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.

***

Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, Pulitzer Prize Winner for his reportage on the infamous My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War, has just broken the colossal true story of how America took out Russia’s Nord Stream I & II LNG Pipelines. Hersh’s account now affords all concerned to more clearly see and understand what the real underpinnings are of the rough-and-tumble geo-political world in which we all, somehow, are now captives of, beholden to, or, in one way or another, feel the brunt of the driving forces behind the commission of the war in Ukraine.

The world is constantly victimized by the habitual chronic lies of the American Government, representatives of NATO itself, and newspapers of note, like the New York Times and Washington Post, who essentially, so far, have blown off what Hersh has had to report about the sabotage by the U.S.-led BALTOPS 22 Task Force as it pertains to the on-going War in Ukraine; not to mention the many sordid, outrageous geo-political events that precipitated, and since have followed, the proxy U.S., NATO and Ukrainian forces fighting against Russias Special Military Operation (SMO) in Eastern Ukraine. It’s a classic textbook case of dissimilitude from beginning to end.

Before this earth-shattering expose by Hersh broke in the international press, the mysterious cause, or cloak and dagger identity/identities of the terrorist saboteurs who perpetrated the BALTOPS 22 SABOTAGE OF RUSSIAS NORD STREAM 1 & 2 PIPELINES hadn’t yet, to date, been adequately investigated by any responsible world body; especially regarding what serious punitive economic and political consequences, sanctions or military actions must now be taken by the UN Security Council and other responsible world authorities.

Like Hersh, this writer himself has spent the past several months trying to crack the same nut, researching and writing about the outrageous ABCs of the crisis in Ukraine that led up to America and its NATO allies obvious need to commit such a serious and damnable Act of War against Russia.

Seymour has now gone the long mile to help all of us fill in the dots of a most distasteful, jarring reality check of what, when push comes to shove, his revelations mean in the rough and tough world of hardball geo-politics in which we all, collectively, now find ourselves engulfed.

There exists so much geo-political fellatio that underlies the sabotage of Russia’s Nord Stream 1 & 2 Pipelines that still needs much more elaboration and erudition of what lies behind this latest travesty against human life.

Its time to probe deeper below the surface at the real ugly hose job if there ever was one, that has been perpetrated on the world since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine that one could say the entire world received right in the good old derriere over this scandalous sabotage. It personifies the endless stream of falsities that underlie America’s long-standing culpable, malevolent military and corporate involvement in the complicated, Machiavellian politics of Ukraine’s modern political history and the war itself.

It behooves the world at this point to know more about the long-standing dirty role America’s CIA and its black ops divisions have long since played in Ukraine’s rough and-tumble geo-political turmoil, going back decades, with the hands-on involvement of every succeeding U.S. Democratic President and their administrations, since the 1990s, and even long before, going back to at least the administrations of George Herbert & George W. Bush, and forward to Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and the present-administration of Joe Biden.

American politicians have a lot of bloody fingerprints smeared all over the evidence of who among them did what to whom that has led up to not only the inception of the war in Ukraine that continues unabated, and now, the case of this pipeline sabotage itself.

The still muddied, unanswered question in the Western Press is how much of the primary cause of the war is due to Russia’s and the West’s long-standing corporate-financial entanglements and power struggles that have existed in the world’s corporate energy sector, especially since the 1990s and early 2000s, between America’s big energy players who ever strive to greedily-corner for themselves whatever the world’s natural energy resources market (water, coal, oil, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera); and now, seeks to take advantage of the coming harsh Northern winter, by seizing total control of the world’s LNG energy market and then sell it back to Germany and Europe at four times the price at which Russia was originally prepared to sell it before its Nord Stream Pipelines 1 & 2 were sabotaged.

Not to mention that this single, ignorant act of the war so far may end up becoming one of the war’s most monumentally-stupid errors that very well may destroy the economies of Western and Eastern Europe and lead to even further colossal political dissension, possibly even leading to yet another civil war or world war somewhere else, like that which kicked off WWI.

America and NATO’s misadventures in Ukraine and the Baltic Sea remind this writer of Agatha Christies, And Then There Were None.

One Little, Two Little, Three Little Indians

It’s now clear the United States, NATO, and their allies, in which they operate in the dark inner sanctums of the twisted, contorted minds of their military-corporate Dark State keepers and handlers, are somehow mixed up to their necks in the under-handed ways the war in Ukraine has progressed from the get-go to cover up America and the Western World’s always cut-throat international business dealings; and now the attempted regime change and final overthrow of Russia, as one of the three remaining big empires left in the world.

Once Russia is finished with as an empire, China no doubt will be America’s next targeted focus. It’s One Little, Two Little, Three littleIndians.all over again, until only One Little Indian -America –is left. Or so America hopes!

Excerpted here now is a chapter from this writer’s earlier writings in December 2022 on the BALTOP AFFAIR that offers the reader yet a different spin and takes on Hersh’s revelations.

It’s a Whodunnit Case of Sloppy Fellatio Logic from Start to Finish

There are so many sordid, unsolved whodunnits of this war so far; the outrageous sabotage of the Nord Stream Pipelines at the top of the whodunnit list. To see it in a different light requires a bit of portmanteau wordplay with the term fellatio (i.e. fallacy), as it often is used to describe sloppy logic, especially the kind of fallacious political logic that continues to raise its ugly head among those who possess an unquenchable thirst for fallacious thinking that keeps them doing such dumb things as listening to mainstream corporate news, following the short-sighted wisdom of the governments think tanks, Pentagon strategists, arms merchants advisors and the like.

Especially when they know the answers to whatever the whodunnit arguments are in the West’s corporate press, specifically about the sabotage of the Nord Stream Pipelines, amount to nothing more than a lot of bogus suppositions based upon fallacious arguments that, to put it bluntly, even fools know suck when it comes to knowing the real criminals who committed this heinous sabotage are those sitting right beside you in the next comfy, easy chair. Subterfuge and Denial are everywhere in the war climate that now has totally permeated the world.

The Smoking Guns Abound, Yet It’s All Quiet on the UN and Corporate News Front

Whoevers bloody hands and fingerprints remain smeared all over this clandestine act of sabotage, whatever insipid investigation so far has been pursued by the United Nations outrageously have excluded Russia, the owner of the actual Nord Stream pipelines, from even participating in the investigations themselves. It’s pathetic. The silence is deafening!

Of course, by now, an enormous brouhaha would have already been made in the U.N. about any other international investigation of similar magnitude and circumstances and, at the very least, already would have resulted in the United Nations’ immediate stinging censure, if not military action, taken against whatever countries were responsible, and still are involved in such an outlandish, unprecedented-aggressive act of corporate terrorism of the most bald-faced kind; that, in any other circumstance, would have immediately sparked a war in and of itself. But, of course, that is, if the war already underway in Ukraine hadn’t already been deviously used as cover to hide all traces of the bloody fingerprints of whatever high-level Western corporate-military-political criminals were involved.

The sabotage of Nord Streams 1 & 2 Pipelines, that essentially all but eliminated, at present, Russia as the chief fossil fuel supplier to Germany and Europe, unquestionably, was planned by the biggest of corporate, military, and political interests at the highest levels in the West, no doubt well in advance of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

The question is what came first, the Chicken or the Egg! Was it the West’s constant goading aggravations and provocations of Russia and its Empire, or was it Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that set off the whole war? What about the West’s bombing of Russia’s land bridge to Crimea? Is that not yet another fundamental war provocation against Russia by the West? Both aggressive acts are tantamount to Acts of War that have long tails that well proceed the war in Ukraine, stretching all the way back to the U.S.-led Maidan coup in 2014 and even long before to at least 2004, and longer back still to the year. But who is really listening? The lights are on but is anyone minding the store?

Still, other existing bloody fingerprints of unparalleled aggression by the West, NATO, and the US against Russia, of which we all now are too well aware, thanks to Seymour Hersh, can be seen in the composition of the Baltic Naval Strike Force (BaltOps 22), that was headed by the USS Kearsarge, an amphibious, special ops vessel, that led this strike forces enormous flotilla of ships and personnel and logistics, not to mention the enormous amount of logistical planning that would have been required to occur long before Russias invasion in February 2022.

At the time of the sabotage of Russia’s Nord Stream 1 & 2 pipelines, the USS Kearsarge was part of a U.S. Naval Forces Europe-Africa so-called exercise, executed by Naval Striking Forces Europe and Naval Striking and Support NATO that included 14 NATO Allies, two NATO partner nations, more than 75 aircraft, 7000 personnel, in June 2022 that included anti-submarine, mine-clearing operations, explosive ordinance disposal, and unmanned underwater personnel recovery training exercises aboard a submarine. Clearly, no small undertaking that would have demanded a high degree of pre-planning!

Yet the world is all but tone-deaf, dumb, and blind to what has gone on in the war before now and has been willing to believe that this Naval Task Force, at the time of the sabotage of the Nord Stream I & 2 Pipelines, just happened to be directly over the area when the pipelines sabotage is known to have created enormous upwellings of methane gas (Sea Power magazine.org).

But, if the U.S., NATO, and BaltOps22 had had nothing to do with the sabotage of Nord Stream, why then did Rodek Sikorski, a member of the European Parliament, a key figure in the U.S.-backed 2014 coup of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, following the sabotage operation, post on Twitter a photo of the methane-blasted region of the Baltic Sea showing a furiously-churned upwelling of bubbling methane gas at that location, with the cryptic three-word caption, THANK YOU, USA.

Or why, again, if this was just an innocent note that referred to something entirely different and unrelated, was it then that the Twitter note also was quickly removed after Poland’s Foreign Minister seconded Sikorski’s affirmation, or what the U.S. Ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland, already knowingly meant when he warned, well in advance, We have not deployed the full set of tools that could significantly undermine, if not outright stop, the Nord Stream Project (Reuters, Nov 13, 2018).

Then again, there was that incident back in 2018, when Richard Greenwell, the U.S. Ambassador to Germany, repeatedly sent threatening letters to German companies working on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, warning them, Companies involved in Russian energy exports are something that could prompt significant risks (Bold am Sontag, Jan. 13th, 2019)

Or yet again, what did U.S. President Biden imply, during a February 2022 state visit to Germany, before Russia had even invaded Ukraine, when, during a press conference, Biden threatened: The United States is able to shut down Nord Stream 2 in the Baltic Sea if Russia invades Ukraine. Yet, when a reporter at that press conference repeatedly pressed Biden, “But how would you do that?” President Biden would only smugly smile and repeat what certainly sounded like a thinly-veiled threat of a pre-ordained given when he replied several more times, “I promise you we will be able to do that.”

Something, clearly, Is Rotten in Denmark!, as Shakespeare would say if he were here. But does anyone really care at this point? And so it goes……

*

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 BigNewsNetwork.com.

The writer Jerome Irwin is a Canadian-American writer who originally was a Criminology student working in one of America’s local police departments. For decades, Irwin has sought to call world attention to problems of environmental degradation and unsustainability caused by a host of environmental-ecological-spiritual issues that exist between the conflicting world philosophies of indigenous and non-indigenous peoples.

Irwin is the author of the book, “The Wild Gentle Ones; A Turtle Island Odyssey” (www.turtle-island-odyssey.com), a spiritual odyssey among the native peoples of North America that has led to numerous articles pertaining to: Ireland’s Fenian Movement; native peoples Dakota Access Pipeline Resistance Movement; AIPAC, Israel & the U.S. Congress anti-BDS Movement; the historic Battle for Palestine & Siege of Gaza, as well as; the many violations constantly being waged by industrial-corporate-military-propaganda interests against the World’s Collective Soul. The author and his wife are long-time residents on the North Shore of British Columbia.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research

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.

***

Perhaps the most agonizing experience for a family, for any bystander, even for humanitarian professionals, is a double tragedy—a death or calamity where they are refused access, where they are forced to helplessly witness suffering, unable to offer succor. This is surely what faces millions of able-bodied Syrians today. It affects Syrians within the stricken nation along with their faraway relatives and friends.

Anyone seeing suffering is involuntarily driven forward– to assist. Yet Syrians globally, those most affected by the agonizing images and stories emerging from the earthquake sites, feel both immobilized and shy behind their tears and frustrations. It’s not any threat of personal danger in a war zone that inhibits them from joining the rescue. It’s the international embargo against Syria.

Given the strict measures imposed by the U.S. and its allies on the Syrian government, even those eager to arrange help are hesitant to gather urgent support at such a critical time. This includes me, unable during the past decade to even send a gift to my close friends.

From my longtime association with Syria, and from regular talks with people residing there, I keep abreast of the toll the war and blockade are taking. I know economic and health conditions well. I know how, month after month, rising food prices mean more citizens go hungry. I know that medicines are in desperately short supply, whereas Syria was once an exporter of pharmaceuticals.

I know that the rich farmland of Northeast Syria, breadbasket of the region, is under U.S. occupation, making its wheat crop inaccessible to Syrians. I know too that Syria’s oil from that same NE region is commandeered by foreign companies under U.S. military protection. I know that most young men are now outside the country; the same for doctors who may manage to find a country to use their talent and training. (Syria, once celebrated for its high medical standards, had had a surplus of doctors.)

I know that no foreign exchange is permitted with Syrian banks, so that anyone wanting to send funds to a family left behind, cannot do so.

I know that Syrian homes have electricity for barely a few hours daily because the electricity system is in disrepair, unfixable without imported parts. I know that Lebanon, which had been helping thousands of Syrian families, can hardly continue this because of its own economic collapse. Humanitarian aid from Iran too has dwindled due to its domestic problems. Whoever can leave do, risking the flight to neighboring countries, including Turkey, then venturing further afield. For over 12 years their absence has drained the nation of its professionals– writers and artists, filmmakers and pharmacists, scientists and social workers, teachers and IT experts. What is more, the country is regularly bombed by Israel.

These conditions are disturbingly and piteously similar to those ravaging Iraq throughout the 1990s, a saga I myself chronicled. That nation was shredded by years of embargo, leading up to the U.S.-led military assault and occupation in 2003.

Whether or not the destruction following the February 6^th earthquake is as extensive in Syria as in Turkey is irrelevant. Urgently needed assistance to Syria is prohibited or held up, largely from  cumulative U.S. embargoes imposed during almost twenty years of Washington’s hostile policy towards the country. Algeria, one of the few nations supportive of Syria, has pledged $15 million in aid, noting that this gift is “to the brotherly Syrian people, in solidarity”.

Algeria will have to overcome U.S.-created hurdles to ensure needed supplies get to Damascus. Meanwhile a United Nations aid convoy to Syria was evidently assigned only to “the rebel-held areas” (no questions raised about that!) where the much-heralded White Helmets operate. As far as we know, relief from 74 nations reportedly rushing supplies and technical assistance to Turkey might not be shared with devastated parts of Syria administered by Damascus (and thereby embargoed).

But that may change. On Thursday, February 9^th the U.S. Dept. of Treasury, the agency that stringently monitors compliance with U.S. policy embargoes, announced that it would suspend some sanctions for relief that’s directed toward earthquake issues. Doubtless there will be close monitoring, with bureaucratic delays. And individuals eager to send aid directly to family or to particular charities in Damascus could face time-consuming formalities. We don’t yet know whether this temporary U.S. license permits Syria’s embassies and consulates to work with American donors to funnel relief aid to the country. And will organizations and individuals be able to transfer funds from abroad directly to Syrian banks? That is unclear too.

Syrians have a long and unassuming tradition of charity. They also are among the most economically successful of immigrants, wherever they reside. They will, if allowed, prove, like New Jersey doctor Souheil Saba, they’re ready to join others leading aid efforts from abroad. (Although Saba can reach Damascus only by road from Beirut, after flying there via Istanbul.)

How one decides which Syrian charities will be authorized and which banks cleared to receive funds will consume precious time. Syrians and their supporters eagerly wait for instructions and clearances. Like their Turkish counterparts, they must now turn all efforts to the injured, homeless, hungry and cold survivors.

*

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.

Barbara Nimri Aziz whose anthropological research has focused on the peoples of the Himalayas is the author of the newly published “Yogmaya and Durga Devi: Rebel Women of Nepal”, available on Amazon. 

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All images in this article are from the author

“Yogmaya and Durga Devi: Rebel Women of Nepal”

By Barbara Nimri Aziz

A century ago Yogmaya and Durga Devi, two women champions of justice, emerged from a remote corner of rural Nepal to offer solutions to their nation’s social and political ills. Then they were forgotten.

Years after their demise, in 1980 veteran anthropologist Barbara Nimri Aziz first uncovered their suppressed histories in her comprehensive and accessible biographies. Revelations from her decade of research led to the resurrection of these women and their entry into contemporary Nepali consciousness.

This book captures the daring political campaigns of these rebel women; at the same time it asks us to acknowledge their impact on contemporary feminist thinking. Like many revolutionaries who were vilified in their lifetimes, we learn about the true nature of these leaders’ intelligence, sacrifices, and vision during an era of social and economic oppression in this part of Asia.

After Nepal moved from absolute monarchy to a fledgling democracy and history re-evaluated these pioneers, Dr. Aziz explores their legacies in this book.

Psychologically provocative and astonishingly moving, “Yogmaya and Durga Devi” is a seminal contribution to women’s history.

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 (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.

***

In a recent column, military analyst William Astore wrote, “[Congressman] George Santos is a symptom of a much larger disease: a lack of honor, a lack of shame, in America. Honor, truth, integrity, simply don’t seem to matter, or matter much, in America today… But how do you have a democracy where there is no truth?”

Astore went on to compare America’s political and military leaders to the disgraced Congressman Santos. “U.S. military leaders appeared before Congress to testify the Iraq War was being won,” Astore wrote. “They appeared before Congress to testify the Afghan War was being won. They talked of “progress,” of corners being turned, of Iraqi and Afghan forces being successfully trained and ready to assume their duties as U.S. forces withdrew. As events showed, it was all spin. All lies.”

Now America is at war again, in Ukraine, and the spin continues. This war involves Russia, Ukraine, the United States and its NATO allies. No party to this conflict has leveled with its own people to honestly explain what it is fighting for, what it really hopes to achieve and how it plans to achieve it. All sides claim to be fighting for noble causes and insist that it is the other side that refuses to negotiate a peaceful resolution. They are all manipulating and lying, and compliant media (on all sides) trumpet their lies.

It is a truism that the first casualty of war is the truth. But spinning and lying has real-world impacts in a war in which hundreds of thousands of real people are fighting and dying, while their homes, on both sides of the front lines, are reduced to rubble by hundreds of thousands of howitzer shells.

Yves Smith, the editor of Naked Capitalism, explored this insidious linkage between the information war and the real one in an article titled,

“What if Russia won the Ukraine War, but the Western press didn’t notice?”

He observed that Ukraine’s total dependence on the supply of weapons and money from its Western allies has given a life of its own to a triumphalist narrative that Ukraine is defeating Russia, and will keep scoring victories as long as the West keeps sending it more money and increasingly powerful and deadly weapons.

But the need to keep recreating the illusion that Ukraine is winning by hyping limited gains on the battlefield has forced Ukraine to keep sacrificing its forces in extremely bloody battles, like its counter-offensive around Kherson and the Russian sieges of Bakhmut and Soledar. Lt. Col. Alexander Vershinin, a retired U.S. tank commander, wrote on Harvard’s Russia Matters website, “In some ways, Ukraine has no choice but to launch attacks no matter the human and material cost.”

Objective analyses of the war in Ukraine are hard to come by through the thick fog of war propaganda. But we should pay attention when a series of senior Western military leaders, active and retired, make urgent calls for diplomacy to reopen peace negotiations, and warn that prolonging and escalating the war is risking a full-scale war between Russia and the United States that could escalate into nuclear war.

General Erich Vad, who was German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s senior military adviser for seven years, recently spoke to Emma, a German news website. He called the war in Ukraine a “war of attrition,” and compared it to the First World War, and to the Battle of Verdun in particular, in which hundreds of thousands of French and German soldiers were killed with no major gain for either side.

Vad asked the same persistent unanswered question that the New York Times editorial board asked of President Biden last May. What are the U.S. and NATO’s real war aims?

“Do you want to achieve a willingness to negotiate with the deliveries of the tanks? Do you want to reconquer Donbas or Crimea? Or do you want to defeat Russia completely?” asked General Vad.

He concluded,

“There is no realistic end state definition. And without an overall political and strategic concept, arms deliveries are pure militarism. We have a militarily operational stalemate, which we cannot solve militarily. Incidentally, this is also the opinion of the American Chief of Staff Mark Milley. He said that Ukraine’s military victory is not to be expected and that negotiations are the only possible way. Anything else is a senseless waste of human life.”

Whenever Western officials are put on the spot by these unanswered questions, they are forced to reply, as Biden did to the Times eight months ago, that they are sending weapons to help Ukraine defend itself and to put it in a stronger position at the negotiating table. But what would this “stronger position” look like?

When Ukrainian forces were advancing toward Kherson in November, NATO officials agreed that the fall of Kherson would give Ukraine an opportunity to reopen negotiations from a position of strength. But when Russia withdrew from Kherson, no negotiations ensued, and both sides are now planning new offensives.

The U.S. media keep repeating the narrative that Russia will never negotiate in good faith, and it has hidden from the public the fruitful negotiations that began soon after the Russian invasion but were quashed by the United States and United Kingdom. Few outlets reported the recent revelations by former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett about the ceasefire negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in Turkey that he helped to mediate in March 2022. Bennett said explicitly that the West “blocked” or “stopped” (depending on the translation) the negotiations.

Bennett confirmed what has been reported by other sources since April 21, 2022, when Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu, one of the other mediators, told CNN Turk after a NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, “There are countries within NATO who want the war to continue… They want Russia to become weaker.”

Advisers to Prime Minister Zelenskyy provided the details of Boris Johnson’s April 9 visit to Kyiv that were published in Ukrayinska Pravda on May 5th. They said Johnson delivered two messages. The first was that Putin and Russia “should be pressured, not negotiated with.” The second was that, even if Ukraine completed an agreement with Russia, the “collective West,” who Johnson claimed to represent, would take no part in it.

The Western corporate media has generally only weighed in on these early negotiations to cast doubt on this story or smear any who repeat it as Putin apologists, despite multiple-source confirmation by Ukrainian officials, Turkish diplomats and now the former Israeli prime minister.

The propaganda frame that Western establishment politicians and media use to explain the war in Ukraine to their own publics is a classic “white hats vs black hats” narrative, in which Russia’s guilt for the invasion doubles as proof of the West’s innocence and righteousness. The growing mountain of evidence that the U.S. and its allies share responsibility for many aspects of this crisis is swept under the proverbial carpet, which looks more and more like The Little Prince’s drawing of a boa constrictor that swallowed an elephant.

Western media and officials were even more ridiculous when they tried to blame Russia for blowing up its own pipelines, the Nord Stream underwater natural gas pipelines that channeled Russian gas to Germany. According to NATO, the explosions that released half a million tons of methane into the atmosphere were “deliberate, reckless, and irresponsible acts of sabotage.” The Washington Post, in what could be considered journalistic malpractice, quoted an anonymous “senior European environmental official” saying, “No one on the European side of the ocean is thinking this is anything other than Russian sabotage.”

It took former New York Times investigative reporter Seymour Hersh to break the silence. He published, in a blog post on his own Substack, a spectacular whistleblower’s account of how U.S. Navy divers teamed up with the Norwegian navy to plant the explosives under cover of a NATO naval exercise, and how they were detonated by a sophisticated signal from a buoy dropped by a Norwegian surveillance plane. According to Hersh, President Biden took an active role in the plan, and amended it to include the use of the signaling buoy so that he could personally dictate the precise timing of the operation, three months after the explosives were planted.

The White House predictably dismissed Hersh’s report as “utterly false and complete fiction”, but has never offered any reasonable explanation for this historic act of environmental terrorism.

President Eisenhower famously said that only an “alert and knowledgeable citizenry” can “guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”

So what should an alert and knowledgeable American citizenry know about the role our government has played in fomenting the crisis in Ukraine, a role that the corporate media has swept under the rug? That is one of the main questions we have tried to answer in our book War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict. The answers include:

• The U.S. broke its promises not to expand NATO into Eastern Europe. In 1997, before Americans had ever heard of Vladimir Putin, 50 former senators, retired military officers, diplomats and academics wrote to President Clinton to oppose NATO expansion, calling it a policy error of “historic proportions.” Elder statesman George Kennan condemned it as “the beginning of a new cold war.”
• NATO provoked Russia by its open-ended promise to Ukraine in 2008 that it would become a member of NATO. William Burns, who was then the U.S. Ambassador to Moscow and is now the CIA Director, warned in a State Department memo, “Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all red-lines for the Russian elite (not just Putin).”
• The U.S.backed a coup in Ukraine in 2014 that installed a government that only half its people recognized as legitimate, causing the disintegration of Ukraine and a civil war that killed 14,000 people.
• The 2015 Minsk II peace accord achieved a stable ceasefire line and steady reductions in casualties, but Ukraine failed to grant autonomy to Donetsk and Luhansk as agreed. Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande now admit that Western leaders only supported Minsk II to buy time for NATO to arm and train Ukraine’s military to recover Donbas by force.
• During the week before the invasion, OSCE monitors in Donbas documented a huge escalation in explosions around the ceasefire line. Most of the 4,093 explosions in four days were in rebel-held territory, indicating incoming shell-fire by Ukrainian government forces. U.S. and U.K. officials claimed these were “false flag” attacks, as if Donetsk and Luhansk’s forces were shelling themselves, just as they later suggested that Russia blew up its own pipelines.
• After the invasion, instead of supporting Ukraine’s efforts to make peace, the United States and the United Kingdom blocked or stopped them in their tracks. The U.K.’s Boris Johnson said they saw a chance to “press” Russia and wanted to make the most of it, and U.S. Defense Secretary Austin said their goal was to “weaken” Russia.

What would an alert and knowledgeable citizenry make of all this? We would clearly condemn Russia for invading Ukraine. But then what? Surely we would also demand that U.S. political and military leaders tell us the truth about this horrific war and our country’s role in it, and demand that the media transmit the truth to the public. An “alert and knowledgeable citizenry” would surely then demand that our government stop fueling this war and instead support immediate peace negotiations.

*

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 the cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and the author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood on Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.

Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies are the authors of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, published by OR Books. They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image: Photo by Master Sgt. Sean M. Worrell, U.S. Air Force via ABACAPRESS.COM

Ukraine: The Performance and the Reality. Manlio Dinucci

By Manlio Dinucci, February 13, 2023

The San Remo Festival will be remembered as the “Festival of the two Presidents”: the President of the Italian  Republic Mattarella at the opening and the Ukrainian President Zelensky at the closing. The latter does not appear live, following the protests that were raised in Italy. 

Engineering a Cult of Chaos to Undermine Rational Thinking.

By Julian Rose, February 14, 2023

The shadowy architects of The Great Reset/New World Order/One World Government pulled-off a clever trick in designing a totalitarian programme for top-down change whose individual parts each contradict one another. So, when put together by the ‘rational’ public mind, it makes people feel that they must be suffering a diminished personal level of intelligence, because they can’t make the agenda make any logical sense.

Russia Is Taking on All of NATO Plus Ukraine

By Kim Petersen, February 14, 2023

It is difficult for the person-on-the-street to get a proper handle on what is happening in a war. Regarding the current fighting between Russia and Ukraine, the monopoly media in the “West” has often pointed to Ukraine winning. Other independent sources will state the opposite. Who should one believe?

Will the Turkish Earthquake Unleash Science from the Shackles of the Statisticians?

By Matthew Ehret-Kump, February 13, 2023

On the morning of February 6, 2023 the people of Turkey and Syria were struck by a devastating 7.8 magnitude earthquake, followed by a 6.7 aftershock and then a final (we hope) 7.5 M quake in the late afternoon. The effects of the three-fold quake struck deep into Syria and as of this writing, over 23,000 deaths, and 500,000 injured have been counted in Turkey and Syria, along with tens of thousands of injuries and incredible destruction to infrastructure.

The War of Terror of a Rogue Superpower: Cui Bono?

By Pepe Escobar, February 13, 2023

Everyone with a brain already knew the Empire did it. Now Seymour Hersh’s bombshell report  not only details how Nord Stream 1 and 2 were attacked, but also names names: from the toxic Straussian neoliberal-con trio Sullivan, Blinken and Nuland all the way to the Teleprompter Reader-in-Chief.

“Purges” in Ukraine: Defense Minster Forced to Resign, Team of Interior Ministry Die in Helicopter Crash. Who’s Next?

By Karsten Riise, February 13, 2023

The leader of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council is Oleksyi Danilov. Danilov is a powerful and interesting figure.  After taking Soledar a few weeks ago, Russia just took another strategic fortified town Krasna Gora yesterday. Russia is developing fast all the way around Bakhmut. Russia is pressing everywhere on the frontlines and Ukrainian losses in men and matériel are enormous.

Social Credit Brazilian Style: Basic Income (UBI) Recipients for Poorest Families Must be Vaxxed

By Mark E. Jeftovic, February 13, 2023

Anybody who seriously thinks that Universal Basic Income (UBI) programs of the future won’t be full blown social credit systems need look no further than Brazil, where newly selected “socialist:” / globalist Lula da Silva just decreed that the Bolsa Familia program will require family members to be vaccinated in order to continue receiving benefits.

Mind Control: WEF Technocrats Openly Plot to Observe and Track Human Thoughts with Implant

By Ben Bartee, February 13, 2023

Mind control is the final frontier of the technocratic revolution. What you say, do, buy, and sell is increasingly trackable through technology. Yet, so far, the human mind remains a sanctuary free from prying foreign eyes – the last refuge.

Lift Sanctions Against Syria to Lessen Sufferings of the People Caused by the Earthquake

By Dr. Chandra Muzaffar, February 13, 2023

The International Movement for a Just World (JUST) urges the American, British, Australian, Canadian, Swiss and some  European Union and Arab League governments to lift the unjust, immoral sanctions against Syria in order to lessen the immense sufferings of the people caused by the massive earthquake of 6^th February 2023.

US Congress Opposed Nord Stream 2, in Favor of LNG

By Renee Parsons, February 13, 2023

There is little doubt that the war in Ukraine has always been about decimation of Russia’s energy, financial and military resources; especially as the September 26, 2022 attack on Nord Stream 2 (NS) pipeline confirmed any lingering doubt.

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 2021 lawsuit filed by Baylor Scott and White Health system against world-renowned internist, cardiologist, and COVID-19 expert Dr. Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, has been dismissed by the 191^st Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas. Associate Judge Tahira Khan Merritt granted the nonsuit and dismissed with prejudice all claims asserted or that could have been asserted in the case. Dr. McCullough stated,

“This is a strong victory for freedom of speech and fair balanced publication and media presentation of clinical data as it has emerged over the course of the pandemic crisis. My analyses and conclusions have been accurate, consistent, and have always been my own, not those of any institution.”

The lawsuit alleged Dr. McCullough violated his separation agreement by using the Baylor Scott and White Health System name during media appearances. As the national crisis has drawn on, Dr. McCullough has been a public voice of data-driven reason in the media, delivering concise scientific interpretation of the available science, and providing a focused assessment of the pandemic landscape.

He has also been one of America’s leading physicians on the early treatment of COVID-19. His protocols and scientific publications have been relied upon to help millions globally.  However, Dr. McCullough has drawn harsh criticism for expressing valid concerns over the public health response, including the mass vaccination of entire populations in the face of an incredible lack of data, from a public health apparatus that has often lacked consistency in it’s public health decisions on Covid-19.

An established medical cancel culture has been running in the background, outside of mainstream awareness, for years. During the COVID response, the unethical behavior of both companies and professional licensing bodies has become a topic of vigorous debate.

Dr. McCullough’s recent court vindication came on the back of another win for open scientific discussion and the free expression of medical professionals as a federal judge has also just blocked a law that punishes doctors for ‘misinformation’ in California.

*

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.

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.

***

… NATO doesn’t respect anything about Russia. NATO knows no limits. — Scott Ritter

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.

***

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 recent Pentagon conference on psychological warfare noted that the forces of indoctrination “cannot wait until a crisis begins.” A high-ranking chief at the Department of Defense suggested a model for propaganda, in no way new: “Look at marketing…What makes people drink Coke, what makes people drink Pepsi?” In short, public “marketing.” “I think,” the chief lauded, that “the private sector has used the information domain through marketing to the Nth degree…And I think we as a department and in the national security enterprise, need to be able to pull some of those lessons.”

In fact, the “lessons” of effective indoctrination and public persuasion have been perfected in the domain of U.S. government propaganda, in conjunction with a servile free press. A natural prediction of this is that in discussions of war, peace, diplomacy, violence and so on, essentially any fact that is unfit for U.S. and Western goals will be either ignored, distorted or falsified, and Western geopolitical ambitions will be revered to the point of almost being beyond what words can describe. In the case of Western imperialism in today’s Asia, this is precisely verified.

I. Aggression in Fact and Fiction

The Biden administration declared early in 2022 that official American policy in Asia and the Pacific sought domination and control over “every corner of the region,” while deploring Chinese “coercion and aggression” which “spans the globe”—a statement which is too ludicrous to comment, and was in fact ignored by the media, though presumably not for that reason. The military branch is usually quite honest about intentions: “This grand strategy uses,” quite effectively, “security and financial institutions to both bound and reshape China’s power within the system to bolster U.S.” imperial power (U.S. Air Force’s journal). Putting all euphemisms aside, the West must ensure that “all nations can benefit”—that is, all nations that obediently serve the U.S.—“from resource-rich” assets in Southeast Asia, as the Chief of Naval Operations, Michael Gilday, put it. Surely actions confirm the urgency among elites of achieving this.

Thus, the U.S. has stationed about 375,000 troops in the Indo-Pacific, of which 80,000 are in South Korea and Japan—while conducting constant offensive large-scale military operations aimed at China, through what is an offensive “global NATO” in Asia, to use the phrase of Liz Truss.

Throughout 2021, U.S. and European “warships and planes carried out more than 2,000 close spying operations aimed at China,” including at the “coastal area of the Chinese mainland.” Although lavishly funded Western news agencies mysteriously found minimal opportunity to report on the incidents, the reader of the Asian press could have learned that Western “strike groups” in “the South China Sea” nearly doubled their activity since 2020—repeatedly to the protest of the Chinese and in fact most of Asia, though to the enthusiastic celebration of the Western liberal and humane press.

This is virtually a continuation of the policy of the Trump administration, from which Biden is scarcely different—insofar as not being more hawkish, which the one-party-two-factions military oligarchy in Washington ensures. Therefore, the U.S. government declared in mid-2020 that the West must mobilize against the “Marxist-Leninist regime” and its “desire for global hegemony of Chinese communism,” which threatens “freedom everywhere.”

Finally, we became aware of the “threat they pose to our very way of life.” The “ambitions for ideological control” of “Joseph Stalin’s successor” (Xi Jinping) are “not limited to his own people,” and violent Chinese global control “is well under way.”

Predictably enough, this was met with not a horse laugh, but rather a deluge of awe. However, liberal critics had their reservations: This policy “is meaningful only if it is accompanied by a firm commitment by the Trump administration to a robust and coordinated policy” (NYT). “China’s strategy also aims to encircle the West” (naturally, no map depicting stationed military forces was presented in the article), and so the West must strike back “in the decisive battle,” “hopefully led once again by the United States” and its “enlightened leadership,” to quote the former director of national intelligence, Dan Coats.

However, not everyone was satisfied, since confrontation with China had to be conducted with “unalterable counterforce at every point,” as New York Times columnists demanded. Crucially, the Trump administration escalated the provocations against China—both maritime and by air— setting new records of daily U.S. military operations and aircraft spying raids against China, and stationing tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel in the Asian region.

Of course, nothing comparable is done by Chinese vessels and aircraft off the coast of Miami, London, Normandy and so on. It is simply taken for granted that we have the right to do anything we feel like, and that this has to be received with stoic equanimity by those who we deem as the Enemy.

Needless to say, the European satellites—convinced that the Boss will share a piece of the cake—have happily joined in on the one-sided military confrontation off the shores of China. Thus, the main Asian diplomatic journal, East Asia Forum, noted:

Since 2016, France has mobilized support for a European presence with annually rotating forces which have expanded with participation from a growing number of countries…The German frigate Bayern was deployed in the Indo-Pacific from August 2021 to February 2022 to conduct operations…and exercise with the navies of Australia, Singapore, Japan and the United States. Germany’s contribution was considered a key decision in forging French-German unity on building a permanent and effective European military presence in the Indo-Pacific. The United Kingdom has also delivered significant contributions to Indo-Pacific defense, decoupling a carrier strike group in 2021 and two warships permanently in 2022.

The Free press insists on the Chinese leader being “the modern-day emperor he has now become,” and China now “hunkering down” in a position of hostility toward the West—that is from David Ignatius at The Washington Post, who concedes that the Chinese perceive “bullying” from “America” with their massive military build-up along China’s borders, aiming to “win the 21^st century.”

In short, to “make it harder for Beijing to maintain growth,” as the technical Asian press openly points out. However, he neatly left the last parts out, naturally. In fact, they are “driven by the leader’s vision of an ascendant and uncompromising China,” unwilling to give the West any chance of respite from its overwhelming confrontational stance—unquestionably “a combative approach,” informed The Wall Street Journal.

Incidentally, in that same day, international wire services (Agence France-Presse) published an official declaration by Xi Jinping, who noted that the U.S. and China have to “find ways to get along” through diplomacy, and invited Washington to increased “cooperation.” China is “willing to work with the U.S. to give mutual respect, coexist peacefully” and “find ways to get along.” That went unreported in the major press, though the vast Western readership of, for example, The Hindu had access to the statements.

The very fact that the Western powers are openly and explicitly provoking China with massive military infrastructure in order to stifle its progress through a military coalition of powerful Western and Asian countries, constantly building new military bases in the South China Sea, is unmentionable in the Free press. However, as one moves away from the typical propaganda channels, and closer to the military strategists, official diplomatic documents and so on, one can discern the obvious.

Thus, a study conducted by the U.S. Air Force observed that

“There is an abundance of evidence that documents China’s discontent with US SRO,” military reconnaissance operations off China’s coast, and that the country is “extremely prickly about sovereignty-related issues.”

The study points out that “China’s sensitivity in this area is further aggravated by ‘ever-present aerial reconnaissance aircraft off the coast,’” conceding that such action “compels Beijing to ‘defend their sovereignty,’” including “with military means.” Consider this report published in perhaps the most respected international Asian journal, South China Morning Post:

As one senior naval officer put it, [constant American and European military operations in the South China Sea] are “an in your face, rub your nose in it operation that lets people know who is the boss.” The Donald Trump administration increased the tempo of U.S. military activities in the South China Sea…The situation became so fraught that Beijing feared an attack against its installations. Yet President Joe Biden’s administration has continued fervently down this path and even worsened the situation … The U.S. now undertakes an average of four [military ship] missions a day over the South China Sea. That is about 1,500 a year.”

That is done in combination with large-scale offensive attack exercises by NATO and its regional allies against China, rarely causing any raised eyebrows at home.

Notice that it is not perceived as relevant, then, to stop these military campaigns, or that any question could arise regarding the justness of such calculated provocations, which once again illustrates the shared consensus in an obedient culture. Rather, we must learn “the hard lessons about hard power” in order to not “succumb to the utopian path of disarmament,” and we must not “allow the fear of escalation to dominate our decisions,” as Representative Mike Gallagher (R-WI) noted in a Wall Street Journal piece.

Speaking of which, the same Journal warned us the next day that the West now faces an “uncompromising China that challenges” us, and has “championed a combative approach in dealing with the West.” You will notice that this was printed as a news article, not an opinion piece, thus exposing the paper’s actual role as a servile tool of state propaganda.

Another window of opportunity for diplomacy opened itself in mid-November, when the Chinese president noted that the West and China “should respect each other, coexist in peace, pursue win-win cooperation” and avoid a “collision.” We do not know whether this was seriously meant, principally because the call was rejected by the West, which responded by saying that it will “continue to compete vigorously”—“compete,” meaning militarize and massively provoke near the shores of China. As we will discover, this sort of response to diplomacy generalizes.

II. The concocted nuclear peril and the predictable response

Using the Chinese “threat” to keep the domestic population in line, the military sector now has free access to unlimited welfare funding to high-tech industry, known in Newspeak as “defense spending.” “The imperative to innovate is back,” as military journals celebrate. Consider in this context the concern over alleged mindless Chinese “nuclear militarism,” a topic of extreme furor and concern in both Western press and government agitprop (essentially the same thing). The media has been saturated with headlines pointing out all kinds of threats to nuclear non-proliferation and expansion. As with every depoliticized and indoctrinated culture, the usual suspects are always fit for attack. In our case: North Korea, Iran and, crucially, China.

Thus, the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review warns of the “PRC” and its ever-increasing ability to conduct “nuclear coercion,” repeated by Pentagon and State Department officials, who regularly decry “China’s nuclear modernization and its rapid expansion.”

That is a staple in government propaganda and, hence, the Free press, which refuses to expose it as the obvious fraud that they in fact know it to be. The best grasping at the straw to illustrate the global intent of the “rogue regime brandishing nuclear weapons and threatening its neighbors” (WSJ editorial commenting on both China and NK l) was in the summer of 2021, in which The Washington Post claimed that “China is building more than 100 new missile silos” to be armed with nuclear warheads. That number later increased, though that cannot be said about the presenting of evidence. The entire thing was quickly exposed as falsification, as these “turn out to be wind turbines” (e.g., TFI Global and Council on Pacific Affairs). However, that lie was simply too useful to let go of, and the actual facts of the matter are yet more or less literally unreported in the West, and the ploy has now been forgotten after having properly served its propaganda function.

The intelligentsia made sure to not miss this splendid opportunity of showing complete loyalty to the state disinformation system. Former CIA agent and Atlantic Council propagandist Matthew Kroenig warned that America “should continue with bipartisan plans to modernize U.S. nuclear weapons. In addition, the Pentagon” has to be able to “meet its deterrence requirements with existing stockpile numbers,” and beyond.

The CIA’s and State Department’s favored China analysts declared that “China is now shifting to war-fighting mode.”

“Beijing’s refusal to talk and its insistence on secrecy about its arsenal means Washington has no choice but to believe but to believe Beijing intends to build a bigger nuclear force than America’s” (Gordon Chang)—that is, to build 14-20 times that of their existing amount of nuclear weapons. The falsifications continued well after the entire episode had been exposed, with media pretending not to know, while describing the “explosive growth” of Chinese nuclear arms as “breathtaking, and frankly, the word ‘breathtaking’ may not be enough” (The Sun, U.S. edition).

Incidentally, had the free press actually been concerned about “explosive growth” of nuclear arms, they would certainly have had no difficulty finding and reporting material documenting such “breathtaking” developments. Just prior to the carefully orchestrated furor about Chinese windmills purported to be “nuclear silos,” the UK openly declared that it would “expand” its “nuclear warhead stockpile by over 40%,” closer to 300 warheads in total.

This fact, too, was totally useless for the purposes of ideological warfare, and was therefore quickly forgotten in the ever-expanding memory hole. However, this is marginal compared to the nuclear escalation that by far puts in the shade other countries’ combined such. Namely, the dramatic American nuclear expansion program—which, of course, also happens to be the one never mentioned in the Free press. It consists of new nuclear missiles, strategic bombers (the newly revealed B-21), submarines and so on, which in total will cost $1.7 trillion, according to congressional numbers—all in all an impressive escalation.

The new B-21 bomber. [Source: military-today.com]

Biden’s Nuclear Posture Review calls for “Modernizing U.S. nuclear forces,” and an openness to a first nuclear strike, which is in order with earlier policy of the only country to have used the nuclear bomb on a population.

The Union of Concerned Scientists deemed the Review to be “a terrifying document” that “not only keeps the world on a path of increasing nuclear risk, in many ways it increases that risk.” Somewhat of an understatement.

Not everyone agrees, however. Nuclear weapons producers and retired military generals inform us that nuclear bombs must serve “as a mainstay of deterrence,” and defense

“is based on our demonstrated capabilities and the will power to use nuclear weapons.” A no-first-use policy of nuclear bombs must, therefore, be regarded as “narcissistic, self-indulgent, dangerous and destabilizing” (C. Robert Kehler, retired general and board member of Maxar Technologies).

You will notice that the entire publication about the alleged threat posed to us by China from which we have to defend ourselves is complete hypocrisy; apparently the West is not obliged to non-proliferation.

That is reserved for our adversary—a funny thought, given that China has about the same number of nuclear weapons as countries such as France, Israel or the UK. The U.S., on the other hand, has 14 times the amount China does, is spending close to two trillion dollars on nuclear weapons modernization, and is carrying out massive provocation off the Chinese border. Though this militarism and nuclear arms proliferation is off the agenda, for reasons obvious enough, while the media goes along.

No sane person would like China, or any other nation for that matter, to have a nuclear arsenal, let alone for them to expand it. Therefore the first thing one who is seriously concerned about Chinese nuclear armament would do, naturally, is to not act in such a way which is known to advance it. In fact, there is a perfectly clear way to stop China from arming itself, and everyone in the government knows it. That is: for the West to stop carrying out massive military provocations against the Chinese.

Thus, military experts, in Senate hearings, note that U.S. nuclear bombs and military infrastructure established in southern Asia “pose threats to China’s ability to retain an assured retaliation capability” and to its ability “to deter” a “first strike by the United States.” “So what accounts for this pattern of change and continuity in China’s strategic posture?” the Senate asked—“Several external drivers play important roles. Foremost among them are developments by the United States [and its allies],” deploying their military forces in China’s backyard, and massively increasing their already overwhelming nuclear capacities.

In the technical diplomatic literature it is conceded all the time that “China” is merely sending “a response to the gratuitous, unrestrained nuclear policies” of the U.S. and its allies. “Massively outgunned, China is acting rationally and predictably…By modernizing its nuclear force, the United States is giving China every reason to expand its own” (Foreign Affairs). Or to quote military analysts in Forbes: The (exaggerated) Chinese modernization of its military and nuclear forces “is a rational response to decades of American provocations. And if those provocations don’t end, rivals such as China are sure to develop even more capable nukes.”

Source: historyproject9.weebly.com

“China” does this, notes Dr. Jeffrey Lewis, one the leading arms-control experts, “because they want to be able to have a secure second-strike capability” were the U.S. to attack—as it regularly simulates in military exercises off China’s borders, together with a hostile alliance of nuclear-armed nations. And so the technical military analyses go, all in virtually the same tune and all equally unreported to the general public.

With the U.S. knowingly acting precisely to increase the Chinese nuclear threat against itself, we can discard the alleged concern and fear over Chinese nuclear arms. The trivial truism that the U.S. is knowingly and actively driving the Chinese to the path of militarization, is far beyond what can be perceived in the Free press. Although the person who fanatically reads the entire press can learn about these facts, one will likely not read the very plausible reality that U.S. policy is in fact designed to induce this Chinese response, as a cover for further aggressive military escalation and renewal. Though all of this is inaudible among the current jingoist blast, favored by hawks and doves alike.

Reaching a frenzied pitch in the fall and winter of 2022, a media barrage sought to inform that, on nuclear talks, there is “zero give on Beijing’s side,” noting “the fact that Xi” will not “negotiate on any of the contentious issues…because of his long record of deception,” to quote The Washington Post’s Josh Rogin.

A few days earlier, the same Post warned in an editorial that “the United States faces” a menace “who might prove far less willing to sign up for new treaty limits”—that is, “China, which has refused to engage in negotiations about its nuclear forces.” Obviously the West has to respond accordingly, and so it “is time for diplomatic rock ‘n’ roll. Let’s prevent whining from isolationists,” to use advice given in The Wall Street Journal by John Bolton.

The record of diplomatic proposals is clear and easy to discover, had there been an interest to do so. But the actual facts are entirely unacceptable to Western government propaganda, and are therefore simply not facts. Namely, that China on multiple occasions has signaled its willingness to establish a nuclear weapons settlement.

Let us pick just a few examples. In 2020 and 2021, there were concerns over how to “bring the Chinese to the negotiating table” to be held between the U.S. and Russia in the START talks in early 2021, as then U.S. top arms negotiator Marshall Billingslea, put it.

Shortly after this announcement, the Chinese leadership declared that it would be “happy” to participate to reach a settlement on the nuclear issue, “happy to participate the next day.” But on one condition: The U.S. dramatically reduces its nuclear arsenal—a perfectly sensible condition, given the astronomical discrepancy between China’s and the U.S.’s arsenals. It is not as if the U.S. ignored the proposal. It responded. Namely, it responded by totally rejecting the diplomatic proposal, boasting that it would outspend China “into oblivion”: “We know how to win these [arms] races and we know how to spend the adversary into oblivion,” Billingslea trumpeted.

Last year, in November 2021, Xi Jinping informed, that “China supports ASEAN’s [Southeast Asia’s intergovernmental body] efforts to build a nuclear weapon-free zone, and is prepared to sign the Protocol to the Treaty on the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon-Free Zone as early as possible.” “Beijing’s demand for a nuclear-free Southeast Asia comes as the U.S. and UK empower their ally Australia with nuclear-armed submarines,” as the Asian press noted.

But none of this can be reported in the West, since it would give the game away, and would render unusable the inversion of fact suggesting that the West is hopelessly trying to reach a settlement, facing “Chinese unwillingness to join any arms-control regime in the foreseeable future” (Global Asia). That is not allowed to happen, since the cover for aggression against China would be exposed for what it plainly is.

One could extend the discussion beyond merely the questions of militarism and diplomacy in Western conduct toward China, though very little unexpected is to be discovered. It was once observed by leaders of the early modern PR and propaganda industry that “it is as impossible to imagine a genuine democracy without the science of persuasion,” namely propaganda, “as it is to think of a totalitarian state without coercion.”

This never ceases to be verified. In short, the behavior of the intellectual classes in their analysis of Western imperial policy in Asia is yet another illustration of how close we are to reaching “the ideal of a propaganda-managed democracy.”^[1]

*

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.

Andi Olluri lives in western Sweden. He just turned 20 and is studying dietetics. Andi has been an activist since he was a young teenager. He can be reached at [email protected].

Note

1. Alex Carey, Taking the Risk Out of Democracy: Corporate Propaganda Versus Freedom and Liberty (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1997), 19, 82.

Featured image is from brownsbfs.co.uk

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 psychopathic Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India, is trying to have it both ways, for and against the world’s only remaining empire, which now is the U.S. empire (India formerly having been “The Raj” of the English Empire — now replacing the old vassalage by a different one); and in doing so is displaying that he adheres to traditional power-politics, instead of to India’s former principled anti-imperialistic neutrality (from India’s anti-imperialist Congress Party) as regards which of the world’s nations will be establishing the socio-cultural-political system that will guide the world in the future.

By Modi’s obsession with power-politics, instead of concern for continuing India’s anti-imperialism, he is leading his country into an Asia that will be increasingly Americanized — which means more hostile toward world peace, more military-dominated, and more encouraging of a World War Three — as being part of the world’s only remaining empire (the U.S. empire) necessarily is.

