Western Duplicity and the War in Ukraine

March 6th, 2023 by Mark Taliano

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

 

 

The war in Ukraine is not about democracy, freedom,  human rights, or Ukrainian peoples.

It is about the destruction of all of the above, and the main perpetrators are the usual suspects:  Washington and the West.

It is the West and its agencies, that revived and emboldened nazism in Ukraine since the end of WW2. (1)

It is Washington that conducted a blatant and violent coup against the democratically-elected Ukrainian government in 2014, thus destoying democracy and freedom and even the pretense of democracy and freedom for all of Ukraine at that moment and for years to come. (2)

The on-going coup brought nazism to the forefront and institutionalized this hideous ideology of exceptionalism and intolerance in its military, its police, its government and its culture. Hatred of all things Russian is taught and imbued from an early age. Today, Ukraine celebrates a national holiday that memorializes nazi-collabrator villains, in particular Stepan Bandera. (3)

Since 2014, nazism and intolerance have manifested themselves widely and were foundational to Kiev’s military bombardment of Russian speaking civilian areas in what has accurately been described as a genocide, especially since ethnic cleansing of anything Russian was the observed strategy. (4)

Peace failed because the West had no intention of honoring Peace Agreements.  Former German Chancellor Merkel, Former Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko, and former French President Francois Hollande all admitted that the Minsk Accords were used to buy time and to build up Ukraine’s miitary to NATO standards. (5)

And so Russia initiated a Special Military Operation ostensibly to protect Russian speaking peoples and Russian nationals from Kiev’s unceasing bombardments. But also to ensure that Ukraine remains neutral, that it be denazified and demilitarized. (6)

A country such as Russia that lost as many as 27 million people to the nazi invasion during WW2 is justified in pre-empting a proven aggressive nazi-state on its borders, especially since U.S Secretary of State James Baker promised Mikail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, with the reunification of Germany, that NATO would not expand “one inch eastward.” (7)

And now the carnage of war is unimagineable, with Ukraine’s military “burn rate” far in excess of Russia’s and prospects for peace not likely since the West, including Canada, insists on supplying Ukraine with billions in weapons, with the apparent goals of using war to fight to “the last Ukrainian” and to “bleed Russia”. (8)

Canada’s “support for Ukraine” in terms of training and weapons prolongs the suffering and raises the death toll for all Ukrainians. The support translates into support for nazism and Western imperialism. (9)

Democracy and freedom and human rights are all crushed beneath the war lies and the war carnage.  Millions of lives are dislocated and destroyed because armchair Western warmongers think of themselves as “exceptional”.

*

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

Mark Taliano is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and the author of Voices from Syria, Global Research Publishers, 2017. He writes on his website where this article was originally published.

Notes

(1) Gerald Sussman, “Ukraine: The CIA’s 75-year-old Proxy.” 12 September, 2022, Covert Action Magazine, (Ukraine: The CIA’s 75-year-old Proxy | CovertAction Magazine) Accessed 4 March, 2023.

(2) Kit Klarenberg, “Anatomy of a Coup: How CIA Front Laid Foundations for Ukraine War.” 1 July, 2022. (Anatomy of a Coup: How CIA Front Laid Foundations for Ukraine War (substack.com) ) Accessed 4 March, 2023.

(3) Brian Berletic, “Ukraine Nazism” (Ukraine Nazism/ By Brian Berletic ) marktaliano.net, 04 March, 2023 ( Ukraine Nazism/ By Brian Berletic ) Accessed 04 March, 2023

(4) “Eva Bartlett describes the unspeakable genocide in Ukraine FULL INTERVIEW”, Redacted Conversations, “Eva Bartlett describes the unspeakable genocide in Ukraine FULL INTERVIEW” 27 September, 2022, marktaliano.net (Eva Bartlett describes the unspeakable genocide in Ukraine FULL INTERVIEW ) Accessed 04 March, 2023.

(5) Mark Taliano, “The West Seeks War Not Peace.” Global Research, 30 November, 2022. (The West Seeks War, Not Peace – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization) Accessed 04 March, 2023.

(6) John Mearsheimer, “Prof. John Mearsheimer on Russia’s Special Military Operation.” . marktaliano.net . 16 May, 2022, (Prof. John Mearsheimer on Russia’s Special Military Operation ) Accessed 04 March, 2023.

(7) Ben Norton, “US, UK, France promised USSR not to expand NATO east of Germany, newly discovered document proves.” Geopolitical Economy Report, 20 February, 2022. (US, UK, France promised USSR not to expand NATO east of Germany, newly discovered document proves – Geopolitical Economy Report) Accessed 03 March, 2023.

See also : NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard. “Not One Inch Eastward”. What Was Agreed Between the Soviets and the West in 1990? – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization

(8) Yves Engler, “Understanding the Logic of Canada Giving $2.26 Billion in Arms to Ukraine.” Global Research, 02 March, 2023. (Understanding the Logic of Canada Giving $2.26 Billion in Arms to Ukraine – Global ResearchGlobal Research – Centre for Research on Globalization) Accessed 02 March, 2023.

(9)  “Canada denies training Ukrainian Neo-Nazis.” RT, 11 April, 2022. ( Canada denies training Ukrainian Neo-Nazis — RT World News ) Accessed 03 April, 2022.


Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

**Voices from Syria**

Author: Mark Taliano

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-9-1

Year: 2017

Product Type: PDF File

List Price: $6.50

Special Offer: $5.00 

Click to order.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Western Duplicity and the War in Ukraine
  • Tags:

The Seeds Of Suicide: How Monsanto Destroys Farming

March 6th, 2023 by Dr. Vandana Shiva

This article was originally published in April 2013

In recent developments, Monsanto and Bayer have merged into a powerful cartel which controls not only what we eat but also politicians, scientists and journalists.

***

Monsanto’s talk of ‘technology’ tries to hide its real objectives of control over seed where genetic engineering is a means to control seed,

“Monsanto is an agricultural company.

We apply innovation and technology to help farmers around the world produce more while conserving more.”

“Producing more, Conserving more, Improving farmers lives.”

These are the promises Monsanto India’s website makes, alongside pictures of smiling, prosperous farmers from the state of Maharashtra. This is a desperate attempt by Monsanto and its PR machinery to delink the epidemic of farmers’ suicides in India from the company’s growing control over cotton seed supply — 95 per cent of India’s cotton seed is now controlled by Monsanto.

Control over seed is the first link in the food chain because seed is the source of life. When a corporation controls seed, it controls life, especially the life of farmers.

Monsanto’s concentrated control over the seed sector in India as well as across the world is very worrying. This is what connects farmers’ suicides in India to Monsanto vs Percy Schmeiser in Canada, to Monsanto vs Bowman in the US, and to farmers in Brazil suing Monsanto for $2.2 billion for unfair collection of royalty.

Through patents on seed, Monsanto has become the “Life Lord” of our planet, collecting rents for life’s renewal from farmers, the original breeders.

Patents on seed are illegitimate because putting a toxic gene into a plant cell is not “creating” or “inventing” a plant. These are seeds of deception — the deception that Monsanto is the creator of seeds and life; the deception that while Monsanto sues farmers and traps them in debt, it pretends to be working for farmers’ welfare, and the deception that GMOs feed the world. GMOs are failing to control pests and weeds, and have instead led to the emergence of superpests and superweeds.

The entry of Monsanto in the Indian seed sector was made possible with a 1988 Seed Policy imposed by the World Bank, requiring the Government of India to deregulate the seed sector. Five things changed with Monsanto’s entry: First, Indian companies were locked into joint-ventures and licensing arrangements, and concentration over the seed sector increased. Second, seed which had been the farmers’ common resource became the “intellectual property” of Monsanto, for which it started collecting royalties, thus raising the costs of seed. Third, open pollinated cotton seeds were displaced by hybrids, including GMO hybrids. A renewable resource became a non-renewable, patented commodity. Fourth, cotton which had earlier been grown as a mixture with food crops now had to be grown as a monoculture, with higher vulnerability to pests, disease, drought and crop failure. Fifth, Monsanto started to subvert India’s regulatory processes and, in fact, started to use public resources to push its non-renewable hybrids and GMOs through so-called public-private partnerships (PPP).

In 1995, Monsanto introduced its Bt technology in India through a joint-venture with the Indian company Mahyco. In 1997-98, Monsanto started open field trials of its GMO Bt cotton illegally and announced that it would be selling the seeds commercially the following year. India has rules for regulating GMOs since 1989, under the Environment Protection Act. It is mandatory to get approval from the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee under the ministry of environment for GMO trials. The Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology sued Monsanto in the Supreme Court of India and Monsanto could not start the commercial sales of its Bt cotton seeds until 2002.
And, after the damning report of India’s parliamentary committee on Bt crops in August 2012, the panel of technical experts appointed by the Supreme Court recommended a 10-year moratorium on field trials of all GM food and termination of all ongoing trials of transgenic crops.

But it had changed Indian agriculture already.

Monsanto’s seed monopolies, the destruction of alternatives, the collection of superprofits in the form of royalties, and the increasing vulnerability of monocultures has created a context for debt, suicides and agrarian distress which is driving the farmers’ suicide epidemic in India. This systemic control has been intensified with Bt cotton. That is why most suicides are in the cotton belt.

An internal advisory by the agricultural ministry of India in January 2012 had this to say to the cotton-growing states in India — “Cotton farmers are in a deep crisis since shifting to Bt cotton. The spate of farmer suicides in 2011-12 has been particularly severe among Bt cotton farmers.”

The highest acreage of Bt cotton is in Maharashtra and this is also where the highest farmer suicides are. Suicides increased after Bt cotton was introduced — Monsanto’s royalty extraction, and the high costs of seed and chemicals have created a debt trap. According to Government of India data, nearly 75 per cent rural debt is due to purchase inputs. As Monsanto’s profits grow, farmers’ debt grows. It is in this systemic sense that Monsanto’s seeds are seeds of suicide.

The ultimate seeds of suicide is Monsanto’s patented technology to create sterile seeds. (Called “Terminator technology” by the media, sterile seed technology is a type of Gene Use Restriction Technology, GRUT, in which seed produced by a crop will not grow — crops will not produce viable offspring seeds or will produce viable seeds with specific genes switched off.) The Convention on Biological Diversity has banned its use, otherwise Monsanto would be collecting even higher profits from seed.

Monsanto’s talk of “technology” tries to hide its real objectives of ownership and control over seed where genetic engineering is just a means to control seed and the food system through patents and intellectual property rights.

A Monsanto representative admitted that they were “the patient’s diagnostician, and physician all in one” in writing the patents on life-forms, from micro-organisms to plants, in the TRIPS’ agreement of WTO. Stopping farmers from saving seeds and exercising their seed sovereignty was the main objective. Monsanto is now extending its patents to conventionally bred seed, as in the case of broccoli and capsicum, or the low gluten wheat it had pirated from India which we challenged as a biopiracy case in the European Patent office.

That is why we have started Fibres of Freedom in the heart of Monsanto’s Bt cotton/suicide belt in Vidharba. We have created community seed banks with indigenous seeds and helped farmers go organic. No GMO seeds, no debt, no suicides.

Vandana Shiva is a philosopher, environmental activist, and eco feminist.Shiva, currently based in Delhi, has authored more than 20 books and over 500 papers in leading scientific and technical journals. She was trained as a physicist and received her Ph.D. in physics from the University of Western Ontario, Canada. She was awarded the Right Livelihood Award in 1993. She is the founder of Navdanya http://www.navdanya.org/ 

She is a frequent contributor to Global Research

The Battle for Our Grasslands and Livestock

March 6th, 2023 by Viv Forbes

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published by Global Research on January 4, 2023

***

Grasslands and arable land cover just 10% of Earth’s surface but (with the oceans) they produce all of our food and fibre. But the productivity and health of our grasslands, farms and livestock are under threat from global warming alarmists and green preservationists.

We are afflicted by climate crazies and methane madness. It is poor public policy that condones restrictions on grazing operations, or taxes on grazing animals, based on disputed theories that claim that bodily emissions from farm animals will cause dangerous global warming.

New Zealand was the first cattle country to propose a “livestock fart tax”. Four hundred farmers then drove 20 tractors to the Parliament in Wellington waving placards and banners saying “STOP THE FART TAX”. The proposal was laughed out of Parliament. But the war on farmers and livestock continues.

fart-tax-cartoon

Permission is given to the authors to reproduce this cartoon providing the source (www.clexit.net) is credited.

Ruminants such as sheep, cattle and goats cannot make long-term additions to the gases in the atmosphere – they just recycle atmospheric carbon and nitrogen nutrients in a cycle-of-life that has operated for millennia.

Grazing ruminant animals with their emission products have always been part of healthy grasslands. Only when large numbers of animals are fed artificially and confined on the one patch of land do pollution problems appear.

Many otherwise genuine environmentalists are assisting the destruction of grasslands with their native pastures and endangered grass birds. Blinded by their love for the trees, they neglect the grasses, legumes, herbs and livestock that provide their food. In Australia they pass laws to protect weedy eucalypts invading the grasslands but ignore the valuable and declining Mitchell grass that once dominated Australia’s treeless plains.

Grasslands are also under threat from cultivation for biofuel crops, from subsidised carbon credit forests and from the remorseless encroachment of fire-prone government reserves and pest havens.

Trying to control atmospheric carbon-bearing gases with taxes is futile and anti-life. Even if carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere doubled, or more, the climate effect if any, is probably beneficial (warmer at night and near the poles and with more moisture in the atmosphere). More importantly, all life on Earth already benefits from the additional CO2 plant nutrient in the atmosphere, and would benefit even more were CO2 levels to double.

Nitrogen is the most abundant natural gas in the atmosphere, inhaled in every breath and an essential component of all protein. Grazing livestock merely recycle a few compounds of nitrogen, all of which either return to the atmosphere or provide valuable nitrogen fertilisers for the plants they graze on.

We also have the modern methane madness. Mobs of grazing ruminants have been roaming the grasslands since cave-man days. Methane has also been seeping from marshes, bubbling out of oceans, leaking from coal seams and oil seeps and being released in huge quantities from volcanoes. So what more can a few domestic cows and sheep do to affect this? Methane from domestic ruminants is a non-problem.

It is a foolish and costly fantasy to believe that Earth’s climate can be controlled by passing laws, imposing taxes, attempting to manipulate the bodily emissions of farm animals or trying to prevent farmers from clearing woody weeds invading their pastures.

The Clexit (ClimateExit) Coalition, comprising over 190 representatives from 26 countries, has formed the Clexit Grassland Protection Group with eleven representatives from six big grazing countries.

The Clexit Grassland Protection Group is represented and supported by:

It is also endorsed by Global Research

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. 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 CLEXIT.

Viv Forbes has technical and financial qualifications and experience. He has solar panels on his roof, but no vested interests in coal, oil or gas apart from diesel farm equipment and a diesel generator in the shed. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on March 1st, 2023

***

The US Congress last tried to grapple with what the country’s ballooning security services were up to nearly half a century ago.

In 1975, the Church Committee managed to take a fleeting, if far from complete, snapshot of the netherworld in which agencies such as the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and National Security Agency (NSA) operate. 

In the aftermath of the Watergate scandal, the congressional committee and other related investigations found that the country’s intelligence services had sweeping surveillance powers and were involved in a raft of illegal or unconstitutional acts.

They were covertly subverting and assassinating foreign leaders. They had coopted hundreds of journalists and many media outlets around the world to promote false narratives. They spied on and infiltrated political and civil rights groups. And they manipulated the public discourse to protect and expand their powers.

Senator Frank Church himself warned that the might of the intelligence community could at any moment “be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything … There would be no place to hide.”

Since then, the technological possibilities to invade privacy have dramatically increased, and the reach of the intelligence agencies, especially after 9/11, has moved on in ways Church could never have foreseen.

This is why establishing a new Church Committee is long overdue. And finally, in the most controversial of circumstances and for the most partisan of reasons, some sort of revival may finally be about to happen.

A protracted battle last month within the Republican Party to elect Kevin McCarthy as the new speaker of the House of Representatives forced him to cave to the demands of his party’s right wing. Not least, he agreed to set up a committee on what is being called the “weaponisation” of the federal government.

It held its first meeting last week. The panel said its task would be to look at “the politicization of the FBI and DOJ and attacks on American civil liberties”.

Earlier, in a speech to the House on the new committee, Republican Representative Dan Bishop said it was time to cut out the “rot” in the federal government: “We’re putting the deep state on notice. We’re coming for you.”

Democrats are already decrying the committee as a tool that will be wielded in the interests of Donald Trump and his supporters, saying the Republican right wants to discredit the security services and suggest malfeasance in the treatment of the former president.

Snowballing powers

But while the committee will almost certainly end up being used to settle political scores, it may still manage to shed light on some of the terrifying new powers the security services have accrued since the Church Committee’s report.

The degree to which those powers have snowballed should be obvious to all. Documents leaked by whistleblower Edward Snowden a decade ago showed illegal mass surveillance at home and abroad by the NSA. And Julian Assange’s transparency organisation Wikileaks published dossiers not only revealing US war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, but a huge global hacking programme by the CIA.

Notably, in what may be a sign of the power of the security agencies to inflict retribution on those challenging their might, both Assange and Snowden have suffered dire consequences.

Snowden has been forced into exile in Russia, one of the few jurisdictions where he cannot be extradited to the US and locked away. Assange has been jailed as US authorities seek his extradition, so he can be disappeared into a maximum-security prison for the rest of his life.

Now, in an unlikely turn of events, a billionaire has opened another window on covert manipulations by the security services – this time in relation to social media platforms and the US electoral process. The key players this time are the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), set up by former President George W Bush’s administration in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

After he bought the social network Twitter last year, Elon Musk gave a handful of independent journalists access to its corporate archives. In a continuing series of investigations named the Twitter Files, published as long threads on the platform, these journalists have been making sense of what was going on under Twitter’s previous owners.

The bottom line is that, after Trump’s election, US security agencies – aided by political pressure, especially from the Democratic Party – aggressively wormed their way into Twitter’s decision-making processes. Other major social media platforms appear to have made similar arrangements.

A ‘nothingburger’?

The Twitter Files suggest a rapidly emerging but hidden partnership between state intelligence services, Silicon Valley, and traditional media, to manipulate the national conversation in the US – as well as much of the rest of the world.

The parties in this alliance justify to each other their meddling in US politics – concealed from public view – as a necessary response to the rapid rise of a new populism. Trump and his supporters had come to dominate the Republican Party, and a populist left headed by Senator Bernie Sanders had made limited inroads into the Democratic Party.

Social media attracted particular concern from the security services because it was seen as the vehicle that had unleashed this wave of popular discontent. According to a report in the Intercept, one FBI official remarked last year that “subversive information on social media could undermine support for the US government”.

The national security state, it seems, viewed an alliance with the Big Tech private sector as an opportunity to protect the old guard of politics, particularly in the Democratic Party. Figures such as President Joe Biden and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi were seen as a safe pair of hands, positioned to preserve the legitimacy of a turbo-charged, neoliberal capitalism, and the forever wars that have been the lifeblood of the intelligence community.

This partnership has served all sides well. Silicon Valley has been the career of choice for many liberals who believe that progress is best pursued through technological means that depend on social stability and political consensus. Populism and the polarisation it engenders naturally discomfort them.

And both the security services and more centrist politicians in the Republican and Democratic parties understand that they are in the firing line in populist politics for decades-long failures: a growing polarisation of wealth between rich and poor, a creaking US economy, depleted or non-existent welfare services, the ability of the rich to buy political influence, the constant loss of treasure and life in seemingly pointless wars fought in far-off lands, and a media that rarely addresses the concerns of ordinary people.

Rather than focusing on the real causes of growing anger and anti-establishment sentiment, the security services offered politicians and Silicon Valley a more comforting and convenient narrative. The populists – on the right and left – were not articulating a frustration with a failing US political and economic system. They were working to sow social discontent to advance the interests of Russia.

Or as the minutes of a DHS meeting last March recorded, the new focus was on curbing “subversive data utilized to drive a wedge between the populace and the government”.

This strategy reached its zenith with “Russiagate”, years of evidence-free hysteria promoted by the intelligence community and the Democratic Party. The central claim was that Trump was only able to defeat his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election because of collusion with Moscow, and Russian influence operations through social media.

As in a game of whack-a-mole, any signs of misconduct or criminality by the security services, or systemic failures by the US political class, were now knocked down as “Russian disinformation”.

Snowden’s exile to Russia – the only choice left to him – was used to discredit his whistleblowing on the NSA. And the disclosures by Assange and Wikileaks of war crimes and lawbreaking by the intelligence community were effectively negated by a supposed collusion with “Russian hackers” in revealing corruption in the Democratic Party during the 2016 election.

In practice, claims of “Russian disinformation” simply served to further polarise US politics.

The key issues raised by the Twitter Files – of deep-state collusion with the tech and media industries, election meddling, and narrative manipulation and deflection – have been subsumed within, and obscured by, political partisanship.

Interest in the Twitter Files has been largely confined to the right. In knee-jerk fashion, Democrats have mostly dismissed the revelations as a “nothingburger”.

Climate of fear

Perhaps coincidentally, Musk has found himself transformed since his takeover of Twitter from a darling of liberals – for his Tesla electric cars – into a near-pariah. In October, the Biden administration denied reports that it was considering a national security review of his businesses in the face of Musk’s “increasingly Russia-friendly stance”. His status as the world’s richest man has rapidly collapsed alongside his reputation.

The irony is that the same security agencies that whipped up the “Russiagate” hysteria are now exposed in the Twitter Files as perpetrating the very interference of which they accused Moscow.

During the 2016 presidential election, Russia was said to have colluded with Trump and assisted him by weaponising social media to sow discord and manipulate the US electorate. A subsequent official inquiry by Robert Mueller failed to stand up those allegations.

Instead, I believe the Twitter Files indicate that it was not Russia but the FBI, DHS and CIA – the very agencies arguing that Russia threatened political order in the US – that were aggressively and clandestinely seeking to influence American public opinion.

The Twitter Files suggest that it is the US security state, much more than Russia, that poses the real menace to US democracy. The climate of fear these agencies fuelled over supposed “Russian disinformation” not only swayed public opinion, but gave the intelligence community even greater leverage over social media networks and further licence to accumulate greater powers.

State actors are increasingly in charge of deciding who is allowed to be heard on social media – even Trump was banned while president – and what can be said. Those decisions are often taken not to prevent a crime or enforce laws, or even for the public good, but to tightly control political discourse to marginalise serious criticism of the establishment.

The fact that the collusion between social media platforms and these agencies has taken place in secret is itself an indication of the nefarious nature of what’s been going on.

Hidden pressure

The Twitter Files open a window on a phenomenon that appears to have been playing out across all social networks.

Traditionally, liberals have defended social media’s use of censorship on the grounds that these platforms are private companies that can do as they please. Their behaviour supposedly does not constitute a violation of First Amendment protections of free speech.

The reality exposed by the Twitter Files, however, is that the networks have often been responding to hidden pressure, either directly from the federal government or via its intelligence agencies, in restricting what can be said. As the Files have repeatedly noted, Twitter, like other social media, has come to function less as a private company and more as “a kind of subsidiary of the FBI”.

In 2017, at the height of the Russiagate panic, the FBI set up a Foreign Influence Task Force whose numbers soon swelled to 80 agents. Its ostensible job was to liaise with the various networks to stop alleged foreign interference in elections.

Twitter executives were soon meeting and communicating with senior FBI officials on a regular basis, while receiving an endless stream of demands for content takedowns to prevent “Russian disinformation”. The CIA appears to have attended meetings too, under the moniker of OGA or “other government agency”. Although the task force’s remit was foreign influence, it reportedly became a “conduit for mountains of domestic moderation requests, from state governments, even local police”.

Under growing pressure behind the scenes from the intelligence services, and in public from politicians, the social networks reportedly started to draw up secret blacklists, aided by information from the security services, to limit the reach of accounts or stop topics trending. The effects were often hard to miss, with Trump declaring he would investigate the practice in 2018.

In response, Twitter executives publicly denied that they practised “shadow banning” – a term for when posts or accounts are made difficult or impossible to find. In fact, Twitter had simply invented a different phrase for the exact same regime of speech suppression. They called it “visibility filtering”.

Such censorship was used not only against suspected bot accounts, or those peddling obvious misinformation. Even eminent public figures who had authority to speak on a topic were secretly targeted if they challenged key establishment narratives.

Stanford epidemiologist Jay Bhattacharya, for example, suffered from “visibility filtering” during the Covid-19 pandemic after he criticised lockdowns for inflicting harm on children. He was put on a “trends blacklist”.

Amid recent mass layoffs at Twitter, Middle East Eye was unable to contact the company for comment on these and other allegations made in the Twitter Files. The CIA had not replied by publication time, while the FBI sent a response stating: “The correspondence between the FBI and Twitter show nothing more than examples of our traditional, longstanding and ongoing federal government and private sector engagements … As evidenced in the correspondence, the FBI provides critical information to the private sector in an effort to allow them to protect themselves and their customers.”

Other leading doctors who questioned government orthodoxy have also been sidelined by Twitter, the Files found, often under direct pressure from the White House or vaccine company lobbyists.

But the highest-profile casualty of the Twitter censorship regime was Trump himself. He was banned on 8 January 2021, even though staff reportedly agreed behind the scenes that they could not base such a decision on any direct violation of their rules.

Russian ‘influence’

The fallout from Russiagate drew Twitter more deeply into the embrace of the security services. In early 2018, a Republican representative, Devin Nunes, submitted a classified memo to the House Intelligence Committee detailing alleged abuses by the FBI in surveilling a figure connected to Trump.

The FBI allegedly relied on the so-called Steele dossier, which had been partly financed by Clinton and the Democratic Party but was initially presented by the media as an independent, intelligence-led inquiry verifying collusion between Trump’s team and Moscow.

News of the memo provoked a storm on social media among Trump supporters, fuelling a viral hashtag: #ReleaseTheMemo. Nunes’s allegations were verified nearly two years later by a Department of Justice inquiry. Nonetheless, at the time, Democratic politicians and the media rushed to ridicule the memo, characterising any demand for its publication as a “Russian influence operation”.

The heat was dialled up on Big Tech. Twitter’s own investigations could not pinpoint any Russian involvement, suggesting that the hashtagwas trending organically, driven by VITs – Very Important Tweeters.

But Twitter executives were in no mood for a fight. Rather than take on the Democratic Party – and most likely behind it the FBI, concerned by the memo’s revelations – Twitter followed “a slavish pattern of not challenging Russia claims on the record”, noted Matt Taibbi, one of the journalists who worked on the Twitter Files.

Soon, Russia was being blamed by major media outlets for any embarrassing hashtag that went viral, such as #SchumerShutdown, #ParklandShooting and #GunControlNow. As the campaign of Russiagate claims intensified, Twitter came under ever-greater pressure for action. In 2017, it manually examined some 2,700 accounts flagged as potentially suspicious. The vast majority were cleared. Twitter suspended 22 as possible Russian accounts, while a further 179 were found to have “possible links” to those accounts.

Democratic politicians were incensed, apparently relying on intelligence sources to support their claim that social media was overrun with Russian bots. Twitter responded by setting up a “Russia task force” to investigate further, but again found no evidence of a Russian influence campaign. All it identified were a few lone-wolf posters spending limited money on ads.

Nonetheless, Twitter was plunged into a PR crisis, with politicians and establishment media accusing it of inertia. Congress threatened draconian legislation that would starve Twitter of advertising revenue. Twitter’s inability to find Russian influence accounts led to an indictment from Politico: “Twitter deleted data potentially crucial to Russia probes.” Twitter’s original investigation of the 2,700 accounts fuelled outlandish claims in the media that a “new network” of Russian bots had been discovered.

In the midst of this firestorm, Twitter suddenly changed tack, publicly stating that it would remove content “at our sole discretion” – but in truth it was far worse than that. As Taibbi reported in one of the Twitter Files, it was as the company decided privately to “off-board” anything “identified by the U.S. intelligence community as a state-sponsored entity conducting cyber operations”.

Twitter increasingly found itself besieged. A Twitter File released last month argues that a prominent online lobby called Hamilton 68 – with ties to the intelligence community – perpetrated “a scam” about Russian disinformation.

The site elicited endless headlines in the US media after indicating it had uncovered a Russian influence campaign on social media, involving hundreds of users. Media outlets published these claims as proof that the social networks were overrun with Russian bots. Hamilton 68’s staff were even invited to testify before senior congressional politicians.

Despite this furore, however, Hamilton 68 never made public the list of bots it said it had unearthed. Internal Twitter investigations revealed that almost all of those on the list were ordinary users. 

The Alliance for Securing Democracy (ASD), which hosted Hamilton 68 and its successor Hamilton 2.0, issued a “fact sheet” in response to the Twitter Files denying the allegations, and suggesting that its data had been “consistently misunderstood or misrepresented” by the media and lawmakers, despite “extensive efforts to correct misconceptions at the time”. The ASD noted that it never suggested all the bots were Russian, but it was monitoring some that might have been.

Notably, Hamilton 68 was headed by a former senior FBI official. Twitter executives did not publicly stand up to the media pile-on, and found themselves given the brush-off when they tried to raise their concerns privately with reporters.

FBI ‘belly button’

In a sign of how close the relationship between the FBI and Twitter had grown, Twitter recruited as legal counsel James Baker, the FBI’s former top lawyer. Baker had been one of the central figures in the efforts to paint a picture – again now discredited – of collusion between Trump and Moscow.

Plenty of others who left the FBI headed straight to Twitter. They included Dawn Burton, the former deputy chief of staff to FBI head James Comey, who initiated the Russiagate investigation. She became Twitter’s director of strategy in 2019.

Similar ties existed with the British security services. Twitter recruited Gordon MacMillan as its top editorial adviser on the Middle East. It was a part-time post, as he was serving at the same time in the British military’s psychological warfare unit, the 77th Brigade.

By 2020, as the pandemic unfolded, other government agencies saw their chance to wage a parallel campaign against Twitter focused on China’s supposed efforts to spread Covid-19 disinformation. An intelligence arm of the State Department, the Global Engagement Center, using federal government data, alleged that 250,000 Twitter accounts were amplifying “Chinese propaganda”, once again to sow disorder. Those accounts included the Canadian military and CNN.

Emails between Twitter executives show that they had their own views about what the campaign hoped to achieve. State Department officials wanted to “insert themselves” into the consortium of agencies, such as the FBI and DHS, that were allowed to take down Twitter content.

It is telling that Twitter argued against State Department inclusion – and in terms that contrasted strongly with their approach to the FBI and DHS. State was viewed by executives as more “political” and “Trumpy”.

In the end, it was suggested that the FBI would serve as the “belly button” through which Silicon Valley would keep other government agencies informed. The result, according to the Files, was that Twitter “was taking requests from every conceivable government body”, and often in bulk. The platform almost never said no to requests to delete accounts accused of being Russian bots.

As Twitter grew more supine, even senior US politicians tried to get in on the act. Adam Schiff, then head of the House Intelligence Committee, asked for a journalist he did not like to be deplatformed. Though Twitter was reluctant to accede to such requests, it “deamplified” some accounts.

As the 2020 election drew near, the flow of security-service demands became a deluge that threatened to overwhelm Twitter. Many were unrelated to foreign influence – the FBI task force’s ostensible purpose. Instead, the submissions often appear to have concerned domestic accounts. They rarely detailed law-breaking or terror threats, presumably the FBI’s main area of interest, but focused instead on much less-well-defined violations of Twitter’s “terms of service”.

Often, accounts faced “digital execution” not because what was said was verifiably disinformation, but because tweets crossed political red lines: by noting a neo-Nazi problem in Ukraine, or being too sympathetic to Venezuelan leader Nicholas Maduro or Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Laptop revelations

Once embedded in Big Tech, the security services reportedly used their powers to covertly shape the national conversation around the 2020 presidential election.

Perhaps the biggest single disclosure so far – confirming suspicions on the right – is that social media and state security agencies played a role in suppressing the so-called Hunter Biden laptop story weeks before the 2020 election.

In the run-up to the vote, the FBI task force prepared the ground by claiming to Silicon Valley executives that Russia would try to “dump” hacked information to damage the Democratic candidate for president, Biden. This was supposedly a rerun of the 2016 election, when publication of internal emails from the Democratic Party harmed the then-candidate, Hillary Clinton.

After Trump’s election, much of the Russiagate narrative grew out of evidence-free claims by the security services that those embarrassing emails, indicating political corruption among the Democratic Party leadership, were hacked by Russia.

Evidence suggesting a different explanation – that the emails were leaked by a disgruntled insider – was widely ignored. The furore provoked by the story obscured the fact that the emails, and their damning revelations about the Democratic Party, were all too real.

Based on the warnings from the intelligence community, social media platforms hurriedly blocked the Hunter Biden laptop story, which alleged problematic ties between the Biden family and foreign officials in Ukraine. Joe Biden’s officials denied any wrongdoing by the then-presidential candidate, while Hunter himself was evasive about whether the laptop belonged to him. The story, which was broken by the right-wing New York Post, was immediately declared a Russian influence operation by dozens of former intelligence officials.

But in truth, the FBI knew nearly a year before the story became public that the laptop belonged to Hunter Biden and that the information it contained was not likely forged or hacked. A Delaware computer store owner asked by Hunter Biden to repair his laptop had reported his concerns to the FBI. The agency had even subpoenaed the device.

This chain of events raises questions over whether the FBI decided to pre-empt the impacts of the laptop story, which threatened Joe Biden’s electoral chances in 2020, before the right-wing press could publish. It appears that they manipulated the media, including social networks, into assuming that any story harming Biden before the election was Russian disinformation.

Big Tech had other reasons at the time to believe the story was likely true. The New York Post had carried out the usual verification checks. Other reporters soon confirmed that the information had come from Hunter Biden’s laptop.

Nonetheless, Twitter hurriedly accepted the claim that the story violated its policy against publishing hacked material, echoing the FBI’s claim that it was Russian disinformation. Others, such as Mark Zuckerberg at Facebook, accepted the FBI’s claims on trust too, as he later admitted.

The social networks took the unprecedented step of blocking attempts to share the story on their platforms, which might have impacted the outcome of the 2020 election – something viewed by much of the Republican right as a crime against democracy, and by many Democratic Party supporters as an unfortunate necessity to defend the democratic order.

Psychological warfare

The collusion between social media platforms and the US security state over Russiagate was no aberration. According to the Files, Twitter gave the Pentagon special dispensation, in violation of its own policies, to set up accounts to carry out “online psychological influence ops”.

Twitter assisted the military in “whitelisting” 52 fake Arabic-language accounts to “amplify certain messages”. These accounts promoted US military objectives in the Middle East, including messages attacking Iran, supporting the Saudi-led war in Yemen, and claiming that US drone strikes hit only terrorists.

By May 2020, Twitter had detected dozens more accounts the Pentagon had not disclosed that tweeted in Russian and Arabic on topics such as Syria and the Islamic State. According to Lee Fang, one of the journalists who worked on the Twitter Files: “Many emails from throughout 2020 show that high-level Twitter executives were well aware of [the Department of Defense’s] vast network of fake accounts & covert propaganda and did not suspend the accounts.”

Other research has exposed an extensive Pentagon propaganda network on other social media apps, such as Facebook and Telegram.

Twitter’s indulgence of these covert Pentagon accounts contrasts strongly with its handling of media and individuals accused of being affiliated with countries considered by the US government as enemy states. They are prominently labelled as such, including western dissident journalists and academics alleged to have worked with Russian, Chinese, Iranian or Venezuelan outlets.

According to research by the media watchdog group FAIR, Twitter continues to conceal the state affiliations of accounts funded by the US government, including those advancing its propaganda aims in Ukraine and elsewhere. FAIR could find no examples of accounts identifiedas “United States state-affiliated media”, nor any labelled as such in Britain or Canada.

The group concluded: “Twitter enables US propaganda outlets to maintain the pretense of independence on the platform, a tacit endorsement of US soft power and influence operations … Twitter is serving as an active participant in an ongoing information war.”

Thick pall of secrecy

After the Twitter Files began dropping in December, the FBI responded not by addressing the veracity of the documents, but by playing the same game as before. It accused the journalists involved of spreading “conspiracy theories” and “misinformation” intended to “discredit the agency”.

Hillary Clinton, the doyenne of the Democratic Party establishment, continues to blame Russian disinformation for her country’s woes.

The truth is that both the security services and the political establishment have far too much invested in their current, secret arrangements with the social networks to agree to change.

And the pressure to do so is not likely to increase while the US continues to lurch from crisis to crisis: from the “war on terror”, to the Trump presidency, to the Covid-19 pandemic, to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. All of these crises – in their different ways, it should be noted – are the legacy of policy decisions taken by the very same actors now rebuffing scrutiny and oversight.

These crises provide the pretext not only for inaction but for ever-closer, tighter policing of the digital public square by the state – and not transparently, but under a thick pall of secrecy.

As Church warned nearly half a century ago, the biggest threat the US faces is the possibility that its security agencies will turn their enormous powers inwards, against the American public. And that process is exactly what the Twitter Files document.

They show that the intelligence community has come to redefine its primary role – protecting the American public from foreign threats – to include the American public itself as part of that threat.

In 2021, one of the Biden administration’s first priorities was to unveil a National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism. It described the loss of faith in government and extreme polarisation as “fueled by a crisis of disinformation and misinformation often channeled through social media platforms”.

The rise in dissatisfaction among the US citizenry is not the fault of a failed political leadership or an overweening deep state, it seems. Instead, that same failed establishment views the popular backlash – and electoral discontent – in self-serving terms only, as proof of foreign meddling.

In the Twitter Files, Musk has thrown open a small window to show a little of what has been going on behind closed doors. But even that window will shut again soon enough. And then the dark will return – unless the public demands its right to know more.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 MEE

Globalization and Russia-Africa Relations

March 5th, 2023 by Fyodor Lukyanov

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Below is an insightful interview conducted by Kester Kenn Klomegah with Fyodor Lukyanov, Research Director at the Valdai Discussion Club, and Editor of Russia’s Global Affairs journal, focused largely on Russia and Africa relations, and a few aspects of the emerging new world order.

Here are the interview excerpts.

Kester Kenn Klomegah (KKK): During late October Valdai gathering, Vladimir Putin’s speech underscored the fact that Russia was looking for its Soviet-era allies and “non-Western friends” for creating a new world order. What are the implications, from historical perspectives, relating to Africa?

Fyodor Lukyanov (FL): The role of Africa in international affairs is growing, no one can deny it. Russian credit record in relationship with Africa is not easy – from very tight contacts in the decolonization era and period when African countries were building their statehood through the bumpy road in 1990s when Russia suffered a huge economic and geopolitical setback and was forced to the emergency survival to the slow, but steady re-establishment of ties in 21st century. It should be noted that renaissance of Russian interest vis-à-vis Africa started much earlier than Russia – West relations collapsed due to Ukrainian war. And it was result of the realization that Africa will be increasingly important in decades to come.

As far as the Russian vision of the world order is concerned, it should be a polycentric and pretty complicated constellation of countries or group of countries (regional groupings) with a permanently shifting balance and steady work on adjustment of different interests. Not easy, but a vaccine against anybody’s hegemony and opportunity to be flexible in pursuing own needs. Africa as a big group of countries with interests which are both intertwining and contradicting can serve both as a model of the future global picture and a strong unit in this world, if needed. Notwithstanding all that, Africa has its own strengths and weaknesses based on history, but the balance is positive in this new world. Most of potential success depends on African countries themselves and their ability to build up relations with outside powers on rational and calculated basis.

KKK: Soviet Union, of course, enormously supported Africa’s liberation struggle to attain political independence in the 60s. African leaders are looking for external players with funds to invest, transform its economy. What could be Russia’s role, in practical terms, to fight what is frequently referred to as “neocolonialism” in Africa?

FL: Unlike former colonial powers and to some extent China, it is quite clear that Russia doesn’t envisage an exclusive or an ultimately leading role in Africa. There are no political disadvantages associated with Russian relations with Africa. The practical input could be huge, in case Russia will make its homework. Russian resources to invest massively are not comparable with what China or Western states can do. But, Russia has a lot of services which are on the highest international level, while much more cost effective, and they can be offered to African partners. Russia has, for example, developed one of the best systems of digital state services in the world, Russian tax authorities are better equipped with modern technology than most of developed countries. Russian experience in raw material sector is unique, as many technological solutions are independent from other great powers, which is getting more and more important now. As I said, Russian problem is to complete its homework – to list all we can offer and manage those offers in a transparent way, and understandable for partners. It will be done soon, because now it gets very vital for Russian development.

KKK: Do you think Russia is much critical about United States and European Union’s hegemony in Africa? How can we interpret African elites feeling (after the first 2019 summit) about Russia’s renewed economic interests in Africa?

FL: Russia is much critical about the US hegemony where ever it exists, Africa is not an exemption. Russian economic and political focus on Africa is obvious, and skills to implement it in the contemporary way acceptable for partners will increase now.

KKK: What are your views about Russia’s public outreach diplomacy with Africa? How would you evaluate Russia’s engagement, particularly in sustainable development in Africa?

FL: Russia was not very advanced in the diplomatic outreach to Africa until certain moment, situation started to improve in 2010s, now we have entered a new stage. Minister Sergey Lavrov’s activity all over the continent is very telling. As for sustainable development, this concept is a product of a particular political period, I would call it an advanced liberal globalization. This period is over, we are moving towards something else. Frankly, I don’t believe that Russia will be much interested in current circumstances to be part of international efforts to promote sustainable development as understood by international organizations and bureaucracy. But Russia will certainly be eager to work together with particular countries on particular projects.

KKK: Geopolitical confrontation, rivalry and competition in Africa. For now, Russia has too many initiatives and bilateral agreements with African countries. What are your suggestions here for strengthening Russia and African relations especially in the economic directions?

FL: You are right, optimization is needed. Less projects and initiatives, more practical outcome. That is what I mentioned earlier as a necessity to do homework. Combination of very well calibrated regional initiatives and bilateral projects where Russia has clear competitive advantage – be it technology, security or food – should be priorities. And they should be numbered, not endless. Africa is certainly not the main topic for BRICS agenda, those countries prefer to focus on global issues, where they don’t have any major differences (if any), while regional level is more controversial. Anyway there is no intention to build unified front against US and EU. BRICS is by default not confrontational, there is no goal to counterwork the West, rather to bypass it.

In Africa, each BRICS member will have its own agenda, no coordination expected. But then, Africa is represented in BRICS by South Africa. And I would suggest that it would be natural task for South Africa to promote African agenda in this group. Of course, each BRICS state has it own hierarchy of interests, this is normal. But as BRICS aspires greater international role and Africa is growing in significance as an essential part of the world, I see field for common interests. As far as confrontation with the West is concerned, there is no such goal for most of BRICS countries indeed. But if we look at international trends and the speed with which the previous international system collapses and overall competition spreads, I would not be so sure to predict how international situation and stance of BRICS will evolve in years to come.

*

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

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), is now a regular contributor to Global Research. As a versatile researcher, he believes that everyone deserves equal access to quality and trustworthy media reports.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

This story is important in light of my recent report on 96 Canadian children who died suddenly or unexpectedly in the past 3 months (click here).

While there have been many stories of child deaths due to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, this is the first one that involves government compensation.

Taiwan awards compensation to 9 COVID vaccine deaths

Taiwan News published this story on Feb.27, 2023 (click here).

One of the 9 compensated families was a girl aged 5 to 11, who died of fulminant myocarditis after receiving her 2nd shot of Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

The girl lost consciousness 3 days after receiving her 2nd Pfizer vaccine, and a cardiac ultrasound scan showed preserved systolic function, suggesting fulminant myocarditis.

A forensic autopsy found lymphocytic infiltration within her myocardial fibers. Considering the sequence of events, the committee agreed to offer the girl’s family the highest compensation amount for an adverse reaction after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine: NT$3.5 million (USD $114,829).

Another news source suggests she fell into a coma after her 2nd Pfizer vaccine and had an ultrasound scan just before she died (click here)

Her pathology findings are consistent with the James Gill paper called “Autopsy Histopathologic Cardiac Findings in 2 Adolescents Following the Second COVID-19 Vaccine Dose” which describes 2 teenage boys who died with 3-4 days after receiving 2nd dose of Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (click here):

Vietnam: 5 children died after Pfizer mRNA vaccine: 

After Vietnam started vaccinating with Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccines on Nov.23, 2021, within two weeks, 5 children were dead and 120 hospitalized (click here)

  • 17 yo girl (Trieu Phong, vaxxed Dec.2, died Dec.9, 2021) (click here)
  • 15 yo boy (Son La, vaxxed Dec.4, died Dec.6, 2021) (click here)
  • 12 yo boy (Binh Phuoc, vaxxed Nov.29, died Nov.30, 2021) (click here)
  • 16 yo boy (Bac Giang, vaxxed Nov.24, died Nov.28, 2021) (click here)
  • 14 yo girl (Hanoi, vaxxed Nov.27, died Nov.28, 2021) (click here)
  • Vietnam suspends Pfizer batch after 120 children hospitalized (click here)

USA: Many children died after Pfizer mRNA vaccine:

  • Michigan: 13 yo boy died in his sleep 3 days after 2nd vaccine dose (click here)
  • California: 9 yo girl died 2 weeks after 1st Pfizer dose (click here)
  • California: 16 yo boy died 3 weeks after 2nd Pfizer dose (click here)
  • Colorado: 15 yo boy died 2 days after Pfizer (click here)
  • 16 yo Ernesto Ramirez Jr died 5 days after Pfizer (click here)
  • Two US teens died within 3-4 days of 2nd Pfizer dose (click here)
  • Washington: 7 yo boy died 13 days after 1st Pfizer dose (click here)

Canada

  • 17 yo Sean Hartman died (Sep.27, 2021), 33 days after Pfizer (click here)

Other Countries:

  • Ireland: 14 yo boy died 3 weeks after 1st Pfizer dose (click here)
  • New Zealand: teen died weeks after Pfizer dose (click here)
  • Malaysia: 13 yo boy died 18 days after 1st Pfizer dose (click here)
  • Barbados: 14 yo boy died 90 min after 2nd Pfizer dose (click here)
  • Guyana: 13 yo boy died 2hr after 2nd Pfizer dose (click here)
  • Brazil: teen died after Pfizer (click here)

My Take…

This is the first case in the world that I am aware of, involving government compensation of a child death due to Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

When Canadian doctors who pushed mRNA vaccines attack me on the 96 Canadian children who died suddenly in the past 3 months, they do it for a reason. They want to maintain a false reality where COVID-19 vaccines are safe in children and have not killed any children. But in reality, mRNA is neither safe nor effective in children.

They don’t want people to remember that many children died in the US after taking Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, or that 5 kids died in Vietnam within 2 weeks of their Pfizer vaccine rollout. You will rarely hear any of these stories now.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 Zero Hedge


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as 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.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on First Child Death Due to Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Compensated. Taiwanese Girl 5-11 Years Old Died After Second Pfizer Jab. Government Awarded $115,000 to Family
  • Tags: ,

Wars: The Cancelled History

March 5th, 2023 by Manlio Dinucci

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On her visit to New Delhi, Italian Premier Meloni declared “the Russian aggression against Ukraine” is a “provocation at the heart of the UN Charter” and undermined “the rules-based international order”, concluding that “we cannot submit to the law of the fittest”. In this way, the history of the events that led to the current critical situation is erased. We reconstruct it in this episode of Grandangolo, in its essential features:

1. NATO was born from the Bomb.

2. Yugoslavia: the founding war of the new NATO

3. NATO’s expansion eastward toward Russia

4. US and NATO attack and invade Afghanistan and Iraq

5. NATO demolishes the Libyan state

6. US/NATO leadership in the coup in Ukraine

7. The aircraft carrier Italia on the war front

8. USA AND NATO tear up the Treaties and deploy new nuclear weapons in Europe 

The moment when the Cold War ended with the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union in 1991 was fundamental.

The United States took the opportunity to unleash the first post-Cold War conflict in the Gulf, in which the main NATO countries took part, including Italy. At the same time, NATO moves to expand eastward toward Russia.

The first step is the demolition of the Yugoslav Federation, which the United States and the European NATO powers began in 1990.

The war, called “Operation Allied Force”, started on March 24, 1999.

While demolishing the Yugoslav Federation with war, NATO began to expand eastward. This despite Washington having assured USSR, President Mikhail Gorbachev, that “NATO will not extend an inch eastward.”

In twenty years, NATO expanded from 16 to 30 countries. With the forthcoming entry of Sweden and Finland, it will expand to 32 countries increasingly close to Russia. Three other countries – Bosnia and Herzegovina (formerly part of Yugoslavia), Georgia, and Ukraine (formerly part of the USSR) – are candidates to join NATO.

The video of this article has been censored on Youtube. For those who want to see it, here is the link.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. 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 byoblu.

Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from The Transnational

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Wars: The Cancelled History

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The CIA, through its long-time and trusted propaganda unit, RFR/RL (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty), reported on the Bryansk attack by an heir of the Russian Liberation Army, the Russian Volunteer Corps. The Russian Liberation Army was a Nazi collaborationist formation during WWII organized by Heinrich Himmler, Reichsführer of the Schutzstaffel, or SS (Gestapo).

