COVID Have Permanent Heart Damage. “Microscopic Blood Clots”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/canadian-doctor-62-patients-vaccinated-covid-have-permanent-heart-damage/5750198

30 Ricardo Delgado and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 17, 2021. Video: Graphene Oxide: A Toxic Substance in the Vial of the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine? https://www.globalresearch.ca/video-graphene-oxide-a-toxic-substance-in-the-vial-of-the-covid-19-mrna-vaccine/5750340

31 Prof. Dr. Pablo Campra Madrid, June 28, 2021. Graphene Oxide Detection in Aqueous Suspension, Observational study in Optical and Electron Microscopy. https://www.docdroid.net/Ov1M99x/official-interim-report-in-english-university-of-almeria-pdf

32 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 14, 2021. Face Masks Contain Graphene, A Poisonous Substance. https://www.globalresearch.ca/face-masks-contain-graphene-a-poisonous-substance/5749855

33 Mamer and Amar Goudjil, January 23, 2022. Study on Electromagnetism of Vaccinated Persons. https://www.globalresearch.ca/study-electromagnetism-vaccinated-persons-luxembourg/5749516

34 Madlen Davies, Rosa Furneaux, et al., February 23, 2021. ‘Held to ransom’: Pfizer demands governments gamble with state assets to secure vaccine deal. https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2021-02-23/held-to-ransom-pfizer-demands-governments-gamble-with-state-assets-to-secure-vaccine-deal

35 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, August 13, 2022. Bombshell Document Dump on Pfizer Vaccine Data. https://www.globalresearch.ca/bombshell-document-dump-pfizer-vaccine-data/5763397

36 Pfizer, 2021. Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports of PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) Received Through 28-Feb-2021. https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf

37 Ibid.

---

 

Chapter IX

A report by President Obama’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology “considered the H1N1 pandemic ‘a serious health threat’ to the U.S. — not as serious as the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic but worse than the swine flu outbreak of 1976.”

“It’s not that the new H1N1 pandemic strain is more deadly than previous flu threats, but that it is likely to infect more people than usual because so few people have immunity.” (Get swine flu vaccine ready: U.S. advisers)

Even within the agency, the director of the WHO Collaborating Center for Epidemiology in Munster, Germany, Dr. Ulrich Kiel, has essentially labeled the pandemic a hoax. “We are witnessing a gigantic misallocation of resources [$18 billion so far] in terms of public health,” he said.

They’re right. This wasn’t merely overcautiousness or simple misjudgment. The pandemic declaration and all the Klaxon-ringing since reflect sheer dishonesty motivated not by medical concerns but political ones.

Unquestionably, swine flu has proved to be vastly milder than ordinary seasonal flu. It kills at a third to a tenth the rate, according to US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates. Data from other countries like France and Japan indicate it’s far tamer than that.(

(Michael Fomento, Forbes, February 10, 2010)⁵

 

GSK in Canada 

GSK’s ArepanrixTD (broadly similar to PambremixTD with a different name) was applied in Canada (see here).⁷

Endnotes

1 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, August 25, 2009. Remember the “Fake” 2009 H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic: Manipulating the Data to Justify a Worldwide Public Health Emergency. https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-h1n1-swine-flu-pandemic-manipulating-the-data-to-justify-a-worldwide-public-health-emergency/14901

2 Katie Reid and Laura MacInnis, May 19, 2009. WHO sees 4.9 billion pandemic flu shots in best-case. https://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE54H1XO20090519

3 MSNBC News, July 24, 2009. Swine flu could sicken over 2 billion in 2 years. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna32122776

4 NDTV, April 28, 2009. Deadly flu could infect 40 per cent of UK population: Report. ndtv.com/…/deadly-flu-could-infect-40-per-cent-of-uk-population-report-392997

5 See this: https://www.forbes.com/2010/02/05/world-health-organization-swine-flu-pandemic-opinions-contributors-michael-fumento.html#4fd9f96548e8 (Article was unpublished)

---

 

Chapter X

Categorizing The Protest Movement as “Anti-Social Psychopaths”

 

Introduction

The  imposition of the MRNA vaccine has relied on coercive persuasion and brainwashing tactics, coupled with media propaganda and the fear campaign.  The objective of national governments is to ensure “Acceptance”. Dr. Margaret Singer quoted above, refers to “coercive influence, anxiety and stress-producing tactics over continuous periods of time“.

From the very outset of the pandemic, a diabolical process was undertaken which consisted in “identifying” and “categorizing” all those who are opposed to the governments’ management of the coronavirus pandemic including the lockdowns and the vaccine mandate.  

According to so-called “peer-reviewed psychological studies” (commissioned by corporate foundations on behalf of the Globalist elites) the opponents of the covid consensus have been categorized as “anti-social psychopaths”.  

The unvaccinated have been prevented from travelling, fired from their jobs, prevented from attending schools and universities. They are categorized and accused (according to “scientific opinion) of being extremists and psychopaths. 

What has unfolded is a social divide between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

These social divisions are creating conflicts within families and local communities, literally contributing to the disruption of social life, with devastating impacts on economic activity. 

Supported by media propaganda, the campaign is proceeding unabated. Those who refuse to get the killer “vaccine” are categorized as “anti-social psychopaths”.

What prevails is a “divide and rule” scenario which is being enforced simultaneously in numerous countries. 

This chapter reviews several psychological studies undertaken with a view to undermining the protest movement against the COVID-19 mandates and the vaccine.

 

“Scientific Studies”: Categorizing COVID Opponents as “Anti-social Psychopaths” 

What is the nature and thrust of these “scientific studies”? 

Protest against the “official truth”, criticize government mandates, express reservations regarding the lockdown, social distancing, the wearing of face mask, the vaccine, etc. and you will be tagged (according to “scientific opinion”) as a “callous and deceitful psychopath”. 

Accept the “official narrative” and vaccine mandate you are tagged as a “good person” with “empathy” who understands the feelings of others. 

A so-called peer-reviewed “empirical report” describes those who refuse to wear the face mask or abide by social distancing as having “anti-social personality disorders”. 

Those who “do not adhere to measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19” are tagged as “anti-social”.  

The findings of the Brazilian study involving a “sample” of 1,578 adults was published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences under the title COVID-19 pandemic over time: Do antisocial traits matter?¹

 

 

“Empathy” versus “Anti-social Traits” 

The statistical “methodology” of this study is straightforward. It is intended to serve as a model. It consists in categorizing a so-called sample of adults from all major regions of Brazil into two distinct groups. It examines:

“..the relationships between antisocial traits and compliance with COVID-19 containment measures. The sample consisted of 1578 Brazilian adults aged 18–73 years … and a questionnaire about compliance with containment measures.²

Latent profile analyses indicated a two-profile solution:

“the antisocial pattern profile which presented higher scores in Callousness, Deceitfulness, Hostility, Impulsivity, Irresponsibility, Manipulativeness, and Risk-taking, as well as lower scores in “Affective resonance” (processes of social interaction) and “the empathy pattern profile which presented higher scores in Affective resonance …” 

The antisocial and empathy groups showed significant differences. … Our findings indicated that antisocial traits, especially lower levels of empathy and higher levels of Callousness, Deceitfulness, and Risk-taking, are directly associated with lower compliance with containment measures. These traits explain, at least partially, the reason why people continue not adhering to the containment measures even with increasing numbers of cases and deaths. (emphasis added)³

The research methodology is built around three main questions⁴:

Yes/No Categorization

Answer Yes to these three questions: you are categorized as having “Empathy” (i.e. the ability to understand and share the feelings of others).

Answer No to all three questions: you are categorized (according to the study) as having “higher levels of Callousness, Deceitfulness, Hostility, Impulsivity, Irresponsibility, Manipulativeness, and Risk-taking” (as quoted above).

It all sounds very scientific. The unspoken objective of these psycho-studies is to provide governments with a mandate to intimidate as well as to enforce compliance, while smearing the alleged psychopaths who refuse to conform to the official narrative, which is an outright lie.  

 

“The Dark Triad” and “Collective Narcissism” 

According to Eric W. Dolan (PsyPost), the above study consisted in identifying “a measure of maladaptive personality traits…”.  Dolan also refers to a related study focusing on:

“the “Dark Triad” of narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism associated with ignoring preventative COVID-19 measures.”

The study conducted in Poland is entitled: 

“Adaptive and maladaptive behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: The roles of Dark Triad traits, collective narcissism, and health beliefs“⁵

The study refers to the practice of “collective narcissism”, namely a common belief and practice by a so-called “In-Group” (aka protest movement, collective of dissident medical doctors, scientists) directed against the official coronavirus “truth” (aka the Big Lie). Collective narcissism is embedded in what psychologists call the Dark Triad.