Modi is turning his country gradually hostile toward Russia and China, and more hostile than before against Pakistan. India is heading to become another American colony — a nation that will be at war not just internally but also externally, and joining America’s decline, and thereby increasing the world’s decline, by slowing the world’s move toward peace and encouraging the war-industries that increasingly lead the U.S. Government to lead the world toward a nuclear WW III.

As the cogoport report headlined, on 6 July 2022, “A Showcase of India’s Top 10 Trade Partners”, summarizes:

In the wake of the US surmounting China as India’s top trade partner in 2021 – 22, it is pertinent to take a look at South Asia’s biggest economy’s top 10 trade partners. Interestingly, barring the top trade partner, the US, India has a trade deficit with the rest of the nine partners, amounting to a colossal $154.7 billion.

Only the top two partners, the US and China have bilateral trade above $100 billion whereas the bottom three, Indonesia, South Korea and Australia roughly have the same quantum of around $25 billion.

America replaces China, now, as India’s top trading partner; and, whereas India imports from China far more than it exports to China, India exports to America far more than it imports from America.

“Starkly, the US is the only trade partner in the top 10 club with which India enjoys a trade surplus, $32.7 billion.”

In balance-of-power politics (the politics that drove imperialism, and that produced both of the two World Wars, and that FDR tried to replace by inventing and starting to design a U.N. that would be empowered to create and enforce democratically produced international laws but which Truman stopped), exports — which enrich the billionaires most of all — supposedly benefit a nation more than imports do (that’s not actually true); and, so, India’s trying now to export more than it imports (which would benefit India’s billionaires) is really India trying to become an imperial power: a goal that’s both evil and stupid, and that will never realistically be possible in the foreseeable future (especially because it would require India to replace America as the world’s only imperial power — and that won’t happen).

On February 9th, Leonid Savin headlined at Oriental Review, “U.S. Strengthens Presence In Southeast Asia”, and he opened,

India and the U.S. last week launched a joint initiative on critical and emerging technologies (iCET). This was discussed in Tokyo back in May 2022 at the Quadrilateral Dialogue summit. Now the signing took place in Washington just after the U.S.-India Business Forum.

The meeting was reportedly preceded by tweets from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and U.S. President Joe Biden, reflecting an agreement on the two sides’ strategic, commercial and scientific approaches to technology.

On January 31, 2023, the first iCET meeting was held in Washington, D.C., hosted by the two countries’ national security advisers Jake Sullivan and Ajit Doval. On the part of the U.S. there was also the administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the director of the National Science Foundation, the executive secretary of the National Space Council, and senior officials from the Department of State, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, and the National Security Council. On the Indian part there were the Indian Ambassador to the United States, the Chief Science Advisor to the Government of India, the Chairman of the Indian Space Research Organization, the Secretary of the Department of Telecommunications, the Science Advisor to the Secretary of Defense, the Director General of the Defense Research and Development Organization, high-ranking officials from the Department of Electronics and Information Technology and the Secretariat of the National Security Council.

According to the White House webside, “The two sides discussed opportunities for greater cooperation in critical and emerging technologies, co-development and coproduction, and ways to deepen connectivity across our innovation ecosystems. They noted the value of establishing “innovation bridges” in key sectors, including through expos, hackathons, and pitch sessions. They also identified the fields of biotechnology, advanced materials, and rare earth processing technology as areas for future cooperation”.

In recent years, cooperation between India and the U.S. has grown rapidly in all spheres, from trade and economic deals to military exercises and intelligence exchanges. The two sides have their own reasons for deepening such cooperation – the U.S. has an interest in containing China by proxy, as well as keeping an eye on Pakistan, which from time to time shows a zeal for autonomy. Both countries pose threats to India, so New Delhi’s external support is in the Indian leadership’s interest.

In this regard, U.S. Undersecretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks told Indian National Security Adviser Ajit Doval that “building alliances and partnerships are a top priority” for the Pentagon. …

Though Modi speaks out of both sides of his mouth — the imperialist (pro-U.S.) and anti-imperialist (pro-China and pro-Russia) sides of his mouth  — he now is finally behaving clearly as an imperialist.

He aims for India ultimately to be a part of the American global empire.

He is toxic to the Indian people but a blessing to India’s billionaires.

His imperial dreams for India can only prolong and slow the decline of America’s empire, by India’s joining it as yet another U.S. ‘ally’ or vassal-nation (colony).

It’s bad for the Indian people, and it is also bad for the entire world. But what is really stunning is its stupidity. (Unless, of course, Modi’s only objective is to further enrich India’s billionaires at the expense of the Indian public. It’s smart for that.)

*

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 Duran.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public. He is a regular 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.

***

Incisive Analysis of renowned author Colonel Douglas Macgegor

“I think it is clear that the American people are largely divorced from the reality of this [Ukrainian] conflict, as they have been for the last 30 years.

War has always been something that happened far away on somebody else’s soil. The difference this time is that Washington has decided, along with help and assistance particularly from its allies and London and the global financial community run out of New York City, to wage war on the Russian state with the goal of not simply of regime change but destroying the state particularly dismembering it.” – Col. Douglas Macgregor

Watch his interview below.

*

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 Cradle

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 leader of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council is Oleksyi Danilov.

Danilov is a powerful and interesting figure.

After taking Soledar a few weeks ago, Russia just took another strategic fortified town Krasna Gora yesterday. (see map below)

Russia is developing fast all the way around Bakhmut.

Russia is pressing everywhere on the frontlines and Ukrainian losses in men and matériel are enormous.

Dispatch of NATO tanks is still far away and will not make a significant difference anyway. Obviously, Russia has taken all the initiatives and is extremely successfully preparing the battlefield for even bigger offensives.

US think-tanks and media are becoming openly nervous. US think-tanks like CSIS is getting desperate that Russia is depleting US military stocks, and RAND (Pentagon affiliated) has begun to shriek that

“US interests must overrule Ukrainian interests”, and that a continuation of the war is suddenly “no longer in US interests”. The Times of London suddenly starts to talk about that Zelensky “owes the West” and they want to put strings on Zelensky to stop him.

In spite of that, Danilov claims that Russia has “big problems” – just like the CIA institute for the lies about war.

Simultaneously with Ukrainian and US lies about the course of the war, the enormous purges in Kiev continue to grow.

Obviously, the Ukrainian purges are organized by the USA in efforts to stabilize Kiev in spite of Ukraine’s breakdowns at the front.

And Danilov seems to be central in the purge process.

Purges in Kiev follow the classical pattern

They started in the top of the security organs, using the secret service SBU and spreading to the Interior Ministry (police), Defense Ministry etc. A “corruption scandal” took away Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov.

A “helicopter crash” took away all the top of the Interior Ministry, including Interior Minister Denys Monastyrsky himself. Various “incidents” take away other key-figures like Zelensky’s spin-doctor and buddy Oleksii Arestovych.

A murder by the SBU takes away a former member of Ukraine’s negotiation team in Istanbul.

Now the Kiev purges proceed laterally “down the ranks” in the SBU and military – and the purges spread horizontally to other powerful centres like the tax authority.

The Kiev purges are becoming a massacre.

Danilov in the Security Council with Budanov as the new Defense Minister while still controlling the SBU through a henchman as successor – they are the new axis running Kiev. Steered by the US, of course.

Is Zelensky part of that ?

CIA boss William Burns’ trip to Kiev included personal talks to calm down a nervous Zelensky.

Zelensky more and more looks like a one-man show.

Zelensky is kept until his soft utility for PR has to be sacrificed for the increasing US need to openly resort to massive violence against Ukrainians – the bloody show must get bloodier to go on.

Then Zelensky will suffer an “accident” or a “scandal” – “ohh, we didn’t know”that Zelensky had stashed millions of dollars in Monaco and the Virgin islands. Though for a long time, reports flourish that Zelensky’s people have flooded Monaco.

*

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.

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

Featured image: Oleksyi Danilov (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

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.

***

Anybody who seriously thinks that Universal Basic Income (UBI) programs of the future won’t be full blown social credit systems need look no further than Brazil, where newly selected “socialist:” / globalist Lula da Silva just decreed that the Bolsa Familia program will require family members to be vaccinated in order to continue receiving benefits.

“we can’t play around. It is a question of science. If there are ten covid vaccines, 50 to take, I will take as many as necessary because I like my life. I think everyone has a duty to their children’s life, take them [to vaccinate] at the right age ”.

The news comes via The Rio Times, which describes the Bolsa program as “a social welfare program for the poorest families in Brazil” and “a kind of Universal Basic Income”.

Lula says Brazilians can receive financial aid only if they have taken the vax. Bolsa Família will require vax certificates from participants & their children: We can't play, it's a question of science. If I have 10 covid vaccines to take, I will take all that is necessary. 💉 💰 pic.twitter.com/hqrYq4jO6r

— Geopolitics & Empire (@Geopolitics_Emp) February 7, 2023

UBI is considered by many to be beneficent and inevitable. I personally believe the latter but not the former.

However it shouldn’t surprise anyone that if you’re dependent on The Saviour State for your sustenance (as Charles Hugh Smith calls it),  you are, in effect, their chattel.

CBDCs will be the rails for UBI programs

The emergence of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) initiatives in nearly every nation on earth clearly signals the direction this is going. Nearly every CBDC white paper or proposal I’ve come across have the following three characteristics spelled out in plain text, and I expect every CBDC to have these five capabilities baked-in, whether or not they are initially enabled (or  documented).

#1) Expiry dates / use-by dates

CBDCs will have expiry dates after which their value will evaporate or erode. What I’ve noticed is white papers coming out of central banks started framing it as a feature, not a bug, to facilitate “recovery of lost funds”.

Abstract

An important feature of physical cash payments is resilience, which is due to their indifference to power outages or network coverage. Many central banks are exploring issuing digital cash substitutes with similar online payment functionality. Such substitutes could incorporate novel features, making them more desirable than physical cash. This paper considers introducing an expiry date for online digital currency balances to automate personal loss recovery. We show that this functionality could substantially increase consumer demand for digital cash, with the time to expiration playing an important role. Having more information available to the central bank improves accuracy of loss recovery but may decrease welfare.
— Best Before Expiry? Expiring Digital Currency and Loss Recovery, Bank of Canada Staff Paper, December 24, 2021

However the real reason CBDCs will have expiry dates is to stimulate money velocity and keep recipients dependent.

#2) “Anti-hoarding” features

Saving for the future is being rebranded as “hoarding” and it is becoming officially unfashionable because personal savings reduces dependancy on the state. The easiest mechanism for achieving this will be through negative interest rates on savings accounts, as per this IMF white paper,

…which goes on to outline the challenges there would be in eliminating the “arbitrage” between digital and physical cash:

A zero lower bound can be broken through a combination of (1) adopting or strengthening an electronic money standard in which electronic money is the unit of account and (2) implementing a time-varying interest rate (or more generally, rate of return) on paper currency (cash). Then, as the interest rate on cash moves in line with the official policy rates, there is no arbitrage between cash and money in the bank. Operationally this can be done while remaining quite close to the current monetary system, but there are several legal, communication, and political challenges to a transition to such an electronic money standard (Agarwal, and Kimball 2019).

(Despite the current rise in rates, once the money printers fire back up, this is where we’re headed).

#3) Total Information Awareness

Once it’s digitized in a centralized database (central banks) as opposed to being cryptographically secured on a decentralized blockchain (Bitcoin) – everything becomes known to central authorities instantly. Taxation can be applied per-transaction, but more interestingly – prices can also be modified on the fly.

If you’re behind on your property or income taxes – or have an unpaid fine (maybe because you’re fighting it), for example, they could simply enable a rolling garnishee on your wallet until it’s paid off.

While all transaction signatures are public on Bitcoin – they are pseudonymous and more importantly, unalterable. It’s true it may be known or discoverable that A sent sats to B, but there’s nothing any third-party can do about it. With Lightning on the ascent, combined with  various privacy enhancements there – Bitcoin development is moving in the direction of more freedom and more privacy – which is the opposite direction of most CBDC initiatives.

Finally, whether CBDCs are launched with the noblest of intentions, there will at some point arise “an emergency” which will make it necessary for The People in Charge to “flip the switch” and turn them into:

#4) Social Credit Systems

Imagine if “LoonCoin” was a thing last year when the #FreedomConvoy hit Ottawa (and signalled the beginning of a worldwide revolt against Covid tyranny). Instead of emailing a list of bank accounts to be frozen that were cribbed from a (hacked) spreadsheet, they could simply direct the Bank of Canada to turn off everybody’s digital wallets who were in the vicinity of the protest, or who contributed to their crowdfund, or who retweeted the #HonkHonk hashtag.

Do you think they wouldn’t have done it?

Covid vaxports have already been weaponized in China, Brazil is doing it with their UBI program and when this is all formaized into a CBDC, they will probably not launch it without the framework for widespread social credit and control systems being part of the plumbing.

We all know from our experience with the pandemic, emergencies tend to drag on in perpetuity. The “War on Terror” is still in effect, and there are still legions of collectivist automatons tweeting #CovidIsntOver.

So when “The Long Emergency” (to use James Kunstler’s term) becomes a never ending, rolling climate crisis, the social credit systems built into CBDCs will be used to enforce:

#5) Carbon footprint tracking

Back in Carbon Rationing, CBDCs and Sound Money I wrote how this trajectory is more or less baked-in now, and that the state-run financial system is undergoing a shift from a debt-backed monetary system to one based on carbon quotas.

This is the ultimate end-game of CBDCs. There is no hidden agenda or conspiracy around this (there’s already a Mastercard that cuts off your spending when you exceed your carbon quota), and globalist elites are quite up front about it….

Notice how he pitched it as “track your own footprint” then described it as “track their”, “what they’re eating”, “where they’re travelling” https://t.co/omHLzwqJAZ

— Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) February 9, 2023

Why CBDCs will ultimately fail

The developments of CBDCs is something we monitor in The Bitcoin Capitalist (formerly The Crypto Capitalist). Every month we put out our coverage of CBDCs  in the “Eye On Evilcoin” section and it’s not always bad news:

There is still  some time to stop CBDCs

Despite all the jawboning about CBDCs, nobody has really deployed anything viable. It’s all still design and planning – with some test beds going on. The few projects that have launched formal, actual CBDC’s have largely stiffed: Nigeria’s Enaira, Venezuela (lol). Even China’s much vaunted Digital Yuan had an underwhelming reception at last year’s Olympics (my suspicion is that the global financial system is unraveling faster than CBDCs can be developed, so they may have to go with something already out there, like Ethereum).

Worth noting, is that Brazil plans to deploy its CBDC next year.

I should note one exception to all the proposals out there in former CFTC Commissioner Chris Giancarlo (a.k.a “CryptoDad”) and the Digital Dollar Project. So far it’s the one proposal I’ve seen bucking the trend among all CBDC specifications in that there is no talk of expiry dates, and an actual emphasis on tokenization, custody and privacy.

CBDCs will not be permanent

It amuses me that when I read these plans around social credit flavoured CBDC’s, policy makers still continue to believe that by hobbling “cash”, making it impossible to save, eliminating privacy and layering on Orwellian levels of social control, they still get something that the public will prefer to cash, crypto or Bitcoin.

Only a central banker would be worried that people are going to want to hoard a statist shitcoin. (Especially after they put expiry dates on it).

— Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) February 8, 2023

It’s delusional.

Incentives matter, and that’s why nobody in their right might isn’t going to hold any wealth in CBDCs and keep their transactions within it to the lowest practical level.

The overall global system of governance is in a Fourth Turning style restructuring. With institutional legitimacy in tatters and public trust plummeting, CBDCs are typical and symbolic of the last gasp of industrial era, centrally planned economies.

The transition period between where we are now (Late Stage Globalism) and where we are headed – decentralized Network States, is going to be rough, so I advise battening down the hatches and reducing one’s reliance on government entitlements as much as possible…

Pro Tip: Don’t be poor

This is where we’re headed folks, so at the risk of sounding flippant, the solution is not to need financial aid.

Anybody depending on state entitlements or financial support will be CBDCerfs, their affairs fully regulated by the state, their carbon footprints metered, and rationed, while their lives are gamified through their smartphones.

Among the affluent G20 nations where woke-ism reigns supreme and neo-Marxism is still fashionable,  a lot of them may even like it.

But for the rest of us, who would prefer not to “own nothing and be happy”, it’s imperative that you have zero reliance on government subsidies, entitlements or support payments.

If you haven’t already:

1. Start a business. (Even a kitchen table business or an online venture)
2. Start stacking sats (Bitcoin) – get off zero, today.
3. Start taking sats at your business.

If you already own or run a business, buy, start or invest in another one.

It’s going to get a lot more expensive to be free. It’s not right or fair, but that doesn’t matter.

The good news is there’s never been a better time in history to learn, create, innovate and grow and these are the dynamics and incentives that will ultimately prevail. We’re in a period of Peak Collectivism and Peak Centralization now (for the next few years). This dominating ideology is ultimately an anti-human philosophyand this too shall pass.

Be ready for it, either way.

*

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.

Mark E. Jeftovic is the founder of Bombthrower and CEO of easyDNS.com, a company he co-founded in 1998 which has been operating along the lines described within these pages.

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.

***

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 WHO is working through at least two parallel plans to achieve the same objective: an unelected global dictatorship. These are the IHR amendments, and the Pandemic Treaty.  The IHR amendments are a fast track underhanded path, while the Pandemic Treaty may be a decoy or a plan B. The Pandemic Treaty is more obvious in name, and is meant to  establish the same global dictatorship, though at a slightly slower pace.

Please join me in thanking my friend James Roguski for keeping meticulous vigil on the schemes and back room deals of the World Health Organization. In this 6 minute video, he exposes the contents of the “zero draft” of the Pandemic Treaty published February 1st, 2023.  The WHO continue plotting, on behalf of evil WEF oligarchs, to enslave us all. We must stop them!

James Roguski will be keynote speaker at the World Council for Health General Assembly #76 at 2PM EST on Monday February 13, 2023 in the WCH Newsroom. If you miss the live event, you can watch this, all WCH GA’s, and more here. WCH GA’s can be joined live every Monday at 2 PM EST here. Please help support the World Council for Health 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 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.

***

On February 8, 2023, while arguing on behalf of fired NYC workers who declined covid vaccination, attorney John Bursch stated in open court that unvaccinated teachers in New York City were flagged with problem codes in their personnel files, and when that occurred “their fingerprints are sent with that flag to the FBI and the New York Criminal Justice Services.”

You can listen to Bursch make this statement at the 5:30 mark of the audio recording of the court proceeding.

The source of this information is Betsy Combier who wrote an affidavit (see pdf below) in the Kane v. de Blasio case where she stated unvaccinated teachers were given a “problem code” label that was “then sent to the national databases at both the Federal Bureau of Investigation” (FBI) and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

In federal court on February 8th attorney Susan Paulson who was defending NYC stated that educators fired for declining covid vaccination were not removed for misconduct, but rather for not meeting a requirement for employment.

If there was no misconduct, why are unvaccinated educators fingerprints sent to the FBI?

I believe that unvaccinated NYC educators were being setup to be viewed as “right-wing extremists” or even “terrorists.” We know for many years Dr. Peter Hotez has been promoting an insane narrative that those who are “vaccine hesitant” are an extremely dangerous group, and that we need to look to Homeland Security and even NATO for suggestions of how to deal with such a “threat.” (watch Part 1 & 2 of Dan Cohen’s investigation into Dr. Peter Hotez)

If we look at those who declined covid vaccination through this lens, it is easy to see why their sensitive biometric information (like fingerprints) would be illegally sent to the FBI.

Educators who declined covid vaccination – including myself – had every right to do so. No one is a “terrorist” or “extremist” for holding the line on what does and does not go inside of their bodies – especially injected directly into their muscle tissue.

These developments are certain to open up a new round of lawsuits.

Violations of educators (and students) rights to their biometric information by NYC is no surprise to me. The first time I sued the city was back in 2020 over in-school covid testing and the privacy rights to the DNA in the specimen provided. Turned out the covid testing company then-mayor Bill de Blasio contracted – FULGENT GENETICS – reserved the right to utilize DNA samples obtained from covid testing and catalogue it in proprietary libraries the company owned. Also turned out Fulgent had close ties to the Chinese Government.

Never trust NYC or their Department of “Education.”

Click here to read the full document

*

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.

Michael Kane is the founder of TeachersforChoice.org. He was an NYC public school teacher for over 14 years until he was fired for declining covid vaccination. He is also the Grassroots Organizer for Children’s Health Defense.

Featured image is from TFC

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 a clear indicator of the disappearance of freedom from our so-called Western democracies that Sy Hersh, arguably the greatest living journalist, cannot get this monumental revelation on the front of The Washington Post or The New York Times, but has to self-publish on the net.

Hersh tells the story of the U.S. destruction of the Nordstream pipelines in forensic detail, giving dates, times, method and military units involved. He also outlines the importance of the Norwegian armed forces working alongside the U.S. Navy in the operation.

One point Sy does not much stress, but it is worth saying more about, is that Norway and the U.S. are of course the two countries that have benefitted financially, to an enormous degree, from blowing up the pipeline.

Not only have both gained huge export surpluses from the jump in gas prices, Norway has directly replaced Russian gas to the tune of some $40 billion per year. From 2023 the United States will appear in that list in second place behind Norway, following the opening in the last two months of two new liquefied natural gas terminals in Germany, built to replace Russian gas with U.S. and Qatari supplies.

So Russia lost out massively financially from the destruction of Nordstream and who benefited? The U.S. and Norway, the two countries who blew up the pipeline.

But of course, this war is nothing to do with money or hydrocarbons and is all about freedom and democracy….

To return to Hersh’s account, particularly interesting are the series of decisions taken to avoid classification of the operation in various ways which would require it to be reported to Congress. In terms of United States history, this ought to be a big deal.

For the executive branch to commit what is an act of war without the approval of the legislature is fundamentally unconstitutional. But that is one of those quaint remnants of democracy that the neoliberal elite consensus can quietly sidestep nowadays.

Hersh sets out the well-known background in compelling detail, including that, from U.S. President Joe Biden down, the Americans effectively announced what they were going to do, openly.

At a Senate hearing, top US diplomat Victoria Nuland celebrated the Nord Stream 2 pipeline bombing:

"Senator Cruz, like you, I am, and I think the administration is, very gratified to know that Nord Stream 2 is now, as you like to say, a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea." pic.twitter.com/KS5OM4N165

— Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) January 27, 2023

Pres. Biden: "If Russia invades…then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."

Reporter: "But how will you do that, exactly, since…the project is in Germany's control?"

Biden: "I promise you, we will be able to do that." https://t.co/uruQ4F4zM9 pic.twitter.com/4ksDaaU0YC

— ABC News (@ABC) February 7, 2022

But what most worries me about the entire story is the unanimous complicity of the mainstream media in ignoring the completely obvious.

The media line, parroted here relentlessly by the BBC and corporate media, was  that the Russians had probably themselves blown up the pipeline on which they had expended such great resources and three decades of intense diplomatic activity, and which was to be the key to Russia’s single most valuable source of income for the next 40 years.

This was always quite literally incredible. You would have to be deranged to believe it.

How the Big Lie Works 

It actually taught me not just that we truly are in the realm of totalitarianism and the Big Lie, but I learnt something very important about how the Big Lie works.

The secret is not that people genuinely believe an outrageous claim. The secret is that people do genuinely believe that they are in a battle of good against evil, and it is necessary to accept the narrative being promoted, in the interests of fighting evil.

Don’t question, just follow. If you do question, you are promoting evil.

I am sure that is how it works.

State and corporate stenographer journalists are actually intelligent individuals. If they thought about it, they would realise that the narrative that Russia blew up its own pipeline is obvious nonsense.

But they are convinced it is morally wrong to think about it.

Seymour Hersh signing books at the London Review of Books bookshop, April 2016. (David Jones, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Which is why none of them challenged the equally mad claims that Russia was repeatedly shelling its own forces occupying the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station. It’s also why none of them challenged the utterly risible official version of the Skripal story.

I previously told the anecdote from when I worked in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and asked a good friend if he really believed the misinformation on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD) with which he was involved.

He replied by referring to the video game “Championship Manager” (now renamed “Football Manager”), which we used to play together. He said when he was in the game, it was immersive, he was manager of Liverpool and it fully absorbed him.

Similarly, when he walked through the FCO gates, the world of the intelligence reports was immersive and Iraq did have these WMDs inside that world. He worked in the “reality” of the FCO. Once he left in the evening, he lived in a different reality, the world of us in the pub.

I know of journalists bright enough to detach their professional output from what they really think, in a similar way. (I once had a conversation along these lines with Jeremy Bowen in Tashkent.)

Most however don’t think like this. They simply think that all right-thinking people support the historic struggle against the evil Russians, so it must be right to read out the propaganda without thinking too much about it.

Those of us critical of the aggressive promotion of war in Europe, are not only barred from all mainstream media and confined to corners of the internet. Even there we are heavily suppressed on social media (which is why Sy Hersh’s article does not have the scores of millions of readers it merits).

We can’t even obtain freedom of assembly.

Two established left-wing venues have cancelled the “No-2-NATO” meeting I am addressing in London on Feb. 25. Conway Hall’s reasons for cancellation included threats to funding and fears for the safety of staff.

We are now reduced to a guerrilla meeting, the Central London venue for which will not be announced until the evening before.

Is this really a democracy, where it is not possible for dissidents to hold a public meeting without secrecy, subterfuge and hiding from supporters of the state?

I do urge you to come along on the day, whatever your views on the subject, to support the right to freedom of speech.

I have a different view from perhaps all of the other speakers, on the legitimacy of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which I oppose.

But I also oppose NATO expansion which is an underlying cause of the war, and indeed oppose the existence of NATO itself.

NATO is a war machine that sucks resources from working people to benefit the military industrial complex, and unleashes devastating destruction on the developing states that do not make their natural resources available to Western billionaire elites.

It is also a fundamental node of the propaganda apparatus that manipulates and controls our society, particularly as counter narrative. Dissident thought is now rigorously and systematically excluded.

There is no longer an Overton window of permitted debate. It has narrowed and should be renamed the Overton letterbox.

One of those small difficult ones right down at the bottom of the door.  With a very fierce spring, and snarling dogs guarding it.

*

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.

Craig Murray is an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010. His coverage is entirely dependent on reader support. Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Featured image: LNG site in the Norwegian industrial island of Melkøya, end point of the undersea pipeline for natural gas from the Snøhvit fields in the Barents Sea. (Andreas Rümpel, CC BY-SA 3.0, Wikimedia Commons)

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.

***

CDC Director Rochelle Walensky appeared before Congress this week, and blamed “dis and misinformation” for kindergarten children showing up at school without being fully vaccinated.

Click here to view the video

And where could these parents be getting this “misinformation” that is causing them not to vaccinate their children?

Maybe they are getting it from the CDC’s own Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) which is available to anyone in the public.

According to VAERS, there were 77,990 injuries including 263 deaths recorded in 2021 and 2022 following all vaccines. (Source.)

Of those 77,990 cases filed during 2021 and 2022, 61,375 were following COVID-19 “vaccines,” including 160 of the deaths recorded. (Source.)

Prior to 2020, for the 10-year period covering 2010 through 2019, there were 120,783 cases of vaccine injuries and deaths recorded in VAERS, or about 12,000 per year. (Source.)

That’s an increase of over 200% for vaccine injuries and deaths since the COVID shots were introduced, according to the CDC’s own data.

Could this be the “misinformation” that Walensky was talking about?

Of course Walensky knows all of this, since it is the CDC’s own data, so by petitioning Congress and parents to give more vaccines to their children is intent to commit premeditated murder.

Why would parents want to avoid that?

*

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 HIN

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. 

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.

***

An extremely significant video features three activists in today’s truth and justice movement, each playing a seminal role championing the cause of human freedom and redress from the genocidal killers. The three are involved in several exciting related developments currently breaking that are unprecedented regarding game-changing tipping points involving potential landmark lawsuits against both national governments and the primary mRNA Big Pharma giant – Pfizer-BioNTech as the fascist business model for merging corporate and state power.

The second speaker in the video is retired Swiss international banker, author and filmmaker Pascal Najadi, who filed a criminal case on December 2^nd, 2022 in Lucerne, Switzerland against the sitting President of the Swiss Confederation Alain Berset. Since March 2020 Berset heads Switzerland’s COVID response.  Pascal Najedi’s lawsuit charges him and other prominent national government officials for abusive process – deceptively inflicting risk of injury and death to Swiss citizenry based on Pfizer’s experimental vaccine deception.

From the December 7^th, 2022 Swiss Times opening sentence:

Switzerland’s future President Alain Berset falsely claimed on national television that those vaccinated with Covid-19 vaccines could not spread the virus, but has not yet been held accountable.  One Swiss man wants to change that.

Like nearly 70% of the Swiss citizens who listened to their medical and government authorities and in good faith, received at least one vaccine injection, trusting the authorities, Pascal Najadi along with his wife and mother complied with the national policy and received three Pfizer injections. Pascal was shocked when Pfizer director Janine Small on October 11, 2022 speaking before the European Union’s Covid-19 Response answered Dutch EU member Rob Roos’ all-important question:

Was the Pfizer vaccine tested on stopping the transmission of the virus before it entered the market?

Janine Small’s response:

Regarding the question around did we know about stopping immunization before it entered the market…No.

Having carefully noted previous official statements issued by Swiss public health authorities, including back on August 3, 2021 when then Swiss Health Minister Alain Berset was present at a press conference admitting that those vaccinated are transmitting the COVID virus as much as those unvaccinated. Then on October 27, 2021 on national television, in an effort to push through his Covid-19 legislation agenda, Alain Berset stated that with the vaccine certificate, Swiss citizens will demonstrate that they are not contagious but safe, thus contradicting his less than three months earlier announcement. Essentially, this confirms that current Swiss President Alain Berset knew his October 2021 statement was false and misleading. Pascal concluded that his nation’s leader knowingly, recklessly and falsely promoted the dangerous experimental vaccines that placed Pascal, his family and millions of his fellow citizens at considerable risk of harm.

Pascal Najadi’s case is the first lawsuit of its kind calling for investigation and prosecution at the national level of any country in the world, once Switzerland’s current Attorney General Stefan Blättler agreed to prosecute the criminal case against the current Swiss president, seeking adjudication in a federal court of law, charging the top political officeholder for willfully deceiving the public, persistently misleading and pushing the mRNA vaccine as safe and effective as national COVID policy when it’s clearly been proven that vaccines are neither safe nor effective.

Pascal Najadi cites Article 6 of the Swiss Constitution that grants every citizen the right and duty to uphold justice in compliance with Swiss law according to the Constitution.

Pascal asserts that as a citizen it is his duty in observance of the law to file the criminal charges against the top leaders within the Swiss government for violating the law. Pascal’s lawsuit also contends that Pfizer, the CDC and every national and international medical regulator in the world cannot legally authorize or impose a drug injection on a population when its legal authorization is limited as an experimental drug only that we now know carries an extraordinarily long list of potential adverse and even deadly side effects, and that according to both the Nuremberg Code and Swiss national law, it cannot be administered without signed consent of every person prior to voluntarily submitting to COVID inoculation.

Also, in the first part of the video international attorney and activist Todd Collender shares that he is now working on behalf of the royal family of Thailand to seek a military tribunal in Thailand. 44-year old Princess Bajrakitiyabha and daughter of the King of Thailand Maha Vajiralongkorn, collapsed 23 days after her third Pfizer injection, slipping into a coma due to alleged heart failure, leading to lack of oxygen to her brain. For over six weeks she has been in a comatose state, likely now brain dead and an apparent fatality according to American attorney Todd Collender.

Thus, at least two major cases are currently underway on record with international implications that may well be instrumental in triggering many more criminal lawsuits filed at the national level in numerous countries. Perhaps the so far, lame International Criminal Court at The Hague might be prompted to belatedly follow through on the Reiner Fuellmich lawsuit filed a year ago seeking redress for crimes against humanity.

An optimistic Todd Callender announces on video:

BREAKING NEWS: Swiss President and the Minister of Health are under investigation, indictment, and prosecution by the Attorney General for Covid Crimes involving lying about the vaccine effectiveness and safety. Thailand convening war crime tribunals to nullify Pfizer Contracts. pic.twitter.com/3RfT4t3puq

— Truth Justice ™ (@SpartaJustice) February 7, 2023

The tide has changed, it’s really changed, and now you’re going to see the floodgates open. These are universal jurisdiction crimes, which means that if Switzerland wanted to prosecute our president, they would not only have the ability to do that in abstentia, they would have the ability to sentence and actually carry out that sentence in abstentia, meaning that extraterritorially, they were able to find a treaty partner that could go and grab whoever it is responsible, bring them back to Switzerland for the execution if that what the sentence was. This is a big deal, this is a huge deal, the first sovereign to do this.

The promising development in Thailand was also explained on the video by Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, a fellow Thai and professor of virology and immunology as well as renowned COVID activist and physician who has been passionately warning of the dangers of Covid-19 vaccines for the last three years. The doctor announces that for the first time he was invited by a nation’s authorities and advisors from the Thai government in this case, to offer his expertise testimony in a hearing. Dr. Bhakdi laid out details how the “entire Covid-19 agenda was fake” based on fraud, which then prompted the Thai government to declare its contract with Pfizer-BioNTech null and void. Dr. Bhakdi maintains that Pfizer is now obligated to pay back billions to Thailand for the government to then recompensate its harmed citizens.

Dr. Bhakdi along with Todd Collender are part of the professional team now working with the royal family of Thailand to seek justice at the national level to hold the perpetrators accountable. Dr. Bhakdi was informed by German lawyers that a criminal case can also be filed in the United States against Pfizer for harming and killing millions. These unfolding actions together represent a fundamental turnaround and necessary sea change that so many of us around the globe have been seeking and waiting for, as the beginning of a worldwide legal movement through criminal lawsuits filed in national federal courts and governments to ensure that Big Pharma giants like Pfizer conspiring with the WHO, major governments, their public health agencies and medical organizations along with mainstream corporate media and Big Tech industry will all have to pay for their guilt in each’s active contributory role committing genocidal crimes against humanity.

Finally, Dr. Bhakdi mentions that Bill Gates has spoken of new viruses coming, that Dr. Bhakdi warns will be released in the spring of 2023 and that Pfizer has patents placing the same lipid poisons in today’s flu vaccines as well as all the veterinary vaccines worldwide, containing the same deadly poison secretly included in all the vaccines being given to pets around the world. He says profit from this income source will be used to pay out settlements as Pfizer’s plotted scheme to stay solvent and remain in business.

Meanwhile, recent legal actions in Florida in December 2022 report that Governor Ron DeSantis requested a grand jury investigation of any Big Pharma wrongdoing regarding its so-called Covid-19 vaccinations, specifically any false claims that they could effectively prevent the spread of the virus. And on December 23, 2022, the Florida Supreme Court approved the governor’s request to convene a grand jury of 18 members that will last a year to determine if criminal indictments are warranted and make viable recommendations.

Implications of potential criminal wrongdoing by Pfizer emerged in late January 2023 when watchdog activist group Project Veritas caught on tape Pfizer executive Jordon Trishton Walker, boasting how the company is exploring vaccine marketability profits based on the drug company’s own mutated virus in the lab. Of course, it didn’t take long for Pfizer’s vehement denial, claiming it “has not conducted gain of function or directed evolution research.” RNA technology pioneer and harsh Covid-19 critic Dr. Robert Malone labeled Pfizer’s doublespeak denial a “word salad” likened to “renaming a child kidnapping and claiming it was an impromptu adoption.”

*

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 James H. Fetzer.

Joachim Hagopian is a West Point graduate, former Army officer and author of “Don’t Let the Bastards Getcha Down,” exposing a faulty US military leadership system based on ticket punching up the seniority ladder, invariably weeding out the best and brightest, leaving mediocrity and order followers rising to the top as politician-bureaucrat generals designated to lose every modern US war by elite design. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field with abused youth and adolescents for more than a quarter century. In Los Angeles he found himself battling the largest county child protective services in the nation within America’s thoroughly broken and corrupt child welfare system.

The experience in both the military and child welfare system prepared him well as a researcher and independent journalist, exposing the evils of Big Pharma and how the Rockefeller controlled medical and psychiatric system inflict more harm than good, case in point the current diabolical pandemic hoax and genocide. As an independent journalist for the last decade, Joachim has written hundreds of articles for many news sites, like Global Research, lewrockwell.com and currently https://jameshfetzer.org. As a published bestselling author on Amazon of a 5-book volume series entitled Pedophilia & Empire: Satan, Sodomy & the Deep State, his A-Z sourcebook series exposes the global pedophilia scourge is available free at https://pedoempire.org/contents/. Joachim also hosts the Revolution Radio weekly broadcast “Cabal Empire Exposed,” every Friday morning at 6AM EST (ID: revradio, password: rocks!).

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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. 

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 San Remo Festival will be remembered as the “Festival of the two Presidents”: the President of the Italian  Republic Mattarella at the opening and the Ukrainian President Zelensky at the closing. The latter does not appear live, following the protests that were raised in Italy. However, the substance remains: Zelensky sent a speech to the San Remo Festival which  – the anchorman Amadeus in charge of this reading announced – “it is even translated by the Ukrainian Embassy in order to be very faithful to President Zelensky’s writing”.

Zelensky’s performance at the Festival is confronted with the reality happening in Ukraine, reconstructed through dramatic visual documentation in this episode of Grandangolo.

What Zelensky’s real role is, has been revealed by a journalistic investigation published by The Guardian. In the 2019 presidential election, actor Zelenski, who became famous for his TV sitcom on the corruption of Ukrainian political leaders, pledged to end the war in Donbas and clean up the oligarch-dominated government system. He accused wealthy Petro Poroshenko, incumbent president, of hiding his assets in tax havens abroad.

Regarding his first commitment, once in the presidency, Zelensky’s role was not to end the war in Donbas, unleashed in 2014 against the Russian populations of this region, but to fuel the NATO-led de facto war to target Russia.

Regarding the second commitment to eliminate corruption, in particular the export of capital to tax havens, the investigation elements  published by The Guardian are clear. Zelensky is the co-owner of three companies headquartered and capitalized in Belize and the British Virgin Islands (Central America) and Cyprus. Upon assuming the post of chairman, Zelensky “transferred” his company shares to two of his partners. And, once in office, he appointed his first partner  as his special assistant and the second one as head of the Ukrainian secret service.

*

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: Ariston Theater in Sanremo February 16, 2013 during the last night of the 2013 Festival (Licensed under 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.

***

Mind control is the final frontier of the technocratic revolution. What you say, do, buy, and sell is increasingly trackable through technology. Yet, so far, the human mind remains a sanctuary free from prying foreign eyes – the last refuge.

This will not last if the technocrats have their way.

“Can you imagine that in ten years when we are sitting here we have an implant in our brains and I can immediately feel… because you all will have implants [gesturing to audience], I can measure your brain waves,” cartoon James Bond villain Klaus Shwaub giddily introduced the prospect of shared consciousness at Davos.

Duke University Professor Nita Farahany, also at Davos, surveyed the current state of mind-monitoring technology.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) is very interested in monitoring our thoughts. – “Imagine a world of total transparency, where every thought you think is visible to everyone else,” they eagerly state. – Duke University Professor Nita Farahany 2023. pic.twitter.com/7aTKqz9sCX

— SikhForTruth (@SikhForTruth) January 25, 2023

Nita Farahany, Professor at Duke University talks about “the coming age of wearable neurotechnology” where your ear pods monitor your brainwave activity “all day every day” to “track brain health” #wef23

What could possibly go wrong here… pic.twitter.com/zdkFpthqIF

— Andreas Wailzer (@Andreas_Wailzer) January 20, 2023

(1/2) Nita Farahany, Professor at Duke University, discusses if employers and insurance companies should have access to data about “genetic predictions” of people’s future health.

NO! and that should not even be a question#WEF23 pic.twitter.com/BaTXbqyt4t

— Andreas Wailzer (@Andreas_Wailzer) January 20, 2023

Likely, the technology is actually further along than publicly acknowledged, as the technocrats tend to roll out controversial advances incrementally to slowly acclimate the slaves to their new reality.

Note the apparent lack of any hesitation on the part of Farahany, Schwab, or any of these WEF technocrats to these novel technologies. Normal people (who don’t crave total control) don’t casually discuss monitoring every human’s brain activity 24/7/365 with no acknowledgment of the obvious risks of abuse. The only logical conclusion here is that there is something fundamentally broken in their psychological/spiritual makeup that allows them to decouple their normal human intuition from their work advancing The Science™.

Farahany’s WEF talk featured a short accompanying narrated animation to help digest what unrelenting surveillance of the mind might mean for everyday life.

The story centers around a fictitious dystopian techno-hell office in which the victim’s boss monitors her brain activity to make sure she’s doing her work and not fantasizing about sex with her coworker, “given the policy against intra-office romance.”

Government agents later show up at the protagonist’s workplace, commandeer every office worker’s brain activity, and cull through it indiscriminately to look for “synchronized brain activity” between co-workers to see who was thinking what illegal thoughts.

Dystopian prophet George Orwell, brilliant though he was, did not have the same vision as his contemporary Aldous Huxley did in the context of tech’s facilitation of tyranny. Orwell understood power brilliantly but not necessarily how the state would implement technology to underwrite its power.

Huxley, on the other hand, was plugged into the transhumanist, technocratic elite which even in the early 20^th century had ambitions of total domination of humanity – not just physical control, but psychological as well.

Rather than Orwell’s infamous nightmarish “boot stamping on a human face forever” prophecy, the future of enslavement will more closely mirror Huxley’s vision in Brave New World, in which the state uses various technological and pharmacological implements to cull and pacify the population, so that physical force becomes unnecessary to maintain control.

In fact, in 1949, Huxley, after reading 1984, penned a little-known letter to Orwell, explicating their analytical differences in their respective novels:

“Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that… the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.”

This is impressive foresight for a man writing in the pre-internet era, when the pharmaceutical industry was still in its infancy.

The tyrants of tomorrow won’t appear in gaudy military attire; they’ll be the kind of soft-spoken HR administrator whose inflections trends upward at the end of her sentences as if her commands are just questions– in other words, totally non-threatening.

The technocracy’s footsoldiers won’t goosestep in orchestrated shows of force as an intimidation tactic; they’ll coo their charges into submission like a mother singing an infant to sleep with a lullaby. Without firing a bullet or dropping a bomb, they’ll infiltrate and subvert the human mind with drugs and irremovable implants.

Humans are conditioned by millions of years of evolution to respond with commensurate force to clear physical threats like armed goons rolling through their community. We are considerably less vigilant about insidious threats that do not rely on brute force but rather subtle psychological manipulation and unseen control mechanisms.

*

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 Daily Bell.

Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Armageddon Prose and/or Substack, Locals, Gab, and Twitter. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from TDB

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.

***

Alberta government censored & hid all data about COVID-19 vaccine injuries to the immune systems of the double vaccinated (Part 1), the failure of the first COVID-19 booster (Part 2), and more immune system damage to the triple vaccinated (Part 3).

I haven’t even begun addressing COVID-19 vaccine damage caused to University and College students, high school students, children, newborns, pregnant women, doctors, nurses and other healthcare workers. That comes later.

COVID-19 Vaccine immune system damage is dose-dependent (more jabs leads to more injury)

I have seen this pattern before. Yes, the data that Alberta government permanently deleted in January 2022 showing that the double vaccinated were more likely to get infected with COVID-19 as time passed after their 2nd vaccination:

That’s almost the same pattern for the first 100 days. While the Cleveland Clinic’s data ends there, Alberta’s data showed that the immune system damage from COVID-19 vaccines continued for the first 8 months (240 days), before the double vaccinated began to partly recover from their immune system injuries.

Albertans were owed FULL access to this data for the 0x, 1x, 2x, 3x, 4x, 5x-vaccinated until today. We have never seen it for the 3x, 4x, and 5x-jabbed.

The best we got from the Alberta government was a very brief glance at data that showed the triple vaccinated had higher COVID-19 infection rates than the double vaccinated (click here) and the govt deleted that data on March 23, 2022 (click here):

During this time (March 2022), UKHSA data also showed this same relationship between more jabs and higher rates of COVID-19 infection, nicely broken down by age groups (click here):

The triple vaccinated were the most immune damaged group in every age category and had the highest infection rate in every age category.

Let’s add the last piece: the quadruple vaccinated. We have no data from Alberta but we do have data from Australia. It is, as one would expect. The quadruple vaccinated led in hospitalizations and deaths throughout (click here). It’s not even close.

 

COVID-19 Vaccine induced immune damage was known:

The Alberta government had to be aware of research showing the breadth and variety of immune system damage that COVID-19 vaccines were causing (beyond increased risk of infections). For example: Chen et al, “New-onset autoimmune phenomena post COVID-19 vaccination” was published online on Jan.7, 2022 (click here).

Another paper published online on June 5, 2022: Yamamoto, “Adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines and measures to prevent them”, raised many alarms about immune system damage to the vaccinated (click here):

The message couldn’t be more clear: “frequent COVID-19 booster shots could adversely affect the immune response and may not be feasible…As a safety measure, further booster vaccinations should be discontinued.”

From post COVID-19 vaccine immune system damage to skyrocketing excess mortality

In July 2022 it was clear that the triple vaccinated were disproportionately dying from COVID-19 but what about non-COVID-19 deaths? What about the 3,362 Albertans who died of “unknown causes” in 2021 ? (click here). What about the 4000+ excess dead Albertans in 2022? In a province where autopsies are all but forbidden, the answers were not forthcoming. The fact that Alberta government to this day has refused to investigate these deaths shouldn’t surprise anyone – it is one more cover-up in a long series of cover-ups. It really reminds me of the way Alberta Health Services Executives operate: once they’ve committed a crime, they’re committed to it.

COVID jabs = increased mortality; more jabs = more excess death

These days, it seems everywhere you look there is some new evidence of significantly increased mortality in the vaccinated:

1. UK data (2022) (source: testimony to US Senate by Insurance Analyst Josh Stirling:Vaccinated had 26% higher mortality

   Vaccinated under age 50 had 49% higher mortality (click here)

2. England (2022) (source: Daily Sceptic) (click here)Higher vaccinated areas of England had higher excess deaths
3. Israel, Australia, India (source: Denis Rancourt, et al.) (click here)Vaccine-dose fatality rate of up to 1% in Australia

   Vaccine-dose fatality rate of 1% in India

   Vaccine-dose fatality rate of up to 0.6% in Israel

4. US data (2021) (source: Steve Kirsch, Medicare database (click here)Dose #1 increases your risk of death by 20%

   Dose #2 increases your risk of death by 20%

   Dose #3 increases your risk of death by 10%

5. Germany (2021-22) (source: Kuhbandner et al.) (click here)100,000 excess deaths ages 15-79 starting to accumulate only from April 2021 onwards (vaccine rollout)
6. World (2022) (source: Alex Berenson) (click here)1,000,000 excess deaths in COVID-19 mRNA vaccine countries

Conclusion

For what will ultimately be the deadliest cover-up in Alberta’s history, it has been a rather sloppy one. Alberta’s Public Health Chief Dr.Deena Hinshaw was likely relieved to be fired, she’s not really cut out for this level of criminal activity. She seeks asylum in British Columbia, with a pharma left BC NDP govt which will protect her.

Her deputy Chief Medical Officers of Health Dr.Jing Hu (a respirologist from Wuhan, China) and Dr.Rosana Salvaterra resigned (click here) and no one knows where they are now. At least their “cash benefits” for their hard work and long nights of deleting COVID-19 vaccine injury data from government websites, kept up with inflation.

Alberta Health Services CEO Dr.Verna Yiu, who was the source of a lot of tainted and manipulated pandemic data, was fired through a revolving door right into a $700,000+ job as the new Vice President of University of Alberta (click here). She continues to make arrogant, hypocritical and tone-deaf comments on Twitter about leadership, honesty and integrity.

Albertans deserve investigations and criminal prosecutions of these healthcare leaders who caused them so much harm. I suspect we will see neither.

*

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

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. 

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 West/NATO has always lacked a long-term strategy. After all, it was militarily, economically and politically superior and could impose its will. Didn’t have to think.

Hoping Ukraine would join NATO without fuss was hubris-ridden wishful thinking, and stupid to boot, in that it’s been convincingly documented that Russia’s leaders, from Gorbachev to Putin for the past 30 years, have said that NATO expansion was: a) a clear violation of the promises made by all important Western leaders to Gorbachev – and it’s true; b) a humiliation and counterproductive if you want common security; and c) that if it could be no other way, then Ukraine would be Russia’s definitive red line.

No one listened. Because, as former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen so aptly put it: Putin knows NATO can beat him to a pulp because we spend ten times more on weapons than he does.

So, as some of us have predicted, it went wrong – which is not a sign of support for Russia’s invasion. I distanced myself from that the next day. But neither do I support the West’s response to this invasion, the rearmament of Ukraine, and the anti-intellectual narrative NATO countries are running, including the claim that NATO is not responsible for anything and that Russia’s invasion was ‘unprovoked.’

Then, on 30 January 2023, the heads of the Danish government visited Ukraine. One understands from the Danish Broadcasting’s (Danmarks Radio) report that there was no attempt to push President Zelensky towards a negotiating table. No, Denmark comes with promises of more weapons and aid to its twin city. To that I wrote immediately on my Facebook page:

“Holy simplicity!

Surely it makes an impression to see the horror of war. Some of us have done that more times than these three put together.

But then Denmark will have to supply even more weapons so that there can be even more suffering, death and destruction.

The conflict between NATO and Russia in Ukraine must be settled on the battlefield and not at a table. More than usually short-sighted and, well, foolish…

It’s almost unbearable to watch Løkke Rasmussen bombing in Syria. Today 12 million – half the population – are starving there, over 300 000 have died and 12 million are refugees and internally displaced persons, IDPs.

But that war – the war of the West – is not to be talked about.

And no government delegation will visit Syria and see the results of the West’s – failed – war of regime change there from 2011-2016. With Denmark’s full political support and military contribution.

The absence of any moral thought is palpable. Far into the heart. In some of us, but not in these people for whom sacrifice can apparently be categorized in two:

The worthy – victims of Russia’s wars – Christians

in contrast to:

The unworthy – victims of NATO countries’ wars – Muslims.”

*

An imminent Russian major offensive and what do the US, NATO, the EU – and Denmark – do?

It’s a strange war, the one in Ukraine. In the picture above, the Danish ministers are talking to President Zelensky in the street, none of them wearing bulletproof vests and no military protection to be seen. There are large areas of Ukraine that are not affected at all by this war, which is otherwise being blown up to be the most horrific proportions in living memory. But it is good PR for Denmark’s increasingly militaristic and anti-intellectual foreign and defence policy – with photo opportunities like few.

With sadness in my heart – because I am Danish-born, it could all have been avoided and it will get worse – I would say that this will probably be the last time they can visit Ukraine.

More and more articles are now appearing in international media – written by independent and self-reliant civilian experts as well as by experienced soldiers – arguing convincingly that time is running out for Ukraine, and that Russia has now mobilised for an imminent major offensive. You can find many of them at The Transnational and at TFF 2 – the online magazine “TFF Peace Affairs.”