The Russian Volunteer Corps “uses symbols of the Russian Liberation Army…  which is typical for Russian neo-Nazis,” according to Antifascist Europe. The group “includes Russians from the Azov regiment of the Ukrainian National Guard and the Right Sector Ukrainian Volunteer Corps.”

“The ultimate programme is to overthrow the Putin regime and establish a new, truly faithful and decent power in Russia that will not engage in acts of aggression and wage local wars but will peacefully co-exist with the rest of the world, focusing more on domestic rather than foreign policy”.

This declaration does not differ substantially from that issued by USG war chieftain, Lloyd Austin, who said Russia must be “weakened.” In other words, the USG is on the same page as a group of neo-nazi terrorists attacking and killing civilians in Russia. This shouldn’t be surprising, considering the degree the CIA collaborated with Nazis.

RFR/RL did mention the Nazi connection, and relied on the propaganda outfit Bellingcat (receives money from USG and intelligence agencies), “which has researched right-wing extremist groups, described the Volunteer Corps as ‘a unit… made up primarily of anti-Putin, anti-Kremlin, Russian far-right figures active in Ukraine.’”

According to former Deputy of the State Duma, Ilya Ponomarev, a Russian “partisan” group, the National Republican Army, is responsible for the assassination of Darya Dugina on 20 August. Darya was the daughter of the political philosopher Aleksandr Dugin, a supporter of Vladimir Putin.

The Zelenskyy government, via its state-controlled propaganda media, said the Russian Volunteer Corps, the Freedom Legion, and the National Republican Army signed a declaration of cooperation in Irpin, on the outskirts of Kyiv, in August. The Freedom Legion, or Freedom of Russia Legion, was organized with the help of Ukraine’s SBU intelligence agency.

The SBU worked closely with C14, the former youth wing of the ultranationalist political party Svoboda, and other neo-nazi groups in Ukraine. C14 was notorious for attacks on Romani camps, in participation with other neo-nazi groups (Karpatska Sich, Right Sector, and Traditsii i Poryadok).

In addition, the SBU is used to initiate criminal proceedings against political opponents. According to Valery Yehoshina, writing for RFE/RL, “there are friendly satellite organizations in the orbit of security forces [preferring] even more radical actions,” including assassination, kidnapping, and torture of political opposition.

Max Blumenthal writes,

The Ukrainian SBU security services has served as the enforcement arm of the officially authorized campaign of repression. With training from the CIA and close coordination with Ukraine’s state-backed neo-Nazi paramilitaries, the SBU has spent the past weeks [from April, 2022] filling its vast archipelago of torture dungeons with political dissidents. (Emphasis added.)

In short, the government of Ukraine, its security service, and associated nazi groups and paramilitaries are actively involved in terror attacks and murdering civilians in Russia proper.

Andriy Yusov, of the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine, “appeared to endorse any sort of cross-border attack,” and declared in the wake of the attack on Russian civilians, “Perhaps Russians are beginning to wake up, realize something, and take some concrete steps.”

Yusov and his boss, Volodymyr Oleksandrovych Zelenskyy, are suffering from a cognitive grand mal seizure.

Russians understand the terror attacks inside their country are conducted by Nazis, the heirs of the SS and its Einsatzgruppen, a paramilitary death squad that killed Russians, Jews, Romani, and partisans in Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe and Russia during WWII.

The Russian people, unlike Americans and many Europeans, remember the sacrifices made in the “Great Patriotic War” (WWII) as it fought against Nazi Germany and its collaborationists in Ukraine and elsewhere in Eastern Europe.

Indeed, as Yusov said, the Russian people are waking up—not to a threat by Putin, but rather that posed by Nazi executioners crossing the border to kill them, as Hitler’s Nazis did during Operation Barbarossa in the summer of 1941, the largest land offensive in human history.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 the author’s blog site, Kurt Nimmo on Geopolitics.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Neo-Nazi Terrorists Invade Russia, Kill Civilians
  • Tags: ,

India’s Education Market: The Next Neo-Colonial Frontier

March 5th, 2023 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Over the last week or so, Australian politicians and representatives of the university sector got busy pressing flesh in India, hoping to open avenues that have largely remained aspirational.  It was timed to coincide with G20 talks in New Delhi, which has seen a flurry of contentious meetings traversing security, economics and education, all taking place in the shadow of the Ukraine War.

A starring outcome of the various discussions was an agreement between Canberra and New Delhi to ensure the mutual recognition of qualifications.  On March 3, the Australian Minister for Education, Jason Clare, stated in a media release that the Mechanism for the Mutual Recognition of Qualifications was “India’s most comprehensive education agreement of its type with another country.”

Such a mechanism would ensure that Indian students attaining a degree from an Australian university would have it recognised should they wish to continue higher education in India.  The release continues to optimistically extol the merits of the mechanism, which would open “a world of possibilities to develop flexible and innovative partnerships between the two countries.”  Minister Clare and his counterpart Shri Dharmendra Pradhan also reaffirmed their wish to establish an Australia India Working Group on Transnational Partnerships.

A number of memoranda of understanding, totalling 11 in all, were also signed, stressing bilateral cooperation between India and Australia in a number of fields, including law and bio-innovation.

“The developments today,” announced the Indian Ministry of Education with certain effusion, “will create more opportunities for two-way mobility of students and professionals for the purpose of education and employment, and pave the way for making education the biggest enabler in taking India-Australia bilateral relationship to greater heights and shared aspirations.”

The public relations front was also busy with fanfare.  Brian Schmidt, Nobel laureate and vice-chancellor of the Australian National University, met students and officials at Sri Venkateswara College of the University of Delhi.  His polite welcome was shaded by the more raucous one given to former Australian test cricketer Adam Gilchrist, who acts as the University of Wollongong’s global brand ambassador. For such institutions, brands come before brains.

Gilchrist’s presence was unsurprising, given the zeal with which the university he represents is pursuing a base in India.  (The added point here is that Indians are utterly bonkers for cricket.)  The soft power of cricketing appeal has been twinned with the hard corporate agenda.  In July 2022, a Letter of Intent was signed between the University of Wollongong and the Gujarat International Finance Tec-City (GIFT City).  According to the university, the intention is “to establish a location for teaching, research and industry engagement in GIFT City within a partnership or a stand-alone basis.”  This will further supplement pre-existing research collaborations in a number of fields, including 3D bioprinting, transportation and advanced medicine.

These events have served to show how starry-eyed education apparatchiks in Australia are increasingly looking to India as an alternative to China.  Earlier this year, applications for student visas from India exceeded those from China.

What will eventuate from this round robin chat fest is hard to tell.  The modern university behaves much as a colonial enterprise, with all its failings and brute drawbacks.  In certain practices, they resemble the VOC or British East India Company.  The guns and ammunition might have been abandoned but the residual ruthless mercantilism remains.

This takes the form of International Branch Campuses (IBCs), a booming neo-colonial favourite of universities from the United States, UK, Australia and a number of EU member states.  Between 2002 and 2006, the number of IBCs grew from 18 to 82.  By 2009, that number had swollen to 162.  In some part, the move into the global education market, with its emphasis on academic capitalism, was encouraged by declines in domestic government funding.  But it also betrayed a lazy myopia on the part of university managers.

Vice-chancellors, equipped with the powers of petty despotism, resemble functionaries in the service of capital, and not always good capital at that.  They continue to embrace the plundering model of the rich student market, hoping to reap the rewards of the developing world spouting cliches about mutual advantage and “world class” education.  If China falls out of favour, another market will take its place.

Deakin University’s vice-chancellor, Iain Martin, gives us a sense of this attitude.  India had “250 million people between the ages of 18 and 26 and an overcrowded, overly stressed domestic education system.”  Alas, standalone institutions from the outside were hard to establish as things stood.  Thankfully, “the government has realised it needs to work with others outside India to open up educational opportunities.”

As the Australian Financial Review reports, “the sound of billions of dollars in tuition fees from a new generation of Indian students who are not just keen to study here, but to stay on to work and gain permanent residency, is pure happiness to the ears of vice-chancellors.”

The welfare of such students, however, is quite a different thing.  Those who tend to represent cash cows are rarely taken seriously, except for their cash.  The quality of what they receive is less significant than what they provide to university coffers.  This works both ways, whether through the IBCs, or in the metropole where the main university campus is located.  The treatment meted out to international students by Australian universities during the pandemic was nothing short of atrocious, characterised by callousness regarding the delivery of courses and uneven support schemes.

Another area of educational importance is also being neglected in these latest negotiations.  India’s officials and policy makers have expressed considerable interest in the role of vocational education.  (This was touched on in the Australia India Future Skills initiative announced in March 2022 by the previous government.)  A number of Australian universities are what are termed “dual sector” entities, straddling both tertiary and vocational. But its conspicuous absence on this occasion suggests that Australian universities, and some of their counterparts, are hoping for the easy cash-filled options.

*

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

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He currently lectures at RMIT University.  He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected].

Featured image: Shri Dharmendra Pradhan (Licensed under GODL-India)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on India’s Education Market: The Next Neo-Colonial Frontier
  • Tags:

China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis

March 5th, 2023 by China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs

The following document released by China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on February 24th 2023 has been in the object of analysis as well a response and rebuttal by the Biden administration.

It should be mentioned that’s the publication of this important document pertaining to Ukraine was preceded by the release on February 20th, 2023 of a broader and more detailed text entitled US Hegemony and Its Perils

***

1. Respecting the sovereignty of all countries. Universally recognized international law, including the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, must be strictly observed. The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld. All countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor, are equal members of the international community. All parties should jointly uphold the basic norms governing international relations and defend international fairness and justice. Equal and uniform application of international law should be promoted, while double standards must be rejected.

2. Abandoning the Cold War mentality. The security of a country should not be pursued at the expense of others. The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs. The legitimate security interests and concerns of all countries must be taken seriously and addressed properly. There is no simple solution to a complex issue. All parties should, following the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security and bearing in mind the long-term peace and stability of the world, help forge a balanced, effective and sustainable European security architecture. All parties should oppose the pursuit of one’s own security at the cost of others’ security, prevent bloc confrontation, and work together for peace and stability on the Eurasian Continent.

3. Ceasing hostilities. Conflict and war benefit no one. All parties must stay rational and exercise restraint, avoid fanning the flames and aggravating tensions, and prevent the crisis from deteriorating further or even spiraling out of control. All parties should support Russia and Ukraine in working in the same direction and resuming direct dialogue as quickly as possible, so as to gradually deescalate the situation and ultimately reach a comprehensive ceasefire.

4. Resuming peace talks. Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis. All efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis must be encouraged and supported. The international community should stay committed to the right approach of promoting talks for peace, help parties to the conflict open the door to a political settlement as soon as possible, and create conditions and platforms for the resumption of negotiation. China will continue to play a constructive role in this regard.

5. Resolving the humanitarian crisis. All measures conducive to easing the humanitarian crisis must be encouraged and supported. Humanitarian operations should follow the principles of neutrality and impartiality, and humanitarian issues should not be politicized. The safety of civilians must be effectively protected, and humanitarian corridors should be set up for the evacuation of civilians from conflict zones. Efforts are needed to increase humanitarian assistance to relevant areas, improve humanitarian conditions, and provide rapid, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access, with a view to preventing a humanitarian crisis on a larger scale. The UN should be supported in playing a coordinating role in channeling humanitarian aid to conflict zones.

6. Protecting civilians and prisoners of war (POWs). Parties to the conflict should strictly abide by international humanitarian law, avoid attacking civilians or civilian facilities, protect women, children and other victims of the conflict, and respect the basic rights of POWs. China supports the exchange of POWs between Russia and Ukraine, and calls on all parties to create more favorable conditions for this purpose.

7. Keeping nuclear power plants safe. China opposes armed attacks against nuclear power plants or other peaceful nuclear facilities, and calls on all parties to comply with international law including the Convention on Nuclear Safety (CNS) and resolutely avoid man-made nuclear accidents. China supports the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in playing a constructive role in promoting the safety and security of peaceful nuclear facilities.

8. Reducing strategic risks. Nuclear weapons must not be used and nuclear wars must not be fought. The threat or use of nuclear weapons should be opposed. Nuclear proliferation must be prevented and nuclear crisis avoided. China opposes the research, development and use of chemical and biological weapons by any country under any circumstances.

9. Facilitating grain exports. All parties need to implement the Black Sea Grain Initiative signed by Russia, Türkiye, Ukraine and the UN fully and effectively in a balanced manner, and support the UN in playing an important role in this regard. The cooperation initiative on global food security proposed by China provides a feasible solution to the global food crisis.

10. Stopping unilateral sanctions. Unilateral sanctions and maximum pressure cannot solve the issue; they only create new problems. China opposes unilateral sanctions unauthorized by the UN Security Council. Relevant countries should stop abusing unilateral sanctions and “long-arm jurisdiction” against other countries, so as to do their share in deescalating the Ukraine crisis and create conditions for developing countries to grow their economies and better the lives of their people.

11. Keeping industrial and supply chains stable. All parties should earnestly maintain the existing world economic system and oppose using the world economy as a tool or weapon for political purposes. Joint efforts are needed to mitigate the spillovers of the crisis and prevent it from disrupting international cooperation in energy, finance, food trade and transportation and undermining the global economic recovery.

12. Promoting post-conflict reconstruction. The international community needs to take measures to support post-conflict reconstruction in conflict zones. China stands ready to provide assistance and play a constructive role in this endeavor.

Why Biden Snubbed China’s Ukraine Peace Plan

March 5th, 2023 by Medea Benjamin

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

There’s something irrational about President Biden’s knee-jerk dismissal of China’s 12-point peace proposal titled “China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis.”

“Not rational” is how Biden described the plan that calls for de-escalation toward a ceasefire, respect for national sovereignty, establishment of humanitarian corridors and resumption of peace talks.

“Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution to the Ukraine crisis,” reads the plan. “All efforts conducive to the peaceful settlement of the crisis must be encouraged and supported.”

Biden turned thumbs down.

 “I’ve seen nothing in the plan that would indicate that there is something that would be beneficial to anyone other than Russia if the Chinese plan were followed,” Biden told the press.

In a brutal conflict that has left thousands of dead Ukrainian civilians, hundreds of thousands of dead soldiers, eight million Ukrainians displaced from their homes, contamination of land, air and water, increased greenhouse gasses and disruption of the global food supply, China’s call for de-escalation would surely benefit someone in Ukraine.

Other points in China’s plan, which is really more a set of principles rather than a detailed proposal, call for protection for prisoners of war, cessation of attacks on civilians, safeguards for nuclear power plants and facilitation of grain exports.

“The idea that China is going to be negotiating the outcome of a war that’s a totally unjust war for Ukraine is just not rational,” said Biden.

Instead of engaging China–a country of 1.5 billion people, the world’s largest exporter, the owner of a trillion dollars in US debt and an industrial giant–in negotiating an end to the crisis in Ukraine, the Biden administration prefers to wag its finger and bark at China, warning it not to arm Russia in the conflict.

Psychologists might call this finger-wagging projection–the old pot calling the kettle black routine. It is the US, not China, that is fueling the conflict with at least $45 billion dollars in ammunition, drones, tanks and rockets in a proxy war that risks–with one miscalculation–turning the world to ash in a nuclear holocaust.

It is the US, not China, that has provoked this crisis by encouraging Ukraine to join NATO, a hostile military alliance that targets Russia in mock nuclear strikes, and by backing a 2014 coup of Ukraine’s democratically elected Russia-friendly president Viktor Yanukovych, thus triggering a civil war between Ukrainian nationalists and ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, regions Russia has more recently annexed.

Biden’s sour attitude toward the Chinese peace framework hardly comes as a surprise. After all, even former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett candidly acknowledged in a five-hour interview on YouTube that it was the West that last March blocked a near-peace deal he had mediated between Ukraine and Russia.

Why did the US block a peace deal? Why won’t President Biden provide a serious response to the Chinese peace plan, let alone engage the Chinese at a negotiating table?

President Biden and his coterie of neo-conservatives, among them Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, have no interest in peace if it means the US concedes hegemonic power to a multi-polar world untethered from the all-mighty dollar.

What may have gotten Biden unnerved—besides the possibility that China might emerge the hero in this bloody saga—is China’s call for the lifting of unilateral sanctions. The US imposes unilateral sanctions on officials and companies from Russia, China and Iran. It imposes sanctions on whole countries, too, like Cuba, where a cruel 60-year embargo, plus assignment to the State Sponsor of Terrorism list, made it difficult for Cuba to obtain syringes to administer its own vaccines during the COVID pandemic. Oh, and let’s not forget Syria, where after an earthquake killed tens of thousands and left hundreds of thousands homeless, the country struggles to receive medicine and blankets due to US sanctions that discourage humanitarian aid workers from operating inside Syria.

Despite China’s insistence it is not considering weapons shipments to Russia, Reuters reports the Biden administration is taking the pulse of G-7 countries to see if they would approve new sanctions against China if that country provides Russia with military support.

The idea that China could play a positive role was also dismissed by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who said, “China doesn’t have much credibility because they have not been able to condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine.”

Ditto from US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who told ABC’s Good Morning America, “China has been trying to have it both ways: It’s on the one hand trying to present itself publicly as neutral and seeking peace, while at the same time it is talking up Russia’s false narrative about the war.”

False narrative or different perspective?

In August of 2022, China’s ambassador to Moscow charged that the United States was the “main instigator”of the Ukraine war, provoking Russia with NATO expansion to Russia’s borders.

This is not an uncommon perspective and is one shared by economist Jeffrey Sachs who, in a February 25, 2023  video directed at thousands of anti-war protesters in Berlin, said the war in Ukraine did not start a year ago, but nine years ago when the US backed the coup that overthrew Yanukovych after he preferred Russia’s loan terms to the European Union’s offer.

Shortly after China released its peace framework, the Kremlin responded cautiously, lauding the Chinese effort to help but adding that the details “need to be painstakingly analyzed taking into account the interests of all the different sides.” As for Ukraine, President Zelensky hopes to meet soon with Chinese President Xi Jinping to explore China’s peace proposal and dissuade China from supplying weapons to Russia.

The peace proposal garnered more positive response from countries neighboring the warring states. Putin’s ally in Belarus, leader Alexander Lukashenko, said his country “fully supports” the Beijing plan. Kazakhstan approved of China’s peace framework in a statement describing it as “worthy of support.” Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orbán–who wants his country to stay out of the war– also showed support for the proposal.

China’s call for a peaceful solution stands in stark contrast to US warmongering this past year, when Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, a former Raytheon board member, said the US aims to weaken Russia, presumably for regime change–a strategy that failed miserably in Afghanistan where a near 20-year US occupation left the country broke and starving.

China’s support for de-escalation is consistent with its long-standing opposition to US/NATO expansion, now extending into the Pacific with hundreds of US bases encircling China, including a new base in Guam to house 5,000 marines. From China’s perspective, US militarism jeopardizes the peaceful reunification of the People’s Republic of China with its break-away province of Taiwan. For China, Taiwan is unfinished business, left over from the civil war 70 years ago.

In provocations reminiscent of US meddling in Ukraine, a hawkish Congress last year approved $10 billion in weapons and military training for Taiwan, while House leader Nancy Pelosi flew to Taipei – over protests from her constituents–to whip up tension in a move that brought US-China climate cooperation to a halt.

A US willingness to work with China on a peace plan for Ukraine might not only help stop the daily loss of lives in Ukraine and prevent a nuclear confrontation, but also pave the way for cooperation with China on all kinds of other issues–from medicine to education to climate–that would benefit the entire globe.

*

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

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK, and author of several books, including War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict.

Marcy Winograd serves as Co-Chair of the Peace in Ukraine Coalition, which calls for a ceasefire, diplomacy and an end to weapons shipments that escalate the war in Ukraine.

Wei Yu is the China Is Not Our Enemy campaign coordinator for CODEPINK.

Featured image is from GlobelyNews

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Why Biden Snubbed China’s Ukraine Peace Plan
  • Tags:

Former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter — also a former United States Marine Corps officer — joins Mike Adams in a far-reaching interview that covers Ukraine, Russia, NATO and Nord Stream.

Ritter is of course heavily censored on mainstream platforms and is widely condemned by officials in the US government, including those in the State Dept. That’s because his analysis doesn’t coincide with the official propaganda being catapulted into the info war by the mainstream media.

Ritter’s take on the current situation is that Ukraine’s leadership (Zelensky) is hopelessly corrupt and deeply infested with Nazis and murderers who issue hit lists of journalists to execute. Ritter himself has now achieved the No. 1 top position on one such list that’s run by the Zelensky government. (Yes, the Zelensky regime quite literally runs a kill list that targets journalists.)

During the interview, I ask Ritter if he is “anti-war,” and he disagrees, stating that he wants peace for everyone, but is also trained on how to defeat enemies and is willing to go to battle to halt those who are aggressors against innocent people or nations.

Ritter explains that NATO is the aggressor in this conflict, and that NATO has broken every promise, violated every treaty and incessantly lied its way into transforming Ukraine into a proxy state for NATO, from which the West plans to completely destroy Russia and its people.

Watch the full interview with Scott Ritter here, via Brighteon.com:

Hear the full details in the interview, below. Scott Ritter’s website is www.ScottRitterExtra.com

I also ask Ritter about Russia’s nuclear weapons capabilities, hypersonic missiles, hyperglide vehicles and anti-air systems. He reiterates that Russia is far ahead of the West in weapons technology — both offensive and defensive — and that if Russia were to decide to launch nuclear weapons against western cities, there’s nothing in the US military defensive arsenal that could stop those missiles from reaching their intended targets.

Even worse, he explains that Russia has the Sarmat-II missile systems already deployed, and these missiles — which carry up to 15 nuclear re-entry vehicles each — can be launched on a trajectory over the South Pole, bringing them into the United States from a direction for which US national defense forces are not prepared.

He explains that the US focuses its missile tracking and interdiction systems on the North Pole region, since that’s obviously the shortest distance between Russia and the continental United States. But Russia’s missiles have the range to go the other way and travel over the south pole of the planet.

 

Davos 2023: Fragmenting the World

March 5th, 2023 by Rick Thomas

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

First published on January 15, 2023

The annual Davos Boys Club (it’s also open to girls as long as they know their place) is meeting Jan 16 – 20 in the Swiss Alps. The uber wealthy technocrats will discuss how to fix the fragmented world they broke. The promo for the event says it all, no need to dig for a hidden agenda:

Canadian Deputy Crime Minister Chystia Freeland will be there sniffing and twitching like she just fell off the bus on East Hastings. The usual suspects will attend, basking in the glow of their mutual sociopathy. Hopefully, they will squeeze in some skiing, and maybe cruise by the elementary school for future prospects. Epstein sightings are predicted.

The meeting will bring together 2700 members including 52 heads of state, 600 CEO’s, 160 young globalists and 125 experts from the world’s leading universities, research institutions, and think tanks. From the United States: the likes of FBI director Chris Wray, the CEOs of Amazon, BlackRock, and Pfizer, top officials at the Gates Foundation and in the Soros network, and the Publisher of The New York Times, to name a few. Special guests include:

  • John F. Kerry, Special Presidential Envoy for Climate of the United States of America
  • Avril Haines, US Director of National Intelligence
  • Martin J. Walsh, Secretary of Labor of the United States
  • Katherine Tai, United States Trade Representative
  • Chrystia Freeland, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance of Canada
  • Christine Lagarde, President, European Central Bank

Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky will speak at the annual World Economic Forum conference in January 2023, and he will be featured on a panel with Jens Stoltenberg, the secretary-general of NATO, and CNN’s Fareed Zakaria. The panel will be called “Restoring Security and Peace,” which is Orwellian Newspeak for “How do we Balkanise Russia after we Destroy Ukraine.”

Conspicuously absent, there will be no Russian delegation this year.

In a recent Globe and Mail article, WEF managing director Adrian Monck complains that trolls are wrecking all of Klaus Schwab’s beautiful wickedness, by spreading far-right disinfo and stuff. He rattles on trying to prove the WEF are nice guys and would never plot world takeover or pull the wings off butterflies: “A pandemic was raging, and the World Economic Forum launched The Great Reset, promoting the idea of building back better so that economies could emerge greener and fairer out of the pandemic,” he says without blinking.

He continues on with the usual scripted propaganda that anti-semitic, far-right extremists, conspiracy-theorists, white-supremacists, neo-nazis, other-non-conformists are-misbehaving on the internet.

Why can’t they just drink the koolaid and do what they’re told like everybody else?

He is simply astonished that one website claimed the Great Reset was a “response to the coronavirus faked crisis” and would usher in “global communism” to ensure “no one will be able to own anything.” Wow, imagine that.

And yet, straight out of the horse’s mouth, the WEF itself suggests that a globalised world is best managed by a self-selected coalition of multinational corporations, governments and civil society organisations, which it expresses through initiatives like the Great Reset and the Global Redesign.

The main themes for 2023 will include: [translations provided by the author]

  1. Energy and Food Crises in the context of a New System for Energy, Climate and Nature [how to starve the plebs into submission]
  2. High Inflation, Low Growth, High Debt Economy in the context of a New System for Investment, Trade and Infrastructure [how to bankrupt the plebs into submission]
  3. Industry Headwinds in the context of a New System for Harnessing Frontier Technologies for Private Sector Innovation and Resilience [how to create the Borg]
  4. Social Vulnerabilities in the context of a New System for Work, Skills and Care [how to exploit the crisis they created]
  5. Geopolitical Risks in the context of a New System for Dialogue and Cooperation in a Multipolar World [how to exploit the war in Ukraine and/or how to exploit the crises they made without blowing themselves up in the process]

During the annual meeting the population of Davos explodes to well over 100,000, including participants, media, security, and support staff. About 2,500 in that surge are WEF delegates and the remainder comprise their entourage and security necessary for the delegates’ appearances, about 40 staff members per delegate.

Becoming an official member of WEF is expensive to say the least. You must be either in the billionaire crowd or a world leader whose tax payers foot the bill.

It costs $19,000 per person to attend.

Unfortunately, you cannot do so unless your organisation is also a WEF member. That costs between $60,000 and $600,000 a year, depending on your “partner” status. Doing the math, it costs minimum $79,000 per delegate to attend plus the additional cost for flights, accomodation and meals for their private entourages.

Doing more math: Schwab and the WEF are raking in a minimum of $213,000,000 and that would be the most conservative estimate. No doubt, the WEF gets a cut from all the hotels and other services, and so it would not be out of line to estimate at least a billion dollars per year in income.

Fortunately, the Swiss Army will be there, armed with their Swiss Army Knives, to keep all the nasty conspiracy theorists from crashing the party and spoiling all the fun. The Swiss government announced:

“For the use of the army in the form of support services on the occasion of the WEF from 10 to 26 January, the Federal Parliament has set an upper limit of 5,000 military personnel … With armed fighter jets on permanent patrol duty during the conference period, ground-to-air defence, additional radars, enhanced airspace surveillance and 24-hour air police service (throughout Switzerland).”

Though the WEF meets in Davos every year, it is actually headquartered in the tiny town of Cologny, outside of Geneva, 265 miles west.

One of Cologny’s claims to fame is that a group of Romantic poets and writers spent the summer there in 1816: Lord Byron, John Polidori, Mary Shelley and Percy Bysshe Shelley. Due to the poor weather, the guests spent days indoors telling each other horror stories. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and John Polidori’s The Vampyre, were the result of these fireplace sessions. Frankenstein is the story of a mad scientist who creates a monster out of used body parts, and The Vampyre is the story of a blood-sucking aristocrat who preys upon society. Sweet.

Despite the downplaying of regular attendees like Bono, who smirks that Davos is a herd of “fat cows in the snow,” the reality is that the WEF is increasingly becoming the centre of global decision-making. The United Nations did not become the forum that the elites could use to create their global corporate empire, simply because there is too much red tape and policies within the United Nations’ constitution that cannot be over-riden.

Secondly, the United Nations is built on the nation-state model, something the WEF wants to do away with.

The WEF is the future world government, plain and simple. Schwab is already its first president, and arguably the unacknowledged and unofficial CEO of the world.

All that has to happen next, through their planned series of forthcoming mega-crisis, is for the world to acknowledge the WEF’s conquest of all nation states and submit to its supreme authority.

The pandemic was the first stage towards the WEF’s endgame.

The World Health Organisation successfully enlisted 194 nations into a global coup d’etat without firing a shot.

There are three things the WEF needs to destroy in order to consolidate their power: national sovereignty, civil rights and faith in our Creator. Only the first one can be destroyed.

They can take away the power of nations on the world stage. Sovereignty has been undergoing a gradual degradation for decades. As Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, “Canada is the world’s first post-national state,” referring to the fact that his cabinet is infiltrated by WEF members.

[Here is a complete list of Canadian elected officials who are WEF members.]

Civil rights and faith are impossible to destroy, and as history has shown, violating either results in an increase. Civil rights are the outward political expression of the inner spiritual path. Those who are on a spiritual journey, or those who value their freedom are boldly indignant when injustice occurs, especially when people’s right to basic human existence is threatened. The universe reveals that good is more powerful than evil. For all the evil that is done under the sun, the good that it produces is a hundred times greater.

The seed of destruction is planted in every totalitarian regime because tyranny is ultimately suicidal for all involved. We can, therefore, stand firm and say in confidence, “Bring it on, Schwab, bring it on.”

*

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

Rick Thomas is a musician, activist and the author of How to Defeat the New World Order. For social activism: VictoryCanada.today and for all articles: Substack.

All images in this article are from the author

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @globalresearch_crg.

***

This important article was originally published on December 12, 2017 by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

Our thanks to Jan Oberg of Transnational for bringing this to our attention. 

***

What this article fails to acknowledge is that the collapse of the Soviet Union was a carefully engineered strategic project which was formulated by the U.S. in the immediate wake of the Second World War.

It was “regime change” coupled with the fragmentation and destruction of an entire country.

The “Who Promised What” and “Security Assurances” narrative was based on an outright lie. The reassurances from CIA Director Robert Gates and President G.H. W. Bush are meaningless.

Both Gorbachev and Yeltsin were “intelligence assets”. They were complicit in the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, March 5, 2023

 

***

Declassified documents show security assurances against NATO expansion to Soviet leaders from Baker, Bush, Genscher, Kohl, Gates, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Hurd, Major, and Woerner.

Slavic Studies Panel Addresses “Who Promised What to Whom on NATO Expansion?”

U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s famous “not one inch eastward” assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified U.S., Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels.

The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of “pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.”[1] The key phrase, buttressed by the documents, is “led to believe.”

President George H.W. Bush had assured Gorbachev during the Malta summit in December 1989 that the U.S. would not take advantage (“I have not jumped up and down on the Berlin Wall”) of the revolutions in Eastern Europe to harm Soviet interests; but neither Bush nor Gorbachev at that point (or for that matter, West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl) expected so soon the collapse of East Germany or the speed of German unification.[2]

The first concrete assurances by Western leaders on NATO began on January 31, 1990, when West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher opened the bidding with a major public speech at Tutzing, in Bavaria, on German unification.

The U.S. Embassy in Bonn (see Document 1) informed Washington that Genscher made clear “that the changes in Eastern Europe and the German unification process must not lead to an ‘impairment of Soviet security interests.’ Therefore, NATO should rule out an ‘expansion of its territory towards the east, i.e. moving it closer to the Soviet borders.’” The Bonn cable also noted Genscher’s proposal to leave the East German territory out of NATO military structures even in a unified Germany in NATO.[3]

This latter idea of special status for the GDR territory was codified in the final German unification treaty signed on September 12, 1990, by the Two-Plus-Four foreign ministers (see Document 25).

The former idea about “closer to the Soviet borders” is written down not in treaties but in multiple memoranda of conversation between the Soviets and the highest-level Western interlocutors (Genscher, Kohl, Baker, Gates, Bush, Mitterrand, Thatcher, Major, Woerner, and others) offering assurances throughout 1990 and into 1991 about protecting Soviet security interests and including the USSR in new European security structures.

Michail Gorbachev discussing German unification with Hans-Dietrich Genscher and Helmut Kohl in Russia, July 15, 1990. Photo: Bundesbildstelle / Presseund Informationsamt der Bundesregierung.

The two issues were related but not the same. Subsequent analysis sometimes conflated the two and argued that the discussion did not involve all of Europe. The documents published below show clearly that it did.

The “Tutzing formula” immediately became the center of a flurry of important diplomatic discussions over the next 10 days in 1990, leading to the crucial February 10, 1990, meeting in Moscow between Kohl and Gorbachev when the West German leader achieved Soviet assent in principle to German unification in NATO, as long as NATO did not expand to the east. The Soviets would need much more time to work with their domestic opinion (and financial aid from the West Germans) before formally signing the deal in September 1990.

The conversations before Kohl’s assurance involved explicit discussion of NATO expansion, the Central and East European countries, and how to convince the Soviets to accept unification. For example, on February 6, 1990, when Genscher met with British Foreign Minister Douglas Hurd, the British record showed Genscher saying, “The Russians must have some assurance that if, for example, the Polish Government left the Warsaw Pact one day, they would not join NATO the next.” (See Document 2)

Having met with Genscher on his way into discussions with the Soviets, Baker repeated exactly the Genscher formulation in his meeting with Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze on February 9, 1990, (see Document 4); and even more importantly, face to face with Gorbachev.

Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the “not one inch eastward” formula with Gorbachev in the February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev’s statement in response to the assurances that “NATO expansion is unacceptable.”

Baker assured Gorbachev that “neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place,” and that the Americans understood that “not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.” (See Document 6)

Afterwards, Baker wrote to Helmut Kohl who would meet with the Soviet leader on the next day, with much of the very same language. Baker reported: “And then I put the following question to him [Gorbachev]. Would you prefer to see a united Germany outside of NATO, independent and with no U.S. forces or would you prefer a unified Germany to be tied to NATO, with assurances that NATO’s jurisdiction would not shift one inch eastward from its present position?

He answered that the Soviet leadership was giving real thought to all such options [….] He then added, ‘Certainly any extension of the zone of NATO would be unacceptable.’” Baker added in parentheses, for Kohl’s benefit, “By implication, NATO in its current zone might be acceptable.” (See Document 8)

Well-briefed by the American secretary of state, the West German chancellor understood a key Soviet bottom line, and assured Gorbachev on February 10, 1990: “We believe that NATO should not expand the sphere of its activity.” (See Document 9) After this meeting, Kohl could hardly contain his excitement at Gorbachev’s agreement in principle for German unification and, as part of the Helsinki formula that states choose their own alliances, so Germany could choose NATO. Kohl described in his memoirs walking all night around Moscow – but still understanding there was a price still to pay.

All the Western foreign ministers were on board with Genscher, Kohl, and Baker. Next came the British foreign minister, Douglas Hurd, on April 11, 1990. At this point, the East Germans had voted overwhelmingly for the deutschmark and for rapid unification, in the March 18 elections in which Kohl had surprised almost all observers with a real victory.

Kohl’s analyses (first explained to Bush on December 3, 1989) that the GDR’s collapse would open all possibilities, that he had to run to get to the head of the train, that he needed U.S. backing, that unification could happen faster than anyone thought possible – all turned out to be correct.

Monetary union would proceed as early as July and the assurances about security kept coming. Hurd reinforced the Baker-Genscher-Kohl message in his meeting with Gorbachev in Moscow, April 11, 1990, saying that Britain clearly “recognized the importance of doing nothing to prejudice Soviet interests and dignity.” (See Document 15)

The Baker conversation with Shevardnadze on May 4, 1990, as Baker described it in his own report to President Bush, most eloquently described what Western leaders were telling Gorbachev exactly at the moment: “I used your speech and our recognition of the need to adapt NATO, politically and militarily, and to develop CSCE to reassure Shevardnadze that the process would not yield winners and losers. Instead, it would produce a new legitimate European structure – one that would be inclusive, not exclusive.” (See Document 17)

Baker said it again, directly to Gorbachev on May 18, 1990 in Moscow, giving Gorbachev his “nine points,” which included the transformation of NATO, strengthening European structures, keeping Germany non-nuclear, and taking Soviet security interests into account.

Baker started off his remarks, “Before saying a few words about the German issue, I wanted to emphasize that our policies are not aimed at separating Eastern Europe from the Soviet Union. We had that policy before. But today we are interested in building a stable Europe, and doing it together with you.” (See Document 18)

The French leader Francois Mitterrand was not in a mind-meld with the Americans, quite the contrary, as evidenced by his telling Gorbachev in Moscow on May 25, 1990, that he was “personally in favor of gradually dismantling the military blocs”; but Mitterrand continued the cascade of assurances by saying the West must “create security conditions for you, as well as European security as a whole.” (See Document 19) Mitterrand immediately wrote Bush in a “Cher George” letter about his conversation with the Soviet leader, that “we would certainly not refuse to detail the guarantees that he would have a right to expect for his country’s security.” (See Document 20)

At the Washington summit on May 31, 1990, Bush went out of his way to assure Gorbachev that Germany in NATO would never be directed at the USSR: “Believe me, we are not pushing Germany towards unification, and it is not us who determines the pace of this process. And of course, we have no intention, even in our thoughts, to harm the Soviet Union in any fashion. That is why we are speaking in favor of German unification in NATO without ignoring the wider context of the CSCE, taking the traditional economic ties between the two German states into consideration. Such a model, in our view, corresponds to the Soviet interests as well.” (See Document 21)

The “Iron Lady” also pitched in, after the Washington summit, in her meeting with Gorbachev in London on June 8, 1990. Thatcher anticipated the moves the Americans (with her support) would take in the early July NATO conference to support Gorbachev with descriptions of the transformation of NATO towards a more political, less militarily threatening, alliance. She said to Gorbachev: “We must find ways to give the Soviet Union confidence that its security would be assured…. CSCE could be an umbrella for all this, as well as being the forum which brought the Soviet Union fully into discussion about the future of Europe.” (See Document 22)

The NATO London Declaration on July 5, 1990 had quite a positive effect on deliberations in Moscow, according to most accounts, giving Gorbachev significant ammunition to counter his hardliners at the Party Congress which was taking place at that moment. Some versions of this history assert that an advance copy was provided to Shevardnadze’s aides, while others describe just an alert that allowed those aides to take the wire service copy and produce a Soviet positive assessment before the military or hardliners could call it propaganda.

As Kohl said to Gorbachev in Moscow on July 15, 1990, as they worked out the final deal on German unification: “We know what awaits NATO in the future, and I think you are now in the know as well,” referring to the NATO London Declaration. (See Document 23)

In his phone call to Gorbachev on July 17, Bush meant to reinforce the success of the Kohl-Gorbachev talks and the message of the London Declaration. Bush explained: “So what we tried to do was to take account of your concerns expressed to me and others, and we did it in the following ways: by our joint declaration on non-aggression; in our invitation to you to come to NATO; in our agreement to open NATO to regular diplomatic contact with your government and those of the Eastern European countries; and our offer on assurances on the future size of the armed forces of a united Germany – an issue I know you discussed with Helmut Kohl.

We also fundamentally changed our military approach on conventional and nuclear forces. We conveyed the idea of an expanded, stronger CSCE with new institutions in which the USSR can share and be part of the new Europe.” (See Document 24)

The documents show that Gorbachev agreed to German unification in NATO as the result of this cascade of assurances, and on the basis of his own analysis that the future of the Soviet Union depended on its integration into Europe, for which Germany would be the decisive actor.

He and most of his allies believed that some version of the common European home was still possible and would develop alongside the transformation of NATO to lead to a more inclusive and integrated European space, that the post-Cold War settlement would take account of the Soviet security interests. The alliance with Germany would not only overcome the Cold War but also turn on its head the legacy of the Great Patriotic War.

But inside the U.S. government, a different discussion continued, a debate about relations between NATO and Eastern Europe. Opinions differed, but the suggestion from the Defense Department as of October 25, 1990 was to leave “the door ajar” for East European membership in NATO. (See Document 27) The view of the State Department was that NATO expansion was not on the agenda, because it was not in the interest of the U.S. to organize “an anti-Soviet coalition” that extended to the Soviet borders, not least because it might reverse the positive trends in the Soviet Union. (See Document 26) The Bush administration took the latter view. And that’s what the Soviets heard.

As late as March 1991, according to the diary of the British ambassador to Moscow, British Prime Minister John Major personally assured Gorbachev, “We are not talking about the strengthening of NATO.” Subsequently, when Soviet defense minister Marshal Dmitri Yazov asked Major about East European leaders’ interest in NATO membership, the British leader responded, “Nothing of the sort will happen.” (See Document 28)

When Russian Supreme Soviet deputies came to Brussels to see NATO and meet with NATO secretary-general Manfred Woerner in July 1991, Woerner told the Russians that “We should not allow […] the isolation of the USSR from the European community.” According to the Russian memorandum of conversation, “Woerner stressed that the NATO Council and he are against the expansion of NATO (13 of 16 NATO members support this point of view).” (See Document 30)

Thus, Gorbachev went to the end of the Soviet Union assured that the West was not threatening his security and was not expanding NATO. Instead, the dissolution of the USSR was brought about by Russians (Boris Yeltsin and his leading advisory Gennady Burbulis) in concert with the former party bosses of the Soviet republics, especially Ukraine, in December 1991.

The Cold War was long over by then. The Americans had tried to keep the Soviet Union together (see the Bush “Chicken Kiev” speech on August 1, 1991). NATO’s expansion was years in the future, when these disputes would erupt again, and more assurances would come to Russian leader Boris Yeltsin.

The Archive compiled these declassified documents for a panel discussion on November 10, 2017 at the annual conference of the Association for Slavic, East European and Eurasian Studies (ASEEES) in Chicago under the title “Who Promised What to Whom on NATO Expansion?” The panel included:

  • Mark Kramer from the Davis Center at Harvard, editor of the Journal of Cold War Studies, whose 2009 Washington Quarterly article argued that the “no-NATO-enlargement pledge” was a “myth”;[4]
  • Joshua R. Itkowitz Shifrinson from the Bush School at Texas A&M, whose 2016 International Security article argued the U.S. was playing a double game in 1990, leading Gorbachev to believe NATO would be subsumed in a new European security structure, while working to ensure hegemony in Europe and the maintenance of NATO;[5]
  • James Goldgeier from American University, who wrote the authoritative book on the Clinton decision on NATO expansion, Not Whether But When, and described the misleading U.S. assurances to Russian leader Boris Yeltsin in a 2016 WarOnTheRocks article;[6]
  • Svetlana Savranskaya and Tom Blanton from the National Security Archive, whose most recent book, The Last Superpower Summits: Gorbachev, Reagan, and Bush: Conversations That Ended the Cold War (CEU Press, 2016) analyzes and publishes the declassified transcripts and related documents from all of Gorbachev’s summits with U.S. presidents, including dozens of assurances about protecting the USSR’s security interests.[7]

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Notes

[1] See Robert Gates, University of Virginia, Miller Center Oral History, George H.W. Bush Presidency, July 24, 2000, p. 101)

[2] See Chapter 6, “The Malta Summit 1989,” in Svetlana Savranskaya and Thomas Blanton, The Last Superpower Summits (CEU Press, 2016), pp. 481-569. The comment about the Wall is on p. 538.

[3] For background, context, and consequences of the Tutzing speech, see Frank Elbe, “The Diplomatic Path to Germany Unity,” Bulletin of the German Historical Institute 46 (Spring 2010), pp. 33-46. Elbe was Genscher’s chief of staff at the time.

[4] See Mark Kramer, “The Myth of a No-NATO-Enlargement Pledge to Russia,” The Washington Quarterly, April 2009, pp. 39-61.

[5] See Joshua R. Itkowitz Shifrinson, “Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion,” International Security, Spring 2016, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 7-44.

[6] See James Goldgeier, Not Whether But When: The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO(Brookings Institution Press, 1999); and James Goldgeier, “Promises Made, Promises Broken? What Yeltsin was told about NATO in 1993 and why it matters,” War On The Rocks, July 12, 2016.

[7] See also Svetlana Savranskaya, Thomas Blanton, and Vladislav Zubok, “Masterpieces of History”: The Peaceful End of the Cold War in Europe, 1989 (CEU Press, 2010), for extended discussion and documents on the early 1990 German unification negotiations.

[8] Genscher told Baker on February 2, 1990, that under his plan, “NATO would not extend its territorial coverage to the area of the GDR nor anywhere else in Eastern Europe.” Secretary of State to US Embassy Bonn, “Baker-Genscher Meeting February 2,” George H.W. Bush Presidential Library, NSC Kanter Files, Box CF00775, Folder “Germany-March 1990.” Cited by Joshua R. Itkowitz Shifrinson, “Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion,” International Security, Spring 2016, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 7-44.

[9] The previous version of this text said that Kohl was “caught up in a campaign finance corruption scandal that would end his political career”; however, that scandal did not erupt until 1999, after the September 1998 elections swept Kohl out of office. The authors are grateful to Prof. Dr. H.H. Jansen for the correction and his careful reading of the posting.

[10] See Andrei Grachev, Gorbachev’s Gamble (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2008), pp. 157-158.

[11] For an insightful account of Bush’s highly effective educational efforts with East European leaders including Havel – as well as allies – see Jeffrey A. Engel, When the World Seemed New: George H.W. Bush and the End of the Cold War (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2017), pp. 353-359.

[12] See George H.W. Bush and Brent Scowcroft, A World Transformed (New York: Knopf, 1998), pp. 236, 243, 250.

[13] Published in English for the first time in Savranskaya and Blanton, The Last Superpower Summits (2016), pp. 664-676.

[14] Anatoly Chernyaev Diary, 1990, translated by Anna Melyakova and edited by Svetlana Savranskaya, pp. 41-42.

[15] See Michael Nelson and Barbara A. Perry, 41: Inside the Presidency of George H.W. Bush (Cornell University Press, 2014), pp. 94-95.

[16] The authors thank Josh Shifrinson for providing his copy of this document.

[17] See Memorandum of Conversation between Mikhail Gorbachev and John Major published in Mikhail Gorbachev, Sobranie Sochinenii, v. 24 (Moscow: Ves Mir, 2014), p. 346

[18] See Rodric Braithwaite, “NATO enlargement: Assurances and misunderstandings,” European Council on Foreign Relations, Commentary, 7 July 2016.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard. “Not One Inch Eastward”. What Was Agreed Between the Soviets and the West in 1990?
  • Tags: , , ,

Artificial Intelligence translation into Turkish. Not verified or edited by Global Research

Yapay Zeka Türkçe tercümesi. Global Research tarafından doğrulanmadı veya düzenlenmedi.

.

.

.

Original Article in English

Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) and the Turkey-Syria Earthquake: An Expert Investigation is Required

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 28, 2023

.

.

Yıkım, sosyal yıkım ve can kaybı. Düşüncelerimiz Türkiye ve Suriye halklarıyla birliktedir.

.

Giriiş 

.

Son tarama, Türkiye ve Suriye’de 50.000’den fazla ölü, yarım çocuklar fazla yaralı ve on binlerce insanın kayıplarını biliyor işaret ediyor. Toplumsal imha ve imha tarifesi olamaz. Türkiye’nin güneyindeki Kahramanmaraş ilinde 6 Şubat 2023’te meydana gelen birinci ve ikinci depremler sırasıyla 7,6 ve 7,8 (Richter’in çocukları) bölgeleriydi.

20 Şubat’ta 6,3 üçüncü üçüncü bir deprem kaydedildi. 

Türkiye’de yaklaşık 530.000 kişi afet bölgesinden tahliye edildi. Ankara, “Şimdiye kadar 173.000 binanın yıkıldığı veya ciddi şekilde hasar gördüğü ve 1,9 binden fazla insan geçici barınaklara veya sığınaklara ve kamu tesislerine sığındı .

Cumhurbaşkanı Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’ın  sözleriyle: Tarihimizin en acı günlerini gördük”. 

Suriye’de depremler, Suriye’nin Türkiye ile batı sınırına yakın olan Halep, Lazkiye ve Hama şehirlerini büyük ölçüde genişletiyor. Suriye’de en son açıklama sayısı ölü 5.914 oldu ve 8.8 milyon kişi yükseliyor. 

Cumhurbaşkanı Bachar Al Esad, ABD-NATO’nun yaklaşık 12 yıldır Suriye ile savaş halindeyken tarihini çizerken, ” Suriye’nin yaklaşık iki buçuk asırdır deprem bölgesi olmadığını”  vurguladı .

Bu makalenin I. Bölümü’nde, 6Şubat 2023 depreminden önce Güney Anadolu’da  “büyük deprem” faaliyetine ilişkin yakın tarihli bir kanıt veya geçmiş kaydın kaldırılmasının ardından  Türkiye’deki Deprem Faaliyetinin Tarihine odaklanacağım.

Kısım II, Çevresel Modifikasyon Tekniklerinin (ENMOD) bir Gözden Geçirileceğini alacak . 

Bölüm III,  1977’de BM Genel Kurulu tarafından onaylanan, Çevresel Sürüm Tekniklerinin Askeri veya Diğer Her Türlü Düşmanca Kullanımının Yasaklanmasına İlişkin Sözleşme’ye odaklanılacaktır.

Türkiye-Suriye depremi açısından önemli olan, 1977 BM Sözleşmesi’nin (yukarıda anılan), “Taraf resimleri” tarafından maruz kalınan “ yıkım, hasar veya yaralama”  ile ilgili olarak soruşturmaya ilişkin hükümler içermesidir . BM  “Uzmanlar Danışma Komitesi” nin himayesinde .