 

Screenshot from ScienceDirect

The study is based on “a nationally representative sample from Poland (N = 755)”. It examines “the relationships between the Dark Triad traits (i.e. psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism) and collective narcissism (i.e. agentic and communal) … Participants characterized by the Dark Triad traits engaged less in prevention …”⁶

“The results point to the utility of health beliefs in predicting behaviors during the pandemic, explaining (at least in part) problematic behaviors associated with the dark personalities (i.e., Dark Triad, collective narcissism). …

The traits, such as the Dark Triad (i.e., narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) and collective narcissism … may have implications for how one copes with the virus…  For example, individuals characterized by the Dark Triad traits may be less likely to follow governmentally-enforced restrictions related to COVID-19.⁷

The term “agentic” quoted above refers to “goal-achievement”.

And here is the methodology:

“We measured the Dark Triad traits (Wave 2) … [also with reference to] the Dark Triad Dirty Dozen scale (Jonason & Webster, 2010). The scale consists of four items assessing individual differences in psychopathy (e.g. “I tend to lack remorse”), narcissism (e.g. “I tend to seek prestige or status”), and Machiavellianism (e.g. “I tend to manipulate others to get my way”). Participants indicated their agreement with each item (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). We averaged responses to create indices of each trait.”⁸

Sounds scientific. What are the conclusions?

“We advanced the scope of the model by illustrating the relevance of dark personality traits in predicting both adaptive and maladaptive behaviors in response to the pandemic by person-focused (i.e. the Dark Triad traits) and group-focused (i.e. collective narcissism) personality traits.” 

To read the full report, click here, emphasis added)⁹

The psychological definition of Dark Triad Traits comprises the combined personality traits of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. “They are called “dark” because of their “malevolent qualities“.”Illustration by Global Research

The Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD) consists of a broader “personality inventory” which assesses and measures the three personality components of the Dark Triad.

Illustration by Global Research

In substance, what this “scientific report” confirms is that people, who question the COVID-19 official narrative including the vaccine mandate, have “malevolent personality disorders”. They are said to suffer from the Dirty Dozen “Dark Triad Traits” (DTDD). 

 

The Anti-COVID Protest Movement Is Identified as “Collective Narcissism”

When they act contiguously within an In-Group or a Protest movement, they are tagged as applying “collective narcissism”.

The framework of the above study is also envisaged for other countries in partnership with the Warsaw group. Another related study is entitled “Who complies with the restrictions to reduce the spread of COVID-19?: Personality and perceptions of the COVID-19 situation”¹⁰

Strong words. “Peer-reviewed”?

 

Towards an Inquisitorial Environment. Digital Witch Hunt

Psychology is being used in a pernicious way to provide legitimacy to police state measures. The mandate is to “go after” those who allegedly have “malevolent personality disorders”.

It’s an inquisitorial doctrine, which could eventually evolve towards a Digital Witch Hunt. In contrast to the Spanish Inquisition, the contemporary inquisitorial system has almost unlimited capabilities of spying on and categorizing individuals who are opposed to the COVID-19 consensus. 

People are tagged and labeled, their emails, cell phones are monitored, detailed personal data are slated to be entered into a giant Big Brother data bank of 7.9 billion people under WHO auspices. 

Anti-vaccine scientists and medical doctors are categorized. They are the object of censorship, and in some cases they are arrested and sent for treatment in a psychiatric ward. 

Once this digital cataloging has been completed, people are locked into watertight compartments. Their profiles are established and entered into a computerized data bank. 

Meanwhile, the citizenry is galvanized into supporting the tenets of “Global Governance”. 

Painting by Francisco Goya depicting an auto de fé, an act of public penance carried out between the 15th and 19th centuries of condemned heretics and apostates imposed by the Inquisition, based on 1800-1810 first-hand accounts. (By QAHsJoGPh6kFeQ at Google Cultural Institute, licensed under the Public Domain)

 

Are the Billionaires Mentally Deranged? 

These empirical psychology studies are meant to be used against citizens who oppose the COVID-19 policy mandates implemented by their governments. In turn these governments obey orders from higher up. 

We might beg the question: Are the billionaires, “philanthropists”, corrupt politicians, et al., who are the unspoken architects of both the COVID-19 vaccine and the lockdown policies mentally deranged? 

Their personality traits are not the motive of scientific investigation. They are psychopaths. Money and enrichment is the driving force.

 

Endnotes

1 Fabiano Koich Miguel, Gisele Magarotto Machado, et al., January 1, 2021. Compliance with containment measures to the COVID-19 pandemic over time: Do antisocial traits matter? https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886920305377

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid.

4 Ibid.

5 Bartłomiej Nowak, Paweł Brzóska, et al., December 1, 2020. Adaptive and maladaptive behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: The roles of Dark Triad traits, collective narcissism, and health beliefs. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886920304219

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 Ibid.

9 Ibid.

10 Marcin Zajenkowski, Peter K. Jonason, et al., November 1, 2020. Who complies with the restrictions to reduce the spread of COVID-19?: Personality and perceptions of the COVID-19 situation. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886920303883

---

 

Chapter XI

The Worldwide COVAX Operation 

and The Nuremberg Code.

Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide

 

“We, the survivors of the atrocities committed against humanity during the Second World  War, feel bound to follow our conscience. …

Another holocaust of greater magnitude is taking place before our eyes. We call upon you to stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately. It is a medical experiment to which the Nuremberg Code must be applied.” —Rabbi Hillel Handler, Hagar Schafrir, Sorin Shapira, Mascha Orel, Morry Krispijn et al, see complete text here

 

The mRNA “Vaccine” vs. Nuremberg 

The vaccine is being applied and imposed worldwide. The target population is 7.9 billion. Several doses are contemplated. It is the largest vaccination program in world history (see Chapter VIII).

“Never before has immunization of the entire planet been accomplished by delivering a synthetic mRNA into the human body”.¹

Image: “Very good meeting with @BillGates on the margins of #Rotary convention. Discussed on @WHO & @gatesfoundation collaborative initiatives focused on Primary health care. His commitment to helping the needy is beyond words.” (By Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus/Facebook)

The WHO “guidelines” for establishing a Worldwide Digital Informations System for issuing so-called “Digital Certificates for COVID-19” are generously funded by the Rockefeller and Bill and Melinda Gates foundations.” (see Chapter XIII)² 

Focusing on the experimental nature of the mRNA vaccine and its devastating health impacts, legal analysts have raised the issue of the historic Nuremberg “Nazi Doctors’ Trial” (1946-47) in which Nazi doctors were charged for war crimes, specifically in the conduct of medical experiments on both prisoners in the concentration camps and civilians.

The Medical Case, U.S.A. vs. Karl Brandt, et al. (also known as the Doctors’ Trial), was prosecuted in 1946-47 against 23 doctors and administrators accused of organizing and participating in war crimes and crimes against humanity in the form of medical experiments and medical procedures inflicted on prisoners and civilians.³

Karl Brandt, the lead defendant, was the senior medical official of the German government during World War II; other defendants included senior doctors and administrators in the armed forces and SS (see Harvard Documents).⁴

 

Letter to Heinrich Himmler concerning x-ray and surgical sterilization (Taken from Nuremberg Trials Project of Harvard Law)

 

Resulting from the verdict on August 19, 1947, the Nuremberg Code was enacted. Reviewed below are the Ten Principles of the Nuremberg Code.⁵ Several of these principles – in relation to the mRNA vaccine and the vaccine passport – have been blatantly violated.

The first principle of the “Nuremberg Code” states that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential,” and that is precisely what is being denied in relation to the “vaccine” (see sentences in bold below).⁶

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.

8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probably cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

(emphasis added)

 

Nuremberg and the COVID Crisis

Starting in December 2020, entire populations in a large number of countries are under threat to comply and get vaccinated.

With reference to the Nuremberg Code, they are unable:

“to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion” (Nuremberg principle 1 above).

Amply documented, there is an upward trend in mRNA vaccine deaths and injuries worldwide and the health authorities are fully aware of the “health risks”, yet they have not informed the public. There is no informed consent. And the media is lying through their teeth:

“No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur” (Nuremberg principle 5 above). 

The above “a priori reason” outlined in Nuremberg principle 5 is amply documented. Deaths and disabling injuries are ongoing at the level of the entire planet. They are confirmed by the official statistics of mRNA vaccine mortality and morbidity (EU, US, UK).