So reverse beating to a pulp? Putin’s pluck fish? After all, the logic and rules of war dictate that you don’t just sit idly by while third parties spend years arming your opponent – just in the last year, to the tune of at least US$150-200 billion, or more than twice Russia’s entire defence budget. Instead, you try to get ahead of them.

Putin still has time, to some extent, because all the hardware the West is pumping in takes a long time to learn how to manage, repair and operate effectively, because the leadership in Kyiv has obvious internal conflicts and extensive corruption, because the fighting spirit is wearing off over time, because Ukrainian human and material losses are probably far greater than we are told in Western media, and because the NATO side so wants to win but does not have the courage to deploy its own troops and more advanced weapons. It will only fight to the last Ukrainian – sacrificing nothing itself in this cowardly and strategy-less proxy war.

Let me make it clear here that I certainly do not think NATO should do so; I am simply pointing out that it will not fight (or pay a human price) for the Ukraine it holds so dear – and that that it is not particularly noble. High technology is the Pentagon/NATO weapon, not morality, courage or sacrifice.

Russia, as I said, has time, but not infinite time. What President Putin called a special military operation may, as this time passes, become more of a great new Patriotic War. Ukraine is Russia’s neighbourhood and vitally important to Russia, not the US. Yet Ukraine must get into NATO by devil’s force, against a host of expert warnings. The only country it did not want in was Russia, whose leaders repeatedly – including Putin – have suggested that Russia should join NATO.

I wonder if the 70-odd high-priced Leopards and Abrams tanks will arrive in time and someone can learn to operate them in time to make a difference on the battlefield? (Some say 320 tanks, but who will supply the other 250?)

I wonder if Denmark’s Caesar artillery system will arrive in time. And I wonder how much longer people in Europe and the US are prepared to cough up the money and pay sky-high prices for everything – not because of Russia’s invasion, but because of the panicky, short-sighted and self-justifying response with which the West responded to the invasion: the indefinite sanctions, the exclusion of all things Russian, the withdrawal of businesses, the loss of markets, the inflation, the armament, the Great Day of Prayer (a Danish religious holiday to be cancelled by the government on which people must instead work to collect money for the Danish military!) – and the destruction of Nordstream 2 (which you don’t hear about any more in the media because it just can’t be sold as something Russia did).

And add to all this the colossal misjudgment that “the international community” would follow US/NATO policy. The fact is that 85% of humanity lives in countries that either directly oppose Western policy or remain as neutral as they can. When NATO’s Stoltenberg travels to South Korea and Japan to tie them closer as NATO ‘partners’ and rally military support for the war in Ukraine, it is obvious that desperation is escalating as well.

I predict a Russian major offensive very soon. When the superior party in a conflict (NATO) refuses to negotiate and only aims to become even more superior, well then it’s pretty clear what the other side will think and do. The clock is ticking, and timing is essential.

Then a much larger part of Ukraine will be destroyed, and we in Europe will be forced to deal with infinitely higher numbers of refugees – and later spend untold billions rebuilding Ukraine – even more than the US$ 300 billion it intends to take from Russia, namely its deposits in Western banks.

We’re talking about ordinary, peaceful Ukrainians who cannot survive either because of the war or because of chaos, unemployment, hunger, and cold – sick people who can no longer get help in wildly overloaded hospitals. They will knock on the doors of the EU.

I wonder what the Danish government and Defence Minister, Jakob Elleman Jensen, will say? Today he has only this – banal – to say:

“But even though the Russian bombs are still falling over Ukraine and the future may look bleak, according to Danmarks Radio, Defence Minister Jakob Ellemann Jensen is sending an appeal to the Danes:

“From the Danish side we should be proud of our contribution. For it is massive, he says. Their wish list is, by nature, endless. If they are to defeat evil – and they must – they can only do so with our help.

At the end of December, the Danish government donated DKK 300 million to an arms fund.”

Here Elleman Jensen promises “evil” – not Russia, but evil – that it will be beaten into a pulp. With Danish help. None of Denmark’s three leaders seems to have any substantial clue about either the laws of war or its psychology – much less the conflict underlying the war.

And the consequences of their actions must then be felt by others. Prime minister Mette Frederiksen does not put her own hand on the Ukrainian hotplate (a rather strange formulation she has used about Denmark needing to be at the forefront of conflicts and wars with the US).

Future issues now the Western consensus on Ukraine begins to crumble

In passing, there are some arguably big questions about the boomerang effects of NATO and EU policies: If/when the battle over Ukraine’s membership in NATO is somehow lost (because in NATO it will never be, and fortunately, there are many other viable options), will NATO be able to survive? The Alliance’s biggest blunder ever?

Can the EU, which has been there all along and, as usual, has not been able to unite around one policy, let alone a policy different from that of the US? How will the US evolve in the next few months, and will it be an ever weaker, often unclear-speaking Biden, Trump or someone today unknown who will carry out the policies of the US MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex? Will the country’s president be swept aside if he or she takes the path of negotiation and coexistence instead? (Don’t forget that the biggest winner of the Ukraine war so far is the arms industry).

Will the US empire, parts of the US society be dismantled peacefully or with violence, with a Bang or with a Whimper? Will the EU survive or fall apart, partly because Germany – one must assume – cannot go all the way? Will Sweden, having gambled everything, including 200 years of good experience in non-alignment, not get in after all? Will Turkey stay and prevent Sweden’s membership or leave NATO and turn completely to the East? (It is NATO’s biggest military power after the US).

Will Hungary leave the EU and NATO? And how much longer will Serbia accept to be bullied since the 1990s, NATO’s illegal bombing of Kosovo and Serbia and various ultimate demands repeatedly made of the country – in which, by the way, China is already the single largest trading partner?

Western media are not exactly beating the drum for the growing criticism of Western policy in Ukraine. Zoran Milanovic, the president of the NATO and EU member Croatia, has said everything that should not be said in EU and NATO circles, calling parts of NATO’s policy counterproductive and immoral.

And then, on 1 February came the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) assessment, reproduced here by the New York Times: “The resilience of Russia’s economy is helping fuel global growth, according to a new [I.M.F.] report … suggesting … [Western] efforts … to weaken Moscow because of its war in Ukraine appear to be faltering. … [T]he I.M.F. predicts … Russian output will expand 0.3 per cent… this year and 2.1 per cent next year, defying earlier forecasts ….”The sanctions are having little impact on Russia’s economy, explaining that “[the West’s] efforts … to weaken Moscow over the war in Ukraine appear to be falling flat. … [The IMF] predicts that … Russian output will grow by 0.3 percent … this year and 2.1 percent next year, defying earlier forecasts.”

New RAND report should make all decision-makers in the West think

And as if these “cracks in the wall” weren’t enough, the American hawkish think tank, the Rand Corporation, has just released a report – “Avoid A Long War” – that says in no uncertain terms that the US must take urgent steps to stop this war because it is not in the US’s long-term interest. If Ukraine is to retake all its territory, it will, it says, be a much longer and more destructive war and increase the risk of nuclear weapons being used. A long war would have devastating consequences for the global economy, take US attention away from other major issues and increase Russia’s ‘dependence’ on China.

And beyond that, RAND points out, there are plenty of difficult dilemmas – like this one: By steadily increasing arms aid to Ukraine, Zelenskyj will feel empowered to oppose negotiations; if the US/NATO cut back on arms aid, Russia could feel empowered. How to balance expectations and action/reaction?

Or: US/EU massive sanctions are imposed to punish Russia forever; it means Russia has no hope that its policies will have any effect on them, that they will never be lifted, so to speak. (They should have been conditional instead, of course: if you Russians stop this war, we will lift the sanctions, JO).

So RAND suggests that the US must say clearly what it is Russia must do for sanctions to be lifted and then negotiate from there.

RAND even says (p. 24) that Russia has already paid a very high political and economic price – NATO enlargement with Finland and Sweden, NATO rearmament, loss of prestige, Europe’s reduction of energy and trade cooperation with Russia, reduction of Russia’s defence capability, etc.

Finally, RAND makes it clear that Ukraine’s regaining of lost territory is not the most important thing; instead, the US should give it some kind of security guarantees of neutral status and non-NATO membership, get peace talks going and discuss how sanctions can then be lifted.

If this authoritative report by RAND – which basically demonstrates how counterproductive everything the US, NATO and the EU have done so far is and also argues that a long war with nuclear risks is not in the US interest – does not make a deep impression and finally make decision-makers in all NATO headquarters – including Copenhagen – think, there is hardly anything that can.

And it is interesting that RAND – of all people – says in its own way what we peace professionals have been saying all along: what is happening now is counterproductive, creates a long war with ever-increasing risks and that the only solution must come about at a negotiating table and with a clear recognition that Ukraine can never become a NATO member, but can surely gain security in other ways (see my analysis here with texts from 2014 and up to 2022).

In parenthesis, it is then as interesting as unethical that RAND in 2019 also published an analysis of how the West could make Russia ever weaker, unbalance it, without even sacrificing anything further on it.

Social and economic protests will grow in Europe

How to contain the protests of people around Europe, when the prices of energy, petrol and groceries have risen to levels that are pushing living standards ever lower – and social services and healthcare are deteriorating further? When people discover that they have been deceived by the propaganda of NATO’s innocence and have to pay even more to the alliance which bears the main responsibility for the conflict and is also now engaging in a war which this so-called defensive peace-building alliance was set up precisely to avoid? Trillions of dollars extracted from the taxpayers of 30 countries over decades only to demand even more in a time of multi-crisis?

I actually think Western leaders have enough to think – deeply – about.

But today, politics is reduced to photo-ops, symbolic politics with flags, pin badges and blue-and-yellow dresses, fancy Twitter-esque statements and the total absence of an awareness of one’s own professional ignorance and, therefore, also of the fact that what one is experimenting with just to be proven right is the possible destruction of large parts of Europe.

There is certainly no prudent statesmanship, caution or coherence between action, tactics and long-term strategy to be seen anywhere. It’s helter-skelter, more or less panicking, positioning and signalling politics.

Or perhaps it is the megalomaniacal illusion that NATO members and partners – when on the other side of all this and when “we” have won and Russia has been chopped up like Yugoslavia was – will defeat China, expand NATO even further and liberate Taiwan… the China that in no way wants war or is waging war anywhere and threatens no one in NATO?

Weapons and armaments are, after all, the only area where the West still has a comparative advantage. There is only the Aberdabei about it, that the very use of this advantage, this military superiority, will with unerring certainty destroy the West itself. Sooner rather than later. The pervasive militaristic culture is like cancer spreading.

But like a puppet on the strings of His Master’s Voice, NATO’s Jens Stoltenberg repeats himself endlessly about China as the great challenge, China’s armament and provocative behaviour and disinformation, and… most recently during his visit to South Korea and Japan at the end of January.

The people of Ukraine will pay the highest price and Europe will get the boomerang of the US/NATO response to Russia’s invasion

I wonder how much will be left of Ukraine and its people in a few months’ time, who are, after all, innocent in the game played by their own Poroshenko and Zelensky governments, the governments of NATO countries and, last, by Russia, full well knowing that millions of these by definition innocent Ukrainian fellow human beings could well have their lives and future destroyed for decades ahead.

As always, it is ordinary people who pay the price for the heartless power games of leaders – including Danish leaders.

While I have no sympathy for Ukrainian leaders’ interactions with the US/NATO since the 2014 US-orchestrated regime change in Kyiv, with their rearmament of Ukraine, their civil war against their own citizens that has cost 14,000 lives, or with the shenanigans called the Minsk Accords, one can only have sympathy for the innocent Ukrainians whom all sides have sacrificed like pawns on a chessboard.

And in this case, the cause of this suffering is that everyone in NATO circles denies every co-responsibility for the conflict that has sparked off the war – indeed, that there is a conflict at all, which presupposes two parties. Russia is the only party to this unique conflict and NATO, according to Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, is not even a participant in it.

No one in either the media or politics understands the essential difference between the war (symptom) and the underlying conflicts (causes), and no one seems to possess the self-awareness and diplomatic ability to do anything other than drive ever deeper into the dead end of military escalation.

Like a lemming train towards the abyss.

It’s called mission creep, and it’s terribly dangerous – especially when the actors are blinded by the self-righteous winner’s groupthink that rejects all alternative interpretations and courses of action and day by day confirms the group that it is infallible and, therefore on the right path.

This kind of thing happens when militarism has become a religion and NATO its church, the main – last – cohesive factor in the Western world whose time as the world’s self-appointed leader is definitely over and a new cooperative, multi-polar world order without hegemons rapidly evolving.

One can only hope today that it will implode and not explode.

Here is President Zelensky speaking about the visit of the Danish politicians:

*

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: The Danish foreign, defence and the prime minister is greeted by President Zelensky (right) (Source: The Transnational)

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.

***

Barcelona becomes the first city administration in the world to suspend relations with Israel since the BDS movement was started. It has also announced the suspension of the twinning agreement with the Tel Aviv city council.

Ada Colau, Mayor of Barcelona, announced on Wednesday, February 8, her city’s temporary suspension of all official relations with Israel over its apartheid practices and systematic violations of Palestinian rights in the occupied territories.

Colau wrote a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday announcing the decision to suspend relations with Israel. She also announced that the twinning agreement with the Tel Aviv city council, signed in 1998, was suspended “until the Israeli authorities put an end to the system of violations of the Palestinian people and fully comply with the obligations imposed on them by the international law and the various United Nations resolutions.”

Colau clarified that the decision was solely related to the institutional relationship between authorities in Barcelona and Israel, and did not affect relationships between the residents of Israel and the city.

The decision was taken after a petition for the same was signed by a federation of over 110 human rights groups—called Lafede.cat—from  and more than 4,000 residents of the city.

Lafede.cat, also known as the Organizations for Global Justice, had first published its demands in May 2021 during the 11-day-long attack on the besieged Gaza strip by Israel, in which more than 250 Palestinians were killed and over 2,000 injured. It had also demanded that the Spanish government stop selling weapons to Israel and end all business deals with Israeli companies.

Action against Israeli apartheid

Colau claimed that the petitioners had asked her to “condemn the crime of apartheid against the Palestinian people, support Palestinian and Israeli organizations working for peace, and break off the twinning agreement between Barcelona and Tel Aviv.”

The Deputy Mayor of Barcelona and the leader of the Catalan Socialist Party in Barcelona, Laia Bonet, opposed the decision and demanded the “restoration” of the relationship. She said that authorities should make efforts to “reinforce, not weaken, the role of Barcelona in the world,” Catalan News reported.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry responded to the news by claiming that the decision was not backed by the majority of the residents of Barcelona. Some Jewish groups have also called the decision “sophisticated anti-semitism.”

This prompted a wave of international solidarity in favor of Colau and her party Barcelona En Comú on Thursday.

URGENT 🇪🇸: Barcelona mayor Ada Colau has been attacked for her courageous decision to suspend ties with the State of Israel. Join leaders around the world rallying to her defense — and call on cities everywhere to join her fight for Palestinian rights.https://t.co/zCllc8k03j

— Progressive International (@ProgIntl) February 9, 2023

European Jews for Just Peace, a federation of 12 European Jewish peace groups, supported Colau’s decision, claiming that “boycott is a legitimate, time-honored method for civil society to protest against a country that commits human rights abuses. Mayor Colau is following the footsteps of those who boycotted apartheid South Africa.”

The Palestinian national committee of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement also welcomed the decision, “[saluting] the Mayor of Barcelona.” It also noted that Barcelona’s move to suspend ties with Israel was “reminiscent of the historic and courageous city councils that pioneered cutting ties with apartheid South Africa.”

The decision will be voted on in the city council on February 24.

*

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: Barcelona Mayor Ada Colau. (Photo: Blanca Blay via Catalan News)

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.

***

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says that the United States shot down an unidentified flying object (UFO) over Canada’s Yukon at his request Saturday. “I ordered the takedown of an unidentified object that violated Canadian airspace,” Trudeau wrote on Twitter.

This is the second time in a few days that a strange object has been shot down by the United States. Another object was detected entering U.S. airspace around 9 p.m. Alaska time on Thursday, February 9th and the U.S. government subsequently sent a surveillance plane to track it. The object was flying between 20 and 40 mph ( 32 and 64 km/h) at an altitude used by civilian aircraft, according to Live Science. 

I ordered the take down of an unidentified object that violated Canadian airspace. @NORADCommand shot down the object over the Yukon. Canadian and U.S. aircraft were scrambled, and a U.S. F-22 successfully fired at the object.

— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) February 11, 2023

Canada is currently in the process of recovering the wreckage of the UFO to determine its origins. The U.S. is also in the process of recovering what it can to determine where the first object came from. Oddly enough, it was shot down even though it didn’t pose a “military threat.”

The news of these objects comes as the U.S. faces criticism for its handling of the Chinese spy balloon debacle that took place earlier in the week.

The U.S. is also trying to distract, deceive, and divide right now as major evidence surfaces that it was responsible for the Nord Stream pipeline attacks last year. 

The news has been barely touched on by the ruling class’s mainstream media puppets, which tells us one thing: someone is hiding and distracting. These UFOs could also be cause to convince the public to get involved in a third world war.

Additionally, Japanese and local astronomers said a Chinese satellite has been caught on video beaming down green lasers over the Hawaiian Islands. A National Astronomical Observatory of Japan live stream camera atop the Subaru Telescope on Mauna Kea recorded the footage in late January.

According to a report by KHON2, a University of Hawaii astronomer says that the “green lasers” were measuring pollutants. “It’s a Chinese satellite that is measuring pollutants, among other things, it has many different instruments on it,” said UH Institute of Astronomy associate astronomer Roy Gal. “Some kind of topographical mapping or they’re also used for measuring stuff in Earth’s atmosphere, and I think that’s what it is, environmental measurement satellite.”

“The U.S. has satellites to do the same thing, so, in this case, despite all the flurry, well deserved flurry, about Chinese spy satellites and other devices, this one is just orbiting earth and has a known orbit,” Gal said.

However, the ruling class may not take it the same: “I’m not sure, and this is my opinion, why the Chinese — who are probably some of the most prolific polluters on the planet — would be collecting data on pollutants on this side of the Pacific, said Ray L’Heureux, former marine forces Pacific chief of staff.

*

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 SHTFplan.com

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.

***

“Can we forecast earthquakes? No. Neither the United States Geology Survey (USGS) nor any other scientists have ever predicted a major earthquake. We do not know how, and we do not expect to know how any time in the foreseeable future.” –United States Geology Survey website

On the morning of February 6, 2023 the people of Turkey and Syria were struck by a devastating 7.8 magnitude earthquake, followed by a 6.7 aftershock and then a final (we hope) 7.5 M quake in the late afternoon. The effects of the three-fold quake struck deep into Syria and as of this writing, over 23,000 deaths, and 500,000 injured have been counted in Turkey and Syria, along with tens of thousands of injuries and incredible destruction to infrastructure.

Were it not for the political obfuscation that has derailed all fields of science over the past decades, then this tragic loss of life would have been entirely preventable.

How?

Because despite the clamorings of the priests of standard model geology managing the US Geological Survey, the fact is that earthquakes are completely forecastable.

Take the singular case of Dutch scientist Frank Hoogerbeets, representing the self-funded Solar System Geometry Survey (SSGEOS) who published the following tweet a full three days prior to the February 6^th disaster:

Reflecting on the method he and other like-minded scientists use within the international forecasting community, Hoogerbeets explained:

“As I stated earlier…this would happen in this region, similar to the years 115 and 526. These earthquakes are always preceded by critical planetary geometry, as we had on the fourth-fifth of February”

What sort of “planetary geometries” is Hoogerbeets talking about?

It isn’t that Hoogerbeets uses a crystal ball, believes in astrology or has better data than the scientists of the US Geographical Survey, but rather that he is simply a real scientist who doesn’t believe in dogmatic procedures masquerading as “science” if they don’t actually work. His method of looking at “planetary geometries” as an important component to his success was laid out in a three minute introductory video Earthquakes and Electro Magnetic Waves:

It should also be noted that this was not Hoogerbeets’ first successful forecast.

On February 2, 2023, the SSGEOS published that there was “potential for stronger seismic activity in or near the purple band (indicating the east side of South America) in 1-6 days.” This warning was followed by a February 5, 2023 5.6 magnitude earthquake that struck Cuiquimbo Chile.

On January 29, 2023, SSGEOS predicted stronger seismic activity in an area which he outlined on a map as southern China and northern India. This was followed within a day by a 5.8 magnitude earthquake that hit southern Xinjiang.

Since setting up the SSGEOS in 2014, Hoogerbeets and his team have made hundreds of successful forecasts which stand in loud contrast to their mainstream rivals whose commitment to statistical probability theory, and linear computer modeling have resulted in dismal failure consistently for decades.

What sets Hoogerbeets apart from the statisticians who have come to dominate the field of seismology is simply his emphasis upon the electro-magnetic, chemical, and galactic properties of earth’s dynamics.

Unlike the modern “seismologists” who assert that everyone must adhere to the absurd “elastic rebound theory”, which presupposes the sole cause of earthquakes is located within tectonic plates and gravitational forces, those scientists who make successful predictions in this contentious field choose instead to focus on the electromagnetic properties of the earth and broader solar system (and galaxy) shaping the earth’s environment.

As Hoogerbeets states:

“Based on our research, it appears that gravity is not responsible for larger earthquakes at the time of critical planetary and lunar geometry. The most likely force acting on Earth’s crust at the time of critical geometry is electromagnetic. This could also explain the lightning in Earth’s atmosphere prior to larger earthquakes which could be the result of atmospheric forcing induced by electrogmagnetic charge from critical geometry between celestial bodies in the solar system.”

Throughout Hoogerbeets’ writings and educational videos, the Dutch forecaster explains that space between planets and between stars is not empty but permeated by subtle but efficient magnetic fields, and electric currents which feed into each of the planets, moons, and sun. The analogue used for this process is not a computer model with abstract notions of “gravitational forces pulling on objects within empty space” as is so often the case, but rather an electrical process with the sun acting as a form of dynamo and the planets acting as both antennas that simultaneously receive, transform, and emit signals according to certain specific wavelengths.

Quoting RCA Radio Engineer John Nelson whose 1500 atmospheric condition forecasts in the 1960s were made with a 95.2% accuracy, Hoogerbeets wrote:

“The similarity between an electrical generator with its carefully placed magnets and the sun with its ever-changing planets is intriguing. In the generator, the magnets are fixed and produce a constant electrical current. If we consider that the planets are magnets and the sun is the armature, we have a considerable similarity to the generator”

This property of the planets and moons within the solar system was confirmed by the Voyager and Cassini satellites which recorded specific EM waves emitted from all planets ranging from radio wave, microwave, infrared, and even smaller wavelengths.

It was also outlined beautifully by Safire project lead scientist Dr. Michael Clarage in his recent 16 minute video, “Function in the Cosmos”:

Admittedly, what causes the EM emissions/absorption between planets is not understood. Also not fully understood is how these emissions influence activity both within the atmosphere, ionosphere of the earth — not to mention the deep crust, mantle, and core of the earth. Humans have, after all only pierced 16 km through the 60 km crust and have no direct knowledge of the mantle or lower.

Despite our ignorance of so much, we do know some things about the magnetic fields and resonances within our solar system, and simply acknowledging this reality and its influence on the affairs of earth is itself the first step to making a discovery… which is more than can be said of the standard theory gatekeepers attempting to keep new discoveries from emerging.

Core Precursors to a Science of Earthquake Forecasting

One of the factors which appear to be playing a much larger role within the science of earthquakes involves the chemical secretions of elements like radon from ground water near earthquake epicenters days and hours before and after an event.

What causes the release of radon is still unknown but this was what technician Gianpalo Giuliani was looking at when he predicted a 2009 earthquake that would strike l’Aqila Italy days later.

Another particularly important variable in earthquake forecasting involves the behavior of the large layer of ionised plasma surrounding the earth beginning at 40 miles and stretching to 600 miles above the surface. This zone is called the ionosphere and is replete with electrons and electrically charged atoms and molecules driven by the constant fluxes of radiation (mostly UV and Xray) emitted by the sun, but also influenced by the EM pulses of other planets within the electrical circuit that is our solar system.

As Sergey Pulinets described in his Principles of Organizing Earth Quake Forecasting based on Multi Parameter Sensors (October 16, 2020): “In the case of ionospheric precursors, the precursor… manifests itself in the form of a strong positive variation of the electron concentration over the earthquake preparation zone”

In the relatively recent case of the deadly magnitude 9.1 earthquake that struck Japan, it resulted in the tsunami that smashed into the Japanese coast in March 2011 killing over 20,000 and leaving $38 billion in damage in its wake. As can be seen in the graphic below, this tragedy would have been entirely forecastable had anyone looked at the spike in electron density in the ionosphere above the epicenter which began eleven days prior to the disaster as demonstrated during a forensic analysis by Chinese researcher Fuying Zhu at the Wuhan Institute of Seismology in August 2011.

Another study conducted by Japanese seismologist Kosuke Heki not only substantiated Zhu’s findings but went further back and found the same electron fluxes in the ionosphere days before the 2010 magnitude 8.8 earthquake struck Chile killing 524 people and prior to the 8.3 Hokkaido earthquake in 1994.

In 2011, a team of researchers began pouring over data accumulated by the DEMETER satellite which was the most advanced satellite designed to trace earthquake precursors from space while it was operational between 2004-2010. The researchers were looking for any electromagnetic anomalies that would have given the government of Haiti time to foresee the 7.0 earthquake that took the lives 250,000 people on January 12, 2010.

The team published a paper on their findings where they wrote: “One day (11 January 2010) before the earthquake there is a significant enhancement of electron density and electron temperature near the epicenter… Statistical processing of the DEMETER data demonstrates that satellite data can play an important role for the study of precursory phenomena associated with earthquakes.”

As is the case in most instances of electromagnetic/chemical precursors, the project had no budget to pay for any staff to analyse the data in real time, and thus nothing was seen or done.

Earlier work on successful forecasting which turns the supposed rules of ‘elastic rebound theory’ upside down include the work of Stanford electrical engineer Dr. Antony Frasier Smith who accurately forecast a Magnitude 7.1 Loma Prieta earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Area California two weeks before it struck on October 17, 1989. Dr. Frasier-Smith had installed sensors near the eventual epicenter of the quake which noticed a 20-fold spike in ultra low frequency (ULF) radio waves 14 days before the shock, and which rose to a 60-fold spike above average three hours prior to the event.

Similar precursors were observed by researchers in Armenia before a magnitude 6.9 earthquake in December 1988 and again days prior to a magnitude 8.0 earthquake in Guam in August 1993.

Inspired by Dr. Fraser-Smith’s 1989 forecast in California, a scientist named Tom Bleier set up Quake Finder in Palo Alto California in 2000 which currently oversees a network of 125 magnetometers around the San Andreas Fault which makes up the massive earthquake dense zone called the Ring of Fire stretching from Japan around Russia, Alaska and the western coast of the Americas. Working with a group called ‘Stellar Solutions’, Bleier’s team has spent 20 years accumulating evidence of similar precursors that have occurred before dozens of small to medium earthquakes.

Another team of researchers took Frasier-Smith’s insights and reviewed the case of the massive Taiwanese earthquake of September 22, 1999 that resulted in 2500 deaths and $300 billion of damages. Not only did this team discover the ULF signals days in advance, but also found multiple points of connection to solar wind streams that accompanied those ultra low radio emissions that emerged from at least 8 km below the earth’s surface.

Another electromagnetic precursor that has borne fruit has been infrared emissions which also spike prior to large earthquakes. This was observed  by NASA’s Terra Earth Observing satellite on January 21, 2001 which caught such “thermal anomalies” in Gujarat India five days prior to a 7.7 magnitude earthquake that killed over 20,000 civilians and destroyed 350,000 buildings. This anomaly disappeared immediately after the quake ended.

As can be seen in the image below, the magnitude 9.3 earthquake/tsunami that killed 228,000 people in Sumatra, Indonesia on December 26, 2004 was preceded by an anomalous spike in infrared radiation five full days before the tragedy. Unfortunately due to the dismissal of this entire field of science as “fringe” heresy, these precursors are either not listened to, OR they were only discovered AFTER the disasters struck as no financial resources were made available to staff the facilities needed to interpret the data in real time.

There are many more cases of earthquake forecasting which could have been raised that take into account all those parameters mentioned above and more.

Keplerian Roots of Modern Forecasting

It is important to hold in mind that this is not a new or ‘fringe’ field that emerged in recent history, but goes back literally millennia. Perhaps the earliest outline of planetary geometries and harmonics playing a direct role upon the material conditions of nature on earth was developed in the Timaeus dialogue by Plato in 360 BCE.

While the Pythagorean study of the harmony of the spheres and the lives of humans remained in the realm of philosophy for two millennia after the Timaeus was written, it was the scientist Johannes Kepler who first established an actual science of astrophysics and planetary forecasting with his Mysterium Cosmographicum (1594), followed by his New Astronomy (1609) and culminated in his Harmonies of the World (1619).

It was in this last work which saw Kepler consummate 30 years of research on the Pythagorean hypothesis and shaped his famous third law (aka: harmonic law) of planetary motion.

In Book 4, Chapter 7 of the Harmonies of the World, Kepler writes:

“The view that there is some soul of the whole universe, directing the motions of the stars, the generation of the elements, the conservation of living creatures and plants, and finally the mutual sympathy of things above and below, is defended from the Pythagorean beliefs by Timeaus of Locri in Plato… a Christian can easily understand by the Platonic mind, God the Creator and by the soul, the nature of things” [p. 358]

Kepler worked through several chapters outlining the planetary and lunar geometries (which he dubbed ‘aspects’) that conform to visual harmonies in the form of archetypal angles generated from elementary polygons. Those elementary geometries include, but are not limited to triangles, squares, pentagons, hexagons and octagons as well as the internal angles generated from these shapes. With this accomplished in book three of his Harmonies, Kepler outlined a set of angles that define specific quantized states using the earth’s relationship to various planets, the moon, and the sun.

Kepler was no numerologist and recognized that numbers were not self-contained causes but rather the effect of those archetypical shapes that permeated all physical space-time. For example, numbers like 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 would be expressed by the elementary shapes (triangle, square, pentagon, hexagon, octagon) that can then be combined into the five Platonic Solids and 13 Archimedean polyhedra.

When nested into each other, these Platonic solids determine a set of proportions which Kepler used to guide 30 years of research into the causes for the positions of the planets around the sun which he also speculated was moved by an electric fluid within his New Astronomy[1].

Internal angles contained within the elementary shapes are also treated as properties of qualities rather than self-contained quantities. For example: Squares generate internal angles of 90, while triangles feature internal angles of 60 and 120 degrees. Pentagons generate internal angles of 135 and 72 degrees while hexagons generate internal angles of 120 and 60 etc.

In his Harmonies of the World, Kepler demonstrates the musical proportions of these numbers as functions of resonance/consonances demonstrating a model of the solar system built on the well-tempered musical scales featuring both major and minor modes.

Johannes Kepler’s 3 planetary laws unshackled physics from mysticism and relied on a musical insight outlined in his 1619 masterpiece featuring his model of the solar system above. The fact that his 3rd Law of Planetary Motion, which is still used today, was the effect of this theory should cause the sceptic to think twice before dismissing Kepler’s insight as rubbish.

Within Book Four of the Harmonies, Kepler breaks from the astrologers and statisticians dominating the ‘standard models’ of his day by outlining various verifiable weather phenomena that coincide with these “aspects” saying: “I was moved to that… only and solely by observation of the weather and study of the aspects by which it is excited. For I saw that with great consistency the state of the atmosphere was disturbed whenever planets were either in conjunction or configured in the aspects commonly spoken of by the astrologers. I saw that there was generally calm in the atmosphere if few or no aspects occurred or if they were quickly completed or concluded. Indeed I considered that this business should not be considered so lightly as the common herd of forecasters usually does.”

One of dozens examples of planetary geometries examined in Kepler’s Harmonies of the World which imposed a reasonable scientific method onto a domain long dominated by astrologers.

Later on, Kepler discusses various weather phenomena and their correlation with various geometrical configurations of the solar system saying:

“I took account of consistent experience, not indeed concentrating in that way on snows in particular, or winds, or thunder and the other things which astrologers usually predict, but observing in general that the state of the air was disturbed in some way or other if there were aspects, for example if Mars and Jupiter were in conjunction, and were peaceful or if there were not any [conjunctions].”

Gauss-Weber Pioneer the Electric Model of the Atom and Universe

Later on, German scientists Carl Gauss (1777-1855) and Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859) developed the Keplerian model of a universe of harmony even further by leading an international scientific program to chart the invisible magnetic field shaping the world which was accomplished in 1838.

In Gleismeier and Tsurutani’s brilliant 2014 study Carl Friedrich Gauss – General Theory of Terrestrial Magnetism, the authors write:

“As Gauss stated in a letter to his friend Wilhelm Olbers (1781–1862), he was interested in the terrestrial magnetic field as early as 1803. This interest was greatly stimulated after meeting Baron Alexander von Humboldt (1769–1859) and Wilhelm Weber (1804–1891) in Berlin in 1828. After 1831, his major collaborator was Wilhelm Weber. Inspired by Alexander von Humboldt, Gauss and Weber realized that magnetic field measurements needed to be done simultaneously and globally with standardized instruments. This research program led to the foundation of the Göttinger Magnetischer Verein in 1836, an organization without much formal structure, only devoted to organizing magnetic field measurements throughout the world.”

Three leading scientists who fought against the Newtonian British school of empiricism during the 19th century (left to right: Wilhelm Weber, Carl Gauss and Alexander von Humboldt).

Gauss was also a forecaster of the highest order who was the first to discover the location of the asteroid Ceres in 1801 which verified an earlier forecast made 200 years earlier by Kepler who stated that the gap between Mars and Saturn would necessarily contain a planet (in this case it appears that the asteroid belt is either a residual of a former planet or the material that may someday form into a planet).

Gauss was also the first scientist to recognize the necessity for a layer of charged electrical current above the stratosphere in order to contain the radio signals passing across the surface of the globe, and would be verified by the discovery of the ionosphere in 1929.

It was also Gauss’ close friend and collaborator Wilhelm Weber who pioneered the Keplerian hypothesis of harmonic relations shaping the frequencies of space into the domain of the micro universe. In the 1850s, Weber actually became the first scientist to measure the exact distance of an electron circling the orbit of a nucleus (which he successfully did without actually seeing the electron or nucleus).

Neither Weber, nor Max Planck, who later picked up the torch which Weber left to posterity, saw a schism between the macro universe in the large and the micro universe in the small. For these scientists, keys discovered in one domain were also valuable in unlocking doors of the other domain.

Max Planck Stands up for Truth

It is thus no small irony that Planck’s success in founding a new science in the quantum world was motivated by his commitment to Kepler’s method that trumped “the common herd of forecasters” of the 17^th century.

In his Where is Science Going? (1932), Planck warned of the corruption of science and forecasting caused by the spread of the statisticians and formalists who lacked a creative flexibility and love of truth needed to continue the momentum of new discoveries that had been opened up by the great minds of Planck’s generation. The old musician/scientist contrasted Johannes Kepler with his contemporary Tycho Brahe who both had access to the same date, although only one had the spark of love of truth that ushered in the creation of a new physics. Max Planck wrote:

“Kepler is a magnificent example of what I have been saying. He was always hard up. He had to suffer disillusion after disillusion and even had to beg for the payment of the arrears of his salary by the Reichstag in Regensburg. He had to undergo the agony of having to defend his own mother against a public indictment of witchcraft. But one can realize, in studying his life, that what rendered him so energetic and tireless and productive was the profound faith he had in his own science, not the belief that he could eventually arrive at an arithmetical synthesis of his astronomical observations, but rather the profound faith in the existence of a definite plan behind the whole of creation. It was because he believed in that plan that his labor was felt by him to be worth while and also in this way, by never allowing his faith to flag, his work enlivened and enlightened his dreary life. Compare him with Tycho de Brahe. Brahe had the same material under his hands as Kepler, and even better opportunities, but he remained only a researcher, because he did not have the same faith in the existence of the eternal laws of creation. Brahe remained only a researcher, but Kepler was the creator of the new astronomy.”

The Statisticians Play Dice with Truth

While it is under appreciated today, as Max Planck was saying these words amidst the rise of a new techno-feudal system of fascism in his native Germany, a pitched battle was being waged over what direction science would go in the 20^th and 21^st century.

On the one side stood Planck, Einstein, Madame Curie and other great scientists who actually made revolutionary discoveries into the universe, and on the other side stood the mathematical statisticians led by the “Copenhagen school” of Niels Bohr, Max Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli. This latter school of probability theorists correctly demanded that a new science was needed due to the anomalous data emerging in the realm of the quantum and new studies of deep space which couldn’t be explained by the “classical model” of Newtonian science.

The 5th Solvay Conference of 1927 featured an all-out battle between two opposing schools of physics over how the paradoxes of the quantum domain should be treated. On the one hand, actual creative scientists who made sincere breakthroughs such as Planck, Marie Curie, Lorenz and Einstein defended the idea of causality and truth while the new breed of statistical probability theorists of the Copenhagen School of Bohr, Heisenberg, Paoli et al asserted the contrary. Unfortunately for the 20th century, the “old guard” scientists were discarded as obsolete and naive.

The fact that this new school of statisticians never discovered anything didn’t stop them from being dubbed the victors of the Solvay Conference in 1927. In the wake of this battle, pioneering scientists like Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Mendeleyeev and Marie Curie were placed in the same category as rigid “classical” positivists of the Newtonian sect (including Ernst Mach, Bertrand Russell, Rudolph Clausius and David Hilbert) who demanded that the only definition of “truth” acceptable in the realm of science had to be mathematical perfection.

According to these anti-creative positivists, IF it could be proven that mathematical perfection were an impossible ideal, then TRUTH ITSELF had to be rejected as having any assumed existence.

By treating all scientists that believed in truth as “positivists”, a straw man was created which the young Copenhagen statisticians jumped on. Since the universe could be demonstrated to be shaped by a non-linearity and elements of uncertainty (evidenced by Kurt Gödel’s famous 1932 proof) that denied the possibility of absolute mathematical truth, it was asserted that only the science of “dice rolling” (aka: statistical probability) be permitted by scientists wishing to conduct any experimental research on reality — either of the atomic world, or even in the macrocosm. This was the context shaping Einstein’s famous statement to Niels Bohr that “God does not play dice with the universe”.

In this perversion of science, randomness and uncertainty became presumed “laws” in the domain of the quantum in the very small, while a stiff mechanistic determinism became the assumed dominant law of the macrocosm in the very large. It didn’t take long for these contrary impulses to become forced together into something called “Standard Model Cosmology” which became a soulless dead corollary to “Standard Model Quantum Mechanics” during the Cold War.

And within the insanity of the shadowland of lies that was the Cold War, the fear of nuclear annihilation increasingly swept the love of truth in science away, and the unbounded financial resources of the monstrous military industrial complex absorbed cutting edge scientific work into the classified world of black budgets and espionage with no connection to the benefit for the civilian sector or universal knowledge more generally. Scientists who didn’t conform to the new normal were increasingly purged from the scientific establishment as a newer generation of cognitively handicapped scientists emerged onto the scene, leaving nothing unaffected by their toxic irrationalism.

The Cancer Metastasizes: Economics, Ecology, and Geology Infected

All of a sudden, scientists were told to accept the deterministic rules of a universe that supposedly emerged out of nothing exactly 13.7 billion years ago, and would die a slow heat death in some linear extrapolation into the future. While this fatalistic determinism was enforced from the top down, a fatalistic indeterminism was enforced from the bottom up whereby scientists had to accept that nothing could be known of the specific principles shaping the existence of protons, electrons, or other sub-atomic behavior. Every system in the universe from organisms, human economies, galaxies, and solar systems were assumed to be both rigidly closed and deterministic AND ALSO random, fluid, and irrational.

This self-contradictory dualism embedded as a Trojan Horse not only derailed discoveries in atomic science (with fusion power increasingly dubbed ‘the impossible dream of forever being 30 years away’), but also in political economy and climate science.

In economics, this dualism was unleashed with the post-1971 floating of the US dollar onto global speculative markets as a new consumer society cult was imposed onto the western world. Under this new era that became known as “globalization”, economics was defined as the hedonistic pursuit of pleasure driven by atomized consumers which were likened to gas particles stochastically bumping around within an aerosol can. The macro-system (aka aerosol can) in which the “markets” were located was increasingly shaped by a new technocratic class of “scientific engineers” who would impose closed system determinism onto humanity in a bid to maximize the “perception” of freedom, with none of the actuality of it.

Forecasters in this new surreal wonderland were told that they could extrapolate present trends into the future using probability functions, but they could not think about boundary conditions shaping the invisible (albeit real) constraints shaping those very economies they sought to influence.

In climate science, computer models were imposed onto a field which once took the sun, fluctuating magnetic fields, cosmic radiation, and broader galactic environment into consideration. Instead of thinking about top-down factors like solar wind, magnetic fields, and cosmic radiation determining earth’s climate, the new generation of climate scientists trained by Club of Rome computer models during the 1970s and beyond increasingly found themselves mentally handicapped by the acceptance of dualistic absurdities.

Chief among these absurdities was the assumption that although predicting short term weather patterns were intrinsically unknowable (beyond statistical probability functions), it was absolutely certain that the globe would heat up in a new furnace within a century.

In the geological sciences, things did not fare much better.

While real scientists were making pioneering discoveries into earthquake science by observing the magnetic and planetary/solar alignments of the solar system through the 1930s-1960s, the false dualism again asserted itself as the new era of computer modeling emerged onto the scene.

Compare the article from the July 18, 1959 edition of Nature magazine, showcasing the new insights into earthquake forecasting, with the modern gospel of the United States Geographical Survey (which sets the standards for all “acceptable educational practices” across the trans-Atlantic):

Concepts such as those published in the 1959 Nature magazine became increasingly verboten over the years to the point that the current US Geological Survey official website addresses the question “can earthquakes be predicted with the following answer:

“No. Neither the USGS nor any other scientists have ever predicted a major earthquake. We do not know how, and we do not expect to know how any time in the foreseeable future. USGS scientists can only calculate the probability that a significant earthquake will occur in a specific area within a certain number of years. An earthquake prediction must define 3 elements: 1) the date and time, 2) the location, and 3) the magnitude.”

Unless one is able to satisfy the impossible standards set by the priests at the USGS (demanding mathematically PERFECT results in predicting the exact date and time, exact location, and exact magnitude of an earthquake)… if there is even a slight deviation from mathematical perfection between forecast and empirical result, then it is asserted that no forecast is made. The irony of course, is that if scientists like Kepler, Weber, Gauss, or Planck actually used the standards promoted by the scientists at the USGS, then none of their discoveries could ever have been made.

Those scientists wishing to make actual discoveries in this new field of earthquake forecasting, which would do much to expand humanity’s knowledge of the cosmos and also save countless lives, would be much better rewarded eating some humble pie, spitting out some “elastic rebound” kool aid and thinking like Kepler, Gauss, Planck and Frank Hoogerbeets.

*

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 first published on The Canadian Patriot.

Matthew Ehret the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas trilogy. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Note

[1] Kepler always maintained that magnetism was the form that this species of attraction and motion took, saying: “Therefore, as the sun forever turns itself, the motive force or the outflowing of the species from the sun’s magnetic fibres, diffused through all the distances of the planets, also rotates in an orb and does so in the same time as the sun, just as when a magnet is moved about, the magnetic power is also moved, and the iron along with it, following the magnetic force.”

The author developed some of these concepts in a recent episode of the Great Game viewable here:

All images in this article are from the author unless otherwise stated

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.

***

Everyone with a brain already knew the Empire did it. Now Seymour Hersh’s bombshell report  not only details how Nord Stream 1 and 2 were attacked, but also names names: from the toxic Straussian neoliberal-con trio Sullivan, Blinken and Nuland all the way to the Teleprompter Reader-in-Chief.

Arguably the most incandescent nugget in Hersh’s narrative is to point ultimate responsibility directly at the White House. The CIA, for its part, gets away with it. The whole report may be read as the framing of a scapegoat. A very fragile, shoddy scapegoat – what with those classified documents in the garage, the endless stares into the void, the cornucopia of incomprehensible mumbling, and of course the whole, ghastly, years-long family corruption carousel in and around Ukraine, still to be completely unveiled.

Hersh’s report happened to pop up immediately after the deadly earthquakes in Turkey/Syria. This is an investigative journalism earthquake in itself, straddling over fault lines and revealing countless open air fissures, nuggets of truth gasping for air amidst the rubble.

But is that all there is? Does the narrative hold from start to finish? Yes and no. First of all, why now? This is a leak – essentially from one Deep State insider, Hersh’s key source. This 21^st century “Deep Throat” remix may be appalled at the toxicity of the system, but at the same time he knows that whatever he says, there will be no consequences.

Cowardly Berlin – ignoring the nuts and bolts of the scheme all along – will not even squeak. After all the Green gang has been ecstatic, because the terror attack has thoroughly advanced their medieval de-industrialization agenda. In parallel, as an extra bonus, all the other European vassals receive further confirmation this is the fate that awaits them if they don’t follow His Master’s Voice.

Hersh’s narrative frames the Norwegians as the essential accessory to terror. Hardly surprising: NATO’s Jens “Peace is War” Stoltenberg has been a CIA asset for perhaps half a century. And Oslo of course had its own motives to be part of the deal; to collect loads of extra cash selling whatever spare energy it had for desperate European customers.

A little narrative problem is that Norway, unlike the U.S. Navy, still does not have any operational P-8 Poseidon. What was clear at the time is that an American P-8 was commuting back and forth – with mid-air refueling – from the U.S. to Bornholm island.

A positive screamer is that Hersh – rather, his key source – had the MI6 completely vanish from the narrative. SVR, Russian intel, had focused like a laser on MI6 at the time, as well as the Poles. What still cements the narrative is that the combo behind “Biden” provided the planning, the intel and coordinated the logistics, while the final act – in this case a sonar buoy detonating the C4 explosives – may have been perpetrated by the Norwegian vassals.

The problem is the buoy may have been dropped by an American P-8. And there’s no explanation of why one of the sections of Nord Stream 2 escaped intact.

Hersh’s modus operandi is legendary. From the perspective of a foreign correspondent on the ground since the mid-1990s, from the U.S. and NATOstan to all corners of Eurasia, it’s easy for someone like me to understand how he uses anonymous sources and how he accesses – and protects – his extensive list of contacts: trust works both ways. His track record is absolutely unrivalled.

But of course the possibility remains: what if he is being played? Is this no more than a limited hangout? After all, the narrative oscillates wildly between minute detail and quite a few dead ends, constantly featuring a huge paper trail and too many people in the loop – which implies exaggerated risk. The CIA hesitating too much to go for the kill is a certified red alert throughout the narrative – especially when we know that the ideal underwater actors for such an op would have come from the CIA Special Activities Division, and not the U.S. Navy.

What will Russia do?

Arguably the whole planet is thinking what will be the Russian response.

Surveying the chessboard, what the Kremlin and the Security Council see is Merkel confessing Minsk 2 was merely a ruse; the imperial attack on the Nord Streams (they got the picture, but might not have all the insider details provided by Hersh’s source); former Israeli PM Bennett on the record detailing how the Anglo-Americans killed the Ukraine peace process which was on track in Istanbul last year.

So it’s no wonder that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has made it clear that when it comes to nuclear negotiations with the Americans, any proposed gestures of goodwill are “unjustified, untimely and uncalled for.”

The Ministry, on purpose, and somewhat ominously, was very vague on a key issue: “strategic nuclear forces objects” that have been attacked by Kiev – helped by the Americans. These attacks may have involved “military-technical and information-intelligence” aspects.

When it comes to the Global South, what the Hersh report imprints is Rogue Superpower, in giant blood red letters, as state sponsor of terrorism: the ritual burial – at the bottom of the Baltic Sea – of international law, and even the Empire’s tawdry ersatz, the “rules-based international order”.

It will take some time to fully identify which Deep State faction may have used Hersh to promote its agenda. Of course he’s aware of it – but that would never have been enough to keep him away from researching a bombshell (three months of hard work). The U.S. mainstream media will do everything to suppress, censor, demean and ignore his report; but what matters is that across the Global South it is already spreading like wildfire.

Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Lavrov has gone totally unplugged, much like Medvedev, denouncing how the U.S. has “unleashed a total hybrid war” against Russia, with both nuclear powers now on a path of direct confrontation. And as Washington has declared the “strategic defeat” of Russia as its goal and turned bilateral relations into a ball of fire, there can be no “business as usual” anymore.

The Russian “response” – even before Hersh’s report – has been on another level entirely; advanced de-dollarization across the spectrum, from the EAEU to BRICS and beyond; and total reorientation of trade towards Eurasia and other parts of the Global South. Russia is establishing firm conditions for further stability, already foreseeing the inevitable: the time to frontally deal with NATO.

As kinetic responses go, facts on the battleground show Russia further crushing the American/NATO proxy army in full Strategic Ambiguity mode. The terror attack on the Nord Streams of course will always be lurking in the background. There will be blowback. But that will be at a time, manner and place of Russia’s choosing.

*

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.

Pepe Escobar, born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok. 

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is licensed under 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.

***

The sheer scale of the disastrous series of earthquakes in southeast Turkey and northwest Syria is hard to absorb, especially in a region already blighted by a decade of war, displacement, drought and disease.

As if that were not sufficient punishment, the cruel weather has added another layer of suffering with its comfortless blanket of snow, making rescue efforts even tougher, whilst leaving thousands of shell-shocked souls to freeze in the open, homeless.

For many outside the region, it may seem a faraway tragedy that has no direct bearing on their own lives.

But as someone who has visited the area repeatedly over several decades, I feel that, beyond the humanitarian crisis unfolding day by day, there is a bigger picture that needs to be explained, to help grasp how connected we all are by oft-forgotten historical and cultural ties.

The discovery in the 1990s of the world’s oldest temples, a series of mysterious circular structures on the summit of Gobekli Tepe (“Pot-bellied Hill” in Turkish), turned all previous perceptions of man’s early history on their head.

Overlooking the once lush grasslands of the Fertile Crescent, northeast of Urfa, they were built by nomadic hunter-gatherers some 12,000 years ago, pre-dating Stonehenge by 6,000 years, and the world’s earliest city at Catalhoyuk, also in eastern Turkey, by a full 3,000 years.

Similar groupings of circular temples have been identified in northern Syria, collectively proving that man’s first construction efforts were devoted, not to building settlements, but to the worship of deities connected with the sun, the moon and the circular seasonal cycles on which he depended.

The temples were first unearthed in 1994 by German archaeologist Klaus Schmidt, who tragically died before seeing Unesco inscribe them on its World Heritage List in 2018.

A world heritage site

As recently as 2021, Unesco added the late Hittite site of Aslantepe (Lion Hill) near Malatya and the Euphrates, in recognition of its significance in illustrating how a state society first emerged in the Near East, along with a sophisticated bureaucratic system that predated writing.