Sözleşme’de ayrıca Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyi’ne sevk edilmesi için hükümler adına “Taraf resimleri” bulunmaktadır. Bu sorunlar Bölüm IV’te özetlenmiştir

.

I

Türkiye’de Deprem Faaliyetinin Tarihçesi

 

Türkiye ile ilgili olarak, aşağıdaki jeolojik analizleri önermektedir:

“Deprem çalıştırma etkileri olarak “ Arap levhasının doğuya doğru Avrasya levhasına çarpmasıyla batıya doğru sıkışmayan küçük kama şeklindeki tektonik levha olan Anadolu levhasında ” meydana gelir. (vurguları) .

Türkiye’nin depremi kutsayan şey

Kuzey Anadolu Fayı boyunca 1939’da başlayan ve 60 yıl boyunca doğudan batıya doğru ilerleyen büyük depremlere neden olanbir tarihi ”  

 

6 Şubat 2023’te Gaziantep ve  Kahramanmaraş ulaşımıki Pazarcık (7,8) ve Ekinözü’nde (7,5) merkez büyüklüğü olan depremler, yakın tarihin en büyük “büyük depremleri”dir. (Bkz. Ekteki Tablo, aşağıdaki Grafik).

6 Şubat’ta yerel saatle 04:15 civarında,   Türkiye’nin orta-güney kesiminde Türkiye/Suriye sınırına yakın bir yerde 7,8 büyüklüğünde bir deprem meydana geldi. Sadece 11 dakika sonra, 6.7  hakimiyetindeki bir artçıyı kapsayan sarstı. Dokuz saat sonra 7.5 büyüklüğünde bir deprem izledi. ( USGS – Ulusal Deprem Bilgi Merkezi )

Aşağıdaki Harita , Güney’de, Suriye’nin Kuzeybatı sınırına yakın bir yerde bulunan 6 Şubat 2023 depremlerinin merkez üslerini gösteriyor .

Ekinözü’nün merkez merkezleri, Pazarcık depremleri, 6 Şubat 2023

Oğlu “Büyük Depremler”

Tarihsel olarak, Türkiye’deki en büyük depremlerin merkezleri Kuzey Batı Anadolu’da, İstanbul’un gidişatı, Batı Anadolu’da ve Kuzeydoğu bölgelerinde bulunur.

Kuzey Anadolu Fayı

Kuzey Anadolu Fayı boyunca 1939’dan 1999’a kadar yedi büyük (MS) 7.0 depremi . Yukarıdaki haritaya bakın

Bu depremler fayı doğudan batıya doğru giderek parçalamıştır. Kuzey Anadolu fayını sonuçları parçalayan yedi büyük depremin verileri aşağıdaki gibidir :

  • 1939 26 Aralık. Büyüklük (MS) 7.9 – 8.0. 30.000 ölüm. Fay uzunluğu yaklaşık 360 km. Kuzey Anadolu fayı üzerinde büyük depremlerin doğuya doğru göçünü başlatmıştır. (1939 Erzincan depremi, Kuzey Anadolu olarak adlandırılır)
  • 1942 20 Aralık. Büyüklük (MS) 7.1. Fay uzunluğu yaklaşık 50 km. (1942 Erbaa depremi olarak, Kuzey Anadolu)
  • 26 Kasım 1943. Büyüklük (MS) 7.6. Fay uzunluğu yaklaşık 280 km. (1943 Tosya depremi olarak, Kuzey Anadolu)
  • 1944 01 Şubat. Büyüklük (MS) 7.3. Fay uzunluğu yaklaşık 165 km. (1944 Bolu-Gerede depremi olarak, Kuzey Anadolu)
  • 1957 26 Mayıs. Büyüklük (MS) yaklaşık 7. Fay uzunluğu yaklaşık 30 km. (1957 Abant depremi olarak, Kuzey Anadolu)
  • 1967 22 Temmuz. Büyüklük (MS) 7.1. Fay uzunluğu yaklaşık 80 km. (1967 Mudurnu Vadisi depremi olarak, Kuzey Anadolu)
  • 1999 17 Ağustos. İzmit. Büyüklük (MS) 7.8; MW 7.4-7.5) Kuzey Batı Anadolu

Özet , tüm Kuzey Anadolu Fayı boyunca olan, 1950’den bu yana meydana gelen en büyük 5 depremin raporları yer almaktadır.

Bingöl: 6.9 adresi ve 22 Mayıs 1971’de Türkiye’nin gidişindeki ilde gerçekleşti.

İzmit Şehri : 17 Ağustos 1999, İstanbul’un 90 km, 7.6 konumunda. Deprem, İstanbul’un sanayileşmiş ve en yoğun nüfuslu dış alanları olan Sakarya, Gölcük, Darıca ve Derince’de meydana geldi.

Düzce Depremi, 12 Kasım 1999, Adapazarı’nın 70 kilometre (45 mil) süresi veya Ankara’nın 170 km (105 mil) ömrü 7,2 büyüklüğünde büyük bir deprem meydana geldi.

Van Şehri . 23 Ekim 2011. 7.1 büyüklüğünde bir deprem, İran sınırına yakın kuzeydoğu şehri.

İzmir:  30 Ekim 2020, 7.0 yerel ve merkez yerleşimi Yunanistan’ın Sisam Adasının yaklaşık 14 km Çevresi

İzmit-Gölcük depreminin Kuzeybatı Anadolu’daki merkez üretimi

Nota Bene: Bu büyük depremlerin (1939-1999) hiç Güney Anadolu’da değil.

Türkiye’de Depremlerin Uzun Dönem Tarihi (MS 342 -1999)

USGS – Ulusal Deprem Bilgi Merkezi tarafındanderlenen verilere göre “büyük depremlerin” tarihi MS 342’den beri kayıtlıdır  ( Ekteki Tabloya bakınız).

13. Yüzyılda  1268’de (Güney Anadolu) Adana’da “büyük bir deprem” (60.000 ölü) yaptırmaktadır  . Ayrıca 15. yüzyıldan beri tüm “büyük depremler” Kuzeybatı, Batı ve Kuzeydoğu Anadolu’da meydana gelmiştir. (Eke bakınız)

Güney Türkiye Depremleri

Reuters , ilk büyük depremi (6 Şubat 2023)  “en az bir yüzyılda en güçlüsü” olarak sınıflandırdı . Bu yetersiz bir ifade. Güney Anadolu açısından yedi asırdan fazla bir geçmişte görülen en büyük depremdir. (Adana 1268, Ekteki Tabloya bakınız )

27 Haziran 1998′ de Ceyhan ve Adana şehirlerini inceleme, 146 kişinin hayatını kaybettiği, 6.3 büyüklüğündeki Ceyhan-Adana depremi , Türkiye’nin güneyindeki kayıtlara geçmiştir. Ancak Ceyan depremi “büyük deprem”kategorisine girmiyor . 

Yukarıdaki görüntüler gibi, Türkiye’deki büyük depremler Kuzey Anadolu Fayı boyuncadır .

6 Şubat 2023’ten önce

Güney Anadolu’da 700 yılı aşkın süredir tek bir “büyük deprem” geçmişi : Bu, Türkiye’nin güneyinde bir “büyük deprem”in meydana gelmesi “olasılığı” veya “olasılığı” konusunda bize “bir şey” söylemiyor mu?

Deprem “Tahmin”

Deprem tahmini rutin bir iştir. Aylar sonrasına kadar bir deprem tahmin edilebilir. Ancak “tahmin”, “sismolojik tahmin” ile karıştırılmamalıdır:

Hollanda’daki Güneş Sistemi Geometri Araştırması (SSGS) için çalışan Hollandalı sismolog Frank Hoogerbeets, 3 Şubat 2023’te Türkiye’deki depremi, meydana gelmesinden üç gün önce tahmin etti. 

Terör Saldırısına İlişkin Kesin Kanıt Yok 

Siyasi düzeyde şüpheler olsa da, şu adımlar  bunun bir terör saldırısının uygulanmasından kesin bir kanıt yok.  Kamuya açık bilgilere göre (gizli bilgi depoları), Türkiye ve Suriye’ye karşı “ çevre değiştirme tekniklerinin”  kullanıldığına dair somut bir kanıt bulunmamaktadır.

Ancak önemli olan, Türk Uzay Ajansı Başkanı Serdar Hüseyin’in Rus televizyonuna yaptığı bir röportajda yaptığı resmi olmayan ( henüz doğrulanmayan )  bir açıklamaydı. Yeryüzüne, yerin derinliklerine güçlü enerji yollarından geçen sert metalli çubuklardan söz etti.

Aşağıdaki röportajın çevirisi var.

Transkript (Çeviri)

Türkiye Uzay Ajansı Başkanı Serdar Hüseyin Yıldırım, depreme neden olabilecek silahlarla ilgili:

Sokaklardaki elektrikleri direkt olarak verebilir. Yaklaşık 8-10 metre bedendeki bu sütunlara benzerler. Metal çubuklar.

Çubuğun içinde hiçbir şey yok, patlayıcı yok, hiçbir şey yok, ancak sert metal alaşımlı bir malzeme olarak kullanılan metal bir çubuk.

Aletleri bir uyduya yerleştirdiler. Ve sonra nişan alıp onları Dünya’ya fırlatırlar. Sivri uçlu bir sopa gibi. Mesela Allah’ı göstermenin bir yere düşer, bir hâtırafete şimdi isim vermeyeyeceğiz ama yere düşmez 5 km kadar yerin derinliklerine kadar mahkum eder.  

Bu çok hızlı gerçekleşir ve 7-8 boyutta bir deprem yaratır.

Çarpmanın bir sonucu olarak, orada olan her şey yok olacak. Bakın burada silah yok, patlayıcı yok, bomba yok, öyle bir şey yok. Basit çubuklar [çubuklar]. Ama uzaydan gelen öyle bir güç var ki onu görme, durma, kendini savunma gibi bir şans yok.” (vurgu eklendi)

videoya buradan bakın

II

Çevresel Modifikasyon Teknikleri

 

Askeri kullanım için hava anlatımı hakkında, çoğu zaman kapsamı geniş bir literatür vardır. ABD ve Rusya kayıtlarda. Gelişmiş ENMOD teknolojilerine binmek.

ABD Ordusu hava durumunu kontrol edebilir. Bu,  “Kuvvet Çarpanı Hava Durumu Olarak: 2025’te Hava Durumuna Sahip Olmak kaynağı bir  ABD Hava Kuvvetleri belgesi tarafından onaylanmıştır. 

Rahmetli dünyaca ünlü bilim adamı Dr. Rosalie Bertell, “ABD askeri bilim adamlarının … Potansiyel bir silah olarak hava sistemleri üzerinde teşebbüslerini doğruladı. Daha 1970’lerde, eski Ulusal Güvenlik toplantıları Zbigniew Brzezinski “İki Çağ Arasında” adlı notlarda yer olduğunu tahmin etmişti:

“Teknoloji, büyük ulusların liderlerine, güvenlik güçlerinin asgari bir ölçüt olarak değerlendirilmesi gereken gizli savaş yürütme giderlerini yürütecektir…”

HAARP’a karşı halk kampanyasına aktif olarak katılan bilim adamı Dr. Nicholas Begich, HAARP’ı şu şekilde tanımlamıştır:

“Bir ışıma odaklayarak ve bu alanları ısıtarak iyonosferin [atmosferin üst katmanları] alanlarını kaldıran süper güçlü bir radyo yayılımı ışınlama teknolojisi .

Eski bir Fransız askeri subayı olan Marc Filterman , radyo frekanslarını kullanan çeşitli “geleneksel olmayan silahların” ana hatlarını çiziyor. ABD ve Asker Birliği’nin zaten

“1980’lerin başında ani iklim değişikliklerini (kasırgalar, kuraklık) serbest zaman için gerekenleri elde etmekte ustalaştı.”

İlk olarak 22 Mayıs 2008’de The Ecoologist  tarafından yayınlanan Weather Warfare başlıklı makalem,   daha önceki bir dönem askeri kullanım için düzenleme modifikasyonu (ENMOD) karışımı üzerine yazdığım birkaç genişletme ve ayrıntılı makalenin bir özetini sunuyor:

“Küresel iklim değişikliği tartışmasında nadiren görülen, dünyanın hava durumu artık yeni nesil gelişmiş dahili silahların bir parçası olarak değiştirilebiliyor. Hem ABD hem de Rusya, askeri kullanım için iklimi manipüle etme özellikleri geliştirildi.
 .
Çevresel düşman ABD füzesi tarafından yarım yüzyıldan fazla bir süre kullanılmış. ABD Savunma Bakanlığı ile irtibat halinde olan ABD’li matematikçi John von Neumann , 1940’ların sonunda Soğuk Savaş’ın zirvesinde havayı yükseltme araştırmasına başladı ve ‘henüz hayal bile edilemeyen iklim savaşını’ni öngördü.
 .
Vietnam savaşı sırasında, amaç muson mevsimini uzatmak ve Ho Chi Minh Patikası boyunca düşman ikmal bakımlarını engellemek olan Temel Reis Projesi kapsamında 1967’de görülen bulut görme bölgelerini.
.
ABD ordusunu, havayı yönlendiren seçici olarak değiştirmesini sağlayan gelişmiş yetenekler geliştirdi. Yüksek Frekanslı Aktif Auroral Araştırma Programı (HAARP) [2014 yılında kapatılmıştır, resmi olarak Alaska Üniversitesi’ne devredilmiştir] kapsamında mükemmelleştirilmekte olan teknoloji, Stratejik Savunma Girişimi – ‘Yıldız Savaşları’nın bir uzantısıdır. Askeri yapılar HAARP, dış atmosferden çalışan ve dünya hedefli faaliyet gösteren ve ekolojik sistemleri istikrarsızlaştıran bir kitle imha silahıdır.
.
1992 yılında kurulmuş, Alaska, Gokona merkezli HAARP, yüksek frekanslı radyo dalgaları yayılan iyonosfer (atmosferin üst katmanı) büyük geniş kapsamlı enerji ileten bir dizi yüksek güçlü antendir. İnşaatları ABD Hava Kuvvetleri, ABD Donanması ve İleri Savunma İleri Araştırma Projeleri Ajansı (DARPA) tarafından finanse edildi.
.
Hava Kuvvetleri Araştırma Laboratuvarı ve Deniz Araştırma Ofisi tarafından ortaklaşa yürütülen HAARP, ‘iyonosferde kontrollü yerel değişiklikler’ yaratma yeteneğine sahip güçlü antenlerden oluşan bir sistem oluşturur.
.

Uluslararası Halk Sağlığı Endişesi Enstitüsü başkanı Rosalie Bertell, HAARP’ın “iyonosferde büyük bozulmalara neden olmuyor, koruyucu tabakada sadece görüşleri değil, aynı yürütücü zamanda radyasyonu bombardımandan koruyan uzun kesikler bileşiminde büyük bir ısıtıcı” olarak çalıştığını söylüyor . gezegen’.

Fizikçi Dr Bernard Eastlund, onu “şimdiye kadar yapılmış en büyük iyonosferik ısıtıcı” olarak nitelendirdi.

HAARP, ABD Hava Kuvvetleri tarafından bir araştırma programı olarak sunuluyor, ancak askeri belgeler, asıl amaç, hava durumu modellerini değiştirmek ve iletişim ve radarı bozmak amacıyla ‘iyonosferik değişikliklere neden olduğunu’ doğruluyor.

HAARP ile ilgili CBC Belgeseli

Bir CBC TV raporu (1996), ABD Hava Kuvvetlerinin himayesi sahibi Alaska’daki HAARP yönetimi tayfunları, depremleri, selleri ve kuraklıkları tetikleme yeteneklerine sahip olduğunu kabul etti: 

“Yönlendirilmiş enerji o kadar güçlü bir teknolojidir ki, havayı bir savaş silahına dönüştürmek için iyonosferi yakmak için kullanılabilir  .hava değişimine çok fazla zaman tuttu.Bir şehrin üzerinde bir darbe patlarsa, temeldeki tüm elektronik eşyalar gözpar ve patlama ve kalıcı olarak yok olurlar.”

CBC TV Raporu (1996)

Alaska, Gakonacentric HAARP programı 2014 yılında kapatılırken (Alaska Üniversitesi’ne devredildi), HAARP projesini yöneten ABD Hava Kuvvetleri yine de askeri kullanım için ENMOD tekniklerinin devamını doğruladı . :

“HAARP’ın gerçekten yapmak için tasarlandığı, iyonosferi yönetmenliğin diğer yollarına geçiyoruz” dedi.

“Onu gerçekten kontrol edebilmek için iyonosfere enerji sağlamak. Ancak bu çalışma tamamlandı” dedi.

“Kuvvet Çarpanı Olarak Hava Durumu: Hava Durumuna Sahip Olmak”

Askeri uzantıların temel amacı “Havaya Sahip Olmak” tır. Bu ABD Hava Kuvvetleri idaresi 1996’da elinde bulunduran, HAARP programı, CBC tarafından belgelendiği gibi zaten tam olarak çalışıyor durumdaydı.

Raporun açıklama amacını ayrıntılı olarak açıklamaktadır:

Bu yazıda, hava durumu modifikasyonunun uygun şekilde uygulanmasının, daha önce hiç hayal edilmemiş bir derecede savaş alanı hakimiyeti sağlayabileceğini gösteriyoruz. Gelecekte, bu tür operasyonlar hava ve uzay üstünlüğünü artıracak ve orada savaş alanı şekillendirme ve savaş alanı farkındalığı için yeni seçenekler sunacak ve hepsini bir araya getirmemizi bekleyecek; 2025’te “Hava Durumuna Sahip Çıkabiliriz”. (ABD Hava Kuvvetleri tarafından görevlendirilen AF 2025 Nihai Rapor belgesi, (kamuya açık belge)  

ABD Hava Kuvvetleri Raporuna göre hava değişikliği, ” savaş savaşçısına bir düşmanı yenmek veya zorlamak için çok çeşitli olası seçenekler sunuyor”, diyor ki, yetenekler sel, kasırga, kuraklık ve depremleri tetiklemeye kadar uzanıyor:

‘Hava Kurtarma iç ve dış güvenliğin bir parçası haline gelecek ve tek taraflı olarak hedeflenebilir… Saldırı ve savunma uygulamaları olabilir ve hatta caydırıcılık amaçlı kullanılabilir. Yeryüzünde yağmur, sis ve fırtına oluşturma veya uzay havasını değiştirme gücü… ve yapay hava üretiminin tümü, entegre bir [askeri] teknolojiler dizisinin bölümü.”

ABD Hava Kuvvetleri belgesi AF 2025 Nihai Raporu,  (orijinal AF belgesi bağlantısı artık mevcut değil)

ABD Hava Kuvvetleri tarafından yaptırılan eksiksiz raporları görün

 ….Dost operasyonlarını geliştirmekten veya doğal hava modellerinin küçük ölçekli uyarlanması yoluyla düşman operasyonlarını kesintiye uğratmaktan küresel iletişim ve karşı uzay kontrolüne tam hakimiyete kadar, hava modifikasyonu, savaş savaşçısına bir savaşı yenmek veya zorlamak için çok çeşitli olası seçenekler sunar. düşman. Bir hava durumu modifikasyon sisteminin bir savaş başkomutanına (CINC) sağlayabileceği potansiyel yeteneklerden bazıları tablo 1’de listelenmiştir. (vurgular eklenmiştir)

Depremlerin tetiklenmesi HAARP teknolojisinin ayrılmaz bir parçası olmakla birlikte, ABD Hava Kuvvetleri belgesinin yukarıdaki versiyonunda deprem terimi açıkça yer almamaktadır. Raporun Ekleri A ve B, İyonosferin maksimum kullanılabilir frekans (MUF) ile ilgili rolüne işaret etmektedir.

CIA’nın ENMOD Teknolojilerine Katılımı

Temmuz 2013’te MSN haberleri, CIA’nın Ulusal Bilimler Akademisi’nin (NAS) jeo-mühendislik ve iklim manipülasyonuna odaklanan bir projesinin finanse edilmesine yardımcı olduğunu bildirdi. Rapor yalnızca bu teknolojileri kabul etmekle kalmadı, aynı zamanda ABD istihbaratının rutin olarak iklim manipülasyonu sorununu ele aldığını doğruladı:

NAS web sitesine göre, “CIA destekli NAS çalışmasının amacı, “sınırlı sayıda önerilen jeomühendislik tekniğinin teknik değerlendirmesini” yapmaktır. Bilim adamları, hangi jeomühendislik tekniklerinin uygulanabilir olduğunu belirlemeye ve her birinin (“ulusal güvenlik endişeleri” dahil) etkilerini ve risklerini değerlendirmeye çalışacak.” (Bkz. Slate , Temmuz 2013)

Kearney, “CIA, araştırmanın finanse edilmesine yardımcı oluyor çünkü NAS aynı zamanda “dünyanın herhangi bir yerinde konuşlandırılan jeomühendislik teknolojileriyle ilgili (olabilecek) ulusal güvenlik endişelerini” değerlendirmeyi planlıyor.

.

 III

1977 BM Sözleşmesi. 

Çevresel Modifikasyon Tekniklerinin Kullanımı Üzerine

.

1977’de BM Genel Kurulu tarafından ” yaygın, uzun süreli veya ciddi önlemler olan düzenleme tekniklerinin askeri veya diğer düşmanca kanadı” yasaklanan uluslararası bir Sözleşme onaylandı.  
.
ENMOD ölçümleri ayrıca depremler için de geçerlidir:
.
“Çevresel modifikasyon tekniklerini”, “doğal modellemeyi tasarlamayı hedefleyerek – biyotası, litosferi , hidrosferi ve atmosferik veya dış uzay dahil olmak üzere dünyanın dinamiklerini, muhafazanı veya oluşumlarını değiştirmeye yönelik bir teknik” olarak tanımladı. (vurgu eklendi)
.

 

BM Genel Kurulu tarafından onaylanan tarihi 1977 Sözleşmesi, “yaygın, uzun ömürlü veya ciddi etkilere sahip olan düzenleme tekniklerinin askeri veya diğer düşmanca görevlileri” yasaklıyor.

 

….Bu Sözleşmeye Taraf olan her Devlet, başka herhangi bir Taraf Devleti yok etme, hasar verme veya yaralama aracı olarak yaygın, uzun inceleme veya ciddi etkiler olan askeri … düzenleme değişikliklerini tekniklerini kullanmayı kabul eder. ( Çevresel Sürüm Tekniklerinin Askeri veya Diğer Herhangi Bir Düşmanca Kullanımının Yasaklanmasına İlişkin Sözleşme, Birleşmiş Milletler, Cenevre, 18 Mayıs 1977. Yürürlük tarihi: 5 Ekim 1978, Ekteki Sözleşmenin tam açıklamasına bakın)

BM metninin tam metnini okumak için tıklayınız

Antlaşmayı onaylayan veya imzalayan ülkelerin listesi 

2022 sonunda Suriye, Türkiye, Irak, İran, ABD ve Rusya Federasyonu dahil olmak üzere 78 ülke anlaşmasını sağladılar veya gönderdiler. İsrail Antlaşmayı onaylamadı.

Resmi BM belgesi 

Avrupa Görev Komitesi’nin Karar Önergesi

Şubat 1998’de Avrupa’da Dış İlişkiler, Güvenlik ve Savunma Politikası Komitesi’nin HAARP programı hakkında Brüksel’de halka açık oturumların başlaması gerekiyor. Komite’nin Avrupa yönetimine yönelik çözümler “Çözüm Önerileri”:

“Çevre üzerindeki geniş etki etkisi nedeniyle HAARP’ı küresel bir mesele olarak kabul eder ve yasal, ekolojik ve etik sonuçlarının uluslararası bağımsız bir kuruluş tarafından incelenmesinde bulunur…; [Komite] Birleşik tablo Yönetiminin, HAARP çalışmasının ve kamu risklerine ilişkin …kamuya açık duruşmaya kanıt sunmayı reddetmesinden üzüntü duymaktadır.”  (vurgu eklendi)

 

 

IV

“ENMOD’un Düşmanca Kullanımı” İlişkin “Uzman İncelemesi” 

.

Türkiye-Suriye depreminin ciddiyeti, can kaybı, yıkıcı sosyal ve ekonomik sonuçların göz önüne alınması, “çevre değiştirme tekniklerinin askeri veya diğer düşmanca sorumluğu” yasaklayan 1977 Uluslararası Sözleşmesine dayalı olarak bir “uzman soruşturması” yürütülmelidir. .

Yukarıda belirtilen 1977 BM Sözleşmesinin onaylanmasından bu yana, askeri kullanım için ENMOD tekniklerinin giderek daha karmaşık hale geldiğini belirtmeliyim.

Birleşmiş Milletlere güvenebilir miyiz? İki “Taraf Devlet” yani Türkiye ve Suriye BM himayesinde bir uzman soruşturmasının yöneticilerinden önce ortak yürütme ve kendi iç soruşturmalarını yürütmelidir.

Bu Soruşturmanın Görev Tanımı, BM Anlaşmasının Anlaşma Maddelerinde yer almaktadır.

Uzman Soruşturmasının doğasını okuyucusu Madde I, II ve V’e (alıntılar) bulacağım. (vurgu eklendi). Makaleleri tam olarak saklamak için veri tıklayın

Madde I. 1.

Bu Sözleşmeye Taraf olan her Devlet, herhangi bir diğer Taraf Devleti yok etme, hasar verme veya yaralama aracı olarak yaygın, uzun süreli veya ciddi etkilere sahip askeri veya diğer düşmanca tahribatı değiştirme tekniklerini kullanma taahhüdü verir.

Madde II, depremler dahil olmak üzere ENMOD tekniklerine bağlıdır:

deli 2

1. maddede kullanılan şekliyle, “çevresel değişikliklerin kullanımı” terimi, biyotası , litosferi, hidrosferi ve göksel veya uzay.

Madde V

1. Bu Sözleşmeye Taraf tabloları, Sözleşmenin amaçları veya Sözleşme hükümlerinin idamesi ile ilgili olarak ortaya çıkma üretimi çözümünde iletkenliği sonayı ve işbirliği oluşturmalarıdır. Bu maddeyi oluşturmak istişare ve işbirliği, Birleşmiş Milletler sınırları içinde ve Şartına uygun olarak uygun uluslararası operasyonlar aracılığıyla da gerçekleştirilebilir . Bu uluslararası ameliyatlar, bu çıldırmış 2. paragrafta öngörüldüğü gibi , uygun uluslararası sonuçlar ve ayrıca bir Uzmanlar Danışma Komitesini bitirir.

2. Bu çıldırtıcı 1. paragrafta belirtilen amaçlar için, Depoziter, bu Sözleşmeye Taraf herhangi bir Devletten gelen bir talebin alınmasından itibaren bir ay içinde, bir Uzmanlar Danışma Komitesi toplayacak. …

3. Bu Sözleşmeye Taraf herhangi bir Devlet, başka bir Taraf Devlet Sözleşme hükümlerinden elde edilen tasarrufları korumak için olası nedenler varsa, Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyine şikayette bulunabilir . Böyle bir şikayetin, geçerliliğini ortaya koyan tüm olası kanıtların yanı sıra ilgili tüm bilgileri içermelidir.

4. Bu Sözleşmeye Taraf her Devlet, Konsey tarafından alınan şikayet talimatı, Güvenlik Konseyi’nin Birleşmiş Milletler Şartı kurallarına uygun olarak başlatabileceği herhangi bir soruşturmanın yürütmesinde işbirliği yapma kararı verir. Güvenlik Konseyi soruşturmanın sonuçlarını Taraf resmine bildirecektir.

Sözleşme Metnin Takımı’nda orkestra yer alıyor:

1. Uzmanlardan oluşan Danışma Komitesi, Komite’nin görüşmesine çağrılmasını talep eden Taraf Devlet tarafından bu Sözleşme’nin V. maddesinin 1. paragrafı öngördüğü ileri gidebilecek herhangi bir sorunla ilgili olarak uygun olgu tespitleri yapma ve uzman görüşme sağlamayı taahhüt etmesi.

vurgu eklendi

Oğul sözleri 

Türkiye ve Suriye halklarıyla dayanışma içindeyiz.

Bu bölümler, basit sonuçlar varmak gibi ve erken olacaktır.

Yasaklanmış bir gerçek var. Bir analiz ve anlayış çerçevesini inceleyin.

Hasar ve can kaybı tarifinin aşılması: Bu konu, “çevresel tekniklerinin askeri veya diğer düşmanca varsayımları” yasaklayan 1977 Uluslararası Sözleşmene bulunarak analiz, diyalog ve tartışma konusu olmalıdır.

“Taraf resimleri” olarak Türkiye ve Suriye, konu BM Uzmanlar Danışma Komitesi’ne ve/veya Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyi’ne havale edilmeden önce, ilk adım olarak kendi iç soruşturmalarını yürütmelidir.

 

 


Ek  

Kaynak: Bu Bilgi USGS – Ulusal Deprem Bilgi Merkezi tarafından yapılmıştır.

Kaynaklar ve dipnotlar aşağısıdır. 

ISK: Kandilli Rasathanesi Deprem Kataloğu, Boğaziçi Üniversitesi, İstanbul, NOAA/NGDC (Meyers ve Von Hake), Boulder CO, 1985 tarafından çıkarma.

İTÜ: K. Ergin, U. Güçlü ve Z. Uz, Türkiye ve Çevresi İçin Deprem Kataloğu (MS 11 – MS 1964), İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Maden Fakültesi, 1967.

AFAD: Deprem Risk Haritası, AFAD, Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Daire Başkanlığı, 2018.

NG(n): R. Ganse ve J. Nelson, Catalogue of Significant Earthquakes 2000 BC – 1979 Include Quantitative Zayiatlar ve Hasar, NOAA/NGDC Raporu SE-27, Boulder CO, 1981. Parantez okuma sayı referans tablosundandır, aşağıda listede tutulduğu gibi :

2: Lomnitz, Küresel Tektonik ve Deprem Riski, 1974.

3: Hamam, Sismolojiye Giriş, 1978.

5b: (kaynak 5b yok — muhtemelen 55 olmalı?).

7: Meyers ve von Hake, Deprem Verisi Anlatımı, 1976.

51: Munchener Ruckversicherungs-Gesellschaft, Dünya Doğal Tehlike Haritası, 1978.

55: Milne, Yıkıcı Depremler Kataloğu, 1911.

73: ABD Kongresi, Büyük Depremler, 1888.

99: Karnik, Avrupa Bölgesinin Depremselliği, 1971.

120: Alsinavi ve Galih, Irak’ın Tarihi Depremselliği, 1978.

138: Ambraseys, Orta Doğu Depremselliğin Yeniden Değerlendirilmesi, 1978.

 

Guerre: La Storia Cancellata

March 4th, 2023 by Manlio Dinucci

La presidente Meloni, in visita a Nuova Delhi, ha dichiarato che “l’aggressione russa nei confronti dell’Ucraina” costituisce una “provocazione al cuore della Carta dell’ONU” e mina “l’ordine internazionale fondato sulle regole”, concludendo che “non possiamo sottostare alla legge del più forte”. Si cancella in tal modo la storia degli eventi che hanno portato all’attuale critica situazione.

La ricostruiamo, in questa puntata di Grandangolo, nei tratti essenziali:

1.La NATO nasce dalla Bomba
2.Jugoslavia: la guerra fondante della nuova NATO
3.L’espansione della NATO ad Est verso la Russia
4.USA e NATO attaccano e invadono l’Afghanistan e l’Iraq
5.La NATO demolisce lo Stato libico
6.La guerra USA/NATO per demolire la Siria
7.La regia USA/NATO nel colpo di stato in Ucraina
8.La portaerei Italia sul fronte di guerra
9.USA E NATO stracciano i Trattati e schierano in Europa nuove armi nucleari

Fondamentale è il momento in cui la guerra fredda termina con il dissolvimento del Patto di Varsavia e della stessa Unione Sovietica nel 1991. Gli Stati Uniti ne approfittano per scatenare nel Golfo il primo conflitto del dopo guerra fredda, al quale partecipano i principali paesi della NATO, tra cui l’Italia.

Contemporaneamente la NATO si muove per espandersi ad Est verso la Russia. Il primo passo è la demolizione della Federazione Jugoslava, che gli Stati Uniti e le potenze europee della NATO iniziano nel 1990. La guerra, denominata «Operazione Forza Alleata», inizia il 24 marzo 1999.

Mentre demolisce con la guerra la Federazione Jugoslava, la NATO inizia a espandersi ad Est, nonostante Washington avesse assicurato il Presidente dell’URSS Mikhail Gorbaciov che «la NATO non si estenderà di un solo pollice ad Est». In vent’anni, la NATO si estende da 16 a 30 paesi. Con il prossimo ingresso di Svezia e Finlandia si allargherà a 32 paesi, sempre più a ridosso della Russia. Altri tre paesi – Bosnia Erzegovina (già parte della Jugoslavia), Georgia e Ucraina (già parte dell’Urss) – sono candidati a entrare nella NATO.

Manlio Dinucci

Video :

 

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

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

Visit and follow us on InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

First published on February 13, 2022

 

 

Women’s Day, March 8, 2023

 

Methodological introduction

You may be astonished or even shocked by my following presentation, as it may seem very unusual to you or even rather radical.

The reason for this is the different perspective from which I am speaking now: I am no longer arguing from a merely human point of view. The human or social point of view is the usual one in modern times of anthropocentrism, which includes women and their views as well. However, even ecofeminism did not yet arrive at really shifting perspective, or changing sides – i.e. meaning to change to the side of nature, life and even the planet as such, looking at the world from a different, that is non-human – or more than human – perspective.

This perspective was originally an indigenous one, one that we, in the West, have abolished with colonialism. My perspective, nevertheless, differs from the indigenous one insofar as nature and the planet today are not the same any more, because they have been and are widely being transformed, even „wrecked“, as Rosalie Bertell calls it. This is due to something that I call patriarchy, which is a civilization that disregards and hates all life, because it wants to replace it by its own „creation“, and as a consequence, engages in its deliberate destruction process.

Strangely enough, however, nearly nobody sees this destruction – as we have no concept for it. We are blinded by a „progress“ that goes along with the destruction. It seems to be beyond our perception even though we know from detailed measuring of its magnitude, that destruction exists. The Austrian philosopher Günther Anders who made the most profound and radical critique of the nuclear threat, therefore, spoke of an „apocalypse-blindness“ in Western society. He thought that this blindness regarding the dangers of modern technology is due to a general admiration for it, preventing people from recognizing the potential catastrophic consequences and even the annihilation of life these technologies are proclaiming and probably, or inevitably, would bring to the world, sooner or later.

In order to overcome this blindness, there is only one way: looking, or trying at least, to look at the world from the perspective of nature, life and the planet itself. This means to look at what this so-called civilization has done and is doing to them as the non-human or more-than-human-world, and to speak on its behalf. Of course, its ongoing permanent destruction should be stopped immediately, otherwise, we as humans would also not survive what we do to the Other. And from the perspective of nature and the planet, this „we“ includes all those who think to do no harm at all, too, because they are part of the human race and as such co-responsible for this behavior.

In this context, I suggest the consideration of the following 16 points:

  1. We know that the question of war, the military and violence is the most central question and result of patriarchy as a civilization that has a history of several thousands of years in which war has become the „ultima ratio“ of this civilization.

Without war and a military there would be no patriarchy, and has never been. This is the main contrast to matriarchal civilization, existing for millenia, before patriarchy was established, and where no institutions of war, violence nor military existed. If somebody tried to change this, it was prevented immediately (s. Clastres).

Matriarchal cultures are egalitarian and consensus-oriented cultures, i.e. meaning finding solutions to arising problems by way of reaching a consensus within their community. However, never having experienced violent invasions by an organized military force from the outside, matriarchal societies were unable to find answers.

When confronting the question of war and violence, we directly touch the foundation of our current civilization as the last and most modern patriarchal one, „capitalist patriarchy“, as we have defined it. I call it the „Alchemical War-System“ (Werlhof 2011, 2013).

Image source The Grayzone

Today, the military is organized as the military-industrial complex, MIC, and related to the so-called „Deep State“ with its secret services, etc. – all that is concealed from us and does not normally reach the public.

The way the military exists today, proves how far away we are from a patriarchy-free world – contrary to those who think that patriarchy is disappearing or, has even come to an end already!

Today, we are even facing a completely new situation in this respect, namely nothing less than the ongoing destruction of life on this planet, of the planetary life-support-cycles and even of the planet itself – due to military inventions, experiments and activities on the basis of a really futuristic new weaponry, already in development since WWII, that is since more than 70 years already (s.Bertell 20000/2020; Werlhof 2021). In fact, we have entered a new world war that is even a planetary one, in the sense that it is more than global – it reaches even out to the solar system. This new, and in fact, „total“ war has started already and is going to develop much further. It involves thesimultaneous use of nuclear and post-nuclear technologies and weaponry. We call these the weapons of military geo-engineering which means that these techniques are spanning the planet as a whole, something that has never occurred in history before.

  1. A war based on military geo-engineering is different from nearly everything that we define as war until today, because this new war is not an „officially“ declared one, it has no armies the way we are accustomed to, it does not depend on borders nor limits, it does not necessarily distinguish between friends and enemies, for it is the process of transforming the entire planet and its immense natural energies, into a mega-weapon and gigantic war-machine.

Rosalie Bertell: „New wars are never fought with the same weapons than previous ones. And the next war will be one against the environment in which the weather, climate and natural catastrophes will play a role…“ (Bertell 2011).

The only thing that resembles previous wars are the secrecy and lies that are accompanying it, and the huge propaganda-system legitimizing it – even denying that it exists at all. This is possible because – as Bertell tells us – the military is, from the point of view of its weaponry, 50 years ahead of us.

  1. This war is instead explained to us as the salvation of the planet from something that we, the people, are responsible for, namely CO2-emissions growth and irresponsible consumption patterns that lead to the change of the planetary climate and a life-threatening „global warming“, as we are told (Werlhof 2021).

The new war is supposed to bring peace, as George Orwell would call this inversion.

From the totally new dimensions this war is comprising we have to conclude that it is related to a wider societal project of immense change that cannot be achieved neither democratically nor peacefully (s. Werlhof 2021, Introduction).

It seems that we are at the doorsteps of a revolution from above that is going to change nearly everything: the entire civilization, as we know it, the way how those surviving this war are going to live in it, and all of the natural surroundings, including the planet itself.

Those who believe in a salvation-project for the planet, however, are made to believe that the system agrees to get organized in an „alternative“, even „green“, way. But the „smart-cities“-propaganda tells us something else (s. Heibel 2021), like the G5 and digitalization via AI, artificial intelligence. As Maria Heibel says: CO2 is only the scapegoat to reach very different goals and obscures the truth of the arrival of a New World Order now going to be forced upon us all.

  1. It is necessary, if we want it or not, to analyze the situation and to find answers to this development, be it as human beings, be it as women, because in this war, it is life itself that is now threatened in its entirety, even the life of Mother Earth herself.

We are confronted with a completely new dimension of what is happening, on and with the earth, a dimension never heard of before in history.

This is why we are in urgent need of re-thinking the activities, reflections and feelings we until now have developed in view of war and especially the nuclear threat (s. Caldicott 2002), because in view of the new panorama that is now unfolding, our former answers are far from being suffficient.

Image source Countercurrents

As women, we have to confess that our movements against wars, including the nuclear threat, have not been successful so far. If we do not recognize what is going on now – and first of all, understand why – we will be even less successful today.

We even seem to have arrived at a situation in which something like the „pure war“, as Paulo Virilio called it, is approaching, a world in which not only democracy as we know it, but civil life as such is going to be overwhelmed by militarization – and eventually, effectively will cease to exist (s. Virilio/Lotringer 1984).

The actual concept of „weaponization“ may be a symptom of what is arriving, meaning that everything is being turned into a weapon: all techniques, all labor, all communication, politics, sex, health-care, educational systems, the weather and even the human being itself by being changed via „transhumanism“ (s. Werlhof 2020).

Patriarchy’s weaponized machine civilization that is bringing everything under its control – the mega-machine (s. Mumford 1970) – is now emerging on the horizon. It means that we as former free and independent humans are now supposed to become just a tiny part of this machine. This will be our new „part“-icipation.

  1. The destructive realities on earth have started to be felt everywhere.

As we have seen already, they are explained to us as the consequences of CO2 as alleged greenhouse gas emissions of civil industries and our life style, resulting in a „global warming“ and a „climate change“ we seem to be responsible for, ourselves.

This way we are supposed to feel guilty about the problems of the planet and agree to the measures proposed from above, like accepting a so-called „civil geo-engineering“ as a technology that is said to save us and the planet from global warming and climate chaos as the supposed main problems of humanity today.

However, the underlaying concepts of this „information war“ never define those who are really responsible for what is happening on earth, that is the multi-nationals, financial capital and the military industrial complex, the deep state (s. Fraile 2021) and the “Fourth industrial revolution“ as such, adding AI, Artificial Intelligence, nanotechnology, biotechnologies (genetic and synthetic technplogies) to military geoengineering (s. Freeland 2021). They conceal and hide from us that the entire narrative and the fake science about CO2 and global warming is an invention by the real powers to be and stems from their dark agenda for the world (s. Engdahl 2018).

After the Paris UN Climate Conference of 2015 the new IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) – Special Report of 2018 is finally propagating to implement those new planetary technologies that until now have not officially been discussed, as a possible solution (IPCC 2018).

In the first instance it is the technology of so-called SRM, solar radiation management, (or SAI), proposed of being able to cool down the planet by imitating a volcanic eruption, the so- called Pinatubo effect, which means blocking the sun by metallic particles in the atmosphere, like aluminum, sulfur (s. Keith 2015), and others (s. Werlhof 2021, Geoengineering: From geo-weaponry to geo-warfare).

This debate has been opened to the public only a few years ago and gave rise to the alleged „science“ of „civil geo-engineering“ or „climate engineering“, without mentioning the military background behind, not to speak of its disturbing history. This part of the story is bluntly denied.

  1. The work of Rosalie Bertell, however, is the first to reveal a totally different picture of what is going on in reality.

Bertell (1929-2012) was a catholic nun and scientist, specialized in biometry, environmental disaster and health questions, living in the US and Canada. She worked for the UN as a specialist for industrial accidents worldwide and founded various institutions, e.g. the IICPH, the International Institute of Concern for Public Health. Bertell was awarded 9 honorary doctoral degrees as well as the Right Livelihood Award, among others.

Since I met Rosalie in 2010 she wanted me to continue her work, publishing and discussing it everywhere, and relating it more to the question of patriarchy as our modern civilization. In this way I came to consider myself an heir of her work.

This is why I am here and why I can present today the Italian version of her most important book: “Pianeta Terra. L´ultima arma di guerra“ (Trieste 2018, Asterios).

Image source Amazon

No immediate danger: Prognosis for a radioactive earth: Bertell, Dr Rosalie.: 9780704328464: Amazon.com: Books

Rosalie Bertell wrote two unique books: “No Immediate Danger? Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth“ (1985) and “Planet Earth. The Latest Weapon of War“ (2000) – now available in Italian, French, Spanish and German, in the 4th edition already (since 2020, in the 5th edition, as well as a new enhanced English edition in 2020). They may be considered to belong to the most important books of the 21st century.

The first book discusses the health problems caused by low nuclear radiation that occurs even in peace times, next to the nuclear industry and nuclear plants, and explains the way these health problems are passed on to future generations without possibilities of being healed, because the genetic alterations they cause cannot be reversed.

In the second book, Bertell addresses nuclear and mostly secret developments of post-nuclear weapons for planetary destruction – including the ongoing destruction of the planet itself, which is actually being transformed into a giant weapon of war – and the historical development of this project in East and West so far.

  1. From the perspective of Bertell’s analysis, the realities on the planet are completely different from the ones we are told officially, and they result from very different origins than those presented to the public.

According to Rosalie Bertell’s findings, we are confronted with the results of:

  • 200 nuclear tests in the atmosphere and on earth between 1958-1998 alone, that have damaged the magnetosphere and the atmosphere, changing even the earth´s axis (now observed by the Inuit), and lowering the circular movement of the planet
  • weather and climate manipulation, the provocation of seemingly natural disasters and the change of the earth´s life support systems and cycles in the air and on the ground, by using so-called „plasma weapons“
  • SRM – solar radiation management – that is supposed to be implemented now by civil geo-engineers to combat so-called global warming, whereas SRM is already in secret use since 30 years with completely different effects and being applied for very different reasons.

SRM consists of airplanes spraying aerosols in the form of nanoparticles into the atmosphere, and they can be seen nearly everyday worldwide. They dump on us an ever increasing variety of alumimum and heavy metals like barium and strontium, fly coal ash (s. Herndon 2018), fibers, polymeres, viruses, bacteria and soon, or already, even minimachines in the form of nanobots, all of which make us sick. Furthermore, these link us as living beings via microwaves with special devices on the ground as well as with satellites in orbit (s. Elon Musk´s activities, cf. Freeland 2021).

In this way, we are continuously being poisoned; the increased toxicity in the atmosphere and in our bodies cause Alzheimer and other neurological diseases, cancer, heart and lung diseases and autism, a disease that seems to especially effect boys. According to an estimation for the US, nearly all future generations will be effected by it (s. Klinghardt 2016). We are already on the way to „transhumanism“ where our survival depends on how we manage to live as cyborgs („Homo transformator“, s. Wörer 2017; Werlhof 2020).

  • Most recently, DEW, directed energy weapons (s. Wood 2014, Johnson 2017) are to be debated, based on EM – electromagnetic – waves which seem to have been applied in 9/11 and in the so-called forest fires all over the world (s. Kadia 2021). However, the public is still lacking a more thorough analysis of such weapons.

The spraying of the atmosphere via SRM, however, is officially denied everywhere – whereas Monsanto (now Bayer) invented a seed that resists aluminum, one of the main components of the sprayings. So, how did they know?

Furthermore, the SRM-spraying technology relates to other geo-engineering techniques secretely practiced by the military, namely the above mentioned plasma weapons, because the artificial clouds produced by spraying metals, offer guidance and an artificial „replace-atmosphere“ for the electromagnetic waves of the plasma weapons to spread even there, where the atmosphere has been weakened or destroyed in the meantime (ozone depletion, s. Herndon 2018, Werlhof 2018).

This way SRM-spraying has nothing to do with cooling the planet. It has been invented and applied first in the Vietnam War as „Agent Orange“ – but an alleged cooling is the main reason why this method is now propagated to be applied in the near future!

  • Using the method of SRM now officially, only means starting to apply military geo- engineering as such, defining it as even saving the planet, whereas in reality, the opposite is true.

About the new plasma weapons:

  • The use of plasma weapons occurs from high up in the ionosphere, from 100 to 200 and much more km hight, and results in seemingly natural catastrophes on earth.

These weapons are much more difficult to understand. They are based on the inventions of Nicola Tesla – a Serbian physicist and inventor, living from 1856-1943. Tesla worked with the earth´s electromagnetism and invented the production and use of electric power in all its forms, including alternating current, electronic devices and wireless communication – all of what is in general use today.

  • Based on his work it was possible to invent arms that function with electromagnetic waves, artificially produced and pulsed up to billlions of Watt that can reach high up into the ionosphere and turn down to earth again, even passing through its core – its heart – leading to deliberate and planned destruction where they arrive.

Rosalie Bertell compared this functioning with a gun from the ionopshere that threatens the earth from above. These weapons are plasma weapons, plasma being an electrified state of matter beyond solid, liquid or gaseous. Such weapons are applied by so-called ionospheric heaters, like HAARP (High Frequency Active Aurora Borealis Research Program) in Alaska.

There are about 3-4 dozens of these installations functioning at different levels of strength on earth now, some of the most recent ones being MUOS in Sicily, and Marlow in the North-East of Germany.

  • The plasma technology is basic for all military geo-engineering, and so is all the spraying of the atmosphere necessarily related to it. From the perspective of the military and thr military industrial complex behind it, in conjunction with the dark, deep state’s agenda for the future of the planet, this technology and strategy most likely will never be given up.
  1. The ENMOD Convention (Environmental Modification Convention) of the UN is explaining all these methods already in 1977 after the Vietnam War, in which some of them had been used.

In total, they comprise the artificial implementation of: earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, the change of the weather in an entire geographic region and for a prolongued period of time, hurricanes, droughts, fires, and floods, and the change of ocean currents (el Nino, la Nina).

One can also use EM waves to change the jet streams, wind currents that travel at high velocities around the earth and influence the distribution of heat and cold. One can influence the vapor streams of the earth that manage the distribution of rain, and together with sprayings one can transport humidity from one region of the world to another one, because metal in the air ties humidity (effects being rain and snow in Saudi Arabia, drying out of Europe and California…)

  1. After decades of experimentation, beginning with WW II, and an ongoing secret war on the level of the planet as such, we are now confronted with what I call “the Moment of Truth“ (Werlhof 2018). It means that the earth has been damaged in a way that is finally going to be the beginning of the death of life on earth, if nothing is done NOW to prevent it.

There is in fact real evidence of it, as most recently investigated, for example:

The ongoing dying of the ozone layer in the atmosphere. Deadly UV-B and -C radiation from the sun, not filtered any more by the ozone layer, reach the surface of the earth, producing a toxic burning and causing death from suffocation of many life forms, especially the small ones, because ozone is a sort of atmospheric oxygen. This way, the food chain is being interrupted and with it, the reproduction of life as such.