 

Nazi “Medical Experiments”

Let us recall the categorization of specific crimes pertaining to Nazi “medical experiments” conducted on concentration camp prisoners. These included “the killing of Jews for anatomical research, the killing of tubercular Poles, and the euthanasia of sick and disabled civilians in Germany and occupied territories. …”⁷

Karl Brandt and six other defendants were convicted, sentenced to death, and executed; nine defendants were convicted and sentenced to terms in prison; and seven defendants were acquitted.

The trial documents and evidence are all on file. The defendants were charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. 

 

The defendants in the dock during the Nuremberg Trials (By Raymond D’Addario, licensed under the Public Domain)

 

The Scale and Size of the Worldwide COVID-19 Vaxx Operation

While the Nuremberg principles are of utmost relevance to the COVID-19 vaccine project, simplistic comparisons should be avoided. The context, the history and the mechanisms of compliance pertaining to the mRNA “vaccine” are fundamentally different.

The scale and size of the worldwide COVAX operation as well as its complex organizational structure (WHO, GAVI, Gates Foundation, Big Pharma) are unprecedented.

Humanity in its entirety is the object of the vaxx project. The target population for experimentation of the COVID-19 vaccine is the entire population of planet Earth:

Almost 8 billion people, involving several doses.

Multiply the world’s population by four doses (as proposed by Pfizer): the order of magnitude is 30 billion doses worldwide.

The numbers are in the billions. The likely impacts on mortality and morbidity are beyond description.

Big Money is behind this public-private partnership project.

We are dealing with a worldwide process of crimes against humanity. Entire populations in a large number of member states of the UN are subject to compliance and enforcement (without the rule of law).

If they refuse the vaccine, they are socially marginalized and confined, rejected by their employers, rejected by society; no education, no career, no life. Their lives are destroyed.

If they accept the vaccine, their health and their life are potentially in jeopardy.

The evidence of mortality and morbidity resulting from vaccine inoculation both present (official data) and future (e.g. undetected microscopic blood clots) is overwhelming (see Chapter VIII).

And that’s just the beginning.

Extensive crimes against humanity worldwide are being committed.

The mRNA “vaccine” modifies the human genome at the level of the entire planet. It’s genocide.

It’s a “holocaust of greater magnitude, taking place before our eyes”. 

 

Endnotes

1 Rabbi Hillel Handler, Hagar Schafrir, et al., September 16, 2021. Stop the Covid Holocaust! Open Letter. https://www.globalresearch.ca/stop-the-covid-holocaust-open-letter/5755902

2 WHO, August 27, 2021. Digital documentation of COVID-19 certificates: vaccination status: web annex A: DDCC:VS core data dictionary, 27 August 2021. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-2019-nCoV-Digital_certificates-vaccination-data_dictionary-2021.1

3 Harvard Law School, n.d. NMT Case 1: U.S.A. v. Karl Brandt et al.: The Doctors’ Trial. https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/nmt_1_intro

4 Ibid.

5 US Holocaust Memorial Museum, n.d. Nuremberg Code. https://www.ushmm.org/information/exhibitions/online-exhibitions/special-focus/doctors-trial/nuremberg-code

6 Ibid.

7 Harvard Law School, n.d. NMT Case 1: U.S.A. v. Karl Brandt et al.: The Doctors’ Trial. https://nuremberg.law.harvard.edu/nmt_1_intro

---

 

Chapter XII

Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”.

Global Debt and Neoliberal “Shock Treatment”

 

“The IMF, World Bank and global leaders knew full well what the impact on the world’s poor would be of closing down the world economy through COVID-related lockdowns.

Yet they sanctioned it and there is now the prospect that in excess of a quarter of a billion more people worldwide will fall into extreme levels of poverty in 2022 alone.” —Colin Todhunter, July 2022

History of Economic “Shock Treatment”. From the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) to “Global Adjustment (GA)”

Big Money including the billionaire foundations are the driving force. It’s a complex alliance of Wall Street and the banking establishment, the Big Oil and Energy Conglomerates, the so-called “Defense Contractors”, Big Pharma, the Biotech Conglomerates, the Corporate Media, the Telecom, Communications and Digital Technology Giants, together with a network of think tanks, lobby groups, research labs, etc. The ownership of intellectual property also plays a central role.

This powerful digital-financial decision-making network also involves major creditor and banking institutions: the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank (ECB), the IMF, the World Bank, the regional development banks, and the Basel-based Bank for International Settlements (BIS), which plays a key strategic role.

By far the most powerful financial entities are the giant investment portfolio conglomerates including Black Rock, Vanguard, State Street and Fidelity. They control: 

“… a combined 20 trillion dollars in managed assets…. Conservatively counting, a four to five-fold leverage power (i.e. some US$ 80 to 100 trillion)”. These powerful financial conglomerates have a leverage in excess of the the world’s GDP which is of the order of about 82 trillion dollars.”⁷

In turn, the upper echelons of the US state apparatus (and Washington’s Western allies) are directly or indirectly involved, including the Pentagon, US Intelligence (and its research labs), the health authorities, Homeland Security and the US State Department (including US embassies in over 150 countries).

 

The “Real Economy” and “Big Money”

Why are these COVID lockdown policies spearheading bankruptcy, poverty and unemployment?

Global capitalism is not monolithic. There is indeed “a class conflict” “between the super rich and the vast majority of the world population”.

But there is also intense rivalry within the capitalist system; namely a conflict between “Big Money Capital” and what might be described as “Real Capitalism” which consists of corporations in different areas of productive activity at the national and regional levels. It also includes small and medium-sized enterprises.

What is ongoing is a process of concentration of wealth (and control of advanced technologies) unprecedented in world history, whereby the financial establishment (i.e. the multi-billion dollar creditors) are slated to appropriate the real assets of both bankrupt companies as well as state assets.

The “real economy” constitutes “the economic landscape” of  real economic activity: productive assets, agriculture, industry, services, economic and social infrastructure, investment, employment, etc. The real economy at the global and national levels is being targeted by the lockdown and closure of economic activity. The Global Money financial institutions are the “creditors” of the real economy.

 

Global Governance: Towards a Totalitarian State

The individuals and organizations involved in the October 18, 2019 201 Simulation are now involved in the actual management of the crisis once it went live on January 30, 2020 under the WHO’s Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), which in turn set the stage for the February 2020 financial crisis and the March lockdown (see Chapter I).

The lockdown and closure of national economies has triggered several waves of mass unemployment coupled with the engineered bankruptcy (applied worldwide) of small and medium-sized enterprises (see Chapter IV).

All of which is spearheaded by the installation of a global totalitarian state which is intent upon breaking all forms of protest and resistance.

The COVID vaccination program (including the embedded digital passport and the QR Code) is an integral part of a global totalitarian regime (see Chapter VIII and Chapter XIII).

What is the infamous ID2020? It is an alliance of public-private partners, including UN agencies and civil society. It’s an electronic ID program that uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity. The program harnesses existing birth registration and vaccination operations to provide newborns with a portable and persistent biometrically-linked digital identity.red zones, face masks, social distancing, lockdown. (Peter Koenig, March 12, 2020)⁸

Watch the interview below, Towards Digital Tyranny, with Peter Koenig. Click here for the Bitchute version.

June 2020. The WEF Officially Announces the Great Reset

“The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.” -Klaus Schwab, WEF (June 2020) 

What is envisaged under “the Great Reset” is a scenario whereby the global creditors will have appropriated by 2030 the world’s wealth while impoverishing large sectors of the world population.

In 2030, “you’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy.” (Click here to watch the video)

 

The United Nations: An Instrument of Global Governance on Behalf of an Unelected Public-Private Partnership

The UN system is also complicit. It has endorsed “Global Governance” and the Great Reset. And so has the Vatican. 

Image: Antonio Guterres (By U.S. Mission Photo by Eric Bridiers/Flickr, licensed under the Public Domain)

While UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres rightfully acknowledges that the pandemic is “more than a health crisis”, no meaningful analysis or debate under UN auspices as to the real causes of this crisis has been undertaken.

According to a September 2020 UN Report:

“Hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost. The lives of billions of people have been disrupted. In addition to the health impacts, COVID-19 has exposed and exacerbated deep inequalities … It has affected us as individuals, as families, communities and societies. It has had an impact on every generation, including on those not yet born. The crisis has highlighted fragilities within and among nations, as well as in our systems for mounting a coordinated global response to shared threats. (UN Report)¹⁰

The far-reaching decisions which triggered social and economic destruction worldwide are not mentioned. No debate in the UN Security Council. Consensus among all five permanent members of the UNSC.