Among the finds were the world’s earliest known swords, evidence of the first forms of organised combat used by the new elite to maintain their political power.

Towering above the Tigris, Unesco’s other World Heritage Site (2015) that lies within the earthquake zone is the brooding city of Diyarbakir, whose mood seems reflected in its massive black basalt walls. It, too, is part of the ancient Fertile Crescent, an important regional centre commanding the surrounding fertile plains throughout Hellenistic, Roman, Sassanid Persian, Byzantine, Islamic and Ottoman times. Its elegant “Ten-Eyed” bridge, built by the Seljuks in 1065, still spans the river below.

Further testimony to the onetime prosperity of the region is the site of Zeugma on the Euphrates, famous for its collection of superb mosaics, among the finest in the world. Once a thriving frontier town on the eastern edges of the Roman Empire, where 5,000 troops were garrisoned to defend against the Persians in the 2nd and 3rd centuries CE, it was also known as Belkis, a reference to the Queen of Sheba and her legendary wealth.

Rescued, along with many other ancient sites, from the flooding caused by the modern Birecik Dam on the Euphrates, the spectacular mosaics graced the floors of rich villas, but today are housed a new purpose-built museum in nearby Gaziantep, epicentre of the first 7.8 magnitude earthquake that struck at dawn on 6 February.

Those who know Aleppo will find in Gaziantep many echoes of that more famous Syrian city. Not for nothing did so many Syrian refugees fleeing war in their own country take refuge in Gaziantep as their city of choice.

In the days before the artificial borders imposed by Britain and France after World War One, the two cities were closely linked. Easily the most sophisticated city in southeast Turkey, Gaziantep, long hailed as the pistachio capital of the world, boasts around its prominent Seljuk citadel an old quarter, much of which was built by the Ottoman governor of Aleppo.

Like Aleppo, it has a mixed Muslim-Christian population, with its Christian population in Ottoman times likewise much larger than today. Their churches and mansions are still scattered about the old Christian quarter, often now converted to musical venues or boutique hotels.

The citadel itself has suffered damage in the earthquake, so the historic quarter of which it forms the heart must also have been affected. Like Aleppo’s historic centre, it was the subject of extensive restoration projects, and experienced boom-level growth in recent times, its citizens deeply proud of their shared heritage and identity.

Border ironies

Earthquakes do not recognise political boundaries, and just as Gaziantep was part of the Ottoman province of Syria till 1922, so Aleppo too, less than 200km to the south, has suffered damage, both to its iconic citadel mound and to its surrounding historic areas. Friends have told me of their homes, newly restored from the war, damaged once again, by force majeure, as if accursed.

Aleppo’s Great Umayyad Mosque, located at the foot of the citadel, has been undergoing restoration funded by Ramzan Kadyrov, president of Chechnya. The mosque’s unique 1,000-year-old Seljuk minaret miraculously survived many earlier earthquakes, only to collapse in cross-fire in 2013. Its rebuilding is a dauntingly complex jigsaw that has yet to begin.

In more border ironies, Hatay province in southeast Turkey belonged to Syria till 1939. Known before then as the Sanjak of Alexandretta, it was incorporated into Syria under the French mandate in 1918 at the Ottoman Empire’s demise, but the French then gave it to Turkey in anticipation of a new war against Germany, a bribe to buy Turkish neutrality.

Syrians have never accepted the transfer and most Syrian maps still show it as part of Syria.

Now eclipsed by the mosaics at Zeugma, Hatay boasts its own, much older mosaic museum in its capital city of Antakya, ancient Antioch, also hit by the earthquake. Built by the French, it was considered in its day second in the world only to the Bardo Museum in Tunis, displaying, in scenes like Narcissus and Echo and the Drunken Dionysus, the licentious lifestyle of banqueting and dancing against which the early Christians here preached.

St Peter’s Rock Church cut into the cliffs behind the city was founded in 47 CE by Peter, Paul and Barnabas as the first church after Jerusalem. Matthew is said to have written his Gospel in Antioch. Even before the arrival of Christianity, the city was very mixed, with Greek, Hebrew, Persian and Latin all spoken in its streets.

“If your aim in travelling is to get acquainted with different cultures and lifestyles, it is enough to visit Antioch,” wrote Roman historian Libanius. ‘There is no other place in the world that has so many cultures in one place.”

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 past Friday I joined a few hundred people who gathered on the slopes of the New Zealand Parliament to commemorate the massive protest that took place a year before.

I was on the grounds of Parliament last year every day but one and saw firsthand a unique and wonderful coming together of New Zealanders from all walks of life in a kind of glorious unity against the mandates that had been illegally and immorally imposed upon us all.  What emerged, out of the general good will and spontaneity, was a fascinating community of participants who helped one another generously, stood firm against the puerile tactics of the government to disrupt the peaceful occupation, who smiled a great deal, embraced, who articulated grievances and were determined not to let our unalienable rights be traduced.  Throughout that assembly we asked members of Parliament, including our then-Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, for a meeting, a hearing, an exchange, a debate – we asked, simply, for those people who derived their political power from the people to lend their people an ear.

They did not. Not one of them dared to traverse the steps of the building to greet us, to welcome our questions and our voices. Not once did they do what any democratically imbued government has a duty to do during our time on the people’s soil.

The day before the government unleashed its stormtroopers to clear out New Zealand citizens with violence, I was part of a group scheduled to meet with representatives of the Police force and negotiate a peaceful end to the impasse that had developed.  The Police failed to show up. Later that same afternoon I sat in (virtually, via Zoom) on a meeting called by Paul Hunt, New Zealand’s Human Rights Commissioner. Before this meeting I warned everyone I knew – various group leaders, press, friends, filmmakers on site – that a police action would be imminent because I had seen amassed at Wellington’s central station a veritable battalion of unmarked vans.

I understand that Mr. Hunt had been apprised of the planned invasion and that he had been begged at the very least to stand witness as a symbol of the high importance of human rights, and as a safeguard against their violation.  Instead, he did nothing. The meeting he had called, and which I attended as an observer, turned out to have been nothing but an exercise in bureaucratic hypocrisy. If he set an example to anyone, it was an example of political and moral cowardice.

The following morning, 2 March 2022, the anticipated invasion commenced, and brutally so. I assisted an elderly man whose hip was fractured by the police assault. The first ambulance that had been called  refused to take him to hospital, for reasons we could hardly fathom. A second arrived, given the developing medical emergency, and thankfully did what it was supposed to do, and this man underwent surgery and recovered.

These events were much in my mind when I said a few words the other day to those who returned to the scene.  I kept my comments brief.  I had two words for those Parliamentarians who had refused to engage us in a civil exchange to hear us out: “Why not?”  And I had two words for those who joined the commemoration: “Never forget.”

Life in Wellington, more especially given this year’s exceptionally warm summer, has the appearance of normality. People crowd the harbour beaches when the sun is out, the cruise ships have returned to give retailers who survived the lockdowns some business, and I can now get a haircut despite not having received a Pfizer inoculation.

The freedom-loving friends I gained during the past three years, and particularly during the demonstrations at Parliament, have been a boon to my life: they far outweigh the friendships lost, and these friendships lost I fear will be forever.  Why?  Because these former friends did nothing to support those of us who ‘naively’ extolled bodily autonomy as an ingrained right; to those of us who protested against the cruelty of an apartheid nation; to those of us who quite sensibly warned against an untested medical intervention; to those of us who criticized the quarantining of the healthy, the destruction of livelihoods, the shutting down of commerce, the prevention of public worship, the forbidding of public protest, the wholly inhumane isolation of our suffering relatives from family contact, the ubiquitous and absurd use of inefficacious and psychologically damaging masks; to those of us who stood true against tyranny and its purposeful inculcation of never-ending fear.

Make no mistake. The corona respiratory virus, whatever its origins, did not kill as we were led to believe, not even by wildly erroneous PCR standards.  People do not transmit respiratory viruses when they are asymptomatic. Effective treatments did and do exist for such viruses, along with protective healthy lifestyle habits that enhance our ability to manage them.

As I left Parliament grounds a few days ago, after having heard others speak eloquently about our show of pacific force, I thought of a passage from the Book of Daniel in the Old Testament.  In chapter five, King Belshazzar is hosting a feast, a feast attended by his underlings, concubines and princes, and in the midst of his revels he perceives a hand that has written a message in a language unknown on the palace chamber walls. He is taken aback. None of his wise men can elucidate the mystery, so the king sends for Daniel, who had served his father well and who was known for his perspicacity and fearless interpretation of dreams and signs.  Daniel translates the message for Belshazzar: “Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting.”  By morning, King Belshazzar was no more.

I wonder if Jacinda Ardern, or Paul Hunt, or Ashley Bloomfield and their ilk here in New Zealand  have thought about how they will be judged? I wonder about those dancing doctors and nurses who had time to take video-selfies for YouTube. I wonder about the Faucis and Tedros’s of the world, and their little soldiers who scolded us for not being afraid enough.  I wonder, in fact, if the one-world government I have inveighed against so often, is already here.

After all, as many have observed, the entire globe was brought to a standstill in short order on the back of a lie.

The universal lockdowns and rush to coerce inoculation were not organically developing phenomena. The relatively abrupt descent into governmental lawlessness across the globe – lawlessness that saw private citizens’ bank accounts frozen in Canada, and people forced into quarantine camps in Australia – was not spontaneous.  The universal persecution of doctors for daring to be decent doctors did not arise out of nowhere. Even now, as I  write, the corrupt Medical Council of New Zealand is attacking physicians for having prescribed Ivermectin and other helpful medications, and for insisting on informed consent. I have no doubt that the Medical Council here is following the orders of the Federation of State Medical Boards, a private entity in the pay of Big Pharma wielding authority over medical licensing entities in America and the West.

There is, to my mind, a consortium of groups with power and money and military might who have managed to organize a very effective campaign to depopulate (meaning: murder) and safeguard (meaning: enslave) humanity. Digital IDs and total surveillance, control over our ‘carbon expenditure’ and who knows what else, are being openly touted by the likes of the United Nations and the World Economic Forum. The World Health Organization is warning again of another ‘pandemic’ and arrogating unto itself dominion over national sovereignty, given the eager genuflection of countries like New Zealand to its will.

But this consortium will have to meet the likes of an ever more determined resistance among those who, from the beginning, smelled a bat, fought against manufactured fear, and refused to renounce the birthright of autonomy to a domineering State.

I now have no bones about predicting an ever growing cascade of excess morbidity and mortality as a result of the covid injections over the next number of years: more sudden deaths, more earlier than usual deaths, more sickness and ill-health generally.

These unstoppable realities will shake even the most unquestioning followers of the established order – those who feed on the mainstream news outlets as their meat and potatoes of reality, and who can’t imagine that their countries’ political authorities or big corporations could ever tell a lie, let alone attempt a genocide-in-the-making whose breadth has already begun to rival the familiar genocides of the previous century. I sincerely hope that they, when the inevitable showdown comes to pass, will err on the side of humility and compassion, instead of the vehemence and savagery they espoused not long ago.
I hope that they too see the writing on the wall – and understand it.

*

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. Garcia is a Philadelphia-born psychoanalyst and psychiatrist who emigrated to New Zealand in 2006. He has authored articles ranging from explorations of psychoanalytic technique, the psychology of creativity in music (Mahler, Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Delius), and politics. He is also a poet, novelist and theatrical director. He retired from psychiatric practice in 2021 after working in the public sector in New Zealand. Visit his substack at https://newzealanddoc.substack.com/

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All images in this article are 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.

***

The US Navy and Marines Corps are conducting drills in the South China Sea amid heightened tensions between Washington and Beijing over the Chinese balloon incident.

The US Navy’s Seventh Fleet said in a statement that the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz and its strike group conducted the drills on February 11 with the 13th Marine Expeditionary Unit. The Seventh Fleet did not say when the drills started or when they would end.

The US has stepped up its military activity in the South China Sea in recent years and has formally rejected most of Beijing’s claims to the waters. China, the Philippines, and several other Southeast Asian nations all have overlapping claims to the South China Sea.

The US has involved itself in the dispute, and starting under the Obama administration, the US began sailing warships near Chinese-controlled islands in the South China Sea. The Biden administration is looking to expand the US presence in the region and recently signed a deal with the Philippines that will give the US access to four more military sites in the country.

The current exercises come after China declined a call from Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin following the US downing of the Chinese balloon. Washington claimed the balloon was a spy device, while Beijing insisted it was a weather balloon only used for civilian purposes.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken canceled a planned trip to China when the balloon was first announced by the Pentagon. Since the incident, the US military has shot down two unidentified objects, but the White House says they didn’t look like Chinese balloons.

*

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.

Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.

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.

***

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.

***

There was an air of magical realism in the daylong visit to Kiev last Friday by the EU’s policy commissioners comprising the executive branch of the group — the so-called College — led by the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. 

At the end of the day in Kiev on Friday, during a joint press conference in Kiev with President Volodymyr Zelensky, all that the EU’s super bureaucrats would promise was that “Ukraine’s future is in the EU.”

However, as the BBC reported, “Typically, it takes years for countries to join — and the EU has declined to set a timescale, describing the sign-up process as “goal-based.” It all depends now on what sort of Ukraine emerges out of the war. 

Surely, there is a pall of gloom in the western media lately about the war storms gathering on the horizon. A Ukrainian military officer told the BBC that the Russian forces have occupied a third of the highly strategic Bakhmut city, the hub of the so-called Zelensky Line in Donbass. Since then, there have been reports of more Russian successes. The Ukrainian defence line is cracking through which an elephant can pass to the steppes en route to the Dnieper River. 

An AP report quoting Ukrainian officials in Kiev says, “Russian forces are keeping Ukrainian troops tied down with attacks in the eastern Donbass region as Moscow assembles additional combat power there for an expected offensive in the coming weeks.” Reuters too reports that  Russian forces have been advancing “in relentless battles in the east. A regional governor said Moscow was pouring in reinforcements for a new offensive that could begin next week.” 

Writing for Bloomberg, Hal Brands at the American Enterprises Institute, drastically trims the Biden Administration’s priorities to “reluctance to further inflame Putin’s ire.” Hal sums up: “Washington’s goal is a Ukraine that is militarily defensible, politically independent and economically viable; this doesn’t necessarily include retaking difficult areas such as the eastern Donbass or Crimea.” 

There is no more talk about destroying the Russian “war machinery” or an insurrection against the Kremlin and a regime change.  

Two recent think tank reports that appeared in the US last month — Avoiding a Long War by the Rand Corporation (affiliated to the Pentagon) and Empty Bins by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies — epitomise a rude awakening. 

The Rand Corporation report starkly warns that given the NATO countries’ indirect involvement in the war — “breathtaking in scope” — keeping a Russia-NATO war below the nuclear threshold is going to be “extremely difficult.” 

It introduces another chilling thought that a protracted war in Ukraine, which “many” in the Beltway subscribe to as a means to degrade the Russian military and weaken the Russian economy, “would also have consequences for US foreign policy,” as the US’ ability to focus on other global priorities — particularly, competition with China — will remain constrained. 

The Rand report argues that “Washington does have a long-term interest in ensuring that Moscow does not become completely subordinated to Beijing.” The report concludes that the paramount US interest lies in avoiding a long war, since “the consequences of a long war — raging from persistent elevated escalation risks to economic damage — far outweigh the possible benefits.” 

The report presents a frank assessment that “it is fanciful to imagine that it [ Kiev] could destroy Russia’s ability to wage war.” Its most astounding finding, perhaps, is two-fold: firstly, the US does not even share Ukraine’s drive for retrieving “lost” territories”; and, secondly, that it is in the American interest that Russia remains independent of China with a measure of strategic autonomy vis-a-vis the US-China rivalry. 

On the other hand, the CSIS report, authored by the well-known strategic thinker Seth Jones (formerly at the Rand) is a wake-up call that the US defence industrial base is grossly inadequate for the “competitive security environment that now exists.” The report has a chapter titled Ukraine and the Great Awakening, which underscores that the US arms supples to Ukraine have “strained the [US] defence industrial base to produce sufficient quantities of some munitions and weapon systems.” Jones represents the duality of the US military-industrial complex, which is disinterested in the objective of the war in Ukraine as such.  

His grouse is that the US defence industrial base — including the munitions industrial base — is not currently equipped to support a protracted conventional war, although, as the UK newspaper Sunday Times wrote last week, “All wars spawn profiteers, and the Ukraine conflict is no exception… The enormous supply of western arms to Ukraine has bolstered all weapons manufacturers, mainly in restocking Nato’s own arsenals and fulfilling the big orders from countries now spending more on defence….In the US, Lockheed, Raytheon and Northrop are among the big arms and jet fighter manufacturers with bulging order books.” 

The Rand and CSIS reports appeared at a time when the war has reached a tipping point. Thus, within the last month, the US has announced three of the largest aid packages to Ukraine in a sign of ongoing support as the war nears its one-year mark. And on Friday, the Biden Administration announced yet another new Ukraine security package worth approximately $2.2 billion that includes longer-range missiles with a range of 90 miles for the first time.

Herein lies the paradox. On February 1, four senior Defense Department officials reportedly told the US House Armed Services Committee lawmakers in a classified briefing that the Pentagon doesn’t believe Ukraine has the ability to force Russian troops out of the Crimean peninsula. After the briefing, the House Armed Services Chair Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) asserted in an interview that the war “needs to end this summer.”

Senator Rogers said:

“There’s a school of thought … that Crimea’s got to be a part of it. Russia is never going to quit and give up Crimea…  What is doable? And I don’t think that that’s agreed upon yet. So I think that there’s going to have to be some pressure from our government and NATO leaders with Zelensky about what does victory look like. And I think that’s going to help us more than anything to be able to drive Putin and Zelensky to the table to end this thing this summer.” 

This is the first time that a top US political personality has called for a timeline for the war. It came as no wonder, as Senator Bob Menendez the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who presided over the hearings on Ukraine on January 26 — also addressed the core issue in a question for the record to the US Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland who was testifying. 

The influential senator bemoaned that Washington has “no definition of victory,” and sought an answer from Nuland, who was rendered speechless. But it must have rankled her, for, at the fag-end of the hearing, she volunteered a reply: “If we define winning as Ukraine surviving and thriving as a cleaner democratic state, it can, it must, it will.” Period. 

Nuland fudged. But that is also what President Biden did in his State of the Union address on Wednesday by sticking to his tiresome  mantra — that the US will support Ukraine for “as long as it takes.” That said, significantly, Zelensky has taken off for a tour of major European capitals to discuss what could possibly constitute peace. 

Indeed, all this is a far cry from Von der Leyen’s rhetoric as she set out for Kiev last week:

“With the visit of the College to Kyiv, the EU is sending today a very clear message to Ukraine and beyond about our collective strength and resolve in the face of Russia’s brutal aggression. We will continue supporting Ukraine for as long as it takes. And we will continue to impose a heavy price on Russia until it ceases its aggression. Ukraine can count on Europe to help rebuild a more resilient country, that progresses on its path to join the EU.” 

There is something that either Von der Leyen doesn’t know about, or doesn’t want to talk about. Meanwhile, Biden seems closer to her than to Rand and the CSIS or Senator Menendez and Nuland — leave alone Republican Senator Rogers. That must be an optical illusion. 

*

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 Ukrainian soldier adds wood to a fire to stave off the bitter cold, Bakhmut, Donbass (File photo)

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 International Movement for a Just World (JUST) urges the American, British, Australian, Canadian, Swiss and some  European Union and Arab League governments to lift the unjust, immoral sanctions against Syria in order to lessen the immense sufferings of the people caused by the massive earthquake of 6^th February 2023.

A number of local groups including the Syrian Red Crescent Society have already made this call. Among individuals and groups at the international level who also want sanctions lifted is Helga Zepp LaRouche of the Schiller Institute. It is reported that the US and EU have suspended temporarily their sanctions. But this is not enough because it means that they can be re-imposed at any time. If sanctions have to be terminated once and for all, it is because there were no justifications for them in the first instance.

The US began targeting Syria in 1979 by placing it on the list of state sponsors of terrorism. This was largely because of the support that then Syrian president Hafez Azad gave Palestinian, Syrian and other Arab freedom fighters seeking to liberate Palestine, Syria’s Golan Heights and other Arab territories from Israeli occupation. It is an indication of the degree of influence that Israel and Zionism exercise over US foreign policy in West Asia and North Africa (WANA). Between March and August 2004, sanctions were intensified as a result of new allegations of Syrian interference in Iraq and Lebanon which impacted upon Israel. By this time, the Syrian government’s relationship with Hamas in Palestine and Hezbollah in Lebanon and its close fraternal ties with Iran were at the core of US animosity towards the resolutely independent minded nation. Needless to say, Israeli interests were prominent in all these US stances.

However, it was only after 2011, camouflaged by the so-called Arab Spring, that organised, aggressive US led attempts to overthrow the Syrian government of Bashar Azad, supported by some of its European allies and WANA friends, gave birth to a whole range of new sanctions from travel bans and asset freezes to prohibitions on exports and restrictions upon the oil sector. The EU also joined the US in embargoing the oil sector. 20% of Syria’s GDP came from oil. It has been estimated that the country has lost 107 billion US dollars from its oil and gas earnings since 2011.

Some Arab League states also froze Syrian government assets as did Turkiye in 2011. But none of these actions had as severe an impact upon the Syrian economy and State as the capture of territories containing oil and producing wheat and cotton by rebel groups linked to governments, ethnic movements or terrorist outfits in the region. These groups collectively known as the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are led by Kurds with longstanding grievances against both the Syrian and Turkish governments and are supported by the US. They occupy parts of North West Syria badly affected by the earthquake.

It is this fractured and fragmented country that Bashar Azad presides over. It is a country in which 15.3 million people out of a population of 21.3 million are in need of humanitarian aid. Bashar’s power and authority have been further weakened as we have seen by loss of control over vital resources and by crippling sanctions.  It is understandable why his government was not able to respond quickly and effectively to the earthquake catastrophe which as of 11^th February has killed at least 3,500 people. It is of course much smaller than the more than 22,300 children, women and men who have perished in neighbouring Turkiye.

Nonetheless, the Syrian tragedy demands a response that goes beyond rescue and recovery operations. It is a colossal tragedy complicated by sanctions which impede not only on-going operations such as the flow of basic necessities and the arrival of much needed personnel but also hinder medium and long-term relief and rehabilitation work. This is why sanctions have to be lifted immediately. This is why both peoples and governments everywhere should make this their priority plea.

The conflicts between competing groups the majority of which are armed should also be brought to an end as soon as possible. It is not going to be easy. One hopes that this mammoth catastrophe will persuade some of the principal actors in these conflicts to reflect deeply on what has happened — the unfathomable suffering of millions of human beings on both sides of the Turkiye-Syria border. If their suffering is to have any meaning at all, let it herald the end of conflicts and killings along the border and in other parts of Syria. In this regard, it is encouraging that the United Nations has appealed to all warring parties to observe a ceasefire with immediate effect to enable humanitarian assistance to be channelled to the victims of the earthquake.

There is another glimmer of hope. Even before the earthquake, on the 5^thof January 2023, the president of Turkiye, Recep Erdogan indicated that he wants to meet up with the Syrian president, Bashar Azad, to discuss and resolve their differences. Let us hope and pray that both men will work towards such a meeting — a meeting which will result in a mutually acceptable solution to their problems. If the two leaders who enjoyed a close friendship some time ago make peace with one another, there is a strong possibility that Turkiye and Syria will be able to come together on a firm footing and most of the other protagonists will also be able to bury the hatchet.

If that happens, the deaths of thousands — especially little children — in one of the greatest tragedies in recent times would not have been in vain.

*

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 Chandra Muzaffar is the president of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST). He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image: The earthquake destroyed buildings in the town of Jandaris, near Afrin, Syria.Credit: Rami al-Sayed/AFP/Getty

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 Saturday, President Biden sent a USG fighter aircraft to shoot down… something over the Yukon in Canada.

Trudeau disclosed the latest balloon incident, saying in tweets that Canadian and U.S. fighter aircraft had been scrambled and that a “U.S. F-22 successfully fired at the object” over the Yukon and that Canadian forces would retrieve the debris.https://t.co/e4buSWjR16

— Tom #JoeKnowsHowToPresident! 🇺🇸🇺🇦🇺🇸🇺🇦 (@spokanetom) February 12, 2023

This is the third such alleged shootdown. The second one is said to have occurred on Friday over Alaska, according to the stenographic media. It “reports” what the government wants you to know—and in the case of the attack of the weather balloons, they want you to know virtually nothing—except it is the sinister behavior of those darn spy-obsessed commies in China.

The “object” over the Yukon was “cylindrical” and “smaller than the suspected Chinese balloon shot down last weekend, Canadian Defense Minister Anita Anand said on Saturday evening,” CNN relayed from the government.

The object shot down Saturday marks the third time in one week that US aircraft have shot down an object in North American airspace. Saturday’s incident follows the downing of another unidentified object on Friday over Alaska, and the shoot-down of a suspected Chinese surveillance balloon on February 4 by a US F-22 fighter jet.

Forget the adjective “suspected” prior to “Chinese surveillance balloon.” The state demands you to believe “communist” China is spying on America, and now Canada. The government has produced zero evidence the original balloon was indeed a surveillance thingamajig.

Of course, you’re expected to take whatever the state tells you at face value. Questions are not allowed, as the corporate media on occasion needs to be reminded. Even NPR makes a mistake on occasion.

Aboard Air Force One, NPR White House Correspondent Ayesha Rascoe asked White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki for evidence of the US’s claim that Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi, an ISIS leader killed along with numerous civilians (including children) during a US raid, had detonated a suicide bomb. Far from providing evidence, Psaki expressed surprise that anyone could doubt the US military’s claims when it came to civilian casualties. She went a step further and accused such people of believing ISIS over the US military. (Emphasis added.)

Ned Price, the official storyteller for the State Department, did likewise, essentially accusing Matt Lee of the AP of being a Russian dupe-bot.

“If you doubt the credibility of the U.S. government, of the British government, of other governments and want to, you know, find solace in information that the Russians are putting out, that is for you to do,” Price berated the out of line stenographer.

Prior to dodging rare questions of substance, Price worked as a CIA “analyst.” He was taught by the best at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.

It’s odd, the amnesia of Americans. It is possible, however, a few Americans remember the particularly deadly lie told by Lyndon Baines Johnson about the Gulf of Tonkin “incident” slash fairy tale of treacherous N. Vietnam commies attacking the “reconnaissance” destroyer Maddox, thus initiating a war in Southeast Asia (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia). More than three million people were killed.

Or, more recently, the lies of George W. Bush and his perfidious neocons. It was said repeatedly Saddam Hussein (former CIA operative) had WMDs ready to attack innocent American children while they slept. Later, when the lies were exposed, Bush turned it into a comedy routine. No WMDs here… just a million and a half dead people.

Maybe a couple of people remember when Bush triumphantly announced the USG death machine had wiped out the Taliban (formerly on the CIA payroll). It was another bald-faced lie told by a pathological liar.

P.S., the Taliban won. The war will cost us—or, rather, our descendants—$2.261 trillion. Forbes put the cost at $300 million a day for 20 years.

Now they’re telling big whoppers about Ukraine, a democracy with neo-nazis. It’s a textbook example of Orwellian Doublethink.

Anyway, back to the invasion of commie balloons. I’m not sure the state will ever provide evidence demonstrating the origin and purpose of these balloons and the “cylindrical” unidentified object supposedly shot down over the Yukon, the last with the blessing of the liberal authoritarian leader of Canada, Justin Trudeau.

Americans will be on the hook, as usual. The USG F-22 Raptor’s AIM 9X Sidewinder missile supposedly shot at the “object,” which we are told was the size of a “small car,” cost $472,000.

The stockholders at Raytheon benefit greatly from these psychological ops.

Meanwhile, as intended, we are kept in the dark, and given zero evidence proving this “surveillance” thing even existed. Americans, who are forced to pay for this nonsense, are commie Chinese bots, dupes, and disinfo zombies if they dare ask for more details.

It’s a CCP surveillance thing. How dare you ask questions.

Maybe we’ll get additional UFO reports this week, more half-million dollar shoot downs (minus the cost of operating F-22s), and additional heaps of engineered paranoia as the state builds its case to confront its major competitors, China and 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.

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.

***

There is little doubt that the war in Ukraine has always been about decimation of Russia’s energy, financial and military resources; especially as the September 26, 2022 attack on Nord Stream 2 (NS) pipeline confirmed any lingering doubt. Just as there is no serious refutation of the validity of Sy Hersh’s How America took out the Nord Stream Pipeline identifying the US  role in what amounted to a military attack on another country’s infrastructure with termination of the NS 2. Hersh’s reputation is as sterling as they come.  

Even beyond the unassailable original qui bono, the US has been easily viewed as culpable and Hersh has provided the necessary details although the Russians are inclined to refer to the “Anglo-Saxon” world. The Administration’s denial  of “false and complete fiction” focuses on four of its least trusted Administration figures as major accomplices: the senile, imposter President Joe Biden, incompetent Secretary of State Antony Blinken, the depraved Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland with a long history of loathing Russia and Biden’s political adolescent Foreign Policy Advisor Jake Sullivan. They are all consistent in their excessive hostility to Russia and its Nord Stream pipelines as a perceived threat to ‘national security.’

Keeping in mind that ‘sanctions’ are used to punish Russia for daring to have abundant natural energy resources and to construct the NS pipelines which provide reliable and relatively cheap energy to its customers, the ‘national security’ in question requires the substitution of US produced LNG.

Here is the ‘rest of the story” which may provide essential background that fits with Hersh’s narrative.

Buried within Title LXXV of the National Defense Authorization Act (fy 2020) was HR 3206 Protecting Europe’s Energy Security Act of 2019 (PEESA).  The $738 Billion appropriation was signed by President Donald Trump on December 20, 2019; thereby enacting the NDAA’s contents as authorizing appropriations and establishing federal policy.

Specifically, a summary of the NDAA identifies LNG as a rationale to extinguish the $11 Billion, 760 mile Nord Stream 2 pipeline:

“European businesses involved in Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline from Russia to European Union have been sanctioned by the United States, which has been seeking to sell more of its own liquefied natural gas (LNG) to European states,^[3] with the enactment of the NDAA 2020.  German Finance Minister Olaf Scholz called the sanctions “a severe intervention in German and European internal affairs.. and an EU spokesman criticized “the imposition of sanctions against EU companies conducting legitimate business.”

On December 11, 2019, the NDAA was adopted in the House on a 377-48 vote with six Republican House Members voting Nay (Reps. Buck (Colo), Gohmert (Texas), Griffith (Va.), Massie (Ky.), McClintock (Calif)  and Rice (SC).   On December 20, 2019 on an 86 – 8 vote in the Senate, four Republican Senators voted Nay (Sens. Paul (SC), Lee (Utah), Braun (ND) and Enzi (Wyo.).

After adoption of the NDAA,  the EU formally opposed targeting sanctions against the pipeline citing EU’s energy sovereignty to conduct its own legitimate business as well as a violation of international law.  It is  noteworthy that the US Treasury Department has the most sanctions (38)  applied in the world which accounts for the level of honor, prestige and respect in which the US is held.

As described in the State Department’s December 27, 2019  “Fact Sheet on US Opposition to Nord Stream 2”:

“Related parties must ensure that vessels involved in Nord Stream 2 “immediately cease construction-related activity” in a “good-faith wind-down,” as indicated by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).  That includes “involved parties that have knowingly sold, leased, or provided vessels that are engaged in pipe laying at depths of 100 feet or more below sea level for the construction of Nord Stream 2.”  Parties that do not comply will face sanctions as described in PEESA.”

As if that were not specific enough, the Fact Sheet adds that

“Nord Stream 2 is a tool Russia is using to support its continued aggression against Ukraine” that would “bypass Ukraine for gas transit to Europe, which would deprive Ukraine of substantial transit revenues” providing the flawed justification that “ the availability of U.S. LNG saved European consumers $8 billion by enabling them to negotiate lower prices with existing suppliers.” The piece de resistance includes  “The United States’ intention is to stop construction of Nord Stream 2.”

In addition, the PEESA (Section 7503, as amended) provides the US with

“authority to advance U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives, …to address Russian pipeline projects that create risks to U.S. national security, threaten Europe’s energy security, and consequently, endanger Europe’s political and economic welfare” as it  “calls on Russia to cease using its energy resources for coercive purposes.  Russia uses its energy export pipelines to create national and regional dependencies on Russian energy supplies .. and undermine U.S. national security and foreign policy interests.”

The fact that the US disinformation campaign could be so far removed from the real world, touting that NS 2 would  ‘threaten Europe’s’ energy security” and ‘endanger Europe’s political and economic welfare” as a precursor of current circumstances rather than provide a reasonably cheap and reliable source of fuel is less an error in judgement than it was Administration’s misplaced  bombast.

PEESA then directs the Secretary of State to work with the Treasury Department to establish necessary sanctions  “imposed on those foreign persons..” as well as “consultation with the  governments of Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and member countries of the EU before imposing any sanctions.”  It might be noted that Germany was not specifically identified.

Meanwhile, soon after assuming the Presidency and in a surprise move, Biden waived sanctions against Nord Stream that “would negatively impact U.S. relations with Germany, the EU and other European allies and partners” while Secretary of State Antony Blinken reiterated that he was  “determined to do whatever we can to prevent NS 2 completion.”   By January, 2021, Angela Merkel continued to support the NS 2 despite US opposition.

In response to Biden’s waiver, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) was chief sponsor of S.3897, Protecting Europe Energy Clarification Act which would expand sanctions on the NS 2 project and those engaged in its construction.  In commenting with Nuland at a Foreign Relations Committee meeting:

“My understanding is the State Department recommended that sanctions be imposed to try to stop the pipeline, and that the Biden White House overrode that recommendation” and in an grotesque expression of Russian antipathy, Cruz continued

“…in my view a complete and total capitulation by President Biden to Putin. He has given Putin everything he wants. He has surrendered on the pipeline – the pipeline that we had stopped. That we had successfully stopped, until Biden surrendered. I believe this is a generational, geopolitical mistake, that will be reaping billions of dollars of benefits annually from Joe Biden’s mistake and will be using that pipeline to exert economic blackmail on Europe decades from now.”

Commenting on Senate Foreign Affairs Committee’s unanimous approval of sanctions in April, 2021, Sen. Cruz suggested

“Today, a unified, bipartisan, unmistakable message to all companies involved in Nord Stream 2: the United States knows who you are, and if you don’t get out immediately you will be sanctioned. After the Committee’s actions today, no one should be under any illusions what will happen next to any entity that fails to heed this warning” and that

“Ambassador Nuland has committed publicly and privately in conversations with me to using every tool available, including Congressionally-mandated sanctions, to stop Nord Stream 2.”

On January 13, 2022, with the Biden White House still in opposition to sanctions, the Senate approved Cruz’s bill 55-44to apply immediate sanctions on the NS 2 pipeline.  The only Republican voting Nay was Sen. Rand Paul (SC) with Democratic opposition explained as supportive of Biden’s engagement with Russia over the Ukraine conflict rather than outright support for sanctions.

By September, 26, 2022, NS 2 was effectively bombed by unknown entity who had the technical skill and operational know-how to commit such a complex deconstruction maneuver.  At the same time, it would be foolish to believe that Russia has been in the dark since September with no skilled expert or technical capability of its own to identify the who did what and when.  Despite German and other European opposition to the sanctions in favor of NS 2, Euro vassals folded like a tent and acquiesced when Russia conducted its Special Military Operation in Ukraine on February 24, 2022 as their worst economic and energy fears have come to fruition.

In other words, the US Congress (with few exceptions of integrity) has been known for its irrational and mindless antagonism against Russia witness their multiple standing ovations in its hallowed halls on behalf of the despotic porn king of Ukraine.  While it is rumored that negotiations are currently occurring, it remains unclear whether  Russia’s response will be comparable to what is internationally recognized as an Act of War  which raises the question whether there is any recollection of Russia’s repeated promises to retaliate directly against any foreign power providing Ukraine with weapons of mass destruction?

*

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.

Renee Parsons served on the ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and as president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, staff in the Office of the Colorado State Public Defender, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and a staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC.

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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.

***

There’s something not-quite-right about Sy Hersh’s report on the destruction of Nord Stream 2. There is a number of inconsistencies in the piece that lead me to believe that Hersh was less interested in presenting ‘the unvarnished truth’ than relaying a version of events that advance a particular agenda.

That is not to say that I don’t appreciate what the author has done. I do. In fact, I think it would be impossible to overstate the significance of a report that positively identifies the perpetrators of what-appears-to-be the biggest act of industrial terrorism in history. Hersh’s article has the potential to greatly undermine the credibility of the people in power and, by doing so, bring the war to a swift end. It is an incredible achievement that we should all applaud. Here’s a brief recap by political analyst Andre Damon:

On Wednesday, journalist Seymour Hersh revealed that the United States Navy, at the direction of President Joe Biden, was responsible for the September 26, 2022 attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines carrying natural gas between Russia and Germany.

This article, which has been met with total silence in the major US publications, has blown apart the entire narrative of US involvement in the war as a response to “unprovoked Russian aggression.” It lifts the lid on far-reaching plans to use the escalating conflict with Russia to solidify US economic and military domination over Europe.

Hersh revealed that: The operation was ordered by US President Joe Biden and planned by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan.” (“Seymour Hersh’s exposure of the Nord Stream bombing: A lesson and a warning”, Andre Damon, World Socialist Web Site)

This short excerpt summarizes the primary claim that is the focal point of the entire article and—in my opinion—the claim is well researched, impartially presented and extremely persuasive. But there are other parts of the article that are not nearly as convincing and will undoubtedly leave alot of fairly well-informed readers scratching their heads. For example, here’s Hersh discussing the timeline for the Nord Stream operation:

“Biden’s decision to sabotage the pipelines came after more than nine months of highly secret back and forth debate inside Washington’s national security community about how to best achieve that goal. For much of that time, the issue was not whether to do the mission, but how to get it done with no overt clue as to who was responsible.” (“How America Took Out the Nord Stream Pipeline”, Seymour Hersh, Substack)

“Nine months”?

The war broke out on February 24. The pipeline was blown up on September 26. That’s seven months. So, if there were “more than nine months of highly secret back and forth debate inside Washington’s national security community about how to” “sabotage the pipelines” then we must assume the scheming preceeded the war. This is a crucial point, and yet Hersh skims over it like it’s ‘no big deal’. But it is a big deal because—as Andre Damon points out—it “blows apart the entire narrative of US involvement in the war as a response to “unprovoked Russian aggression.” In other words, it proves that the United States was planning to engage in acts of war against Russia regardless of developments in Ukraine. It also suggests that the Russian invasion was merely a cover for Washington to execute a plan that it had mapped out years earlier.

Later in the article, Hersh makes the same claim again without emphasizing its underlying significance. He says: “The Biden Administration was doing everything possible to avoid leaks as the planning took place late in 2021 and into the first months of 2022.”

The truth—as journalist John Helmer states in a recent article—is far different than Hersh describes. Here’s Helmer to explain:

From the full text of the Hersh report, it appears that neither the source nor Hersh has “direct knowledge” of the history of US-led operations to sabotage and destroy the pipelines which became public more than a year before; they directly involved the Polish government and the Danish government. In fact, by error of omission Hersh and his man are ignorant of those operations and of that history.” (“WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE HERSH REPORT ON THE NORD STREAM ATTACKS“, John Helmer, Dances With Bears)

US opposition to Nord Stream is not a recent development; it has a long history dating back to the very beginning of the project in 2011. Even back then, an article appeared in the German magazine Spiegel claiming that ” The project is aimed at ensuring the long-term security of Europe’s energy supplies, but it remains controversial”

Controversial?

Why was Nord Stream considered controversial? What is controversial about sovereign nations strengthening economic ties with other countries in order to ensure they have enough cheap energy to fuel their factories and heat their homes?

This question really cuts to the heart of the matter, and yet, Hersh eschews it altogether. Why? Here’s more from Hersh:

President Biden and his foreign policy team—National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, Secretary of State Tony Blinken, and Victoria Nuland, the Undersecretary of State for Policy—had been vocal and consistent in their hostility to the two pipelines… From its earliest days, Nord Stream 1 was seen by Washington and its anti-Russian NATO partners as a threat to western dominance...

America’s political fears were real: Putin would now have an additional and much-needed major source of income, and Germany and the rest of Western Europe would become addicted to low-cost natural gas supplied by Russia—while diminishing European reliance on America.” (“How America Took Out the Nord Stream Pipeline”, Seymour Hersh, Substack)

Why is Hersh defending the imperial mindset that economic transactions between foreign nations must somehow benefit the United States or be regarded as a national security threat? That is not the role of an impartial journalist gathering information for his readers? That is the role of a propagandist.

Yes, it is true, that Putin would have “an additional and much-needed major source of income”, because that is how the free market works: You sell your gas and you get paid. End of story. There is nothing criminal or sinister about this, and it certainly does not provide a justification for acts of terrorism.

And following this shocking statement, Hersh follows with his other concern that “Germany and the rest of Western Europe would become addicted to low-cost natural gas supplied by Russia.”

Why does Hersh invoke this tedious “addiction” meme that is repeated ad nauseam by the political activists in the mainstream media? And what does it actually mean?

The simple fact is, that Germany was getting cheap gas from Russia which increased its competitiveness, profitability and economic prosperity. How is that a bad thing? How can access to cheap fuel be characterized as an “addiction”? If you were able to fill your gas-tank for 1 dollar per gallon, would you refuse on the basis that you might become addicted?

Of course, not. You’d be grateful that you could buy it that cheap. So, why is Hersh pushing this nonsense and why does he double-down shortly afterwards when he says:

“Nord Stream 1 was dangerous enough, in the view of NATO and Washington, but Nord Stream 2, (would) double the amount of cheap gas that would be available to Germany and Western Europe.”

Horrors! Imagine the free market actually working as it was designed to work; lifting people from poverty and spreading prosperity across national borders. Can you see how narrowly imperialistic this is?

Germany needs Russia’s cheap gas. It’s good for its industry, good for working people, and good for economic growth. And, yes, it is good for Russia, too. The only one it’s not good for is United States whose power is undermined by the German-Russian partnership. Can you see that?

And, by the way, there has never been an incident in which Putin has used Russian gas or oil for the purpose of blackmail, coercion or extortion. Never. That is a myth concocted by Washington spinmeisters who want to throw a wrench in German-Russo relations. But there’s not a word of truth to any of it. Here’s more from Hersh:

Opposition to Nord Stream 2 flared on the eve of the Biden inauguration in January 2021, when Senate Republicans… repeatedly raised the political threat of cheap Russian natural gas during the confirmation hearing of Blinken as Secretary of State….

Would Biden stand up to the Germans? Blinken said yes…. “I know his strong conviction that this is a bad idea, the Nord Stream 2,” he said. “I know that he would have us use every persuasive tool that we have to convince our friends and partners, including Germany, not to move forward with it.”

A few months later, as the construction of the second pipeline neared completion, Biden blinked. That May, in a stunning turnaround, the administration waived sanctions against Nord Stream AG, with a State Department official conceding that trying to stop the pipeline through sanctions and diplomacy had “always been a long shot.” Behind the scenes, administration officials reportedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, by then facing a threat of Russian invasion, not to criticize the move.

There were immediate consequences. Senate Republicans, led by Cruz, announced an immediate blockade of all of Biden’s foreign policy nominees and delayed passage of the annual defense bill for months, deep into the fall. Politico later depicted Biden’s turnabout on the second Russian pipeline as “the one decision, arguably more than the chaotic military withdrawal from Afghanistan, that has imperiled Biden’s agenda.” (“How America Took Out the Nord Stream Pipeline”, Seymour Hersh, Substack)

This is interesting. We already know that Biden and his lieutenants were resolutely committed to terminating Nord Stream regardless of the risks. So, why did Biden decide to do an about-face and lift sanctions, even while his team was putting the final touches on the plan to blow up the pipeline?

Why?

Are we supposed to believe that Joe Biden suddenly changed his mind and decided to pursue a less dangerous and felonious strategy?

No, as Hersh points out, the decision to blow up the pipeline had already been made, which means the administration was merely looking for a way to hide their tracks. In other words, they were already working on a legal defense of “plausible deniability” which was reinforced by the lifting of sanctions. That was the real objective, to create as much distance between themselves and the terrorist act they had already approved and were about to launch. Here’s more from Hersh:

The administration was floundering, despite getting a reprieve on the crisis in mid-November, when Germany’s energy regulators suspended approval of the second Nord Stream pipeline. Natural gas prices surged 8% within days, amid growing fears in Germany and Europe that the pipeline suspension and the growing possibility of a war between Russia and Ukraine would lead to a very much unwanted cold winter. It was not clear to Washington just where Olaf Scholz, Germany’s newly appointed chancellor, stood. Months earlier, after the fall of Afghanistan, Scholtz had publicly endorsed French President Emmanuel Macron’s call for a more autonomous European foreign policy in a speech in Prague—clearly suggesting less reliance on Washington and its mercurial actions.” (“How America Took Out the Nord Stream Pipeline”, Seymour Hersh, Substack)

This is pure fiction. Of course, Scholz paid lip service to a more “autonomous European foreign policy”. What would you expect him to say to a domestic audience? And, does Hersh honestly believe that Scholz has not been in Washington’s back-pocket from the very beginning? Does he think that Scholz based his decision on Putin’s invasion and not on agreements he had made with Washington before the war had even begun?

Keep in mind, the United States has been arming, training and providing logistical support for Ukrainian forces in the east for the last 8 years, the purpose of which was to prepare for a war with Russia.

Does anyone deny that?

No, no one denies that.

Was Scholz aware of this?

Of course, he was aware of it. Every leader in Europe knew what was going on. There were even articles in the mainstream news that explained in minute detail what the United States was up-to. It was not a secret.

And this is just one inconsistency, after all, didn’t former Chancellor Angela Merkel openly admit (in an interview with a German magazine) that Germany deliberately shrugged off its obligations under the Minsk treaty in order to buy time so the Ukrainian army could get stronger so they’d be better prepared to fight the Russian invasion.

Yes, she did! So, we can be 100% certain that Scholz knew what the overall game-plan was. The plan was to lure Russia into a war in Ukraine and then claim “Unprovked aggression”. Scholz knew it, Hollande knew it, Zelensky knew it, Boris Johnson knew it, Petro Poroshenko knew it and Biden knew it. They all knew it.

Even so, Hersh wants us to believe that Scholz knew nothing about these elaborate and costly plans, but simply made his decisions as developments took place in real time. That is not true. That is not what happened and, I would argue, that Hersh knows that is not what happened.

But the biggest failing of the Hersh piece is the complete omission of the geopolitical context in which this act of terrorism took place. The US doesn’t go around the world blowing up critical energy infrastructure for nothing. No. The reason Washington embarked on this risky gambit was because it is facing an existential crisis that can only be resolved by crushing those emerging centers of power that threaten America’s dominant position in the global order. That’s what’s going on below the surface; the US is trying to roll back the clock to the glorious 1990’s after the Soviet empire had collapsed and the world was Washington’s oyster. But those days are gone forever and US power is irreversibly eroding due to its basic lack of competitiveness. If the US was still the industrial powerhouse it was following WW2—when the rest of the world was in ruins—then there would be no need to blow up pipelines to prevent European-Russian economic integration and the emergence of a massive free trade zone spanning the area from Lisbon to Vladivostok . But the fact is, the US is not as essential to global growth as it once was and, besides, other nations want to be free to pursue their own growth model. They want to implement the changes that best fit their own culture, their own religion and their own traditions. They don’t want to be told what to do. But Washington doesn’t want change. Washington wants to preserve the system bestows the greatest amount of power and wealth on itself. Hersh does not simply ignore the geopolitical factors that led to the sabotage, he proactively creates a smokescreen with his misleading explanations. Check it out:

“As long as Europe remained dependent on the pipelines for cheap natural gas, Washington was afraid that countries like Germany would be reluctant to supply Ukraine with the money and weapons it needed to defeat Russia. It was at this unsettled moment that Biden authorized Jake Sullivan to bring together an interagency group to come up with a plan.”

More baloney. Washington doesn’t care about Germany’s pathetic contribution to the war effort. What Washington cares about is power; pure, unalloyed power. And Washington’s global power was being directly challenged by European-Russian economic integration and the creation of a giant economic commons beyond its control. And the Nord Stream pipeline was at the very heart of this new bustling phenom. It was the main artery connecting the raw materials and labor of the east with the technology and industry of the west. It was a marriage of mutual interests that Washington had to destroy to maintain its grip on regional power.

Think about it: This new economic commons, (“Greater Europe”) would eventually ease trade and travel restrictions, allow the free flow of capital and labor between countries, and harmonize regulations in a way that would build trust and strengthen diplomatic ties. Here’s more from an earlier piece that sums it up:

In a world where Germany and Russia are friends and trading partners, there is no need for US military bases, no need for expensive US-made weapons and missile systems, and no need for NATO. There’s also no need to transact energy deals in US Dollars or to stockpile US Treasuries to balance accounts. Transactions between business partners can be conducted in their own currencies which is bound to precipitate a sharp decline in the value of the dollar and a dramatic shift in economic power. This is why the Biden administration opposes Nord Stream. It’s not just a pipeline, it’s a window into the future; a future in which Europe and Asia are drawn closer together into a massive free trade zone that increases their mutual power and prosperity while leaving the US on the outside looking in.” (“The Crisis in Ukraine Is Not About Ukraine. It’s About Germany“, Unz Review)

It is the responsibility of a journalist to provide the context that is needed for the reader to understand the topic of discussion. Hersh doesn’t do that, which leads me to believe that John Helmer is right when he says:

This is an indictment of the Biden pipeline plot, not of the US war plan.” (“What’s Wrong with the Hersh Report”, John Helmer, Dances With Bears)

*

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

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.

***

In this episode, we report on the hearings that took place all day today in the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, as three former senior Twitter executives and one low-level pro-censorship “whistleblower” answered questions for more than 8 hours on how that company decided what to censor, whether parts of the government attempted to influence those decisions and whether they succeeded, and why Twitter specifically decided to brute-censor reporting from the New York Post on Joe Biden’s business activities in Ukraine and China – and then proceeded to lock the nation’s oldest newspaper out of its Twitter account for more than two weeks right as the 2020 presidential election was approaching.

We’ve covered that censorship decision multiple times on this show because, in our view, that specific act constitutes one of the gravest attempts yet to weaponize censorship to interfere in our presidential elections in decades, if not ever. We’ll show you some of the key exchanges from today’s hearing, what we learned and what it all means moving forward.

Also: the nation’s most popular podcast host, the comedian Joe Rogan, is the target of widespread denunciations this week from many on the right and the left due to a joke he told on this program that his critics believe expressed vicious antisemitism, notably very notably, the anti-Rogan denunciations are being led by many people who have built their careers on opposing cancel culture and woke mobs and who, they say, –and we agree – often have hair-trigger sensitivities to lurking bigotry. We’ll examine this illuminating controversy and ask whether consistent standards are being applied in general and to Rogan specifically.