Already in 2007 the NASA, North American Space Agency, knew about this and did nothing to alarm the public or conduct any further research (s. Herndon 2018).

Marvin Herndon from San Diego et al. found out that life in the oceans as well as on land is affected: by dying plankton, coral bleech, and dying insects so that birds are dying out as well (s. Carson 1962: Silent Spring), and trees loose their reproductive capacities as the cell structures and their whole surroundings are genetically and chemically modified. In the end, agriculture will become impossible. As a consequence there won’t be enough food to feed the world if this process continues.

  1. Rosalie´s prophecies are already becoming dire realities: the process of the ozone–dying which she anticipated, forces us to become active now. Ozone is the dress, or gown, of the earth, a very thin, special layer that is unique in the universe and is the reason why life could develop on earth at all. Without ozone, the earth is naked, unprotected and exposed to unfiltered solar radiation of all types, of which UV is the most detrimental (plus gamma, x rays, infrared, micro waves). In the long run, should this process continue, the earth would thus look and become like Mars…uninhabitable.

It would need decades to repair the ozone layer, knowing the reasons for its depletion and stopping them from working. CFC was supposed to be the reason, and it was prohibited in the 1980‘s already (Montreal Protocol). Everybody was made to believe that the ozone layer would recover. Since 2018, however, data show that this was not the case, on the contrary. The ozone layer even weakened everywhere, not only at the poles.

  • The new bad news about the ozone layer can only be explained by the effects of radioactivity and military geo-engineering alltogether, including their civil applications:

They all are detrimental to the ozone layer which is situated in the stratosphere between 10-25 km, above the troposphere and below the ionosphere (oxygen O2 from the earths´ surface there being transformed into O3 by sun radiation). The process of ozone building is disturbed by radioactivity, (s. Fuskushima) and the ozone layer as such is threatened by EM waves, which are cutting holes into it by supersonic flights, rockets and all air traffic, especially SRM spraying – all of which are occurring next to the ozone layer, within it or travelling and cutting through it, and, last but not least, by microwaves from below and above.

The application of these technologies would have to be completely abolished, with the main problem being radioactivity which cannot be controlled once it has been released

  • Our knowledge and understanding of these processes mean that we now know what we urgently need to reclaim!

Until today there is no debate about the real reasons behind ozone-depletion, even though there is real evidence at hand as it is measured. So, the first thing to do is to inform the public which has no idea about theses dangers and their real causes. On the contrary, the „information war“ of today consists of feeding the public systematically with wrong explanations.

  1. Rosalie Bertell was still optimistic about the on-going and new movements for social change worldwide to confront the new war developing, including the women´s movement to fight for a world free of patriarchy, capitalism and the military. This was during the 1990‘s, when she wrote her book “Planet Earth“.

However, before she passed away in 2012 Rosalie, had become more pessimistic, as many movements had failed or disappeared in the meantime, or became corrupted, and also because the military and its new weaponry development were neither recognized nor understood by the public and by the social movements, including the women´s movement.

Knowledge about modern technologies has not yet become a female tradition, nor has the view of the earth like the one Rosalie Bertell had, considering the planet as a living cosmic macro-being – in which all life is inter-dependent in a larger, organic web of life, known for millenia in all pre-partriarchal and indigenous societies. This understanding was abolished with the rise of modern science which gave room for the modern view of the planet as a dead rock racing through a dead universe.

Women, and even the social movements of women today, have not yet grasped what is going on. Thus, they are not prepared for taking in, acknowledging and critically discussing what is happening in the meantime. And men and their movements normally do not develop a critique of modern technologies as they are „apocalypse-blind“ (Anders), and continue to understand and define these as progress! Our critique of patriarchy did not reach them.

  1. The two main dangers which Bertell saw, consist of this:
  • The effects of on-going nuclear radiation, including Fukushima. She asks: “Are we the last generations?“ (Bertell 2016)
  • The effects of military geo-engineering. She asks: „Planet without a future? New weapons through the destruction of Mother Earth“ (Berthe 2017).

Thus, a new women’s movement is needed, if possible a global one, in order to discuss and understand the causes of patriarchy’s planetary destruction, and to promote a movement for abolishing these devastating technologies altogether.

  1. However, such a movement is unlikely to become active in due time, as most women who wanted to get organized, have fallen prey to the deliberate deception from above of the alleged dangers through CO2, unable to develop their awareness of the secret military interventions. (s. 14th Info letter PBME: Manifest of civil society and UN women for climate justice).

It has, nevertheless, to be our aim as women to organize a new movement that acts simultaneously in two directions: in favor of mother earth, the planet, nature and life, on the one hand, and in pointing to those who are actively destroying them, on the other hand, so that facts of life can be known.

By now we are all heirs of Rosalie Bertell’s findings in the sense that we know for the first time, how and by which means the war against life and the planet exists and is working!

This advantage of knowledge is due to Bertell and her years of in-depth research. But, two things we do not yet know: WHY is all this happening, and WHAT can we do to stop it.

  1. WHY has this whole destructive arsenal been developed? For Bertell it was enough to see it in relation to the destructive business of the military and the military industrial complex (MIC) as such.

In order to confront the new dangers, however, we have to understand more of it:

  • Why could these weapons be invented and get into the world at all?
  • Why was and is nearly nobody aware of them and why is nearly nobody resisting them?
  • Why is questioning the military a “taboo“, thus preventing it from becoming a part of the debate?
  • Why is the military allowed to do whatever it wants, and as we now know, even threatening all life and the very conditions of life on the planet, including the planet itself?

Here, I can offer our “critical theory of patriarchy“ as an explanation. Our research has shown that patriarchy does not consist of simply dominating women in one way or another, but that patriarchy is a system, an entire “civilization“, and it is one that has developed into what I call the „alchemical war system“ we are currently living in (Werlhof 2011, 2013, 2022/3).

This has to do with the utopian idea of patriarchs to transform the world from a mother-oriented one into a father-oriented one, which means to have the entire earthly order changed and transformed into one of male creation, instead of remaining a female/motherly one. Since the beginnings of patriarchy, for instance in ancient alchemy, this has already been discussed and practiced: techniques that would lead to revolving nature and to turn her upside down in order to become a patriarchal one instead of remaining a matriarchal one. The new civilization would thus no longer depend on mothers and nature, but be independent from them and replaced by male inventions. In the end, this process has led to modern technologies which all claim to be part of a better, more “divine and higher“ civilization – one created by the “Fathers“.

However, the other side of the coin of such progress is destruction, as the alchemy of transformation implies the death of nature and the mother, while being transformed into the raw material to be „mined“ for the „brave new world“ of the fathers.

Such is the case of geo-engineering as a form of what I call “military alchemy“. It is the latest expression of a planetary, patriarchal civilization and its “hatred of life“ – the motive for deliberately destroying this life in ever more efficient ways, and propagating its replacement by the supposedly better and higher inventions of male „creation“. This includes even the earth as such, as the military industrial complex and its deep-state thinkers are is envisioning a „better planet“, which, in their thinking, has to become a managable and obedient one, one that needs to be tamed by them, so it acts the way they want it to act– and that means: as a giant war machine at their disposal. In patriarchy, the military is in power, and nearly everybody believes in progress and development! This is the alchemical war system we live in and that is spreading to all spheres of life and around the globe.

  1. What to do? First of all, we need to spread the knowlege about what is going on and why, in order to get out of the darkness of ignorance and seduction in times of an “information war”.

We need to reclaim our planetary living conditions which the military should not be allowed to threaten, as Rosalie Bertell said. And indeed, this threat happens to land, water, air and now even to the sun light! – to all the elements of earthly life.

We women will have to invent other forms of struggle. We can learn from Rosalie´s love for Mother Earth. Her „planetary consiousness“ is a consciousness that understands the earth as a big cosmic being that is alive, friendly, beautiful and motherly, though not human. Mother Earth is the only one we have!

This implies we should be grateful and happy with this earth. We should fight for it, protect it and save it from so much aggression! This is what is most urgently needed today.

A strong being is also a vulnerable one, as we know. So, we have to accept our responsibility and change sides: from the side of human society to the side of Mother Nature, the earth, and life, looking with their eyes, letting them speak to us, listening to them, understanding their suffering, feeling their strength as well as their despair – asking them for guidance and offering them our love, respect and protection. What else?

We owe this to her and to all of life.

Because it is humans who are destroying the earth, it can only be humans to stop that. These humans are WE!

In order to muster the courage for this, and after understanding consciously Rosalie Bertell’s clear mind, we most likely will initially go through hell, and I am speaking from experience. It is pure hell when we really arrive at this depth of understanding of the current situation– because it also implies to feel in your body– what is happening to the earth today. You will feel it as fear, it will shock you to the core, it is loud, you’ll get ill, your whole body will be trembling, it is like an earthquake in your bofy, mind and psyche at the same time…

This is the crisis you will have to expect and go through, when you change your perspective and turn to the side of the living planet. The crisis cannot be avoided. But, it is my experience from the hells I have been through in this process, you can come out of it again. By then, however, you will have lost your illusions with respect to this society and civilization, its leaders, its institutions and its politics. You will have learned about the myriads of feelings we have at our disposal as human beings. Certain feelings have nearly been lost, such as deep sadness, deep joy, deep pain and a deep understanding. These are then re-emerging in all their intensity and beauty. And in the end there is one feeling in particular: LOVE. It is love as you have not experienced it before. Love is the feeling of all feelings. It is the reason why you feel at all! Love must be cosmic in origin because it has to do with our cosmic being, the living earth and all life on it.

  1. So, the answer is: “Cosmic Love” – instead of patriarchal hatred. This Love is much bigger and more powerful than hatred, because it is the cosmic force as such, whereas hatred is only a human invention or inversion, a mistake that can be let aside – not so: Cosmic Love. Cosmic Love is going to show us what to do, how to do it, and how to remain strong.

This love is, however, not an easy one. It does not replace our responsibility for what is happening on earth. On the contrary, it is defining this responsibility and leads us to not only feel, but also think and act on its behalf. It tells us that we indeed have the power to stop the violent transformation of the world around us. We have the power to re-organize our civilization until it will be in synchrony with Nature again – becoming a Civilization of Love, instead of hatred.

This is our duty as women and as humanity. We are the result of cosmic love. Thus, we are called to not only remember this, but to apply it as a power for our liberation. Liberation from the forces of hatred, violence, and war that are used to destroy and transform the living earth and all life into their opposite!

In a first step, we have to learn to love and support – the earth! So she can be and will be with us, now and in the future, supporting us with all her strength, as well. We can experience this in ritual settings and other methods we know.

Furthermore, we have to invent forms of support on how to go through hell and how to know about Love – i.e. we have to learn how to love, love on a deep and comprehensive level, including love for the more-than- human world. Love is the only power that is going to help us in the coming struggle –a struggle we can no longer avoid. The time has come to act and show that the human race is in support of and with the earth and with life itself, not against them!

Otherwise we will be lost in Armageddon, if not even a possible „Omnicide“ as Rosalie Bertell warns us.

However: a movement cannot be invented. It has to emerge by itself. It´s a mystery. A spiritual and collective love event is a mystery – it may happen or not. Nobody knows in advance.

*

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

Claudia von Werlhof, born in 1943 near Berlin, Germany, is a University Professor of political sciences and women’s studies in Austria at Innsbruck, mother of a son. She co-invented the “Bielefeld School” in Germany, worked at the grass roots in Central- and South America, developed the “Critical Theory of Patriarchy”, co-founded FIPAZ (Research Institute for the Critique of Patriarchy and Alternative Civilizations), the “Planetary Movement for Mother Earth” and “BOOMERANG – Journal for the Critique of Patriarchy”.

She is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization, Montreal.

Sources

Anders, Günther, 1992/1995: Die Antiquiertheit des Menschen, 2. Bde, München, Beck

Bertell, Rosalie,1985: No Immediate Danger. Prognosi for a Radioactive Earth, London, the Women´s Press

  • 2000: Planet Earth. The Latest Weapon of War, London, The Women´s Press
  • 2010: Are we the last Generations? Interview, in: BOOMERANG, Nr. 2, 2016, www.fipaz.at
  • Planet without a Future? Interview, in BOOMERANG, Nr. 3, 2017, www.fipaz.at
  • 2011, Slowly Wrecking our Planet, 3rd Information Letter, www.pbme-online.org
  • 2011-2020, Kriegswaffe Planet Erde, 5 editions, Gelnhausen, J. K. Fischer
  • 2018, Pianeta Terra. L´ultima arma di guerra, Trieste, Asterios
  • 2018, Planeta Tierra – la última Guerra, Guadalajara, La Casa del Mago
  • 2018, La Planète Terre. Ultime Arme de Guerre, 2. Vol., Paris, Talma
  • 2020, Planet Earth. The Latest Weapon of War, enhanced edition, Dublin, Talma International

Caldicott, Helen, 2002: The new nuclear danger, New York, the New Press

Carson, Rachel, 1962: Silent Spring, Boston, Houghton Mifflin

Clastres, Pierre, 1981: Freiheit – Fatalität – Namenlos, in: Unter dem Pflaster liegt der Stran, Bd. 8, Berlin, S. 85-99

Engdahl, William, 2018: Climate Change, Panic Scenarios, Killing Scientific Debate. The Dark Story Behind „Global Warming“, in Global Research, 16.10.18

Fipaz, Research Instítute for the Critiqze of Patriarchy and Alternative Civilizations, www.fipaz.at

Fraile, Josefina, 2021: From Geoengineering to a New Deal for Nature: Destroying the Earth for Profit, in: Werlhof, C. v. (Ed.): Global WAR-NING! pp34-48

Freeland, Elana, 2021: Geoengineering, the „Deep State“, and Planetary Lockdown, in: Werlhof. C.v. (Ed.): Global WAR-NING! pp14-21

Heibel, Maria, 2021: CO2 as the Scapegoat and the Way to a „Brave New World“, in: Werlhof, C. v. (Ed.): Global WAR-NING! pp 57-62

Herndon, Marvin, 2018: http://www.NuclearPlanet.com/uv.html

IPCC Report, 2018: SR1.5 – Special Report 1,5 – IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) 8th of. Oktober, Incheon, South Korea

Johnson, Andrew, 2017: Uncommon Purpose – Agenda 2022, in: BOOMERAN, Nr. 3, www.fipaz.at

Kadia, Conny, 2021: Engineered Forest Fires in Portugal 2017, in: Werlhof, C. v. (Ed.): Global WAR-NING! pp 22-33

Keith, David, 2015: Project SCOPEX, in: Der Spiegel, Hamburg, June

Klinghardt, Dietrich, 2016: Effects of Chemtrails on Health, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1eqT-xu54Y

Mumford, Lewis, 1970: The Myth of the Machine. The Pentagon of Power, San Diego. Harcourt Brace* Co

PBME, Planetary Movement for Mother Earth, 2018: 14 th Infoletter, www-pbme-online.org

Orwell, George, 1949: nineteen eighty-four, London, Secker and Warburg

Tesla, Nikola, 1919/1982: My Inventions, in: Electrical Experimenter, Neuhrsg. Ben Johnson, Febr—Juni, New York

UN, 1977: Environmental Modification (ENMOD) Convention. Convention on the Prohibition of Miitary or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, signed 18 of May, Geneva

Virilio, Paul und Lotringer, Sylvère, 1984: Der reine Krieg, Berlin, Merve

Werlhof, Claudia von:

2011: The Failure of Modern Civilization and the Struggle for a „Deep“ Alternative, Frankfurt a.M., Peter Lang

  • 2013: Destruction trough „Creation“ – The „Critical Theory of Patriarchy“ and the Collapse of Modern Civilization, in: CNS, Capitalism-Nature-Socialism, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp.68-85
  • 2018, Wissenschaftler schlagen Alarm! Ozonschicht lässt hochgefährliche kosmische Strahlung durch, in: raum& zeit, Juli; english: The Moment of Truth Has Come! What Now? Threat to Life on Planet Earth: Ozone Dying and the Deadly Ultraviolet Cosmic Radiation, auf globalresearch.ca, April 26, 2018
  • 2020, https://www.globalresearch.ca/compulsory-vaccination-no-longer-human-being/5716572
  • 2021, (Ed.): Global WAR-NING! Geoengineering is Wrecking our Planet and Humanity, Montreal, Global Research (e-book)
  • Väter des Nichts. Zum Wahn einer Neuschöpfung der Welt. 2 Bde., Höhr-Grenzhausen, Zeitgeist, 2022/3 forthcoming

Wörer, Simone, 2017: Homo Transformator und die Krise der Gabe, Dissertation, Universität Innsbruck

Wood, Judy, 2014: Where Did the Towers Go? Evidence of Directed Free-Energy Technology on 9/11, Port Townsend, Feral House


Global WAR-NING! Geoengineering Is Wrecking Our Planet and Humanity

Edited by Prof. Claudia von Werlhof

After more than one year of “lockdowns” all over the world, the issue of “global warming” and “climate change” is back on the table of the international debate.

It seems that natural catastrophes have started to surround us everywhere – from the animal world next to us as well as from the sky above us. Is “nature” the enemy that has to be combatted today, be it by vaccinating humanity against the coronavirus that allegedly jumped out of the wilderness attacking us, be it by tearing down industrial production and consumption in order to avoid the alleged greenhouse gas CO2 emissions, being officially identified as the sole culprit of a so-called global warming? Or be it by applying methods of an alleged civil “geoengineering” against an ongoing climate change that seems to threaten the world?

Click here to read the e-Book.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Heirs of Rosalie Bertell? Her Significance for a Women’s Movement, in View of Today’s “New War Against All Life and Mother Earth Herself”

Neocons and the Ukraine Coup

March 4th, 2023 by Robert Parry

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland.

Of relevance to the ongoing war in Ukraine, this incisive article was first written by the late Robert Parry on February 24, 2014, in the immediate wake of the US Sponsored Coup d’Etat.

***

American neocons helped destabilize Ukraine and engineer the overthrow of its elected government, a “regime change” on Russia’s western border. But the coup – and the neo-Nazi militias at the forefront – also reveal divisions within the Obama administration.

More than five years into his presidency, Barack Obama has failed to take full control over his foreign policy, allowing a bureaucracy shaped by long years of Republican control and spurred on by a neocon-dominated U.S. news media to frustrate many of his efforts to redirect America’s approach to the world in a more peaceful direction.

But Obama deserves a big dose of the blame for this predicament because he did little to neutralize the government holdovers and indeed played into their hands with his initial appointments to head the State and Defense departments, Hillary Clinton, a neocon-leaning Democrat, and Robert Gates, a Republican cold warrior, respectively.

Even now, key U.S. diplomats are more attuned to hard-line positions than to promoting peace. The latest example is Ukraine where U.S. diplomats, including Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland and U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt, are celebrating the overthrow of an elected pro-Russian government.

Occurring during the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, the coup in Ukraine dealt an embarrassing black eye to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who had offended neocon sensibilities by quietly cooperating with Obama to reduce tensions over Iran and Syria, where the neocons favored military options.

Over the past several weeks, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was undercut by a destabilization campaign encouraged by Nuland and Pyatt and then deposed in a coup spearheaded by neo-Nazi militias. Even after Yanukovych and the political opposition agreed to an orderly transition toward early elections, right-wing armed patrols shattered the agreement and took strategic positions around Kiev.

Despite these ominous signs, Ambassador Pyatt hailed the coup as “a day for the history books.” Most of the mainstream U.S. news media also sided with the coup, with commentators praising the overthrow of an elected government as “reform.” But a few dissonant reports have pierced the happy talk by noting that the armed militias are part of the Pravy Sektor, a right-wing nationalist group which is often compared to the Nazis.

Thus, the Ukrainian coup could become the latest neocon-initiated “regime change” that ousted a target government but failed to take into account who would fill the void.

Some of these same American neocons pushed for the invasion of Iraq in 2003, not realizing that removing Saddam Hussein would touch off a sectarian conflict and lead to a pro-Iranian Shiite regime. Similarly, U.S. military intervention in Libya in 2011 eliminated Muammar Gaddafi but also empowered Islamic extremists who later murdered the U.S. ambassador and spread unrest beyond Libya’s borders to nearby Mali.

One might trace this neocons’ blindness to consequences back to Afghanistan in the 1980s when the Reagan administration supported Islamic militants, including Osama bin Laden, in a war against Soviet troops, only to have Muslim extremists take control of Afghanistan and provide a base for al-Qaeda to plot the 9/11 attacks against the United States.

Regarding Ukraine, today’s State Department bureaucracy seems to be continuing the same anti-Moscow geopolitical strategy set during those Reagan-Bush years.

Robert Gates described the approach in his new memoir, Duty, explaining the view of President George H.W. Bush’s Defense Secretary Dick Cheney: “When the Soviet Union was collapsing in late 1991, Dick wanted to see the dismantlement not only of the Soviet Union and the Russian empire but of Russia itself, so it could never again be a threat to the rest of the world.”

Vice President Cheney and the neocons pursued a similar strategy during George W. Bush’s presidency, expanding NATO aggressively to the east and backing anti-Russian regimes in the region including the hard-line Georgian government, which provoked a military confrontation with Moscow in 2008, ironically, during the Summer Olympics in China.

Obama’s Strategy

As President, Obama has sought a more cooperative relationship with Russia’s Putin and, generally, a less belligerent approach toward adversarial countries. Obama has been supported by an inner circle at the White House with analytical assistance from some elements of the U.S. intelligence community.

But the neocon momentum at the State Department and from other parts of the U.S. government has continued in the direction set by George W. Bush’s neocon administration and by neocon-lite Democrats who surrounded Secretary of State Clinton during Obama’s first term.

The two competing currents of geopolitical thinking – a less combative one from the White House and a more aggressive one from the foreign policy bureaucracy – have often worked at cross-purposes. But Obama, with only a few exceptions, has been unwilling to confront the hardliners or even fully articulate his foreign policy vision publicly.

For instance, Obama succumbed to the insistence of Gates, Clinton and Gen. David Petraeus to escalate the war in Afghanistan in 2009, though the President reportedly felt trapped into the decision which he soon regretted. In 2010, Obama backed away from a Brazilian-Turkish-brokered deal with Iran to curtail its nuclear program after Clinton denounced the arrangement and pushed for economic sanctions and confrontation as favored by the neocons and Israel.

Just last summer, Obama – only at the last second – reversed a course charted by the State Department favoring a military intervention in Syria over disputed U.S. claims that the Syrian government had launched a chemical weapons attack on civilians. Putin helped arrange a way out for Obama by getting the Syrian government to agree to surrender its chemical weapons. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “A Showdown for War or Peace.”]

Stirring Up Trouble

Now, you have Assistant Secretary of State Nuland, the wife of prominent neocon Robert Kagan, acting as a leading instigator in the Ukrainian unrest, explicitly seeking to pry the country out of the Russian orbit. Last December, she reminded Ukrainian business leaders that, to help Ukraine achieve “its European aspirations, we have invested more than $5 billion.” She said the U.S. goal was to take “Ukraine into the future that it deserves.”

The Kagan family includes other important neocons, such as Frederick Kagan, who was a principal architect of the Iraq and Afghan “surge” strategies. In Duty, Gates writes that “an important way station in my ‘pilgrim’s progress’ from skepticism to support of more troops [in Afghanistan] was an essay by the historian Fred Kagan, who sent me a prepublication draft.

“I knew and respected Kagan. He had been a prominent proponent of the surge in Iraq, and we had talked from time to time about both wars, including one long evening conversation on the veranda of one of Saddam’s palaces in Baghdad.”

Now, another member of the Kagan family, albeit an in-law, has been orchestrating the escalation of tensions in Ukraine with an eye toward one more “regime change.”

As for Nuland’s sidekick, U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Pyatt previously served as a U.S. diplomat in Vienna involved in bringing the International Atomic Energy Agency into a line with U.S. and Israeli hostility toward Iran. A July 9, 2009, cable from Pyatt, which was released by Pvt. Bradley Manning, revealed Pyatt to be the middleman who coordinated strategy with the U.S.-installed IAEA director-general  Yukiya Amano.

Pyatt reported that Amano offered to cooperate with the U.S. and Israel on Iran, including having private meetings with Israeli officials, supporting U.S. sanctions, and agreeing to IAEA personnel changes favored by the United States. According to the cable, Pyatt promised strong U.S. backing for Amano and Amano asked for more U.S. money. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “America’s Debt to Bradley Manning.”]

It was Ambassador Pyatt who was on the other end of Nuland’s infamous Jan. 28 phone call in which she discussed how to manipulate Ukraine’s tensions and who to elevate into the country’s leadership. According to the conversation, which was intercepted and made public, Nuland ruled out one opposition figure, Vitali Klitschko, a popular former boxer, because he lacked experience.

Nuland also favored the UN as mediator over the European Union, at which point in the conversation she exclaimed, “Fuck the E.U.” to which Pyatt responded, “Oh, exactly …”

Ultimately, the Ukrainian unrest – over a policy debate whether Ukraine should move toward entering the European Union – led to a violent showdown in which neo-fascist storm troopers battled police, leaving scores dead. To ease the crisis, President Yanukovych agreed to a power-sharing government and to accelerated elections. But no sooner was that agreement signed then the hard-right faction threw it out and pressed for power in an apparent coup.

Again, the American neocons had performed the role of the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, unleashing forces and creating chaos that soon was spinning out of control. But this latest “regime change,” which humiliated President Putin, could also do long-term damage to U.S.-Russian cooperation vital to resolving other crises, with Iran and Syria, two more countries where the neocons are also eager for confrontation.

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his new book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and barnesandnoble.com). For a limited time, you also can order Robert Parry’s trilogy on the Bush Family and its connections to various right-wing operatives for only $34. The trilogy includes America’s Stolen Narrative. For details on this offer, click here.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Neocons and the Ukraine Coup

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on September 1, 2022

***

On August 22 the exchange-traded market price for natural gas in the German THE (Trading Hub Europe) gas hub was trading more than 1000% higher than a year ago. Most citizens are told by the Scholz regime that the reason is Putin and Russia’s war in Ukraine. The truth is quite otherwise. EU politicians and major financial interests are using Russia to cover what is a Made in Germany and Brussels energy crisis. The consequences are not accidental.

It is not because politicians like Scholz or German Green Economy Minister Robert Habeck, nor EU Commission Green Energy Vice President Frans Timmermans are stupid or clueless. Corrupt and dishonest, maybe yes. They know exactly what they are doing. They are reading a script. It is all part of the EU plan to deindustrialize one of the most energy-efficient industrial concentrations on the planet. This is the UN Green Agenda 2030 otherwise known as Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset.

EU Gas Market Deregulated

What the EU Commission and government ministers in Germany and across the EU are carefully hiding is the transformation they have created in how the natural gas price is determined today. For almost two decades the EU Commission, backed by the mega banks such as JP MorganChase or large speculative hedge funds, began to lay the basis for what is today a complete deregulation of the market for natural gas. It was promoted as the “liberalization” of the European Union’s natural gas market. What it now allows is for unregulated real-time free market trading to fix prices rather than long-term contracts.

Beginning around 2010 the EU began to push a radical change in rules for pricing natural gas. Prior to that point most gas prices were set in fixed long-term contracts for pipeline delivery. The largest supplier, Russia’s Gazprom, provided gas to the EU, most especially to Germany, in long-term contracts pegged to the price of oil. Until the last several years almost no gas was imported by LNG ships. With a change in US laws to allow export of LNG from the huge shale gas production in 2016 US gas producers began a major expansion of LNG export terminal construction. The terminals take an average of 3 to 5 years to build. At the same time Poland, Holland and other EU countries began to build LNG import terminals to receive the LNG from abroad.

Emerging from World War II as the world leading oil supplier, the Anglo-American oil giants, then called the Seven Sisters, created a global oil price monopoly. As Henry Kissinger noted during the oil shocks of the 1970s, “Control the oil and you control entire nations.” Since the 1980s Wall Street banks, led by Goldman Sachs, created a new market in “paper oil,” or futures and derivative trading of future oil barrels. It created a huge casino of speculative profits that was controlled by a handful of giant banks in New York and the City of London.

Those same powerful financial interests have been working for years to create a similar globalized “paper gas” market in futures they could control. The EU Commission and their Green Deal agenda to “decarbonize” the economy by 2050, eliminating oil, gas and coal fuels, provided the ideal trap that has led to the explosive spike in EU gas prices since 2021. To create that “single” market control, the EU was lobbied by the globalist interests to impose draconian and de facto illegal rule changes on Gazprom to force the Russian owner of various gas distribution pipeline networks in the EU to open them to competitor gas.

The big banks and energy interests that control EU policy in Brussels had created a new independent price system parallel to the long-term, stable prices of Russian pipeline gas which they did not control.

By 2019 the series of bureaucratic energy directives of the Brussels EU Commission allowed fully deregulated gas market trading to de facto set the prices for natural gas in the EU, despite the fact that Russia was still by far the largest gas import source. A series of virtual trading “hubs” had been established to trade gas futures contracts in several EU countries. By 2020 the Dutch TTF (Title Transfer Facility) was the dominant trading center for EU gas, the so-called EU gas benchmark. Notably, TTF is a virtual platform of trades in futures gas contracts between in trades between banks and other financial investors, “Over-The-Counter.” That means it is de facto unregulated, outside any regulated exchange. This is critical to understand the game being run in the EU today.

In 2021 only 20% of all natural gas imports to the EU were LNG gas, whose prices were largely determined by futures trades in the TTF hub, the EU de facto gas benchmark, owned by the Dutch Government, the same government destroying its farms for a fraudulent nitrogen pollution claim. The largest import share of European gas came from Russia’s Gazprom supplying more than 40% of EU imports in 2021. That gas was via long term pipeline contracts whose price was vastly lower than today’s TTF speculation price. In 2021 EU states paid an estimated penalty cost around $30 billion more for natural gas in 2021 than if they had stuck with Gazprom oil-indexation pricing. The banks loved it. US industry and consumers not. Only by destroying the Russian gas market in the EU could financial interests and the Green Deal advocates create their LNG market control.

Closing EU Pipeline Gas

With full EU backing for the new gas wholesale market, Brussels, Germany and NATO began systematically to close stable, long-term pipeline gas to the EU.

After she broke diplomatic ties with Morocco in August, 2021 over disputed territories, Algeria announced the Maghreb-Europe (MGE) gas pipeline, which was launched in 1996, would cease operation on October 31, 2021, when the relevant agreement expired.

In September 2021 Gazprom completed its multibillion dollar undersea Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia across the Baltic Sea to northern Germany. It would double the capacity of Nord Stream 1 to 110 billion cubic meters annually, allowing Gazprom to be independent of interference with gas deliveries via its Soyuz pipeline going through Ukraine. The EU Commission, backed by the Biden Administration, blocked opening of the pipeline with bureaucratic sabotage, and finally German Chancellor Scholz imposed sanction on the pipeline on February 22 over Russian recognition of Donetsk People’s Republic and Luhansk People’s Republic. With the growing gas crisis since, the German government has refused to open Nord Stream 2 despite the fact it is finished.

Then on May 12, 2022 although Gazprom deliveries to the Soyuz gas pipeline through Ukraine were uninterrupted for almost three months of conflict, despite Russia’s military operations in Ukraine, the NATO-controlled Zelenskyy regime in Kiev closed a major Russian pipeline through Lugansk, that was binging Russian gas both to his Ukraine as well as EU states, declaring it would remain closed until Kiev gets full control of its pipeline system that runs through the two Donbass republics. That section of the Ukraine Soyuz line cut one-third of gas via Soyuz to the EU. It certainly did not help the EU economy at a time Kiev was begging for more weapons from those same NATO countries. Soyuz opened in 1980 under the Soviet Union bringing gas from the Orenburg gas field.

Next came the Jamal Russian gas pipeline through Belarus and through Poland to Germany. In December 2021, two months before the Ukraine conflict, the Polish government closed the Polish part of the pipeline cutting Gazprom gas delivery at low prices to Germany as well as Poland. Instead Polish gas companies bought Russian gas in the storage of German gas companies, via the Polish-German section of the Jamal pipeline at a higher price in a reverse flow. The German gas companies got their Russian gas via long-term contract for a very low contract price and resold to Poland at a huge profit. This insanity was deliberately downplayed by the Green Economics Minister Habeck and Chancellor Scholz and German media, even though it forced German gas prices even higher and worsened the German gas crisis. The Polish government refused to renew its gas contract with Russia, and instead buys gas on the free market for vastly higher prices. As a result no more Russian gas to Germany via Jamal is flowing.

Finally gas delivery via Nord Stream 1 undersea pipeline has been interrupted because of needed repair of a Siemens-made gas turbine. The turbine was sent to a special facility of Siemens in Canada where the anti-Russian Trudeau regime held it for months before finally releasing it on request of German government. Yet they deliberately refused to grant the delivery to its Russian owner, but instead to Siemens Germany, where it sits, as the German and Canadian governments refuse to grant a legally binding sanctions exemption for the transfer to Russia. By this means Gazprom gas through Nord Stream 1 is also dramatically reduced to 20% of normal.

In January, 2020 Gazprom began sending gas from its TurkStream pipeline through Turkey and on to Bulgaria and Hungary. In March 2022 Bulgaria unilaterally, with NATO backing, cut its gas supplies from TurkStream. Hungary’s Viktor Orban, by contrast, secured continuation with Russia of TurkStream gas. As a result today Hungary has no energy crisis and imports Russian pipeline gas at contract very low fixed prices.

By systematically sanctioning or closing gas deliveries from long-term, low cost pipelines to the EU, gas speculators via the Dutch TTP have been able to use every hiccup or energy shock in the world, whether a record drought in China or the conflict in Ukraine, to export restrictions in the USA, to bid the EU wholesale gas prices through all bounds. As of mid-August the futures price at TTP was 1,000% higher than a year ago and rising daily.

German Highest Price Madness

The deliberate energy and electricity price sabotage gets even more absurd. On August 28, German Finance Minister Christian Lindner, the sole cabinet member from the Liberal Party (FDP), revealed that under the opaque terms of the complex EU Electricity Market Reform measures, the producers of electricity from solar or wind automatically receive the same price for their “renewable” electricity they sell to the power companies for the grid as the highest cost, i.e. natural gas!

Lindner called for an “urgent” change to the German energy law to decouple different markets. The fanatical Green Economics Minister Robert Habeck immediately replied that, “We are working hard to find a new market model,” but cautioning that the government must be mindful not to intervene too much: “We need functioning markets and, at the same time, we need to set the right rules so that positions in the market are not abused.”

Habeck in fact is doing all possible to build the Green Agenda and eliminate gas and oil and nuclear, the only reliable energy sources at present. He refuses to consider re-opening three nuclear plants closed a year ago or to reconsider closing the remaining three in December. While declaring in a Bloomberg interview that, ”I will not approach this question ideologically,” in the next breath he declared, “Nuclear power is not the solution, it is the problem.” Habeck as well as the EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have repeatedly declared more investment in unreliable wind and solar is the answer to a gas price crisis that their policies have deliberately created. In every respect the suicidal energy crisis ongoing in Europe has been “Made in Germany,” not in Russia.

*

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

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from Libertarian Car Talk


Seeds of Destruction: Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation

Author Name: F. William Engdahl
ISBN Number: 978-0-9879389-2-3
Product Type: PDF File

Price: $9.50

This skilfully researched book focuses on how a small socio-political American elite seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival: the provision of our daily bread. “Control the food and you control the people.”

This is no ordinary book about the perils of GMO. Engdahl takes the reader inside the corridors of power, into the backrooms of the science labs, behind closed doors in the corporate boardrooms.

The author cogently reveals a diabolical world of profit-driven political intrigue, government corruption and coercion, where genetic manipulation and the patenting of life forms are used to gain worldwide control over food production. If the book often reads as a crime story, that should come as no surprise. For that is what it is.

Click here to order.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published by Global Research on January 4, 2023

***

Dr. Masanori Fukushima, a professor emeritus at Kyoto University, presented a warning on November 25, 2022, at an event organized by Kazuhisa Ukawa, a concerned private citizen. Apparently on the agenda were concerns involving discrimination against the unvaccinated in Japan as well as an ever-growing list of persons reporting injuries associated with the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. In what frankly can be described as a bombshell acknowledgment given the pedigree of this physician-scientist in Japanese medical research circles, Fukushima declared that “the harm caused by vaccines is now a worldwide problem” and that “given the wide range of adverse events, billions of lives could ultimately  be in danger.” Is this just reactionary hyperbole of a bitter critic or a prescient signal to be taken very seriously?

Involved with the Foundation for Biomedical Research and Innovation and the Translational Research Center for Medical Innovation, the infectious disease expert (Fukushima) has been an oncologist with over 25 years of experience in practice and research, including ongoing reform of Japan’s medical care system.

A big proponent of clinical research,  Fukushima has actively contributed to building the clinical trial infrastructure, with a focus on translational research.  In this recent video of the conference uploaded to Rumble Fukushima told the audience that “Vaccine damage now represents a global problem. Billions of lives at possible risk.” But could this be true? Does this include some hyperbolic alarmism?

What does the physician-scientist share during this conference?

He starts out by saying that “this vaccine was scientifically misconceived. So, in 2020 I immediately translated the Chinese guidelines as soon as they arrived from China to use steroids as appropriately as possible.” He emphasized he made such a proclamation but that such messaging fell on deaf ears.

Complimenting Japan’s excellent doctors, the prominent physician-scientist emphasized that once he released unfolding guidelines involving early care with the use of drugs such as steroids, the death rate [in Japan] dropped dramatically before the vaccine. Harboring some clear resentment, Fukushima declared, “So anyone inciting this vaccine without any academic acumen is to be condemned.”

Then comes the Fukushima bombshell: “The harm caused by vaccines is now a worldwide problem. Here is my article recently published. Shall we read it? Given the large number of people who have received vaccinations and given the wide range of adverse events, billions of lives could ultimately be in danger.”

What is Dr. Fukushima demanding?

The doctor went on the record at this Japanese event:

“We urge public health agencies to acknowledge or substantiate the issues raised in this document that are relevant to public health. Recognize them and act accordingly. Also, ensure that all individuals make their own decision on the matter.”

Conveying that the medical community has an obligation to investigate this matter in pursuit of their duty of helping patients, he calls for healthcare professionals to start making their own decisions.

TrialSite also includes a Twitter link to this event. The video is hosted on multiple channels but not on YouTube. See another video capture of the same event in Japan.

A growing chorus of concern about mRNA COVID-19 vaccine safety and the need to not only recognize vaccine injury but the need to care for the injured becomes a fundamentally important unfolding event. It’s not an either-or, vaxxed vs. unvaxxed, or a liberal vs. conservative false dilemma. The COVID-19 vaccines represented an emergency response to a dangerous pandemic, and these vaccines, during bursts of time, did bring down the risks of serious COVID-19—less the unknown risk factors associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. But it’s time for the mainstream to start recognizing the problem.

Recently TrialSite reported that a New England Skeptical Society affiliated physician, Dr. Frank Han, while attacking many of the participants involved with Senator Ron Johnson’s recent roundtable on COVID-19 vaccine safety, did acknowledge an urgent need to support the COVID-19 vaccine-injured. See the link.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 NaturalNews.com


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as 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.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

The book is available in print form in Japanese. 仕組まれたコロナ危機:「世界の初期化」を目論む者たち

From the Gulf of Tonkin to the Baltic Sea. Seymour Hersh

March 4th, 2023 by Seymour M. Hersh

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on February 27, 2023

***

Why Norway? In my account of the Biden Administration’s decision to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines, why did much of the secret planning and training for the operation take place in Norway? And why were highly skilled seamen and technicians from the Norwegian Navy involved?

The simple answer is that the Norwegian Navy has a long and murky history of cooperation with American intelligence. Five months ago that teamwork—about which we still know very little—resulted in the destruction of two pipelines, on orders of President Biden, with international implications yet to be determined. And six decades ago, so the histories of those years have it, a small group of Norwegian seamen were entangled in a presidential deceit that led to an early—and bloody—turning point in the Vietnam war.

After the Second World War, ever prudent Norway invested heavily in the construction of large, heavily armed fast attack boats to defend its 1,400 miles of Atlantic Ocean coastline. These vessels were far more effective than the famed American PT boat that was ennobled in many a postwar movie. These boats were known as “Nasty-class,” for their powerful gunnery, and some of them were sold to the US Navy. According to reporting in Norway, by early 1964 at least two Norwegian sailors confessed to their involvement in CIA-led clandestine attacks along the North Vietnam coast. Other reports, never confirmed, said the Norwegian patrol boats where manned by Norwegian officers and crew. What was not in dispute was that the American goal was to put pressure on the leadership in North Vietnam to lessen its support of the anti-American guerrillas in South Vietnam. The strategy did not work.

None of this was known at the time to the American public. And the Norwegians would keep the secret for decades. The CIA’s lethal game of cat-and-mouse warfare led to a failed attack on August 2, 1964, with three North Vietnamese gunships engaging two American destroyers—the USS Maddox and the USS Turner Joy—on a large body of contested water known as the Gulf of Tonkin that straddled both North and South Vietnam.

Two days later, with the destroyers still intact, the commander of the Maddox cabled his superiors that he was under a torpedo attack. It was a false alarm, and he soon rescinded the report. But the American signals intelligence community—under pressure from Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, who was doing President Johnson’s bidding—looked the other way as McNamara ignored the second cableand Johnson told the American public there was evidence that North Vietnam had attacked an American destroyer. Johnson and McNamara had found a way to take the war to North Vietnam.

Johnson’s nationally televised speech on the evening of August 4, 1964, is chilling in its mendacity, especially when one knows what was to come.

“This new act of aggression,” he said, “aimed directly at our own forces, again brings home to all of us in the United States the importance of the struggle for peace and security in Southeast Asia. Aggression by terror against the peaceful villagers of South Vietnam has now been joined by open aggression on the high seas against the United States of America.”

Public anger swelled, and Johnson authorized the first American bombing of the North. A few days later Congress passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution with only two dissenting votes, giving the president the right to deploy American troops and use military force in South Vietnam in any manner he chose. And so it went on for the next eleven years, with 58,000 American deaths and millions of Vietnamese deaths to come.

The Norwegian navy, as loyal allies in the Cold War, stayed mum, and over the next few years, according to further reporting in Norway, sold eighteen more of their Nasty Class patrol boats to the U.S. Navy. Six were destroyed in combat.

In 2001, Robert J. Hanyok, a historian at the National Security Agency, published Skunks, Bogies, Silent Hounds, and the Flying Fish: The Gulf of Tonkin Mystery, 2–4 August 1964,a definitive study of the events in the gulf, including the manipulation of signals intelligence. He revealed that 90 percent of the relevant intercepts, including those from the North Vietnamese, had been kept out the NSA’s final reports on the encounter and thus were not provided to the Congressional committees that later investigated the abuse that led America deeper into the Vietnam War.

That is the public record as it stands. But, as I have learned from a source in the US intelligence community, there is much more to know. The first batch of Norwegian patrol boats meant for the CIA’s undeclared war against the North Vietnamese actually numbered six. They landed in early 1964 at a Vietnamese naval base in Danang, eighty-five miles south of the border between North and South Vietnam. The ships had Norwegian crews and Norwegian Navy officers as their captains. The declared mission was to teach American and Vietnamese sailors how to operate the ships. The vessels were under the control of a long-running CIA-directed series of attacks against coastal targets inside North Vietnam. The secret operation was controlled by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Washington and not by the American command in Saigon, which was then headed by Army General William Westmoreland. That shift was deemed essential because there was another aspect of the undeclared war against the North that was sacrosanct. US Navy SEALs were assigned to the mission with a high-priority list of far more aggressive targets that included heavily defended North Vietnamese radar facilities.

It was a secret war within a secret war. I was told that at least two SEALs were ambushed by the North Vietnamese and severely wounded in a fire fight. Both men managed to make their way to the coast and were eventually rescued. Both men were awarded the Medal of Honor, America’s highest decoration, in secret.

There also were far less dramatic movements as the war unraveled. At some later date, it was decided to arm bats with incendiary devices and drop them, by air, over areas of high interest in the south. The release came at high altitude, and the bats quickly froze to death.

This bit of top secret and heretofore unknown history raises, to this reporter, an obvious question: what else do we not know about the secret operation in Norway that led to the destruction of the pipelines? And is there anyone in the Senate and the House, or in the American press, interested in finding out what was going on—and what else we do not know?

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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: Lyndon B. Johnson delivering his televised report on the Gulf of Tonkin incident, August 4, 1964. (Source: Seymour Hersh)

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on July 12, 2022

**

Author’s Update

Undercover Economic and Social Warfare? 

The following article published on July 12, 2022 focusses on the “Covid-19 Zero Tolerance” lockdown and its economic and social consequences. 

Starting in Shanghai in April 2022, the Covid-19 zero tolerance project extended its grip to major urban areas across China.

Socially oppressive measures were adopted against millions of people in large cities. People were confined to their apartments in high rise buildings. 

China’s zero tolerance model was conducive to “confining the labour force” as well as “paralyzing the workplace”, not to mention transportation, the closing down of schools, universities, cultural activities, sports events, etc. 

The COVID-19 zero tolerance lockdown applied nationwide is based on “fake science”. 

It constitutes a de facto act of “economic warfare”. It is broadly based on the same concepts as the March 11, 2020 covid-19 pandemic “lockdown” applied in more than 190 members states of the UN under the auspices of the WHO. 

It has created social havoc. It has contributed to undermining China’s economy. 

It has created chaos in supply lines within the domestic economy as well as the destabilization of China’s buoyant commodity export economy.

The justification to close down major urban areas, put forth by China’s National Heath Commission  (on July 11, 2022) was based on the following data for Mainland China:  

  • A total of 352 new domestically transmitted COVID infections recorded on July 10,
  • 46 new symptomatic cases, 
  • 306 new asymptomatic cases.

46 new symptomatic cases out of a population of 1.45 billion people does not justify closing down China’s major urban areas. (July 10)

The most recent data of Covid positive cases using unreliable PCR and related tests is as follows. 

November 28, according to the WHO: 19,130 so-called confirmed cases out of a population of more than 1.4 billion people.

The Chinese government has now acknowledged that:

There was no scientific basis for implementing zero tolerance, which consisted in applying socially repressive measures against millions of people.

There is no public health concern behind these measures.

The number of “confirmed cases” released by the WHO are low and SARS-Cov2 (confirmed by the WHO and the CDC) is not a “dangerous virus”.

 

The process of economic and social destabilization initiated in March (see article below) extended its grip beyond Shanghai to several major industrial cities including the southern city of Guangzhou and Shenzhen, China’s major exporting hub to the World Market.

According to Nomura, more than 20% of China’s GDP is currently under lockdown.

The Shanghai stock market collapsed on November 24, 2022.

We are dealing with a very complex process of Worldwide economic and social destabilization. Who are the actors behind this process?

In view of China’s leading role as a major commodity producer (with sizeable exports to all major regions of the World), the crisis in China will inevitably have repercussions in Europe, North America, not to mention the Global South.

What is unfolding is an engineered disruption of the global economy. Read carefully. Who is behind it.

 

Michel Chossudovsky, August 23, 2022, November 29, 2022, January 3, 2023

***

click the Translate Website option on the top right hand side of top banner of our home page to read this article in Chinese

点击我们主页顶部横幅右上角的“翻译网站”选项,阅读这篇文章的中文

Read article in Chinese Here

***

Starting in late March early April 2022, the Chinese government ordered a Covid zero tolerance lockdown mandate pertaining to Shanghai, a port city of 26 million people:

“The official story put out by the city of Shanghai, and not denied by the Chinese Communist Party, is so extreme as to invite ridicule.

A new “zero tolerance” policy for COVID-19, which is a bogus non-existent disease in the first place, was imposed on all Shanghai citizens, first on the East side of the Huangpu River from March 28 [2022], and then for the entire city from April 1st.

Supposedly all citizens will be tested for COVID-19. According to media reports, only 26,087 new cases of COVID-19 have been found, and of those, only 914 were symptomatic…  (Emanuel Pastreich)

The confinement of Shanghai’s labour force was carried out under a “Covid zero tolerance mandate”: “At least 38,000 medical workers from across China have been deployed to aid Shanghai … in the fight against the Omicron variant…” (Global Times)

Omicron is the Buzzword: Omicron and its BA.5 Sub-Variant

China’s Health authorities have confirmed that “Nucleic acid [namely the PCR ] tests are central to its strategy”. 

A Covid-19 Response Expert Panel headed by Dr. Liang Wannian was set up under the auspices of China’s National Health Commission. The Zero Tolerance Mandate consisted in “China beating the Omicron variant” using the defunct PCR test, which does not distinguish between Covid-19 and seasonal influenza. The PCR test was categorized by the US CDC as totally invalid, effective 31 December 2021.

The Role of  Dr. George Gao Fu

Visibly, China’s Health authorities have endorsed the Fauci-Gates “fake science” lockdown consensus without batting an eyelid.

China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CCDC) is headed by Dr. George Gao Fu, a colleague of Anthony Fauci et al.

Dr. Gao was a participant in the Scenario 201 October 2019 Table Top Simulation of a Corona Virus Pandemic, less than three months prior to the outbreak of the “Real Life” novel 2019 corona virus epidemic in Wuhan in December 2019.