V the Virus is casually held responsible for the process of economic destruction. 

The World Economic Forum’s “public-private partnership” project entitled “Reimagine and Reset Our World” has been endorsed by the United Nations. 

Image: George Kennan (By Harris & Ewing/Library of Congress, licensed under the Public Domain)

Flashback to George Kennan and the Truman Doctrine in the late 1940s. Kennan believed that the UN provided a useful way to “connect power with morality,” using morality as a means to rubber-stamp America’s “humanitarian wars”.

The COVID crisis, the lockdown measures and the mRNA vaccine are the culmination of a historical process.

The lockdown and closure of the global economy are “weapons of mass destruction” which in the real sense of the word “destroy people’s lives”. Amply documented, the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is best described as a “killer vaccine”. 

What we are dealing with are extensive “crimes against humanity”.

 

President Joe Biden and the “Great Reset”

Joe Biden is a groomed politician, a trusted proxy, serving the interests of the financial establishment.

Let’s not forget that Joe Biden was a firm supporter of the invasion of Iraq on the grounds that Saddam Hussein “had weapons of mass destruction”. “The American people were deceived into this war”, said Senator Dick Durbin. Do not let yourself be deceived again by Joe Biden.¹¹

Evolving acronyms: 9/11, GWOT, WMD and now COVID. Biden was rewarded for having supported the invasion of Iraq.

During the election campaign, Fox News described Biden as a “socialist” who threatens capitalism; “Joe Biden’s disturbing connection to the socialist ‘Great Reset’ movement”.

While this is absolute nonsense, many “progressives” and anti-war activists have endorsed Joe Biden without analyzing the broader consequences of the Biden presidency.

“The Great Reset” is socially divisive, it’s racist. It is a diabolical project of global capitalism. It constitutes a threat to the large majority of American workers as well as to small and medium-sized enterprises. It also undermines several important sectors of the capitalist economy. 

 

The Biden Presidency and the Lockdown

With regard to COVID, Biden is firmly committed to maintaining the partial closing down of both the US economy and the global economy as a means to “combating the killer virus”.  

President Biden is a firm supporter of the corona lockdown. He not only endorses the adoption of staunch COVID-19 lockdown policies, his administration is committed to the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the “vaccine passport” as an integral part of US foreign policy, to be implemented or more correctly “imposed” worldwide.

In turn, the Biden-Harris administration will attempt to override all forms of popular resistance to the coronavirus lockdown.

What is unfolding is a new and destructive phase of US imperialism. It’s a totalitarian project of economic and social engineering, which ultimately destroys people’s lives worldwide. This “novel” neoliberal agenda using the corona lockdown as an instrument of social oppression has been endorsed by President Biden and the leadership of the Democratic Party. 

The Biden White House is committed to the instatement of what David Rockefeller called “Global Governance”. 

 

The Protest Movement

It should be noted that the protest movement in the US against the lockdown is weak. In fact there is no coherent grassroots national protest movement. Why? Because “progressive forces” including leftist intellectuals, NGO leaders, trade union and labor leaders — most of whom are aligned with the Democratic Party — have from the outset been supportive of the lockdown. And they are also supportive of Joe Biden.  

In a bitter irony, anti-war activists as well as the critics of neoliberalism have endorsed Joe Biden.

Unless there is significant protest and organized resistance, nationally and internationally, the Great Reset will be embedded in both domestic and US foreign policy agendas of the Joe Biden-Kamala Harris administration.

It’s what you call imperialism with a “human face”.

Where Is the Protest Movement Against This Unelected Corona “Public-Private Partnership”?

The same philanthropic foundations (Rockefeller, Ford, Soros, et al.) which are the unspoken architects of the “Great Reset” and “Global Governance” are also involved in (generously) financing climate change activism, the Extinction Rebellion, the World Social Forum, Black Lives Matter, LGBT, et al. 

What this means is that the grassroots of these social movements are often misled and betrayed by their leaders who are routinely co-opted and generously rewarded by a handful of corporate foundations.

The World Social Forum (WSF), which is commemorating its 21st anniversary, brings together committed anti-globalization  activists from all over the world. But who controls the WSF? From the outset in January 2001, it was (initially) funded by the Ford Foundation. 

It’s what you call “manufactured dissent” (far more insidious than Herman-Chomsky’s “manufactured consent”).

The objective of the financial elites “has been to fragment the people’s movement into a vast “do it yourself” mosaic. Activism tends to be piecemeal. There is no integrated anti-globalization anti-war movement.” (Michel Chossudovsky, Manufacturing Dissent, Global Research, 2010)¹²

Image: Joe Biden with Henry Kissinger (By Kai Mörk – www.securityconference.de, licensed under CC BY 3.0 de)

In the words of McGeorge Bundy, President of the Ford Foundation (1966-1979):

“Everything the [Ford] Foundation did could be regarded as “making the world safe for capitalism”, reducing social tensions by helping to comfort the afflicted, provide safety valves for the angry, and improve the functioning of government.¹³

The protest movement against the Great Reset which constitutes a “global coup d’état” requires a process of worldwide mobilization:

“There can be no meaningful mass movement when dissent is generously funded by those same corporate interests [WEF, Gates, Ford, et al.] which are the target of the protest movement”.¹⁴

 

 

Endnotes

1 Michel Chossudovsky, April-June 1975. Hacia El Nuevo Modelo Económico Chileno Inflación Y Redistribución Del Ingreso. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20856482?refreqid=excelsior%3A9228243fa26a81bb3c2b0c2d58094922&seq=1

2 Ibid.

3 Michel Chossudovsky, April 16, 1977. Legitimised Violence and Economic Policy in Argentina. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4365500?seq=1 

4 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 3, 2020. Understand the Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order. https://www.globalresearch.ca/understand-the-globalization-of-poverty-and-the-new-world-order/25371

5 Ibid. 

6 National Security Council, December 10, 1974. Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (THE KISSINGER REPORT). https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PCAAB500.pdf

7 Peter Koenig, January 22, 2022. The COVID-Omicron Crisis: The Roadmap Towards a Worldwide Financial Crash, Inflation, Digitization. https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-omicron-is-killing-christmas-and-beyond-financial-crash-inflation-digitization/5765170

8 Peter Keonig, March 12, 2020. The Coronavirus Vaccine: The Real Danger is “Agenda ID2020”. Vaccination as a Platform for “Digital Identity”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/coronavirus-causes-effects-real-danger-agenda-id2020/5706153

9 Colin Todhunter, November 9, 2020. Dystopian “Great Reset”: “Own Nothing and Be Happy”, Being Human in 2030. https://www.globalresearch.ca/own-nothing-happy-being-human-2030/5728960

10 UN, September 2020. United Nations Comprehensive Response to COVID-19. https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/un-comprehensive-response-to-covid-19.pdf

11 Mark Weisbrot, February 17, 2020. WORTH THE PRICE? Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War (narrated by Danny Glover). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhcuei8_UJM

12 Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 20, 2010. “Manufacturing Dissent”: The Anti-globalization Movement is Funded by the Corporate Elites. https://www.globalresearch.ca/manufacturing-dissent-the-anti-globalization-movement-is-funded-by-the-corporate-elites/21110

13 Ibid. 

14 Ibid.

---

 

Chapter XIII 

“Digital Tyranny” and the QR Code

 

“It’s the worldwide invasion of the QR code – QR coding of everything: all of your most intimate data, health, personal behaviors, habits – track records of where we have been and even where we may be planning to go. Nothing will escape the QR code. Nobody talks about it.” —Peter Koenig, former World Bank analyst, Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization

 

Towards a Digitized Global Police State 

The worldwide QR Verification Code project lays the groundwork for the instatement of a “Digitized Global Police State” controlled by the financial establishment. It’s part of what the late David Rockefeller entitled “The March Towards World Government” based on an alliance of bankers and intellectuals (see Chapter XII).  Peter Koenig describes the QR code as:

“an all-electronic ID – linking everything to everything of each individual (records of health, banking, personal and private, etc.).”

 

Towards a Worldwide Digital Currency System (CBDC)  

Consultations are also ongoing between the World Economic Forum (WEF) and central banks with a view to implementing a so-called Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) network. According to David Skripac,

“A worldwide digital ID system is in the making. … The aim of the WEF—and of all the central banks [is] to implement a global system in which everyone’s personal data will be incorporated into the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) network.”¹ 

 

The QR Verification Code Software

In early 2022, the WHO signed a major contract with Deutsche Telekom T Systems to develop a QR Verification App and software which is to be applied worldwide.

