The War in Ukraine: Made in Washington Not Moscow

By Mike Whitney, October 24, 2022

Putin does not want Washington’s nuclear missiles parked on his western border in the Ukraine. For security reasons, he cannot allow this. He has made this excruciatingly clear over and over again.

Dictatorship in Disguise: Authoritarian Monsters Wreak Havoc on Our Freedoms

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, October 25, 2022

There’s the world we see (or are made to see) and then there’s the one we sense (and occasionally catch a glimpse of), the latter of which is a far cry from the propaganda-driven reality manufactured by the government and its corporate sponsors, including the media.

Millions Demonstrate in Support of Ethiopia Against Western Interference

By Abayomi Azikiwe, October 25, 2022

Throughout the Horn of Africa state of Ethiopia millions of people joined government-endorsed demonstrations on October 22 calling for national unity and an end to the United States coordinated destabilization efforts.

Is Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine “Really Worse” Than America’s & UK’s Invasion of Iraq?

By Eric Zuesse, October 25, 2022

America and UK invaded Iraq on 20 March 2003. Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022. Which was worse? Let’s first examine the invasion of Iraq.

mRNA Gene Transfer Technology: Regression of Humanity, How Big Pharma Is Risking Everything

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, October 25, 2022

In a typical month, there may be one case of this at the hospital, so 13 in 24 hours make it highly unusual. And there’s just one thing which has changed during this timeframe.

Fake News, Fake Putin Nuclear Threat

By Kurt Nimmo, October 25, 2022

If one reads the news with an uncritical eye, he or she would more than likely believe Vladimir Putin intends to nuke Ukraine. Of course, Putin never said he would use nukes in Ukraine, only if his country faces an existential threat, undoubtedly the same policy followed the USG.

“The US-NATO War of Aggression Against Yugoslavia”. Belgrade Children’s Hospital was a “Strategic Target”. Michel Chossudovsky

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, October 25, 2022

The presentation took place against the background of international tensions and the discussion about Serbia’s membership in the EU (and NATO ?) – because the pressure from the USA and the EU on the country is getting stronger.

Create Legislation to Protect People’s Brains and Bodies Against Attacks by Neurotechnologies

By Mojmir Babacek, October 25, 2022

Time is running out. We urge you to take the necessary steps to create legislation that ensures the human rights and freedoms of your country’s citizens.

Nicaragua in Latin America – The Invisible and the Reality

By Stephen Sefton, October 24, 2022

In Nicaragua, the population lives the daily reality of the country’s revolutionary development, the democratization of the economy, the modernization of the health and education systems, the transformation of infrastructure and a dynamic reaffirmation of culture, identity and national dignity.

The Last Temptation of Things

By Edward Curtin, October 24, 2022

Let me tell you a story about a haunted house and all the thoughts it evoked in me. Do we believe we can save ourselves by saving things? Or do our saved possessions come to possess their saviors? Do those who save many things or hoard believe that there are pockets in shrouds?  Or do they collect things as a magical protection against the shroud?

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: The War in Ukraine: Made in Washington Not Moscow

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.

***

“You see them on the street. You watch them on TV. You might even vote for one this fall. You think they’re people just like you. You’re wrong. Dead wrong.”They Live

We’re living in two worlds.

There’s the world we see (or are made to see) and then there’s the one we sense (and occasionally catch a glimpse of), the latter of which is a far cry from the propaganda-driven reality manufactured by the government and its corporate sponsors, including the media.

Indeed, what most Americans perceive as life in America—privileged, progressive and free—is a far cry from reality, where economic inequality is growing, real agendas and real power are buried beneath layers of Orwellian doublespeak and corporate obfuscation, and “freedom,” such that it is, is meted out in small, legalistic doses by militarized police and federal agents armed to the teeth.

All is not as it seems.

Monsters with human faces walk among us. Many of them work for the U.S. government.

This is the premise of John Carpenter’s film They Live, which was released in November 1988 and remains unnervingly, chillingly appropriate for our modern age.

Best known for his horror film Halloween, which assumes that there is a form of evil so dark that it can’t be killed, Carpenter’s larger body of work is infused with a strong anti-authoritarian, anti-establishment, laconic bent that speaks to the filmmaker’s concerns about the unraveling of our society, particularly our government.

Time and again, Carpenter portrays the government working against its own citizens, a populace out of touch with reality, technology run amok, and a future more horrific than any horror film.

In Escape from New York, Carpenter presents fascism as the future of America.

In The Thing, a remake of the 1951 sci-fi classic of the same name, Carpenter presupposes that increasingly we are all becoming dehumanized.

In Christine, the film adaptation of Stephen King’s novel about a demon-possessed car, technology exhibits a will and consciousness of its own and goes on a murderous rampage.