From the outset, Dr. Gao Fu played a central role in overseeing Covid-19 in China, acting in close liaison with the US CDC, Fauci’s NIAID, the Gates Foundation, the WHO, John Hopkins et al.

George Gao Fu is an Oxford graduate. For several years, he was fellow of the Wellcome Trust which is linked to Big Pharma.  Gao Fu is a professional colleague and “longtime friend” of Anthony Fauci:

“George F. Gao, head of China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention, received the email from Anthony Fauci on March 28, 2020. [a few days after the lockdown in the US]. 

As Fauci faced criticism for his handling of the pandemic, Gao reached out again.

“I saw some news (hope it is fake) that [you] are being attacked by some people. Hope you are well under such a irrational situation,” Gao wrote April 8, 2020.

Three days later, Fauci replied and thanked his longtime friend for his “kind note.”

“All is well despite some crazy people in this world,” Fauci wrote, the newspaper reported.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci is a “Double Speak”

From the outset, Fauci has persistently warned of the imminent dangers of the SARS-CoV-2 (including its variants and sub-variants), while acknowledging in his peer reviewed article in the New England Journal of Medicine that:

“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)…” (See Covid-19 — Navigating the Uncharted, NEJM)

Careful timing: the article was published by the NEJM on March 26, 2020 two weeks following the March 11, 2020 Global Covid-19 pandemic “Lockdown” imposed on 193 member states of the United Nations.

Dr. Fauci’s NEJM peer reviewed analysis (which is barely mentioned by the media) is in sharp contrast with his frenzied statements on network TV.

On March 28, 2020 (2 days following the publication of his peer reviewed article) he stated that “Covid Could Kill as many as 200,000 Americans”

Is this Relevant to China?

Anthony Fauci is Dr. Gao Fu’s Mentor. The same policy framework is being applied.

China’s  Zero Tolerance Covid Mandate is a “copy and paste” of the March 11, 2020 lockdown (based on “fake science”) sponsored by Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates et al under the auspices of the WHO (in close consultation with the World Economic Forum).

China’s Zero Tolerance Covid mandate is predicated on a fear campaign.

The Devastating Economic Impacts of the Shanghai Lockdown

On July 10, 2022, China’s Health authorities announced that several major urban areas have been instructed to implement the Zero Tolerance COVID-19 mandate as a means to combating  the “highly-transmissible Omicron BA.5 subvariant”  

The labour force has been confined in a large number of industrial cities thereby leading to economic and social chaos as well as a dramatic decline in economic activity. According to Reuters:

The BA.5 [subvariant] lineage, spreading fast in many other countries, has been detected in cities such as Xian in the province of Shaanxi and Dalian in Liaoning province, … It was first found in China on May 13 in a patient who had flown to Shanghai from Uganda, the China Center for Disease Prevention and Control said, with no local infections linked to the case that month.

Did that “patient” from Uganda take the PCR test upon his return to ChinaVariants and sub-variants cannot under any circumstances be detected by the PCR test. (The original SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected by the PCR test).

The study by China’s CCDC  focussing on the detection of genetic sequences based on a PCR nasopharyngeal swab is misleading.

A large number of urban areas have literally been closed down. There is absolutely no scientific or public health justification for these measures: 

“In the central province of Henan, the town of Qinyang has almost completely locked down its nearly 700,000 residents from Sunday, with one person in each household allowed a trip every two days for groceries.

Authorities in Wugang, another town in Henan, have told its 290,000 residents not to leave home in the next three days, except for COVID tests.

Four major districts in the northwestern city of Lanzhou, in the province of Gansu, and the southern cities of Danzhou and Haikou in Hainan province, are under temporary curbs for several days, with a total of 6 million people affected.

The city of Nanchang in southern Jiangxi province, with 6.3 million residents, shut some entertainment venues on Saturday, although the duration of the curbs was not specified.

In the northwestern province of Qinghai, the city of Xining kicked off a mass testing campaign on Monday after one person tested positive on Sunday.

Mass tests also began on Monday in several major districts of the southern metropolis of Guangzhou.

On July 11, 2022 China’s National Heath Commission confirmed the following data for Mainland China:  

  • A total of 352 new domestically transmitted COVID infections recorded on July 10
  • 46 new symptomatic cases, 
  • 306 new asymptomatic cases

46 new symptomatic cases out of a population of 1.45 billion people does not justify closing down China’s major urban areas.

  • This decision borders on ridicule.
  • It has no scientific basis.
  • Is there a hidden agenda?
  • The Chinese Communist Party has acquiesced?
  • Are there divisions within China’s leadership? 

Both the Western and Chinese media are totally silent on the matter.

The impacts of these measures put forth by China’s National Health Commission and China’s CCDC have precipitated China’s supply chains into jeopardy.

“Covid Tolerance Zero” has contributed to destabilizing Shanghai’s financial sector as well as its buoyant export economy. It has also contributed to undermining domestic transport and commodity supply lines.

China’s QR code

The Covid Zero Tolerance Mandate has created social havoc and hardship for millions of people, requiring the imposition of PCR tests on a regular basis using QR green, yellow  and red color codes as a means of social control. 

The  Washington based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) applauds:

“One area of real success, and that may have application in other countries, is the rapid development of an online “health code” system (健康码).

This innovative app tracks an individual’s travel, contact history, and biometric data (for example, body temperature) directly through one’s smartphone.” (emphasis added)

.

Impacts on the Global Economy

Since mid April 2022 (coinciding with the lockdown of Shanghai), the Yuan (CNY) declined abruptly against the US dollar (USD). 

 

 

The volume of commodity trade in and out of the Port of Shanghai (and other major port cities) has subsided, which inevitably has a bearing on the availability of “Made in China” commodities Worldwide. 

“Made in China” is the backbone of retail trade which indelibly sustains household consumption in virtually all major commodity categories from clothing, footwear, to hardware, electronics, toys, jewelries, household fixtures, food, TV sets, mobile phones, etc. Ask the American consumer: The list is long.  

Importing from China is a lucrative multi-trillion dollar operation. It is the source of tremendous profit and wealth in the US, because consumer  commodities imported from China’s low wage economy are often sold at the retail level more than ten times their factory price.

Global commodity trade at wholesale and retail levels is in crisis. The potential impacts in all major regions of the World are devastating. World-wide scarcities of essential consumer goods are coupled with inflationary pressures. 

These developments also affect China’s sovereignty as a nation state with a weakened economy, not to mention its Belt and Road initiative. 

In the context of the current crisis, including Washington’s “Pivot to Asia”, there are serious geopolitical implications which have a direct bearing on the confrontation between China and the US. 

China is a Capitalist Country

Most analysts and historians fail to understand that starting in the early 1980s, China has become a full fledged capitalist country. There are powerful US business interests including Big Pharma, major hi-tech companies, banking institutions which are firmly entrenched inside China. 

The United States has faithful allies within China’s business establishment as well as among academics, scientists, medical doctors who tend to be “pro-American”.

China’s Academy of Sciences (中国科学院), China’s business schools (e.g. Beijing, Dalian, Guangzhou) going back to the early 1980s have ties with Ivy League institutions. Many of them have joint MBA programs, e.g. Shanghai’s  Fudan University School of Management with MIT. Stanford has a campus in China as well an agreement with Beijing University, etc.  

Another example is Tsinghua University’s School of Journalism’s graduate program which is funded by Bloomberg together with several Wall Street banking institutions.

The interests of powerful Chinese business interests (specifically within the pharmaceutical industry) including China’s billionaires (Forbes List 2022, Forbes New Billionaires) are represented at the highest levels of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership. 

Needless to say there are profound divisions within China’s CCP leadership. 

 

Featured image is from OffGuardian


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’État Against Humanity

Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression

By Michel Chossudovsky

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0Year: 2022

Product Type: PDF File

Pages: 164 (15 Chapters)

Price: $11.50 

Download PDF Free of Charge

As a means to reaching out to millions of people worldwide whose lives have been affected by the corona crisis, we have decided in the course of the next few weeks to distribute the eBook for FREE.

Price: $11.50. FREE COPY Click here to download.

For more details click here

*

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

  • Posted in English, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on “Economic Warfare” Directed against China? The Shanghai “Covid Zero Tolerance Mandate”

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.a

a

***

“Enough is enough! We demand change! Do the right thing! Implement ceasefire in Ukraine! Today! Imagine the collective sigh of relief across the globe! The outpouring of joy! The international joining of voices in harmony singing an anthem to peace!”

 – Roger Waters, speaking at the Rage Against the War Machine rally on February 19 [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

As Professor Michel Chossudovsky has noted in the past, the month of March, is the time chosen by the U.S. and NATO, as the best month to go to war. [2]

The Vietnam War (March 8, 1965), the War on Yugoslavia (March 24, 1999), the Iraq War (March 20, 2003), the Covert War on Syria (March 15, 2011), NATO’s “Humanitarian” War on Libya (March 19, 2011), and the Saudi-led War on Yemen supported by U.S. airstrikes (March 25, 2015), all started in this month. [3]

But, there are also signs that peace movements in the United States and around the world are also preparing their own counterpoint signals to the Roman God of War. It was evident in 2003, twenty years ago when millions took to the streets the month previous for the most massive protests in history. More than ten million people marched and rallied in over 60 countries and over 600 cities, including Melbourne in Australia, New York City, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Toronto, Montreal, Rome, Barcelona, Madrid, London, Glasgow, Berlin, Paris, Brussels, Amsterdam, Vienna, Copenhagan, Athens, and Belfast, as well as scores of cities in Latin America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East. [4]

In late February, turn-outs at rallies against funding the war in Ukraine, seen by many as a proxy war on Russia by the U.S. and NATO were not as huge as the demonstrations against the Iraq War. They are still significant however, especially considering the way the protests and the participants are completely either ignored or pilloried by Mainstream media personalities. [5]

Democrat darling Rachel Maddow reacted in a far from objective way to the Rage Against the War Machine event on February 19 in Washington DC. She referred to some of the members as “white supremacists,” pro-Russian, and used the words “weird,” “tiny,” and “random” to describe the event. She never mentioned that thousands of people who showed up! [6]

“Tis the season to collectively protest against the Military Industrial Media Complex and the Western Oligarchs that profit from this endeavor! On this week’s Global Research News Hour radio program we will be looking at two troubled situations that worldwide demonstrations are endeavoring to challenge.

In the first half hour, three figures from Toronto, Loloa Alkasawat, Mohammed Boudjenane and Dr. Atif Kubrusi speak to us about a revitalized campaign against the  unjust and unilateral coercive economic measures taken by the US and its European allies against Syria, especially at a time when attempts to provide disaster relief is being frustrated by the sanctions. They also discuss the events in Canada, Jordan, the UK, Morocco, Egypt, Ireland, Germany and elsewhere planned for Saturday the 4th as part of an “End the Siege Campaign!” The event in Toronto happens Saturday March 4th at 12pm outside the U.S. Consulate at 360 University Avenue.

In our second half hour, we air energizing speeches from three of many individuals speaking at the Rage Against the Machine event two weeks ago.

Loloa Alkasawat is an architect and an organizer of the Toronto event. She is also a Syrian immigrant.

Mohammed Boudjenane is a Member of the Board of Trustees of the Canadian Arab Federation and a Morrocan Canadian.

Dr. Atif Kubrusi is the past Acting Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission and Professor at McMaster University. He is Lebanese Canadian.

Jimmy Dore is  a comedian, political commentator, and host of The Jimmy Dore Show, a YouTube and Rumble show.

Ann Wright is a retired United States Army colonel and retired U.S. State Department official. She was one of three State Department officials to publicly resign in direct protest of the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.

Tulsi Gabbard was a U.S Army Reserve officer who served a 12 month tour in Iraq. She was also formerly a U.S. member of Congress and ran against Biden for the nomination as the Democratic Presidential candidate.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 382)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.

WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.

CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am. 

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time.

Notes:

  1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwB01vUgGc0&t=56s
  2. https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-pentagons-ides-of-march-best-month-to-go-to-war-2/5670257
  3. ibid;
  4. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2003/02/summ-f17.html
  5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g_gpv0Z12k&t=173s
  6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g_gpv0Z12k&t=173s

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

This is a horrific story of a 37 year old UK woman who developed a lump after COVID-19 vaccination (click here):

Katie Pritchard, a 37 year old mom of two went to her family doctor after finding a lump and was told it might have been a side effect of her COVID-19 vaccine.

She was misdiagnosed twice before doctors determined she had cervical cancer.

After she was initially diagnosed, Katie was forced to wait an agonizing three months for her treatment to begin, by which point the cancer had spread.

She began five weeks of grueling radiotherapy, chemotherapy and brachytherapy in April last year and was told the treatment had been a success.

But tragically, in December, after undergoing further scans, she received the devastating news that the cancer had returned and she was given just months to live.

At the start of this year, Katie was diagnosed with lung, shoulder, spine, and pelvic cancer and started palliative chemotherapy three weeks ago.

My Take…

This is not normal behavior for cervical cancer and I believe this to be yet another example of “turbo cancer” or rapidly progressive cancer due to severe immune system damage from COVID-19 vaccination.

Look at the high survival of cervical cancer patients in early stages over the course of 10 years (click here). And yet, according to her story, she went from finding a lump to having it metastasize within 3 months while she was waiting for her treatment to start, then it returned a few months after her treatments were completed and metastasized throughout her body.

Symptomatic cervical cancers do NOT behave this way:

US pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole has been discovering COVID-19 mRNA vaccine spike protein in malignant tumours (see short video)

Dr.Cole: “Why aren’t my colleagues doing these same stains on unexpected cancers in young people or any individual who has an unexpected cancer?”

We need pathologists to start testing all unusual or unexpected cancers for the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine spike protein, instead of ignoring these patients until it’s too late.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 the author


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as 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.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A 37 Year Old UK Mom Finds a “Lump” After COVID-19 Vaccine. It Turns Out to be a Turbo Cervical Cancer Leaving Her with Months to Live
  • Tags: ,

Dr. Strangelove Is No Longer Satire

March 4th, 2023 by Dee Knight

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“We are fighting a war against Russia,” German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock told the Council of Europe on January 24. The next day German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and U.S. President Joe Biden announced plans to send high-powered tanks to Ukraine, in a major escalation of the conflict.

“Germany has really stepped up,” Biden said, “and the chancellor has been a strong, strong voice for unity…and for the level of effort we’re going to continue.”

Biden said nothing about destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines last September, considered by many as a direct attack on its European “ally.” Other voices were not so united. Croatian President Zoran Milanovic commented at the Council of Europe meeting that “The German FM said we must be united because we are at war with Russia. I did not know that. Maybe Germany is at war with Russia again, then good luck to them, maybe it will turn out better than 70 years ago.”

World-renowned economist Jeffrey Sachs declared on January 25 that

“We are at the brink of a disaster…first and foremost because of the United States which is a major provocateur of this war, and a major threat to peace.” He made an impassioned plea to “get us off this reckless war between Russia and NATO, which is escalating by the day. The Doomsday Clock was moved to 90 seconds to midnight at the same time as the U.S. and Germany agreed to send new highly advanced tanks to Ukraine, in a guaranteed reckless escalation that brings us closer to nuclear war.”

Sachs said the conflict goes back more than 30 years to 1990, when the U.S. began to “pursue its unipolar agenda, moving its systems further east, with the idea of surrounding Russia.”

“Passing Germany the Poisoned Chalice”

A leader of Germany’s Left Party (Die Linke), Sevim Dagdelen said “This is obviously about passing Germany the poisoned chalice. Berlin is to be sent into the line of fire, to conclusively destroy German-Russian relations and turn them into open war for others’ benefit.” Dagdelen is the spokesperson for her party in the German Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Dagdelen’s view echoes economist Michael Hudson, who says the U.S. war against Russia is actually waged against Europe, to keep the European Union (EU) subordinated to U.S. capital. Hudson says the sanctions against Russia and China aim to prevent America’s allies from opening up more trade and investment with Russia and China, to “keep them firmly within America’s own economic orbit.” European industry has been shutting down recently as energy prices soar due to sanctions.

The German Left Party leader said delivering German tanks to Ukraine would “entail the greatest security threat to face the German population since the Second World War.” She added that “many Russians, especially those who lost loved ones in [WWII]…will see in these weapons a renewed German military campaign against their country.”

Source: thestrollingeconomist.substack.com

A large majority of Germans and other Europeans share these concerns. In a recent poll by Project Europe, more than two-thirds of respondents in the 27 countries of the EU think the conflict is “worrisome.”

Across Europe, more than 80% want negotiations, not continued war, the poll said. European public opinion reflects the impact of sanctions against Russia, which have had a “boomerang” effect, with skyrocketing inflation leading to near-depression conditions. Street protests and strikes across Europe have had an impact, as people pressure their leaders to stop doing Washington’s bidding.

Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Washington’s loudest “poodle” in London, was toppled by the crisis, along with Italy’s ex-Prime Minister Mario Draghi; and French President Macron lost his majority in the French National Assembly.

In the United States, people are more divided: A survey completed in late November by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found the U.S. public split 48% to 47% on whether Washington should “support Ukraine as long as it takes,” or “urge Ukraine to settle for peace as soon as possible.”

It is a changing trend: The percentage supporting “as long as it takes” went down ten points from 58% in July; and the “settle for peace” percentage rose from 38% in the same period. During that time there were anti-war protests in dozens of cities and towns across the country. More recently the protests intensified—spreading to more than 90 localities, as major national coalitions joined forces around Martin Luther King’s birthday weekend.

Mission Creep: How the U.S. Role Has Escalated

A January 28 article in Responsible Statecraft by Branko Marcetic says “NATO and the United States are creeping closer to the catastrophic scenario President Joe Biden said ‘we must strive to prevent’ — direct conflict between the United States and Russia….NATO arms transfers have now escalated well beyond what governments had worried just months ago could draw the alliance into direct war with Russia, with the U.S. and European governments now sending armored vehicles and…preparing to send tanks.”

The article adds that,

“[d]espite stressing at the start of the war that ‘our forces are not and will not be engaged in the conflict,’ current and former intelligence officials…[said] ‘there is a much larger presence of both CIA and U.S. special operations personnel’ in Ukraine than there was when Russia invaded, conducting ‘clandestine American operations’ in the country that ‘are now far more extensive.’”

Responsible Statecraft cites a January 18 report in the New York Times that U.S. officials are “strongly considering giving Ukraine the green light to attack Crimea, even while acknowledging the risk of nuclear retaliation that such a move would carry. Fears of such an escalation ‘have dimmed,’ U.S. officials told the paper.”

Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov is quoted in Newsweek saying that “We have repeatedly warned the U.S. about the consequences that may follow if the U.S. continues to flood Ukraine with weapons. It effectively puts itself in a state close to what can be described as a party to the conflict.”

A “Spanner in the Works”

German Left Party leader Dagdelen says “we must do all we can to put a spanner in the works” – that is, do something that prevents this plan from succeeding (Cambridge Dictionary explanation). “If the German tanks are delivered, the door will be open for more weapons. Calls for combat aircraft have already been voiced…The next thing will be missiles, followed, when that does not work either, by our own soldiers. But a gambler’s mentality, which responds to losses by raising the stakes and eventually betting everything on one play, is a bad guide for any society.”

Dagdelen adds:

“The tank deliveries are today what war loans were in 1914. They lead directly to participation in the war. They cannot be considered in isolation from their purpose—that is, victory in NATO’s proxy war against Russia in Ukraine. But consideration must also be given to the Russian response. In the end, after all, Western tanks would practically invoke the use of nuclear weapons—against Germany first…

“Why is it in Washington’s interest to send the Germans, of all people, into Russia’s line of fire?…Germany, it appears, is supposed to draw Russia’s counterfire…The United States would thus have achieved one of its long-term strategic objectives, namely to prevent cooperation between Germany and Russia forever.”

It is a reminder of the September 26 explosion of the Nord Stream pipelines, which can be seen as a guarantee, at least for now, that Europe cannot depend on Russian gas. All evidence about who did this has disappeared. But months before, Biden assured reporters the U.S. “has the capacity” to do it.

Russian President Vladimir Putin sent a message to ordinary Germans during his visit to Volgograd—formerly Stalingrad—on February 2, the 80th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s historic and decisive 1943 victory against Nazi Germany in the Battle of Stalingrad. Russia’s official news agency Tass reported that Putin said “they remember it in Germany, that German anti-fascists became the first victims of the German fascism, Nazism. And it is very good that such memory remains in ordinary citizens. Unfortunately, modern elites seem to be losing it.”

He noted that an “ordinary citizen of the Federal Republic of Germany treats Russia and the heroes that defeated Nazism with respect.”

The RAND Corporation, which functions as the Pentagon’s planning agency, released a January 2023 study entitled “Avoiding a Long War,” which concludes that “the consequences of a long war—ranging from persistent elevated escalation risks to economic damage—far outweigh the possible benefits.”

This is not the view of NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who declared on January 5 that

“weapons are, in fact, the way to peace.”

Victoria Nuland, along with her bosses, Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, tend to see things more like Stoltenberg than their RAND advisers. “They don’t see the world the way sane people do,” commented Margaret Kimberley, of Black Agenda Report, in a February 1 article. “They have made the Ukraine conflict an existential crisis, and then decide they have no choice but to engage in dangerous actions…The idea of peaceful coexistence is anathema to Nuland, Biden, and Blinken. Blown up pipelines are seen as proof of victory to people who thought they could make dangerous and irrational obsessions come true.”

“Dr. Strangelove Is No Longer Satire”

Roger D. Harris, of the U.S. Peace Council and the SanctionsKill campaign, says “The world was fortunate that the Cuban Missile Crisis ended with both sides willing to seek accommodation rather than victory. In contrast, the currently raging and indeed escalatingUkraine War could be the prelude to World War III because neither side appears to have an exit strategy; one by choice, the other because its back is to the wall.”

“The U.S.’s intent,” Harris further wrote, “is victory by ‘overextending and unbalancing’ Russia,” as a 2019 RAND paper suggested. Harris cites analyst Rick Sterling that “this was the playbook for the U.S. to provoke Russia into the current conflict. Bombers have been repositioned within striking range of key Russian strategic targets, additional tactical nuclear weapons deployed, and U.S./NATO war exercises have been held on Russia’s borders.”

Harris adds that “Now the prevailing propaganda from Washington is that nuclear war can be ‘won.’ Dr. Strangelove is no longer satire. This planning to fight a nuclear war as if it were not an existential threat is institutionalized insanity.”

He cites Robert Kagan, spouse of U.S. Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, asking: “Can America learn to use its power?” He says Kagan “argues in favor of a vigorous nuclear confrontation with Russia on the grounds that Putin will most likely back down.”

Text Description automatically generated

Source: deviantart.com

Whether Russia will “back down” or not is debatable. But back in December 2021, Russian initiatives might have prevented hostilities and made the region more secure with a reduced likelihood of war. Following are the proposals Russia made then:

  • Russia and the U.S. shall not use the territory of other countries to prepare or conduct attacks against the other.
  • Neither party shall deploy short- or intermediate-range missiles abroad or in areas where these weapons could reach targets inside the other’s territory.
  • Neither party shall deploy nuclear weapons abroad, and any such weapons already deployed must be returned.
  • Both parties shall eliminate any infrastructure for deploying nuclear weapons outside their own territories.
  • Neither party shall conduct military exercises with scenarios involving the use of nuclear weapons.
  • Neither party shall train military or civilian personnel from non-nuclear countries to use nuclear weapons.

When these measures were proposed by Russia in December 2021, they were considered “non-starters” by the U.S. Now the question is whether there is anyone in Washington, D.C., who could convince the Biden administration to reconsider. That is what Jeffrey Sachs is demanding.

Events in Munich and Moscow since Blinken’s late January ‘trial balloon’ clarify that the U.S. is really offering nothing for peace. Instead it continues to escalate the war while attempting to project blame onto both Russia and China.

*

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

Dee Knight is a member of the DSA International Committee’s Anti-War Subcommittee. He is the author of My Whirlwind Lives: Navigating Decades of Storms, soon to be published by Guernica World Editions. Dee can be reached at: [email protected].

Featured image is from russia-insider.com

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Dr. Strangelove Is No Longer Satire

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Now that www.smotrim.ru is back up and running, I have been immersing myself in Russian news, which in the past couple of days has included an assortment of separate items, or faits divers as the French would have it, which are frankly ominous when taken all together.

Why ominous?  Because they fit the description of WWIII that the most recent Russian talk shows say has already begun and is about to transition from hybrid war to hot war.

A couple of days ago Russian news showed images of six Yars ICBMs rolling into Moscow on their self-propelled launchers. Yars, to those who are not familiar with the Russian missile families, are the backbone of the present ground-based Russian strategic nuclear strike force. They date from 2007 and their numbers are listed in the now scrapped New Start arms limitation treaty. These solid fuel three stage rockets have a range of 12,000 km and carry multiple warheads (MIRV). Each launch unit on wheels weighs 100 tons and their route into town was carefully selected accordingly.  But what are they doing in Moscow?

The Vesti reporter said they have been brought there in preparation for the Victory in Europe Day parade.  However, that takes place on May 9th, so the arrival now two months ahead catches your attention.

Then today Russian news informed us that a United States “Doomsday Plane,” as it is known on the street, officially a Boeing E-4 Advanced Airborn Command Post capable of supervising military operations in case of nuclear war, has landed earlier today in Iceland on its way to Europe.  To Europe? Why is a Doomsday Plane going to be stationed here unless a nuclear scenario is being worked out by the US and Allied forces?

It is also worth mentioning something else you will not find in the New York Times or the Frankfurter Allgemeine today:  yesterday the air space over Petersburg and within 200 km radius of the city was closed to civilian air traffic.  No explanation was given at the time, but today mail.ru briefly ran an article explaining that there had been intelligence reports of a possible Ukrainian drone strike on the city.  Meanwhile Moscow today claimed to have recovered fragments of a drone downed in the Moscow Oblast bearing Ukrainian military signs. All such attacks in the very center of European Russia must be seen as a direct provocation.

However, the Russian military yesterday and today came forward with information about far more serious provocations that the Ukrainians have been planning in the Donbas and Transnistrie  (Russian patrolled territory in Moldova).  The Russian military gave details of the delivery by train into Kramatorsk of cases of poisonous chemicals which, they say, the Ukrainians have planned to release into the atmosphere to poison the population of this city in the Ukrainian occupied portion of the Donetsk Oblast, intending to put the blame for the chemical attack on Russia, just as US and British forces had done in Syria three years ago when they staged and filmed a supposed attack on civilians by the Assad government forces.  Only this time the chemicals would be real and many civilians would be endangered.  The Russian military also issued a detailed statement today on cases of radioactive materials which the Ukrainians have just now delivered by train to Moldova to stage a similar provocation that could be blamed on the Russians.

It is fairly obvious why these vile attacks were being prepared by Ukrainian military precisely now – to distract from the impending fall of Bakhmut which they have defended in the past several weeks at a cost of more than 20,000 casualties.

The aforementioned intended ‘false flag’ operations approach the realm of the insane. In that sense they reflect perfectly well the mentality of Zelensky and his neo-Nazi collaborators, as well as the madness of Nuland and other sponsors of Zelensky in the U.S. State Department.

As I said at the outset, these assorted facts taken separately are worrisome. Taken all together, they provide compelling reason why this war should be ended by negotiations forced on Zelensky at the earliest opportunity.  The Wall Street Journal has in the last few days reported that both Macron and Scholz have, behind closed doors, been telling him it is time to sit down with the Russians.

Perhaps when the Democrats take in the power of Donald Trump’s latest message on Ukraine in a Tweet that has attracted nearly 4 million views in the United States, and reckon how this logic can be used in the 2024 elections, they will also see the wisdom of pressing for talks now, before all hell breaks loose.  See:

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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: A US Army Stryker armored vehicle (Source: Antiwar.com)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Straws in the Wind as WWIII Blows In. Peace Negotiations are the Only Solution

Global Research March Referral Campaign

March 3rd, 2023 by The Global Research Team

We will never grow tired of expressing our gratitude to you, our readers, for supporting us in our monthly endeavors.

For the entire month of March, our campaign will revolve around the act of censorship committed against Global Research.

We have repeatedly shared how the Big Tech continues to target us and conspire to drag us into the abyss. Excluding our articles from external search engines, shadowbanning our social media profiles, and placing malicious labels on our links are among the most detrimental schemes directed against us.

Amid all the struggles we’ve encountered, it remains our objective to maintain our independence, accepting neither corporate nor government funding.

So, we need your help to keep us afloat. In this referral campaign, our ask is for you to do any of the following:

  • If you have blog sites, crosspost Global Research articles;
  • Forward Global Research articles through email and other communication apps;
  • Share Global Research articles on social media and discussion groups;
  • Stay updated with important world events, subscribe to our newsletter and encourage family, friends and colleagues to do the same.

It is our hope to continue our mission until genuine peace is on the horizon. Until then, let us work together.

Click to view our membership plans

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation


Thank you very much for supporting independent media.

The Global Research Team

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Global Research March Referral Campaign

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A new #TwitterFiles thread will be dropping in a few hours, at noon EST. It follows up the Hamilton 68 story of a month ago with examples of state-funded digital blacklisting campaigns run amok. It’s self-explanatory, but some advance context might help:

In 2015-2016, during the brief, forgotten period when Islamic terrorism was fading as a national obsession and Trumpian “domestic extremism” had not yet become one, Barack Obama made a series of decisions that may yet prove devastating to his legacy.

The short version is he signed Executive Order 13271, establishing a “Global Engagement Center” (“GEC”) to “counter the messaging and diminish the influence of international terrorist organizations.” This act got almost no press and even within government, almost no one noticed.

In the bigger picture, however, a lame duck president kick-started the process of shifting the national security establishment’s focus from counterterrorism to “disinformation.” Whether by malfunction or design, this abrupt course change of Washington’s contracting supertanker would have dramatic consequences. In fact, the tale of how America’s information warfare mechanism turned inward, against “threats” in our own population, might someday be remembered as the story of our time, with collective panic over “disinfo” defining this generation in much the same way the Red Scare defined the culture of the fifties.

This is a complicated story and it would be a mistake to jump to simplistic conclusions, like that the Global Engagement Center (humorously nicknamed “GECK” or “YUCK” by detractors in other agencies) is an evil Orwellian mind-control scheme. It isn’t. But for a few crucial bad decisions, it could have fulfilled a useful or at least logical mission, much as the United States Information Agency (USIA) once did. However, instead of stressing research and public reports, as the USIA did when responding to Soviet accusations that Americans had caused the AIDS crisis, GEC funded a secret list of contractors and employed a more surreptitious approach to “counter-disinformation,” sending companies like Twitter voluminous reports on foreign “ecosystems” — in practice, blacklists.

GEC was not conceived as a partisan mechanism to defang conservative media, despite the recent true and damning series of reports by the Washington Examiner, outlining how a GEC-funded NGO in England used algorithmic scoring to de-rank outlets like The Daily Wire and help papers like the New York Times earn more ad revenue. The blacklisting tales you’ll be reading about later today on Twitter also primarily target American conservatives, though GEC and GEC-funded contractors also target left-friendly movements like the gilets jaunes (yellow vests), socialist media outlets like Canada’s Global Research, even the Free Palestine movement.

The scary angle on GEC is not so much the agency as the sprawling infrastructure of “disinformation labs” that have grown around it.

Underneath America’s love affair with “anti-disinformation” in the Trump years — which expressed itself in the seemingly instant construction of a sprawling complex of disinformation studies “labs” at institutions like Harvard, Stanford, Clemson, UT, Pitt, William and Mary, the University of Washington, and other locations — lay a devastating secret. Most of these “experts” know nothing. Many have skill, if you can call mesmerizing dumb reporters a skill, but in the area of identifying true bad actors, few know more than the average person on the street.

This is described repeatedly in the #TwitterFiles. In one sequence Twitter was contacted by Sheera Frenkel of the New York Times, who was writing a hagiographic profiles of “disinformation” warrior Renee DiResta, who’d achieved some renown as a campaigner against vaccine misinformation. Frenkel wrote Twitter to ask why they hadn’t hired “independent researchers” like DiResta, Jonathan Albright, and Jonathon Morgan — coincidentally, all hired witnesses of the Senate Intelligence Committee — to help Twitter “better understand” its own business.

At the sight of Frenkel’s provocative note, some Twitter execs lost it.

“The word ‘researcher’ has taken on a very broad meaning,” snapped Nick Pickles. “Renee is literally doing this as a hobby… Of those three only [Albright] is the most credible, but… the bulk of his work is Medium blogs.”

“Like CVE before it, misinformation is becoming a cottage industry,” agreed comms official Ian Plunkett, referencing “countering violent extremism,” a.k.a. counterterrorism.

Today’s thread among other things will detail crude digital blacklisting schemes dreamed up by this new cottage industry. Each features the same design “flaw,” in which giant lists of supposed foreign disinformationists somehow also come to include ordinary Americans, often with the same political leanings.

In one ridiculous case, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab), a GEC-funded entity, sent Twitter a huge list of people they suspected of “engaging in inauthentic behavior… and Hindu nationalism more broadly.” You’ll see the list to judge. As was the case with the “Hamilton 68” story, in which a spook-laden think tank purported to track accounts linked to “Russian influence activities” while really following the likes of @TrumpDyke and @TimeForTrumppp, this DFRLab list of “Hindu nationalists” is weirdly packed with real septuagenarian Trump supporters.

One, a woman named Marysel Urbanik who immigrated from Castro’s Cuba in her youth, struggled to understand why a Washington think tank had sent Twitter a letter ID’ing her as either “inauthentic” or a Hindu nationalist.

“They say I’m what?”

“A Hindu nationalist,” I said. “Well, suspected.”

“But I’m Cuban, not Indian,” she pleaded, confused. “Hindu? I wouldn’t even know what words to say.”

Such listmakers are either employing extremely expansive definitions of hate speech, extremely inexact methods of identifying spam, or they’re doing both in addition to a third thing: keeping up a busywork campaign for underemployed ex-anti-terror warriors, who don’t mind racking up lists of “foreign” disinformationists that just happen to also rope in domestic undesirables.

In his book Information Wars, the original nominal head of GEC and former Time editor Rick Stengel explained an epiphany he had that allowed him to tie the fight against “foreign” disinformation to matters domestic. It happened when Stengel watched a YouTube video of Russian nationalist Alexander Dugin:

He castigated Hillary Clinton’s campaign as a bunch of ‘“storm troopers.” He lambasted what he called the American “obsession with the fake Russian threat.” He said it was an excuse for losers… The production values were poor, the audience was small, but the video revealed an extraordinary mirroring of language and ideas between Dugin and other Russian voices and candidate Trump… The notion that there was some kind of shared rhetorical playbook just seemed too fanciful to believe. While the messages did not exactly repeat each other, they certainly rhymed.

At the same time as Dugin was uploading his video, according to public U.S. intelligence, the GRU—the Russian military intelligence service—began going through the email accounts of DNC officials…

Stengel didn’t need to prove an actual link between Dugin, Russia, and Trump. It was enough to imply it, by placing stories about the GRU near Trump’s name, while asserting Trump and Dugin’s ideas “rhymed.”

This is probably what’s going on in the DFRLab list: one assumes many BJP supporters have views that “rhyme” with what one might call the American version of nationalism, #MAGA. Similarly, a GEC report sent to Twitter about “Russian Pillars of Disinformation” stressed that even actors who “generate their own momentum” online should be considered part of a propaganda “ecosystem.” Independence, the GEC report stressed, should not “confuse those trying to discern the truth.”

Twitter’s complaints against agencies like GEC and projects like the India list dovetail with what current and former intelligence sources have been calling in to comment on, since the first Twitter Files reports: that though sophisticated methods for detecting true bad actors exist, virtually none of the high-profile “experts” employ those.

Instead, methodologies are often openly absurd. List #1 might target everyone who follows more than one Chinese diplomat on Twitter. List #2 might rope in everyone who’s retweeted a “Peter Douche” video or a “Free Palestine” meme made in Iran. One former GEC staffer laughs about how experts win over the media with impressive-looking “hairball” charts that nearly always come down to some sort of volume or affinity analysis: who retweets whom, whose ideas “rhyme” with whose, etc.

In a key email, OK

“In short, no,” he said, adding that it was really only possible to make “inferences.”

But inferences are enough, for the innumerable “Centers for Countering Whatever” whose real goals may involve deplatforming or disenfranchising domestic groups deemed unworthy of sharing the full benefits of Western civil society (like the unmolested use of PayPal, GoFundMe, Twitter, etc.). With an inference, you can smear, and with a smear, you can do damage.

The Hamilton 68 scam in this sense was perfect. It used digital alchemy to create streams of news stories tying ordinary Americans to “foreign” disinformation. With headlines like CNN’s “Russian bots are using #WalkAway to try to wound Dems in midterms” in hand, a “Disinfo Lab” or a noble journalistic enterprise like the “extremism” desk at USA Today can finish the important work of calling up strings of Internet companies to “ask” why this or that person is still allowed to use credit cards, advertise on Amazon, etc.

What organizations like GEC and subcontractors like DFRLab do are just subtler versions of those same schemes. They make lists and let the increasingly sophisticated machinery of digital deprivation do the rest. It’s bad enough when this dubious activity is private. But paying taxes for the pleasure? This supertanker needs turning around.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 the author

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US Ambassador to China: “We’re the Leader” of the Indo-Pacific

East Palestine, Ohio and the Oligarchy

March 3rd, 2023 by Margaret Kimberley

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The U.S. is an oligarchy. Stating this fact explains events that may seem mysterious if this simple truth is not spelled out. The ruling class are fully in control and ensure that their needs are met. They disregard the public good and any claims of democracy are easily exposed as a cruel hoax. Americans have no representation in congress or the white house and the corporate media are also part of the oligarchic class. They expose nothing that their partners in crime want to hide. Governmental action and inaction if the wake of a freight train derailment exemplify all of these dynamics.

On February 3, 2023 a 150-car Norfolk Southern freight train derailed in East Palestine, Ohio near the Pennsylvania border. Twenty of those cars were carrying chemicals such as vinyl chloride, butyl acrylate, ethylene glycol, isobutylene, and ethylhexyl acrylate. One doesn’t need to be a scientist to figure out that none of these should be in the air or water.

Despite photographic and video evidence of an environmental catastrophe, the accident initially received little media attention. Nothing is covered unless the Biden administration wants it to be and East Palestine didn’t make the cut when there was war propaganda about Ukraine to stir up. In addition, Biden had already made clear that the railroads are in the class of corporate untouchables who are to be placated. They are among those who were promised that “nothing would fundamentally change” and he kept his promise to them by giving the derailment little attention. However he did give these corporations all the attention they demanded.

When railroad unions rejected a contract that didn’t include paid sick leave provisions the Biden administration forbade them to strike. There was a phony show among “progressives” about having made a good deal but they were lying. Barack Obama excluded the railroads from a requirement that federal contractors provide paid sick leave. Biden could have issued an executive order changing that policy. But he had no intention of doing anything that might upset the oligarchs, and the Democratic Party succeeded in presenting a false narrative.

Pete Buttigieg is Secretary of the Department of Transportation (DOT), and is responsible for overseeing railroad safety. But he has made it clear that he follows his boss’s dictate to change nothing that would upset their oligarchic bosses.

As DOT Secretary, Buttigieg has the ability to regulate corporations such as airlines in regard to their public service. When a series of Southwest airlines snafus left thousands of passengers stranded during the holiday season, Buttigieg made a great show of saying his hands were tied. Of course he is the one person who can direct the airlines or levy large fines. Buttigieg was a no-show when the people needed him to act.

It took Buttigieg three weeks to show up in East Palestine and he only did so after Donald Trump visited. The town residents may have been better off without him. When he arrived he whined about railroad companies, “fighting us every time we try to do a regulation.” It is hard to believe that Buttigieg makes any effort to fight back when corporate chieftains tell him what to do.

The duopoly worked together to cover up their mess. Ohio’s republican governor Mike DeWine and Biden’s EPA Administrator Michael Regan took a page out of Barack Obama’s Flint, Michigan book by dramatically drinking East Palestine water . Fortunately the U.S. still has plenty of lawyers, and one of many lawsuits filed in recent days specifically names the stunt as having made a “mockery of Ohio citizens.”

The back and forth over freight train regulations isn’t complicated. Trump undid regulations that Obama enacted but Biden didn’t undo what Trump had done. But even worse, regulations currently on the books allowed Norfolk Souther to get away with not labeling the train as carrying hazardous materials because it also carried wheat and vegetables. All over the country trains go through residential areas carrying hazardous materials but the law doesn’t require anyone to be informed of the dangers. And yes, the oligarchs like it that way.

The Biden administration is siding with Norfolk Southern in a case before the Supreme Court. A worker claims to have developed cancer as a result of exposure to carcinogens without having had the proper protective equipment. Norfolk Southern wants to restrict plaintiffs from choosing the venue in which they file suits, a practice known as forum shopping. Corporations are the biggest proponents of forum shopping, for themselves, but want to restrict where they can be sued. The Biden administration filed a brief in favor of Norfolk Southern. It doesn’t matter if the presidents are democrats or republicans, at the end of the day they end up doing what the oligarchs want.

Next year in 2024 the people will be subjected to the quadrennial political hoax, i.e., a presidential election. Let’s tell the truth before the theater begins anew. The power doesn’t rest with the presidency. It rests with the people who do the presidential hiring, and they don’t care about railroad workers or any other workers or people who have hazardous chemicals traveling through their communities. Should an accident happen, their hirelings will just drink water for the camera.

*

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

Margaret Kimberley is the author of Prejudential: Black America and the Presidents. You can support her work on Patreon  and also find it on the Twitter  and Telegram  platforms. She can be reached via email at margaret.kimberley(at)blackagendareport.com.

Featured image: Contractors removing the burnt wagons, East Palestine, Ohio. (Facebook via Free West Media)

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Ben Hodges, a former commanding general of the USG army in Europe, tweeted a few days ago he believes Ukraine can recapture Crimea by plummeting Sevastopol and Russia’s Black Sea Fleet with long-range missiles.

More than half a million people live in Sevastopol along with the Black Sea Fleet. Saky is located near the settlement of Novofedorivka with a civilian population of around 6.5 thousand.

Russia’s Sevastopol-based fleet was established in 1804. Following Russian “annexation” in response to a USG-orchestrated coup in 2014, the people of Crimea, predominately ethnic Russian, voted in referenda to separate from the illegally installed “Maidan” government in Kyiv. It is dominated in large part by extreme nationalists and neo-nazi brigades known for ethnic violence.

Blinken and Nuland never talk about the illegal “annexation” in 2014 of Ukraine by supremacist radicals and Russia haters, back when Nuland passed out USG State Department cookies to cutthroats, known in the “collective West” as “pro-EU protesters.”

The ultranationalist threat in Ukraine (Svoboda, Right Sector) is not Kremlin-contrived propaganda, as the corporate media insists.

Prior to Russia’s SMO, the corporate media often reported on “ultra-right” (anti-Russian) parties and paramilitary brigades in Ukraine. The media went so far as to mention Stepan Bandera, the national hero of Ukraine, a Nazi collaborator and war criminal responsible for killing thousands of innocent civilians.

The “leftist” alternative media in particular documented many of the crimes committed by Ukrainian ultranationalists. Following a significant increase in AFU bombardment of civilians in the Donbas last February, and the Russian response with its SMO, any mention of the genocidal behavior of the post-coup government is now denounced as Russian propaganda.

The Nazi problem in Ukraine, according to the USG-media argument, is insignificant, and cynically exaggerated for propaganda purposes by Putin, the cancer-strickenparanoid cowering in his bunker with a quivering finger on the nuclear button. The Hitler analogies are endless. It’s all nonsense, of course.

The USG and the “collective West” appear to be conflicted on what to do about Crimea. Realists understand an outright invasion will be considered an attack on the Russian Federation.

Despite this, Ben Hodges, while associated with the Center for European Policy Analysis (“re-inventing Atlanticism for a more secure future”), calls for a “precision” attack on a Russian naval base, on Russian territory, the territory where a majority of residents consider themselves to be Russians opposed to the post-coup regime in Kyiv. Many are willing to fight Kyiv in self-defense, the same as the ethnic Russians in the Donetsk and Luhansk republics have done over the last eight years.

Biden, Blinken, Sullivan, and Ben Hodges might want to read the Declaration of Independence. It talks about the right to separate from a tyrannical government.

But I guess our “public servants” are not interested in such things these days. In fact, a lot of them believe advocating separation from an abusive and predatory government is domestic terrorism.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 the author’s blog site, Kurt Nimmo on Geopolitics.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

It is worth noting that the protest movement in Israel described in the article does not in any way address the issue of the Rights of Palestinians.

Global research, March 3, 2023

***

As Wednesday marked a huge day for protests all over the country decrying the judicial reform, Holon is the latest city to join the list of local municipalities where people, waving flags and chanting aloud, are taking to the streets by the thousands.

Up until now, Israelis, who wanted to make their disapproval of the government’s judicial reform known, traveled to major cities like Tel Aviv, Haifa, Be’er Sheva or Jerusalem, but as the massive nationwide protests enter their third month, smaller municipalities are also having their say.

One such locale is the city of Holon, 190,000 strong, which lies just south of Tel Aviv and where thousands of flag-wielding adults, teenagers and toddlers all turned out Wednesday night, honking their horns, shouting slogans through their loudspeakers, playing their drums, singing songs, dancing or just standing in solidarity with the spirit of the demonstration.

Image: Elderly woman holding sign saying she’s had enough of dictatorships back in Stalin’s time (Photo: Gilad Meiri)

Elderly woman with sign saying she's had enough with dictatorships back in Stalin's time

People showed up equipped with some interesting signs. An elderly woman carried a sign that said “I’ve already lived under Stalin”, evoking the Soviet despot in concern the reform might be a step toward absolving the government of all accountability.

A group of young women carried a sign bearing the inscription “They can take our lives, but they will never take our freedom!”, an iconic quote from Mel Gibson’s 1995 epic historical drama Braveheart.

Another sign addressed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu directly: “Bibi, you’ll go down in history as the one who ruined Israel!”

The chants, much like the signs, were varied. Some simply shouted “Democracy” over and over while others chanted “havurat mushchatim lo tivhar et hashoftim”, meaning they won’t allow a group of corrupt politicians to pick their judges, eluding to one of the more polarizing provisions in the reform which would give the government greater control over the judge selection process.

One of the reform opponents’ gravest concerns is that Netanyahu would use it to reshape the judiciary in a way that would allow him to avoid his corruption trial.

Shelly David is a 62-year-old Holon native who shares that concern.

“I actually made a sign that urges calm between both sides but my husband didn’t think it’s a good idea for me to bring it,” she said.

“I’m also a bit worried about the idea that Netanyahu is using it to get out of his legal trouble. I don’t have all the proof for this, but it is a concern.”

Image: A sign saying Netanyahu will be remembered as the one who ruined the State of Israel (Photo: Gilad Meiri)

A sign saying Netanyahu will be remembered as the one who ruined the state of Israel

Shelly Atzmon, a 37-year-old mother of two, was more adamant. “We can’t allow this reform to happen. We just can’t.”

What provision from the overall reform package bothers you the most?

“The fact that 61 Knesset members that have a political agenda are going to overrule Supreme Court justices? How can this be? We’re no longer a democracy if we just stand by and let this go on. This isn’t Syria.”

How do you respond to those who want accountability for the Judiciary?

“Don’t make me laugh. Their version of accountability is that they’ll use the status in the Knesset to make their interests the law of the land. That’s not accountability. I don’t trust any of them.”

Regardless of how you feel about it, do you think the reform will pass?

“I don’t know. The only thing I can say is that we’ll keep fighting to the end, and with some help from above, we’ll win in the end.”

And the protest seemed to also erode boundaries between left and right. Mordechai Kirilinsky, 67, is a proud Likud voter. “I’ve always liked Netanyahu.”

How many times did you vote for him?

“Pretty much every time he ran, including when he beat (former prime minister Shimon) Peres after Rabin was assassinated.”
So this really goes back a long time for you.

“Not just for me. My grandfather was in the Haganah (a pre-state Zionist paramilitary that served as a precursor to the IDF) and was a big fan of Menachem Begin. He wouldn’t have stood for this.”

Weren’t there signs before the elections that Netanyahu might be inclined toward supporting such a reform?

“You know what he once said? That the existence of a strong and independent judiciary is the key to all other institutions in a democracy. How could I have known he’d suddenly change his tune like that?”

A politician is a politician, right?

“Sure, but there has to be a limit. This is too big of an issue to flip-flop on.”
Does that mean that in the next elections, you might vote for someone like Lapid?

“I’m disappointed,” he smiled. “Not insane.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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: Protesters waving flags in Holon (Photo: Gilad Meiri)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on ‘I’ve already lived under Stalin!’ Anti-government Protests Spread Across Israel
  • Tags: ,

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

See the interview was first published in Spanish by “elsaltodiario“. It was organized by Julioa Zamarrón in Lima, Peru, with the cooperation of Irene Zugasti He Zugasti Hervás and Pablo Elorduy in Madrid. The German translation was made by Klaus E. Lehmann und Vilma Guzmán and published by the German on-line news “nacheenkseiten“ – see this. For the original Spanish version – see this

President Castillo: “The US collaborates with the European Union to oppress us.”