The QR code-based software solution is slated to be used:

“for other vaccinations as well, such as polio or yellow fever, T-Systems said in a statement … adding that the WHO would support its 194 member states in building national and regional verification technology.” (emphasis added)

According to a Deutsche Telekom I-T Systems Communique, “The WHO’s gateway service also serves as a bridge between regional systems“, which essentially implies a coordinated global structure of QR surveillance, which oversees the entire population of Planet Earth.²

And once established, it will police “every aspect of our lives”, wherever our location. “It can also be used as part of future vaccination campaigns and home-based records.“

According to the CEO of Deutsche Telecom T Systems:

“Corona has a grip on the world. Digitization keeps the world running”.³

Bill Gates has a long-standing relationship with Deutsche Telekom’s  former CEO Ron Sommer going back to the late 1990s.⁴

 

Tracing and Tracking

T-Systems had previously set up the European Federation Gateway Service (EFGS). The service ensures that member states’ corona tracing apps work across borders.

The Telekom app is categorized as “one of the most successful tracing apps in the world”.

Who has the grip on the world? A giant data bank pertaining to almost 8 billion people is controlled by “Big Money”.⁵

People are tagged and labeled, their emails, cell phones are monitored, detailed personal data are entered into a giant Big Brother data bank.

“Digital tyranny” requires repelling all forms of political and social resistance. 

Individual human beings are categorized as “numbers”. Once these “numbers” are inserted into a global digital data bank, humanity in its entirety is under the control of the globalists, namely the Financial Establishment.

The history, culture and identity of nation-states is foreclosed. People become numbers inserted into a global data bank. In turn the formulation of societal projects (projet de société) at national, local and community levels is erased.

Social democracy, socialism, libertarianism: under global governance, all forms of representative democracy and class struggle are precipitated into the dustbin of history.

Progressives should understand who is behind this hegemonic project, it’s part of a neoliberal agenda, it’s an endgame which destroys the identity of human beings; it destroys humanity.

It is important to organize a broad movement of resistance leading to the outright dismantling of this diabolical agenda, which is embedded in the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty, sponsored by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Gates Foundation.

The modalities of the globalists’ project are embedded in the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty, an initiative of the WEF and the Gates Foundation.

 

The Infamous WHO “Treaty on Pandemics”  

Image: Damaged but still decodable QR code (Licensed under CC0)

In March 2022, the WHO launched an Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) with a mandate to create “A Pandemic Treaty”, i.e. a global health governance entity which would override the authority of WHO member states.

“The Global Pandemic Treaty on pandemic preparedness would grant the WHO absolute power over global biosecurity, such as the power to implement digital identities / vaccine passports, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions, lockdowns, standardized medical care and more.

This Pandemic Treaty, if implemented, will change the global landscape and strip you and me of some of our most basic rights and freedoms.

Make no mistake, the WHO Pandemic Treaty is a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.” (Peter Koenig, June 2022)⁶

The Treaty on Pandemics is tied into the WHO’s QR Verification Code project and the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

The  legitimacy of both the Treaty on Pandemics and the QR Verification Code under WHO auspices rests on the presumption that the alleged “COVID-19 pandemic is real” and that the mRNA vaccine constitutes a SOLUTION to curbing the spread of the virus. 

What is the legitimacy as well as the science behind this diabolical project? NONE. Amply confirmed: THERE IS NO PANDEMIC. The alleged COVID-19 pandemic is based on “fake science” (see Chapter III).

Both the EU Digital COVID Certificate Framework as well as the WHO QR Verification Code are predicated on outright lies and fabrications.

The Treaty on Pandemics is the “back door” towards “Global Governance” and digital tyranny. It consists in constructing a worldwide nexus of proxy regimes controlled by a “supranational sovereignty” (World Government) composed of leading financial institutions, billionaires and their philanthropic foundations (see Chapter XII).

Image by the Council of the European Union

 

The WHO’s Plan Is for 10 Years of Pandemics (2020-2030)

A series of future pandemics have been contemplated by the WHO with the support of the Gates Foundation.  According to the President of the European Council Charles Michel and the Director-General of the WHO Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus: 

 “There will be other pandemics and other major health emergencies.

The question is not if, but when. …  we must be better prepared to predict, prevent, detect, assess and effectively respond to pandemics in a highly coordinated fashion.

To that end, we believe that nations should work together towards a new international treaty for pandemic preparedness and response.” 

-Joint call for an international pandemic treaty⁷

 

Bill Gates’s “Pandemic Number Two”: The Monkeypox?

“We’ll have another pandemic. It will be a different pathogen next time,” (CNBC, February 18, 2022)

“We’ll have to prepare for the next one…

“To be ready for Pandemic Two, … I call this Pandemic One”  (Bill Gates, see Video: The WHO Plans for 10 Years of Pandemics)⁸

President Joe Biden says America “needs to start getting funding to prepare for the next pandemic“. 

Big Money is behind Biden’s proposal, supportive of Bill Gates: 

“The White House has proposed allocating $82 billion toward planning for pandemic response”. (Business Insider, June 23, 2022)⁹

 

The  Monkeypox PHEIC

On July 23, 2022, a Monkeypox Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) was declared unilaterally by the Director-General of the WHO Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus against a majority vote of the International Health Regulations (IHR) Emergency Committee (9 against, 6 in favor).¹⁰

“We have an outbreak that has spread around the world rapidly through new modes of transmission…I [Tedros] have decided that the global monkeypox outbreak represents a Public Health Emergency of International Concern.”  …¹¹

 “Although I [Tedros] am declaring a public health emergency of international concern, for the moment this is an outbreak that is concentrated among men who have sex with men, especially those with multiple sexual partners.  …

It’s therefore essential that all countries work closely with communities of men who have sex with men, to design and deliver effective information and services, and to adopt measures that protect the health, human rights and dignity of affected communities.

(emphasis added)

“I  Have Decided… “

Tedros’ decision to declare a PHEIC in defiance of the Emergency Committee is illegal. The above announcement borders on ridicule. Where is the science? What are the implications? A review of WHO statements reveals “scientific biases” and outright manipulations. 

And guess what: it’s the real-time PCR test, which the CDC declared invalid for detecting SARS-CoV-2 (effective December 31 2021), which is now being used to “detect the monkeypox pathogen”.¹²

Screenshot from CDC

There is no evidence that monkeypox is a sexually-transmitted disease. (See Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, August 1, 2022)¹³

Does Tedros’s statement constitute an encroachment of the fundamental rights of the LGBT Community which is currently the object of the emergency measures? In the words of the IHR Emergency Committee report cited above: “interventions [are] targeted to this segment of the population [LGBT].”

The WHO is funded by the Gates Foundation. And Bill Gates is centrefold. He has been pushing for the monkeypox scenario since 2017. 

Moreover, in March 2021, a tabletop simulation (similar to the October 2019 Event 201 Simulation) generously funded by multi-billionaire foundations, portrays a “fictional exercise scenario of a deadly, global pandemic involving an unusual strain of monkeypox virus”. The simulation was presented at the Munich Security Conference.

 

Simulation versus “Real Life” Monkeypox Outbreak

May 15, 2022 marks the commencement of the monkeypox epidemic in the “Simulated Scenario” (see figure below), leading up to January 2023 (83 countries affected) with 70 million confirmed cases and 1.3 million deaths (see graph below).¹⁴

Coincidence? Visibly, May 15, 2022 as well as the 150 cases in the simulation bear a canny resemblance to the “REAL” press reports and WHO advisory:         

Screenshot from the Simulated Scenario, Munich Security Conference, page 10 of NTI Report

 

The Transition from PHEIC 2.0 to “Pandemic Number Two”? 

Dr. Tedros’s July 2022 monkeypox PHEIC was modelled on the WHO’s COVID-19 January 30, 2020 PHEIC (see Chapter II).

What’s next? The PHEIC sets the stage. It’s a preamble towards subsequent pandemics.  

Will the historic July 23, 2022 Monkeypox PHEIC 2.0 lead the way towards “Pandemic Number Two”, i.e. a worldwide monkeypox pandemic, officially enacted by the WHO at some future date?