For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update starting right now.

Monologue

The House Committee on Oversight and Reform spent the day today grilling four former Twitter employees about the company’s censorship policies and especially how those policies were applied in the weeks leading up to the 2020 presidential election. For more than 8 hours today, both Republican and Democratic members of that committee posed questions to former chief legal counsel of Twitter Vijaya Godi; former Twitter deputy counsel James Baker, who before that notably worked as the FBI’s chief lawyer; Twitter’s former head of Trust and Safety, Yoel Roth, a cultural leftist caricature very familiar to viewers of this program, primarily for his starring role in the Twitter Files reporting, and former Twitter employee Anika Collier Navaroli, whom Democrats were quite amusingly trying to herald as some sort of courageous whistleblower for criticisms of Twitter that perfectly aligned with the standard left-liberal desire for greater Big Tech censorship. In other words, she was there, this brave whistleblower, to keep telling committee Democrats that the problem with Twitter is not that it censors too much, but that it doesn’t censor conservatives aggressively or frequently enough.

The context for this hearing, which we’re so happy has finally arrived, is vital to understand. Like I said a couple of minutes ago, I regard the decision – and it wasn’t only by Twitter, but also by Facebook – to manipulate the ability of Americans to access critical reporting – not about Hunter Biden, but about Joe Biden right before the 2020 election – as probably the single gravest example of weaponizing censorship in order to manipulate the outcome of democratic elections, in at least the last several decades, if not ever.

And there are all sorts of reasons why this ended up being such a serious matter. In part, because it’s illustrative of broader trends to attempt to changet the Internet, the promise of which early on was that it would liberate all of us from centralized state and corporate control and would enable us to communicate freely with one another without the need to have this arbiter or this mediator being centralized in corporate and state power in between us. Instead, it has become probably the most potent weapon yet for propagandizing a population, because instead of allowing this free and open inquiry that the Internet was supposed to empower, it’s now being used to censor any kind of views that are designed to challenge the establishment of orthodoxies. This one-way battering ram of messaging perfectly aligns virtually always with the U.S. government, generally, the U.S. Security State specifically.

And the fact that this is the case of two of the most important social media platforms doing exactly that – censoring reporting right before the presidential election, days before, weeks before a very hotly contested election. Joe Biden was certified as the winner of that election because he won three or four states by a very narrow margin, 70,000 or 80,000 votes going a different way and that election would have been certified differently. We will never know whether or not this impediment was put in place to prevent Americans from learning about what turned out everyone now acknowledges – except for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – everyone now acknowledges was true and authentic documents and true and authentic reporting. Whether that would have made the difference, but whether it would have made the difference or not, the obvious attempt on the part of the intelligence community, then corporate media outlets, and then Big Tech to unite and keep this information away from American citizens, or at the very least lead them to believe that it should be seen as discrediting, based on the CIA lie that it was Russian disinformation, was undeniably and a major escalation in the use of censorship in this country, and it deserves, at the very least, a few days of House hearings.

Even though Democrats spent much of the day whining today that this is kind of some kind of a distraction from the things that really matter – free speech really matters, and a free press really matters. The role that Big Tech is playing in our lives and in our democracy – and it’s not just its increasing ability, but its increasing willingness to use that power to manipulate what we’re hearing and what we’re thinking, on behalf of the political factions that it serves most loyally – cannot be minimized or dismissed, as Democrats spent the day doing, for obvious reasons, namely, that this censorship regime is constructed and is supplied to benefit them. So, of course, they’re happy with it.

And one of the things that were real today, if you listen to any part of this hearing, let alone all of it, as we did today, was that these four people who were before the committee to answer questions, three of them senior executives at Twitter, the other a low-level employee who is deemed to be a whistleblower, if you just listen to them at all, they’re immediately recognizable. James Baker, who was the second in command to Vijaya Godi, as deputy general counsel of Twitter, who came from the FBI, where he was their chief lawyer, now, suddenly at Twitter, making decisions about our elections. He is very readily identifiable as someone who is from the U.S. Security State and he hated Donald Trump for the reasons they all did, that he brought instability to their orthodoxies; and then Vijaya Godi and Yoel Roth and this fourth person, who was brought in as the whistleblower. They are very standard left-liberals.

We’ve shown you Yoel Roth at length before, the way he speaks, the things he says, and how he thinks; he comes right out of left-wing academia. Vijaya Godi is a little bit more sophisticated in her presentation, but there’s no doubting the fact that she’s just an establishment devotee to the Democratic Party. And then this fourth person was kind of a caricature, even more so than Yoel Roth, a pro-censorship block that’s looking at free speech as violence, believing that free speech constantly has to be weighed against safety – all of these new liberal doctrines have been invented in order to justify increasing control over the Internet.

Now, I think a timeline to remember what happened here is absolutely vital because what has been done, and this is often the case, is an attempt to tell you this is a really complex series of events that are filled with all kinds of detailed complexities that can’t really be discerned and trying to get you basically to look away – they’ve decided this is past history, there’s no point in looking into this, none of it can ever really be resolved. And the truth is exactly the opposite: there’s great clarity and simplicity to the timeline of what took place.

So, let’s review that. First of all, the context for all the 2020 election – and this isn’t me saying this, there was a very lengthy article in Time Magazine that was remarkably candid in acknowledging that – virtually the entire American establishment was united to ensure Donald Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election. They engaged in all kinds of maneuvers and all kinds of tactics that previously would have been unthinkable, the way in which they aligned across political ideologies and political parties to make sure that Donald Trump didn’t get a second term was also highly unusual, essentially, all of American power and institutions of power were on the same side in this election, something that normally doesn’t happen in American elections.

The Time Magazine article was essentially describing what has now become the Sam Harris mentality. As you recall, Sam Harris, in a now notorious podcast, said that he believes that the censorship of this story of the New York Post reporting and anything that was just done to ensure Donald Trump’s defeat was justified: censorship, lying, manipulation. He was honest enough to acknowledge what he thinks, which is that in his mind, Donald Trump is such a unique threat to the American way of life, such a singular evil that, by definition, anything done for the noble cause of ensuring his defeat was morally justifiable. The classic ends justify the means argument, even if the means in question are things like censorship, CIA interference in our elections, all things that are not supposed to happen in a healthy, normal democracy, to Sam Harris – he was expressing the view quite overtly – all of it was justified as long as it was done to stop Trump. And that was clearly the view of the establishment generally. They’ve spent all year laying the groundwork for this, and in this specific case was an extension of that rotted mentality.

On October 14, right before the 2020 election, The New York Post published an article that at least was relevant and interesting in assessing Joe Biden’s integrity. It described actions that his son, Hunter Biden, attempted to get him to take, and at least some of which Joe Biden did in fact take, to benefit the Burisma, an energy company in Ukraine which was paying Hunter Biden $50,000 a month to sit on the board of something they were doing quite clearly for only one reason. It was not to tap into Hunter Biden’s impressive expertise in the energy industry of Eastern Europe. He had no such expertise. It was because the person running Ukraine since at least 2014 was his father, Joe Biden. He was acting as an imperial overseer or consul of Ukraine.

So, if you were an energy company in Ukraine, like Burisma, facing the possibility of criminal charges and investigations, the person with whom he would want to wield influence most is not a Ukrainian politician, but the one who is actually running Ukraine, which is Joe Biden, when he was the vice president of United States. And then in order to do that, you don’t go and hire or pay the son of an Ukrainian politician, you go and hire the son of the U.S. politician, which is what Burisma did. And Joe Biden was heavily involved in decision-making about whether to fire certain Ukrainian prosecutors. The micromanaging of Ukraine by the United States, right on the other side of the Russian border was so extensive that it went down to the level of which particular prosecutor they wanted to replace, and which ones they wanted remaining, something that obviously had a direct effect on Burisma.

The Biden defense is that the demand that this one particular prosecutor be fired or removed, that Biden demanded and threatened Ukraine to withhold $1 billion in aid unless they did, was the position not just of the U.S. government, but also of the EU. But whatever else is true, when you have an American politician running a country and then an energy company in that country is paying his son $50,000 a month blatantly for influence peddling, that deserves a lot of investigative scrutiny, especially when Joe Biden becomes the presidential frontrunner, which is what he was on October 14, when the New York Post published emails that they said came from Hunter Biden’s laptop – which happens to be true – shedding light on what Joe Biden was doing in Ukraine.

On October 15th, the following day, the New York Post published a second story based on the same set of documents from Hunter Biden’s laptop describing what Joe Biden and the Biden family were doing in pursuing profitable business ventures in China, trading on Joe Biden’s name as somebody who wielded a great deal of influence as vice president, who may one day be the American president, and whether or not there were elements in China seeking to funnel money to Joe Biden and his son and his family to garner influence. We can go through all the details about the deal memo that was part of that laptop that described how 10% of the profits was reserved for the big guy, which Hunter Biden’s business partner, Tony Bobulinski, said referred to Joe Biden.

But leaving that aside for now, there’s no question but that these two stories, what Joe Biden was doing in Ukraine, and what Joe Biden was doing in China, were the utmost for journalistic relevance, that’s exactly what you want the media doing. And because those stories were incriminating of the Biden family and of Joe Biden, because they raised doubts about Joe Biden’s integrity and they played into a storyline that had already been emerging, which was that Joe Biden was trying to enrich his son by using his influence to benefit his family, it was an alarming story to people who are desperate to ensure Donald Trump’s defeat, which is basically most of the political establishment. They were petrified by these stories for obvious reasons. It’s very high stakes. Two weeks out from a presidential election, anything and everything is taken very seriously, let alone an explosive archive that comes from Joe Biden’s son shedding all new light on what this family was doing.

Clearly, this posed a danger to the number one priority goal of the American establishment and the U.S. Security State, which was Donald Trump’s defeat, and so when these two articles were published, the establishment immediately sprang into action. There were instant claims that this is a repeat of the 2016 election in which Russia was trying to interfere in the outcome of the election to help Donald Trump get elected. But remember what happened in 2016, regardless of what you think of Russia’s role, was that similarly relevant and authentic documents were released about Hillary Clinton and the Clinton campaign, something that undoubtedly was a public interest.

This was the frontrunner of the 2016 presidential election. All of these documents that were published by WikiLeaks that came from the email inbox of the Democratic National Committee and John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman, shed obvious light on what Hillary Clinton was thinking and doing, which is something you’d want to know as a journalist and as a citizen. And the publication of that, those authentic documents by WikiLeaks obviously played a role in the outcome of the election. That’s what journalism is for: to reveal to the American public secrets about the candidates. And oftentimes that’s how it’s done, through huge archives.

So, the establishment was petrified they were going to do that again. And when they saw this reporting, they instantly blamed Russia, even though they had no evidence to do so. Immediately, on October 14 and then 15, the day the stories emerged, first Twitter announced that they were banning any attempt to link to The New York Post stories. If you tried on Twitter to link to the New York Post stories, you got a message from Twitter before the tweet was posted saying this is an unhealthy or prohibited link. If you even tried to post it in your direct messages and your private conversation on Twitter, the same thing happened. The link was just banned. You could not use any link to The New York Post reporting for either of those first two stories on the Twitter site.

People have forgotten that it wasn’t just Twitter, but also Facebook who censored that story. They announced that decision through their director of communications, who coincidentally happened to be somebody who had spent his entire life working for the Democratic Party on Capitol Hill – Andy Stone. He worked for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the House Majority PAC, these entities that are designed to ensure that the Democratic Party remains in power. He worked for Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer. He worked for a member of the House who was a Democrat. He was a Democrat through and through.

That was what his whole life was before he got to Facebook. And that’s why Facebook had announced to the public that they were going to tinker with their algorithms to block the spread of that New York Post story to ensure that many people, millions of Americans, would not get exposed to it on Facebook until he said they could conduct a third-party fact check to determine whether the materials were not authentic. And to this day, that fact check has never been provided and the reason is obvious, Facebook, It turns out, banned or algorithmically suppressed a story that turned out to be totally true. So, either that fact check didn’t happen and Facebook lied that it would or it did happen and it concluded that the documents were real and Facebook ended up suppressing the story anyway. But that is a major interference in our American elections.

And then on October 19, just five days after The New York Post began its reporting, 51 former members of the intelligence community, the CIA, Homeland Security, all the same people who are constantly interfering – James Clapper and John Brennan, that whole gang – issued a letter that asserted that the publication of these documents in The New York Post had “all of the trade hallmarks of Russian disinformation”. These 51 intelligence agents admitted they had no evidence to support that claim. They said that explicitly in that letter. And yet the very first reporter to trumpet it was Natasha Bertrand, then at Politico – she’s since been promoted to CNN for her role in spreading disinformation. That’s how you get hired in CNN – was the first to publish the screaming headline that the Hunter Biden laptop and the documents used by the New York Post to do that reporting were “Russian disinformation” and from there, virtually every major media outlet in the country, not all but most, ratified that lie over and over and over and over again.

And then that was what Big Tech used as well to justify the censorship decisions that Twitter executives said at the time that they were justifying this because it violated Twitter’s policy against citing hacked materials. They had no idea that these materials whether they were hacked. The Twitter Files reporting that Elon Musk enabled that, Matt Taibbi and Bari Weiss and other people, reporters that we’ve had on our show, Lee Fang and Michael Shellenberger and others, demonstrated that even at the time that James Baker, the former FBI general counsel, was urging that Twitter blocked this story, based on – they had to invent some rule, they couldn’t just censor it because they wanted Joe Biden to win they had to pretend they had some rule that was violated by this story – they pointed to the ban on pointing to linking to hacked materials, even though inside Twitter, they were admitting they had no evidence to make that conclusion that these materials were hacked. And as it turned out, that was a falsehood. That was a lie. These stories, these materials, we’re not hacked.

So, Twitter had no basis for censoring. Facebook to this day has never acknowledged it made a mistake in what it did. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg did go on Joe Rogan’s program, and when asked about that by Joe Rogan, said the reason Facebook did that was because the FBI spent months warning them that something like this was probably going to happen. It was going to come from Russia, which is why they ended up believing the claim that this was a “Russian disinformation campaign” because the FBI was telling them for months, were priming them for months to get ready to censor any information that could have helped Donald Trump win the election by shedding a negative light on Joe Biden.

Twitter, though, has acknowledged it through Jack Dorsey, the CEO and founder, who apologized. And even today at these hearings, these senior Twitter executives repeatedly acknowledged that they made a mistake not only in banning the link to The New York Post stories but also locking The New York Post out of their Twitter account for two weeks. So, all that reporting in The New York Post is based on this archive. The New York Post was not able to post on Twitter and get maximum circulation for it because Twitter was demanding that they delete their original tweet that promoted their first story in the New York Post, justifiably was refusing to do so, saying, Why should we delete our authentic reporting in order to get back onto Twitter? We’re not going to do that.

So, Twitter’s position, though, is that they made a mistake. It’s a pretty huge mistake given that they ended up censoring genuine, authentic reporting about the person who would, just two weeks later, go on to become the president of the United States.

So that’s why the House Republicans – the Democrats, obviously had zero interest in finding out what happened here and investigating any of it –  convened today their first Oversight hearing where they subpoenaed the three senior executives who were responsible for that decision and many other censorship decisions, suppressing anti-establishment voices, particularly on the right, though also on the left. And then, the Democrats called this whistleblower who was just there to voice her critique of Twitter that aligns perfectly with the left wing of the Democratic Party: that Twitter should be censoring more, not less. Especially, it should have been censoring Trump more, should have been protecting AOC better. That’s what she was there for.

The big question that we didn’t know for sure before this hearing was how much information we were we going to learn about the role that the U.S. government played in those decisions to censor. We have a lot of information that the FBI was trying to censor to influence Twitter’s decision-making when it came to censorship and Big Tech in multiple ways.

Before the Twitter Files, The Intercept, at the end of October, in a story by Ken Bernstein and Lee Fang, obtained secret documents from Homeland Security that revealed the very extensive plan Homeland Security has to ensure they can play a vital role in telling these companies what they should and shouldn’t censor or allow. That was what that whole disinformation czar was supposed to do inside Homeland Security, to formalize the government’s pronouncements about what is true and what is false, with the expectation that Big Tech would almost be obligated to censor anything the government labels false. There was a lot of evidence of Big Tech’s involvement. Mark Zuckerberg’s admission on Joe Rogan was also serious evidence, as was the fact that the Twitter Files revealed all new evidence showing how deeply involved the FBI was with Twitter. There is one example, from Michael Shellenberger, on December 19, 2022, that came from his installment of the Twitter Files. And what he shows here is that pressure had been growing inside the intelligence community for Twitter to censor in anticipation of the election:

This was Twitter internally lamenting the fact that there was so much pressure coming from the FBI and the CIA and Homeland Security, trying to get them to censor in a way that would favor the Democratic Party. And we can’t reveal all the Twitter file revelations.  We devoted many shows to those revelations. We interviewed many of the reporters. Go back and look at those, what they established. Above all, the most important thing was that these were not autonomous decisions by Twitter to censor the Hunter Biden story, to ban Donald Trump from Twitter, even though he was the sitting president of the  United States, to ban Marjorie Taylor Greene, despite being an elected representative. Instead, this is constantly a tidal wave of attempted coercion and influence from obviously very powerful forces inside the government, that if you’re Big Tech and you have big contracts opportunities with the Pentagon, as Amazon does, or the CIA as Amazon does and Microsoft does and Google does, you’re going to take seriously their insistence on what you should censor. And if they tell you that they need you to censor it in the name of national security, you’re going to listen even more closely. So, we know there were all kinds of ties between Facebook and Twitter, and that’s what these executives set out, most of all, to deny today.

So, let’s begin with a statement by Vijaya Godi, the general counsel of Twitter, who has become identified as one of the key players in causing Twitter to censor right-wing voices. And here’s a taste of the kinds of things she had to say today.

(Video 34:52)

So, they had to own up to those mistakes, Jack Dorsey did. They can’t sit there and justify what they did. It’s impossible, particularly because the claim that they invoked to justify the censorship turned out to be completely false. It was a CIA lie. But just note how significant that admission is. First of all, even though it’s true that Twitter’s ban on those links lasted only 24 hours, it completely maligned the story in the eyes of the American voter since Twitter found it to be so fraudulent and that it came from Russia. This is Twitter putting its institutional support behind these lies, and it shaped how the American public views these stories. Joe Biden himself, every time he was asked about it by reporters or it was raised in the presidential debate with President Trump, immediately accused whoever asked him of spreading Russian disinformation.

These lies were weaponized over and over and Twitter’s support for it institutionally played a vital role in that. Secondly, none of these accounts for the role Facebook played, a much, much larger platform, and we don’t know to this day how long Facebook’s algorithmic suppression lasted, what effect that had, how many people ended up being manipulated as a result of Facebook’s doing that. But also, again, Facebook joining Twitter for however long and endorsing this outright lie, that this is Russian disinformation, also manipulated the American public and how they thought about it. Beyond that, this is what gave the media the opening that they took eagerly to ratify this lie over and over. We showed you many times before on every news network from NBC and CBS to CNN. They were bringing one member of the U.S. Security State on after the next to repeat the lie that this was Russian disinformation, which not only minimized the importance of the story but played into the Democrat’s narrative, the number one narrative of the Democrats in the media for four years that somehow Trump was a tool of the Kremlin. That’s what this was really designed to do as well. Twitter jumping on board with that just demonstrated how these people who were called before Congress today, who ran Twitter for all those years, were clearly operatives of the Democratic Party and were using censorship, brute censorship in order to do it.

And then that game playing that she noted at the end where it was kind of a game of chicken. Twitter was saying to The New York Post, “Well, you can come back on to the platform as long as you delete your tweet that we’ve decreed to be in violation of a rule” and the New York Post said, “We’re not going to accept that condition.” I respect the New York Post for doing that. I would do that, too, if I were a journalist, and I knew I had reported the story accurately, and the only way I could use a platform is if I deleted my own reporting, an acknowledgment that I had done something wrong as a condition to being able to get back online.

It took Twitter two weeks to relent and tell The New York Post you can come back to our platform even without deleting that tweet. And of course, that was two weeks of reporting The New York Post is doing at the critical moment with exclusive access to this laptop to report on the Biden family and Joe Biden that Twitter users and therefore millions of people, especially journalists who use Twitter all the time, could not see and were not impacted by. These were mistakes that they made and it’s nice they’re acknowledging that. But what’s critical to remember is how inconsequential this was. And anyone who tells you that it had no effect on the election is not telling the truth. They have no way of knowing that, especially with such a close election.

Now, here is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and she said several things during this hearing. One of the things she did was try to commandeer the hearing to make it about herself. She, out of nowhere – really, out of nowhere – began complaining and screaming and whining about how Twitter didn’t censor enough tweets about her. I know you’ll be shocked to learn that she tried to turn it into a hearing about herself and her own victimhood, claiming that Donald Trump’s tweets inspired hatred against her and demanding to know why Twitter didn’t do more to delete them. In other words, she wanted more censorship from Twitter, that was her anger, which was that they allowed the sitting president of the United States to speak too freely and they should have protected AOC more from the president’s comments.

She was also the only one on either side of the aisle in this committee hearing who kept asserting that the authenticity of these materials remains in doubt. Nobody thinks that. The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN and CBS have all acknowledged, now that the election is safely over, that they could fully authenticate these materials. It takes a level of audacity, or maybe it’s just ignorance to think that. She has no idea what she’s talking about. She shows up for these hearings looking for dramatic moments that will go viral on social media. I don’t think she knows that every major media outlet has authenticated these materials. The reality is, I authenticated them. Many media outlets authenticated them before the election. But the one she trusts has now come out and said there’s no question not only are they authentic, but the story about how they made their way first to the FBI and then to Rudy Giuliani and The New York Post was entirely true, which is that Hunter Biden took the laptop in to have it repaired and never came back to pick it up and after 90 days, under his store policy, it becomes his. He gave it to the FBI  and then Rudy Giuliani once he realized it was Hunter Biden’s. That’s actually what happened. Russia had no involvement in it. And she spent the day either out of ignorance or malice, continuously insinuating that the whole thing is still in doubt. And that’s why Twitter did the right thing. But what she’s really angry about is any of this is even being looked into at all. Watch what she said.

(Video 41:51)

Okay. Let me just stop there and say she’s trying to act like this is something that justifies suspicion about the authenticity of this archive. This is how journalism works all the time. When we got the Snowden reporting and we began reporting on its contents, we didn’t run around handing it to any media outlet that asked. That would be a violation of our source obligations to keep the materials under the framework that we had agreed upon with our sources, and how it would be reported. You don’t just give away the exclusive material that a source entrusted to you, just because they ask. Do you think the New York Times, when they get an exclusive story, will give it away to Fox News?

Just because Fox News asked and said, “We want to verify that what you’re saying is actually true.” The New York Times is going to say, “This is our story.” There was nothing suspicious about that. That’s how newspapers generally behave. Beyond that, there were all kinds of additions to know right away that the material was authentic. There were all kinds of ways to authenticate it. And I’ve talked about those before, about how I was able to and that’s why I was willing to put my name on the story and let The Intercept over their refusal to do so. And Fox News and the New York Post and The Daily Caller, many of them produce concrete evidence verifying and authenticating the material. It’s just that they didn’t want to hear that. So, this argument that she’s making, that because The New York Post wasn’t willing to make it available to Ben Collins of NBC News justifies the suspicion of their authenticity, is moronic. That’s what she’s doing though and the whole day was spent trying to justify Twitter censorship. What’s the rest?

(Video 44:04)

Do you see? She continues to call this authentic archive disinformation. I mean, she’s just a blatant liar. I’m really asking that. Even a lot of the Democrats on the Committee were willing to acknowledge that the materials are authentic. And they’ll say, well, at the time it was unclear and Twitter was grappling with – no one to this day calls that disinformation anymore except her. She’s essentially lying and saying that these materials that we all know are truewere disinformation.

Hearing to do what? Again? What are they trying to do? Get accurate information about the most powerful politicians in the country and then inform the American people about what they revealed. I hope they’re trying to do that again. That’s what journalists are supposed to be doing. But instead, the journalists, most of them in the United States, had a different mission in mind before the election. They weren’t interested in reporting on Joe Biden, just like in 2016, so many of them remain angry that a few of us reported on those WikiLeaks documents and what they reflected. They don’t want accurate information about Democratic Party leaders being disclosed to the American people. They want them hidden. That’s exactly what she’s saying. She’s angry. She considers to this day what The New York Post did to be immoral, even though it was accurate reporting, because the only moral metric they recognize, as Sam Harris said, is whether or not it helps defeat Donald Trump.

(Video 46:09)

What does that mean? Half fake. How is it half fake? What does that even mean? The whole thing is real. There are other committees that are talking about prescription drug costs and inflation and abortion and whatever else she thinks is more important. But again, there’s it’s hard to think of things more important than whether Americans have the ability to speak freely on the Internet or whether a union of Security State agencies is an intel or the intelligence community will unite with the largest media corporations and Big Tech to manipulate what Americans can and can’t hear based on lies, outright lies, that came from the CIA in order to manipulate an election. If that isn’t relevant for Congress to do, I don’t know what is.

Now, many of the Democrats on the Committee actually did spend the day justifying their pro-censorship views. There were at least three new members of the Democratic Party who were on this committee, and all three of them rose in defense of censorship, arguing that censorship of political views is justifiable. I keep saying this. I feel like sometimes people think I’m being hyperbolic deliberately when I do, but I’m not. I’m just being literal. A major plank of the Democratic Party is to increase the amount of censorship Big Tech does in order to prevent voices the Democratic Party dislikes or viewpoints the Democratic Party dislikes from being heard. That is a major tactic of theirs. It should be surprising to hear members of Congress explicitly defend censorship. But it’s not anymore. They really don’t believe in the First Amendment. They don’t believe in the value of free speech. They’re not bothered to hear that the government is trying to intervene with Big Tech’s censorship decision. And again, this is based on total ignorance. This is what you heard over and over as they did it, which is this: the only thing that censorship advocates know you win them up and they say it. They’ll say, you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater. Listen to watch them say that. Here is this whistleblower at Twitter. This is how she said it to defend censorship.

(Video 48:46)

Anika Navaroli: It was sent to my team’s desk every day. We had to decide whether a particular piece of content equated to yelling fire in a crowded theater. My work at Twitter and subsequently at Twitch put me in the middle of key events in history.

Would put her in the middle of key events in history, like whether to censor or not by determining whether or not someone was yelling fire in a crowded movie theater!

Here is one of the new members of the Democratic Party, Summer Lee. She’s a little bit Squadish. I don’t think she’s joining this Squad officially, but she’s expressed support for them. She was supported by that same kind of Democratic Party liberal-left infrastructure like DSA and Justice Democrats as this new, exciting progressive. Here’s what she had to say in defense of censorship.

(Video 49:38)

This is 102 years old now, the yelling fire in a crowded movie theater thing. And it’s how the people who are least informed about constitutional law and the First Amendment and free speech try to justify censorship and it’s all over the world. I’m constantly involved in debates and controversies in Brazil about free speech. I’ve done reporting on this show about the escalating regime of censorship in Brazil through the Judiciary, and you hear this over here as well, to justify censorship, yell fire in a crowded movie theater. So let me just take a minute to explain why this is such a worthless and ignorant invocation. And it’s very ironic as well. This “you can’t yell fire in a crowded movie theater” justification for censorship came from a 1919 Supreme Court case by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, and it was part of a trilogy of cases where people in the United States, American citizens, were being prosecuted under the Espionage Act of 1917, one of the most repressive laws in the history of United States – the law that they used to prosecute Julian Assange and Daniel Ellsberg and Edward Snowden and whoever else decides to blow the whistle on the government.

The purpose of the Espionage Act of 1917 – 1917 was an important year in U.S. history because that was when Woodrow Wilson was trying to involve the country in World War I and there were many people, especially on the left, opposed to that involvement – and it was really designed to criminalize left-wing dissent to America’s involvement in World War I. There are people on the right also on isolationist grounds, opposed to involvement in that war. And they used that Espionage Act to prosecute several leftist leaders, including Eugene Debs – And that’s what this case is, the Schenck case.  Mr. Schenck was an American citizen who had published a petition arguing for the repeal of the draft of conscription. And the state charged him with felonies just for advocating that the draft should be reversed. And their theory was in this case that by arguing against conscription, he was, in fact, obstructing it, that his words weren’t just words, but actions. Does that sound familiar?

That’s the standard left-wing attempt to criminalize speech. Ironically, it was first used to criminalize and prosecute leftists who were opposed to the U.S. war role in World War I. And the opinion by Justice Holmes, in which he said, well, you can’t scream fire in a crowded movie theater to justify this prosecution that the court upheld, was in that context. Ultimately, Holmes himself recanted it throughout the rest of his life. He was writing the dissent, saying free speech is too valuable to sacrifice it at the altar of an emergency. Even that Schenck case said that the only reason we’re allowing the speech to be criminalized is because the war makes it justified and necessary to do so, in peacetime this would be perfectly acceptable speech but just because of the war, we think the government needs more powers to censor.

And then ultimately, it was effectively overruled by the Ohio v Brandenburg decision, in 1967, which said that all speech, all political opinions are constitutionally protected, even advocating violence explicitly, as long as you’re not doing something to imminently create violence (direct incitement of imminent lawless action). And so, the entire context of this case, the fact that it was recanted by the person who wrote it, the fact that it’s not even good law anymore, and the fact that no one is talking about people yelling fire in a crowded theater, they’re talking about people who are expressing political opinions. That’s the nature of the First Amendment. There’s no political content to yelling fire in a crowded theater.

That’s why it was such a good example to justify censorship with. What we’re talking about here is political opinions – Joe Biden being corrupt because he is attempting to benefit and profit with his son in Ukraine or in China. That has nothing to do with screaming fire in a crowded movie theater. It’s the simple minded way that they’ve given people like we just showed you to justify censorship. So, whenever you hear anyone using that example, that is a hallmark of somebody who doesn’t know what they’re talking about. The entire hearing today revealed not just that the Security State attempted to influence Twitter’s decisions, that Twitter had a systematic regime of censoring conservative voices because the people running Twitter under Jack Dorsey were all left-liberal caricatures. But it also revealed, most importantly, I think, that this version of the Democratic Party believes in censorship, wants more of it, and intends on an ongoing basis to use their union with the corporate media and with the U.S. Security State to demand greater and greater levels of Internet censorship. That’s what they want, they’re saying all day: we don’t think Twitter’s problem was that it centered too much. Twitter’s problem is that it didn’t censor enough.

*

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

Germany Prepares for Conscription and the Final War

By Kurt Nimmo, February 13, 2023

Germany’s parliamentary commissioner, Eva Högl of Olaf Scholz’s “center-left” SPD, believes the Bundeswehr, the German army, is woefully unprepared for military conflict and must force the nation’s youth into military “service.”

Revelations Confirm US-backed Pakistan Military Regime Change Against Imran Khan

By Junaid S. Ahmad, February 13, 2023

Yet our ‘principled democrats’ in ‘civil society’ will want all of us to continue to be as delusional as them in their inability to see this for what it was: a Pakistani military establishment/American national security state classic regime change operation against Khan last year – a fact their Westoxicated Islamophobic and Imranophobic racist souls (cheerleading normalization with Israel) would never be able to swallow.

US, French Troops Lead NATO Live-Fire War Games in Romania

By Kyle Anzalone and Will Porter, February 13, 2023

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is once again carrying out military exercises on its Eastern flank. Earlier this week, journalist Seymour Hersh reported that Washington used war games as a cover to plant explosives on the Nord Stream pipelines last year.

Thailand Government Paid Compensation for COVID-19 Vaccine “Side Effects” and Deaths, Sets a Legal Precedent

By Bangkok Post and Prof Michel Chossudovsky, February 12, 2023

On December 15, 2022 about three weeks after her third Pfizer booster shot, Princess Bajrakitiyabha Narendira Debyavati collapsed with heart issues and went into a coma. “The 44-year old eldest daughter of the King in Thailand, and likely heir to the throne, had reported to be in excellent health prior to the vaccination.

Video: Never Again Is Now Global. Anyone Who Wants to Start a War Has to Lie

By Vera Sharav and Children’s Health Defense, February 11, 2023

“Never Again Is Now Global,” a five-part docuseries highlighting the parallels between Nazi Germany and global pandemic policies. Each one-hour episode focuses on recent testimonies by Holocaust survivors and their descendants who discuss comparisons between the early repressive stages under the Nazi regime that culminated in the Holocaust and global COVID-19 policies.

Serbian History and Western Kosovo Mythology

By Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović, February 11, 2023

A national trauma which the Serbs after the fall of the Serbian national state and the Ottoman occupation experienced after June 20^th, 1459 can be compared with that felt by Judea’s Jews after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.

“Doomsday Seed Vault” in the Arctic. Bill Gates 2006 Initiative

By F. William Engdahl, February 11, 2023

One thing Microsoft founder Bill Gates can’t be accused of is sloth. He was already programming at 14, founded Microsoft at age 20 while still a student at Harvard. By 1995 he had been listed by Forbes as the world’s richest man from being the largest shareholder in his Microsoft, a company which his relentless drive built into a de facto monopoly in software systems for personal computers.

Corruption Scandal: Did Zelensky Fire His Minister of Defense?

By Ahmed Adel, February 10, 2023

By Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky having to vehemently deny that Oleksii Reznikov has been replaced as Ukraine Minister of Defence in the wake of a corruption scandal, it demonstrates that national unity is eroding and distrust in the government is growing. This is a nightmare situation for Ukraine since Zelensky initially came to power on the back of an anti-corruption platform and the latest scandal comes as Russia is reportedly preparing for a major offensive.

State of the Union Address: How Does America Perform on Biden’s Test?

By Kim Petersen, February 10, 2023

It is important to parse what Biden said. Notice how this is spoken as a series of questions. Biden is not saying that the US stands for the most basic of principles. Neither is he saying that the US (“we”) stands for all principles. He speaks to just the most basic principles. What are those “most basic of principles”?

Age-stratified COVID-19 Vaccine-dose Fatality Rate. Israel and Australia

By Prof Denis Rancourt, Dr. Marine Baudin, Dr. Jérémie Mercier, and Dr. Joseph Hickey, February 10, 2023

It is now well established from autopsy studies and adverse effect monitoring that the COVID-19 vaccines can cause death. The vaccine-dose fatality rate (vDFR), which is the ratio of vaccine-induced deaths to vaccine doses delivered in a population, has recently been measured by us to be as large as 1 % in India and when “vaccine equity” campaigns were applied in high-poverty states of the USA, and to be 0.05 % in Australia, with data that is not discriminated by age group.

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.

***

Australia became a fervent ally of the US after the fall of Singapore to the Japanese in 1942. Australia was involved in all post-1950 US Asian wars, atrocities  associated with 40 million Asian deaths from violence and imposed deprivation. Presently, as a  US lackey Australia absurdly and dangerously beats the drums of war against a peaceful and non-expansionist China, it is time for urgent re-assessment. Australia should quit the Asian-killing and indeed Australian-killing US Alliance.

Through stupidity, fear, racism,  greed and ignorance (the mendacious Australian Mainstream media are substantially owned by the US Murdoch empire), Australians via the Liberal Party-National Party Coalition Opposition and Labor Government (aka the Lib-Labs and collectively with 68.0% of the vote) back the serial war criminal US Alliance. However the Greens (12.3% of the vote) want Australia to “renegotiate the US alliance” and to stop Australia  wasting hundreds of billions of dollars on US weaponry and US wars.

Summarized below are cogent arguments why Australia should quit its AUKUS (Australia, UK and US) alliance with nuclear terrorist, genocidally racist and serial war criminal America and the UK.

(1) War typically violates International law, and is the penultimate in repugnant racism, with genocide being the ultimate in racism. The UN Charter forbids a party from invading another country except when invited, invaded, or sanctioned by the UN Security Council. The Fourth Geneva Convention demands life-sustaining care for the Occupied  by an Occupier “to the fullest extent of the means available to it” (this being grossly violated by the US Alliance).

(2) The US is a horrendous serial invader of other countries. Apart from inevitable border spats, most countries in the world have not invaded other countries. Costa Rica does not even have an army. In stark contrast, the US has invaded 72 countries (52 since WW2), has committed 469 invasions from 1798 onwards, committed 251 invasions since 1991,  and has 800 military bases in over 70 countries. The US actively spies on and subverts all countries, including  its craven ally Australia.

(3) This century the US has  committed $8 trillion to genocidal wars, killing 32 million Muslims abroad through violence and deprivation rather than trying to save the lives of 36 million Americans at home who have died from “life-style choice” and “political choice” reasons. The US (4.3% of the world’s population) presently uses about 25% of the world’s resources. Continuing inaction and worsening climate genocide will kill 10 billion en route to a sustainable population of only 1 billion in 2100.

(4) America has an entrenched culture of lying which occurs in 2 repugnant forms, lying by omission and lying by commission. Lying by omission is far, far worse than lying by commission because the latter at least admits the possibility of  public refutation and public debate,  subject, of course, in the US and the West  to massive censorship  by US Government-beholden Mainstream media (see “Manufacturing  Consent” by Professors Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky).

(5) Militarist and nuclear terrorist America violates, subverts, dirties and acutely threatens Australia.

(i) Australia was in all post-1950 US Asian wars. As a craven US lackey Australia participated in all post-1950 US Asian wars, atrocities associated with 40 million Asian deaths from violence and war-imposed deprivation. Australian politicians have grossly violated the Fourth Geneva Convention in these wars by resolutely refusing to meet their life-preserving obligations to the Occupied Subjects.

(ii) AUKUS and Australian violation of all Indo-Pacific countries. In the last 80 years as a UK or US lackey  Australia has violated every Indo-Pacific country, variously through  war, military occupation, overt or covert regime change and as being among world leaders in 16  areas of climate criminality.  Thus, for example, Australia with 0.3% of the world’s population has  an annual Domestic plus Exported greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution that is 5.4% of the world’s total.

(iii) Australian involvement in US-effected coups. Variously as US or UK lackeys Australians have been involved in the  covert removal of 8 governments, namely in Laos (1960), Indonesia (1965), Cambodia (1970), Chile (1973), Australia (1975), Australia (2010), and Fiji (1987, 2000) (the latter 3 coups also involving Apartheid Israel).

(iv) US lackey Australia’s deadly covert operations in neighbouring Indonesia. The most deadly Australia-complicit US engineered coup was that in Australia’s huge neighbour Indonesia in 1965 (1 million deaths), with prior backing of anti-Sukarno Islamist rebels. Avoidable deaths of Indonesians from deprivation under the violent, corrupt and US- and Australia-backed Suharto dictatorship (1965-1999) totalled 33 million. Australia and the US approved the Indonesian takeover of  Timor L’Este that resulted in 200,000 deaths, one third of the population.

(v) The US Murdoch media empire dominates Australia. About 70% of Australia’s daily newspaper readership has been captured by the pro-war, anti-science, mendacious and racist  US Murdoch media empire which dominates the Australian Mainstream media, including the ABC (Australia’s taxpayer-funded and US-beholden equivalent  of the UK BBC). Western democracies have become Corporatocracies and Murdochracies (Big Money buys public perception of reality and votes).

(vi) America spies on, subverts, deceives and betrays Australia. The joint US-Australia electronic  spying facility at Pine Gap in Central Asia is crucial for US nuclear war strategy and for targeting deadly and war criminal drone attacks from Africa to Central Asia. It is also able spy on Australians. The Australian Government legislated collection of metadata on all Australians (i.e. who they talk to but not what they say). The US shares raw intelligence on Australians with Apartheid Israel.

(vii) Variously UK-, US-, and Zionist-backed coups and other subversive interventions in Australia: UK-beholden governor removed the NSW Lang Labor Government (1932); UK-, US- and Royal Family-complicit coup removed reformed Whitlam Labor Government (1975); PM Bob Hawke and others as US “assets”; US ambassador attacked Labor leader Mark Latham in elections (2004);  US-approved, mining corporation-backed, and pro-Zionist-led coup removed Labor PM Kevin Rudd (2010).

(viii) Submission to American militarism makes Australia complicit in nuclear terrorism and makes Australia a prime early nuclear target in escalating conflict. The AUKUS Alliance arrangement for Australia to buy 6 nuclear-powered submarines for $200 billion for delivery in the 2040s locks Australia long term into US warmongering and nuclear terrorism, and condemns hundreds of thousands of Australians (notably Indigenous Australians) to premature death from imposed poverty due to government fiscal perversion.

(ix) Australia is second only to the US as a supporter of Apartheid Israel and hence the crime of Apartheid. Australia is one of 35 members of the all-European  International Holocaust Remembrance  Alliance (IHRA). The IHRA Definition  of antisemitism is anti-Jewish anti-Semitic and anti-Arab anti-Semitic (by falsely defaming anti-racist Jews, Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims opposed to Israeli Apartheid and the ongoing Palestinian Genocide), holocaust denying (by ignoring all WW2 holocausts other than the WW2 Jewish Holocaust, and indeed 70 other genocide and holocaust atrocities) and has been condemned by over 40 anti-racist Jewish organizations.

(x) Locked-in support for US militarism and militarist fiscal perversion contributes to 100,000 preventable Australian deaths annually. About 100,000 Australians die preventably each year  from “lifestyle choice” and “political choice” reasons (from “obesity” (24,000)  to “homicide” (200)), deaths in this carnage totalling 2.1 million since 9/11. Huge expenditure on US wars and US weapons (e.g. $200 billion for 6 nuclear submarines) contributes to this carnage.

(xi) Australia is complicit in horrendous UK and US war crimes, notably in Iraq and Afghanistan. Alleged  Australian killing of 39 unarmed Afghan civilians is dwarfed 154,000-fold by 6 million Occupied Afghan deaths from deprivation due to gross violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention by Australian  politicians who should be indicted for war crimes before any Australian soldiers. Variously as a UK or US lackey Australia has invaded 85 countries with 30 of these violations being genocidal .

(xii) Blind support for the US has created a contemptible, reality-ignoring, “look-the-other-way” Australian national culture. The US domination of Australia’s Mainstream media and the major parties (the Liberal Party-National Party Coalition and the Labor Party) means that there is a conservative, US-beholden and Zionist-beholden public narrative. Any deviation from the US line (e.g. its present fervent Sinophobia) raises public suspicion of “treason” and “disloyalty”. Any deviation from the Zionist narrative is furiously attacked as “antisemitism” – indeed anti-racist Jews critical of Apartheid Israel are defamed as anti-Semites and as “self-hating Jews”.

(xiii) US lies and  terror hysteria impact Australian civil liberties. The 9/11 atrocity (3,000 killed) led to the genocidal US War on Terror associated with 32 million Muslim deaths in 20 US Alliance-invaded countries from violence (5 million) and imposed deprivation (27 million). However the accompanying  terror hysteria led to a massive erosion of civil liberties in Western countries, including  Australia (zero Islamist terrorism victims in Australia before 2014 and 4 since) e.g. the secret trials of whistle-blowers Witness J and  Witness K , the raiding of major news organizations, and the horrendous, US- and Australia-complicit, UK  persecution of the world’s most famous journalist, Julian Assange.

(xiv) Zionist- and US-perverted Australia urgently needs de-Nazification by (a) war crimes trials of US lackey politicians who grossly violated the Fourth Geneva Convention in Iraq and Afghanistan (and before trials of any Australian soldiers sent there), (b) massive demilitarization with the army for self-defence and national and regional deployment for “natural” emergencies, (c) cessation of violation of its neighbours, (d) rejection of war and establishment of popular and parliamentary oversight over potential armed conflict, (e) ratification of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), and (f) consequent  dissociation from the nuclear-armed AUKUS and Quad (Japan, Australia and nuclear-armed India and the US).

(6) Leading Australian foreign policy experts have called for an end to Australia’s dangerous subservience to America, notably the Greens, former Coalition PM Malcolm Fraser, former Labor PM Paul Keating, and Professor Stuart Rees (founder of the Sydney Peace Prize, author of “Cruelty or Humanity”).

*

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 Gideon Polya taught science students at La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia over 4 decades. He published some 130 works in a 5 decade scientific career, notably a huge pharmacological reference text “Biochemical Targets of Plant Bioactive Compounds”. He has also published “Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950” (2007, 2022) and “Jane Austen and the Black Hole of British History” (1998, 2008). He has recently published “US-imposed Post-9-11 Muslim Holocaust & Muslim Genocide” (2020), and “Climate Crisis, Climate Genocide & Solutions” (2020). For images of Gideon Polya’s huge paintings for the Planet, Peace, Mother and Child see: http://sites.google.com/site/artforpeaceplanetmotherchild/.

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.

***

Lula’s self-interested publicity stunt in insincerely presenting himself as a neutral mediator in the Ukrainian Conflict should be acknowledged for what it is, which is a means for boosting his clout in parallel with improving ties with the US. Despite being at Russia’s rhetorical expense, the substance of their strategic ties remains solid and is poised to further strengthen, which should be the focus of observers going forward unless he refuses to stop condemning Moscow.  

Brazilian President Lula’s efforts to present himself as a so-called neutral mediator in the Ukrainian Conflict went up in smoke after he condemned Russia in his joint statement with Biden last week. He’d already straddled the line of neutrality by earlier comparing its special operation in Ukraine to the US’ Hybrid War on Venezuela, but he clearly crossed the political Rubicon by unambiguously condemning it alongside his US counterpart after their latest meeting in DC.

Here’s some background reading for those who haven’t followed this dimension of the New Cold War:

• “Lula Just Became The First BRICS Leader To Publicly Condemn Russia’s Special Operation”
• “Lula’s Recalibrated Multipolar Vision Makes Him Amenable To The US’ Grand Strategic Interests”
• “It Makes Perfect Sense Why Russia Doesn’t Support Lula’s G20-Like Peace Proposal”
• “Lula Sealed His Deal With The Devil By Condemning Russia During His Meeting With Biden”
• “Debunking The #LulaLiberals’ Lies For Covering Up His Condemnation Of Russia”

Basically, Lula’s clumsy “balancing act” inadvertently exposes his mediation proposal as a publicity stunt.

Observers should remember that no BRICS leader nor any of their representatives up until this point had condemned Russia like Lula just did, not even former President Bolsonaro after his meeting with Biden last summer. While Turkish President Erdogan has said much worse than his Brazilian counterpart did, his country still managed to facilitate the peace process early last year due to its convenient location for hosting such talks between both sides, which is the extent to which any third party can play this role.

Brazil is literally half a world away from where the Ukrainian Conflict is unfolding so it can’t realistically replace Turkiye as the place where the primary participants’ representatives meet to discuss everything. Perhaps aware of this geographic inconvenience, Lula thought “outside the box” by presenting his G20-like peace proposal for assembling a larger group of countries that would discuss this conflict instead. That’s doomed to fail though for the reasons explained in the third cited analyses above.

Had he not unambiguously condemned Russia in his joint statement with Biden, however, then Lula might have been able to secure at least the rhetorical support of his BRICS counterparts for his proposal. They’re likely now uncomfortable with it after what he just committed to paper alongside the US leader, which in turn reduces the chances that it’ll ever get off the ground, not to mention Russia’s lack of support for it too. After all, he’s now tainted after crossing the political Rubicon just to please the US.

Neither the Chinese, Indian, nor South African leaders thought it wise to agree to anything of the sort after their calls and meetings with Biden, which thus places Lula in a league of his own when it comes to his BRICS counterparts. If they associate with his G20-like peace proposal that Russia’s already very clearly ignored after indirectly conveying its belief that it’s an insincere publicity stunt that also goes against its interests, then they risk eroding the goodwill that they’ve thus far generated with Moscow.

To be absolutely clear, it’s Brazil’s sovereign right and that of Lula as its commander-in-chief to promulgate whatever policy is regarded by its leadership as being in that country’s interests, but there are also consequences to its choice as well. Constructive critiques of the aforesaid are to be expected whenever the decision that’s ultimately made is disadvantageous to one of its partner’s interests, in this case Russia’s, especially considering these two’s officially strategic relations.

That said, the Russian-Brazilian Strategic Partnership shows no risk of weakening in spite of Lula disqualifying himself as a mediator in the Ukrainian Conflict due to his tacit preference for pleasing the US in this instance at Russia’s rhetorical expense. Its Ambassador to Moscow’s recent suggestion that this Eurasian Great Power establish a serious presence in his country’s energy industry proves that Lula does indeed intend to balance between both protagonists in the New Cold War’s top proxy war.

This being the case, his self-interested publicity stunt in insincerely presenting himself as a neutral mediator in the Ukrainian Conflict should be acknowledged for what it is, which is a means for boosting his clout in parallel with improving ties with the US. Despite being at Russia’s rhetorical expense, the substance of their strategic ties remains solid and is poised to further strengthen, which should be the focus of observers going forward unless he refuses to stop condemning Moscow.

*

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 Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

He 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.

***

Imagine Vladimir Putin, sitting behind his desk in the Kremlin, learning the news Germany plans to reintroduce conscription (involuntary servitude). The Russians are outraged at the prospect of Leopard 2 tanks bearing the Balkenkreuz, the Iron Cross, killing its soldiers and destroying its tanks in Ukraine.

Germany’s parliamentary commissioner, Eva Högl of Olaf Scholz’s “center-left” SPD, believes the Bundeswehr, the German army, is woefully unprepared for military conflict and must force the nation’s youth into military “service.”

Prior to Högl’s remark on conscription, published in the Augsburger Allgemeine newspaper, Jan Christian Kaack, the chief of the German navy, said involuntary servitude and the possibility of citizens becoming bullet stoppers for the state, should be based on the Norwegian model, “whereby men and women are called in for an examination upon turning 19, but only a small, motivated percentage of each year group is drafted into the army,” The Guardian reports.

Considering the russophobic rhetoric emanating from Germany, France, Britain, and NATO countries (add Switzerland’s astounding decision to do away with its centuries-long neutrality), Putin and the Russians are rightfully angry about the growing military hysteria (and psychopathic disorders) of the “collective West.”

US, UK, Germany will send tanks to Ukraine. Note Iron Cross insignia. Last time German tanks entered Ukraine was 1941. How did that work out? Don't any officials in US, UK, Germany have the slightest sense of history? But be assured, officials in Russia know history well. pic.twitter.com/FlTlkRX43d

— David C. Stolinsky (@DCStolinsky) January 26, 2023

The idiots in Brussels, DC, Berlin, and other European capitals either do not understand what Nazi Germany did in Eastern Europe and Russia during WWII, or they simply don’t care.

Nazi Germany’s Operation Barbarossa, the largest invasion in history, razed approximately 1,710 Soviet towns and 70,000 villages. 27 million Russians, the vast majority civilians, were killed during the war. The costly Russian victory over Germany is remembered every May 9 as the Great Patriot War (Velikaya Otechestvennaya voyna in Russian).