***

In the runup to Peru’s 2021 General and Presidential elections, Pedro Castillo, a former teacher and farmer, gained strong support in poor rural areas to win the elections for one of Peru’s socialist or left-wing parties, “Peru Libre”. He won in the second round with a razor-thin margin of 50.13% versus 49.87% of his extreme right-wing opponent Keiko Fujimori, daughter of former President Alberto Fujimori (1990 – 2000).

Alberto Fujimori is currently serving a 25-year prison term for embezzlement of public funds, abuse of power, of human rights and of corruption during almost all of his ten years in power.

Before his ascent to the Peruvian Presidency, Alberto Fujimori was Rector of the National Agrarian University “La Molina”, Lima Peru. He was rather unknown as a politician, but received strong support from the United States to run for President.

This narrowest of narrow margin for Pedro Castillo would have more than justified a “recount”, but despite protests and countrywide calls for vote verification, “the powers that be” did not allow it. So, Pedro Castillo was declared President-elect of Peru on 6 July 2021, entering office on 28 July 2021.

Once in office, his approval ratings fell quickly and he faced constant opposition from a fragmented Congress and accusations of “moral incapacity.” This is a vague and “indefinite” description, invented by the Peruvian mainstream media, which – by the way – are the same as in the rest of the western world.

Remember, there are 5 giant media corporations who control more than 90% of the western “news” – news, that are presented in lockstep, same words, same phrases, same ideology – around the globe. Just think back to the “covid plandemic” that started miraculously the same day around the globe in 194 countries – and proceeded in lockstep for the last three years.

The vast majority of the people around the globe are mind-manipulated by sophisticated social engineering. And the media are funded by huge corporate finance. People believe in these media even though logic should relentlessly tell them, there is something badly wrong. See this, Tavistock et al.

The same wanton-bashing methods applied to Russia and China, are also applied on a micro-scale for demoralizing a politician who is destined from the very get-go to be character-assassinated and eventually “removed” from office; the case of Pedro Castillo.

It has become clearer day by day, that somewhat naïve Castillo has been put in the Presidency by “outside forces”, so that he can be demolished and replaced by THE candidate chosen by the Globalist Cult – or more precisely by Klaus Schwab, WEF.

In the case of Castillo, like in a myriad of other cases around the world, his election was a fraud, a disguise to put one of Klaus Schwab’s (WEF) Young Global Leaders (YGL) in charge of Peru, an ultra-rich country, arguably one of the two or three resources-richest countries in Latin America with resources from oil, gas, lithium, uranium, copper, rare earths, gold, other precious metals and more. All resources the west covets for their luxury and ever-more digitized lifestyles.

In that sense, Castillo, when he said, “The US collaborates with the European Union to oppress us”, he may have added “… and usurp us”.

In the interview, President Castillo focuses mostly on his concern for his family, after the Coup, when he was arrested. He was worried about bringing his family in security, especially his children and wife. He said, he never had the intention to flee the country but was adamant to get cover for his family in a secure embassy – in this case the Embassy of Mexico. His family is now living in Mexico, in security.

Castillo told the interview team about the intense and non-stop media smear campaign against him and his family, from the first day of his Presidency forward, or, actually even before he had taken up the lead position of the country. He and his family were put under constant pressure, insulted, denigrated and accused with lies and “fake truths”. He was worried about the impact of such a dirty environment on his family, particularly on his children.

As to carrying out his duties and tasks as President, he said the opposition and their allies in Congress would not let him govern. Castillo mentioned the corruption-driven privatization of mostly everything. For example, about 70% of Lake Titicaca related fishing rights and infrastructure belonged to one corporation. Similar with roads and airports, large expanses of agricultural lands are all owned by transnationals. The country was gradually put into foreign hands – with the local Peruvian oligarchy taking their cuts.

Castillo’s government presented Congress with 76 legislation proposals to take back some of the privatized government properties. They were all rejected. He also wanted to create a Peruvian flag independent airline, building and enlarging three airports – all were blocked. And so were many other initiatives his Government put before Congress for debate and consideration. In brief, after about a year and a half in office, he had achieved virtually nothing. The country was at a standstill. And mind you – this was part of the plan.

On the other hand, out of a long list of mining projects, he blocked more than 40 because they were damaging the environment and especially polluting water resources, aquifers high up in the Andes, vital for downstream populations and agriculture.

Of course, such measures didn’t make him popular among the national and international oligarchy, but he was liked by the peasants as he represented their vital and survival interests. With his origins in Cajamarca, one of the most mined Provinces of Peru, he knows firsthand what he is talking about.

Up to the early 1990s, the city of Cajamarca had plenty of crystal-clear water that needed hardly any treatment. With the installation of the US-American Newmont corporation’s open pit Yanacocha gold mine, the aquifer at an altitude of 4000-plus meters above sea-level, became contaminated with heavy metals and toxic chemicals.

undefined

Yanacocha gold mine near Cajamarca, Peru (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Also, gold-mining, the washing process, uses enormous quantities of water. The plentiful flow of drinking-quality water was reduced to a trickle, guaranteeing water supply only for a few hours a day on average in the province’s capital city of Cajamarca.

This is just one example of environment and water resources destroying mining in Peru. There are literally hundreds of ongoing mining projects in Peru that are harmful to the environment, the water and the people, as well as animals, drastically reducing dairy output.

Most of the mining benefits – profits – flow abroad, leaving a pittance for the Peruvians. There is a saying – Peru is one of the richest countries in Latin American, yet the population remains poor. Unfortunately, that is a fact.

Local corrupt oligarchs negotiate resources exploitation contracts with equally corrupt international corporations – and the result is disastrous.

Pedro Castillo, coming from a rural area and being a farmer, knows that Peru would be perfect for agricultural development, highly productive small-holders, as was proven by several small-scale irrigation projects, run by farmer associations.

Peru’s coastal desert is miraculously fertile, as soon as it receives water almost everything grows. There is water available from rivers, underground water sources and springs in the Andes as well as in the valleys. With advanced irrigation technology, Peru could be turned into a highly successful agricultural nation, with modern ag-industry, adding value in the country, creating sustainable jobs and exporting processed ag-products, rather than just raw materials – which is still the case today.

But that’s not the idea of the powerful oligarchy ruling the country since independence 200 years ago, through a five-year term Congress, where Congressmen cannot be re-elected, filling their pockets during their one-term political “highlife”.

President Castillo may have intended to bring change to these corrupt structures. However, he didn’t realize that Peru, like many other resources-rich countries in the Global South, is in control of foreign corporations, foreign politicians, and often, especially in the last two decades, controlled by the World Economic Forum (WEF) which acts as the executing branch for the giant financial, largely invisible Death Cult and for family billionaires.

On December 7, 2021, when President Castillo intended to dissolve Congress, because it didn’t allow him to govern, the “internal Coup” was well prepared by outside forces.

undefined

Boluarte with Castillo at Palacio de Gobierno in 2022 (Licensed under CC BY 3.0)

Castillo said in the interview that prior to the 2021 elections he didn’t know his Vice President, Dina Boluarte. She was imposed on him during the second-round voting campaign. She was made a member of the left-wing “Peru Libre” party, and once Castillo was elected with this razor-thin margin, she became his Vice President. Guess, who may have had a hand in this?

During the interview, Castillo didn’t mention that this was all planned ahead of the election, nor that Dina Boluarte was a scholar of Klaus Schwab’s Academy for Young Global Leaders (YGL), either because he didn’t know, or he didn’t want to admit that he was treacherously trapped by local and international capital wanting to take over the riches of Peru.

Preceding the “coup”, the Ambassador of the United States to Peru, Ms. Lisa Kenna, a former 9-year CIA veteran, went to see the Peruvian Minister of Defense telling him not to interfere with the “removal” of Castillo. Normally, the military sides with the sitting President. The Ministry complied. They did not intervene.

Shortly after the coup, with the acting President Boluarte already in office, the same Ambassador went to see her – telling her that she may count on US support, including for whatever strong measures she may have to take to suppress the countrywide protests.

This was a carte blanche for Boluarte to apply an iron fist to all those demonstrators and protesters, most of whom were supporting her adopted party, “Peru Libre”. The result was police shooting from helicopters and other oppressive atrocities, leading so far to more than 50 deaths. See also this.

 Ex CIA agent and US ambassador to Peru, Lisa Kenna, meets with its defense minister two days before a coup against its elected left-wing President Castillo (Source: Multipolarista)

Another few days later, the same US Ambassador, Ms. Lisa Kenna, went to see the Peruvian Minister of Energy and Mining to talk about future investments. No further need to elaborate, as to who was behind this “election circus of 2021”. To the detriment, again, of the Peruvian people.

Immediately after Castillo attempted to resolve Congress, presumably to call for new elections, because Congress made his governing impossible, a legal move under these circumstances and within the laws of the Peruvian Constitution – Pedro Castillo was arrested and Ms. Boluarte became “acting” President. She claimed, she would hold the Presidency until the next General and Presidential election in 2026. Great try!

After his arrest, Castillo was put immediately in “preventive” prison, “on guard”, in a high-security prison, for 18 months, WITHOUT TRIAL, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.

So much for Human Rights – dear Mr. Schwab.

Under the Peruvian Constitution, in such circumstances new elections must be called within 6 months. The Constitutional Court eventually decided on a compromise – holding new elections in April 2024. Under protests from the people in the streets, they wanted Boluarte out and new elections immediately, she proposed new elections in October 2023. That was not accepted by Congress. They wanted to keep their “privileges” as long as possible. She suspected that much, when she “offered” the new date.

Now, new elections are in limbo, no dates set. That’s precisely what Boluarte and Schwab want – maybe she can extend this limbo until 2026? – In the coming three years, she could do horrors to the people of Peru and to the country’s legislation, privatizing state enterprises, licensing indiscriminately all mining, long-term concessions to foreign corporations to exploit Peru’s resources, and not to forget, the coming “health tyranny” through the possible (lets hope not) WHO “Pandemic Treaty”.

She could also tacitly collaborate with those also foreign influenced powers, who want to divide Peru: the resources-rich south from the poorer north – thereby creating lasting internal unrest.

This is an emerging implicit “plan”. Whether it will be implemented, depends on Peru’s internal political dynamics and on the populations state of mind – their love for the country, and to what extent will the politicians forego their personal interests for the interests of the people, defend the rights of the Peruvian citizens, and the rights of Their President.

Peru’s continued corruption scandals, have made the country one of the most unstable nations at least in Latin America. Here is a rundown of Peru’s political turmoil during at least the last 20-plus years, represented by seven (7) dubious Presidents, either in jail, or on escape abroad or being investigated for fraud:

  • Pedro Castillo (2021-2022) – former teacher and farmer, see above;
  • Manuel Marino (Nov. 10-15, 2020) – a former head of Congress who led impeachment proceedings against his predecessor Martin Vizcarra; he lasted less than a week;
  • Martin Vizcarra (2018-2020), who took over from ousted Pedro Pablo Kuczynski. Vizcarra was himself ousted by lawmakers after media reports alleged, he had received some US$640,000 equivalent in bribes from two companies that won a public works tender while he was a regional governor several years earlier;
  • Pedro Pablo Kuczinsky (2016-2018); prosecutors investigated Kuczynski for favoring contracts with Brazilian construction firm Odebrecht, while he was a minister under former President Alejandro Toledo. Kuczynski resigned from the presidency in 2018 amid pressure from Congress. He is currently under house arrest. He was succeeded by Martin Vizcarra (see above);
  • Ollanta Humala (2011-2016) – is facing trial over allegations he received $3 million from Odebrecht (Brazilian construction firm) during the 2011 presidential election campaign. Prosecutors have requested 20 years in prison. Humala denies the allegations. The case is apparently still under investigation. Money also buys court proceeding delays;
  • Alan Garcia (1985-1990 and 2006-2011) – allegedly killed himself when faced with new corruption investigations. He was apparently cremated, within 24 hours after the claimed suicide, without any forensic investigation, very unusual for the death of a former President. It is widely assumed that he organized a well-paid escape, had several esthetic surgeries and lives happily under a different name somewhere in the world, many suspect in Switzerland;
  • Alejandro Toledo (2001-2006) – is accused of receiving a $20 million bribe from Odebrecht during his tenure. He is free on bail in the United States, but faces extradition proceedings to Peru – proceedings that have been ongoing for a long time.

Peru is just one more example demonstrating Klaus Schwab’s “Pride to infiltrate governments around the world with our Young Global Leaders”.

People, take note and do not allow it to happen any longer, not in Peru – nor anywhere else.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and 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: Pedro Castillo greets from the balcony of his party’s headquarters, Lima, Peru, June 15, 2021. | Photo: EFE

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on How the President of Peru Was “Removed” by “Outside Forces”. WEF’s Klaus Schwab at His Best

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“Nicaragua Frees Hundreds of Political Prisoners to the United States,” the New York Times (2/9/23) reported. In an unexpected move on February 9, the Nicaraguan government deported to the United States 222 people who were in prison, and moved to strip them of their citizenship. The prisoners had been convicted of various crimes, including terrorism, conspiracy to overthrow the democratically elected government, requesting the United States to intervene in Nicaragua, economic damage and threatening the country’s stability, most relating to the violent coup attempt in 2018 and its aftermath.

President Daniel Ortega explained that the US ambassador had unconditionally accepted an offer to send the 222 “mercenaries” (as Ortega called them) to Washington. Two others opted to stay in prison in Nicaragua, and an additional four were rejected by the US.

Despite the Times’ relatively benign headline, its story was heavily weighted against a country that had “slid into autocratic rule,” and whose government had “targeted opponents in civil society, the church and the news media.” For the Times, the “political prisoners” were not criminals but “opposition members, business figures, student activists and journalists.”

For the Washington Post (2/9/23), they included “some of Nicaragua’s best-known opposition politicians” and “presidential hopefuls.” Their release had “eased one of Latin America’s grimmest human rights sagas.” It added that “several of the prisoners had planned to run against Ortega in 2021 elections, but were detained before the balloting.”

The Guardian (2/9/23) blamed the imprisonments on “Nicaragua’s authoritarian regime” and its “ferocious two-year political crackdown,” intended to “obliterate any challenge” before the last presidential election in 2021.

Bad when they do it

The corporate media were given a second bite of the cherry when the Nicaraguan government announced, six days later, that it was rescinding the citizenship of a further 94 people, most of them living abroad, in some cases for many years. The list included such notable names as authors Sergio Ramírez and Gioconda Belli. The Times (2/17/23) quoted the United Nations refugee agency as saying that international law “prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of nationality, including on racial, ethnic, religious or political grounds.” For the Guardian (2/16/23), “Daniel Ortega’s authoritarian regime has intensified its political crackdown.”

Neither mentioned that law in the US and Britain, and other countries, permits the revocation of citizenship in the US for, among other things, engaging in a conspiracy “to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States,” and in Britain of “those who pose a threat to the country.” The British government has made orders to deprive at least 767 people of citizenship since 2010.

There are other important considerations that apply in Nicaragua’s case, which the media ignore. First, it is a small country, with limited means to defend itself, that has been the subject of US intervention for decades—militarily in the 1980s, politically more recently, and economically since sanctions were imposed in 2018. Those calling for even stronger US pressure (e.g., curbs on trade) are putting the well-being of Nicaraguans at real risk.

Second, there is a precedent for a country’s unelected citizens being recognized as its “real” government by the US and its allies, in the case of self-proclaimed “president” Juan Guaidó in Venezuela, a gambit that successfully stole the country’s assets (Venezuelanalysis, 1/11/22), even though it did not provoke the hoped-for military coup (FAIR.org, 5/1/19). The possibility of similar tactics being used against Nicaragua might well have been a factor influencing the action it took.

The corporate media’s accounts of the Nicaraguan government’s reasons for the deportations and cancellations of citizenship were both perfunctory and disparaging. For example, the Guardian’s second article (2/16/23) said the government “called the deportees, who were also stripped of their citizenship, ‘traitors to the motherland.’” The rest of its article was given over to criticism of the Ortega government.

The New York Times (2/9/23) quoted Nicaraguan journalist Carlos Chamorro, one of the 94, as saying, “All prisoners of conscience are innocent.” It made no assessment of his claim.

The Washington Post (2/9/23) did include Ortega’s criticism of US financing of opposition groups: “These people are returning to a country that has used them…to sow terror, death and destruction here in Nicaragua,” Ortega said. But it went on to report in its own voice that “Ortega crushed a nationwide anti-government uprising in 2018, the beginning of a new wave of repression.”

Three months of January 6

As FAIR has shown in a range of articles, media coverage of Nicaragua consistently presents the image of a country suffering extreme repression. The story of the 222 deportees was a further opportunity to repeat this treatment. For example, included in the Guardian’s coverage (2/16/23) was an official from Human Rights Watch saying, “The country is on the verge of becoming the Western Hemisphere’s equivalent of North Korea.” Whether it is the closure of NGOs, the results of the 2021 presidential election, the reasons for increased Nicaraguan migration to the United States, or the country’s response to Covid-19, corporate media ignore good news about Nicaragua, give prominence to the views of government opponents and, if Daniel Ortega is quoted, this is done in a disparaging way.

The most extraordinary example of this bias is the corporate media’s pretense that the “terror, death and destruction” of the 2018 coup attempt either never occurred or were perpetrated solely by the “authoritarian regime.” Yet there was ample evidence at the time, and since, of horrific acts of violence against police and Sandinista supporters. Examples can be seen in two short videos (warnings about content apply), here and here, which include clips made by opposition protesters themselves and uploaded to social media.

The uprising that shook Nicaragua lasted roughly three months, resulted officially in 251 deaths (including 22 police officers; others put the total deaths as higher) and over 2,000 injured. It allegedly “caused $1 billion in economic damages,” and led to an economic collapse. (After years of growth, GDP fell by 3.4% in 2018).

The coup attempt led to at least 777 arrests, with many of those convicted given lengthy prison sentences. But importantly, and mostly ignored by the corporate media, 492 prisoners were released between mid-March and mid-June 2019.

Nicaragua’s experience in 2018 stands comparison with the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, and the response to it by the US justice system, generally with the corporate media’s support. The siege of the Capitol lasted only a few hours and led to five deaths, about 140 injuries to police and $2.7 million in damage. Reporting uncritically on the sanctions against those responsible, the New York Times (12/19/22) said that more than 900 people had been charged so far, facing prison sentences of up to ten years.

Later, the Times (1/23/23) reported that four culprits had been charged with “seditious conspiracy,” under a statute dating from the civil war period. In words not dissimilar to those used by the Nicaraguan judge who announced the order stripping 94 people of citizenship, one of the prosecutors was quoted as saying that the defendants “perverted the constitutional order.” He added that they “were willing to use force and violence to impose their view of the Constitution and their view of America on the rest of the country.” Unlike the Times’ reports on Nicaragua, there is no hint of criticism of these charges, nor questioning of whether they are justified.

Evidence of wrongdoing

This is the context in which the 222 supposedly “innocent” people released into the United States had been charged and found guilty during 2021 and 2022. Questions about the wrongdoing of the 222 were set aside in corporate media coverage, yet it would have been easy to find evidence of wrongdoing. Here are three examples:

  • Cristiana Chamorro headed an NGO, the Violeta Barrios de Chamorro Foundation, that received $76 million from USAID. This was used to influence Nicaragua’s elections via an array of opposition media outlets, several owned by the Chamorro family. She refused to comply with transparency laws and closed her foundation; she was then convicted of money laundering.
  • Félix Maradiaga was convicted of treachery because he had pleaded for economic sanctions against Nicaragua.
  • Medardo Mairena and Pedro Mena had organized a range of armed attacks in 2018, for which they had been pardoned in the 2019 amnesty. These included the siege of the police station in Morrito on July 12, 2018, in which five people were killed. Both were later convicted again for further offenses. In 2020, a large number of victims provided evidence of the violence directed by Mairena and his associates in 2018 in the central region of Nicaragua.

For US corporate media, none of this was relevant. The real reason for the original arrests in 2021 was simple: Ortega expected to lose that year’s election, so he locked up his opponents.

It is true that several of those imprisoned had expressed interest in running. But in a joint post-election analysis with journalist Rick Sterling, I argued that they would have had little chance of taking part, much less of winning.

However, according to the Washington Post (2/9/23), this meant that Ortega, “essentially unopposed, cruised to a fourth consecutive term.” In fact, he won 76% of the vote on a 65% turnout, standing against five others, including two candidates from parties that had been in government in the years before Ortega returned to power.

‘A terrible place’

Why were the prisoners released? The Post admitted that there had been no “quid pro quo,” but then carried a quote claiming that Ortega was “buying some breathing room internationally.”

The New York Times reported that the releases “bolster the argument that sanctions are effective,” linking this to its portrayal of Nicaragua as an authoritarian regime: “The sanctions have also stretched the government’s ability to pay off pro-Ortega paramilitaries or expand the police force to manage dissent.”

Not that sanctions would be relaxed, of course: “Officials…said they would continue to apply pressure to the Ortega administration,” the paper reported, as “the Biden administration does not believe that ‘the nature of the government’ has changed.” Dan Restrepo, President Obama’s national security adviser for Latin America, declared, “Nicaragua remains a terrible place for Nicaraguans, and a lot more has to change.”

Readers of the corporate media who are unfamiliar with Nicaragua receive impressions of the country, reinforced with every news item, that it is a “terrible place,” in the grip of a police state. As someone who lives in the country, I find a huge disjuncture between these descriptions and the reality of Nicaraguan daily life.

Readers of the Times or the Post might be surprised to hear Nicaragua was recently judged to be the place in the world where people are most at peace (CNBC, 1/7/23). InSight Crime (2/8/23) ranked it the second-safest country in Latin America, according to reported data on homicides. It tackled Covid-19 more successfully than its neighbors, and has the highest vaccination rate in the region. Websites devoted to tourism dub it a favorite destination in Central America and extol its friendliness.

Finally, the government’s decision to deport the 222 was popular in Nicaragua itself, at least among government supporters. There were enthusiastic demonstrations in at least 30 cities the following weekend, including the one where I live. Unpersuaded, the British Independent (2/12/23) said that the “Sandinista political machine mobilized a few thousand of its faithful.” They must not have seen the reports from the capital, Managua, where tens of thousands filled the streets.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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: Tens of thousands march in Nicaragua in support of the government expulsion of people seen as “vende patrias”—country-sellers (TN8, 2/13/23).

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On February 23, 2023, the White House issued a statement: “Today, President Biden announced that the United States is nominating Ajay Banga, a business leader with extensive experience leading successful organizations in developing countries and forging public-private partnerships to address financial inclusion and climate change, to be President of the World Bank.

Once again, the President of the World Bank is American, he is a man, and he comes from high finance, which seems to be a guarantee of success for Joe Biden:

“Ajay is uniquely equipped to lead the World Bank at this critical moment in history. He has spent more than three decades building and managing successful, global companies that create jobs and bring investment to developing economies, and guiding organizations through periods of fundamental change.”

The CADTM International network condemns this nomination because:

The CADTM International network had no illusions: any decision taken by the IBRD (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) must receive 85% of the votes to be adopted. However, the United States has 15.47% of the voting rights for each of the important decisions, so it has a de facto veto right. So there will be no positive change within the World Bank. As long as it continues to exist, it will remain an institution serving the interests of the United States, whether or not it is chaired by a US citizen drawn from big business and finance. It will continue to provide loans, usually onerous, in exchange for conditionalities that reinforce and deregulate capitalism, increase social and gender inequalities and worsen the climate and ecological crisis.

The CADTM International network calls once again:

*

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

Note

[1] https://chomsky.info/priorities01/

Featured image: Ajay Banga, at the India Economic Summit 2017 in New Delhi, World Economic Forum / Benedikt von Loebell, CC, Flickr

US Exceptionalism and the Wars in Syria and Ukraine

March 3rd, 2023 by Rick Sterling

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Introduction 

Syria has been at war since 2011. The conflict is in a stalemate. US troops control nearly a third of the country. The US finances the operation and a secessionist army with oil and wheat they take from the area. It funds them and deprives the Syrian government from their own resources. In the northern province of Idlib, the Syrian version of Al Qaeda is in control, receiving the majority of aid from Europe while the 90% of  Syrians who live in government controlled areas go hungry and have electricity only three hours per day.

Meanwhile in Ukraine, the bloodshed continues as Russian troops battle Ukrainian soldiers while the US and NATO pour in weapons. Russian troops have taken control of much of the eastern region, the Donbass.

How did we get here and what is driving the process?

The Rise of the US Exceptionalism  

After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990, influential neoconservatives said it was time for US interests and priorities to be dominant. There was only one superpower. This was to be  a New American Century with no challengers. This perspective went from being a fringe element to increasingly influential. Over the course of the 1990’s, it took hold and became US foreign policy. They said it explicitly: The US should not permit any country to challenge US supremacy and dominance.

With the Soviet Union gone and Russia in disarray, there was no counter-force in international organizations or the United Nations.  The US manipulated existing agencies and created new institutions to its advantage. History and international agreements were rewritten. For example, with US and Israeli pressure, the UN resolution affirming that Zionism is a form of racism was overturned.

US foreign policy became increasingly aggressive. Sanctions on Iraq, aimed to drive the country into total submission, led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Children were especially vulnerable to sickness from contaminated water. Chlorine for purification was prohibited while the US hailed itself a leader in gender equality with the first female Secretary of State, Madeline Albright.

Recalcitrant countries were subject to attack. The multi-ethnic country of Yugoslavia was a prime target. Divisions were promoted while the CIA funded an extremist separatist army. NATO went on the attack, bombing Serbia without authorization from the UN Security Council. The plan was clear: divide and conquer.

Simultaneously, the creation of the European Union in 1993 made it harder for individual countries to act in their own best interests and easier for the US to dominate the whole.

The military alliance binding them together is NATO – the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Although this is a military alliance, there is no doubt which country is paramount. The US spends more than all others combined.

The September 11 attacks in 2001 were a watershed moment. The attacks provided a “Pearl Harbor” moment and justification for increased US aggression abroad.  The official explanation of who carried out the attacks and why has been seriously challenged.  Whoever perpetrated the attacks, neoconservatives used 9-11 to push their agenda. The US commenced their attack and occupation of Afghanistan.

The next major violation of international law was the invasion of Iraq in 2003.  Iraq was devastated, extremism and sectarianism exploded.  Today, US troops remain there despite the Iraqi parliament and government requesting they leave.

Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction as claimed by US “intelligence”. Instead, a form of chemical weapons was created in Iraq by the US military. Dust from depleted uranium bullets and missiles vaporized and mixed with the environment. Iraq has experienced a huge increase in birth defects and cancer.

Russia Restabilizes

While this was happening, Russia was starting to restabilize under the Putin administration. After a decade of chaos, corruption and the collapse of the communist safety net, Russia was getting back on its feet in the early 2000s.  The standard of living and life expectancy started to increase. Western advisors were no longer in charge. Oligarchs were no longer able to  rob at will.

Even though the Warsaw Pact has ceased to exist, NATO refused to disband. On the contrary, despite promises to Russian leaders, NATO expanded in 1999, 2004 and 2009.

When NATO invited Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO in 2008, Russia loudly said NO. They said that would cross a red line for them. NATO was clearly an OFFENSIVE alliance and to permit it on the Ukraine border less than 500 miles from Moscow would jeopardize Russian security.  Russia kept asking that security for ALL be considered.

War in Libya and Syria

Unrest in Libya erupted in early 2011. Western media started propagating stories of pending massacres and the UN Security Council, with China and Russia abstaining, authorized a “no fly zone” and “necessary measures to protect civilians”. This became the pretext for the US plus NATO and other allies to attack Libyan government forces. They overthrew the Libyan government and unleashed a civil war that continues to today. Later evidence revealed the sensational claims of rape and pending massacre were falsehoods, just like in the past.

U.S. military vehicle runs past the Tal Tamr area in the countryside of Hasakah province, northeastern Syria, Nov. 14, 2019. | Photo: Str/Xinhua

At the same time, the West and allies Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey were funding, training and supporting extremists and foreigners travelling to Syria. After the overthrow of the Libyan government, the CIA took control of Libyan military arsenals and started sending weapons to jihadists in Syria.

Extremists were trained in camps in Turkey on the Syrian border.  Weapons were flown into Incirlik US Air Base in southern Turkey. Thus started the US war on Syria which continues to today.

In the Fall of 2013, a sarin gas attack killed hundreds of civilians in outer Damascus.  Neocons were itching to attack Syria as they had attacked Libya and Iraq. President Obama claimed, “We know the Assad regime was responsible.” He also said “I believe we should act. That’s what makes America different. That’s what makes us exceptional.”

The US attack was deterred after Russia persuaded Syria to give up all their chemical weapons – which had been developed as a deterrent against Israel’s nuclear weapons. Russian Putin praised the agreement but cautioned, “It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.”

Later, Seymour Hersh revealed that the chemical attacks were not carried out by the Syrian government as claimed by Obama.  Rather, they had been perpetrated by Syrian extremists with Turkish support. The purpose was to provide a pretext for US and NATO direct attacks on Syria.

War in Ukraine

Meanwhile, 1200 miles north of Damascus, protests in the Maidan main square of Kyiv Ukraine were growing in intensity. There was a combination of peaceful protesters and a small but violent faction of ultra nationalist extremists. Western billionaires and US agencies were instrumental in promoting pro-western organizations and  the Ukraine protests. US politicians and officials such as Victoria Nuland and John McCain showed up to offer symbolic and tangible support.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

On Feb 7, 2014 Victoria Nuland and the US Ambassador planned who would take leadership  after the pending Ukraine coup. Nuland summed it up: “Yats is the guy” (Arseny Yatsenyuk). Referring to a compromise agreement preferred by European leaders, Nuland said, “Fuck the EU.” From the conversation, we also know that Jake Sullivan (current National Security Advisor) and then Vice President Biden were  involved. US neoconservatives were not satisfied with a mixed Ukraine. They wanted an anti Russia Ukraine.

With the Winter Olympics in Sochi Russia drawing toward a close, someone decided to expedite the coup. Timing is important. On Feb 20 snipers killed over 50 protesters and police to ignite the events.  Ukrainian-Canadian Professor Ivan Katchanovoski of the University of Ottawa has rigorously researched the events and shows that the shootings were by snipers located in opposition controlled buildings.

On the first day of the coup government, on 27 February, they removed Russian as an official language despite 30% of the population having it as a first language. It would be comparable to a coup in Ottawa Canada with the coup government removing French as an official language of Canada. The new leader was the same Arseny Yatsenyuk as planned by Nuland weeks earlier.

Opponents of the coup government were attacked with 42 killed in Odessa. In Crimea, they quickly organized a referendum on whether to secede from Ukraine. With 83% turnout, 97% of the population said they wanted to join the Russian Federation. In eastern Ukraine north of Crimea,  called the Donbas, there was also a majority of the population deeply opposed to the coup and coup government. They confronted the authorities and many military units defected to join the secessionists.  The regions were cut off  by the Kiev government, with pensioners no longer receiving retirement checks and government services stopped. The Ukrainian Army attacked and thousands died. The regions were excluded from national elections. Eventually they organized themselves as the Donetsk and Lugansk Peoples Republics.  Thus the war in Ukraine did not begin one year ago; it began nine years ago, in February 2014.

In late 2014 and again  in 2015, peace agreements  to resolve the civil war in Ukraine were signed in Minsk. France and Germany were to help insure the implementation. Russia supported this as a way to resolve the conflict. The UN Security Council passed a resolution endorsing the agreement.

Instead of implementing this, Kiev ignored their promises while the US and NATO began arming and training the Ukraine Army. In effect, Ukraine became an unofficial member. The arming and NATO-ization continued and escalated. First it was only “defensive” weapons. Then, under Trump, they began supplying “offensive” weapons.

NATO plans to destabilize and weaken Russia were explicit. The Pentagon thinktank, the RAND Corporation,  published reports discussing strategic options to weaken and destabilize Russia.  The longer term goal: to break it up as plotted by Brzezinkski  in his US foreign policy bible The Grand Chessboard.

It has recently been revealed by the former Ukrainian, French and German leaders that the 2015 MINSK peace agreement was a ruse. By their own statements and admissions, it was never a genuine effort to peacefully resolve the civil war in eastern Ukraine. The goal was to stall for time while NATO trained and equipped the Ukrainian Army, to solidify the anti Russian attitude and crush those not in agreement.

NeoCons do not want peace in Ukraine

The neocons driving Washington’s foreign policy do not want to end the Ukraine war; they want to prolong it. They dream of repeating what happened in the 1980’s when Russian intervention in Afghanistan led to the weakening and ultimate breakup of the Soviet Union. The former boss of Jake Sullivan,  Hillary Clinton, said explicitly in March “That [Afghanistan] is the model that people are now looking toward.”

The immorality of US policy is breathtaking. Afghanistan went through hell beginning in 1979 as the US and Saudi Arabia supported and armed religious fanatics to destabilize Afghanistan and create trouble for the Soviet Union. Afghanistan has endured over four decades of conflict and extremism and is still suffering.

Today, US neocons running foreign policy are sacrificing Ukraine with the same goal of undermining Russia.  They could not live with a neutral Ukraine and have promoted and allied with ultra-nationalist and neo-Nazi Ukrainian elements. Previously Washington did not want anything to do with the neo-Nazis but this has changed.

NeoCons and Syria

The US has also allied with extremists in Syria. In late 2014 and early 2015,  ISIS and Nusra (the Syrian Al Qaeda) made major assaults. Syrian and foreign extremists poured across the Turkish border. There were dozens of Canadians, hundreds of Brits, thousands of Europeans and North Africans. The Canadian and British secret services were well aware of the plans of their citizens who were being recruited by Al Qaeda and ISIS.  They did nothing because, as Jake Sullivan said, “AQ [Al Qaeda] is on our side in Syria.”

With weapons and training from western military and intelligence forces, the extremists were able to capture a large area of northern Syria and the outskirts of  Damascus.

In September 2015 Russia came to the assistance of the Damascus government. They provided airplanes and pilots to attack the advancing extremists.  Uninvited, the US began also overflying Syria and then establishing US bases in the east and south.  They rarely attacked ISIS but attacked Syrian troops at critical times. Then they began cultivating Kurdish secessionist elements. They rebranded them as the “Syrian Democratic Forces”. They are still there today – stealing the Syrian nation’s wealth in oil and wheat. The US  has imposed draconian sanctions on the majority of the country.  The dirty war on Syria continues.

Neoconservative belief in US supremacy and impunity are exemplified by former Deputy Director of the CIA, Michael Morell. In an 2016 interview, he was outraged that Russia supported  the Syrian government resisting extremist attacks. In a 2016  interview, Morell publicly suggested “covertly” killing Russians who are on the ground in Syria. “They got to pay a price for what they’re doing. Just like we made the Russians pay a price in Afghanistan …. We have to make them want to go home.”

Russian Intervention in Ukraine

One year ago, Russia troops went into Ukraine with the stated goal of de-nazifying and de-militarizing the country. Many Ukrainian civilians have fled the fighting with more that 3 million going to Russia, by far the most of any country.

Did Russia have a choice? They could have continued waiting, hoping for a change in attitude by the US and NATO. They tried. In December 2021 Russia proposed peace treaties with the US and NATO.  Instead of negotiating, the US and NATO dismissed the proposals out of hand.

The US-Ukraine Stategic Partnership, signed in November 2021,  made it clear there was no intention to respect the will of the overwhelming majority of people in Crimea or to implement the Minsk Agreement to resolve the eastern Ukraine conflict peacefully. On the contrary, Ukraine with US support was building its forces to attack the Donbass and perhaps Crimea.

After 30 years of NATO provocations and escalating threats, Russia acted. While this has been condemned in the West, there is widespread understanding and support for their position in the Global South. A recent poll indicates that a  big majority continue to feel positively about Russia.

What happens in Ukraine will have a profound impact on the globe.  The “New American Century” dreamed by US hawks has been challenged.

It is high time to end US delusions of superiority and exceptionalism. The USA should become a normal nation.

We need a multipolar world with respect for the UN Charter and international law.

Let the people in Crimea and the Donbass choose their destinies. Let the war end and Ukrainians recover and prosper in an independent country which is neither a tool of the US or Russia. Let Syria rebuild and recover without the cruel US sanctions.

Let the US turn from fomenting conflicts,  undermining and attacking other countries to reforming and improving itself.

*

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

Rick Sterling is an independent journalist based in the San Francisco Bay Area. He can contacted at [email protected]He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Climate and agricultural policies aimed at bolstering carbon markets will fail to curb planet-heating emissions while enabling powerful agribusiness corporations to greenwash their polluting operations and augment their control over the food system.

That’s according to Agricultural Carbon Markets, Payments, and Data: Big Ag’s Latest Power Grab, a report published Wednesday by Friends of the Earth, an environmental advocacy group, and the Open Markets Institute, an anti-monopoly think tank.

While farmers could play a key role in mitigating the climate crisis by adopting agroecological practices capable of sequestering more carbon in the soil, the report warns that U.S. lawmakers from both major parties have embraced a “market-based” approach—centered around the buying and selling of so-called “carbon offset” credits generated through minor tweaks to industrial monoculture production—that is likely to tighten Big Ag’s chemical-intensive stranglehold on the food system and disenfranchise small-scale farmers, all while failing to reduce greenhouse gas pollution.

“Carbon markets have become a top strategy for agriculture and climate, despite a history of fraud, failure to reduce emissions, and corporate greenwashing,” report co-author Jason Davidson, senior food and agriculture campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said in a statement. “Such corporate schemes will strengthen the power of the largest agribusinesses, hand over private farm data, and fail to address the climate crisis.”

As the report explains: “The idea begins with granting credits to farmers who adopt certain practices, such as planting more trees and cover crops, that are supposed to remove carbon from the atmosphere. Farmers then receive compensation for their efforts by selling these credits to other entities, typically large corporations. These corporations, in turn, use their purchases of such credits to justify claims of environmental responsibility.”

Though these corporations “may still be emitting carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, they claim to have ‘offset’ these emissions by paying others to pollute less or actively sequester carbon, often to the point of asserting that they now have a ‘net-zero’ climate impact,” states the report.

A recent investigation revealed that 94% of the rainforest carbon offsets sold by a leading market player provided no measurable climate benefits, casting further doubt on the very notions of ‘net-zero’ and ‘carbon neutrality’ that corporations promote in a bid to maintain or expand their own polluting activities while portraying themselves as green.

Despite mounting evidence of the ineffective or counterproductive nature of ‘net-zero’ commitments, one-fifth of the world’s biggest corporations have made them, meaning that demand for carbon offsets is growing, the report notes. Meanwhile, the federal government is providing key support to such programs, including indirectly through the Inflation Reduction Act and directly through a pair of bills embedded in the Fiscal Year 2023 Omnibus Appropriations Bill.

The first, the Growing Climate Solutions Act, instructs the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to “list private carbon market facilitators on its website and broadly list protocols for measuring carbon sequestration,” the report explains. The SUSTAINS Act, meanwhile, threatens to lend government legitimacy to “fledgling soil carbon offset schemes,” which “could influence their value in voluntary exchanges” and “fan the flames of a speculative industry that stands to divert resources from effective pollution reduction and regulation.” Moreover, through its so-called Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities pilot program, the USDA is poised to offer more than half a billion dollars in grants to several agribusiness giants.

According to the report:

Big agribusiness corporations are using the system to deepen their own monopolistic power. Programs run by corporations such as Cargill, Bayer, Nutrien, and Corteva pay farmers for adopting specific farming practices that either depend on the companies’ proprietary technologies or require farmers to use their digital agriculture platforms.

[…]

Under these private carbon offset programs, agribusiness giants define climate-smart agriculture and promote large-scale, monoculture, chemical-dependent farming methods that can harm the environment in the long run and further entrench their market power. By controlling the same private, unregulated carbon-offset markets in which they trade on their own account and set their own prices, they are also subject to massive conflicts of interest.

“We can’t trust the very corporations that got us into this climate crisis to get us out of it on their terms and timeline,” said report co-author Claire Kelloway, food program director for the Open Markets Institute. “Corporations are designed to serve their investors, not the public, and that’s exactly what these carbon offsetting schemes will do by locking farmers into their networks, protecting product sales, and stalling meaningful regulation.”

A joint statement from Friends of the Earth and the Open Markets Institute explained three major pitfalls of private soil carbon credit programs:

  • Agricultural carbon markets are jumping ahead of the science to commodify something that cannot be reliably measured. There is no scientific consensus on how long carbon remains in the soil or under what conditions. Carbon sequestered in the soil can be released by changing land management practices or through severe weather events, which fails to sequester carbon on a meaningful timescale to address climate change. Without basic market fundamentals of information exchange and consistent commodities, selling and buying offsets is little more than speculation.
  • Carbon sequestration verification programs allow agribusinesses to collect and monetize detailed agronomic data and drive new users to their digital agriculture platforms. This further incentivizes and promotes their products, such as Bayer’s Roundup and genetically engineered seeds, entrenching corporate market power and destructive chemical-intensive industrial monocultures. Yet, use of agrichemicals kills soil organisms that support carbon sequestration.
  • Carbon payment programs, especially those run by seed and chemical companies, are not designed for smaller and ecologically regenerative farms. Generally, the largest farms stand to profit the most from carbon payments, further marginalizing family-scale farms and driving consolidation. Farmers contractually commit to years, even decades, of more expensive practices that produce credits for Big Ag with minimal payment guarantees.

“There’s no doubt that farmers should be supported in shifting to ecologically regenerative methods,” the report says. “But the evidence shows that using carbon offsets to do so is a counterproductive and inequitable approach that will let big polluters off the hook and fail the needs of family farmers.”

Davidson said that “instead of another handout to Big Ag, the Biden administration and Congress must support farmers in pursuing proven climate solutions.”

As Congress debates the next Farm Bill, the report’s executive summary calls on lawmakers and the USDA to take the following steps:

  • Ensure that USDA programs do not promote private carbon payment programs and reject corporate contributions to conservation programs that require farmers to share ownership of carbon credits with corporate donors.
  • Invest in existing programs with a proven track record of funding environmental improvements in agriculture, such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP); channel funds toward practices that are demonstrated to enhance on-farm biodiversity, conserve water, improve soil carbon sequestration, reduce the use of synthetic inputs, and enhance farmers’ resilience in the face of droughts and floods.
  • Encourage tree planting as a part of the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).
  • Regulate air and water pollution from the largest, most polluting farms, including working with the [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency] to set limits on agricultural greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Protect farmer data by ensuring the right to port and remove data from digital agriculture platforms. Prohibit the use of farmer data gathered as part of carbon payment programs to speculate in futures markets or target farmers with personalized advertisements.

Notably, a separate report published Wednesday by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy showed that 3 out of every 4 farmers who applied for EQIP and CSP funds in 2022 were denied.

“We do not have time or resources to waste on ineffective approaches to addressing the climate crisis, especially those that greenwash corporate pollution and risk increasing greenhouse gas emissions,” wrote Davidson and Kelloway. “Congress and the USDA must channel the billions of dollars that are being invested in climate-smart agriculture toward proven and transformative solutions.”

From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

*

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

Kenny Stancil is a staff writer for Common Dreams.

Featured image is from Beyond Pesticides

Corporate Media Gobsmacked on Crimea

March 3rd, 2023 by Kurt Nimmo

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

NBC News fixture Andrea Mitchell, wife of former Federal Reserve boss Alan Greenspan, has gone against the grain of the Ukraine narrative. In the clip below, she says the people of Crimea are Russian.

So, here we have an admission by corporate media journalist Keir Simmons that it is not only “dangerous” but virtually impossible for Ukraine (that is, the USG) to force the return of Crimea (where a Russian ethnic population has lived for centuries). Russia will defend its naval base in Sevastopol.

For his reality-based report, Simmons was placed on Ukraine’s Myrotvorets death list.

The CIA is an old pro at compiling death lists. Maybe that’s why “Langley, VA, USA” is featured on the death list website (top right corner). I wrote about the CIA’s handiwork and its relation to the Myrotvorets death list in September. The list now includes a number of prominent westerners who dared tell the truth about Ukraine, its rabid ultranationalists, NATO’s encroachment, and the violent 2014 coup that overthrew an elected president and government.

The Myrotvorets now include westerners on their murder list, including the popular former member of the progressive rock band Pink Floyd, Roger Waters. In addition, the Nazis of the Ukraine want to kill Hungary’s Viktor Orban, and Nobel Prize winner Zoran Milanovic. “Ukrainian writer Oles Buzina and former Verkhovna Rada parliamentarian Oleg Kalashnikov” were assassinated after Myrotvorets published their home addresses, reports Debt-Stop.

Andrea Mitchell and NBC may sheepishly admit the retaking of Crimea will not happen, but such reports have not dissuaded Zelenskyy and the Ukrainians.

As I wrote earlier, a retired USG General has the invasion of Crimea all figured out, never mind the immense loss of civilian life that would occur if his plan were to be implemented.

If this happens, count on an escalation, as Crimea is now part of the Russian Federation. In fact, it is already happening, although not to the degree imagined by Ben Hodges.

Following a spate of drone attacks inside Russia, the UK Express reported:

Meanwhile, one of Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s top advisers, Mykhailo Podolyak, denied today that Ukraine had used drones to attack Russian territory following official statements from Russia that Ukraine had targeted infrastructure deep inside Russia.

This makes perfect sense. It is likely Ukraine does not have the ability to coordinate attacks deep inside Russia, but the USG, its Pentagon and CIA, have plenty of experience in sabotage. The National Security Archive has a long list of documents exposing the “covert action” of the USG and its CIA.

 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 the author’s blog site, Kurt Nimmo on Geopolitics.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

The Coming Battle for the Liberation of Cuba

March 3rd, 2023 by Ted Snider

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The US loudly proclaims that large, belligerent powers should listen when the world is united against their hostility toward their smaller neighbors.

The world is united against the US.

In thirty consecutive votes since 1992, the UN General Assembly has overwhelmingly condemned the US embargo of Cuba. In the most recent vote, on November 3, 2022, the world delivered what William LeoGrande, Professor of Government at American University and a specialist in US foreign policy toward Latin America, told me was “the most complete repudiation of the US embargo by the world community since the annual resolution was first introduced 30 years ago.”

The vote was 185-2. Only Israel voted with the US, and only Ukraine and Brazil abstained. The year before, Colombia abstained, but the election of Gustavo Petro as president of Colombia peeled that support away from the US. The recent election of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Brazil will see to it that one more anomalous Latin American abstention is lost in this year’s vote.

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador recently demanded that the US and the world start acting on the will of the General Assembly. He said that the world must become more “active” and “not only when it comes to voting in the UN, where it is always only one or two countries who vote in support of it, while the vast majority of the countries in the world abstain or vote for the blockade to be eliminated. But when the [General] Assembly is over, it is back to the same old.”

Instead, López Obrador promised that “[w]e are going to continue demanding that the blockade against Cuba be lifted, that it be eliminated. It is inhumane.”

Mexico “has the greatest leverage,” LeoGrande told me, “because Washington needs its cooperation on two pre-eminent issues – migration and narcotics trafficking.” But López Obrador, who has initiated a “new, very close relationship between Mexico and Cuba” and who has signed documents that “formalize” and make the relationship between the two countries “institutional,” is not alone in opposing the blockade and calling it “inhumane.” Belize’s Prime Minister John Briceño, recently condemned the “illegal blockade against Cuba” and called it an “affront to humanity.”

Before López Obrador assumed the mantle of leader of Latin America’s struggle against America’s imposition of its will on the region, that mantle was worn by Lula DA Silva. On January 24, Lula DA Silva met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel. It was their first meeting since DA Silva returned to the presidency of Brazil. Just prior to their meeting, he had condemned the US embargo.

DA Silva and Díaz-Canel held their talk during the meeting of the Summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). In a press conference held with Argentine President Alberto Fernandez the day before the summit, DA Silva asked the members of CELAC to solve the problems of Cuba – and Venezuela – and treat them with “much affection.”

In November 2021, DA Silva told the European Parliament that the embargo is “unacceptable” and “not fair, normal or democratic.” He promised that “[a]s long as I live, I will say that the United States must end its blockade.”

Latin American opposition is swelling not only against the US embargo but also against the US inclusion of Cuba on the list of state sponsors of international terrorism.

In May 2015, the Obama administration took Cuba off the list. Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes said US policy on Cuba had become “an albatross” around the neck of the US, crippling their policy in the hemisphere. After reviewing Cuba’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, the State Department concluded that it should be removed from the list. The Trump administration put it back on.

López Obrador has promised “to lead a more active movement” against the inclusion of Cuba on the list of state sponsors of international terrorism that has continued under the Biden administration. He said that “all countries” must “unite and defend the independence and sovereignty of Cuba, and never, ever treat it as a ‘terrorist’ country, or put its profoundly humane people and government on a blacklist of supposed ‘terrorists’.”

And again, the Mexican president is not alone. On October 3, 2022, Colombia’s new president, Gustavo Petro, asked US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to remove Cuba from the list of State Sponsors of Terrorism.”

When asked by a reporter at a joint press conference “whether it is possible for the U.S. to remove Cuba . . . from the list of countries promoting terrorism,” Blinken answered, “When it comes to Cuba and when it comes to the state sponsor of terrorism designation, we have clear laws, clear criteria, clear requirements, and we will continue as necessary to revisit those to see if Cuba continues to merit that designation.” Petro disagreed about the merit. “[W]hat has happened with Cuba is an injustice,” he said.