A monkeypox vaccine was developed (prior to the outbreak in May 2022). It was announced on May 18, 2022.¹⁶

 

Endnotes

1 David Skripac, March 26, 2022. Oh, Canada! Our Home and Native . . . Dictatorship! The WEF is “Trampling Our Freedoms”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/canada-our-home-native-dictatorship/5772052

2 Albert Hold, February 23, 2022. Checking Covid 19 certificates: World Health Organization selects T-Systems as industry partner. https://www.telekom.com/en/media/media-information/archive/covid-19-who-commissions-t-systems-648634

3 Ibid.

4 Dow Jones Newswires, September 4, 1998. Deutsche Telekom Won’t Comment On Reports of Talks With Microsoft. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB904923633645893500

5 Worldometer, n.d. Current World Population. https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

6 Peter Koenig & Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, June 2, 2022. Video: Digital Tyranny and the QR Code. The WHO Pandemic Treaty is the Back Door to “Global Governance”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/digital-tyranny-and-the-qr-code-the-who-pandemic-treaty-is-a-back-door-to-global-governance/5782245

7 Council of the European Union, n.d. An international treaty on pandemic prevention and preparedness. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/coronavirus/pandemic-treaty/

8 Stopworldcontrol, May 4, 2022. THE PLAN – WHO plans for 10 years of pandemics, from 2020 to 2030. https://rumble.com/v13kefy-must-see-the-plan-who-plans-for-10-years-of-pandemics-from-2020-to-2030.html

9 Matthew Loh, June 23, 2022. Biden says another pandemic will come and the US needs to start preparing for it. https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-second-pandemic-funding-us-preparing-2022-6

10 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, May 25, 2022. Worldwide Monkeypox Health Emergency (PHEIC): For Bill Gates, It’s “Moneypox”: Simulation of Fictitious Monkeypox Virus Pandemic in March 2021, Goes Live in May 2022. https://www.globalresearch.ca/bill-gates-warns-smallpox-terror-attacks-urges-leaders-use-germ-games-prepare/5781195

11 WHO, July 23, 2022. WHO Director-General’s statement at the press conference following IHR Emergency Committee regarding the multi-country outbreak of monkeypox – 23 July 2022. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-statement-on-the-press-conference-following-IHR-emergency-committee-regarding-the-multi–country-outbreak-of-monkeypox–23-july-2022

12 CDC, June 6, 2022. Test Procedure: Monkeypox virus Generic Real-Time PCR Test. https://www.cdc.gov/poxvirus/monkeypox/pdf/pcr-diagnostic-protocol-508.pdf

13 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, August 1, 2022. “Factual Chaos” at the WHO? Dr. Tedros: Monkeypox Outbreak Is “Among Men Who Have Sex with Men”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/factual-chaos-at-the-who-dr-tedros-monkeypox-outbreak-is-among-men-who-have-sex-with-men/5788349

14 NTI, November 23, 2021. Strengthening Global Systems to Prevent and Respond to High-Consequence Biological Threats. https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/strengthening-global-systems-to-prevent-and-respond-to-high-consequence-biological-threats/

15 WHO, May 21, 2022. Multi-country monkeypox outbreak in non-endemic countries. https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2022-DON385

16 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, May 25, 2022. Worldwide Monkeypox Health Emergency (PHEIC): For Bill Gates, It’s “Moneypox”: Simulation of Fictitious Monkeypox Virus Pandemic in March 2021, Goes Live in May 2022. https://www.globalresearch.ca/bill-gates-warns-smallpox-terror-attacks-urges-leaders-use-germ-games-prepare/5781195

---

Chapter XIV

The COVID-19 Endgame: Eugenics

and the Depopulation Agenda

 

“We’re now facing a situation where a huge number of very powerful organizations and elites at international and national levels are calling for policies that are basically a suicide pact. Basically a death wish of some sort.” —Patrick Moore, former president of Greenpeace

Do these “Do Goodie” billionaires have any idea of the carnage and suffering their mass-vaccination campaign is likely to generate? Or is that the goal, a world with fewer people? —Michael Whitney, renowned author and geopolitical analyst. 

Introduction

The two strategic pillars of the COVID agenda examined in the previous chapters are:

• The lockdown: an act of economic and social warfare which has triggered a worldwide process of impoverishment, social marginalization and despair,
• The mRNA COVID “vaccine” which has resulted in a worldwide upward trend in mortality and morbidity.

Unprecedented in world history, these two strategic pillars are instrumental in triggering a process of depopulation which indelibly points to extensive crimes against humanity.

The enforcement of the depopulation agenda requires a socially repressive structure of “global governance” controlled by the financial establishment.

It also requires a cohesive propaganda apparatus with a view to enforcing social acceptance worldwide. In turn, this process requires the demise of the institutions of representative government coupled with the criminalization of the judicial system.

 

Depopulation and the History of Eugenics

The Global Governance scenario attempts to impose an agenda of social engineering and economic compliance.

The World Government envisaged by the globalists is predicated on obedience and acceptance. One of its major objectives is to carry out a worldwide depopulation agenda. 

The contemporary eugenics movement sponsored by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the billionaire philanthropists hinges upon two strategic pillars: the COVID lockdown and the mRNA vaccine, which are instruments of global population reduction.

US-NATO-led war are also instruments of depopulation. 

What we are living now is unprecedented. Today’s depopulation agenda is by no means comparable to the eugenist movement which unfolded in the US as of the early 20th century. Eugenics at the outset was based on legislation directed against specific population groups with so-called “learning or physical disabilities”:

“The 1907 law denied entry to anyone judged ‘mentally or physically defective, such mental or physical defects being of a nature which may affect the ability of such alien to earn a living.’ It added ‘imbeciles’ and ‘feeble-minded persons’ to the list. …

By 1938, 33 American states permitted the forced sterilisation of women with learning disabilities and 29 American states had passed compulsory sterilisation laws covering people who were thought to have genetic conditions. Laws in America also restricted the right of certain disabled people to marry. More than 36,000 Americans underwent compulsory sterilisation before this legislation was eventually repealed in the 1940s.” (Victoria Brignell)¹

 

Depopulation Directed Against Third World Countries

Inspired by the eugenist ideology, depopulation in the post World War II era became an integral part of a neo-colonial agenda. It was carefully embedded into the tenets of US foreign policy, largely directed against so-called “developing countries”.

We recall US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s National Security Study Memorandum 200 entitled “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth For U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.”

 

Screenshot from the National Security Council document

 

According to Kissinger (NSSM 200, 1974):

“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the Third World, because the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.”

Illustration by Global Research / Image of Henry Kissinger is by Jay Godwin/Flickr, licensed under the Public Domain

 

The Vaccine Campaign Directed Against Third World Countries

In regards to Third World countries, depopulation was carefully instrumented through vaccines. The “tetanus vaccines” project implemented under WHO-UNICEF auspices was intended to “secretly sterilize women in poor countries all over the planet”.

“Kenya’s Catholic bishops are charging two United Nations organizations with sterilizing millions of girls and women under cover of an anti-tetanus inoculation program sponsored by the Kenyan government.”²

Bill Gates, who is now at the forefront of the globalists’ mRNA “vaccine” program was intricately involved. “The Gates Foundation was sued by governments around the world, Kenya, India, the Philippines – and more.” (Peter Koenig, April 2020)³

 

The Globalists’ Depopulation Agenda.“What to Do with All These Useless People?”

While the globalists consider that planet Earth is overpopulated, they do not formally acknowledge that the COVID-19 mandates including the vaccine constitute the means to reducing the world’s population. The vaccine is upheld as means to “save lives”.

Klaus Schwab’s protégé Prof. Yuval Noah Harari, nonetheless begs the question, “what to do with all these useless people?”  

Harari is an influential member of the World Economic Forum (WEF) who supports the idea of creating a dystopian society managed by a handful of globalists who will rule over every human being on earth from the day they are born. (Timothy Alexander Guzman, July 2022)⁴

 

Secret 2009 Meeting of “The Good Club”. “Billionaires Try to Shrink World’s Population”

Flashback to April 25, 2009. The World Health Organization (WHO) headed by Margaret Chan declared a Public Health Emergency of International concern (PHEIC) pertaining to the H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic, which in many regards was a “dress rehearsal” of the COVID pandemic (see Chapter IX). Barely two weeks later in early May 2009, at the height of the H1N1 “pandemic”, the billionaire philanthropists met behind closed doors at the home of the president of the Rockefeller University in Manhattan.

This secret gathering was sponsored by Bill Gates. They call themselves “The Good Club”. Among the participants were the late David Rockefeller, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey and many more:  

“Some of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population and speed up improvements in health and education.” (Sunday Times, May 2009)⁵

The emphasis was not on population growth (i.e. planned parenthood) but on “depopulation”, i.e. the reduction in the absolute size of the world’s population. To read the complete WSJ article, click here.

According to the Sunday Times report:

The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.