None of this is the least bit significant to USG war chief Lloyd J. Austin III, Secretary of State Atony Blinken, the scurrilous Victoria Nuland, wife of top neocon Robert Kagan, and Biden’s “liberal hawks” (sic), including National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan (formerly of Macro Advisory Partners, along with CIA boss William Burns), Wendy Sherman (former Vice Chair of Albright Stonebridge Group, founded by mass murder facilitator and apologist Madeleine Albright, role model for the aforementioned Blinken) Brett McGurk (a Bush admin. appointee), and others.

In the “indispensable nation,” there is yet little talk of reinstating the draft, which ended in 1973 as the disastrous Vietnam War ground to a halt. However, the state has kept its “selective service” active, obligating millions of young men to register.

The so-called “Generation Z” is not so hot on involuntary servitude and the prospect of a horrible death for the sake of Biden and his neocons. The Pentagon derisively calls Gen Zers the “Nintendo Generation” due to sedentary lifestyles, obesity, drug and alcohol abuse, and the fact they are not as physically fit as previous generations.

In 2017, a Gallup poll revealed 49% of Americans favor involuntary servitude for young adults. However, those likely to be conscripted were opposed. “A majority (57%) of those younger than 30 are against the idea,” Gallup reported.

The idea of mandatory national service has been floated numerous times by think tanks and opinion writers over the past decade and a half, but it has never become a major issue in national politics. U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel unsuccessfully pushed a version of the idea in every legislative session from 2003 to 2015; at one point, it even reached the House floor, where it was defeated by a vote of 402-2.

Of course, that was before Ukraine, the incessant, intrusive pounding of war drums by propaganda media, an idiotic desire to feed war machines into the conflict by the West, and the very real prospect of a third world war.

According to author Shadia Drury, the guru of neocon-ism, Leo Strauss, and his devotees,

understood politics as a conflict between mutually hostile groups willing to fight each other to the death. In short, they all thought that man’’s humanity depended on his willingness to rush naked into battle and headlong to his death. Only perpetual war can overturn the modern project, with its emphasis on self-preservation and “creature comforts.

In the current context, the “conflict between mutually hostile groups” will result in the termination of life on the planet.

It is an arrogant and psychopathic disregard for the lives of ordinary people that is in part driving the world toward a final thermonuclear conflict.

It is unfortunate far too many Americans are incapable of realizing they are nothing more than pawns in a geopolitical suicide pact. History demonstrates, over and over, this realization usually arrives when it is far 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.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Kurt Nimmo on Geopolitics.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular 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.

***

So the cat is finally out of the bag, coming to you straight from the horse’s mouth.

Yet our ‘principled democrats’ in ‘civil society’ will want all of us to continue to be as delusional as them in their inability to see this for what it was: a Pakistani military establishment/American national security state classic regime change operation against Khan last year – a fact their Westoxicated Islamophobic and Imranophobic racist souls (cheerleading normalization with Israel) would never be able to swallow.

“Pakistan’s powerful army chief Bajwa (who has stolen billions of dollars through corruption) publicly admitted that he conspired against elected Prime Minister Imran Khan, who was overthrown in a US-backed coup in 2022

Soon after, Bajwa visited Washington”

Pakistan's powerful army chief Bajwa (who has stolen billions of dollars through corruption) publicly admitted that he conspired against elected Prime Minister Imran Khan, who was overthrown in a US-backed coup in 2022

Soon after, Bajwa visited Washingtonhttps://t.co/2MywavD9pg

— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) February 9, 2023

“Bajwa reassured top US officials that Pakistan will oppose Russia, not get too close to China, and consider recognizing apartheid Israel”

*

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.

Junaid S. Ahmad teaches Religion and World Politics and is the Director of the Center for the Study of Islam and Decoloniality, Islamabad, Pakistan. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Cradle

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 North Atlantic Treaty Organization is once again carrying out military exercises on its Eastern flank. Earlier this week, journalist Seymour Hersh reported that Washington used war games as a cover to plant explosives on the Nord Stream pipelines last year.

Dubbed Eagle Royal 23, the combat drills kicked off in Romania and areas of the Black Sea last week, with American and French soldiers leading some 350 troops participating in the war games.

During the military exercises, NATO forces fired munitions from the HIMARS launcher, dozens of which Washington has transferred to Kiev over the last year. On New Year’s Eve, Ukrainian forces attacked a Russian barracks in the town of Makiyivka with a missile fired from a HIMARS, killing at least 89 Russian soldiers.

Intended to test the alliance’s ability to defend its Eastern flank, the war games opened on February 2 and will conclude on Friday.

NATO is conducting Eagle Royal 23 as Hersh – a veteran investigative journalist known for breaking a long list of major stories, such as the massacre by US forces in the Vietnamese village of My Lai in 1968 – reported that Washington used the BALTOPS 22 war games as a cover to plant mines on pipelines carrying gas from Russia to Europe.

According to Hersh, the US detonated the explosives months later, then claimed the attack was carried out by Russia.

Prior to Russia’s invasion last year, the Kremlin accused NATO of smuggling weapons to Kiev under the guise of the Sea Breeze military drills hosted in Ukraine, claiming that foreign weapons would be ”delivered to the Ukrainian troops and nationalist formations stationed close to areas in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions uncontrolled by Kiev.”

*

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.

O CEO da Pfizer, Albert Bourla, Ph.D., fez comentários “enganosos” e “não qualificados” promovendo o uso de vacinas de mRNA COVID-19 para crianças pequenas durante uma entrevista na BBC, descobriu uma agência reguladora do Reino Unido.

A Autoridade do Código de Prática de Medicamentos de Prescrição (PMCPA), um órgão auto-regulador independente estabelecido pela Associação da Indústria Farmacêutica Britânica (ABPI), descobriu que Bourla violou várias regras em seu Código de Prática para publicidade.

O regulador da indústria farmacêutica do Reino Unido, UsForThem, apresentou a queixa à PMCPA. Em uma postagem da Substack após a decisão, UsForThem acusou o editor médico da BBC, Fergus Walsh, de conduzir a entrevista “como um bate-papo amigável ao lado da lareira”, dando a Bourla “uma oportunidade promocional de passe livre que o dinheiro não pode comprar”, permitindo-lhe promover a aceitação da vacina, principalmente entre crianças pequenas para as quais a vacina ainda não havia sido autorizada.

Como emissora de serviço público nacional do Reino Unido, a BBC deve seguir diretrizes rígidas em relação à publicidade comercial ou à colocação de produtos, que UsForThem disse que a entrevista de Bourla não seguiu.

A BBC publicou a entrevista com Bourla em dezembro de 2021 em seu site, seu aplicativo de notícias e no programa “BBC News at One”, como uma entrevista em vídeo e um artigo que a acompanha, “Pfizer boss : Annual Covid jabs for years to come.”

A entrevista foi ao ar dois dias depois que o governo do Reino Unido anunciou que concordou em comprar mais 54 milhões de doses das vacinas de mRNA da Pfizer-BioNTech e mais 60 milhões da Moderna.

O PMCPA pode multar Bourla apenas por custos administrativos. Não tem autoridade para impor outras penalidades.

A BBC é o membro fundador da Trusted News Initiative (TNI). No mês passado, a Children’s Health Defense processou a BBC e três outros membros do TNI, alegando que eles fizeram parceria com várias grandes empresas de tecnologia para “censurar coletivamente as notícias online”, incluindo histórias sobre o COVID-19 que não estavam alinhadas com as narrativas oficiais sobre essas questões.

Bourla: imunizar crianças pequenas ‘seria uma ótima ideia’

Na entrevista à BBC, Bourla disse que cabia às agências reguladoras determinar se aprovavam e distribuíam vacinas para crianças menores de 11 anos, mas ele achava que “imunizar essa faixa etária no Reino Unido e na Europa seria uma ideia muito boa”, segundo ao relatório de caso PMCPA publicado na semana passada.

Na época, nenhuma vacina COVID-19 havia sido aprovada pela Agência Reguladora de Medicamentos e Produtos de Saúde (MHRA) do Reino Unido para crianças menores de 12 anos, então o painel considerou que os comentários de Bourla violavam o código.

Citando possíveis interrupções na escolaridade e o potencial para COVID longo, Bourla também disse: “Portanto, não havia dúvida de que os benefícios eram totalmente a favor de fazê-lo [vacinar crianças contra o COVID-19]”.

Ele acrescentou: “Acho que é uma boa ideia”.

O painel descobriu que essas fortes declarações de opinião podem levar o público a inferir que não há necessidade de se preocupar com possíveis efeitos colaterais ou que os benefícios da vacinação superam os riscos, que não foram determinados pelas autoridades de saúde.

Em 11 de dezembro de 2021, a UsForThem apresentou sua reclamação ao PMCPA citando a natureza promocional dos relatórios da BBC e a falha de Bourla em cumprir as regras do Reino Unido que regem a promoção de medicamentos.

Depois que a PMCPA decidiu que as declarações de Bourla violavam uma série de regras do código de prática da ABPI, a Pfizer apelou, incluindo que suas declarações eram de “natureza forte e não qualificada”.

O regulador também disse que as declarações implicavam que “não havia necessidade de se preocupar com os possíveis efeitos colaterais da vacinação em crianças saudáveis ​​de 5 a 11 anos” e que a implicação era “enganosa e incapaz de comprovação”.

O conselho de apelação manteve cinco acusações de violação de três códigos da ABPI que exigem informações e alegações “para serem precisas, equilibradas, capazes de comprovação, não gerando esperanças infundadas de tratamento bem-sucedido e não serem enganosas com relação à segurança do produto”, O Epoch Times informou.

O PMCPA publicou sua decisão final em 27 de janeiro, mais de um ano após a apresentação da queixa inicial.

Durante esse período – em fevereiro de 2022 – o Comitê Conjunto de Vacinação e Imunização do Reino Unido determinou que crianças de 5 a 11 anos poderiam receber a vacina, mas o comitê disse que a recomendação era “não urgente”.

UsForThem comemorou no Twitter:

🚨🚨 BREAKING:

UK regulator finds Pfizer boss guilty of misinformation — full case report published.

Read our inside story here.

👇👇https://t.co/87aSbyHnC8

— UsForThemUK 🌟 (@UsforThemUK) February 2, 2023

Nem a Pfizer nem a Bourla comentaram publicamente a decisão.

O Epoch Times informou que em uma declaração de novembro de 2022 sobre o caso, um porta-voz da Pfizer disse que a empresa estava “comprometida com os mais altos níveis de integridade em qualquer interação com o público”.

A partir de 12 de fevereiro, o Reino Unido não recomendará mais reforços de COVID-19 para pessoas saudáveis ​​com menos de 50 anos e interromperá a distribuição gratuita da série primária de duas doses, informou o The Defender.

Brenda Baletti

Um novo estudo revisado por pares encontrou uma correlação estatística positiva entre as taxas de mortalidade infantil (IMRs) e o número de doses de vacina recebidas por bebês – confirmando as descobertas feitas pelos mesmos pesquisadores há uma década.

Em “Reafirmando uma correlação positiva entre o número de doses de vacina e as taxas de mortalidade infantil: uma resposta aos críticos”, publicado em 2 de fevereiro na Cureus, os autores Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D., um cientista da computação independente, e Neil Z. Miller, um pesquisador médico, examinou essa correlação potencial.

Suas descobertas indicam que “uma correlação positiva entre o número de doses de vacina e as IMRs é detectável nas nações mais desenvolvidas” – que, em média, administram a maioria das doses de vacina a bebês.

Os autores replicaram os resultados de uma análise estatística de 2011 que realizaram e refutaram os resultados de um artigo recente que questionou essas descobertas.

Miller falou com o The Defender sobre o estudo e suas implicações para os calendários de vacinação infantil e neonatal.

Quanto mais doses, maior a taxa de mortalidade infantil

Em 2011, Miller e Goldman publicaram um estudo revisado por pares em Human and Experimental Toxicology, que identificou pela primeira vez uma correlação estatística positiva entre IMRs e o número de doses de vacina.

Os pesquisadores escreveram:

“A taxa de mortalidade infantil (TMI) é um dos indicadores mais importantes do bem-estar socioeconômico e das condições de saúde pública de um país. O calendário de imunização infantil dos EUA especifica 26 doses de vacina para bebês com menos de 1 ano – a maior do mundo -, mas 33 nações têm IMRs mais baixas.”

“Usando regressão linear, os calendários de imunização dessas 34 nações foram examinados e um coeficiente de correlação de r = 0,70 (p <0,0001) foi encontrado entre as IMRs e o número de doses de vacinas rotineiramente administradas a bebês”.

Nas figuras acima, “r” refere-se ao coeficiente de correlação, número que varia de -1 a 1. Qualquer valor acima de zero é entendido como uma correlação positiva, sendo que valores entre 0,6 e 0,79 são considerados uma correlação positiva “forte”, e 0,8 e acima, uma correlação positiva “muito forte”.

O “p-value” indica até que ponto o valor do preditor, em uma análise de regressão linear, está relacionado a mudanças na variável de resposta.

Um valor p de 0,05 ou inferior é considerado estatisticamente significativo e indicativo de que o preditor e a variável de resposta estão relacionados entre si e se movem na mesma direção.

No mesmo estudo de 2011, que usou dados de 2009, os pesquisadores encontraram a maior correlação positiva nos países que administraram a maior quantidade de doses de vacina em bebês (entre 21 e 26 meses de idade).

“A análise de regressão linear de IMRs médias não ponderadas mostrou uma alta correlação estatisticamente significativa entre o aumento do número de doses de vacina e o aumento das taxas de mortalidade infantil, com r = 0,992 (p = 0,0009)”, escreveram os pesquisadores.

Miller disse ao The Defender:

“Em 2011, publicamos um estudo que encontrou uma correlação positiva contraintuitiva, r = 0,70 (p < 0,0001), demonstrando que entre as nações mais desenvolvidas (n = 30), aquelas que exigem mais vacinas para seus bebês tendem a ter taxas de mortalidade infantil (TMIs) mais altas.”

No entanto, “os críticos do artigo alegaram recentemente que essa descoberta se deve à ‘exclusão inadequada de dados’, ou seja, a falha em analisar o ‘conjunto de dados completo’ de todas as 185 nações”.

De acordo com Miller:

“Uma equipe de pesquisadores recentemente leu nosso estudo e achou ‘problemático’ estar entre os 5% principais de todos os resultados de pesquisa. Eles escreveram uma refutação ao nosso artigo para ‘corrigir informações erradas do passado’ e reduzir o impacto da hesitação em vacinar.”

“O artigo deles não foi publicado, mas foi postado em um servidor de pré-impressão.”

Miller disse que ele e Goldman “escrevemos nosso artigo atual para examinar as várias reivindicações feitas por esses críticos, para avaliar a validade de seus métodos científicos e para realizar novas investigações para avaliar a confiabilidade de nossas descobertas originais”.

O artigo original estudou os EUA e 29 outros países com melhores IMRs “para explorar uma possível associação entre o número de doses de vacina … e seus IMRs”, encontrando uma forte correlação positiva.

Os 10 pesquisadores — Elizabeth G. Bailey, Ph.D., professora assistente de biologia na Brigham Young University, e vários alunos associados ao seu curso Bioinformatics Capstone, que escreveu a refutação à análise de Goldman e Miller de 2011 – combinou “185 nações desenvolvidas e do Terceiro Mundo que têm taxas variadas de vacinação e disparidades socioeconômicas” em seus análise.

“Uma justificativa declarada por trás da reanálise de Bailey (e novas investigações adicionais) é reduzir o impacto da hesitação da vacina, que ‘se intensificou devido ao rápido desenvolvimento e distribuição da vacina COVID-19‘”, disseram Goldman e Miller. “Eles também parecem estar direcionando nosso estudo para uma retratação potencial”.

Miller explicou a metodologia que a equipe de Bailey usou:

“Os críticos selecionaram 185 nações e usaram a regressão linear para relatar uma correlação entre o número de doses de vacina e as IMRs.”

“Eles também realizam análises de regressão linear múltipla do Índice de Desenvolvimento Humano (IDH) versus IMR com preditores adicionais e investigam IMR versus taxas percentuais de vacinação para oito vacinas diferentes”.

De acordo com Miller, “Apesar da presença de variáveis ​​de confusão inerentes em seu artigo, uma pequena correlação positiva estatisticamente significativa (r = 0,16, p < 0,03) é relatada que corrobora a tendência positiva em nosso estudo (r = 0,70, p < .0001).”

Ou seja, ainda existe uma correlação positiva entre a TMI e o número de doses da vacina, embora mais fraca, entre os 185 países estudados pelos críticos de Miller.

No entanto, essa correlação positiva é “atenuada no ruído de fundo de nações com variáveis ​​socioeconômicas heterogêneas que contribuem para altas taxas de mortalidade infantil, como desnutrição, pobreza e assistência médica precária” – o que significa que existem fatores de confusão em nações mais pobres que afetam significativamente e contribuem para seus IMRs mais elevados.

Miller explicou a diferença nas metodologias:

“Nós dois usamos regressão linear para analisar uma correlação potencial entre o número de doses de vacina e as IMRs. No entanto, analisamos as 30 nações mais desenvolvidas com altas taxas de vacinação (consistentemente acima de 90%) e uniformidade de fatores socioeconômicos.”

“Em contraste, nossos críticos analisaram 185 nações com taxas variáveis ​​de vacinação (variando de menos de 40% a mais de 90%) e fatores socioeconômicos heterogêneos.”

“Ao misturar nações altamente desenvolvidas e do Terceiro Mundo em suas análises, nossos críticos inadvertidamente introduziram vários fatores de confusão. Por exemplo, desnutrição, pobreza e assistência médica precária contribuem para a mortalidade infantil, confundindo os dados e tornando os resultados não confiáveis”.

Miller e Goldman também conduziram três outros tipos de análise estatística: análises de probabilidades de rádio, sensibilidade e replicação. Esses testes confirmaram suas descobertas, como escreveram em seu novo artigo:

“Nossa análise de razão de chances conduzida no conjunto de dados original controlou várias variáveis. Nenhuma dessas variáveis ​​reduziu a correlação abaixo de 0,62, confirmando assim nossos achados de forma robusta.

“Nossa análise de sensibilidade relatou correlações positivas estatisticamente significativas entre o número de doses de vacina e o IMR quando expandimos nossa análise original dos 30 principais para os 46 países com os melhores IMRs.

“Além disso, uma replicação de nosso estudo original usando dados atualizados de 2019 corroborou a tendência que encontramos em nosso primeiro artigo (r = 0,45, p = 0,002).”

Em outras palavras, o novo estudo, que usou dados de 2019, encontrou uma correlação positiva um pouco mais fraca de 0,045, mas, no entanto, confirmou uma conexão entre o número de doses de vacina infantil e as IMRs.

Miller explicou que, ao contrário do conjunto de dados dos críticos de 185 países, nenhum ajuste nas taxas de vacinação foi necessário para seu conjunto de dados, pois “as taxas de vacinação nos países que analisamos geralmente variaram de 90 a 99%”.

Ele acrescentou que a análise da razão de chances considerou 11 variáveis, incluindo a pobreza infantil, e “nenhuma dessas variáveis ​​reduziu a correlação abaixo de 0,62”.

Da mesma forma, disse Miller, “em nossa análise de sensibilidade, onde analisamos sucessivamente nações com IMRs piores do que os Estados Unidos, 16 nações adicionais poderiam ter sido incluídas na regressão linear de IMRs versus o número de doses de vacina, e os resultados ainda produziram um coeficiente de correlação positiva estatisticamente significativo.”

Miller disse ao The Defender que a correlação positiva que ele e o Goldman identificaram ficou mais forte quando os dados foram limitados a países altamente desenvolvidos, que tendem a exigir um número maior de doses:

“Quando replicamos nosso estudo de 2009 usando dados de 2019, mais uma vez encontramos uma correlação positiva estatisticamente significativa entre o número de doses de vacina e as IMRs. Embora a correlação fosse menos robusta (r = 0,45, p = 0,002) do que nosso achado original, ela corroborou a direção da tendência inicialmente relatada.”

“Quando nossa análise de regressão linear de 2019 foi limitada às 20 principais nações, o coeficiente de correlação aumentou (r = 0,73, p < 0,0003), revelando uma forte relação direta entre o número de doses de vacina e as IMRs.”

Miller observou que o artigo de seus críticos baseou suas conclusões nos resultados encontrados para “nações altamente desenvolvidas” e “muito altas” conforme categorizadas pelo IDH.

O artigo deles declarou: “Uma reanálise apenas de países altamente ou muito altamente desenvolvidos mostra de maneira semelhante que o índice de desenvolvimento humano (IDH) explica a variabilidade na IMR, e doses de vacina mais recomendadas não preveem mais mortes infantis”.

No entanto, Goldman e Miller, em seu novo artigo, desafiaram o uso do IDH como preditor da saúde geral de um país, observando que o IDH analisa apenas “níveis educacionais, renda per capita e expectativa de vida” e que vários estudiosos identificaram “grave erro de classificação na categorização de países de desenvolvimento humano baixo, médio, alto ou muito alto.”

“Conforme discutimos em nosso artigo, até 34% das nações classificadas no IDH são classificadas erroneamente devido a três fontes de erro, por isso não é confiável”, disse Miller ao The Defender. “Embora nossos críticos tenham relatado uma forte correlação entre IDH e IMR, isso não revela medidas específicas de saúde que possam influenciar positiva ou negativamente o IMR”.

Miller também observou: “Um índice alternativo, o Indicador de Vida Humana (HLI) foi criado para abordar as deficiências do IDH. Enquanto a Dinamarca foi recentemente classificada em quinto lugar no mundo pelo IDH, caiu para o 27º lugar com o HLI; os EUA foram recentemente classificados em décimo pelo IDH, enquanto o HLI o classificou em 32º.”

Ao resumir as deficiências do estudo de seus críticos, Miller disse:

“Foi inapropriado para nossos críticos combinar dados de nações com taxas de vacinação altamente variáveis ​​e fatores socioeconômicos heterogêneos.”

“Nas nações do Terceiro Mundo, vários fatores contribuem para uma alta taxa de mortalidade infantil, portanto, quando todas as 185 nações são analisadas (em vez de limitar a análise às nações homogêneas mais desenvolvidas), uma correlação positiva entre o número de doses de vacina e as IMRs é atenuada ou perdida no ruído de fundo desses outros fatores”.

Mortes infantis aumentam nos dias após a vacinação, mostram dados

Miller estudou anteriormente a associação entre vacinas pediátricas e morte súbita infantil, em um artigo de 2021 intitulado “Vacinas e morte súbita infantil: uma análise do banco de dados VAERS 1990–2019 e revisão da literatura médica”.

Comentando as descobertas dessa pesquisa, Miller disse:

“Das 2.605 mortes infantis relatadas ao Sistema de Notificação de Eventos Adversos de Vacinas (VAERS) de 1990 a 2019, 58% ocorreram três dias após a vacinação e 78% ocorreram sete dias após a vacinação, confirmando que as mortes infantis tendem a ocorrer em proximidade temporal com a administração da vacina.”

“O excesso de mortes durante esses primeiros períodos pós-vacinação foi estatisticamente significativo (p < 0,00001).”

Combinado com as descobertas de seu artigo mais recente, Miller argumentou que “as vacinas nem sempre são seguras e eficazes. A morbidade e a mortalidade relacionadas à vacina são mais extensas do que publicamente reconhecidas”.

Ele adicionou:

“Em todas as nações, uma relação causal entre vacinas e mortes súbitas de bebês raramente é reconhecida. No entanto, estudos fisiológicos mostraram que as vacinas infantis podem produzir febre e inibir a atividade dos neurônios 5-HT [serotonina] na medula, causando apneias prolongadas e interferindo na auto-ressuscitação”.

Miller também destacou a sequência na qual as vacinas são administradas como um fator potencial que contribui para as IMRs. Ele disse ao The Defender:

“As autoridades globais de saúde não testam a sequência de vacinas recomendadas nem seus efeitos inespecíficos para confirmar que fornecem os efeitos pretendidos na sobrevivência infantil. Mais estudos sobre este tópico são necessários para determinar o impacto total das vacinações na mortalidade por todas as causas.”

“Em países do Terceiro Mundo, numerosos estudos indicam que as vacinas DTP e poliomielite inativada (IPV) têm um perfil de segurança inverso, especialmente quando administradas fora da sequência. Múltiplas vacinas administradas simultaneamente também demonstraram aumentar a mortalidade”.

Miller disse que, com base em seu último estudo, “não sabemos se são os bebês vacinados ou não vacinados que estão morrendo em taxas mais altas”. No entanto, ele observou que a maioria das nações em sua amostra “tinha taxas de cobertura nacional de vacinação de 90-99%.”

“Em nosso artigo, fornecemos evidências biológicas plausíveis de que a correlação observada entre IMRs e o número de doses de vacina administradas rotineiramente a bebês pode ser causal”, disse Miller.

Como resultado, argumentou Miller, “mais investigações sobre os resultados de saúde de populações vacinadas versus não vacinadas … seriam benéficas”, acrescentando que “as autoridades de saúde em todas as nações têm a obrigação de determinar se seus esquemas de vacinação estão atingindo os objetivos desejados”.

“Muito mais pesquisas precisam ser feitas neste campo, mas mais estudos só alcançarão mudanças positivas limitadas até que mais indivíduos e famílias comecem a fazer a conexão entre vacinas e eventos adversos”, disse Miller.

“Além disso, legisladores e autoridades de saúde devem permitir que as pessoas aceitem ou rejeitem vacinas sem intimidação ou consequências negativas.”

Michael Nevradakis

5G is the next generation of mobile and wireless communication.

This timely article published in December 2018 documents with foresight the health impacts of 5G Wireless Technology which is now being applied Worldwide.

***

This first  EU 5G Appeal was initially submitted in September 2017 to the European Commission  demanding a moratorium on the increase of cell antennas for planned 5G expansion. Concerns over health effects from higher radiation exposure include potential neurological impacts, infertility, and cancer.

“We the undersigned scientists and doctors  recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry.  5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc. for telecommunications already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment…”   READ EU APPEAL HERE

5G is the next generation of mobile and wireless communication.

It will provide faster speeds (up to 100 times) and higher capacity transmissions to carry the massive amount of data that will be generated from the Internet of Things (IoT), driverless cars, smart cities and towns, drones, and for faster video streaming. There are even plans to provide 5G from space, meaning thousands of satellites to cover every square inch of the earth with wireless radiation.

5G will include the higher millimeter wave frequencies never before used for internet and communications technology. The 5G deployment proposes to add frequencies in the microwave spectrum in the low- (0.6 GHz – 3.7 GHz), mid- (3.7GHz – 24 GHz), and high-band frequencies (24 GHz and higher) for faster communications.  As these higher frequencies do not travel far and are blocked by buildings, this system will have to use a dense network of fixed antennae outdoors every 300 meters as well as indoor systems. This radiation, like the 2G, 3G, 4G telecommunications systems, has not had pre market testing for long term health effects despite the fact that people will be exposed continuously to this microwave radiation.

It is argued that the addition of this added high frequency 5G radiation to an already complex mix of lower frequencies, will contribute to a negative public health outcome both from both physical and mental health perspectives.

Environmental effects of existing RF radiation have also been ignored. 5G will massively increase the microwave and millimeter wave radiation in our environment, and will have a detrimental effect on wildlife and trees.    5G will substantially increase exposure to radio–frequency electromagnetic fields RF-EMF, that has already been proven to be harmful for humans, animals and the environment.

Risks from 5G include:

• Damage to the eyes – cataracts, retinal damage
• Severe sweating
• Skin damage
• Immune system disruption
• Metabolic disruption
• Neurological disturbance
• Leakage of blood brain barrier
• Damage to sperm
• Increased risk of cancers
• Collapse of insect populations, the base of food for birds and bats
• Rise in bacterial resistance and bacterial shifts
• Damage to plants and trees

Millimeter wavelengths (at high intensity) have  been used in military applications in active denial systems (non-lethal crowd control weapons). (See this)

Some research on non-thermal effects has shown that millimeter wavelengths target cell membranes and have adverse biological effects as well as clinical effects such as cataracts, immune system alterations and physiological effects on the heart and blood pressure.  Betzalal et al (2018)  have demonstrated that the sweat glands  which are coiled structures in the upper layers of the skin can act as antenna receiver for 5G sub-THz band wavelengths. If not stopped, there may be a serious illness explosion.

Dr. Martin Pall To The NIH: “The 5G Rollout Is Absolutely Insane.”:

Here is what some experts are saying about 5G:

“The new 5G wireless technology involves millimeter waves (extremely high frequencies) producing photons of much greater energy than even 4G and WiFi. Allowing this technology to be used without proving its safety is reckless in the extreme, as the millimeter waves are known to have a profound effect on all parts of the human body.”
-Prof. Trevor Marshall, Director Autoimmunity Research Foundation, California

“The plans to beam highly penetrative 5G milliwave radiation at us from space must surely be one of the greatest follies ever conceived of by mankind. There will be nowhere safe to live.”
-Olga Sheean former WHO employee and author of ‘No Safe Place’

“It would irradiate everyone, including the most vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation: pregnant women, unborn children, young children, teenagers, men of reproductive age, the elderly, the disabled, and the chronically ill.”
—Ronald Powell, PhD, Letter to FCC on 5G expansion

“Along with the 5G there is another thing coming – Internet of Things. If you look at it combined the radiation level is going to increase tremendously and yet the industry is very excited about it…. they project 5G/IoT business to be a $7 trillion business.”
-Prof. Girish Kumar, Professor at Electrical Engineering Department at IIT Bombay

“However, no matter what the future research will show, the 5G technology will be by then fully deployed and without any possibility of reverse because the whole future life of the humanity will be based and dependent on the functioning of the 5G radiation-emitting devices. This is a unique situation in the history of the human kind when the whole human population will be exposed to man-made devices emitting non-ionizing radiation that was insufficiently tested before deployment. What is and what will be the responsibility of the scientists, decision-makers and industry leaders who permit deployment of insufficiently tested technology that will affect us all? The answer is simple – no responsibility… because if any health problems will show up in the future, these will most likely take tens of years of time to manifest and, by then the persons that currently enable deployment of insufficiently tested radiation-emitting 5G technology will be retired or the proverbial “six feet under”. Dariusz Leszczynski, PhD, DSc

“The risks to health from non-ionizing electromagnetic fields are controversial.

However, the scientific evidence that indicates grave dangers continues to grow: increase in the risk of cancer, infertility, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, electrohypersensitivity…

In recent years we have seen accusations by citizens groups and by scientists, researchers and experts (independent of industry) about conflicts of interest of the committees that decide on the permitted levels to which the entire population is exposed.

According to many experts more and more research points to the necessity to upgrade the classification of radio frequency radiation as a carcinogen to 2A or even to 1.

(Mobile telephony, WiFi, cordless telephones…) This together with evidence of important non-thermal biological effects reinforces the need to apply the precautionary principle in relation to lowering the levels of exposure, with special attention to the most vulnerable groups such as children.

In contrast, the march toward 5G technology involves a radical increase of levels of electromagnetic pollution. Therefore 180 doctors and scientists from 36 countries have written a letter to the European Union demanding a moratorium on its implementation.

Meanwhile the industry tries to make its message about lack of harm prevail through large investments in the media and in ill-concealed lobbying.

We think this at least merits a profound public debate.”  Arthur Firstenburg  cellphonetaskforce

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, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Timely article first published on June 7, 2022

***

Credit union and banking trade groups have released a joint letter to the chair and ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, warning of “devastating consequences” if the Federal Reserve moves forward with a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). The letter was sent on May 25, one day before the Committee convened a hearing on “Digital Assets and the Future of Finance: Examining the Benefits and Risks of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency.” That hearing took testimony from only one witness, Lael Brainard, the Vice Chair of the Federal Reserve.

The fact that credit unions, which frequently serve unionized labor, joined with banking trade groups to sign off on the letter, lends credibility to the “devastating consequences” the letter enumerates of a Central Bank Digital Currency.

A CBDC would allow the Federal Reserve to compete for deposits with credit unions and banks. The letter correctly assesses the downside of such a move as follows:

“Private money is created through financial intermediation by banks and credit unions– the process in which financial institutions take deposits and lend out and invest those deposits. Private money is used by financial institutions to provide funding for businesses and consumers and thus supports economic growth. Introducing a CBDC would be a deliberate decision to shift some volume of private money to public money, with potentially devastating consequences for the cost and availability of credit for consumers and businesses. In sum, the savings of businesses and consumers would no longer fund the assets of banks – primarily, loans – but instead would fund the assets of the Federal Reserve – primarily securities issued by the Treasury Department, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac.”

In a similar vein, the letter warns:

“In effect, a CBDC will serve as an advantaged competitor to retail bank deposits that will move money away from banks and into accounts at the Federal Reserve where the funds cannot be lent back into the economy. These deposit accounts represent 71% of bank funding today. Losing this critical funding source would undermine the economics of the banking business model, severely restricting credit availability, increasing the cost of credit, and causing a slowdown of the economy. ABA estimates that even a CBDC where accounts were capped at $5,000 per ‘end user’ could result in $720 billion in deposits leaving the banking system.”

The joint letter also calls out the absurdity that the dollar is not already digitized. (Anyone who uses a “pay by phone” method to pay a monthly bill in seconds from their checking account or a debit card to pay for purchases fully appreciates how rapid and streamlined the digital dollar already is.) The credit unions and banking groups write as follows:

“Contrary to the assertions of some CBDC proponents, a U.S. CBDC is not necessary to ‘digitize the dollar,’ as the dollar functions primarily in digital form today. Commercial bank money is a digital dollar, and is currently accepted without question by businesses and consumers as a means of payment.”

In July 2019, NYU Professor and economist Nouriel Roubini also touched on the existing speed of the Visa credit card system versus digital currency in a Bloomberg News interview. Roubini stated:

“…nobody, not even this blockchain conference, accepts Bitcoin for paying for conference fees cause you can do only five transactions per second with Bitcoin. With the Visa system you can do 25,000 transactions per second…Crypto’s nonsense. It’s a failure. Nobody’s using it for any transactions.”

One of the key concerns in Congress and at the Fed appears to be that another country, such as China, might get ahead of the U.S. in the development of their own Central Bank Digital Currency and endanger the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency. At the House Financial Services Committee hearing on May 26, Fed Vice Chair Brainard testified as follows:

“The future evolution of international payments and capital flows will also influence considerations surrounding a potential U.S. CBDC. The dollar is the most widely used currency in international payments and investments, which benefits the United States by reducing transaction and borrowing costs for U.S. households, businesses, and government. In future states where other major foreign currencies are issued in CBDC form, it is prudent to consider how the potential absence or presence of a U.S. central bank digital dollar could affect the use of the dollar in global payments. For example, the People’s Bank of China has been piloting the digital yuan, and several other foreign central banks are issuing or considering issuing their own digital currencies. A U.S. CBDC may be one potential way to ensure that people around the world who use the dollar can continue to rely on the strength and safety of the U.S. currency to transact and conduct business in the digital financial system. More broadly, it is important for the United States to play a lead role in the development of standards governing international digital finance transactions involving CBDCs consistent with the norms of privacy, accessibility, interoperability, and security.”

The credit unions and banking groups’ joint letter addressed that issue as follows:

“…a CBDC does not appear to be necessary to support the role of the U.S. dollar internationally. While many countries have experimented with a CBDC, many have focused on a wholesale model, something not contemplated by the Federal Reserve’s discussion paper. In addition, many have pulled these experiments back as the costs of implementation have become apparent. The Federal Reserve notes that the dollar’s status as the global reserve currency is driven by 1) the strength and openness of our economy, 2) the depth of our financial markets, and 3) the trust in our institutions and rule of law.”

Wall Street On Parade has been skeptical of the invisible hand(s) behind this push for a Central Bank Digital Currency at the Fed – (the Fed being the perpetual provider of bailouts to Wall Street’s casino banks) – ever since a similar invisible hand pushed Saule Omarova forward as President Biden’s nominee to head the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the regulator of national banks (those that operate across state lines).

In October of last year, the Vanderbilt Law Review published a 69-page paper by Omarova in which she proposed not just a Central Bank Digital Currency but a hair-raising, radical restructuring of the Fed that would include the following:

(1) Move all commercial bank deposits from commercial banks to so-called FedAccounts at the Federal Reserve;

(2) Allow the Fed, in “extreme and rare circumstances, when the Fed is unable to control inflation by raising interest rates,” to confiscate deposits from these FedAccounts in order to tighten monetary policy;

(3) Allow the most Wall Street-conflicted regional Fed bank in the country, the New York Fed, when there are “rises in market value at rates suggestive of a bubble trend,” such as with technology stocks today, to “short these securities, thereby putting downward pressure on their prices”;

(4) Eliminate the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) that insures bank deposits in the U.S. and that prevents panic runs on banks;

(5) Consolidate all bank regulatory functions at the OCC – which Omarova was nominated to head.

By early November, Omarova was facing even more controversy when it was revealed that she had called the very industry that she had been nominated to supervise the “quintessential a**hole industry” in a 2019 Canadian feature documentary. Omarova eventually withdrew her nomination after it became clear she did not have the votes to be confirmed.

You can read the joint letter from the credit union and banking groups here; Brainard’s testimony is available here.

*

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

Ms. Martens is a former Wall Street veteran with a background in journalism. Mr. Martens’ career spanned four decades in printing and publishing management.

Featured image is from WSP

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.

***

Introductory Note and Update

On December 15, 2022 about three weeks after her third Pfizer booster shot, Princess Bajrakitiyabha Narendira Debyavati collapsed with heart issues and went into a coma. “The 44-year old eldest daughter of the King in Thailand, and likely heir to the throne, had reported to be in excellent health prior to the vaccination.

“Top Thai officials  are pulling off their gloves against Pfizer Bio N Tech [yet to be confirmed] and could become the first country in the world to Nullify the contracts between the government and Pfizer.

Which would mean Pfizer would have to pay back billions of dollars because of their jabs to the Thai people.”

See Global Research’s Coverage in the following article

Video: Pfizer Criminality Exposed: Thailand’s Royal Princess In Coma after Covid Pfizer Vaccine Booster

By Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, Prof Michel Chossudovsky, and Redacted, February 09, 2023

Flashback to Our January 28, 2022 report

What is of significance (confirmed by the Bangkok Post) is that more than a Year Ago the Royal Thai Government firmly acknowledged the deaths and adverse events affecting Thais who had taken the vaccine jab. 

A compensation program was announced and implemented in December 2021:

“Out of the 11,707 people who filed a claim with the authorities, 8,470 people, or 72.3% of all claimants, have been compensated”. 

1,962 individuals, namely 23% of those compensated “were left permanently paralysed or died after receiving their Covid-19 shot”. 

This decision has a bearing on recent developments pertaining to Princess Bajrakitiyabha. 

My observations in January 2022 were the following:

People in Thailand and around the World will be informed of the decision of the Royal Thai Government and will refuse to take the jab.

And this decision regarding compensation to the Covid Vaxx victims establishes a legal precedent. It sets the stage for compensation Worldwide on behalf of the victims of the vaccine and their families. 

Class action law suits as well criminal charges against Big Pharma and corrupt governments are forthcoming.  

National governments will no longer be able to deny the devastating impacts of what is widely recognized by scientists and medical doctors  as a killer vaccine. 

Nor will they be able to impose a vaccine passport. 

Also, if you have any doubts consult the “Confidential Report” by Pfizer released under Freedom of Information which confirms unequivocally the criminal nature of the mRNA vaccine which has resulted in a Worldwide wave of deaths and injuries:

“What is contained in  Pfizer’s “confidential” report is detailed evidence on the impacts of the “vaccine” on mortality and morbidity. This data which emanates from the “Horse’s Mouth” can now be used to confront as well formulate legal procedures against Big Pharma, the governments, the WHO and the media.”

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 25, 2022, Updated, February 12, 2023

Our thanks to the Bangkok Post for bringing this important article to our attention. See below. (minor edit to Title)

***

Side Effects Cost Royal Thai Government One Billion Baht  

Bangkok Post,

December 28, 2021

Almost one billion baht in compensation has been paid out to Thais who suffered adverse side effects from the Covid-19 vaccine over the past eight months, says the National Health Security Office (NHSO).

About 927 million baht [28 million dollars] in compensation was approved between April 5 and Dec 26 [2021], it said.

Out of the 11,707 people who filed a claim with authorities, 8,470 people, or 72.3% of all claimants, have been compensated, said Atthaporn Limpanyalert, spokesman and deputy secretary-general of the NHSO.

The claims were grouped into three categories, the first being claims filed by vaccine recipients who reported mild to moderate side effects after receiving their Covid-19 jab.

In total, there are 6,298 people in this category, Dr Atthaporn said, noting they are eligible to receive no more than 100,000 baht in compensation from the government.

The second category, Dr Atthaporn said, comprises claims filed by those who experienced temporary paralysis and/or loss of other bodily functions after they were vaccinated, noting the 210 people in this category will receive up to 240,000 baht in compensation.

The final category is made up of individuals who were left permanently paralysed or died after receiving their Covid-19 shot. The 1,962 people in this category are eligible to claim up to 400,000 baht in compensation.

Out of the 11,707 claims filed, 1,752 were rejected because the claimants failed to meet the criteria set out — 615 of whom have lodged an appeal.

Claimants are entitled to seek the compensation for themselves and/or relatives without having to prove without doubt that their health condition was indeed caused by receiving the Covid vaccine.

Dr Atthaporn said the NHSO has set up 13 committees throughout the country to process the compensation claims, adding compensation will be paid within five days of the petition being approved.

Meanwhile, the NHSO transferred an additional 31.3 billion baht to 1,942 medical facilities and hospitals nationwide in October and November to help the fight against Covid-19, said NHSO secretary-general Jadet Thammathat-aree.

*

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.

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 U.S. Navy’s Diving and Salvage Center can be found in a location as obscure as its name—down what was once a country lane in rural Panama City, a now-booming resort city in the southwestern panhandle of Florida, 70 miles south of the Alabama border. The center’s complex is as nondescript as its location—a drab concrete post-World War II structure that has the look of a vocational high school on the west side of Chicago. A coin-operated laundromat and a dance school are across what is now a four-lane road.

The center has been training highly skilled deep-water divers for decades who, once assigned to American military units worldwide, are capable of technical diving to do the good—using C4 explosives to clear harbors and beaches of debris and unexploded ordinance—as well as the bad, like blowing up foreign oil rigs, fouling intake valves for undersea power plants, destroying locks on crucial shipping canals. The Panama City center, which boasts the second largest indoor pool in America, was the perfect place to recruit the best, and most taciturn, graduates of the diving school who successfully did last summer what they had been authorized to do 260 feet under the surface of the Baltic Sea.

Last June, the Navy divers, operating under the cover of a widely publicized mid-summer NATO exercise known as BALTOPS 22, planted the remotely triggered explosives that, three months later, destroyed three of the four Nord Stream pipelines, according to a source with direct knowledge of the operational planning.

Two of the pipelines, which were known collectively as Nord Stream 1, had been providing Germany and much of Western Europe with cheap Russian natural gas for more than a decade. A second pair of pipelines, called Nord Stream 2, had been built but were not yet operational. Now, with Russian troops massing on the Ukrainian border and the bloodiest war in Europe since 1945 looming, President Joseph Biden saw the pipelines as a vehicle for Vladimir Putin to weaponize natural gas for his political and territorial ambitions.

Asked for comment, Adrienne Watson, a White House spokesperson, said in an email, “This is false and complete fiction.” Tammy Thorp, a spokesperson for the Central Intelligence Agency, similarly wrote: “This claim is completely and utterly false.”

Biden’s decision to sabotage the pipelines came after more than nine months of highly secret back and forth debate inside Washington’s national security community about how to best achieve that goal. For much of that time, the issue was not whether to do the mission, but how to get it done with no overt clue as to who was responsible.

There was a vital bureaucratic reason for relying on the graduates of the center’s hardcore diving school in Panama City. The divers were Navy only, and not members of America’s Special Operations Command, whose covert operations must be reported to Congress and briefed in advance to the Senate and House leadership—the so-called Gang of Eight. The Biden Administration was doing everything possible to avoid leaks as the planning took place late in 2021 and into the first months of 2022.

President Biden and his foreign policy team—National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, Secretary of State Tony Blinken, and Victoria Nuland, the Undersecretary of State for Policy—had been vocal and consistent in their hostility to the two pipelines, which ran side by side for 750 miles under the Baltic Sea from two different ports in northeastern Russia near the Estonian border, passing close to the Danish island of Bornholm before ending in northern Germany.

The direct route, which bypassed any need to transit Ukraine, had been a boon for the German economy, which enjoyed an abundance of cheap Russian natural gas—enough to run its factories and heat its homes while enabling German distributors to sell excess gas, at a profit, throughout Western Europe. Action that could be traced to the administration would violate US promises to minimize direct conflict with Russia. Secrecy was essential.

From its earliest days, Nord Stream 1 was seen by Washington and its anti-Russian NATO partners as a threat to western dominance. The holding company behind it, Nord Stream AG, was incorporated in Switzerland in 2005 in partnership with Gazprom, a publicly traded Russian company producing enormous profits for shareholders which is dominated by oligarchs known to be in the thrall of Putin. Gazprom controlled 51 percent of the company, with four European energy firms—one in France, one in the Netherlands and two in Germany—sharing the remaining 49 percent of stock, and having the right to control downstream sales of the inexpensive natural gas to local distributors in Germany and Western Europe. Gazprom’s profits were shared with the Russian government, and state gas and oil revenues were estimated in some years to amount to as much as 45 percent of Russia’s annual budget.

America’s political fears were real: Putin would now have an additional and much-needed major source of income, and Germany and the rest of Western Europe would become addicted to low-cost natural gas supplied by Russia—while diminishing European reliance on America. In fact, that’s exactly what happened. Many Germans saw Nord Stream 1 as part of the deliverance of former Chancellor Willy Brandt’s famed Ostpolitik theory, which would enable postwar Germany to rehabilitate itself and other European nations destroyed in World War II by, among other initiatives, utilizing cheap Russian gas to fuel a prosperous Western European market and trading economy.

Nord Stream 1 was dangerous enough, in the view of NATO and Washington, but Nord Stream 2, whose construction was completed in September of 2021, would, if approved by German regulators, double the amount of cheap gas that would be available to Germany and Western Europe. The second pipeline also would provide enough gas for more than 50 percent of Germany’s annual consumption. Tensions were constantly escalating between Russia and NATO, backed by the aggressive foreign policy of the Biden Administration.

Opposition to Nord Stream 2 flared on the eve of the Biden inauguration in January 2021, when Senate Republicans, led by Ted Cruz of Texas, repeatedly raised the political threat of cheap Russian natural gas during the confirmation hearing of Blinken as Secretary of State. By then a unified Senate had successfully passed a law that, as Cruz told Blinken, “halted [the pipeline] in its tracks.” There would be enormous political and economic pressure from the German government, then headed by Angela Merkel, to get the second pipeline online.

Would Biden stand up to the Germans? Blinken said yes, but added that he had not discussed the specifics of the incoming President’s views.

“I know his strong conviction that this is a bad idea, the Nord Stream 2,” he said. “I know that he would have us use every persuasive tool that we have to convince our friends and partners, including Germany, not to move forward with it.”

A few months later, as the construction of the second pipeline neared completion, Biden blinked. That May, in a stunning turnaround, the administration waived sanctions against Nord Stream AG, with a State Department official conceding that trying to stop the pipeline through sanctions and diplomacy had “always been a long shot.” Behind the scenes, administration officials reportedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, by then facing a threat of Russian invasion, not to criticize the move.

There were immediate consequences. Senate Republicans, led by Cruz, announced an immediate blockade of all of Biden’s foreign policy nominees and delayed passage of the annual defense bill for months, deep into the fall. Politico later depicted Biden’s turnabout on the second Russian pipeline as “the one decision, arguably more than the chaotic military withdrawal from Afghanistan, that has imperiled Biden’s agenda.”

The administration was floundering, despite getting a reprieve on the crisis in mid-November, when Germany’s energy regulators suspended approval of the second Nord Stream pipeline. Natural gas prices surged 8% within days, amid growing fears in Germany and Europe that the pipeline suspension and the growing possibility of a war between Russia and Ukraine would lead to a very much unwanted cold winter. It was not clear to Washington just where Olaf Scholz, Germany’s newly appointed chancellor, stood. Months earlier, after the fall of Afghanistan, Scholtz had publicly endorsed French President Emmanuel Macron’s call for a more autonomous European foreign policy in a speech in Prague—clearly suggesting less reliance on Washington and its mercurial actions.

Throughout all of this, Russian troops had been steadily and ominously building up on the borders of Ukraine, and by the end of December more than 100,000 soldiers were in position to strike from Belarus and Crimea. Alarm was growing in Washington, including an assessment from Blinken that those troop numbers could be “doubled in short order.”

The administration’s attention once again was focused on Nord Stream. As long as Europe remained dependent on the pipelines for cheap natural gas, Washington was afraid that countries like Germany would be reluctant to supply Ukraine with the money and weapons it needed to defeat Russia.

It was at this unsettled moment that Biden authorized Jake Sullivan to bring together an interagency group to come up with a plan.

All options were to be on the table. But only one would emerge.

Planning

In December of 2021, two months before the first Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine, Jake Sullivan convened a meeting of a newly formed task force—men and women from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA, and the State and Treasury Departments—and asked for recommendations about how to respond to Putin’s impending invasion.

It would be the first of a series of top-secret meetings, in a secure room on a top floor of the Old Executive Office Building, adjacent to the White House, that was also the home of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB). There was the usual back and forth chatter that eventually led to a crucial preliminary question: Would the recommendation forwarded by the group to the President be reversible—such as another layer of sanctions and currency restrictions—or irreversible—that is, kinetic actions, which could not be undone?

What became clear to participants, according to the source with direct knowledge of the process, is that Sullivan intended for the group to come up with a plan for the destruction of the two Nord Stream pipelines—and that he was delivering on the desires of the President.

Over the next several meetings, the participants debated options for an attack. The Navy proposed using a newly commissioned submarine to assault the pipeline directly. The Air Force discussed dropping bombs with delayed fuses that could be set off remotely. The CIA argued that whatever was done, it would have to be covert. Everyone involved understood the stakes. “This is not kiddie stuff,” the source said. If the attack were traceable to the United States, “It’s an act of war.”

At the time, the CIA was directed by William Burns, a mild-mannered former ambassador to Russia who had served as deputy secretary of state in the Obama Administration. Burns quickly authorized an Agency working group whose ad hoc members included—by chance—someone who was familiar with the capabilities of the Navy’s deep-sea divers in Panama City. Over the next few weeks, members of the CIA’s working group began to craft a plan for a covert operation that would use deep-sea divers to trigger an explosion along the pipeline.

Something like this had been done before. In 1971, the American intelligence community learned from still undisclosed sources that two important units of the Russian Navy were communicating via an undersea cable buried in the Sea of Okhotsk, on Russia’s Far East Coast. The cable linked a regional Navy command to the mainland headquarters at Vladivostok.

A hand-picked team of Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency operatives was assembled somewhere in the Washington area, under deep cover, and worked out a plan, using Navy divers, modified submarines and a deep-submarine rescue vehicle, that succeeded, after much trial and error, in locating the Russian cable. The divers planted a sophisticated listening device on the cable that successfully intercepted the Russian traffic and recorded it on a taping system.