With the recent elections of Gustavo Petro in Colombia and Lula DA Silva in Brazil, López Obrador’s opposition to the US’s hostile Cuba policy has become a powerful front. “With Petro, López Obrador and Lula taking the lead,” LeoGrande told me, “Biden will [face] united opposition to his Cuba policy across Latin America.”

*

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

Ted Snider is a regular columnist on US foreign policy and history at Antiwar.com and The Libertarian Institute. He is also a frequent contributor to Responsible Statecraft and The American Conservative as well as other outlets.

Featured image is from Silent Crow News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Coming Battle for the Liberation of Cuba
  • Tags: ,

Conservative Mental Dichotomy on the Draft

March 3rd, 2023 by Jacob G. Hornberger

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The war in Ukraine has displayed a fascinating dichotomy that exists within conservatives. They uniformly condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine while, at the same time, steadfastly ignoring the measures that the Pentagon took through NATO to provoke the invasion. 

Moreover, while they condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine, they also continue to steadfastly support the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and continue to effusively thank the troops for their service in those two longstanding wars of aggression.

Thus, I wasn’t too surprised to see another conservative dichotomy appear in an article by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., who serves on the editorial board of the conservative Wall Street Journal.The title of Jenkins’ article is “Putin Is the West’s Target in the Ukraine War.” The subtitle of the article pretty much sums up what it’s about: “A combination of escalation and deterrence must bring Russia to the table.”

What caught my attention, however, was this sentence in Jenkins’ piece: “Mr. Putin is the one abducting their sons and sending them home three weeks later in body bags.”

Abducting? One doesn’t often see conservatives using that word to describe conscription. One usually expects to see conservatives using the word “draft” or the word “serve” to describe conscription.

I found another article in the Journal that Jenkins wrote a few years ago in which he stated the following, “Even in World War II, more than 60% of American participants were drafted.”

Yes, he used the word “drafted.” No mention of the word “abducted.” But then again, this is the U.S. government, not the Russian government, to which he is referring.

In other words, when conservatives are talking about those evil Russkies, officials “abduct” people to fight in their wars. When the good U.S. government does it, it’s just “drafting” people to “serve” their country.

Actually though, Jenkins gets it right with his word “abduct.” That’s what conscription is all about — in both Russia and the United States. Another word that could be used is “slavery.” The best term is the one used in the Thirteenth Amendment — “involuntary servitude.”

The process works as follows: The government embroils people in a war that is not defensive in nature. Many people don’t like fighting and dying in that type of war. They’d be more than willing to fight and die if a foreign army was invading their homeland. But they don’t have much interest in leaving their homes, families, and businesses to go fight and die in some faraway land against an enemy that has not invaded their country.

But such wars are important to public officials. So, after calling for volunteers, the government finds that it still needs soldiers to fight. When no one else will volunteer, that’s when the government commands citizens to report to military installations to “serve” their country by being forced to travel to some foreign land to kill or be killed. If the person refuses, the government sends armed agents to forcibly seize him and take him away to jail. If he still refuses to “serve,” he is tried, convicted, and sentenced to a long term in a federal penitentiary. 

Jenkins’ point about World War II is a fascinating one. He points out that 60 percent of American solders were abducted — oh, I’m sorry — I mean drafted — to serve in the war. But how can that be? I thought World War II was supposed to be the “good war.” No doubt inadvertently, Jenkins is telling us that what people describe as the “greatest generation” had to be forced to “serve” in World War II.

What’s up with that? If World War II was so good, how come 60 percent of Americans soldiers had to be abducted — I mean drafted — to fight in it?

Prior to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the American people were overwhelmingly opposed to entering the war, especially after the horrors of U.S. intervention in World War I. To circumvent opposition to entry into World War II, FDR did everything he could to provoke the Japanese into attacking the U.S., including imposing an oil embargo on Japan as well as leaving American soldiers at Pearl and in the Philippines to serve as bait. (The FDR playbook undoubtedly served as a model that the Pentagon used to provoke Russia into invading Ukraine.)

My hunch is that those 60 percent who had to be abducted — I mean, drafted — knew that President Roosevelt had schemed, plotted, and maneuvered to provoke the Japanese into attacking the United States. They knew that the Japanese attack at Pearl was simply a response to FDR’s provocations and that the aim of the attack was simply to open up supply lines for oil in the Dutch East Indies. They knew that Japan had no military capability or even interest in invading, conquering, and occupying the United States. They also knew that Germany, which could not even cross the English Channel to conquer England, lacked the military capability, supply lines, money, armaments, troops, and even the interest to cross the Atlantic and invade, conquer, and occupy the United States.

Thus, those 60 percent were smart. They weren’t willing to fight and die in another foreign war, one that FDR had provoked and that did not involve the survival of the United States. That’s why they had to be abducted — I’m sorry, drafted — to “serve their country” and “defend our freedoms.”

Of course, the same thing applied to the wars in Korea and Vietnam. Americans understood the same thing about those wars. That’s why they had to be abducted — I mean drafted.” When people said no, like Mohammad Ali, U.S. officials went after them with a vengeance for their cowardice and lack of patriotism, just like Putin is doing to those who resist his draft in Russia.

Oh well, at least the Russian invasion of Ukraine has caused conservatives to confront the evil nature of conscription, even if they are only referring to Russia.

*

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

Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.

Featured image is from Mises Wire

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Conservative Mental Dichotomy on the Draft

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

It looks like there is a concerted effort underway to prepare the public for a “new pandemic”, and here are some of the mainstream media headlines making the rounds this past week:

  • UK: “Bird flu HAS mutated to infect people…fresh pandemic fears” (click here)
  • USA: “CDC says it’s in a posture of readiness amid fears H5N1 bird flu is poised to jump to humans – there are several vaccines and drugs in the works” (click here)
  • China: “A 53 year old woman in eastern China has tested positive for H5N1 avian influenza, (clade 2.3.4.4b), after exposure to poultry (click here)
  • UK: “Lateral flow tests being prepared for UK outbreaks of avian flu” (click here)
  • Peru: “At least 3500 sea lions in Peru have recently died of H5N1 bird flu” (click here)
  • Cambodia: “Young girl dies of H5N1 bird flu in Cambodia” (click here)
  • Argentina & Uruguay: “Last week, Argentina and Uruguay declared national health emergencies following outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1” (click here)
  • USA New York Times: “An even deadlier pandemic could soon be here” (click here)

What is H5N1 influenza? CDC experts tell us (click here):

  • Current clade of H5N1 avian influenza is called 2.3.4.4b, appears well adapted to spread efficiently among wild birds and poultry, was first identified in wild birds in the US in late 2021, and has affected 58 million commercial poultry
  • Mammals: recent H5N1 infections in wild foxes & skunks in Canada and US, minks in Spain, and sea lions in Peru
  • CDC recently produced an H5 candidate vaccine virus that can be used to make an H5N1 vaccine and has shared it with vaccine manufacturers

“Case Fatality Rate of 56% in humans”

This is where the fear tactics and propaganda come in.

“In October 2022, the disease began spreading among minks at a mink farm in Spain, marking the first time the virus mutated to favor mammal-to-mammal transmission, according to Science.”

when humans have been infected by animals, the virus is deadly, as 56% of the reported cases in humans ended in fatality, according to the World Health Organization.” (click here)

“while the World Health Organization (WHO) reports that the mortality rate of avian flu in humans is around 56 percent, many experts believe it’s likely to be much lower if the virus becomes more transmissible. One reason avian flu is so lethal is that it infects the lower respiratory tract, which can lead to respiratory failure” (click here)

Here’s how a human bird flu pandemic could unfold

“If a human-transmissible version of H5N1 does emerge, there is a good chance that it would rapidly spread, as most people have no immunity to this subtype of flu, which could potentially result in a new pandemic.” (click here)

“A pandemic of H5N1 with a 53 per cent fatality rate would be unimaginable; however, some studies have suggested that when the virus switches hosts and adapts to mammals the lethality drops down significantly”

“we have two antivirals that would likely offer some benefit against H5N1 infection and there are several licensed H5N1 vaccines”

“Unfortunately, just like with SARS-CoV-2, the virus keeps evolving and so our existing H5N1 vaccines may not offer robust protection against the current versions of H5N1, though studies suggest they may still work very well and they also give us a very good starting point for making updated versions of the vaccines.

“WHO-affiliated labs already hold two flu virus strains that are closely related to the circulating H5N1 virus, which could be used by vaccine manufacturers to create a human vaccine if needed” – the second was added this past week to “more closely match the virus spreading among animals” (click here)

H5N1 Gain of Function Research resumed in 2019

H5N1 influenza virus research was temporarily ceased in January 2012 due to the risks involved with disseminating experimental results that could be used for nefarious purposes.” (click here)

“All research on H5N1 transmission was halted (in 2012) after laboratories at the University of Wisconsin and the Dutch Eramus Medical Center in Rotterdam, Netherlands created mutant forms that could be transmitted directly among ferrets.This was concerning because viruses that are easily transmissible between ferrets are often also easily transmissible between humans.”

H5N1 Gain of Function Research resumed in 2019 (click here)

The H5N1 Wild Rumors…Chris Sky

Chris Sky, who had successful predictions about COVID-19, lockdowns and ineffectiveness of mRNA vaccines in 2020 (click here), put out a video today claiming Chile is having an H5N1 outbreak and will be the first country to sign onto the new WHO Pandemic Treaty (click here).

Chris Sky also put out another video on Feb.28, 2023 claiming that a pilot informed him that two antivirals (Oseltamivir – Tamiflu, Peramivir) are being shipped in large quantities to USA, UK, Australia and Netherlands (click here). He included the following communication:

More H5N1 Rumors in Chile…

“Speculations are adrift that certain clandestine vaccine clinical trials are now being conducted in the vicinity due to an undisclosed outbreak of H5N1 Avian Flu virus affecting many healthy young men in a military camp” (click here)

“During January & February 2023, when carcasses of dead birds and other wild animals were being found in large quantities alongside beaches, besides health personnel, local authorities also used young military trainees to help clear the areas and dispose the animals”

“By late February 2023, news emerged that 25 first year trainees from the military school in Pichicuy commune, in Valparaiso Region had developed acute respiratory illness”

“Subsequent news reported that 12 of these military cadets remain in serious hospitalized condition”

“Chilean health and defense authorities ordered a news blackout but locals and parents on social media posted that more than 67 young cadets were seriously sick

“The WHO sent teams along with officials from US CDC and NIH to assist”

Reports have emerged that all military personnel are now receiving some kind of vaccine shots

H5N1 – timing of outbreak with WHO Pandemic Treaty

The propaganda is really ramping up and we have all the components of the next planned pandemic. This time, it is an H5N1 avian flu with an alleged 50% fatality rate, jumping between mammals, with a few human deaths already. The stage is set with antiviral medications and H5N1 vaccines ready to go.

There is an interesting focus on South America, with Peru, Argentina and Uruguay having H5N1 outbreaks in poultry and mammals. Chris Sky’s rumor centers on Chile. While it’s difficult to verify what is going on in Chile, the rumors about military cadets getting sick, are very interesting.

Dr.Robert Malone has recently warned about a new WHO Pandemic Treaty which would give the WHO complete power over US pandemic response (click here)

UK MP Andrew Bridgen has recently blasted the proposed WHO pandemic treaty as well (click here).

WHO Director Dr.Tedros Ghebreyesus has recently announced: “Next week countries will begin negotiations on a zero draft of the new (WHO) Pandemic Accord” (click here)

Kyle Becker reports that “Biden administration is reportedly poised to sign onto a WHO pandemic treaty.” (click here)

H5N1 antiviral Drugs and neuropsychiatric side effects

There are two classes of antiviral drugs used for the treatment of influenza: M2 ion-channel blockers amantadine and rimantadine which act against influenza A only (not recommended due to widespread natural resistance to those drugs among H1N1 and H3N2 influenza viruses), and neuraminidase enzyme inhibitors which act against influenza A and B.

Oseltamivir (Tamiflu), Peramivir (Rapivab) and Zanamivir (Relenza) are neuraminidase enzyme inhibitors.

Viral neuraminidases are essential for influenza reproduction, facilitating viral budding and release of replicated virus from infected host cells.

Oseltamivir (Tamiflu) and Zanamivir (Relenza) have already been used to treat H1N1 and H3N2 influenza infections and act by inhibiting the release of replicated virus from infected cells.

(Image source)

“Despite demonstration of limited benefit, the drug is widely used, with a total of 48 million patients receiving prescriptions for oseltamivir worldwide since 2006. Approximately 10% of the drug penetrates the blood-brain barrier, which allows for potential neuropsychiatric side effects” (click here)

The majority of these adverse events have been observed to have occurred in the pediatric population. Neuropsychiatric adverse events include delirium, disturbances in consciousness, perceptual changes, delusions, tremors, anxiety symptoms, seizure disorders, parasomnias, and apocrine and eccrine gland disorders

“Researchers have found increased propensity for mice to jump from 20-cm high platforms when given oseltamivir.”

“Japan contraindicated its use among individuals aged 10 to 19 due to concerns of abnormal behaviors”

Children receiving oseltamivir should be monitored for neuropsychiatric side effects

From a paper titled: “The Tamiflu fiasco and lessons learnt” (click here):

“Serious Adverse Events, especially neuropsychiatric events associated with Tamiflustarted getting reported…recent articles have questioned the risk-benefit ratio of the drug…recommendations for stockpiling the drug as given by WHO have been put to scrutiny…many reviewers have labeled Tamiflu saga as a “costly mistake.”

For those looking for safer alternatives (these were also helpful with COVID-19):

My Take…

H5N1 could well be the next planned pandemic. The mainstream media are pushing it hard now and we could see it “launched” in the coming weeks. If it hits, it’s going to be a “shock and awe” type of event, meant to catch people off guard.

We’ve been told that the next pandemic would get our attention. An H5N1 avian flu pandemic with a Case Fatality Rate of 56% would fit the bill.

The timing is particularly interesting.

With a new pandemic, the US Public Health Emergency will not end on May 11, 2023 as planned, and we may see the WHO fast-track their new WHO Pandemic Treaty, drafts of which are already being discussed by various countries (click here).

It would take the fear of H5N1’s 50% fatality rate for the public to accept bringing back mandatory masking and perhaps even lockdowns.

Public Health Authorities are likely to lead any H5N1 response with antivirals such as Oseltamivir (Tamiflu), Peramivir (Rapivab) or Zanamivir (Relenza), because H5N1 vaccines won’t be ready right away.

For me, one of the most interesting aspects of all this, is that once these antivirals are rolled out, all COVID-19 mRNA vaccine neurological injuries can then be blamed on the antivirals, as they have very similar, well known neuropsychiatric adverse events.

There will probably be a well-funded campaign to “rehabilitate” the reputation of mRNA vaccines, with Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel having already promised he can have any new mRNA vaccine brought to market in less than 6 months.

Imagine a situation where the public is begging for a new mRNA vaccine. It seems unthinkable right now with the tsunami of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine injuries & deaths, but introduce H5N1 with 50% fatality rate and not enough antiviral medications to go around, and the public will once again demand mRNA.

Imagine the public begging for lockdowns, with the government graciously offering financial support and perhaps even a Universal Basic Income, tied to a digital ID.

As we saw in 2020, the world can change very quickly when a new threat is on the horizon.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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.

All images in this article are from the author unless otherwise stated

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on H5N1 Avian Influenza: What You Need to Know. Wild Rumors and a Look Beyond the Usual Propaganda
  • Tags: ,

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Transcript of Interview with Emanuel Pastreich

Sputnik: What is your personal assessment of the new leaks concerning the origins of COVID-19? Specifically, we are referring to the Wall Street Journal article reporting US intelligence sources suspect a leak from a Chinese bio lab. Why this? Why now? Do you see anything special about the timing of these allegations? 

Emanuel Pastreich: There are several issues at play here. The first is that the entire COVID-19 project, and the medical and general policy enacted in the United States and around the world using COVID-19 as an excuse is increasingly subject to question. A lot of the policies are now being criticized, and all sorts of legal actions are being taken.

There’s a need to try and pin this mess on somebody. And China, the “rising threat” in Washington establishment chatter, is a perfect place to pin it on.

The second factor is what is happening in Ukraine and the numerous reports about US- funded bio labs. I’m not expert enough to judge the accuracy of those reports, but Russia has released considerable information concerning bio labs in Ukraine that they have captured.

There’s been a lot of discussion out there, the information is not classified, about DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) and other private corporations developing both viruses and vaccines, as well as working together, in a corrupt manner, with the World Health Organization and with multinational drug companies.

So clearly there is an incentive to try and pin all of this mess, this transnational global finance mess spilling over from the pandemic, to pin it all on China, and specifically on the Chinese Communist Party.

Sputnik: Michael Gordon played a central role in disseminating false allegations that Iraq possessed the weapons of mass destruction in 2003. Why might it be that the intelligence community turns to him this time again? And how trustworthy, in your view, is his reporting?

Emanuel Pastreich: I am not all that interested in individual operatives. Most of them don’t write the material that they put out. The larger question should be what exactly is this “intelligence community?”

I think there has been some transformation since the Iraq Invasion in 2003. Intelligence is increasingly privatized, run for the profit of multinationals.

Anyone with deep pockets these days can get these organizations to promote their storyline, and they’re extremely closely connected with the media now, even more deeply than was the case before. Intelligence represents multinational pharmaceutical companies and weapons manufacturers, etc.

What specifically was Gordon pushing here? I think there were two goals. To take attention away from the central role of multinational corporations, the World Health Organization, the United Nations, and the United States government in the push for a corona pandemic.

Blaming China is now a popular approach. There’s a recent discussion by Mike Gallagher, a Republican from Wisconsin who sits on the House Intelligence Committee. He wrote at length about how this intelligence report must be credible, that somehow COVID-19 came out of a lab in China, i.e. China is an aggressive power attacking the United States,  the leader of democracy.

There is a problem with this argument. I don’t rule out the possibility that China was involved at some level. There’s corruption in China, as there is in the United States, and around the world. But, it’s clear that the push for mandates, for lockdowns, for vaccines, and for masks did not come from China, although China followed the guidelines.

Clearly the United States, led by the nose by the global capital and technology nexus, was at the core of this operation.

I think we can look at Gordon as being the one selected to convey the message.

I wouldn’t blame him personally, but this move is similar, as you suggested, to the buildup for the war with Iraq. They want to create a false narrative.

They express this narrative in every possible media format. Perhaps in the back of the minds of those people deep in DARPA, in DoD, and at Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and military intelligence contractors, they’re thinking they’ll use this as the lead up for some sort of major confrontation with China, which will allow them to kill two birds with one stone.

On the one hand, they will be able to pin all this stuff which originated with American-flavored multinational corporations, private equity, and multinational banks on China.

The second point is use it as a means to create some sort of new Cold War, or even some sort of actual military conflict, with China, which will allow them to stimulate the economy by creating demand for weapons, and that will save the asses of all these people who are potentially risk for how they tore the United States apart, by shifting to a military economy.

Sputnik: Jake Sullivan said on Sunday that there are a variety of views in the U.S. intelligence community about whether or not the virus originated naturally, or in the lab, and that he can’t confirm or deny according to The Wall Street Journal report. What do you think that “variety” could mean?

Why was he so reluctant here, do you think?

Emanuel Pastreich: There’s a variety of these “intelligence” organizations that have been radically privatized over the last 15 years. So, increasingly, it’s not the government that’s engaged in the collection of information, the analysis of the information, and the pushing of information (propaganda).

It’s a for-profit process in most cases. That said, within the larger intelligence community, including the Department of Energy in this case (which is what was quoted by Sullivan), there are individuals, or even groups, who are honestly trying to give an accurate story.

I would not dismiss all intelligence reports as being inaccurate. Sometimes people bravely state truths that have to be said and they can be more accurate than the media.

Not in this case. In this case, I think the “variety” is not a variety of interpretations, but a variety of propaganda strategies.

Different people are thinking, how are we going to solve this problem?

But the “problem” is what to do if the responsibility for the  COVID-19 pandemic might ultimately be pinned on American-affiliated multinational corporations and wealthy individuals. So they’re trying to come up with some storyline, but they can’t agree on it.

I think one of the major reasons is that the intelligence community, or the American military, is itself split. We have some Republicans who hate China and push for war with China. We have Democrats who hate Russia and are pushing for war with Russia.

And then we have all sorts of people in between, and people who are at war with everybody. They all have different interests.

I think there’s clearly a split within the establishment, the military defense establishment, as to how to deal with this COVID-19 crisis.

Those looking for a solution ranges from those who want to pin it on the Chinese Communist Party, or who prop up the experts who say we need even more vaccines. And there are other people who are saying on the inside that this story is just not going to hold, that it has come time to clean house.

All of this is going on beneath the surface. There are internal struggles taking place within the Pentagon and the CIA, and elsewhere, that we can’t really see directly.

Sputnik: The intel community is manipulating the public both here and abroad. Who knows what to believe anymore?

Emanuel Pastreich: The first thing I would say to people is be skeptical of everything. I would say that, for that matter, about the alternative media too.

We must be very skeptical about reports from the United States. But the same, about European sources and, for that matter, about Chinese, Russian or Iranian sources. They may be a little bit better, but each one of them has their own biases.

I recommend waiting to make any judgments about what’s an accurate story. I think that the scale of the deception that has taken place, and has involved all national governments in the world, is so large that moving to the next stage of sorting through the facts and finding out what really took place will be extremely difficult for us.

I think there is good reason to believe that there was an initial conspiracy between the United States and China to push in the COVID-19 narrative.

There is a “New Cold War” narrative presented in the media that is not without basis. But, at a higher level, between certain corrupt parts of sort of military industrial complex in the United States and in China, there is collaboration taking place that that is based not on national interest, but on class interest, on the interests of the super-rich and the small groups invested in private equity firms who want to make a fortune and to create a totalitarian system wherein these seemingly legitimate global organizations like the World Health Organization will be able to dictate medical practice for everyone in the entire world.

I think what we’re seeing is that this bid, that incredibly ambitious bid to take over the entire medical system and to corrupt it, although it was remarkably successful the first few years, ultimately was not successful. We are seeing some real push back now.

So Jake Sullivan and that whole team, are running around trying to find something to patch over the extremely high risk position they find themselves in.

There have been several reports out about bio labs found in the Ukraine disclosed. We do not know the details, but the possibility that this “Corona Pandemic” will ultimately come back to bite the United States itself, and for that matter, Israel, the U.K., and other affiliated countries, is quite real.

It’s best to see this move as a proactive attempt to cut off the possibility of a critique of, and investigation of, the United States and its allies, multinational corporations, and multinational global governance organizations. The best way to cut off that possibility is to go on the attack first.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 Fear No Evil.

Emanuel Pastreich served as the president of the Asia Institute, a think tank with offices in Washington DC, Seoul, Tokyo and Hanoi. Pastreich also serves as director general of the Institute for Future Urban Environments. Pastreich declared his candidacy for president of the United States as an independent in February, 2020.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as 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.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on ‘Buildup for War’: US Spins COVID Lab Leak Narrative to ‘Pin Blame on China’
  • Tags:

10 Steps to the Edge of the Abyss

March 3rd, 2023 by Edward Lozansky

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

At this moment, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Doomsday Clock now stands at only 90 seconds before midnight. Thus, as we move closer and closer to a nuclear World War 3, why not identify the major steps that took us to this dangerously slippery road? Who knows, perhaps this exercise could help to bring some perspective to those who are pushing us into oblivion. They have families and children too. Sometimes even the greatest villains have the moment of repentance.

Here is my take of the ten such major events in the chronological order and those responsible for them:

1. 1998 – Beginning of NATO expansion – Bill Clinton

Many prominent former US government officials, members of Congress, diplomats, and foreign policy experts have objected to this expansion. “We’ll be back on a hair-trigger,” said Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a New York Democrat, during the debates in the Senate. Moynihan continued: “We’re talking about nuclear war. It is a curiously ironic outcome that at the end of the Cold War we might face a nuclear Armageddon.”

Senator Joseph Biden (D-Delaware), while calling Moynihan “the single most erudite and informed person in the Senate,” said he disagreed with him, and pushed for NATO’s expansion.

2.  2004 – Abrogation of ABM treaty – George W. Bush

This is what Bush said in November 2001 following Putin’s support for the Afghan operation a month earlier:

“A lot of people never really dreamt that an American President and a Russian President could have established the friendship …. to establish a new spirit of cooperation and trust so that we can work together to make the world more peaceful….I brought him to my ranch because, as the good people in this part of the world know, that you only usually invite your friends into your house…. a new style of leader, a reformer, a man who loves his country as much as I love mine…. a man who is going to make a huge difference in making the world more peaceful, by working closely with the United States.”

What a spirit of sanity from a man who would oversee a disastrous two terms in office which included the war in Iraq and an abrogation of one of the most strategic anti-nuclear war treaties.

3.  2008 – Push to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO – George W. Bush again

As Professor John Mearshimer stated in New Yorker “I think all the trouble in this case really started in April, 2008, at the NATO Summit in Bucharest, where afterward NATO issued a statement that said Ukraine and Georgia would become part of NATO. The Russians made it unequivocally clear at the time that they viewed this as an existential threat, and they drew a line in the sand.”

4.  2014 – Western backed and US coordinated Coup in Ukraine sets up the cornerstone of the current crisis – overseen by the duo of Joe Biden and Victoria Nuland

After two decades of eastward NATO expansion, this crisis was triggered by the West’s attempt to replace the democratically-elected President Yanukovich and his administration who were against Ukraine joining NATO with the new anti-Russia team that will be for it.

5.  2015 – Minsk Peace Accords are supported by the UN Security Council but sabotaged by the US, EU, and Ukraine – Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and the EU leadership.

As was discovered years later, the premise of the accords was designed as a dishonest fraud to buy time to arm Ukraine and prepare for the future war with Russia.

6. 2016 – Russia is accused of hacking DNC files – Hillary Clinton and the Deep State

According to former chief NSA security official William Binney, and many other intelligence professionals, substantial evidence has come to light indicating that the DNC hack was probably an inside job that was perpetrated by Democrats within the committee.

7. 2017 – Russiagate scandal is unleashed to derail Trump’s Presidency – Hillary Clinton and the Deep State.

All Russiagate traces lead to Clintonites, who paid Perkins Coie to hire the Beltway smear-specialists of Fusion GPS to draw up and promote the British spy Christopher Steele’s fake allegations.

8. 2018 – Russia is accused of executing operation Hunter’s “Laptop from Hell” – Joe Biden and Deep State

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said Hunter Biden’s laptop was not Russian disinformation but a “domestic disinformation campaign for political reasons” which in Ratcliffe’s words “is a disgrace.” Joe Biden, his administration,  media, and 51 ex-national security officials,  lied about this. They included former Obama CIA Director John Brennan, former Obama DNI James Clapper, and former CIA director, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, among others.

9.  2021 – Rejection of Russia’s proposals for the mutual security guarantees – Joe Biden

President Biden didn’t accept Vladimir Putin’s proposals that included a provision denying Ukraine’s entrance into the NATO.  There were additional items for negotiation which could lead to the exit from crisis but Biden decided otherwise.

10. 2022 – Destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines – Joe Biden

According to many experts, and the famous Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh who got firsthand information from an insider whistleblower, this destruction was done on the direct order from Biden. He denies it but if you had to choose between constantly lying Joe and the most respected American journalist with a high professional reputation who would you believe?

2023 – Here we are – On the Edge of the Abyss.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 PressTV

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 10 Steps to the Edge of the Abyss

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

One year after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, a new report from the Oakland Institute, War and Theft: The Takeover of Ukraine’s Agricultural Land, exposes the financial interests and the dynamics at play leading to further concentration of land and finance.

“Despite being at the center of news cycle and international policy, little attention has gone to the core of the conflict — who controls the agricultural land in the country known as the breadbasket of Europe. Answer to this question is paramount to understanding the major stakes in the war,” said Frédéric Mousseau, Oakland Institute’s Policy Director and co-author of the report.

The total amount of land controlled by oligarchs, corrupt individuals, and large agribusinesses is over nine million hectares — exceeding 28 percent of Ukraine’s arable land. The largest landholders are a mix of Ukrainian oligarchs and foreign interests — mostly European and North American as well as the sovereign fund of Saudi Arabia. Prominent US pension funds, foundations, and university endowments are invested through NCH Capital, a US-based private equity fund.

Several agribusinesses, still largely controlled by oligarchs, have opened up to Western banks and investment funds — including prominent ones such as Kopernik, BNP, or Vanguard — who now control part of their shares. Most of the large landholders are substantially indebted to Western funds and institutions, notably the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) and the World Bank.

Western financing to Ukraine in recent years has been tied to a drastic structural adjustment program that has required austerity and privatization measures, including the creation of a land market for the sale of agricultural land. President Zelenskyy put the land reform into law in 2020 against the will of the vast majority of the population who feared it would exacerbate corruption and reinforce control by powerful interests in the agricultural sector. Findings of the report concur with these concerns. While large landholders are securing massive financing from Western financial institutions, Ukrainian farmers — essential for ensuring domestic food supply — receive virtually no support. With the land market in place, amidst high economic stress and war, this difference of treatment will lead to more land consolidation by large agribusinesses.

The report also sounds the alarm that Ukraine’s crippling debt is being used as a leverage by the financial institutions to drive post-war reconstruction towards further privatization and liberalization reforms in several sectors, including agriculture.

“This is a lose-lose situation for Ukrainians. While they are dying to defend their land, financial institutions are insidiously supporting the consolidation of farmland by oligarchs and Western financial interests. At a time when the country faces the horrors of the war, the government and Western institutions must listen to the calls made by the Ukrainian civil society, academics, and farmers to suspend the land law and all land transactions. The necessity to prioritize an agricultural model no longer dominated by oligarchy and corruption, where land and resources are controlled by and benefit all Ukrainians, is the way forward for post war reconstruction,” Mousseau concluded.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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: View of the wheat field during the harvesting season near Krasne village, Ukraine July 5, 2019 © FAO / Anatolii Stepanov

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Amidst Chaos of War, a New Report Exposes the Stealth Take-over of Ukrainian Agricultural Land

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Ukraine is the first flashpoint in a great power struggle between the United States and China. After years of shifting its industries to low-wage locations around the world, the US finds itself steadily losing market-share to a faster-growing and more resourceful China. By most estimates, China’s economy will overtake the United States by 2035 at which point, Beijing will be in a much better position to shape international trade relations in a way that promotes its own interests. With growth comes power, and that rule will certainly apply to China as well.

China has emerged as an industrial powerhouse that sits at the very epicenter of the most populous and fastest growing region in the world. It is for that reason that the United States has initiated a series of provocations on the island of Taiwan and in the South China Sea. The US has abandoned all hope of prevailing over China through conventional free market competition. Instead, the US plans to engage China militarily in a desperate attempt to drain its resources, garner broader support for economic sanctions and isolate isolate China from its regional trading partners. It is a risky and disruptive plan that could backfire spectacularly, but Washington is moving forward regardless. US foreign policy mandarins and their globalist allies will not accept an outcome in which China is the world’s biggest and most powerful economy. This is from an article at China Macro Economy:

Although the pace of China’s economic rise has slowed in recent years, it appears on track to end the United States’ lengthy run as the world’s largest economy by around 2035, according to the latest projection by economists at Goldman Sachs.

The new estimate is 10 years later than the investment bank had predicted in 2011. But economists Kevin Daly and Tadas Gedminas said that potential growth in China still remains significantly higher than in the US.

“China has already closed most of the gap with US GDP,” they said in a report published on Tuesday, adding that China’s gross domestic product has risen from 12 per cent of the US’ in 2000 to a little under 80 per cent.

China’s annual economic growth will be around 4 per cent from 2024 to 2029, compared with 1.9 per cent in the US, according to the report, which projects what the global economy will look like through 2075….

The US dollar’s exceptional strength over the past 10 years is another reason for the 10-year revision in when China’s economy will become No 1, Daly added… But the US dollar’s strength versus the Chinese yuan is likely to diminish over the coming decade,providing more ground for China to overtake the US, according to the report.

The report also projected that the weight of global GDP will shift more towards Asia over the next 30 years, and that the world’s five largest economies in 2050 will be China, the United States, India, Indonesia and Germany.” (“China GDP to surpass US around 2035, years later than previously expected, Goldman Sachs predicts”, China Macro Economy)

Naturally, the financialization of the US economy has greatly impacted America’s prospects for the future. The rise of Wall Street has led to a myriad of debt-leveraging scams that have enriched a handfull of wealthy bankers while diverting trillions in capital to unproductive activities. At the same time, the absence of any coherent industrial policy has triggered the flight of tens of thousands of businesses and factories that relocated to countries that offer an endless supply of low-wage labor. The problem, of course, is that mounting policy errors eventually lead to a drop-off in productivity which allows other, more ambitious countries to fill the void. In short, the Chinese Miracle is largely attributable to financialization and the short-sighted policies that allowed US corporations to move their industries elsewhere rather than provide incentives for them to stay in America. Bottom line: China’s economy is overtaking the US and there is nothing short of nuclear war that can reverse that situation.

In recent weeks, there has been a steady uptick in negative coverage of China in the media along with the predictable attacks on President Xi Jinping. Americans have seen this show many times before and should have a clear understanding of what it means. The demonization of foreign leaders is always the first step towards war. The media led the charge against Saddam, Qaddafi, Milosevic, Putin and countless others. Now China’s Jinping is in the imperial crosshairs. The names change, but the process remains the same. Already, the provocations, sanctions and slanders have begun to pile-up even while brainwashed Americans are led by-the-nose to another bloody conflict.

If there is a war between the two countries, the economic fallout is likely to be catastrophic. Consider, for a minute, how many American and European companies would be severely impacted by a US-China conflict. Here’s an excerpt from an article at Registration China:

By the end of 2020, a total of 1,040,480 foreign companies were registered in Mainland China, the Official data was provided by the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM)…. According to the official data, China had established a total of 961,000 Foreign-Invested Enterprises (FIE) until the end of 2018, with the actual use of foreign capital of US $2.1 trillion…. The results show that the number of foreign-invested enterprises is keep on increasing in 2021… (“How many Foreign Companies in China?”, GWBMA

1 million foreign-owned companies in China? That is simply astonishing.

And how do these companies generate their profits?

They generate profits by selling their products to the people back home. Check out this excerpt from an older article at NBC News which explains how it works:

“If the United States does decide to impose tariffs on China, Chen said, American companies operating in China, which account for more than 60 percent of China’s exports to the United States, would surely be hurt the most. ‘In the end,’ Chen said, ‘America is the one that needs to adjust.’

“While some analysts have predicted that China would soon start to let the yuan appreciate, Chen’s interview illustrated the fact that there is a strong lobby in China opposing revaluation. One reason why a revaluation would be dangerous for China, Chen said, is that profit margins for Chinese exporters are tiny — ranging from 1.7 to two percentage points.” (“China’s commerce minister: U.S. has the most to lose in a trade war” NBC News)

“American companies… account for more than 60 percent of China’s exports to the United States”? Is that possible? In other words, US companies that moved to their businesses to China are making money off many of the same people they laid off in order to generate bigger profits.

And, at the same time, the profits for the host-nation (China) are a measly 1.7 percent; hardly enough to make it worth their while. The multinationals are making the windfall, not China. So why is China blamed for America’s shrinking share of global output? As Carolyn Bartholomew said in The American Prospect some years ago:

“China policy has, over the past two decades, been driven by the interests of the multinational corporations, and those global firms have benefited from many of China’s policies.Starting several decades ago, it was a handful of the exporting elite — Boeing, Motorola, and GE among them — who argued persuasively to the Bush, Clinton, and Bush administrations that U.S. economic interests would be served if only these companies had access to the Chinese consumer…… Today, of course, we see the result of that sort of thinking. With the global economic crisis, American workers have ended up without jobs and without pension funds.

“….At the behest of U.S. based multinationals, Washington has championed the causes of corporate interests masquerading as free trade.” (“The Great Industrial Wall of China”, Carolyn Bartholomew, The American Prospect)

So, the question is: Aren’t we blaming China for policies that were pushed through by powerful corporations and their plutocrat bosses?

It certainly looks that way. And, if that is the case, then we can assume that Washington’s drive to war is not fueled by anxiety over which country’s economy will be bigger than the others, but by the Chinese government’s resistence to the political meddling and machinations of foreign oligarchs. That’s what’s really going on. Billionaire elites want to insinuate themselves into the political apparatus just like they have nations across the west, but the Communist government won’t allow it. Take a look at this excerpt from an article that author Ron Unz wrote more than ten years ago:

The rise of China surely ranks among the most important world developments of the last 100 years…. and the Chinese economy poised to surpass our own before the end of this decade...

During the three decades to 2010, China achieved perhaps the most rapid sustained rate of economic development in the history of the human species, with its real economy growing almost 40-fold between 1978 and 2010. In 1978, America’s economy was 15 times larger, but according to most international estimates, China is now set to surpass America’s total economic output within just another few years….

Furthermore, the vast majority of China’s newly created economic wealth has flowed to ordinary Chinese workers, who have moved from oxen and bicycles to the verge of automobiles in just a single generation. While median American incomes have been stagnant for almost forty years, those in China have nearly doubled every decade, with the real wages of workers outside the farm-sector rising about 150 percent over the last ten years alone....

A World Bank report recently highlighted the huge drop in global poverty rates from 1980 to 2008, but critics noted that over 100 percent of that decline came from China alone: the number of Chinese living in dire poverty fell by a remarkable 662 million, while the impoverished population in the rest of the world actually rose by 13 million. ..

Over the last decade alone, China quadrupled its industrial output, which is now comparable to that of the U.S…

Against the backdrop of remarkable Chinese progress, America mostly presents a very gloomy picture. …Over the last 40 years, a large majority of American workers have seen their real incomes stagnate or decline. ...

Decay of Constitutional Democracy

The central theme of Why Nations Fail is that political institutions and the behavior of ruling elites largely determine the economic success or failure of countries. If most Americans have experienced virtually no economic gains for decades, perhaps we should cast our gaze at these factors in our own society….

Our Extractive Elites

When parasitic elites govern a society along “extractive” lines, a central feature is the massive upward flow of extracted wealth, regardless of any contrary laws or regulations. Certainly America has experienced an enormous growth of officially tolerated corruption as our political system has increasingly consolidated into a one-party state controlled by a unified media-plutocracy….

A society’s media and academic organs constitute the sensory apparatus and central nervous system of its body politic, and if the information these provide is seriously misleading, looming dangers may fester and grow. A media and academy that are highly corrupt or dishonest constitute a deadly national peril…. America’s own societal information system is vastly more skilled and experienced in shaping reality to meet the needs of business and government leaders, and this very success does tremendous damage to our country….

… we must admit that Richard Lynn, a prominent British scholar, has been correct in predicting for a decade or longer that the global dominance of the European-derived peoples is rapidly drawing to its end and within the foreseeable future the torch of human progress and world leadership will inevitably pass into Chinese hands.” (“China’s Rise, America’s Fall; Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?, Ron Unz, The American Conservative

Prescient words, indeed, but not entirely unexpected given the deep polarization and political dysfunction in the western democracies. If similar divisions exist in China, they certainly aren’t apparent to the outsider. What an objective critic sees is a long-repressed country whose explosive energy has been skillfully harnassed by a ruling body that has raised nearly 800 million people out of poverty (an unprecedented and historic achievement) while– at the same time– creating a socially-unifying goal (The Belt and Road Initiative) that serves as the shared vision for the future.

The Biden administration is commited to containing China in a bid to maintain its predominance in the global order. But Washington has no grand multi trillion-dollar infrastructure plan that would serve as a substitute for China’s Belt and Road project. In fact, Washington has no vision for the future at all. What Washington offers is another century of sanctions, regime change and war. It would be far better for the world if China was allowed to move ahead with its massive global-integration project without the threat of US intervention, meddling or violence. Unfortunately, the Biden team has other things in mind.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 The Unz Review.

Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). 

All images in this article are from TUR except for the featured image which is from OneWorld

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on China’s Turn. America’s Hyper-Financialized Economic System Is No Match for China’s Government-Directed Investment Model.
  • Tags: , ,

Last Month’s Most Popular Articles (February)

March 3rd, 2023 by Global Research News

Canada’s Youngest Athletes, Ages 6-13 Are Dying Suddenly: COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates for Children Playing Sports Were a Crime…

Dr. William Makis, February 23, 2023

We Are Being Smashed Politically, Economically, Medically and Technologically by the Elite’s ‘Great Reset’: Why? How Do We Fight Back Effectively?

Robert J. Burrowes, February 21, 2023

Washington Is Out to Topple India’s Modi

F. William Engdahl, February 20, 2023

Video: Pfizer Criminality Exposed: Thailand’s Royal Princess In Coma after Covid Pfizer Vaccine Booster

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, February 9, 2023

Turkey-Syria Earthquake: Is This An Act of Terror?

Peter Koenig, February 22, 2023

Video: Romanian Senator Diana Iovanovici Sosoaca: “We have lived to witness the production of earthquakes on command.”

Sen. Diana Iovanovici Sosoaca, February 14, 2023

Setting the Record Straight; Stuff You Should Know About Ukraine

Mike Whitney, February 6, 2023

Age-stratified COVID-19 Vaccine-dose Fatality Rate. Israel and Australia

Prof Denis Rancourt, February 10, 2023

Game Over: Medicare Data Shows the COVID Vaccines Increase Your Risk of Dying

Steve Kirsch, February 27, 2023

The End of Excesses. The Collapse of Everything

Peter Koenig, February 20, 2023

How the Super-Rich Destroy Our Minds

Emanuel Pastreich, February 25, 2023

Video: America is at War with Europe

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 16, 2023

“Turbo Cancer” Post COVID-19 Vaccination? 21-Year Old Evan Fishel Died of Leukemia Only Four Days After Diagnosis.

Dr. William Makis, February 21, 2023

How America Took Out the Nord Stream Pipeline

Seymour M. Hersh, February 12, 2023

The Irish Slave Trade – The Forgotten “White” Slaves

John Martin, March 18, 2018

Blow-up of Nord Stream I and II: Did the German Chancellor and the President of the European Commission Betray the People of Germany and Europe?

Peter Koenig, March 2, 2023

Video: Pfizer’s “Secret” Report on the Covid Vaccine. Beyond Manslaughter. The Evidence is Overwhelming. The Vaccine Should Be Immediately Withdrawn Worldwide

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 10, 2023

1500 Scientists Say ‘There Is No Climate Emergency’ – The Real Environment Movement Was Hijacked

Mark Keenan, February 24, 2023

Video: Covid Vaccine, 55 Performers Collapsing or Dying on Stage or Live Camera in Late 2022 through 2023

Brian Shilhavy, February 3, 2023

Tavistock Et Al, Black Cars, Torn Jeans and LGBTQ: Social Engineering, Mind Manipulation

Peter Koenig, February 19, 2023

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Last Month’s Most Popular Articles (February)

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Damaging Immune Systems & Hearts of Canadian Children. Interview with Odessa Orlewicz

By Dr. William Makis and Odessa Orlewicz, March 02, 2023

Died suddenly. Horrible breaking news that Dr. Makis just dropped. Many dropped while playing their sports and many died in their sleep. Parents and grandparents must pay close attention to their vaccinated kids.

The Pfizer Vaccine: A Tale of Two Reports. “Money vs. Mortality”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 02, 2023

“Profits in the billions of dollars were the driving-force behind this diabolical agenda. “Killing is Good Business”. What we are witnessing is a crime against humanity on an unprecedented scale, affecting the lives of the entire population of our  planet”.

“COVID Lab Leaks” and Brick Walls

By Catte Black, March 02, 2023

The “covid was a lab leak” story was always a back door official narrative that reinforced the reality of the “pandemic” while appearing to be a suppressed “alternative”.

Kiev Regime Flooding Black Markets with NATO-sourced Weapons

By Drago Bosnic, March 02, 2023

It has been at least a year and a half since the political West drastically intensified its weapons shipments to the Kiev regime. Ever since, the black markets have been flooded with Western-made arms and munitions, some of which have even started running out from NATO stocks.

US Lawmakers Approve Resolution to Uphold Economic Sanctions on Syria

By The Cradle, March 02, 2023

The US House of Representatives on 27 February approved Resolution 132, which urges the White House to “remain committed” to implementing unilateral economic sanctions on quake-struck Syria.

Eight Alarming Cover-ups and Contradictions in the East Palestine Train Wreck Chemical Nightmare Now Spreading Across Multiple States

By Mike Adams, March 02, 2023

When it comes to explaining away the single largest ecological catastrophe in the history of America, the EPA and Ohio officials just can’t seem to get their stories straight. Every explanation they offer is a contradiction or cover-up. And they refuse to test for the one thing that poses the greatest health hazard of all: DIOXINS.

Iran: Who Is Poisoning Hundreds of Schoolgirls?

By Middle East Eye, March 02, 2023

Hundreds of schoolgirls in Iran have been hospitalised in recent weeks after being poisoned by what officials have described as an “intentional” gas attack. Although incidents have been reported across the country, the majority of cases have centred around the holy city of Qom.

Understanding the Logic of Canada Giving $2.26 Billion in Arms to Ukraine

By Yves Engler, March 02, 2023

According to a February 17 Le Devoir calculation, Canada has delivered $2.26 billion in weapons to Ukraine. The paper costed 17 different announcements, which include 4 heavy tanks, 4,200 single-use rocket launchers, an anti-aircraft missile system, 4 howitzers with 27,000 shells, 76 drone cameras, 247 armored vehicles and more.

Zionist Project Has Always Been Colonisation and Exclusion of Indigenous Palestinians

By Michael Jansen, March 02, 2023

The escalating violence in Israeli-occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank has been inevitable for a long time. The century-old Zionist project in Palestine has always been colonisation and exclusion or subjugation of indigenous Palestinians. The problem is, of course, that the Zionists and Israel launched their project as European colonisation of Asian, African and American territories was winding down and indigenous independence movements were rising up against colonial masters.

The UN Discusses Darkening the Skies to Combat Climate Change

By Igor Chudov, March 02, 2023

The UN is worried about climate change. As the efforts to reduce CO2 emissions are faltering, the UN is looking for more ways to cool the Earth. The UNEP’s report details ideas called “Solar Radiation Modification,” the gist of which is to reflect sunlight and prevent it from heating the surface of our planet.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Damaging Immune Systems & Hearts of Canadian Children. Interview with Odessa Orlewicz

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“New York. Protest for medical freedom, outside Pfizer headquarters, with protesters carrying signs for the Vax injured.

The dam is breaking, they have forgotten that they have to answer to the people. And in the end, the people will not be silenced!”

Video in English

In solidarity. We are dealing with a criminal entity

Did You Know? Pfizer Has a Criminal Record

Of significance, never mentioned by the media or acknowledged by our governments, Pfizer is the only Pharmaceutical Company which has a criminal record with the US Department of Justice.

To consult the Department of Justice’ historic decision click screenshot below

How on earth can we 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”?  

People were never informed. Both the media and the governments “turned a blind eye”.

Today, we are not dealing with an issue of “fraudulent marketing”: The roll out of Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine in December 2o2o is beyond criminality, it’s genocide.

$2.3 Billion  Medical Fraud settlement with Pfizer.

Statement by DOJ Associate Attorney General Thomas Perelli (2009)

*

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

Our thanks to @BPartisans from Twitter.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as 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.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Protest Movement Against Pfizer in New York City. Pfizer Has a Criminal Record
  • Tags: ,

“Covid Lab Leaks” and Brick Walls

March 2nd, 2023 by Catte Black

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The “covid was a lab leak” story was always a back door official narrative that reinforced the reality of the “pandemic” while appearing to be a suppressed “alternative”.

You know, one of those “suppressed alternatives” that end up in the WSJ.

It’s now going to be used to finally bury any hope that 2020-21 will wake us up to the full modern reality of geopolitics.

Remember the grotesque spectacle of supposedly ideologically opposed world leaders all in lockstep, promoting the non-existent “pandemic”, giving the same advice, talking the same talk?

Yeah, they’d much rather you didn’t remember that…

Do you recall how suddenly it was so obvious what they all were?

Little actors, with their lines carefully written for them, scurrying about doing as they’re bidden by forces we had heretofore barely realized were operational?

They suddenly looked so small & ridiculous didn’t they – in their masks & bio-hazard costumes. Speaking with one voice – that belonged to none of them.

We could see they were just employees toeing some company line.

ALL of them. East & West. Left & Right. Putin & Biden. Trump & Xi. All differences forgotten. All rivalries put aside.

Just to sell a lie.

And kill some people with “solutions” to a problem they knew did not exist.

Remember the shock factor as realization dawned – my God, they are literally all in this together and not even pretending otherwise.

Remember how it started to wake us up – like we had never been before?

We had to abandon all our “heroes” because they all abandoned us. Or made it clear they had never really been with us.

They took the covid shilling & got in line to read from the covid script & forced us to face the fact they had never been what we thought they were.

That the world in fact had never been what we thought it was.

I think covid was supposed to launch a brand new geopolitical narrative. I think it was to be the end of “conflict” and the start of the world “coming together” to face a “common threat”.

And I think, like good little actors our global leaders and our tame media were all given new scripts and new motivations. “Ok, guys, in this scene, you’re no longer enemies. You’re seeing that human beings need to work together to overcome terrible existential threats…”

The plan was to get that New Normal communitarian nightmare world all locked in place before we could react – or even get a bead on what was going on.