…

Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the summit was unprecedented. “We only learnt about it afterwards, by accident. Normally these people are happy to talk good causes, but this is different – maybe because they don’t want to be seen as a global cabal,” he said.

Another guest said there was “nothing as crude as a vote” but a consensus emerged that they would back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat.

“This is something so nightmarish that everyone in this group agreed it needs big-brain answers,” said the guest.  …

Why all the secrecy? “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government,” he said. (Sunday Times)⁶

The decision-making is intricate and complex. The reports of this secret May 2009 meeting largely reveal the depopulation narrative. It was one among numerous similar meetings (which are rarely the object of media coverage).

What is significant is the criminal intent of these billionaire “philanthropists” to depopulate planet Earth.

 

Bill Gates 2010 Depopulation Statement. The Role of “New Vaccines”

Image: Bill Gates (By Kuhlmann /MSC, licensed under CC BY 3.0 de)

Was an absolute “reduction” in world population contemplated at that May 2009 secret meeting? A few months later, Bill Gates in his TED presentation (February 2010) pertaining to vaccination, confirmed the following:

“And if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [the world population] by 10 or 15 percent”.⁷

Listen to the quotation in this video starting at 04:21. Alternatively, see below for the screenshot of the quotation.

Screenshot from the TED Talk video

 

Bill Gates’s “Absolute Reduction” in World Population 

Bill Gates’s proposal of an “absolute reduction” in the world’s population using vaccination as an instrument would be as follows:

The world’s population (November 2022 estimate) is of the order of 8.0 billion.

• An absolute reduction of 10% in 2022 would be of the order of 800 million.
• An absolute reduction of 15% of the world population in 2022 would be of the order of 1.2 billion.

The same group of billionaires, who met at the May 2009 “secret venue”, has been actively involved from the outset of the COVID crisis in designing the lockdown policies applied worldwide, the mRNA vaccine and the “Great Reset”, the endgame of which is massive depopulation. 

Crimes against humanity are beyond description.

We are dealing with a criminal cabal which must be confronted.

 

Endnotes

1 Victoria Brignell, December 10, 2010. When America Believed in Eugenics. https://www.globalresearch.ca/when-america-believed-eugenics/5743548?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm_medium=related_articles

2 Michael Snyder, November 11, 2014. Is the WHO Using Vaccines to Secretly Sterilize Women All Over the Globe? https://www.globalresearch.ca/is-the-un-using-vaccines-to-secretly-sterilize-women-all-over-the-globe/5413599

3 Peter Koenig, March 4, 2021. Bill Gates and the Depopulation Agenda. Robert F. Kennedy Junior Calls for an Investigation. https://www.globalresearch.ca/bill-gates-and-the-depopulation-agenda-robert-f-kennedy-junior-calls-for-an-investigation/5710021

4 Timothy Alexander Guzman, August 6, 2022. The Cult of Globalism: The Great Reset and Its “Final Solution” for “Useless People”. https://www.globalresearch.ca/cult-globalism-great-reset-final-solution-useless-people/5784969

5 John Harlow, May 24, 2009. Billionaire club in bid to curb overpopulation. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/billionaire-club-in-bid-to-curb-overpopulation-d2fl22qhl02

6 Ibid.

7 Bill Gates, 2010. Innovating to zero! https://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates_innovating_to_zero/transcript

---

 

Chapter XV 

The Road Ahead:

Building a Worldwide Movement Against “Corona Tyranny”

 

The Storming of the Bastille occurred in Paris on the afternoon of July 14, 1789. The Bastille was a medieval armory, fortress, and political prison. It was the symbol of Royal Authority under the reign of King Louis XVI. 

The French monarchy was obliged to accept the authority of the newly proclaimed National Assembly as well as endorse the fundamental rights contained in the “Declaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen” (Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen), formulated in early August 1789.¹

More than 230 years later, these fundamental rights (Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité) are now being contravened by corrupt governments around the world on behalf of a totalitarian and illusive financial establishment.

Storming of the Bastille (By Bibliothèque nationale de France, licensed under the Public Domain)

 

Bastille 2022

Bastille 2022 pertains not only to the restoration of these fundamental rights. It seeks to reverse and disable the criminal COVID-19 agenda which in the course of more than two and a half years has triggered economic, social and political chaos worldwide in 193 member states of the United Nations, coupled with bankruptcies, unemployment, mass poverty and despair. Famines have been reported in more than 25 countries. 

Starting in November 2020, an experimental mRNA vaccine launched by our governments (allegedly with a view to combating the spread of the virus) has resulted in an ascending worldwide trend of vaccine-related deaths and injuries. It’s a killer vaccine. It’s a crime against humanity. 

Bastille 2022 is not a “protest” movement, narrowly defined.

We do not seek to negotiate with corrupt government officials. We question their legitimacy. They are liars.

Our intent is to confront the powerful actors behind this criminal endeavor which is literally destroying people’s lives worldwide, while creating divisions within society. The impacts on mental health on population groups worldwide are devastating. 

The numerous lockdowns documented in previous chapters (stay at home of the workforce), fear campaigns, COVID-19 policy mandates imposed on approximately 193 member states of the United Nations have also contributed to undermining and destabilizing:

• the very fabric of civil society and its institutions including education, culture and the arts, social gatherings, sports, entertainment, etc. 
• all public sector activities including physical and social infrastructure, social services, law enforcement, etc.
• all major private sector activities which characterize national, regional and local economies including small, medium and large corporate enterprises, family farms, industry, wholesale and retail trade, the urban services economy, transport companies, airlines, hotel chains, etc.
• the structures of the global economy including international commodity trade, investment, import and export relations between countries, etc. The entire landscape of the global economy has been shattered. 

In turn, a process of enrichment by the elite billionaires together with widening social inequalities is unfolding (see Chapter V).

The massive debts incurred by the nation-states resulting from corruption as well fiscal collapse have skyrocketed. Increasingly national governments are in a straitjacket, under the brunt of powerful creditor institutions. Mounting debts at all levels of society are the driving force (see Chapter IV).

 

The Creation of a Mass Movement 

What is at stake is the creation of a mass movement (nationally and worldwide) which questions the legitimacy and authority of the architects of this insidious project which broadly speaking emanates from Big Money, Big Pharma, the Information Technology Conglomerates, the Security Apparatus, Intelligence, the Military Industrial Complex, Big Energy, and the Corporate Media. 

Ironically, the architects of the COVID-19 “pandemic” are now actively involved in formulating the “solution”. The World Economic Forum’s Great Reset consists in installing a worldwide totalitarian regime. What is contemplated is a system of “Global Governance” predicated on depopulation (see Chapters XII and XIII).

Approximately 193 UN member states are slated to be weakened and undermined. They are under the grip of the most serious debt crisis in world history. Under the Great Reset, the institutions of parliamentary democracy and the welfare state are to be replaced by an unelected “public-private partnership” dominated by the upper echelons of the financial establishment. 

 

Restoring Real Democracy

We will seek all avenues through peaceful means to disable and undermine this totalitarian project including dialogue with and within public and private institutions (students, teachers, law enforcement officials, members of the military and the judiciary, etc.)

What is required is to break down the structures of corruption, hierarchy and abusive authority, namely to pursue what might be described as:

“the democratization of decision-making within our institutions”.

 

The Art of Deception

We must nonetheless understand the limitations of conducting effective judicial procedures against national governments. The judges are often pressured, threatened and corrupt, aligned with both dominant financial interests and politicians.

Moreover, inasmuch as this insidious project is enforced by national governments worldwide, the International Criminal Court (ICC) which is officially “independent” in regards to the UN Security Council, has a longstanding record of side-stepping US-NATO war crimes. The ICC is controlled by the same financial elites which control the governments.

We must also understand the complexities of this carefully designed and coordinated totalitarian project, namely the role of various fraudulent financial institutions, corporate advisory and lobby groups, consultants, “scientific advisors”, etc. acting as intermediaries on behalf of Big Pharma and the financial elites. 

There is a hierarchy in the structures of authority. This complex and intricate decision-making process is used to co-opt, bribe and manipulate government officials. Almost identical policy mandates (emanating from higher authority) are implemented simultaneously in numerous countries, requiring active coordination. The same powerful lobby firms are acting at one and the same time in different countries (e.g. in North America and the European Union).

Large scale street protests will not prevail unless they are focused on effectively disabling this corrupt decision-making process. 

 

 

What Are Our Priorities? Counter-Propaganda 

More than 7 billion people worldwide are directly or indirectly affected by the corona crisis. Several billion people have already been vaccinated by an “unapproved” experimental mRNA “vaccine”, which has resulted in a worldwide wave of mortality and morbidity.