The NSA learned that senior Russian navy officers, convinced of the security of their communication link, chatted away with their peers without encryption. The recording device and its tape had to be replaced monthly and the project rolled on merrily for a decade until it was compromised by a forty-four-year-old civilian NSA technician named Ronald Pelton who was fluent in Russian. Pelton was betrayed by a Russian defector in 1985 and sentenced to prison. He was paid just $5,000 by the Russians for his revelations about the operation, along with $35,000 for other Russian operational data he provided that was never made public.

That underwater success, codenamed Ivy Bells, was innovative and risky, and produced invaluable intelligence about the Russian Navy’s intentions and planning.

Still, the interagency group was initially skeptical of the CIA’s enthusiasm for a covert deep-sea attack. There were too many unanswered questions. The waters of the Baltic Sea were heavily patrolled by the Russian navy, and there were no oil rigs that could be used as cover for a diving operation. Would the divers have to go to Estonia, right across the border from Russia’s natural gas loading docks, to train for the mission? “It would be a goat fuck,” the Agency was told.

Throughout “all of this scheming,” the source said, “some working guys in the CIA and the State Department were saying, ‘Don’t do this. It’s stupid and will be a political nightmare if it comes out.’”

Nevertheless, in early 2022, the CIA working group reported back to Sullivan’s interagency group: “We have a way to blow up the pipelines.”

What came next was stunning. On February 7, less than three weeks before the seemingly inevitable Russian invasion of Ukraine, Biden met in his White House office with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who, after some wobbling, was now firmly on the American team. At the press briefing that followed, Biden defiantly said,

“If Russia invades . . . there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”

Twenty days earlier, Undersecretary Nuland had delivered essentially the same message at a State Department briefing, with little press coverage.

“I want to be very clear to you today,” she said in response to a question. “If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.”

Several of those involved in planning the pipeline mission were dismayed by what they viewed as indirect references to the attack.

“It was like putting an atomic bomb on the ground in Tokyo and telling the Japanese that we are going to detonate it,” the source said. “The plan was for the options to be executed post invasion and not advertised publicly. Biden simply didn’t get it or ignored it.”

Biden’s and Nuland’s indiscretion, if that is what it was, might have frustrated some of the planners. But it also created an opportunity. According to the source, some of the senior officials of the CIA determined that blowing up the pipeline “no longer could be considered a covert option because the President just announced that we knew how to do it.”

The plan to blow up Nord Stream 1 and 2 was suddenly downgraded from a covert operation requiring that Congress be informed to one that was deemed as a highly classified intelligence operation with U.S. military support. Under the law, the source explained, “There was no longer a legal requirement to report the operation to Congress. All they had to do now is just do it—but it still had to be secret. The Russians have superlative surveillance of the Baltic Sea.”

The Agency working group members had no direct contact with the White House, and were eager to find out if the President meant what he’d said—that is, if the mission was now a go. The source recalled, “Bill Burns comes back and says, ‘Do it.’”

“The Norwegian navy was quick to find the right spot, in the shallow water a few miles off Denmark’s Bornholm Island . . .”

The Operation

Norway was the perfect place to base the mission.

In the past few years of East-West crisis, the U.S. military has vastly expanded its presence inside Norway, whose western border runs 1,400 miles along the north Atlantic Ocean and merges above the Arctic Circle with Russia. The Pentagon has created high paying jobs and contracts, amid some local controversy, by investing hundreds of millions of dollars to upgrade and expand American Navy and Air Force facilities in Norway. The new works included, most importantly, an advanced synthetic aperture radar far up north that was capable of penetrating deep into Russia and came online just as the American intelligence community lost access to a series of long-range listening sites inside China.

A newly refurbished American submarine base, which had been under construction for years, had become operational and more American submarines were now able to work closely with their Norwegian colleagues to monitor and spy on a major Russian nuclear redoubt 250 miles to the east, on the Kola Peninsula. America also has vastly expanded a Norwegian air base in the north and delivered to the Norwegian air force a fleet of Boeing-built P8 Poseidon patrol planes to bolster its long-range spying on all things Russia.

In return, the Norwegian government angered liberals and some moderates in its parliament last November by passing the Supplementary Defense Cooperation Agreement (SDCA). Under the new deal, the U.S. legal system would have jurisdiction in certain “agreed areas” in the North over American soldiers accused of crimes off base, as well as over those Norwegian citizens accused or suspected of interfering with the work at the base.

Norway was one of the original signatories of the NATO Treaty in 1949, in the early days of the Cold War. Today, the supreme commander of NATO is Jens Stoltenberg, a committed anti-communist, who served as Norway’s prime minister for eight years before moving to his high NATO post, with American backing, in 2014. He was a hardliner on all things Putin and Russia who had cooperated with the American intelligence community since the Vietnam War. He has been trusted completely since. “He is the glove that fits the American hand,” the source said.

Back in Washington, planners knew they had to go to Norway. “They hated the Russians, and the Norwegian navy was full of superb sailors and divers who had generations of experience in highly profitable deep-sea oil and gas exploration,” the source said. They also could be trusted to keep the mission secret. (The Norwegians may have had other interests as well. The destruction of Nord Stream—if the Americans could pull it off—would allow Norway to sell vastly more of its own natural gas to Europe.)

Sometime in March, a few members of the team flew to Norway to meet with the Norwegian Secret Service and Navy. One of the key questions was where exactly in the Baltic Sea was the best place to plant the explosives. Nord Stream 1 and 2, each with two sets of pipelines, were separated much of the way by little more than a mile as they made their run to the port of Greifswald in the far northeast of Germany.

The Norwegian navy was quick to find the right spot, in the shallow waters of the Baltic sea a few miles off Denmark’s Bornholm Island. The pipelines ran more than a mile apart along a seafloor that was only 260 feet deep. That would be well within the range of the divers, who, operating from a Norwegian Alta class mine hunter, would dive with a mixture of oxygen, nitrogen and helium streaming from their tanks, and plant shaped C4 charges on the four pipelines with concrete protective covers. It would be tedious, time consuming and dangerous work, but the waters off Bornholm had another advantage: there were no major tidal currents, which would have made the task of diving much more difficult.

After a bit of research, the Americans were all in.

At this point, the Navy’s obscure deep-diving group in Panama City once again came into play. The deep-sea schools at Panama City, whose trainees participated in Ivy Bells, are seen as an unwanted backwater by the elite graduates of the Naval Academy in Annapolis, who typically seek the glory of being assigned as a Seal, fighter pilot, or submariner. If one must become a “Black Shoe”—that is, a member of the less desirable surface ship command—there is always at least duty on a destroyer, cruiser or amphibious ship. The least glamorous of all is mine warfare. Its divers never appear in Hollywood movies, or on the cover of popular magazines.

“The best divers with deep diving qualifications are a tight community, and only the very best are recruited for the operation and told to be prepared to be summoned to the CIA in Washington,” the source said.

The Norwegians and Americans had a location and the operatives, but there was another concern: any unusual underwater activity in the waters off Bornholm might draw the attention of the Swedish or Danish navies, which could report it.

Denmark had also been one of the original NATO signatories and was known in the intelligence community for its special ties to the United Kingdom. Sweden had applied for membership into NATO, and had demonstrated its great skill in managing its underwater sound and magnetic sensor systems that successfully tracked Russian submarines that would occasionally show up in remote waters of the Swedish archipelago and be forced to the surface.

The Norwegians joined the Americans in insisting that some senior officials in Denmark and Sweden had to be briefed in general terms about possible diving activity in the area. In that way, someone higher up could intervene and keep a report out of the chain of command, thus insulating the pipeline operation. “What they were told and what they knew were purposely different,” the source told me. (The Norwegian embassy, asked to comment on this story, did not respond.)

The Norwegians were key to solving other hurdles. The Russian navy was known to possess surveillance technology capable of spotting, and triggering, underwater mines. The American explosive devices needed to be camouflaged in a way that would make them appear to the Russian system as part of the natural background—something that required adapting to the specific salinity of the water. The Norwegians had a fix.

The Norwegians also had a solution to the crucial question of when the operation should take place. Every June, for the past 21 years, the American Sixth Fleet, whose flagship is based in Gaeta, Italy, south of Rome, has sponsored a major NATO exercise in the Baltic Sea involving scores of allied ships throughout the region. The current exercise, held in June, would be known as Baltic Operations 22, or BALTOPS 22. The Norwegians proposed this would be the ideal cover to plant the mines.

The Americans provided one vital element: they convinced the Sixth Fleet planners to add a research and development exercise to the program. The exercise, as made public by the Navy, involved the Sixth Fleet in collaboration with the Navy’s “research and warfare centers.” The at-sea event would be held off the coast of Bornholm Island and involve NATO teams of divers planting mines, with competing teams using the latest underwater technology to find and destroy them.

It was both a useful exercise and ingenious cover. The Panama City boys would do their thing and the C4 explosives would be in place by the end of BALTOPS22, with a 48-hour timer attached. All of the Americans and Norwegians would be long gone by the first explosion.

The days were counting down. “The clock was ticking, and we were nearing mission accomplished,” the source said.

And then: Washington had second thoughts. The bombs would still be planted during BALTOPS, but the White House worried that a two-day window for their detonation would be too close to the end of the exercise, and it would be obvious that America had been involved.

Instead, the White House had a new request: “Can the guys in the field come up with some way to blow the pipelines later on command?”

Some members of the planning team were angered and frustrated by the President’s seeming indecision. The Panama City divers had repeatedly practiced planting the C4 on pipelines, as they would during BALTOPS, but now the team in Norway had to come up with a way to give Biden what he wanted—the ability to issue a successful execution order at a time of his choosing.

Being tasked with an arbitrary, last-minute change was something the CIA was accustomed to managing. But it also renewed the concerns some shared over the necessity, and legality, of the entire operation.

The President’s secret orders also evoked the CIA’s dilemma in the Vietnam War days, when President Johnson, confronted by growing anti-Vietnam War sentiment, ordered the Agency to violate its charter—which specifically barred it from operating inside America—by spying on antiwar leaders to determine whether they were being controlled by Communist Russia.

The agency ultimately acquiesced, and throughout the 1970s it became clear just how far it had been willing to go. There were subsequent newspaper revelations in the aftermath of the Watergate scandals about the Agency’s spying on American citizens, its involvement in the assassination of foreign leaders and its undermining of the socialist government of Salvador Allende.

Those revelations led to a dramatic series of hearings in the mid-1970s in the Senate, led by Frank Church of Idaho, that made it clear that Richard Helms, the Agency director at the time, accepted that he had an obligation to do what the President wanted, even if it meant violating the law.

In unpublished, closed-door testimony, Helms ruefully explained that “you almost have an Immaculate Conception when you do something” under secret orders from a President. “Whether it’s right that you should have it, or wrong that you shall have it, [the CIA] works under different rules and ground rules than any other part of the government.” He was essentially telling the Senators that he, as head of the CIA, understood that he had been working for the Crown, and not the Constitution.

The Americans at work in Norway operated under the same dynamic, and dutifully began working on the new problem—how to remotely detonate the C4 explosives on Biden’s order. It was a much more demanding assignment than those in Washington understood. There was no way for the team in Norway to know when the President might push the button. Would it be in a few weeks, in many months or in half a year or longer?

The C4 attached to the pipelines would be triggered by a sonar buoy dropped by a plane on short notice, but the procedure involved the most advanced signal processing technology. Once in place, the delayed timing devices attached to any of the four pipelines could be accidentally triggered by the complex mix of ocean background noises throughout the heavily trafficked Baltic Sea—from near and distant ships, underwater drilling, seismic events, waves and even sea creatures. To avoid this, the sonar buoy, once in place, would emit a sequence of unique low frequency tonal sounds—much like those emitted by a flute or a piano—that would be recognized by the timing device and, after a pre-set hours of delay, trigger the explosives. (“You want a signal that is robust enough so that no other signal could accidentally send a pulse that detonated the explosives,” I was told by Dr. Theodore Postol, professor emeritus of science, technology and national security policy at MIT. Postol, who has served as the science adviser to the Pentagon’s Chief of Naval Operations, said the issue facing the group in Norway because of Biden’s delay was one of chance: “The longer the explosives are in the water the greater risk there would be of a random signal that would launch the bombs.”)

On September 26, 2022, a Norwegian Navy P8 surveillance plane made a seemingly routine flight and dropped a sonar buoy. The signal spread underwater, initially to Nord Stream 2 and then on to Nord Stream 1. A few hours later, the high-powered C4 explosives were triggered and three of the four pipelines were put out of commission. Within a few minutes, pools of methane gas that remained in the shuttered pipelines could be seen spreading on the water’s surface and the world learned that something irreversible had taken place.

Fallout

In the immediate aftermath of the pipeline bombing, the American media treated it like an unsolved mystery. Russia was repeatedly cited as a likely culprit, spurred on by calculated leaks from the White House—but without ever establishing a clear motive for such an act of self-sabotage, beyond simple retribution. A few months later, when it emerged that Russian authorities had been quietly getting estimates for the cost to repair the pipelines, the New York Times described the news as “complicating theories about who was behind” the attack. No major American newspaper dug into the earlier threats to the pipelines made by Biden and Undersecretary of State Nuland.

While it was never clear why Russia would seek to destroy its own lucrative pipeline, a more telling rationale for the President’s action came from Secretary of State Blinken.

Asked at a press conference last September about the consequences of the worsening energy crisis in Western Europe, Blinken described the moment as a potentially good one:

“It’s a tremendous opportunity to once and for all remove the dependence on Russian energy and thus to take away from Vladimir Putin the weaponization of energy as a means of advancing his imperial designs. That’s very significant and that offers tremendous strategic opportunity for the years to come, but meanwhile we’re determined to do everything we possibly can to make sure the consequences of all of this are not borne by citizens in our countries or, for that matter, around the world.”

More recently, Victoria Nuland expressed satisfaction at the demise of the newest of the pipelines. Testifying at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in late January she told Senator Ted Cruz, “​Like you, I am, and I think the Administration is, very gratified to know that Nord Stream 2 is now, as you like to say, a hunk of metal at the bottom of the sea.”

The source had a much more streetwise view of Biden’s decision to sabotage more than 1500 miles of Gazprom pipeline as winter approached. “Well,” he said, speaking of the President, “I gotta admit the guy has a pair of balls.  He said he was going to do it, and he did.”

Asked why he thought the Russians failed to respond, he said cynically, “Maybe they want the capability to do the same things the U.S. did.

“It was a beautiful cover story,” he went on. “Behind it was a covert operation that placed experts in the field and equipment that operated on a covert signal.

“The only flaw was the decision to do it.”

*

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.

All images in this article are from the author

Il Festival di Sanremo sarà ricordato come il “Festival dei due Presidenti”: il presidente della Repubblica Mattarella all’apertura e il presidente ucraino Zelenski alla chiusura. Quest’ultimo non appare in immagine, in seguito alle proteste levatesi in Italia. Resta però la sostanza: Zelenski invia al Festival di Sanremo un intervento che – annuncia il conduttore Amadeus incaricato di leggerlo – “viene tradotto addirittura dall’Ambasciata ucraina per poter essere proprio fedelissimi alla scrittura del presidente Zelenski”.

La recita che Zelenski fa al Festival viene messa, in questa puntata di Grandangolo, a confronto con la realtà di ciò che sta avvenendo in Ucraina, ricostruita attraverso drammatiche documentazioni visive.

Quale sia il reale ruolo di Zelensky lo rivela una inchiesta giornalistica pubblicata da The Guardian. Nelle elezioni presidenziali del 2019 l’attore Zelenski, divenuto famoso per la sua sitcom televisiva sulla corruzione dei vertici politici ucraini, si impegna a far finire la guerra in Donbass e a ripulire il sistema di governo dominato dagli oligarchi. Accusa il ricco Petro Poroshenko, presidente in carica, di nascondere i suoi beni in paradisi fiscali all’estero.

Riguardo al suo primo impegno, una volta alla presidenza, il ruolo di Zelenski non è quello di porre fine alla guerra nel Donbass, scatenata nel 2014 contro le popolazioni russe di questa regione, ma di alimentare la guerra di fatto diretta dalla NATO per colpire la Russia.

Riguardo al secondo impegno di eliminare la corruzione, in particolare l’esportazione di capitali nei paradisi fiscali, parlano i fatti dell’inchiesta pubblicata da The Guardian. Zelenski è comproprietario di tre società con sede e capitali in Belize e Isole Vergini Britanniche (Centro America) e a Cipro. Al momento di assumere la carica di presidente, Zelenski “cede” a due suoi soci le sue quote in tali società. E, una volta in carica, nomina il primo socio suo assistente speciale e il secondo capo dei servizi segreti ucraini.

Manlio Dinucci

VIDEO : https://www.byoblu.com/2023/02/10/ucraina-la-recita-e-la-realta-grandangolo-pangea/

Important and timely article first published by Global Research on July 24, 2012

***

On 28 November 1953, at 2 am, a man crashed through a closed window and fell to his death from the 10th floor of the Statler Hotel in New York City. He was identified as Frank Olson, a bacteriologist with the US Army Research Center at Fort Detrick, Maryland. He had fallen from a room he shared with another scientist, Robert Lashbrook. It was ruled a suicide.

Twenty-two years later, in 1975, William Colby, then CIA director, declassified documents that changed the complexion of the case. It was revealed that Olson had actually been an undercover CIA operative at Fort Detrick, and that one week prior to his death, he had been drinking Cointreau at a high-level meeting with scientists at Deep Creek Lodge in rural Maryland. The Cointreau was laced with a large dose of LSD administered by his CIA boss, Sidney Gottlieb. He was then sent to New York with Lashbrook, also with the CIA, to see a psychiatrist because the LSD had induced a psychosis.

It was also revealed that Olson had been part of the top secret CIA program that was known as Project MK-ULTRA, exploring the use of chemicals and drugs for purposes of mind control, and bacteriological agents for covert assassination. Olson had been working on ways to deliver anthrax in aerosol form, for use as a weapon. New evidence that came to light, through the persistent efforts of Olson’s son Eric, made the suicide ruling highly suspect.

It turned out that Olson had been labelled a security risk by British intelligence after getting upset witnessing human experimentation on a trip to Frankfurt, Germany the previous summer. Eric Olson now believes that his father was drugged and then murdered to make sure that he didn’t reveal the secrets of the MK-ULTRA project. Following the 1975 revelations, the government must have felt more than a little guilt about the affair because Olson’s family was given a 17 minute audience with US President Ford, who apologised to them, and they were awarded damages in the amount of $750,000.

Controlling Human Behaviour

The MK-ULTRA program was instituted on 13 April 1953 by CIA Director Allen Dulles, ostensibly to counter the brainwashing techniques of American prisoners being held by the North Koreans during the Korean War, and to duplicate those techniques on enemy prisoners, i.e. the creation of “Manchurian Candidates.” This was the claim used to obtain funding for the project.

However, the Prisoner of War brainwashing program was just the tip of the iceberg, and the CIA-sponsored experiments ventured far and wide into areas of Mind Control under the aegis of MK-ULTRA that had little or nothing to do with methods of interrogation.

The Colby revelations were part of a sweeping investigation of the CIA in January 1975 by the “Commission on CIA Activities Within the United States,” chaired by Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller. The subsequent June 1975 Report to the President said: “The drug program was part of a much larger CIA program to study possible means for controlling human behaviour. Other studies explored the effects of radiation, electric-shock, psychology, psychiatry, sociology and harassment substances.”

Even though the program got off to a rocky start with the Olson affair, it recovered quickly and became an umbrella project with 149 sub-projects. The overall guiding principal was succinctly stated in an internal CIA memo dated January 1952: “Can we get control of an individual to the point where he will do our bidding against his will and even against fundamental laws of nature such as self-preservation?” 

The drug program came under the aegis of the Chemical Division of the Technical Services Staff headed up by Sidney Gottlieb from 1951 to 1956. Gottlieb was a highly intelligent eccentric who drank goat’s milk, enjoyed folk-dancing, and raised Christmas trees on his farm outside Washington.

The Agency funded LSD research programs at major medical centres and universities including Boston Psychopathic, Mt. Sinai Hospital at Columbia University, University of Illinois Medical School, University of Oklahoma and others. The funding was carried out secretly through the Josiah Macy Foundation, and the Geschickter Fund for Medical Research in Washington, D.C. The CIA claimed the secrecy was necessary to keep it from the Russians, but we have already seen that it was part of much larger project to learn how to control human behaviour in general, so this is not credible.

Gottlieb told Dr. Harold Abramson at Mt. Sinai (who just happened to be the psychiatrist that Olson was supposed to see!) that he wanted “operationally pertinent materials [about]: a. Disturbance of Memory; b. Discrediting by Aberrant Behaviour; c. Alteration of Sex Patterns; d. Eliciting of Information; e. Suggestibility; f. Creation of Dependence.” That sounds like pretty deep stuff for the spy game. They were really afraid of public reaction and congressional condemnation, especially since the CIA charter did not allow domestic operations, and certainly prohibited experimentation on US citizens.

The callousness of the research is best exemplified by the CIA-funded work of Dr. Harris Isbell, the Director of the Addiction Research Center in Lexington, Kentucky. The drug addict hospital inmates, who were mostly black, were encouraged to volunteer for LSD research in return for hard drugs of their choice or time off their sentences. In most cases, they were given pure morphine or heroin. At one point Isbell kept seven men on LSD for 77 straight days. Many others were on it for up to 42 days.

Concerning extended LSD usage, John Marks in his landmark book The Search for the Manchurian Candidate: The CIA and Mind Control says about writer Hunter S. Thompson (recently deceased) that he “frightened his readers with accounts of drug (LSD) binges lasting a few days, during which Thompson felt his brain boiling away in the sun, his nerves wrapping around enormous barbed wire forts, and his remaining faculties reduced to their reptilian antecedents.” The recent movie The Rum Diary, starring Johnny Depp, based on the autobiographical book by Hunter S. Thompson, presents an imaginative re-enactment of his LSD adventures.

The CIA Turns On the Counter-Culture

Not satisfied with university research, Gottlieb recruited New York narcotics agent George White to distribute LSD surreptitiously to the “borderline underworld.” Operating through safe houses in Greenwich Village, Haight-Ashbury and Marin County, White gave doses to prostitutes, pimps, drug addicts and other “marginal people” and then observed the results and reported to Gottlieb.

John Marks says they were people “who would be powerless to seek any sort of revenge if they ever found out what the CIA had done to them. In addition to their being unlikely whistle-blowers, such people lived in a world where an unwitting dose of some drug… was an occupational hazard anyway.”

Eventually, White started using it randomly all over New York and San Francisco. Regarding the results, Marks says, “The MKULTRA scientists reaped little but disaster, mischief, and disappointment from their efforts to use LSD as a miracle weapon against the minds of their opponents.” Yet, they continued this program for 10 years until 1963.

Ironically, since the CIA had pretty much cornered the market on LSD internationally, buying up all the product of Sandoz and Eli Lilly, the spread of the drug to the counter-culture was through the Agency. Timothy Leary, Ken Kesey, Allen Ginsburg and Tom Wolfe were first “turned on” thanks to the CIA, and that’s how the “flower children” became psychedelic.

But, the LSD experiments may have been more successful than Marks realised. They were carefully noting the precise effects on brain chemistry, and in the six areas that Gottlieb was concerned with: memory disturbance, aberrant behaviour, altered sexual patterns, eliciting information, suggestibility and creation of dependence. This became evident when they started using LSD as an adjunct in hypnotic and electronic experiments.

Re-Patterning the Brain

Perhaps the most notorious and nefarious MK-ULTRA sub-project was carried out at the Allan Memorial Institute in Montreal, Canada under the directorship of Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron, an American from Albany, New York. Cameron had trained at the Royal Mental Hospital in Glasgow, Scotland, under eugenicist Sir David Henderson, and founded the Canadian branch of the World Federation for Mental Health. At various times, he was elected president of the Canadian, American, and World psychiatric associations. In other words, Cameron was no renegade but had the full faith and endorsement of the world psychiatric establishment.

The CIA wanted Cameron to “depattern” the contents of the brain to make it receptive to new patterning. David Remnick in a Washington Post article on 28 July 1985 said, “The…. heart of the laboratory was the Grid Room…. The subject was strapped into a chair involuntarily, by force, his head bristling with electrodes and transducers. Any resistance was met with a paralysing dose of curare. The subject’s brainwaves were beamed to a nearby reception room crammed with voice analysers, a wire recorder and radio receivers cobbled together… The systematic annihilation or ‘depatterning’ of a subject’s mind and memory was accomplished with overdoses of LSD, barbiturate sleep for 65 days at a stretch and ECT shocks at 75 times the recommended dosage. Psychic driving, the repetition of a recorded message for 16 hours a day, programmed the empty mind. Fragile patients referred to Allan Memorial for help were thus turned into carbuncular jellyfish.”

Anton Chaitkin in his essay, ‘British Psychiatry: From Eugenics to Assassination’, says: “Patients lost all or part of their memories, and some lost the ability to control their bodily functions and to speak. At least one patient was reduced almost to a vegetable; then Cameron had the cognitive centres of her brain surgically cut apart, while keeping her alive. Some subjects were deposited permanently in institutions for the hopelessly insane.”

The CIA funded these horrors through a front called “The Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology.” Other supporters of the Allan Institute were the Rockefeller Foundation, the Geschickter Foundation, and the Canadian government.

About Cameron’s work, Wikipedia says:

“Naomi Klein states, in her book The Shock Doctrine, that Cameron’s research and his contribution to the MKUltra project was actually not about mind control and brainwashing, but ‘to design a scientifically based system for extracting information from “resistant sources.”  In other words, torture’.

And citing a book from Alfred W. McCoy it further says that ‘Stripped of its bizarre excesses, Cameron’s experiments, building upon Donald O. Hebb’s earlier breakthrough, laid the scientific foundation for the CIA’s two-stage psychological torture method’.” This method was codified in the infamous “KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation Manual” published by the CIA in July 1963, and in the Human Resources Exploitation Training Manual – 1983 that was used in CIA training courses in Latin American countries up until 1987. These manuals describe methods of psychological torture, far more potent than physical torture, to elicit information from “resistant sources.”

An Orwellian Nightmare

As one would expect, the technologies now available to the mind-controllers have zoomed off the chart to the point where George Orwell’s world of omni-surveillance now seems almost quaint. Of course, it is true that 1984 was 28 years ago. But even as far back as 1970, US congressman James Scheur was able to say, “As a result of spinoffs from medical, military aerospace and industrial research, we are now in the process of developing devices and products capable of controlling violent mobs without injury. We can tranquillise, impede, immobilise, harass, shock, upset, stupefy, nauseate, chill, temporarily blind, deafen or just plain scare the wits out of anyone the police have a proper need to control and restrain.”

A brief survey of some of the scariest products known to be in the arsenal of the secretive alphabet agencies arrayed against John Q. Public are such devices as the Neurophone, patented by Dr. Patrick Flanagan in 1968. It converts sound to electrical impulses which can be delivered from satellites. When aimed at individuals, the impulses travel directly to the brain where the sounds are re-assembled and appear to be voices inside the head, which can be perceived as coming from God, or telepathic aliens, or whatever. Or the sounds can come out of a turned-off TV or radio. Through software, the device can mimic anyone’s voice and translate into any language.

It is believed that the CIA, DIA, NSA et al use the Neurophone to deliver threats and propaganda to selected targets, or just to torment someone they don’t like. One can imagine the possibilities. Could this explain some of the killings by “psychopaths” who say they were instructed by God, such as Mark David Chapman, David Berkowitz, or Sirhan Sirhan? If they had been previously evaluated through sophisticated personality assessments and groomed by LSD or hypnosis, such voices could easily tip the balance and convince them to kill.

We’ve all heard about the “Thought Police” and laughed because it seemed so implausible. Well, the joke is on us. Brain scanning technology is now well-advanced. In 1974, Lawrence Pinneo, a neurophysiologist and electronic engineer with the Stanford Research Institute succeeded in correlating brain wave patterns from EEGs with specific words. In 1994, the brain wave patterns of 40 subjects were officially correlated with both spoken words and silent thought at the University of Missouri. It is believed that US intelligence agencies now have a brain wave vocabulary of over 60,000 words in most common languages.

Brain waves constitute a magnetic field around the head (the aura), each person having a unique, identifiable electromagnetic signature which becomes visible through Kirlian photography, and these fields can be monitored by satellites. The translated results are then fed back to ground-side super computers at speeds of up to 20 gigabytes/second. Neurophone messages can then be beamed to selected individuals based on their thoughts. It is believed that about one million people around the globe are now monitored on a regular basis. As these numbers increase, as they certainly will, to include most educated and important people in the world, the New World Order will definitely have arrived.

As Australian writer Paul Baird has observed, “no-one will ever be able to even think about expressing an opinion contrary to those forced on us by the New World Order. There will literally be no intellectual property that cannot be stolen, no writing that cannot be censored, no thought that cannot be suppressed (by the most oppressive/invasive means).” Baird also claims that ex-military/intelligence whistle-blowers have reported that experiments in controlling voters with these techniques have been tried in several foreign countries. So much for democracy.

Other technologies, such as microwave bombardment to confuse and disorient field personnel, microchip implantation, silently delivered acoustical subliminal messages, widespread population control through psychiatric drugs, and extreme close-up satellite-based viewing able to read documents indoors, are all well-developed and in use by military and intelligence agencies. This doesn’t even address the monitoring of overt spoken and written material. Under Project ECHELON, the NSA monitors every call, fax, e-mail and computer data message in and out of the US, Canada and several other countries. Their computers then search for key words and phrases. Anything or anyone of interest draws the attention of agency operatives, who can then commence surveillance operations by the NSA or other intelligence agencies.

Novel Capabilities

We conclude with a chilling vision of the future from the US Air Force Scientific Advisory Board. It is from New World Vistas of Air and Space Power for the 21st Century.

“Prior to the mid-21st century, there will be a virtual explosion of knowledge in the field of neuroscience. We will have achieved a clear understanding of how the human brain works, how it really controls the various functions of the body, and how it can be manipulated (both positively and negatively). One can envision the development of electromagnetic energy sources, the output of which can be pulsed, shaped, and focused, that can couple with the human body in a fashion that will allow one to prevent voluntary muscular movements, control emotions (and thus actions), produce sleep, transmit suggestions, interfere with both short-term and long-term memory, produce an experience set, and delete an experience set. This will open the door for the development of some novel capabilities that can be used in armed conflict, in terrorist/hostage situations, and in training…”

And based on the past clandestine abuses of MK-ULTRA reviewed above, one can predict with relative certainty that these capabilities will be used on civilians, with or without their knowledge or acquiescence.
The above article appears in New Dawn Special Issue Vol 6 No 3

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.

***

“Never Again Is Now Global,” a five-part docuseries highlighting the parallels between Nazi Germany and global pandemic policies.

Each one-hour episode focuses on recent testimonies by Holocaust survivors and their descendants who discuss comparisons between the early repressive stages under the Nazi regime that culminated in the Holocaust and global COVID-19 policies.

Watch the trailer of part 2 below. And click here to watch the full episode.

*

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.

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.

***

A National trauma

A national trauma which the Serbs after the fall of the Serbian national state and the Ottoman occupation experienced after June 20^th, 1459[i] can be compared with that felt by Judea’s Jews after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.[ii] Since Serbia soon found herself well within the Ottoman Sultanate and the European Christian states were on defense from the victorious Muslim Ottoman Turks, no light at the end of the historical tunnel was seen and the whole nation sank into deep despair for the next four centuries. In a sense, the nation may be regarded as an extended individual, with similar suffering from wounds and defeats.[iii] And as an individual compensates for its personal defeats by pushing his/her traumatic memories into the subconscious, so a nation builds up a fictitious history, trying to justify his/her failures and construct a fictitious world without unpleasant reality. Subjugated Serbs were no exception, as the Jews, Germans, Albanians, Lithuanians,[iv] etc. were neither. This is evidenced mostly from folk epic poetry.[v]

The latter was resting, as far as the 1389 Kosovo Battle was concerned, on two principal pillars, one ideological, the other quasi-historical. The essence of the Kosovo cycle epic poems centers on the so-called “Prince (Lazar)’s Supper”. This is composed, in its turn, mainly on the New Testament myth of the “(Christ’s) Last Supper”, with an admixture of the Homeric plot from the Iliad.

On the ideological side, the 1389 Kosovo Battle against the Muslim Ottoman Turks is presented in Serbian epic poems as a collective crucifixion. Being aware of the superiority of the Ottoman army, Prince Lazar Hrebeljanović of Serbia was put before two alternatives:

1) To surrender and to enjoy the “Earthly Kingdom” or

2) To fighting and to deserve the “Heavenly Kingdom”, with the obvious allusion to the choice of Jesus Christ. Of course, the Christian Prince chose the second alternative.[vi]

Hence, it was just God’s will, an inevitable outcome of the choice, which resulted in the bloody defeat during the battle. As for the very plot, the scenario at the epic poem “Prince’s Supper” had Jesus in the image of Lazar, while the role of Judah was allotted to Kosovo’s nobleman Vuk Branković.[vii] The latter accused Miloš Obilić of treacherous intentions, and it was for that reason that the latter decided to kill Sultan Murad I (1360−1389) as proof of his loyalty.[viii] The parallel with Achilles before the Troy is conspicuous.

Nevertheless, even ignoring the ideological religious background mentioned, it was this treacherous behaviour of Vuk Branković, who allegedly passed during the very battle on the Ottoman side, which turned out fatal for the Christian and Serbian cause. However, this betrayal has never been proven by historical sources and it was in all probability invented later on, for a number of political and other reasons. But as a result, a Kosovo nobleman and feudal lord Vuk Branković remained in the popular Serb memory as an epitome of a traitor.

Apart from the folk epic cycle mentioned above, many Serb poets used to make use of the 1389 Kosovo Battle as poetic inspiration. A cycle by poet Dragoljub Filipović about Serb Kosovo heroes can move anybody except the Serbophobs. A renown Serb poet from the end of the 19^th and beginning of the 20^th century, Milan Rakić, wrote a poem entitled On Gazimestan.[ix] When in October 1912 Serbian army reached Kosovo Field during the 1912‒1913 First Balkan War, a commander lined up his unit at the spot on Gazimestan and asked if somebody could recite the poem before the line. A soldier stepped ahead and did it, in a solemn silence of moved comrades. Then another soldier stepped ahead and asked the commander if he is aware that the author of the poem is present in the line. The surprised commander then asked Milan Rakić to step ahead, but the latter was so timid that he did not obey the order. The commander then ordered the unit to salute their comrade, what they did proudly.

A historic place of Gazimestan means to the Serbs the same as Golgotha to the Christians, and the West Wall to the Jews. There is no Serb kid who has not read some parts from the collection of the Kosovo cycle poetry, folk or otherwise. Kosovo-Metochia (KosMet)[x] may be torn out from Serbia (and the Serbs), just as the Temple has been destroyed and the Jews left Judea. But just as after every feast meal Jews hit glasses after a toast onto the floor and cry: “Jerusalem, let my right arm dry up if I forget you!”, so Serbs will yearn for the lost homeland. The Jews have returned to Judea (today Israel) and recover Jerusalem and the West Wall (with fundamental support by the US’ administration and the Zionist lobby in the USA).[xi]

The 1389 Kosovo Battle

The battle which took place north of KosMet’s administrative center Priština on the early morning of June 28th on the Kosovo Field[xii] is of focal ideological and patriotic importance to the Serbs during the last 600 years. A ruler of Serbia Prince Lazar Hrebeljanović (1373‒1389), allied with his compatriot from Bosnia King Tvrtko I Kotromanić (1353‒1391), made the last attempt to preserve his independence from rapidly expanding Ottoman Empire.[xiii] In 1388 they succeeded to defeat an Ottoman army in three successive battles of which the Bileća Battle (August 27^th, 1388) was of the crucial significance.[xiv] The Ottoman Sultan Murad I, who had been occupied by pacifying Anatolia (Asia Minor), returned to the Balkans and brought together a huge coalition of forces among his vassals, many of whom were Christians including and ethnic Albanians, Bulgarians, and Serbs. The opposing army under Prince Lazar and King Tvrtko I was composed by the coalition of Central Serbia’s forces, Bosnian troops under Vlatko Vuković, the Vlach (Romanian) contingent of Voyvode Mircea, the troops of Lazar’s son-in-law Vuk Branković (feudal lord of KosMet) and some other detachments.

More numerous Ottoman army won the battle but both leaders, Prince Lazar and Sultan Murad I, lost their lives. According to very popular Serbian legend, Sultan Murad I was assassinated by Serbian knight Miloš Obilić or Kobilić who was before the battle taunted and insulted by Kosovo’s landlord Vuk Branković. The assassinator slipped bravely into Sultan’s tent and stabbed the Sultan Murad I by a long knife to death, before being killed by Sultan’s guards. Prince Lazar was at the last stage of the battle taken as the prisoner with his knights and was decapitated by the Ottomans.[xv]

Nevertheless, the 1389 Kosovo Battle became very soon a focal element of Serb patriotism and national mythology over the centuries. For sure, no other single historical event has had more psychological influence and mental impact on the Serbs as a nation up today. The crucial element in his mythology is a tradition that before the battle, Prince Lazar was offered by Sultan Murad I the choice between the Earthly Kingdom and a Heavenly Empire, and he chose the latter what meant in practice the battle and national tragedy followed by the Ottoman yoke for centuries. As a matter of fact, because of such kind of covenant with God, the Serbs are understanding themselves as a collective identity as a Heavenly People for the very reason they chose in 1389 freedom in a Heavenly Empire over serfdom and humiliation in a temporal world (the Earthly Kingdom). The same happened in 1999 when NATO’s gangsters gave the ultimatum to the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) to handle over KosMet’s province to them but the ultimatum was rejected followed by NATO’s aggression on Serbia and Montenegro for 78 days (March‒June 1999).[xvi]

Historically, the 1389 Kosovo Battle accelerated the disintegration of the medieval Serbian state and opened the way to five centuries of the Ottoman yoke in KosMet and South Balkans.

The Western Kosovo meta-mythology

In political practice, Kosovo-Battle memory, both historical and poetic, has been used by those Serbian politicians who referred to national sentiments, as an easy means to achieve Serbian collective support for their running politics. However, in fact, this refers mainly to Serbian quasi-intellectuals, who were educated in traditional manners. Nevertheless, this instance has been vastly and successfully exploited by those who found their interests in tearing KosMet from Serbia.[xvii] It concerns both Albanians (from Albania and KosMet) and their (Western) patrons. Since this instance appears of great importance for the propaganda war going on about KosMet, it deserves particular attention here.

It is known that one of the main strategies in winning a case has always been to attack an adversary at the point one feels to be the weakest with him/herself. It is obvious, for instance, how the mythology about the quasi Illyrian origin of the Albanians has been developed by Albanian historians and politicians, what should lend support for their claims on almost any West Balkan territory, including that of a present-day Austria. Therefore, the principal target of the same circles has been to convince the world public opinion that Serbs’ claims on KosMet are a product of pure phantasy, an irrational construction of Serb history regarding their presence on KosMet. If they prove that a part of this construction is a false one, a pure myth, then it should be much easier to convince people that the rest is false as well. Their strategy is simple and it goes like this: Serbian claims regarding KosMet’s history are as realistic as their poetry is historically supported.[xviii]

In order to illustrate the point, let us turn for the moment to Israel, his ancient and recent history.  We know from the Old Testament that the Jewish clergy has claimed the historicity of the ancient fables including Exodus, pastes sent on Egypt by Jehovah, parting the Red Sea, slaughter by Joshua of Canaanites, etc.[xix] Since we are aware these are but irrational fancies, it follows that nothing in the Bible has historical support. Hence, the claims of the Jews that they used to live in present-day Israel, including Palestine, are mere fictions, not worthy serious considerations. And, as the logical consequence, the existence of the state of Israel is the result of European colonization of the Arabic national territory, a pure act of aggression and violence.[xx]

Likewise, due to Zeus’s interventions at Troy, the Trojan War never took place, since we know that the Olympian Gods were Greek inventions.[xxi]

The Kosovo meta-mythology has been, therefore, contrived like this: Serbs claim that their poetic memory is history, and since it is untrue, any further claims from their side appear likewise false. Nevertheless, the trouble with this construct is that Albanian Western patrons, like the USA, have accepted this meta-mythology and do not hesitate to express this in public. It is the background of their frequently repeated demands that Serbs should be realistic, to accept the reality (that KosMet is gone), etc. It never occurred to them that it is exactly one may have expected from them to give the advice to the Albanians, Albanian and non-Albanian likewise, to accept the reality that not all Albanians live in the same state, as not all Kurds, Serbs, Roma, Armenians, Jews or Basques do.  However, of course, it is no matter of logic or morality, but rather of geopolitical interest and military power.[xxii]

If one may forgive those involved who are trying to secure their geopolitical and other interests, national or otherwise, by referring to the irrationality of their adversaries, as ethnic-Albanians do, the behaviour of some others self-appointed advisers and/or referees can provoke dismay only. Indeed, those who go around and talk about somebody’s obsessions at microphones or in front of TV cameras, and then go to church and listen to Judeo-Christian myths, (not to mention those of the Islamic provenience) deserve nothing but compassion. To call historical facts myths and kneel at the same time before religious effigies deserve the attention of a particular branch of human professions, indeed.[xxiii]

Here it is interesting to note that the Vidovdan cult (the cult of the 1389 Kosovo Battle) was introduced much later from the time of the battle. Even more interesting is the fact that it came from the West, albeit in an indirect way. Namely, the original cult was that of the Roman Catholic saint St. Vit (Vitus), who was executed on June 28^th, 303 AD. His day was celebrated on that date, together with the seer Amos. Vit’s name entered the Serbian Orthodox ecclesiastic books via Roman Catholic and Russian sources and he was never considered as a Serb saint. On the other hand, the Old-Slavic god Vid (Svevid)[xxiv] was venerated by ancient Slavs as the God of light and welfare, but a God of war as well.[xxv]Sacrifices to Vid were carried out at the end of the yearly harvest, in shrines dedicated to him, all over the Slavic world. Only after the famous Kumanovo battle in October 1912, when the Serbian army decidedly defeated the Ottoman one, at the very beginning of the First Balkan War,[xxvi] the slogan was launched “For Kosovo Kumanovo”, and Vidovdan (The Day of Vid) came into prominence and entered the Serbian Orthodox Church’s calendar by red letters, as one of nine most important state’s official festivities.[xxvii]

The irony of history is that the visit of the Habsburg Prince Ferdinand to Sarajevo was deliberately scheduled for Vidovdan on June 28^th, 1914 and was experienced by the Serb part of the Bosnian-Herzegovinian secret patriotic and anti-Habsburg organization Mlada Bosna (Young Bosnia) as a direct provocation to the Serbs, their national feelings and ethnohistory (as it was in fact) but above all the provocation to their Kosovo cult.[xxviii] Whether the conspirators were aware that it could have been interpreted in another way, as linked with the Roman Catholic St. Vit, is not known. Whether the occurrence of the Great War depended on the (wrong) interpretation of the significance of June 28^th could be a matter of speculation, but the historical reality remains the only certain fact at present.[xxix]

The collective memory on the 1389 Kosovo Battle has produced some other side effects, which will play a remarkable role in the subsequent Balkan history. Two points are to be made here, as two sides of the same coin:

1. The frustrating feeling of the (national) defeat of the Serbs.
2. The heroic assassination of Sultan Murad I by the Serbian knight Miloš Obilić.

The first element of the memory has resulted in the impulse for retaliation, as already mentioned in connection to the above-mentioned slogan. The second aspect is an almost archetypal link of the Vidovdan day to the “heroic assassination” within the patriotic impulse in the Serbian nation. The assassination in Sarajevo was but one instance of the “Vidovdan mythology”. When on June 28^th, 1921 the Regent Alexandar Karađorđević (practically the absolute ruler of Yugoslavia at the time, born in Montenegrin capital Cetinje on December 17^th, 1888[xxx] and Montenegrin by his own determination[xxxi]) declared the so-called “Vidovdan Constitution” of the interwar Yugoslav state, on the Vidovdan day, the same day an attempt was made to assassinate him and the Prime Minister Nikola Pašić (who was accompanying the Regent in a coach). Nikola Pašić was the target of another attempt of assassination in 1923 (on the Vidovdan day as well).[xxxii]

*

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

Notes

[i] Јованка Калић, Срби у позном Средњем веку, Друго издање, Београд: ЈП Службени лист СРЈ, 2001, 221; Чедомир Антић, Српска историја, Четврто издање, Београд: Vukotić Media, 2019, 96−105. About the last years of the 14^th-century Serbian Empire, see in [Раде Михаљчић, Крај српског царства, Београд: БИГЗ, 1989].

[ii] Михаил Ростовцев, Историја Старог света: Грчка и Рим, Нови Сад: Матица српска, 1990, 403; Џон Бордман, Џаспер Грифин, Озвин Мари (приредили), Оксфордска историја Грчке и хеленистичког света, Београд: CLIO, 1999, 541; Дејвид Џ. Голдберг, Џон Д. Рејнер, Јевреји: Историја и религија, Београд: CLIO, 2003, 94−101.

[iii] About the national identity, see in [John Hutchinson, Anthony D. Smith, eds., Nationalism, Oxford−New York: Oxford University Press, 1994, 17−131]. In essence, the nation is a large number of people of mainly common descent or believed to be, language, culture, and history. The nation is in majority of cases associated with some specified territory [Susan Mayhew, A Dictionary of Geography, Third Edition, Oxford‒New York: Oxford University Press, 2004, 344]. In the case of Serbs, it is undoubtedly Kosovo-Metochia (KosMet). About the importance of KosMet in Serbian history, see in [Радован Самарџић и други, Косово и Метохија у српској историји, Београд: СКЗ, 1989].

[iv] In the case of Lithuanians, see, for instance [Zigmas Zinkevičius, Lietuviai: Praeities didybė ir sunykimas, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, 2013].

[v] Folk is a term used in ethnology and anthropology to refer loosely to traditional rural peasant societies in which an oral tradition predominates. The oral tradition is that part of a folk society’s cultural knowledge or traditional culture which is passed on orally rather than in written form, and, therefore, it is in the opposition to the literate tradition. In principle, oral tradition is a source of information not only about contemporary cultural and social systems but as well as about the history of the group (ethnohistory) [Charlotte Seymour-Smith, Dictionary of Anthropology, New York: Palgrave, 1986, 120, 212].

[vi] About Prince Lazar Hrebeljanović, see in [Раде Михаљчић, Лазар Хребељановић, Београд: БИГЗ, 1989].

[vii] As a matter of fact, the very battle was fought on his feudal land at the Kosovo Field.

[viii] See more in [Раде Михаљчић, Јунаци косовске легенде, Београд: БИГЗ, 1989].

[ix] Gazimestan is a place where the decisive Ottoman cavalry charge took place during the battle.

[x] KosMet is an abbreviation for South Serbia’s autonomous province of Kosovo-Metochia. The term was in official usage in the early years after WWII. It was replaced in December 1968 by the term Kosovo in order to more please ethnic Albanians. Today, terms KosMet and Kosovo-Metochia are widely used by the Serbs while the Albanians are using the term Kosova for the same province. The place-name Kosovo is of the Slavonic-Serb origin but not of Albanian.

[xi] About the creation of the Zionist Israel, see in [Giedrius Drukteinis (sudarytojas), Izraelis, žydų valstybė, Vilnius: Sofoklis, 2017, 247‒350]. About the Jewish history, see in [Paul Johnson, A History of the Jews, London: Orion Books Limited, 1993]. About the Jewish-Zionist lobby in the USA, see in [Alfonsas Eidintas, Donatas Eidintas, Žydai, Izraelis ir palestiniečiai, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas, 2007, 247‒298].

[xii] Kosovo Field is a geographical region in East Kosovo. This is a plateau running from Kosovska Mitrovica southward past Priština and Uroševac almost to Kačanik on the border with North Macedonia. It has an elevation of up to 600 meters. In the middle of the field there is a town of the same name, today, in fact, a suburb of Priština [Robert Elsie, Historical Dictionary of Kosova, Lanham, Maryland‒Toronto‒Oxford, 2004, 96].

[xiii] See more in [Joseph von Hammer, Historija Turskog/Osmanskog Carstva, knjiga 1, Zagreb: Nerkez Smailagić, 1979; Фјодор И. Успенски, Источно питање, Београд−Подгорица: Службени лист СЦГ−ЦИД, 2003].

[xiv] Владимир Ћоровић, Историја Срба, Београд: БИГЗ, 1993, 257.

[xv] See [Ратко Пековић, избор текстова, Косовска битка: Мит, легенда и стварност, Београд: Литера, 1987, 43−55; Чедомир Антић, Српска историја, Четврто издање, Београд: Vukotić Media, 76−79].

[xvi] See [Пјер Пеан, Косово: „Праведни“ рат за стварање мафијашке државе, Београд: Службени гласник, 2013].

[xvii] One of them, for example, is Noel Malcolm (b. 1956) – a British scholar and historian. He is the author of one of the first and most influential in the West book of KosMet’s history: Kosovo: A Short History, London, 1998, which is a classic example of falsified propaganda material for the very political purpose to separate this province from the motherland of Serbia. He is a President of the Anglo-Albanian Association in London. His wife is Albanian.

[xviii] See [Tim Judah, The Serbs: History, Myth & Destruction of Yugoslavia, New Haven−London: Yale University Press, 1997].

[xix] About the Biblical legends, see in [Zenon Kosidovski, Biblijske legende, Podgorica: Narodna knjiga‒Miba books, 2013].

[xx] About the history of Israel, see in [Ahron Bregman, A History of Israel, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003].

[xxi] See [Gustav Schwab, Gražiausios antikos sakmės, Vilnius: Tyto alba, 2004].

[xxii] About contemporary geopolitics, see in [Klaus Dodds, Global Geopolitics: A Critical Introduction, Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited, 2005].

[xxiii] Psychological anthropology is the field that includes the study of the individual’s relationship to culture and society as well as the broader area of the interrelationship between psychology and anthropology. Psychoanalysis includes theories of the functioning and nature of the human personality, methods for the investigation of the personality, and therapeutic techniques relating to abnormal personalities or mental illness. Anthropology of religion is as well as a separate field of research. See more in [Arthur S. Reber, The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology, London: Penguin Books, 1985].

[xxiv] One who sees everything.

[xxv] See [Драгољуб Драгојловић, Паганизам и хришћанство у Срба, Београд: Политика−Службени гласник, 2008].

[xxvi] See [Борислав Ратковић, Митар Ђуришић, Саво Скоко, Србија и Црна Гора у Балканским ратовима 1912−1913, Београд: БИГЗ, 1972].

[xxvii] It has to be noted that there is very confusion in the literature with the Slavic God Vid and the Roman Catholic saint Vit/Vitus.