It was Agenda 2030 in quick time. Six months, not ten years. A bold headlong dash instead of the usual steady creep.

It was crazy.

And it didn’t work.

The fear factor never got high enough. The obvious non-existence of the “threat” became too clear too quickly to too many.

There was pushback. They had to halt and retreat.

And today the New Normal remains just a half-built prison.

They’re still working at it but they have gone back to slow and steady and the 2030 goal. One “shortage”, one act of censorship, one tiny new legislative incursion at a time.

And meanwhile what they REALLY need from us is that we all stop thinking about what we just saw.

It didn’t happen!

You didn’t see supposed autonomous and diametrically oppositional world leaders all suddenly stop being autonomous and oppositional – as if by magic.

You didn’t see them adopt totally new personas on cue and meekly start selling the same pandemic lies, and culling their populations with the same lockdowns & useless toxic vaccines.

It did not look for all the world as if they were all on the same side, working for the same goals.

You didn’t get any kind of glimpse behind the curtain.

You didn’t suddenly get to see how superficial and performative global politics must be.

The New Normal? Please. It was just the old normal, ok? – and frankly we’d be grateful if you’d stop using that particular phrase.

The Great Reset? What even was that? Big ole nothing burger is all.

NO. You were mistaken. Imagining things. Being a conspiracy theorist.

Global politics is NOT performative. Conflicts CAN’T all be turned off in a second when it becomes convenient to do so. And any impression they can was purely accidental/imaginary.

In fact look over there – a war has started! And we can’t stop or prevent it!

See, all nice and old normal.

Oh and ok -sigh… “covid” was a lab leak bioweapon…

We feel forced to admit it.

It was those pesky Russians.

Or maybe those awful Yanks.

Or the Chinese.

Or maybe the Iranians.

Or could be ISIS I guess.

Or Israel.

Pick your side. Any side. We don’t really mind which.

Just so long as you totally forget the most important lesson you are ever going to learn about the nature of geopolitics.

Because if you remember it we are rather screwed, and you will be able to set yourself free.

And we don’t want that do we.

What a dreadful unintended consequence of our crazy little covid gamble that would be!

An awake and free world! – Horrible.

No, boys and girls (and “others”), don’t be playing with any of that nonsense.

Just come back to what you know.

The old show. The familiar songs.

Just keep your seat in our theater.

You know you want to really. It’s warm in here. And kind of reassuring.

Just keep buying our tasty popcorn, keep watching our shows. Cheer your chosen good guys, hiss at your chosen baddies.

All we ask is you never – ever – notice that brick wall at the back.

Or if you do notice it – look away and pretend you don’t.

And by the way, have you ever thought that while prisons might not be free – they are lovely and safe.

Just a thought to leave with you – for future reference.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 OffGuardian.

Featured image is from OffGuardian


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as 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.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “Covid Lab Leaks” and Brick Walls
  • Tags:

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

It has been at least a year and a half since the political West drastically intensified its weapons shipments to the Kiev regime. Ever since, the black markets have been flooded with Western-made arms and munitions, some of which have even started running out from NATO stocks. As late as December, top Western officials have complained about this, including the Pentagon’s Deputy Inspector General for Investigations James R. Ives, who admitted that the US is aware of the lack of effective mechanisms to track Ukraine-bound NATO weapons. Several major US media have called for the Biden administration to send investigators to audit and oversee the use of more than $110 billion in US military and economic “aid” to the Kiev regime.

And yet, the true understanding of the massive scale of this is sorely lacking in the political West. Perhaps it is even being ignored, but the consequences are already there. In addition, while the mainstream propaganda machine is lionizing the Kiev regime forces, presenting them as some sort of mythical heroes supposedly “defending” Europe, the West and the so-called “Euro-Atlantic values”, the Neo-Nazi junta troops’ role is crucial in what can only be described as the world’s largest arms smuggling scheme. Also, this certainly doesn’t exonerate the rest of the Kiev regime and the corrupt oligarchs supporting it, as they too are getting their “slice of the cake”.

Corruption is endemic in Ukraine, but ever since the NATO-backed Neo-Nazi coup in 2014, it has worsened dramatically as the political West started showering the already crooked politicians and bureaucrats with tens of billions of dollars. Everyone from the managers of military warehouses, company and battalion commanders, top military officers, directors of the Kiev regime’s military-industrial complex to the defense minister himself, are engaged in essentially stealing NATO-sourced weapons and then reselling them on the Darknet. The list of those involved also includes the office of the president, the cabinet of ministers, security services and military intelligence.

Up until several years ago, the massive stocks of Soviet-era weapons in Ukraine were the main source of smuggled weapons. However, despite inheriting approximately 30% of the Soviet military, Ukraine somehow managed to expend most of it, much of it ending up on the black markets around the globe. The political West was perfectly aware of this, as NATO had a major role in reselling the weapons to terrorist groups they support in many of the targeted countries. And yet, they still went ahead and provided tens of billions in Western weapons and munitions to the same people smuggling their own for decades.

There’s even fierce competition among Kiev regime institutions for the right to control the extremely profitable arms smuggling business. This includes various intelligence services, such as the SBU and GUR. The latter is the main military intelligence agency which is supposed to play a major role in overseeing the transfer and distribution of NATO weapons. Thus, GUR has a substantial headstart in the arms smuggling scheme, which is causing a lot of envy and frustration in the SBU. Since August 2020, Kirill Budanov has been the head of GUR, a close ally of the Kiev regime frontman Volodymyr Zelensky, whose ties to the junta’s top officials allowed him to play a crucial role in the scheme.

On March 5, 2022, mere days after Russia launched its counteroffensive against NATO aggression in Europe, banker Denis Kireev, a member of the delegation for negotiations between Moscow and Kiev, was killed. According to the German publication Bild, Kireev “was shot dead by Ukrainian SBU counterintelligence while trying to avoid arrest.” Two days later, the GUR confirmed that Kireev was their employee, and Budanov himself stated that Kireev had been executed by the SBU, thus confirming that the fierce competition between the two agencies escalated from the very beginning of the special military operation (SMO). It is worth noting that the fact that the SBU and the GUR are “supervised” by various NATO intelligence services also played a major role in the conflict between the agencies.

For instance, the SBU is largely controlled by UK intelligence, primarily the infamous MI6. On the other hand, the GUR has been deeply connected to US services. The looming rivalry erupted after the political West intensified its arms shipments. Budanov’s headstart made it possible for the GUR to oversee the largest contracts for the transfer of Western weapons, further strengthening his position, a state of affairs the SBU didn’t take too kindly. Budanov also worked with intermediaries, such as the Incompass, a company headed by oligarch Sergei Slyusarenko. It is through such companies that GUR manages the supply of weapons from abroad.

Part of the funds embezzled through Incompass ends up in the pockets of Budanov and his associates, with the rest going to the presidential office and even Zelensky himself. In July 2022, the German SWR TV channel reported that Europol had identified “signs” of organized arms smuggling in Ukraine, but gave no further details in order not to incriminate the Kiev regime. The revelation came on the heels of a plane accident that happened in Greece, when a Ukrainian An-12BK aircraft belonging to Meridian, a company registered in Kiev, crashed on July 16, 2022. According to various reports, the airline was working closely with the Kiev regime, including the office of the president and the GUR.

Days before the crash, the plane made several flights to Ostrava (Czechia), Burgas (Bulgaria) and Rzeszow (Poland). The latter is the main NATO transport hub for supplying weapons and other military equipment to the Kiev regime. Each flight included “Stinger” MANPADS, “Javelin” and NLAW ATGMs. In total, approximately 12 tons of missile systems and munitions.

EU politicians, including German officials, also commented on the scandal, with Konstantin von Notz, spokesman for the Bundestag Home Affairs Committee from the “Greens”, acknowledging: “From the experience of the Kosovo war, we learned that weapons from conflict zones often fall into the hands of extremists and organized crime.” Von Notz demanded that the risk of weapons smuggling from Ukraine “be stopped at the international level.”

Additionally, the grain deal was also (ab)used extensively for this purpose, resulting in Russia’s decision to suspend it. The issue was discussed at a meeting of EU interior ministers on July 11, 2022, with Czech Defense Minister Yana Chernokhova admitting that “avoiding arms smuggling will be difficult – we did not achieve this in the former Yugoslavia and certainly will not be able to achieve it in Ukraine”.

This still leaves the question of whether Washington DC is even trying to oversee its massive arms shipments to the Neo-Nazi junta. Many US officials claim they’re unable to audit the weapons once they leave Poland, but the real issue is if they even want to know. Considering the nearly mythical status they’ve given to Zelensky, revealing his involvement with such criminal activities could be rather “uncomfortable” and might even backfire, further exacerbating the growing factionalism within the Neo-Nazi junta.

*

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

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The US House of Representatives on 27 February approved Resolution 132, which urges the White House to “remain committed” to implementing unilateral economic sanctions on quake-struck Syria.

In a 414-2 vote, lawmakers resolved that Washington must “remain committed to the protection of the Syrian people including by implementing the Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019.”

Republican representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie were the only ones to vote against the resolution. While neither has publicly commented on their vote, western media has painted their objection as a refusal to “mourn the victims” of last month’s earthquake.

“I am pleased the House overwhelmingly passed H. Res 132 … [which] urges the administration to remain committed to protecting the Syrian people, including by implementing the Caesar Act,” House Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul said following Monday’s vote, stressing his “concern” about the growing push by Arab states to normalize ties with Damascus.

McCaul added that enforcing unilateral sanctions on Syria “must include disallowing any energy deal for Lebanon that benefits the Assad regime.”

Lebanon has been waiting since 2021 for Washington to provide Egypt, Jordan, and Syria with sanctions waivers to launch a desperately-needed energy sharing plan that the US embassy in Beirut brokered.

In 2019, the US Congress passed the Caesar Act, which strictly prohibited states, companies, and individuals from doing business with the Syrian government. This crushing sanctions package came on top of existing punitive measures imposed on Damascus since 2011.

US-imposed sanctions on the war-torn nation have contributed to the tragedy of the Syrians at a time when the country is in the midst of a major humanitarian crisis, with the US occupation and the Kurdish Autonomous Administration controlling vast areas of lands rich in oil, gas, and crops in the northeast of the country, in addition to the Turkish occupation of other regions.

Late last year, the US congress approved yet another sanctions regime against Syria with the so-called Captagon Act, which “constitutes an integrated plan, security, political and economic, to penetrate more into the vicinity of Syria and encircle it and prevent access to raw materials,” according to Syrian researcher Bassam Abdullah.

Monday’s resolution came just weeks after the White House was forced to issue a temporary sanctions waiver for Syria to allow the unimpeded entry of humanitarian aid to the country.

It also coincided with the US occupation army’s latest oil smuggling operation in northeast Syria.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 source

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

When it comes to explaining away the single largest ecological catastrophe in the history of America, the EPA and Ohio officials just can’t seem to get their stories straight. Every explanation they offer is a contradiction or cover-up. And they refuse to test for the one thing that poses the greatest health hazard of all: DIOXINS.

Dioxins are always created when chlorinated compounds are burned within a certain temperature range. They’re also the most deadly chemical compounds known to humankind, and they can be toxic at parts-per-quadrillion concentrations.

Put another way, it seems that they cause toxic effects on the human body at concentrations 100,000 times lower than where glyphosate begins to show toxicity. That’s just an estimate. The real number may be a million times or more.

Yet the EPA — and Ohio authorities — all refuse to test for dioxins. Or, at least, they refuse to release the test numbers publicly. No doubt they already have their own secret dioxin test results, and they are panicked over those numbers, trying to figure out how to sweep this whole problem under the rug without having to face the reality of an evacuation order that will likely soon be necessary.

The entire town of East Palestine may ultimately have to be condemned, razed and decontaminated. Instead, the EPA is spreading the toxic waste across multiple states. The recent effort to ship over a million gallon of this toxic waste to Texas was thwarted over the weekend, with the EPA now redirecting that toxic waste to Indiana and Ohio, the AP now reports.

And then there’s the issue of the tens of thousands of farms downwind from this disaster… and the countless families who depend on those farms for their food and livelihoods. If there really were no dioxins to be found, the EPA should have already conducted tests, found nothing and released the “all clear” test results publicly.

Why haven’t they done that?

It’s obvious: They’re covering up the dioxin contamination nightmare for as long as possible.

Here are just a few of the many contradictions now emerging from the EPA and Ohio government handling of this incident:

#1) Why are we told by the EPA that vinyl chloride toxic ignition fallout fumes are perfectly safe to live with, but carbon dioxide — necessary for all plant photosynthesis and rain forest growth — is a deadly “pollutant” that threatens human civilization?

Because “science.”

#2) Why are we told that the toxic chemical runoff from the firefighting water sprayed on the chemical fire is so toxic that it has to be injected deep underground so that it won’t surface for thousands of years, but also that the land and water where all those chemicals rained down is now perfectly safe and there’s nothing to worry about?

When it falls on your farm, it’s “safe.” When it falls on the sidewalk, it’s a deadly hazardous waste that must be disposed by an EPA-licensed hazardous waste disposal company.

#3) If the Texas-based hazardous waste disposal company Texas Molecular is already licensed to dispose of vinyl chloride, then why didn’t the railroad just mop up the vinyl chloride and send it to Texas Molecular instead of setting it on fire, creating millions of gallons of contaminated firefighting water?

Just think, you would only be dealing with a few hundred thousand gallons of toxins instead of millions of gallons of toxic water (plus the toxic cloud, fallout, etc.). Whatever happened to the idea of “containment?”

#4) Why are both the EPA and Ohio state authorities completely unwilling to test the surrounding farms for dioxins (which are toxic at parts-per-quadrillion exposure concentrations) but they claim everything is safe enough for families, children and pregnant women to return?

It won’t be long before children are born with birth defects and missing limbs. The EPA already knows this. Maybe they plan to “Tiffany Dover” all the deformed babies or call for post-birth abortions to hide the evidence of their crimes against humanity…

#5) Why do people who already left East Palestine and healed from their original exposure start getting sick again when they return to East Palestine?

Breitbart.com reports on this, revealing how people who feel better after they leave the area begin to experience horrible symptoms as they return.

“Maybe it’s something in the air…”

#6) Every decision made by authorities about how to handle the chemicals had the result of SPREADING them, not containing them

You couldn’t write a better script on how to spread toxic chemicals across multiple states, running the toxic water to Texas and Indiana, while unleashing a toxic cloud over multiple northeastern states. If containment was the goal, the EPA failed miserably.

If only they could contain these toxic molecules as effectively as they contained news about Hunter Biden’s laptop…

#7) If East Palestine first responders had 1.8 million gallons of water to spray on the fire that officials ignited, then they also had enough water to put out the initial small fires that they claim placed the tanker cars at risk (which led to them emptying those cars and igniting the vinyl chloride).

Clearly they had millions of gallons of water available to put out fires. So why didn’t they put out the initial fire and stop this entire disaster from the beginning? Which genius came up with the idea, “Hey let’s set fire to these chemicals because that will make them go away…”

#8) We are told that they had to set fire to the vinyl chloride which had been emptied from the rail tanker cars in order to prevent the risk of a tanker car explosion causing shrapnel injuries, but if the vinyl chloride was already emptied from the tanker cars, the shrapnel explosion risk was already eliminated

In other words, the moment the tanker cars were emptied of the chemical, they no longer had any justification for starting any fire at all. So why did they do it, then?

Likely answer: Somebody ordered them to do it, and they needed a cover story.

Straight-up ecological terrorism, disguised as a railroad accident.

We’re not actually being ruled by idiots, you see. We’re being gaslit by terrorists.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 NaturalNews.com

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Eight Alarming Cover-ups and Contradictions in the East Palestine Train Wreck Chemical Nightmare Now Spreading Across Multiple States

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Ministers briefly considered ordering all domestic cats in Britain to be killed amid fears they could be spreading Covid, a former health minister has said.

Lord Bethell said the concern about pets underlined how little was known about the disease at the outbreak of the pandemic in 2020.

“What we shouldn’t forget is how little we understood about this disease,” he told Channel 4 News. “There was a moment we were very unclear about whether domestic pets could transmit the disease.

“In fact, there was an idea at one moment that we might have to ask the public to exterminate all the cats in Britain. Can you imagine what would have happened if we had wanted to do that?

“And yet, for a moment there was a bit of evidence around that so that had to be investigated and closed down.”

Lord Bethell was Matt Hancock’s deputy in the Department of Health and Social from 2020 to 2021.

His comments came after The Telegraph began publishing details of tens of thousands of leaked Whatsapp messages exchanged between Mr Hancock and other senior figures during the pandemic.

Mr Hancock is fighting claims he rejected advice while health secretary to give Covid tests to all residents going into English care homes.

Mr Hancock’s spokesman said a report claiming he rejected clinical advice on care home testing was “flat wrong” because he was told it was “not currently possible” to carry out the tests.

 ***

Click here to read the full article on The Independent.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “Exterminate All Cats in Britain”: Culling Pet Cats at Start of Pandemic, Says Former U.K Minister

Iran: Who Is Poisoning Hundreds of Schoolgirls?

March 2nd, 2023 by Middle East Eye

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Hundreds of schoolgirls in Iran have been hospitalised in recent weeks after being poisoned by what officials have described as an “intentional” gas attack.

Although incidents have been reported across the country, the majority of cases have centred around the holy city of Qom.

BBC Persian reported that as many as 800 students in Qom had been poisoned so far, and that a number of cases had also been detected in the capital, Tehran. Younes Panahi, a deputy health minister, told media that the poisonings were likely intentional – though he later claimed he was misquoted – while Mohammad Jafar Montazeri, the attorney general, has also described them as “probably intentional”.

A doctor who treated some poisoned students told Middle East Eye the victims had “smelled something like the smell of sewage and salt, and had symptoms of dizziness, nausea and difficult breathing”.

He added that a number of those he treated said they had “seen a suspicious thing thrown inside the school”.

Yet so far, no one has been able to pinpoint who might be responsible, with some suggesting an attempt by ultra-conservatives to disrupt the education of girls and others pointing to anti-government opposition groups.

MEE spoke to a teacher in one of the schools affected by the poisoning. The teacher, who asked to remain anonymous, said two of her colleagues had also been hospitalised.

“The smell of the poison is like a rotten smell, but it is not gas – it is close to gas smell and at the same time it is something like a thick and pungent smell,” she explained.

“The students faced severe coughs and difficulty in breathing and some were hospitalised.”

Iran’s health ministry has been keen to stress that the effects of the poison have been mild, primarily causing “muscle weakness, lethargy, and nausea for a few hours”.

However, the repeated incidents have left parents deeply worried about sending their children to school, with the lack of information about the nature of the poison – and the culprits – further heightening fears.

“Of 550 people, only four students come to the school. The students are also terrified,” said the teacher.

“The poison effects are to the extent that some of the students aren’t able to walk for a few days.”

‘Extremist’ attacks?

A number of theories have spread about the possible motives for the poisoning of schoolgirls. A popular one is that religious fundamentalist groups may be attempting to prevent the education of women and girls.

One conservative cleric based in Qom, speaking on condition of anonymity, said he believed it could be the work of  “extremists” inspired by the Taliban in neighbouring Afghanistan.

“The number of such extremists is not too much and they can mostly be found in Mashhad, Shiraz, Qom and Isfahan, but they are really a little minority,” he said.

He said these groups viewed the education of girls as spreading “corruption” and undermining both family and Islamic values.

“Such persons’ perception of the religion is reactionary, ridiculous and unwise,” he added.

Other religious and political figures concurred with this theory.

Mohammad Ali Abtahi, a cleric who was a senior figure in the reformist government of Mohammad Khatami, compared the possible culprits to the Africa-based militant group Boko Haram.

“Extremism, especially the religious ones, are the biggest danger to all societies,” warned Abtahi, while calling on the security apparatus to identify and arrest the extremists.

Meanwhile, Masoumeh Ebtekar, former vice president for women and family affairs, tweeted that the police and judiciary needed to act “immediately” and compared the incidents to a series of acid attacks in the city of Isfahan in 2014, which allegedly targeted women not wearing “appropriate” hijab.

Counterterrorism calls

A number of people have called on the government to treat the poisoning as terror related and launch counterterrorism investigations.

According to the state-backed Fars News Agency, the security services arrested three suspects on Tuesday in connection with the poisoning.

Fars said there were “unconfirmed” reports linking the poisonings to the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), an Iranian opposition group dedicated to the overthrow of the Islamic Republic.

Although the MEK – who initially supported the 1979 Islamic Revolution, before falling out with the post-Shah administration – carried out numerous deadly bomb attacks in the country in the 1980s, in recent decades they have focused primarily on lobbying foreign governments and campaigning internationally against the Islamic Republic.

On Wednesday, the state-backed Tasnim news agency said there had been another gas attack in the northern city of Ardabil which had forced the hospitalisation of 108 students. The news agency also reported further poisonings at three schools in Tehran.

The ambiguity around the attacks and the lack of information from the government have stoked anger across the country.

Parents have protested outside Qom’s governorate building, calling for more to be done to protect their children.

The poisonings have also come in the wake of months of mass demonstrations that focused on the treatment of women in the country, sparked by the death of Kurdish woman Mahsa Amini in custody following her arrest for “inappropriate hijab”.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 the Public Domain

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Over the past year Ottawa has given Ukraine over $2 billion in weapons. The size of the arms donation is unprecedented in Canadian history.

According to a February 17 Le Devoir calculation, Canada has delivered $2.26 billion in weapons to Ukraine. The paper costed 17 different announcements, which include 4 heavy tanks, 4,200 single-use rocket launchers, an anti-aircraft missile system, 4 howitzers with 27,000 shells, 76 drone cameras, 247 armored vehicles and more. On Friday the Liberals announced they were sending four more heavy tanks, an armored recovery vehicle and more than 5,000 rounds of ammunition.

Since World War II, this quantity of arms donations is unprecedented. The only example that may be comparable is the arms Canada transferred through NATO’s Mutual Aid Program in the decade after the alliance was created. Between 1950 and 1958 Ottawa donated $1.53 billion ($9 billion today) in ammunition, fighter jets, military training, etc. to European NATO countries.

Through this program Canada armed France, Belgium and Britain as they violently suppressed independence struggles in Algeria, Congo, Kenya and elsewhere. In reference to France’s bid to suppress the Vietnamese independence movements, external affairs minister Lester Pearson told Parliament in 1953 that “the assistance we have given to France as a member of the NATO association may have helped her recently in the discharge of some of her obligations in Indo-China.” With 400,000 French troops in Algeria in 1956 Canada transferred hundreds of thousands of bullets to that country.

During the 1950s and 60s Ottawa armed the colonial powers rather than the independence movements. In subsequent years it sold significant amounts of weapons to the US, not the Vietnamese resistance. Likewise, it armed the South African apartheid regime in the 1970s, not Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress. During the 1980s Canadian firms sold Indonesia weapons, not the East Timorese independence movement.

Today, Canada is selling weapons to Saudi Arabia, not the Houthis fighting a vicious foreign invasion of their country. Similarly, Canadian firms sell arms to Israel, not the Palestinians resisting an illegal occupation.

Just months before Russia’s invasion last year, Rwanda instigated a new wave of violence in its three-decade long destruction of eastern Congo. Sending a fraction of the weapons Canada has given Ukraine to Congo would likely end Rwanda’s violence. Or Ottawa could halt Kigali’s violence by severing aid to Rwanda and launching a major diplomatic campaign against it.

Similarly, if Canada and Europe announced a boycott of all contacts and trade with Israel until that country ended its system of apartheid and the illegal occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, change would come quickly.

If Ottawa were truly concerned about sovereignty and international law, wouldn’t it send weapons where they would be most effective in ending foreign aggression and the breaking of international law?

The truth is, rather than defend a country invaded by its neighbor, Canada’s massive arms shipments to Ukraine is designed to fuel and escalate an eight-year-old proxy war that Russia massively expanded 12 months ago. Last week foreign affairs minister Melanie Joly declared, “right now, it’s not time to talk about peace, it is time to arm them.”

Joly went on to say, “I never thought as a progressive politician that I would be saying that.” The foreign minister’s claim to be fighting for peace is nonsense. Amidst Russia massing 100,000 troops on its border with Ukraine 13 months ago, Joly traveled to Ukraine to promote NATO expansion, knowing it would increase the likelihood of Russia invading. Additionally, Joly ignored the Minsk II peace accord (the only time she mentioned it was the day after Vladimir Putin recognized the People’s Republic of Luhansk and Donetsk when she could blame Moscow for breaking the accord). Beginning in 2015 Canada’s Operation Unifier military training mission undermined the Minsk peace accord and helped make Ukraine a de facto member of NATO. A year earlier Ottawa helped overthrow elected president Victor Yanukovich who opposed Ukraine joining NATO.

Canada’s open conflict with Russia over the past decade is part of a historic geopolitical struggle to reduce that country’s size and influence. A small number of Canadians fought with the British during the 1850s Crimean war and 6,000 Canadians along with British, American, French and other allied troops invaded Russia in 1918. Afterwards Ottawa refused to recognize the Bolshevik government for more than a decade and promoted Eastern European nationalism during the Cold War. Since the breakup of the Soviet Union Ottawa has devoted significant resources to promoting anti-Russian forces in Ukraine. It immediately began funding anti-Russian Ukrainian civil society groups, which was on display with Canada’s significant role in the 2004 Orange Revolution.

Washington and Ottawa look set to continue fueling the fighting in Ukraine as part of the old geopolitical game. For supporters of the US empire billions of dollars in weapons is a price worth paying to weaken Russia. Hundreds of thousands of lives are not factored into the cost or can be ignored because they are Russians and Ukrainians.

Fortunately, cracks are appearing in the Canadian consensus when it comes to the policy of “fighting to the last Ukrainian”. On CBC The House last week Green party co-leader Jonathan Pedneault criticized “supplying weapons in active conflict areas” while a recent poll suggests the public is becoming increasingly weary of sending ever more arms. Canadians increasingly want peace talks.

Over the weekend, protests critical of Canadian policy were held in a half dozen cities. On Saturday in Montréal 150 rallied in the bitter cold under the banner “No to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. No to NATO’s encirclement of Russia”. They joined over 10,000 in Berlin and thousands in London over the weekend as well as thousands more in Washington DC and Munich the previous weekend.

More and more Canadians of conscience have decided it’s time to stop the madness. Time to end arms shipments now.

*

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

Yves Engler’s latest book is Stand on Guard for Whom?: A People’s History of the Canadian Military.

Featured image: Intertwined flags of the Ukraine and Canada. Image source: Euromaidan Press.

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A series of antiwar protests over the weekend saw Western European citizens in mass demanding their governments pursue diplomacy with Russia and halt arms shipments to Kiev. As the current conflict in Ukraine turned one year old, major demonstrations – which saw people united across the political spectrum – were seen in Germany, France, and Italy.

10,000 people gathered in Paris to protest against France’s membership in both NATO as well as the EU. Attendees also demanded an end to the French government’s military aid to Kiev. The demonstration, dubbed the “National March for Peace” was organized by the right-wing Les Patriotes party. According to the group’s leader Florian Philippot – who joined the Paris rally himself – similar but smaller protests were held at 30 other locations throughout the country on Sunday.

On Saturday, thousands of people participated in peace demonstrations in the Italian cities of Genoa and Milan. In Genoa, the rally focused on ending weapons shipments to Ukraine and was organized by union members and left-wing activists, whose slogan was “Lower weapons, raise wages.” 4,000 people from across Italy joined the Genoa protest, along with people from France and Switzerland as well, according to local media reports.

The Collective Autonomous Port Workers (CALP) helped organize the rally with the Italian communist party. They demanded the port of Genoa’s facilities no longer be used to facilitate arms shipments to Ukraine.

CALP’s Riccardo Rudino pointed out that “the conflict in Ukraine did not begin last year” but rather “in 2014, with the massacre of the Russian-speaking population of the Donbass.”

Following the U.S. backed 2014 coup in Kiev – which overthrew the government of former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych – Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula, while over 14,000 people were killed, including thousands of civilians, in Kiev’s war on the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk.

In London, a large group carried out a similar demonstration calling for peace in Ukraine and an end to the British government’s weapons transfers to Kiev. The event was held by Stop the War Coalition at Portland Place in Central London and was attended by former Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn.

Many thousands of people participated in a massive protest in central Berlin, where attendees railed against German military aid to Kiev. The protesters, who were massed at the Brandenburg Gate, demanded additionally that their government engage Russia in peace talks and bring the war in Ukraine to an end.

The organizers say as many as 50,000 people joined the “Uprising for Peace” demonstrations. However, the police offered a lower-end estimate of 13,000 people in attendance. The event was organized by Sahra Wagenknecht, a member of the Links Party (the Left Party) in Germany, as well as a feminist author and campaigner Alice Schwarzer.

Wagenknecht declared neo-Nazis were not welcome at the protest, but anyone else who desired peace “with an honest heart” was welcome to attend. During her speech at the event, Wagenknecht declared the creation of a “new, strong peace movement in Germany.”

She also observed that the myriad protestors were united by the fact that they do not feel represented by the government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz and his foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock, in their decision to supply Kiev with weaponry, including main battle tanks.

In a reference to the drastic escalation of Berlin’s involvement in the war since last year, some banners read “Helmets today, tanks tomorrow, the day after tomorrow your sons.”

Other banners carried by the protesters bore such anti war slogans as “Stop the Killing,” “Not My War, Not My Government,” and “Diplomats instead of grenades.”

Two weeks prior to the protest, Wagenknecht and Schwarzer published a “Manifest for Peace” which demanded that Scholz “stop the escalation in weapons deliveries.” The petition has reportedly garnered more than 650,000 signatures, including some prominent intellectuals and political figures.

This weekend’s massive protests in Berlin followed a smaller demonstration at the end of January in Nuremberg, where participants rallied against Scholz’s decision to provide Leopard 2 battle tanks to Kiev. This month, around 10,000 people also protested in Munich during the Munich Security Conference, where Western leaders discussed funding, arming and training Ukrainian forces “as long as it takes” to defeat Russia.

Also on Sunday, in southwestern Germany, protesters gathered at the Ramstein air base – where the Ukraine Defense Contact Group’s meetings on arming Kiev are held – calling for an end to the weapons deliveries while demanding the U.S. Air Force to “go home.”

In Nuremberg, protestors expressed their dire concerns that the German people were being dragged into another war with Russia. As one demonstrator commented “If we Germans get involved in a war, and I personally do not have a war with Russia, then for us Germans, based on history, it is the worst sign that we can send.” The demonstrator continued, “no war must go through Germany, neither with arms deliveries nor anything else, because otherwise, Germany will be in the middle of it again.” He believes this is just what “America wants.”

The latest protests in Germany took place against the backdrop of veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh’s bombshell report “How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline.”

Before the war began, Russia provided roughly a third of Europe’s gas, while Germany depended on Moscow for more than half of its gas supplies. After the Nord Stream pipelines were sabotaged, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to ship gas to Europe via an undamaged line in Nord Stream 2. This offer was quickly rejected by Berlin.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken celebrated the blasts in the Baltic Sea – which, according to Hersh, were caused by explosives planted by U.S. Navy divers and detonated with a sonar buoy dropped by a Norwegian spy plane. Blinken described the attack as a “tremendous strategic opportunity” to wean Europe off its dependency on cheap Russian energy “for the years to come.” Since the attack, which led to possibly the largest ever leak of methane gas, the U.S. and Norway have taken Russia’s place as Europe’s top natural gas suppliers.

As a result of the economic war on Russia led by the U.S., people across Europe have suffered skyrocketing gas prices and inflation, leaving some struggling to heat their homes during the frigid winter months. The strain is beginning to show, likely playing some role in motivating the spate of protest actions in recent days. Last year, tens of thousands attended similar demonstrations in Italy, Germany, France, and the Czech Republic, with many voicing outrage over pricey foreign aid to Ukraine as their living standards continue to plummet.

*

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

Connor Freeman is the assistant editor and a writer at the Libertarian Institute, primarily covering foreign policy. He is a co-host on Conflicts of Interest.

Will Porter is the assistant news editor of the Libertarian Institute and a staff writer and editor at RT.

Featured image is from TLI

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The escalating violence in Israeli-occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank has been inevitable for a long time. The century-old Zionist project in Palestine has always been colonisation and exclusion or subjugation of indigenous Palestinians. The problem is, of course, that the Zionists and Israel launched their project as European colonisation of Asian, African and American territories was winding down and indigenous independence movements were rising up against colonial masters.

Palestinians can no longer tolerate constant Israeli abuse by settlers who threaten and attack Palestinian children walking to school, farmers harvesting their olive crop, householders in their homes and drivers travelling from one West Bank urban enclave to another. Palestinians are prepared to respond with stones, gun-fire and Molotov cocktails to Israeli military raids on refugee camps, cities, towns and villages. Consequently, at least 65 Palestinians and a dozen Israelis have died violently this year. Last year was the most deadly for both sides since 2005.

Palestinians did not figure in the 120-year-old Zionist campaign to colonise Palestine. The slogan, “A land without a people for a people without a land”, was first adopted by Christian Zionists in 1843 and subsequently by Jewish Zionists although his was a false premise for colonisation. The man who proposed the founding of a “Jewish State”, Theodor Herzl did not use this slogan as he visited Palestine and knew it to be false.

Overtly, he adopted a paternalistic line toward native Palestinians and said they would benefit from contact with European Jewish colonists. However, covertly, he wrote in his diaries that Palestinians could be pushed across the borders of their country “surreptitiously”. This was, in fact, what happened and is happening but not “surreptitiously” — as an existential aspect of Israeli policy. The very reference of the land as “Palestine” and “Palestinians” as its inhabitants challenges Israel’s legitimacy.

But modern-day Israelis cannot deny that Palestine and Palestinians have a long history. There is mention of “Philistines” in the Book of Genesis in the Old Testament. They were a sea-faring people thought to be from Crete who settled in southern Palestine in the 12th century BC about the same time as the Jewish tribes. They battled each other and the Canaanites who were the masters of the land. “Palalestine” rather than the names of the Jewish kingdoms was mentioned by the 5th century BC historian Herodotus to identify the district of Syria located between Egypt and Phoenicia.

Current attitudes toward Palestine and the Palestinian people were formed by British colonial rule of the country. This was rooted in the 1917 Balfour declaration which stated that the British government “viewed with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best efforts to facilitate this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine…” At that time, 92 per cent of the estimated 700,000 people in Palestine were Palestinian, 8 per cent were Jewish. Since then there has been a concerted effort to continue to deny Palestinians their identity as the indigenous people of the land.

At the time of Israel’s 1948 war of establishment, two-thirds of the population of Palestine was Palestinian. Consequently, if there was to be a Jewish state, the Zionists/Israelis had to clear the land they conquered of Palestinians. Of 1.37 million, 750,000 were driven from the 78 per cent of Palestine held by Israel and 150,000 remained in Israel. The former became “Arab refugees” and latter “Arab Israelis”. In the mouths of many if not most Israelis Palestinians became “Aravim”, aliens, inveterate enemies and, when they did not behave, “terrorists”. Their Palestinian origin was dismissed in the West.

The greatest contribution of Fateh’s leader Yasser Arafat was to put Palestine back on the map of the world, thereby propelling the Palestinian people to the forefront of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Arafat proclaimed victory on this issue in this protracted struggle in November 1974 in has address to the UN General Assembly when he proffered the gun or the olive branch as the means of resolving this conflict.

The Israelis chose the gun and colonisation of the 22 per cent of Palestine they conquered and occupied in 1967. Despite two Palestinian uprisings and promises of Palestinian independence in a truncated statelet, Israel has not wavered from this objective and has not been obstructed or sanctioned by the US, its primary sponsor, or complicit Europe and the United Nations.

This has allowed Israeli “settlers”, i.e., colonists to build up their numbers in East Jerusalem and the West Bank and, under Likud chief Binyamin Netanyahu, assume powerful positions in the government. Mainstream Israelis are largely responsible for the rise of the “settlers”, their legitimisation (while breaking international law by colonising occupied territory), and their entry into the mainstream. Before the settlers and the hard right took power, the mainstream majority ignored their ascendancy and did not visit the West Bank, occupied East Jerusalem or Gaza.

Many Israelis opted for “internal exile”, until a serious peace movement emerged during and after Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon with the aim of eliminating Arafat and the Palestinian Liberation Organisation. While peaceniks favoured a “two-state solution” involving the emergence of a Palestinian state alongside Israel, their governments, whether Likud or Labour, stepped up colonisation in the land needed for this state. Colonisation continued even after the 1993 Oslo Accords were signed on the White House lawn and there were expectations that a Palestinian state would emerge by 1999. It was hardy surprising that this did not happen. Instead, colonisation has accelerated and under the current settler-friendly Netanyahu government will continue apace.

For him and his ministers, “Aravim” and “terrorists” constitute an obstacle to colonisation and the realisation of the 19th century Zionist project.

The colonists’ storming and burning of the Palestinian West Bank town of Hawara last Sunday was a direct result of Israeli duplicity: Of espousing the “two-state solution” while continuing colonisation. The colonists justify the attack on Hawara and neighbouring towns by calling it “revenge” for the killing of two Israeli brothers earlier in the day. There are likely to be many more Hawaras in the massively one-sided struggle for Palestine. No longer considered by most of the world, including the pro-Israeli Western powers, as a non-people, Palestinians have no choice but to fight for their existence.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Zionist Project Has Always Been Colonisation and Exclusion of Indigenous Palestinians
  • Tags: , ,

Did We Just Start a Revolution? Ban the Jab Resolution

March 2nd, 2023 by Dr. Joseph Sansone

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Last week I presented our Ban the Jab resolution to the Lee County Florida Republican Party and it passed with 80-90% of the vote. Although, the Lee County GOP has thus far been unable to issue a press release because the wire services are claiming it goes against CDC standards and it incites fear. That’s right, after three years of media hysterics and fear mongering, a press release exposing the C19 injections as bioweapons is inciting fear.

This issue is so popular that it has already started trickling out to become national news without a press release. Last Thursday I was interviewed on Stew Peters, and then Friday, Dr. Francis Boyle was on Stew Peters speaking about the bioweapon. Dr. Francis Boyle was the author of the 1989 Bioweapons and Antiterrorism Act, and is one of the world’s most credible authorities on this topic. Dr. Boyle is clear that the C19 injections meet the legal definition of a biological weapon according to the 1989 bioweapons act that he drafted as well as Florida statute.

The information provided in these interviews lays out the sense of urgency to this issue. The Biden administration is working with the World Health organization to basically over throw the United States government. Essentially, the WHO treaty is written in a way that it will provisionally take effect in May. Naturally, another pandemic is likely planned before the United States Senate would vote down ratification of the treaty. This would mean that WHO could force lockdowns, vaccination, masks, etc.

I know it is not constitutional, but they are doing it. The Supreme Court is compromised. According to Dr. Francis Boyle, they have crossed the Rubicon on this issue. Dr. Boyle is very clear that this is an existential threat to the United States. Most politicians are pretending this treason is not occurring. There are a few things that need to occur. The first is to withdraw from WHO. This is not likely because Biden is collaborating with WHO in this treason and attempt at a global coup.

The Republicans in the House of Representatives need to cut funding for WHO. As much political pressure as humanly possible needs to be put on House members. They need to become afraid of the public if they do not defund WHO.

On the state level, states need to pass simple laws stating that they will not comply with any WHO decisions, and are not under the jurisdiction of WHO. Honestly, secession may need to be on the table.

The other option to save our republic is to get an indictment of Fauci and pharma executives before the coup is completed. Dr. Boyle outlines this in his book Resisting Medical Tyranny. Dr. Boyle argues that the federal government is too corrupt and that it is at the state level that these indictments should be sought.

There are approximately 400 local prosecutors’ offices around the country. A state attorney general, state attorney’s office, which covers several counties, or even a county prosecutor where they have them, could indict Fauci and pharma executives for murder and conspiracy to commit murder. According to Dr. Boyle, once the first indictment is issued the house of cards will fall.

The Ban the Jab Resolution is important. It is an official statement of policy of the Republican Party for Lee County Florida. The resolution states that C19 injections are biological weapons, violate the Nuremberg code, and calls for Governor DeSantis and the legislature to ban the injections, and for the attorney general to confiscate all vials of the bioweapons and conduct a forensic audit.

It also shifts the debate from mandates to banning. Sometimes it is true that the best defense is a good offense. Weapons wise we essentially are using a bottle cap and we moved the needle on this more than our worthless politicians have since the shots came out.

As mentioned, the news wire blocked the Lee GOP press release. It is totally absurd that one of the reasons was that it incited fear. A press release about a vote from one of the major political parties is blocked by a newswire because it incites fear. This is after three years of terrorizing the American public. Is this an illegal in kind donation to the other party?

Still, the word is trickling out and it is having an effect. I was told that the Florida Republican Assembly, which is a statewide conservative organization passed the ban the jab resolution unanimously, they are just waiting for a couple signatures. They may start hitting up the phones once officially passed. Collier County will vote Monday March 6, Santa Rosa County is supposed to take it up Wednesday March 9. Hillsborough County is supposed to take it up in April. This is with censorship. Imagine if a proper press release was allowed.

If a few more counties fall like dominoes then this Ban the Jab movement may take on momentum of its own. If that occurs the governor of Florida will have to act. I also know of people in Georgia and North Carolina that are planning on introducing the Lee GOP Ban the Jab resolution.

The revolt within local Republican parties is the first phase. This will build momentum and pressure will increase on politicians on the local and state level. We punched through in Lee County Florida. If we punch through statewide and ban the jab, other states will follow, and so will indictments.

So back to the question in the title. Did we just start a revolution?

Only time will tell. The answer is, that it depends on you. Don’t ask permission to lead. If we can do it, so can you. If you are a member of a Republican Executive Committee, introduce this resolution. If you are not an executive committee member, call your county GOP and tell them to adopt the Lee County Ban the Jab resolution. This is especially true in Florida, but we wouldn’t be too upset if another state banned it first….

UPDATE: The Patriots of the Florida Republican Assembly, a long standing statewide constitutional conservative organization, passed the ban the jab resolution unanimously, and are burning up the phones to the governor, attorney general, and legislature.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 Bigpharmanews.com


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as 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.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Did We Just Start a Revolution? Ban the Jab Resolution

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A new report from the UN was just published. It proposes and discusses ways to cool our planet by restricting sunlight and darkening our skies.

Source: UNEP Document

What is this about? Why block sunlight, of all things? Let me explain.

The UN is worried about climate change. As the efforts to reduce CO2 emissions are faltering, the UN is looking for more ways to cool the Earth. The UNEP’s report details ideas called “Solar Radiation Modification,” the gist of which is to reflect sunlight and prevent it from heating the surface of our planet.

Here are the main ideas that the UN will consider:

  • Injecting reflective nanoparticles/sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere (stratospheric aerosol injection)
  • Brightening of low clouds over the ocean by seeding ocean clouds with submicron salt particles
  • Using space mirrors, that is, many giant mirrors launched into outer space to reflect sunlight.

The UN explains that should the “global stakeholders” decide to proceed, the skies could be darkened within only a few years:

SRM is the only option that could cool the planet within years. To be effective at limiting global warming, SRM would need to be maintained for several decades to centuries, depending on the pace of emissions reductions and carbon removal.

The report does pay lip service to what is undeniable:

  • This is an untested planetary intervention
  • There could be disparate effects on certain regions

However, you and I can guess we should not expect a careful, conservative review of such proposals by the UN if the “Covid vaccine” experience is any guide.

Injecting Sulfur Dioxide Into the Sky Was Bad for Us – Now It is Good Again

This picture introduces us to the sky-dimming technology being considered:

Source: UNEP Document

The report explains:

Major volcanic eruptions, which introduce large amounts of sulphate particles into the stratosphere, provide a natural analogue for SRM deployment (Figure 4). For example, the 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption caused global annual-mean cooling of about 0.3–0.5°C in the following two years. An SAI deployment would inject aerosols continuously into the stratosphere. It is estimated that continuous injection rates of 8–16 Tg of sulphur dioxide (SO2) per year (approximately equivalent to the estimated injection amount of Mount Pinatubo in the single year of 1991) would reduce global mean temperature by 1°C. An operational SAI deployment could be scaled up to produce global cooling of 2–5°C, albeit with diminishing returns at higher rates of injections.

You are probably not a chemist, and neither am I. However, sulfur dioxide was a free byproduct of coal and oil burning, emitted into the atmosphere until recent decades. Environmental activists and authorities concluded that sulfur dioxide was a pollutant gas contributing to the phenomenon of acid rain and causing significant health problems.

Having been assured that sulfur dioxide was bad for us, we spent billions of dollars eliminating it from coal and oil-burning emissions and building sulfur-capture technology to keep SO2 out of the atmosphere.

Now, it turns out that sulfur dioxide is good for us, and we need to spend even more untold billions to inject it into the atmosphere.

Does this sound stupid to you?

I am sure, however, that investors will earn quite a bit of money from “sulfur dioxide atmospheric injections” right after making billions on “eliminating sulfur dioxide emissions” from coal-burning plants.

Volcano Eruptions Were the Nature’s Experiments

The UN document correctly indicates that volcanic eruptions sometimes fill the skies with ash or sulfur, dim the sun for years, and lead to measurable global cooling episodes. The example listed in the report is the above-mentioned Mt. Pinatubo eruption in 1991, which temporarily cooled our planet by 0.5 degrees C.

However, much darker pages of human history were associated with volcanoes causing catastrophic climate changes.

For example, in 1600, the eruption of the Huaynaputina in Peru caused famines in Europe and led to mass deaths.

In Russia, 1601-1603 brought the worst famine in the country’s history, leading to the overthrow of the reigning tsar. Records from Switzerland, Latvia and Estonia record exceptionally cold winters in 1600-1602; in France, the 1601 wine harvest was late, and wine production collapsed in Germany and colonial Peru. In China, peach trees bloomed late, and Lake Suwa in Japan had one of its earliest freezing dates in 500 years.

So, such global sun-dimming projects may indeed cause global cooling at the cost of poisoning the atmosphere, causing acid rain, and leading to the collapse of agriculture in several regions of the world.

In addition, blocked sunlight will prevent the uptake of CO2 by plants because converting CO2 into plant matter and oxygen needs sunlight:

Source: Wikipedia Photosynthesis

Somehow, the dimmed sunlight inhibiting CO2 sequestration (uptake), and lowering food production, does not bother the proponents of Solar Radiation Modification. And how would solar panels run without the sun?

These are not immediately-actionable plans yet. In some ways, the UN report is exploratory. Nobody is building giant sulfur-dioxide-injecting smokestacks or is launching mirrors into space, as of now.

However, the usual stakeholders, such as Bill Gates, are preparing the right conditions for this to happen:

Source: Popular Mechanics

If This Sounds Crazy to You, Do Not Blame Me!

Imagine a hypothetical layperson named Charlie. Charlie is a reasonable, caring, intelligent, but not well-informed individual who has never heard of sky dimming before. Charlie has a friend named Igor, who reads a wide variety of news and uses mostly reliable sources, such as the UN’s official documents from the UNEP or news magazines such as Popular Mechanics.

If Igor informed Charlie that one of the richest men in the world had convinced the United Nations to seriously consider dimming the sky over the entire planet, injecting acid-rain-causing sulfur gas into the atmosphere, and potentially causing famines in some regions, Charlie would consider the messenger, Igor, a crazy conspiracy theorist.

It is not possible! Charlie would say. Take off your tinfoil hat Igor and get a life.That would be Charlie’s likely answer to such news. Our leading authorities, Charlie would assert, would certainly never consider forcing the entire world to implement such crazy ideas!

The problem is that these disturbing ideas are completely real! This is not even the first time reckless global plans were implemented with the UN backing.

Those same people just made the entire world take unproven Covid vaccines that saw no long-term testing and ended up not working.

Sharing news about these plans is, therefore, a challenge due to the inherent insanity of what the plans propose. I discussed such challenges before, also mentioning sky dimming.

Meanwhile, a path is being laid toward such proposals becoming a reality.

Bill Gates is not messing around. Will his sky-darkening plans come to fruition?

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 the author

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

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Died Suddenly. Horrible Breaking News That Dr. Makis just dropped.

 

Many dropped while playing their sports and many died in their sleep.

This is a video clip from my most recent interview with Odessa Orlewicz at Librti.com which can be found here:

February 28, 2023 – 96 Canadian children have died suddenly or unexpectedly in the past 3 months (click here).

***

This is a video clip from my most recent interview with Odessa Orlewicz at Librti.com which can be found here:

 

 

 

 

Click here to view the interview

Odessa Orlewicz has been at the forefront of reporting on Canadian excess deaths, COVID-19 injuries & deaths, and corruption in the Canadian healthcare system.

My other interviews with Odessa Orlewicz at Librti.com:

February 8, 2023 – Excess deaths, COVID-19 Vaccine injuries and deaths being covered up by the Alberta government (click here)

October 17, 2022 – 80 Canadian doctors who died suddenly or unexpectedly since the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines (click here)

September 5, 2022 – 32 Canadian doctors who died suddenly or unexpectedly since the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, and corruption in Canadian healthcare (click here)

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons 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 a screenshot from the video


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as 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.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Damaging Immune Systems & Hearts of Canadian Children. Interview with Odessa Orlewicz