While this tendency is confirmed by official figures pertaining to vaccine-related deaths and adverse events, the mainstream media and the governments are in a state of denial.

The devastating health impacts of the COVID-19 vaccine are rarely acknowledged. It’s the same catchphrase (which is an outright lie) repeated ad nauseam: “the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine”:

“We actually have more safety data on the vaccine than the virus, and already see that the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine. (Intercare)²

Dr. Alan Schroeder thinks it’s very natural for parents to worry, but said for teens, the virus is more dangerous than the vaccine. (NBC)³

Doctors are on the lookout for it in children, but the bottom line remains that the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine.

“The mutations in the omicron variant make it [the virus] more prolific, dangerous, and elusive“.

etc.

This propaganda consensus must be broken. With regard to the vaccine, informing people across the land regarding the data on deaths and adverse events is the first step.

The COVID crisis initiated in January 2020 is unprecedented in world history. Propaganda under Nuremberg is a crime (see Chapter XI).

Dismantling the propaganda apparatus is crucial. Counter-propaganda plays a key role in revealing the lies used to justify the policy mandates.

Without persistent media disinformation, the official COVID narrative falls flat.

First and foremost, we must forcefully challenge the mainstream media, without specifically targeting mainstream journalists who have been instructed to abide by the official narrative. We should in this regard favor dialogue with individual (independent) journalists.

We must ensure that people worldwide achieve an understanding of the history and devastating impacts of the COVID crisis supported by scientific concepts, analysis, testimonies and data. This endeavor will require a parallel process at the grassroots level, of sensitizing fellow citizens and establishing dialogue on the nature of the alleged pandemic, the mRNA vaccine, the RT-PCR test, as well as the devastating economic and social impacts of the lockdowns.

While we must put an end to the fear campaign, we must nonetheless inform our fellow citizens regarding the dangers of the mRNA vaccine as well as the engineered chaos of this totalitarian agenda of “Global Governance” on the very structures of civil society.

The “fear campaign” is to be replaced by “information, concepts, analysis and data” as well as “strategies” to confront Big Pharma, corrupt officials in high office as well as their Big Money sponsors.

We must also ensure the conduct of dialogue and debate at the grassroots of society.

 

Putting an End to the “Killer Vaccine”

Our first task is to immediately halt and cancel the so-called COVID-19 “vaccine” which has triggered a wave of mortality and morbidity worldwide. 

According to Dr. Thomas Binder:

“The gene injections are unsafe. They can cause anaphylactic reactions, thromboembolism, thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, and myocarditis in the short term.⁴

There is possible immunosuppression and antibody-dependent enhancement, ADE, in the medium-term.

And in the long term there are possible autoimmune diseases, cancer and infertility, risks that have not been ruled out yet.”

According to Doctors for COVID Ethics, in the EU, UK and US, the data respectively tabulated by EudraVigilance, MHRA (UK) and VAERS (US):

“have now recorded many more deaths and injuries from the COVID-19 “vaccine” roll-out than from all previous vaccines combined since records began”

With regard to the mRNA “vaccine”, the catastrophic number of injection related deaths has NOT been reported by the mainstream media, despite the official figures being publicly available.

“The signal of harm is now indisputably overwhelming, and, in line with universally accepted ethical standards for clinical trials, we demand that the COVID-19 “vaccination” programme be halted immediately worldwide.

Continuation of the programme, in the full knowledge of ongoing serious harm and death to both adults and children, constitutes Crimes Against Humanity/Genocide, for which those found to be responsible or complicit will ultimately be held personally liable.”⁵

As outlined in Chapter VIII, Pfizer has a criminal record (2009) with the US Department of Justice on charges of “fraudulent marketing”.⁶

As part of the 2009 DoJ settlement, Pfizer was put on parole:

“Pfizer also has agreed to enter into an expansive corporate integrity agreement … [which] provides for procedures and reviews to be put in place to avoid and promptly detect conduct similar to that which gave rise to this matter.”⁷

But we are no longer dealing with “fraudulent marketing”:

“Killing is good for business”: The vaccine is a multi-billion dollar operation worldwide. It’s manslaughter.

Once the “vaccine” has been halted, the criminality of Big Pharma will be fully revealed and understood. In turn, the legitimacy of the official COVID narrative based on lies and fake science will inevitably be impaired. This is the first step towards breaking the “official” COVID narrative. 

The truth is an important peaceful weapon. Without propaganda and media disinformation, the architects of this project do not have a leg to stand on.

Let us break the “official” COVID-19 consensus and the propaganda apparatus which provides “legitimacy” to a criminal agenda.

Once it collapses, it will open up the road towards reversing the broader process of economic, social and political chaos generated in the course of the last two and a half years.

 

The Geopolitical Dimensions

What is unfolding is a new and destructive phase of US imperialism. It’s a totalitarian project of economic and social engineering. 

The Biden administration has endorsed the COVID agenda, which has been used to destabilize and weaken national economies (ironically, including the United States as well as its allies and its “enemies”).

We cannot divorce our understanding of the COVID crisis from that of US foreign policy and America’s hegemonic agenda, e.g. the war in Ukraine, US-Russia relations, the enlargement and extension of NATO, the militarization of the South China Sea directed against China, Iran and the geopolitics of the Middle East, the ongoing sanctions regimes against Venezuela and Cuba, etc. 

Integrating All Sectors of Society

It should be noted that organized opposition in many Western countries is weak. Why? Because “progressive forces” including left intellectuals, NGO leaders, trade union and labor leaders both in Western Europe and North America have from the outset endorsed the official COVID narrative. Many of these progressive movements are supported by corporate foundations. 

The same billionaire foundations which are the unspoken architects of the “Great Reset” and “Global Governance” are also involved in (generously) financing various social movements. “They control the opposition”.  

What this means is that grassroots activists are often misled and betrayed by their leaders who are routinely co-opted by their billionaire sponsors.

It is essential that these grassroots activists be integrated into the mainstay of the movement against the COVID-19 consensus.

 

The Road Ahead

What is required is the development of a broad-based grassroots network which confronts both the architects of this crisis as  well as all levels of government (i.e. national, states, provinces, municipalities, etc.) involved in imposing the vaccine as well carrying out the lockdown and closure of economic activity.

This network would be established (nationally and internationally) at all levels of society, in towns and villages, workplaces, parishes, trade unions, farmers organizations, professional associations, business associations, student unions, and veterans associations. Church groups would be called upon to integrate this movement.

“Spreading the word” through social media and independent online media outlets will be undertaken bearing in mind that Google as well as Facebook are instruments of censorship.

Legal procedures and protests are unfolding in all major regions of the world. As part of a worldwide network of initiatives, it is important to establish mechanisms of communication, dialogue and exchange within and between countries. 

The creation of such a movement, which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of the financial elites, Big Pharma, et al., as well as the structures of political authority at the national level, is no easy task. It will require a degree of solidarity, unity and commitment unparalleled in world history.

What is required is the breaking down of political and ideological barriers within society (e.g. between political parties) while acting with a single voice towards building a worldwide consensus against tyranny. 

Worldwide solidarity and human dignity is the driving force.

 

Endnotes

1 Encyclopaedia Britannica, July 20, 1998. Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Declaration-of-the-Rights-of-Man-and-of-the-Citizen

2 Intercare, n.d. Part 10: COVID-19 vaccines and long-term side effects. https://healthhub.intercare.co.za/2021/09/15/part-10-covid-19-vaccines-and-long-term-side-effects/

3 Anoushah Rasta, May 5, 2021. FDA Expected to Approve Vaccinations for Kids, But Are Parents Ready to Move Forward? https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/coronavirus/fda-expected-to-approve-vaccinations-for-kids-but-are-parents-ready-to-move-forward/2537309/

4 Doctors for COVID Ethics, August 3, 2021. COVID Vaccine Necessity, Efficacy and Safety. https://doctors4covidethics.org/covid-vaccine-necessity-efficacy-and-safety-3/

5 Doctors for COVID Ethics, October 22, 2021. J’Accuse! The Gene-based “Vaccines” Are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve. https://www.globalresearch.ca/jaccuse-governments-worldwide-lying-you-people-populations-they-purportedly-serve/5750650

6 US Department of Justice, September 2, 2009. Pfizer Inc. “Fraudulent Marketing”: “Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement in Its History” (2009). US Department of Justice. https://www.globalresearch.ca/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement/5738792

7 Ibid.