[xxviii] See [Mira Radojević, Ljubodrag Dimić, Serbia in the Great War 1914−1918, Belgrade: SKZ, 2014; Миле Бјелајац, 1914−1918. Зашто ревизија: Старе и нове контроверзе о узроцима Првог светског рата, Београд: Одбрана, 2014].

[xxix] The Western historiography is calling young Gavrilo Princip who assassinated the Archduke Francis Ferdinand, heir to the Austrian-Hungarian throne in Sarajevo on June 28^th, 1914 as “a young Bosnian fanatic” [Marcel Dunan (General Editor), Larousse Encyclopedia of Modern History from 1500 to the Present Day, New York: Crown Publishers, Inc, 1964, 347].

[xxx] Бранислав Глигоријевић, Краљ Александар Карађорђевић, I, Уједињење српских земаља, Београд: БИГЗ, 1996, 24.

[xxxi] Клод Елан, Живот и смрт краља Александра I краља Југославије, Београд: Ново дело, 1988, 15.

[xxxii] About Nikola Pašić, see in [Ђорђе Ђ. Станковић, Никола Пашић и Хрвати 1918−1923, Београд: БИГЗ, 1995].

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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.a

a

***

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

In precisely two weeks, the world will mark the first day of Russia’s aggressive move into Ukraine.[1]

According to BBC News Russian, more than 13.000 identified soldiers on the Russian side died in the war. The Norwegian Chief of Defence puts the number of Ukrainian military casualties at 100,000 and civilians dead at 30,000. More than 8,000,000 Ukrainian refugees have left the country and another 8,000,000 are displaced within the country.

The Ukrainian forces fought back armed with various weapons provided by NATO forces. The Ukrainian people have been crippled recently due to loss of power and loss of heat brought on by the Russianhttps://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/ attacks.

Today, the Ukrainians have been watching the conflict increase. President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has reached out for help from the U.S. and UK from the very beginning. He has  recently gotten more well equipped tanks. Now he is even calling for more fighter jets.

What all this points to is a development for the one year anniversary that could be summed up in a single word – escalation. And as we are midway up this crescendo, how is it likely to climax?

Prominent figures like former general and CIA director David Petraeus do not exclude the prospect of sending U.S. forces into action on the ground alongside Ukraine. If Russia faces the threat of getting struck from within Ukraine by U.S. and NATO weaponry, what card do they have to play?

The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists just reset the time on their doomsday clock to a minute and a half before midnight. NEVER has the doomsday clock been this close! [2]

That is why we must continue to devote time and attention to a game of nuclear fisticuffs that would have terminal consequences for us all. That’s why I chose the company of a geopolitical analyst and good friend Mahdi Nazemroaya to speak to us on this critical edition of the Global Research News Hour.

Mahdi Nazemroaya has a long time association with the Centre for Research on Globalization writing numerous articles and doing plenty of research. He joins us to share his honest appraisal of the Ukraine situation, the support of allies, and the overall trends in the direction this war is headed.

On the subject of Ukraine he wrote The Road to Moscow Goes Through Kiev: A Coup d’Etat That Threatens Russia back in 2015.

He also put together the May 2014 documentary Welcome to Nulandistan: Propaganda and the Crisis in Ukraine for GRTV. (see below.)

Full Length Documentary Produced by Mahdi Nazemroaya

Censored by Youtube:, to view click: Watch on Youtube

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is an interdisciplinary sociologist and an award-winning author and geopolitical analyst, and author of The Globalization of NATO (Clarity Press) and a forthcoming book The War on Libya and the Re-Colonization of Africa. He is a Sociologist and Research Associate at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), a contributor to the Strategic Culture Foundation (SCF) and a member of the Scientific Committee of Geopolitica, Italy. 

(Global Research News Hour Episode 379)

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. Jonathan Yerushalmy (February 2, 2023), ‘Russia planning major offensive to mark first anniversary of war: Ukraine defence minister’, The Guardian; https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/02/russia-major-new-offensive-to-mark-one-year-anniversary-ukraine-war
2. https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/

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.

***

First published in October 2020 prior to the launching of the mRNA Covid Vaccine

The German Corona Investigative Committee has taken testimony from a large number of international scientists and experts since July 10, 2020.

Scroll down for the Video and Full Transcript of Dr. Reiner Fuellmich‘s  presentation.

Their conclusions are the following: 

• The corona crisis must be renamed the “Corona Scandal”
• It is:
  • The biggest tort case ever
  • The greatest crime against humanity ever committed
• Those responsible must be:
  • Criminally prosecuted for crimes against humanity
  • Sued for civil damages
• Deaths
  • There is no excess mortality in any country
  • Corona virus mortality equals seasonal flu
  • 94% of deaths in Bergamo were caused by transferring sick patients to nursing homes where they infected old people with weak immune systems
  • Doctors and hospitals worldwide were paid to declare deceased victims of Covid-19
  • Autopsies showed:
    • Fatalities almost all caused by serious pre-existing conditions
    • Almost all deaths were very old people
    • Sweden (no lockdown) and Britain (strict lockdown) have comparable disease and mortality statistics
  • US states with and without lockdowns have comparable disease and mortality statistics
• Health
  • Hospitals remain empty and some face bankruptcy
  • Populations have T-cell immunity from previous influenza waves
  • Herd immunity needs only 15-25% population infection and is already achieved
  • Only when a person has symptoms can an infection be contagious
• Tests:
  • Many scientists call this a PCR-test pandemic, not a corona pandemic
  • Very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive
  • Likelihood of false-positives is 89-94% or near certainty
  • Prof. Drosten developed his PCR test from an old SARS virus without ever having seen the real Wuhan virus from China
  • The PCR test is not based on scientific facts with respect to infections
  • PCR tests are useless for the detection of infections
  • A positive PCR test does not mean an infection is present or that an intact virus has been found
  • Amplification of samples over 35 cycles is unreliable but WHO recommended 45 cycles
• Illegality:
  • The German government locked down, imposed social-distancing/ mask-wearing on the basis of a single opinion
  • The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating
  • The lockdowns were based on non-existent infections
  • Former president of the German federal constitutional court doubted the constitutionality of the corona measures
  • Former UK supreme court judge Lord Sumption concluded there was no factual basis for panic and no legal basis for corona measures
  • German RKI (CDC equivalent) recommended no autopsies be performed
  • Corona measures have no sufficient factual or legal basis, are unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately
  • No serious scientist gives any validity to the infamous Neil Ferguson’s false computer models warning of millions of deaths
  • Mainstream media completely failed to report the true facts of the so-called pandemic
  • Democracy is in danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models
  • Drosten (of PCR test), Tedros of WHO, and others have committed crimes against humanity as defined in the International Criminal Code
  • Politicians can avoid going down with the charlatans and criminals by starting the long overdue public scientific discussion
• Conspiracy:
  • Politicians and mainstream media deliberately drove populations to panic
  • Children were calculatedly made to feel responsible “for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow Corona rules”
  • The hopeless PCR test is used to create fear and not to diagnose
  • There can be no talk of a second wave
• Injury and damage:
  • Evidence of gigantic health and economic damage to populations
  • Anti-corona measures have:
    • Killed innumerable people
    • Destroyed countless companies and individuals worldwide
  • Children are being taken away from their parents
  • Children are traumatized en masse
  • Bankruptcies are expected in small- and medium-sized businesses
• Redress:
  • A class action lawsuit must be filed in the USA or Canada, with all affected parties worldwide having the opportunity to join
  • Companies and self-employed people must be compensated for damages

Full Transcript 

Hello. I am Reiner Fuellmich and I have been admitted to the Bar in Germany and in California for 26 years. I have been practicing law primarily as a trial lawyer against fraudulent corporations such as Deutsche Bank, formerly one of the world’s largest and most respected banks, today one of the most toxic criminal organizations in the world; VW, one of the world’s largest and most respected car manufacturers, today notorious for its giant diesel fraud; and Kuehne and Nagel, the world’s largest shipping company. We’re suing them in a multi-million-dollar bribery case. 

I’m also one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee. Since July 10, 2020, this Committee has been listening to a large number of international scientists’ and experts’ testimony to find answers to questions about the corona crisis, which more and more people worldwide are asking. All the above-mentioned cases of corruption and fraud committed by the German corporations pale in comparison in view of the extent of the damage that the corona crisis has caused and continues to cause. 

This corona crisis, according to all we know today, must be renamed a “Corona Scandal” and those responsible for it must be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages. On a political level, everything must be done to make sure that no one will ever again be in a position of such power as to be able to defraud humanity or to attempt to manipulate us with their corrupt agendas. And for this reason I will now explain to you how and where an international network of lawyers will argue this biggest tort case ever, the corona fraud scandal, which has meanwhile unfolded into probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed. 

Crimes against humanity were first defined in connection with the Nuremberg trials after World War II, that is, when they dealt with the main war criminals of the Third Reich. Crimes against humanity are today regulated in section 7 of the International Criminal Code. The three major questions to be answered in the context of a judicial approach to the corona scandal are: 

1. Is there a corona pandemic or is there only a PCR-test pandemic? Specifically, does a positive PCR-test result mean that the person tested is infected with Covid-19, or does it mean absolutely nothing in connection with the Covid-19 infection?
2. Do the so-called anti-corona measures, such as the lockdown, mandatory face masks, social distancing, and quarantine regulations, serve to protect the world’s population from corona, or do these measures serve only to make people panic so that they believe – without asking any questions – that their lives are in danger, so that in the end the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, as well as the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints?
3. Is it true that the German government was massively lobbied, more so than any other country, by the chief protagonists of this so-called corona pandemic, Mr. Drosten, virologist at charity hospital in Berlin; Mr. Wieler, veterinarian and head of the German equivalent of the CDC, the RKI; and Mr. Tedros, Head of the World Health Organization or WHO; because Germany is known as a particularly disciplined country and was therefore to become a role model for the rest of the world for its strict and, of course, successful adherence to the corona measures?

Answers to these three questions are urgently needed because the allegedly new and highly dangerous coronavirus has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world, and certainly not here in Germany. But the anti-corona measures, whose only basis are the PCR-test results, which are in turn all based on the German Drosten test, have, in the meantime, caused the loss of innumerable human lives and have destroyed the economic existence of countless companies and individuals worldwide. In Australia, for example, people are thrown into prison if they do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, as deemed by the authorities. In the Philippines, people who do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, in this sense, are getting shot in the head. 

Let me first give you a summary of the facts as they present themselves today. The most important thing in a lawsuit is to establish the facts – that is, to find out what actually happened. That is because the application of the law always depends on the facts at issue. If I want to prosecute someone for fraud, I cannot do that by presenting the facts of a car accident. So what happened here regarding the alleged corona pandemic? 

The facts laid out below are, to a large extent, the result of the work of the Corona Investigative Committee. This Committee was founded on July 10, 2020 by four lawyers in order to determine, through hearing expert testimony of international scientists and other experts: 

1. How dangerous is the virus really?
2. What is the significance of a positive PCR test?
3. What collateral damage has been caused by the corona measures, both with respect to the world population’s health, and with respect to the world’s economy?

Let me start with a little bit of background information. What happened in May 2019 and then in early 2020? And what happened 12 years earlier with the swine flu, which many of you may have forgotten about? In May 2019, the stronger of the two parties which govern Germany in a grand coalition, the CDU, held a Congress on Global Health, apparently at the instigation of important players from the pharmaceutical industry and the tech industry. At this Congress, the usual suspects, you might say, gave their speeches. Angela Merkel was there, and the German Secretary of Health, Jens Spahn. But, some other people, whom one would not necessarily expect to be present at such a gathering, were also there: Professor Drosten, virologist from the Charite hospital in Berlin; Professor Wieler, veterinarian and Head of the RKI, the German equivalent of the CDC; as well as Mr. Tedros, philosopher and Head of the World Health Organization (WHO). They all gave speeches there. Also present and giving speeches were the chief lobbyists of the world’s two largest health funds, namely the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust. Less than a year later, these very people called the shots in the proclamation of the worldwide corona pandemic, made sure that mass PCR tests were used to prove mass infections with Covid-19 all over the world, and are now pushing for vaccines to be invented and sold worldwide. 

These infections, or rather the positive test results that the PCR tests delivered, in turn became the justification for worldwide lockdowns, social distancing and mandatory face masks. It is important to note at this point that the definition of a pandemic was changed 12 years earlier. Until then, a pandemic was considered to be a disease that spread worldwide and which led to many serious illnesses and deaths. Suddenly, and for reasons never explained, it was supposed to be a worldwide disease only. Many serious illnesses and many deaths were not required any more to announce a pandemic. Due to this change, the WHO, which is closely intertwined with the global pharmaceutical industry, was able to declare the swine flu pandemic in 2009, with the result that vaccines were produced and sold worldwide on the basis of contracts that have been kept secret until today. 

These vaccines proved to be completely unnecessary because the swine flu eventually turned out to be a mild flu, and never became the horrific plague that the pharmaceutical industry and its affiliated universities kept announcing it would turn into, with millions of deaths certain to happen if people didn’t get vaccinated. These vaccines also led to serious health problems. About 700 children in Europe fell incurably ill with narcolepsy and are now forever severely disabled. The vaccines bought with millions of taxpayers’ money had to be destroyed with even more taxpayers’ money. Already then, during the swine flu, the German virologist Drosten was one of those who stirred up panic in the population, repeating over and over again that the swine flu would claim many hundreds of thousands, even millions of deaths all over the world. In the end, it was mainly thanks to Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and his efforts as a member of the German Bundestag, and also a member of the Council of Europe, that this hoax was brought to an end before it would lead to even more serious consequences. 

Fast forward to March of 2020, when the German Bundestag announced an Epidemic Situation of National Importance, which is the German equivalent of a pandemic in March of 2020 and, based on this, the lockdown with the suspension of all essential constitutional rights for an unforeseeable time, there was only one single opinion on which the Federal Government in Germany based its decision. In an outrageous violation of the universally accepted principle “audiatur et altera pars”, which means that one must also hear the other side, the only person they listened to was Mr. Drosten. 

That is the very person whose horrific, panic-inducing prognoses had proved to be catastrophically false 12 years earlier. We know this because a whistleblower named David Sieber, a member of the Green Party, told us about it. He did so first on August 29, 2020 in Berlin, in the context of an event at which Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. also took part, and at which both men gave speeches. And he did so afterwards in one of the sessions of our Corona Committee. 

The reason he did this is that he had become increasingly sceptical about the official narrative propagated by politicians and the mainstream media. He had therefore undertaken an effort to find out about other scientists’ opinions and had found them on the Internet. There, he realized that there were a number of highly renowned scientists who held a completely different opinion, which contradicted the horrific prognoses of Mr. Drosten. They assumed – and still do assume – that there was no disease that went beyond the gravity of the seasonal flu, that the population had already acquired cross- or T-cell immunity against this allegedly new virus, and that there was therefore no reason for any special measures, and certainly not for vaccinations. 

These scientists include Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University in California, a specialist in statistics and epidemiology, as well as public health, and at the same time the most quoted scientist in the world; Professor Michael Levitt, Nobel prize-winner for chemistry and also a biophysicist at Stanford University; the German professors Kary Mölling, Sucharit Bhakti, Klud Wittkowski, as well as Stefan Homburg; and now many, many more scientists and doctors worldwide, including Dr. Mike Yeadon. Dr. Mike Yeadon is the former Vice-President and Scientific Director of Pfizer, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world. I will talk some more about him a little later. 

At the end of March, beginning of April of 2020, Mr. Sieber turned to the leadership of his Green Party with the knowledge he had accumulated, and suggested that they present these other scientific opinions to the public and explain that, contrary to Mr. Drosten’s doomsday prophecies, there was no reason for the public to panic. Incidentally, Lord Sumption, who served as a judge at the British supreme court from 2012 to 2018, had done the very same thing at the very same time and had come to the very same conclusion: that there was no factual basis for panic and no legal basis for the corona measures. Likewise, the former President of the German federal constitutional court expressed –  albeit more cautiously – serious doubts that the corona measures were constitutional. But instead of taking note of these other opinions and discussing them with David Sieber, the Green Party leadership declared that Mr. Drosten’s panic messages were good enough for the Green Party. Remember, they’re not a member of the ruling coalition; they’re the opposition. Still, that was enough for them, just as it had been good enough for the Federal Government as a basis for its lockdown decision, they said. They subsequently, the Green Party leadership called David Sieber a conspiracy theorist, without ever having considered the content of his information, and then stripped him of his mandates. 

Now let’s take a look at the current actual situation regarding the virus’s danger, the complete uselessness of PCR tests for the detection of infections, and the lockdowns based on non-existent infections. In the meantime, we know that the health care systems were never in danger of becoming overwhelmed by Covid-19. On the contrary, many hospitals remain empty to this day and some are now facing bankruptcy. The hospital ship Comfort, which anchored in New York at the time, and could have accommodated a thousand patients, never accommodated more than some 20 patients. Nowhere was there any excess mortality. Studies carried out by Professor Ioannidis and others have shown that the mortality of corona is equivalent to that of the seasonal flu. Even the pictures from Bergamo and New York that were used to demonstrate to the world that panic was in order proved to be deliberately misleading. 

Then, the so-called “Panic Paper” was leaked, which was written by the German Department of the Interior. Its classified content shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that, in fact, the population was deliberately driven to panic by politicians and mainstream media. The accompanying irresponsible statements of the Head of the RKI – remember the [German] CDC – Mr. Wieler, who repeatedly and excitedly announced that the corona measures must be followed unconditionally by the population without them asking any question, shows that that he followed the script verbatim. In his public statements, he kept announcing that the situation was very grave and threatening, although the figures compiled by his own Institute proved the exact opposite. 

Among other things, the “Panic Paper” calls for children to be made to feel responsible – and I quote – “for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the corona rules”, that is, if they do not wash their hands constantly and don’t stay away from their grandparents. A word of clarification: in Bergamo, the vast majority of deaths, 94% to be exact, turned out to be the result not of Covid-19, but rather the consequence of the government deciding to transfer sick patients, sick with probably the cold or seasonal flu, from hospitals to nursing homes in order to make room at the hospitals for all the Covid patients, who ultimately never arrived. There, at the nursing homes, they then infected old people with a severely weakened immune system, usually as a result of pre-existing medical conditions. In addition, a flu vaccination, which had previously been administered, had further weakened the immune systems of the people in the nursing homes. In New York, only some, but by far not all hospitals were overwhelmed. Many people, most of whom were again elderly and had serious pre-existing medical conditions, and most of whom, had it not been for the panic-mongering, would have just stayed at home to recover, raced to the hospitals. There, many of them fell victim to healthcare-associated infections (or nosocomial infections) on the one hand, and incidents of malpractice on the other hand, for example, by being put on a respirator rather than receiving oxygen through an oxygen mask. Again, to clarify: Covid-19, this is the current state of affairs, is a dangerous disease, just like the seasonal flu is a dangerous disease. And of course, Covid-19, just like the seasonal flu, may sometimes take take a severe clinical course and will sometimes kill patients. 

However, as autopsies have shown, which were carried out in Germany in particular, by the forensic scientist Professor Klaus Püschel in Hamburg, the fatalities he examined had almost all been caused by serious pre-existing conditions, and almost all of the people who had died had died at the very at a very old age, just like in Italy, meaning they had lived beyond their average life expectancy. 

In this context, the following should also be mentioned: the German RKI – that is, again the equivalent of the CDC – had initially, strangely enough, recommended that no autopsies be performed. And there are numerous credible reports that doctors and hospitals worldwide had been paid money for declaring a deceased person a victim of Covid-19 rather than writing down the true cause of death on the death certificate, for example a heart attack or a gunshot wound. Without the autopsies, we would never know that the overwhelming majority of the alleged Covid-19 victims had died of completely different diseases, but not of Covid-19. The assertion that the lockdown was necessary because there were so many different infections with SARS-COV-2, and because the healthcare systems would be overwhelmed is wrong for three reasons, as we have learned from the hearings we conducted with the Corona Committee, and from other data that has become available in the meantime: 

A. The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating. By the time the lockdown was imposed, the alleged infection rates were already dropping again.

B. There’s already protection from the virus because of cross- or T-cell immunity. Apart from the above mentioned lockdown being imposed when the infection rates were already dropping, there is also cross- or T-cell immunity in the general population against the corona viruses contained in every flu or influenza wave. This is true, even if this time around, a slightly different strain of the coronavirus was at work. And that is because the body’s own immune system remembers every virus it has ever battled in the past, and from this experience, it also recognizes a supposedly new, but still similar, strain of the virus from the corona family. Incidentally, that’s how the PCR test for the detection of an infection was invented by now infamous Professor Drosten. 

At the beginning of January of 2020, based on this very basic knowledge, Mr. Drosten developed his PCR test, which supposedly detects an infection with SARS-COV-2, without ever having seen the real Wuhan virus from China, only having learned from social media reports that there was something going on in Wuhan, he started tinkering on his computer with what would become his corona PCR test. For this, he used an old SARS virus, hoping it would be sufficiently similar to the allegedly new strain of the coronavirus found in Wuhan. Then, he sent the result of his computer tinkering to China to determine whether the victims of the alleged new coronavirus tested positive. They did. 

And that was enough for the World Health Organization to sound the pandemic alarm and to recommend the worldwide use of the Drosten PCR test for the detection of infections with the virus now called SARS-COV-2. Drosten’s opinion and advice was – this must be emphasized once again – the only source for the German government when it announced the lockdown as well as the rules for social distancing and the mandatory wearing of masks. And – this must also be emphasized once again – Germany apparently became the center of especially massive lobbying by the pharmaceutical and tech industry because the world, with reference to the allegedly disciplined Germans, should do as the Germans do in order to survive the pandemic. 

C. And this is the most important part of our fact-finding: the PCR test is being used on the basis of false statements, NOT based on scientific facts with respect to infections. In the meantime, we have learned that these PCR tests, contrary to the assertions of Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, do NOT give any indication of an infection with any virus, let alone an infection with SARS-COV-2. Not only are PCR tests expressly not approved for diagnostic purposes, as is correctly noted on leaflets coming with these tests, and as the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, has repeatedly emphasized. Instead, they’re simply incapable of diagnosing any disease. That is: contrary to the assertions of Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, which they have been making since the proclamation of the pandemic, a positive PCR-test result does not mean that an infection is present. If someone tests positive, it does NOT mean that they’re infected with anything, let alone with the contagious SARS-COV-2 virus. 

Even the United States CDC, even this institution agrees with this, and I quote directly from page 38 of one of its publications on the coronavirus and the PCR tests, dated July 13, 2020. First bullet point says:

“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019 nCOV [novel coronavirus] is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.”

Second bullet point says:

“The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019 nCOV infection.” Third bullet point says: “This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.” 

It is still not clear whether there has ever been a scientifically correct isolation of the Wuhan virus, so that nobody knows exactly what we’re looking for when we test, especially since this virus, just like the flu viruses, mutates quickly. The PCR swabs take one or two sequences of a molecule that are invisible to the human eye and therefore need to be amplified in many cycles to make it visible. Everything over 35 cycles is – as reported by the New York Times and others – considered completely unreliable and scientifically unjustifiable. However, the Drosten test, as well as the WHO-recommended tests that followed his example, are set to 45 cycles. Can that be because of the desire to produce as many positive results as possible and thereby provide the basis for the false assumption that a large number of infections have been detected? 

The test cannot distinguish inactive and reproductive matter. That means that a positive result may happen because the test detects, for example, a piece of debris, a fragment of a molecule, which may signal nothing else than that the immune system of the person tested won a battle with a common cold in the past. Even Drosten himself declared in an interview with a German business magazine in 2014, at that time concerning the alleged detection of an infection with the MERS virus, allegedly with the help of the PCR test, that these PCR tests are so highly sensitive that even very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive. At that time, he also became very much aware of the powerful role of a panic and fear-mongering media, as you’ll see at the end of the following quote. He said then, in this interview: “If, for example, such a pathogen scurries over the nasal mucosa of a nurse for a day or so without her getting sick or noticing anything, then she’s suddenly a MERS case. This could also explain the explosion of case numbers in Saudi Arabia. In addition, the media there have made this into an incredible sensation.” 

Has he forgotten this? Or is he deliberately concealing this in the corona context because corona is a very lucrative business opportunity for the pharmaceutical industry as a whole? And for Mr. Alford Lund, his co-author in many studies and also a PCR-test producer. In my view, it is completely implausible that he forgot in 2020 what he knew about the PCR tests and told the business magazine in 2014. 

In short, this test cannot detect any infection, contrary to all false claims stating that it can. An infection, a so-called “hot” infection, requires that the virus, or rather a fragment of a molecule which may be a virus, is not just found somewhere, for example, in the throat of a person without causing any damage – that would be a “cold” infection. Rather, a “hot” infection requires that the virus penetrates into the cells, replicates there and causes symptoms such as headaches or a sore throat. Only then is a person really infected in the sense of a “hot” infection, because only then is a person contagious, that is, able to infect others. Until then, it is completely harmless for both the host and all other people that the host comes into contact with. 

Once again, this means that positive test results, contrary to all other claims by Drosten, Wieler, or the WHO, mean nothing with respect to infections, as even the CDC knows, as quoted above. 

Meanwhile, a number of highly respected scientists worldwide assume that there has never been a corona pandemic, but only a PCR-test pandemic. This is the conclusion reached by many German scientists, such as professors Bhakti, Reiss, Mölling, Hockertz, Walach and many others, including the above-mentioned Professor John Ioannidis, and the Nobel laureate, Professor Michael Levitt from Stanford University. 

The most recent such opinion is that of the aforementioned Dr. Mike Yeadon, a former Vice-President and Chief Science Officer at Pfizer, who held this position for 16 years. He and his co-authors, all well-known scientists, published a scientific paper in September of 2020 and he wrote a corresponding magazine article on September 20, 2020. Among other things, he and they state – and I quote: 

“We’re basing our government policy, our economic policy, and the policy of restricting fundamental rights, presumably on completely wrong data and assumptions about the coronavirus. If it weren’t for the test results that are constantly reported in the media, the pandemic would be over because nothing really happened. Of course, there are some serious individual cases of illness, but there are also some in every flu epidemic. There was a real wave of disease in March and April, but since then, everything has gone back to normal. Only the positive results rise and sink wildly again and again, depending on how many tests are carried out. But the real cases of illnesses are over. There can be no talk of a second wave. The allegedly new strain of the coronavirus is …” 

– Dr. Yeadon continues – 

“… only new in that it is a new type of the long-known corona virus. There are at least four coronaviruses that are endemic and cause some of the common colds we experience, especially in winter. They all have a striking sequence similarity to the coronavirus, and because the human immune system recognizes the similarity to the virus that has now allegedly been newly discovered, a T-cell immunity has long existed in this respect. 30 per cent of the population had this before the allegedly new virus even appeared. Therefore, it is sufficient for the so-called herd immunity that 15 to 25 per cent of the population are infected with the allegedly new coronavirus to stop the further spread of the virus. And this has long been the case.” 

Regarding the all-important PCR tests, Yeadon writes, in a piece called “Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics: The Deadly Danger of False Positives”, dated September 20, 2020, and I quote

“The likelihood of an apparently positive case being a false positive is between 89 to 94 per cent, or near certainty.”

Dr. Yeadon, in agreement with the professors of immunology Kamera from Germany, Kappel from the Netherlands, and Cahill from Ireland, as well as the microbiologist Dr. Arve from Austria, all of whom testified before the German Corona Committee, explicitly points out that a positive test does not mean that an intact virus has been found. 

The authors explain that what the PCR test actually measures is – and I quote:

“Simply the presence of partial RNA sequences present in the intact virus, which could be a piece of dead virus, which cannot make the subject sick, and cannot be transmitted, and cannot make anyone else sick.”

Because of the complete unsuitability of the test for the detection of infectious diseases – tested positive in goats, sheep, papayas and even chicken wings – Oxford Professor Carl Heneghan, Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, writes that the Covid virus would never disappear if this test practice were to be continued, but would always be falsely detected in much of what is tested. Lockdowns, as Yeadon and his colleagues found out, do not work. Sweden, with its laissez-faire approach, and Great Britain, with its strict lockdown, for example, have completely comparable disease and mortality statistics. The same was found by US scientists concerning the different US states. It makes no difference to the incidence of disease whether a state implements a lockdown or not. 

With regard to the now infamous Imperial College of London’s Professor Neil Ferguson and his completely false computer models warning of millions of deaths, he says that – and I quote: “No serious scientist gives any validity to Ferguson’s model.” He points out with thinly veiled contempt – again I quote:

“It’s important that you know, most scientists don’t accept that it …” – that is, Ferguson’s model – “was even faintly right. But the government is still wedded to the model.” Ferguson predicted 40 thousand corona deaths in Sweden by May and 100 thousand by June, but it remained at 5,800 which, according to the Swedish authorities, is equivalent to a mild flu. If the PCR tests had not been used as a diagnostic tool for corona infections, there would not be a pandemic and there would be no lockdowns, but everything would have been perceived as just a medium or light wave of influenza, these scientists conclude. Dr. Yeadon in his piece, “Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics: The Deadly Danger of False Positives, writes: “This test is fatally flawed and must immediately be withdrawn and never used again in this setting, unless shown to be fixed.” And, towards the end of that article, “I have explained how a hopelessly performing diagnostic test has been, and continues to be used, not for diagnosis of disease, but it seems solely to create fear”. 

Now let’s take a look at the current actual situation regarding the severe damage caused by the lockdowns and other measures. Another detailed paper, written by a German official in the Department of the Interior, who is responsible for risk assessment and the protection of the population against risks, was leaked recently. It is now called the “False Alarm” paper. This paper comes to the conclusion that there was that there was and is no sufficient evidence for serious health risks for the population as claimed by Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, but – the author says –  there’s very much evidence of the corona measures causing gigantic health and economic damage to the population, which he then describes in detail in this paper. This, he concludes, will lead to very high claims for damages, which the government will be held responsible for. This has now become reality, but the paper’s author was suspended. 

More and more scientists, but also lawyers, recognize that, as a result of the deliberate panic-mongering, and the corona measures enabled by this panic, democracy is in great danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models. As I already mentioned above, in Australia, people who do not wear the masks, which more and more studies show, are hazardous to health, or who allegedly do not wear them correctly, are arrested, handcuffed and thrown into jail. In the Philippines, they run the risk of getting shot, but even in Germany and in other previously civilized countries, children are taken away from their parents if they do not comply with quarantine regulations, distance regulations, and mask-wearing regulations. According to psychologists and psychotherapists who testified before the Corona Committee, children are traumatized en masse, with the worst psychological consequences yet to be expected in the medium- and long-term. In Germany alone, to bankruptcies are expected in the fall to strike small- and medium-sized businesses, which form the backbone of the economy. This will result in incalculable tax losses and incalculably high and long-term social security money transfers for – among other things – unemployment benefits. 

Since, in the meantime, pretty much everybody is beginning to understand the full devastating impact of the completely unfounded corona measures, I will refrain from detailing this any further. 

Let me now give you a summary of the legal consequences. The most difficult part of a lawyer’s work is always to establish the true facts, not the application of the legal rules to these facts. Unfortunately, a German lawyer does not learn this at law school but his Anglo-American counterparts do get the necessary training for this at their law schools. And probably for this reason, but also because of the much more pronounced independence of the Anglo-American judiciary, the Anglo-American law of evidence is much more effective in practice than the German one. A court of law can only decide a legal dispute correctly if it has previously determined the facts correctly, which is not possible without looking at all the evidence. And that’s why the law of evidence is so important. On the basis of the facts summarized above, in particular those established with the help of the work of the German Corona Committee, the legal evaluation is actually simple. It is simple for all civilized legal systems, regardless of whether these legal systems are based on civil law, which follows the Roman law more closely, or whether they are based on Anglo-American common law, which is only loosely connected to Roman law. 

Let’s first take a look at the unconstitutionality of the measures. A number of German law professors, including professors Kingreen, Morswig, Jungbluth and Vosgerau have stated, either in written expert opinions or in interviews, in line with the serious doubts expressed by the former president of the federal constitutional court with respect to the constitutionality of the corona measures, that these measures – the corona measures – are without a sufficient factual basis, and also without a sufficient legal basis, and are therefore unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately. Very recently, a judge, Thorsten Schleif is his name, declared publicly that the German judiciary, just like the general public, has been so panic-stricken that it was no longer able to administer justice properly. He says that the courts of law – and I quote – “have all too quickly waved through coercive measures which, for millions of people all over Germany, represent massive suspensions of their constitutional rights. He points out that German citizens – again I quote – “are currently experiencing the most serious encroachment on their constitutional rights since the founding of the federal republic of Germany in 1949”. In order to contain the corona pandemic, federal and state governments have intervened, he says, massively, and in part threatening the very existence of the country as it is guaranteed by the constitutional rights of the people. 

What about fraud, intentional infliction of damage and crimes against humanity?

Based on the rules of criminal law, asserting false facts concerning the PCR tests or intentional misrepresentation, as it was committed by Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and WHO, as well as the WHO, can only be assessed as fraud. Based on the rules of civil tort law, this translates into intentional infliction of damage. The German professor of civil law, Martin Schwab, supports this finding in public interviews. In a comprehensive legal opinion of around 180 pages, he has familiarized himself with the subject matter like no other legal scholar has done thus far and, in particular, has provided a detailed account of the complete failure of the mainstream media to report on the true facts of this so-called pandemic. Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and Tedros of the WHO all knew, based on their own expertise or the expertise of their institutions, that the PCR tests cannot provide any information about infections, but asserted over and over again to the general public that they can, with their counterparts all over the world repeating this. And they all knew and accepted that, on the basis of their recommendations, the governments of the world would decide on lockdowns, the rules for social distancing, and mandatory wearing of masks, the latter representing a very serious health hazard, as more and more independent studies and expert statements show. Under the rules of civil tort law, all those who have been harmed by these PCR-test-induced lockdowns are entitled to receive full compensation for their losses. In particular, there is a duty to compensate – that is, a duty to pay damages for the loss of profits suffered by companies and self-employed employed persons as a result of the lockdown and other measures. 

In the meantime, however, the anti-corona measures have caused, and continue to cause, such devastating damage to the world population’s health and economy that the crimes committed by Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO must be legally qualified as actual crimes against humanity, as defined in section 7 of the International Criminal Code. 

How can we do something? What can we do? Well, the class action is the best route to compensatory damages and to political consequences. The so-called class action lawsuit is based on English law and exists today in the USA and in Canada. It enables a court of law to allow a complaint for damages to be tried as a class action lawsuit at the request of a plaintiff if: 

1. As a result of a damage-inducing event …
2. A large number of people suffer the same type of damage.

Phrased differently, a judge can allow a class-action lawsuit to go forward if common questions of law and fact make up the vital component of the lawsuit. Here, the common questions of law and fact revolve around the worldwide PCR-test-based lockdowns and its consequences. Just like the VW diesel passenger cars were functioning products, but they were defective due to a so-called defeat device because they didn’t comply with the emissions standards, so too the PCR tests – which are perfectly good products in other settings – are defective products when it comes to the diagnosis of infections. Now, if an American or Canadian company or an American or Canadian individual decides to sue these persons in the United States or Canada for damages, then the court called upon to resolve this dispute may, upon request, allow this complaint to be tried as a class action lawsuit.

If this happens, all affected parties worldwide will be informed about this through publications in the mainstream media and will thus have the opportunity to join this class action within a certain period of time, to be determined by the court. It should be emphasized that nobody mustjoin the class action, but every injured party can join the class.

The advantage of the class action is that only one trial is needed, namely to try the complaint of a representative plaintiff who is affected in a manner typical of everyone else in the class. This is, firstly, cheaper, and secondly, faster than hundreds of thousands or more individual lawsuits. And thirdly, it imposes less of a burden on the courts. Fourthly, as a rule it allows a much more precise examination of the accusations than would be possible in the context of hundreds of thousands, or more likely in this corona setting, even millions of individual lawsuits. 

In particular, the well-established and proven Anglo-American law of evidence, with its pre-trial discovery, is applicable. This requires that all evidence relevant for the determination of the lawsuit is put on the table. In contrast to the typical situation in German lawsuits with structural imbalance, that is, lawsuits involving on the one hand a consumer, and on the other hand a powerful corporation, the withholding or even destruction of evidence is not without consequence; rather the party withholding or even destroying evidence loses the case under these evidence rules. 

Here in Germany, a group of tort lawyers have banded together to help their clients with recovery of damages. They have provided all relevant information and forms for German plaintiffs to both estimate how much damage they have suffered and join the group or class of plaintiffs who will later join the class action when it goes forward either in Canada or the US. Initially, this group of lawyers had considered to also collect and manage the claims for damages of other, non-German plaintiffs, but this proved to be unmanageable. 

However, through an international lawyers’ network, which is growing larger by the day, the German group of attorneys provides to all of their colleagues in all other countries, free of charge, all relevant information, including expert opinions and testimonies of experts showing that the PCR tests cannot detect infections. And they also provide them with all relevant information as to how they can prepare and bundle the claims for damages of their clients so that, they too, can assert their clients’ claims for damages, either in their home country’s courts of law, or within the framework of the class action, as explained above. 

These scandalous corona facts, gathered mostly by the Corona Committee and summarized above, are the very same facts that will soon be proven to be true either in one court of law, or in many courts of law all over the world.

These are the facts that will pull the masks off the faces of all those responsible for these crimes. To the politicians who believe those corrupt people, these facts are hereby offered as a lifeline that can help you readjust your course of action, and start the long overdue public scientific discussion, and not go down with those charlatans and criminals. 

Thank you.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Pixabay

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 December 19, 2022

Henry Kissinger, advisor to presidents, and a notorious war criminal (Chile, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia), realizes the current USG insanity in regard to Ukraine may very well get all of us killed.

Kissinger: It's Time For Negotiated Peace In Ukraine To Avoid World War https://t.co/9Jqn8oMDYa

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) December 18, 2022

“Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has again called for urgently finding a path of negotiated settlement to the war in Ukraine, warning that the entire world is in danger as nuclear-armed superpowers inch closer toward disastrous direct confrontation,” writes Zero Hedge.

Kissinger believes the objective declared by Biden’s neocons and “humanitarian interventionists” to dissolve Russia will create far larger and more ominous problems.

“A peace process should link Ukraine to NATO, however expressed. The alternative of neutrality is no longer meaningful,” he emphasized. He warned that continued attempts to render Russia “impotent” could result in an uncontrollable and unpredictable spiral. He laid out that along with the sought after “dissolution” of Russia would come a massive power vacuum out of which new threats to the whole world would emerge as bigger powers rush in.

In a new essay, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said if Russia was dissolved, the enormous territory could become a "contested vacuum." https://t.co/0apOYY11lu

— Newsweek (@Newsweek) December 16, 2022

Despite Kissinger’s call for a negotiated peace settlement, the USG—under Biden, his Secretary of State, and Secretary of “Defense”—has decided there will be no negotiated peace deal until Zelensky and Ukraine decide to do so.

JUST IN: #BNNUkraine Reports.

Ukraine would decide on the timing and contents of any negotiation framework with Russia, according to a readout of Secretary of State Antony Blinken (@SecBlinken). #RussiaUkraineWar pic.twitter.com/6elqrmd6y9

— Gurbaksh Singh Chahal (@gchahal) November 12, 2022

Zelensky will not negotiate unless Russia removes its troops and relinquishes Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk, in addition to compensation for war damages. During internationally monitored referenda in these territories, the respective populations voted to separate from Ukraine. Although Ukraine is described as a democracy in the west, the government does not respect the wishes of the people. It is a cardinal rule for the state: any move toward secession of territory must be violently opposed. In response to separatist demands, following the US-orchestrated coup of 2014, the new Nazi-tinged government began bombarding Donbas.

The Russians are frustrated by Zelensky’s obstinate and absolutist demands, thus making a negotiated settlement impossible. Not even the USG, if it decides to do so, can get Zelensky to the negotiating table. In November, Vladimir Dzhabarov of Russia’s Federation Council remarked on the trustworthiness of Zelensky.

“Even if they [the Americans] order Zelensky to begin talks, how can we hold talks with him, with Mr. Zelensky, who says one thing in the morning and quite a different thing in the evening, sending contradictory messages,” Vladimir Dzhabarov, first deputy chairman of the international committee of Russia’s Federation Council (upper parliament house), told a news conference.

Zelensky demands a return to Ukraine’s 1991 borders when the Soviet Union collapsed.

In short, the problem is not Russia. It is Zelensky, the Biden administration, and its state department. They have created a situation where a negotiated settlement is impossible, thus leaving Russia little choice short of turning Ukraine into an uninhabitable wasteland, a dystopian landscape devoid of water, food, heated shelter, electricity, and the other necessities of civilized life.

So long as the west refuses to consider Russia’s legitimate security concerns regarding Ukraine and the encroachment of NATO, the war will continue, thus increasing the possibility of nuclear brinkmanship.

The idea has long been to initiate ethnic and religious conflict on the periphery of the Soviet Union and later the Russian Federation. An example of this was the use of the Afghan Mujahideen in the Tajikistani Civil War. It is well-known the Mujahideen, an austere Sunni Wahhabi sect, received assistance, weapons, and training from the CIA and Pakistani intelligence.

The long-running effort to destabilize, neutralize, and dismember Russia from its southern periphery is a cause célèbre for the neocons. The American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, founded in 1999, is a who’s who of notorious and criminal neocons, including Richard Perle, Elliot Abrams, Kenneth Adelman, Midge Decter, Frank Gaffney, Michal Leeden, and former CIA boss James Woolsey.

Following 9/11 and the Bush invasions, a few people became suspicious. John Laughland wrote in 2004, two years after the invasion of Iraq:

Allegations are even being made in Russia that the west itself is somehow behind the Chechen rebellion, and that the purpose of such support is to weaken Russia, and to drive her out of the Caucasus. The fact that the Chechens are believed to use as a base the Pankisi gorge in neighbouring Georgia—a country which aspires to join Nato, has an extremely pro-American government, and where the US already has a significant military presence—only encourages such speculation. Putin himself even seemed to lend credence to the idea in his interview with foreign journalists on Monday.

And now there is a national-tribal crisis brewing in the Balkans, an aftershock of the USG’s direct involvement in Serbia, then Yugoslavia, most pointedly its 78-day bombing of that country in 1998, many aspects of which constitute unpunished war crimes (including but not limited to the use of internationally outlawed cluster munitions).

It is important to remember the first president of Kosovo, Hashim Thaci—a former Kosovo Liberation Army commander, organized crime boss, indicted war criminal, and protégé of Madeleine Albright—was warmly received by the Clinton Administration.

“US-NATO covert support the KLA goes back to the mid-1990s. In the year preceding the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, the KLA was quite openly supported by the Clinton administration,” writes Prof Michel Chossudovsky.

The “elder statesman” Kissinger understands what is at risk in the current standoff in Ukraine. In 1970, aware Vietnam had become a quagmire dividing America, Kissinger entered into secret negotiations (without Nixon’s knowledge) with Vietnam’s Le Duc Tho, a high-ranking member of the Hanoi Politburo. And while these negotiations did not result in a peace deal, it can be said they were held, never mind the true intentions of the parties involved.

The USG act of diplomatic stonewalling—and instructing Kyiv to do likewise—is making the Ukraine conflict in Europe more dangerous by the day. It is devolving into a humanitarian disaster for the Ukrainian people and soldiers alike, the latter killed in droves every week as the Kyiv government forces them into the shredding machine of Russian artillery. The Big Lie is that Ukraine can win this war.

The war criminal Kissinger is one year shy of 100. It is possible he may not make it as the war in Ukraine grinds onward, consuming precious human life, inflicting untold misery, and threatening a thermonuclear planetary extinction before Kissinger’s next birthday.

*

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.

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.

First published on February 18, 2022

***

Dr. Charles Hoffe is a family physician in British Columbia. 

“I have been horrified to see what the COVID shots have done to my own patients. I have a small country practice with about 2,000 patients and amongst those people, I now have 12 in my own practice who are disabled since their COVID shots.”

Watch the video below.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate This Article 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 September 30, 2022

This is an earlier report on Nord Stream, which confirms unequivocally that it was an act of US-NATO sabotage

***

Increasingly, there is little doubt who is behind the Nordstream pipeline leaks, now numbering four. The corporate media is lamely attempting to blame Russia for blowing up its own multi-billion dollar pipeline and its expensive cargo, but as usual, the corporate propaganda media provides no evidence to back this up.

From that oh-so-reliable news source, the Express:

The massive leak in the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, which many suspected to be an act of sabotage, could be Russia’s way of sending a horrifying threat to Europe, experts have warned. They say he has the prowess and firepower needed to damage other pipelines. Over the past few days, four leaks have been discovered along the 1,234km-long Nord Stream 2 pipeline between Russia and Germany. The pipelines, which bypassed Ukraine and Poland by transitting gas via the Baltic Sea, started leaking on Monday, which experts from Denmark and Sweden have confirmed occurred after strong explosions.

Indeed, I am certain Russia does possess such technology. However, so do the US and NATO, both with more incentive to blow up the pipelines than Russia. It doesn’t need to do this. Russia can simply turn off the tap on its end, as it has partially accomplished in response to Germany and Europe sending munitions to kill Russian soldiers.

As for the required technology:

Back in June of this year, NATO conducted its annual BALTOPS military exercise in the Baltic Sea. This year’s exercises had significant focus on using US Navy unmanned underwater vehicles to clear sea mines. pic.twitter.com/n8T4CfzP23

— professional hog groomer (@bidetmarxman) September 27, 2022

BALTOPS is an annual military exercise held in the Baltic Sea. From Naval News:

Participating nations include Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. These countries will exercise a myriad of capabilities demonstrating the inherent flexibility of maritime forces. Exercise scenarios include amphibious operations, gunnery, anti-submarine, air defense, mine clearance operations, explosive ordnance disposal, unmanned underwater vehicles, and medical response. (Emphasis added.)

Moreover, not mentioned by the corporate propaganda media, is the fact BALTOPS was held near the coast of Bornholm, an island off the east coast of Denmark, precisely where the explosions and gas leaks occurred.

As part of the NATO exercise Baltops, the US Navy's 6th Fleet trained in the use of underwater drones in June. Where? Just on the coast of Bornholm, right in the area of ​​the NordStream2 leaks. Afterwards USA and GB Navy trained the UA Navy in August 22 in handling these drones pic.twitter.com/3kmt5vywIg

— Dan Reznik (@DanReznikWSWS) September 27, 2022

NATO tested underwater drones close to Nord Stream leak zone – Moscow https://t.co/P6SUFk3bYP

— The Press United (@ThePressUnited) September 29, 2022

Coincidence, right? Here’s another one, quite naturally not reported:

In 2015, the annual routine underwater survey of the Nord Stream 1 pipelines came across a remote operated vehicle rigged with explosives right next to one of the lines in Swedish waters.

The umbilical cable had been cut. The drone’s national origin was never disclosed. 🧵

— professional hog groomer (@bidetmarxman) September 27, 2022

It wasn’t disclosed because this explosive-laden device belongs to the US military or NATO (or possibly Sweden, a country begging, along with Finland, to join NATO). If it had been identified as Russian, the morning headlines would be taller than Mount Everest.

Only trade publications reported the strange discovery. Obviously, not many Americans read pipeline technology journals.

The vehicle was discovered during a routine survey operation as part of the annual integrity assessment of the Nord Stream pipeline. Since it was within the Swedish Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) approximately 120 km away from the island of Gotland, the Swedes called on their armed forces to remove and ultimately disarm the object.

As social media de-platformed analyst Pepe Escobar notes, the development and production of this sort of submersible drone have been on NATO’s to-do list for some time. “NATO for its part has been very active on the underwater drones department. The Americans have access to long distance Norwegian underwater drones which can be modified with other designs,” he writes.

Meanwhile, the corporate propaganda media is ramping up the “Russia did it” story.

Nord Stream leak: West shores up pipeline security, blaming Russia 'sabotage' https://t.co/sy9Mml1dZr

— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) September 29, 2022

Europe pointing at Russia, alleging sabotage for Nord Stream damage – The Washington Post – Russia now sabotaging the world and itself in accelerating #globalwarming ? https://t.co/ajhEcfjNut

— Steven C. Hall (@Chandlerllc) September 28, 2022

I’d link to The Washington Post story, but they want money to read their propaganda.

*

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.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Kurt Nimmo 

First published by Global Research on May 24, 2014.

This full length GRTV documentary produced by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya examines the fictitious land of “Nulandistan” (named after Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland)  that has been constructed out of Ukraine.

It depicts how the realities of crimes against humanity and political oppression involving terrorist mobs are casually replaced by a World of fiction, in which real “Western style democracy” prevails.

It deconstructs the rhetoric and propaganda of the Obama Administration and its European allies regarding the crisis in Ukraine and takes a look at their growing frustration towards the Russian media, particularly RT, for challenging their account of events on the ground in what they have declared is an intensifying “information war”.

The documentary starts with an examination of the EuroMaidan protests that both Washington and the Western media have used to justify the instatement of an unelected self-proclaimed regime in Kiev.

The May 2 Odessa Massacre and the political protest movement leading up to the referendums in Donesk and Luhansk in East Ukraine are reviewed.

The underlying focus is to show how the reality of events in Ukraine has been been misappropriated and propagandized to support US foreign policy and to justify tensions against Russia.

VIDEO.  (The contents of this video production has been the object of censorship, It is tagged as “offensive” by YouTube. Click Watch on YouTube)

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 in May 2017

From political and social chaos to economic instability and global warfare, the crises created by the privatization of politics are increasingly spinning out of control.

This video interview of Michel Chossudovsky produced by James Corbett, summarizes in many regards what is now unfolding. 

“How The Lie becomes the Truth.

“And then the Lie becomes the Consensus”.

“And then there is no Moving Backwards”

Politics is fully privatized. War becomes a multibillion dollar endeavour. 

In this interview Michel Chossudovsky examines how all of these crises are converging on one point:

the systematic destruction of the “Reproduction of Real Life”.

Politics is privatized.

When the State is privatized, the societal project is undermined and eventually destroyed.

Civilization is collapsing and the Reproduction of Real life is impaired. 

Video

Order Directly from Global Research (click front cover)

Currently available only in PF format

The Globalization of War, America’s “Long War” against Humanity

By Michel Chossudovsky

America’s hegemonic project in the post 9/11 era is the “Globalization of War” whereby the U.S.-NATO military machine —coupled with covert intelligence operations, economic sanctions and the thrust of “regime change”— is deployed in all major regions of the world. The threat of pre-emptive nuclear war is also used to black-mail countries into submission.

This “Long War against Humanity” is carried out at the height of the most serious economic crisis in modern history.

It is intimately related to a process of global financial restructuring, which has resulted in the collapse of national economies and the impoverishment of large sectors of the World population.

The ultimate objective is World conquest under the cloak of “human rights” and “Western democracy”.

REVIEWS:

“Professor Michel Chossudovsky is the most realistic of all foreign policy commentators. He is a model of integrity in analysis, his book provides an honest appraisal of the extreme danger that U.S. hegemonic neoconservatism poses to life on earth.”