In In the Mouth of Madness, Carpenter notes that evil grows when people lose “the ability to know the difference between reality and fantasy.”

And then there is Carpenter’s They Live, in which two migrant workers discover that the world is not as it seems. In fact, the population is actually being controlled and exploited by aliens working in partnership with an oligarchic elite. All the while, the populace—blissfully unaware of the real agenda at work in their lives—has been lulled into complacency, indoctrinated into compliance, bombarded with media distractions, and hypnotized by subliminal messages beamed out of television and various electronic devices, billboards and the like.

It is only when homeless drifter John Nada (played to the hilt by the late Roddy Piper) discovers a pair of doctored sunglasses—Hoffman lenses—that Nada sees what lies beneath the elite’s fabricated reality: control and bondage.

When viewed through the lens of truth, the elite, who appear human until stripped of their disguises, are shown to be monsters who have enslaved the citizenry in order to prey on them.

Likewise, billboards blare out hidden, authoritative messages: a bikini-clad woman in one ad is actually ordering viewers to “MARRY AND REPRODUCE.” Magazine racks scream “CONSUME” and “OBEY.” A wad of dollar bills in a vendor’s hand proclaims, “THIS IS YOUR GOD.”

When viewed through Nada’s Hoffman lenses, some of the other hidden messages being drummed into the people’s subconscious include: NO INDEPENDENT THOUGHT, CONFORM, SUBMIT, STAY ASLEEP, BUY, WATCH TV, NO IMAGINATION, and DO NOT QUESTION AUTHORITY.

This indoctrination campaign engineered by the elite in They Live is painfully familiar to anyone who has studied the decline of American culture.

A citizenry that does not think for themselves, obeys without question, is submissive, does not challenge authority, does not think outside the box, and is content to sit back and be entertained is a citizenry that can be easily controlled.

In this way, the subtle message of They Live provides an apt analogy of our own distorted vision of life in the American police state, what philosopher Slavoj Žižek refers to as dictatorship in democracy, “the invisible order which sustains your apparent freedom.”

We’re being fed a series of carefully contrived fictions that bear no resemblance to reality.

Tune out the government’s attempts to distract, divert and befuddle us and tune into what’s really going on in this country, and you’ll run headlong into an unmistakable, unpalatable truth: what we are dealing with today is an authoritarian beast that has outgrown its chains and will not be restrained.

Through its acts of power grabs, brutality, meanness, inhumanity, immorality, greed, corruption, debauchery and tyranny, the government has become almost indistinguishable from the evil it claims to be fighting, whether that evil takes the form of terrorism, torture, disease, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, murder, violence, theft, pornography, scientific experimentations or some other diabolical means of inflicting pain, suffering and servitude on humanity.

We have let the government’s evil-doing and abuses go on for too long.

We’re being fed a series of carefully contrived fictions that bear no resemblance to reality.

Despite the fact that we are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack; 11,000 times more likely to die from an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane; 1,048 times more likely to die from a car accident than a terrorist attack, and 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist, we have handed over control of our lives to government officials who treat us as a means to an end—the source of money and power.

As the Bearded Man in They Live warns, “They are dismantling the sleeping middle class. More and more people are becoming poor. We are their cattle. We are being bred for slavery.”

We have bought into the illusion and refused to grasp the truth.

From the moment we are born until we die, we are indoctrinated into believing that those who rule us do it for our own good. The truth is far different.

The powers-that-be want us to feel threatened by forces beyond our control (terrorists, pandemics, mass shootings, etc.).

They want us afraid and dependent on the government and its militarized armies for our safety and well-being.

They want us distrustful of each other, divided by our prejudices, and at each other’s throats.

Most of all, they want us to continue to march in lockstep with their dictates as fearful, controlled, pacified zombies.

This brings me back to They Live, in which the real zombies are not the aliens calling the shots but the populace who are content to remain controlled.

When all is said and done, the world of They Live is not so different from our own. As one of the characters points out, “The poor and the underclass are growing. Racial justice and human rights are nonexistent. They have created a repressive society and we are their unwitting accomplices. Their intention to rule rests with the annihilation of consciousness. We have been lulled into a trance. They have made us indifferent to ourselves, to others. We are focused only on our own gain.”

We, too, are focused only on our own pleasures, prejudices and gains. Our poor and underclasses are also growing. Injustice is growing. Inequality is growing. A concern for human rights is nearly nonexistent. We too have been lulled into a trance, indifferent to others.

Oblivious to what lies ahead, we’ve been manipulated into believing that if we continue to consume, obey, and have faith, things will work out. But that’s never been true of emerging regimes. And by the time we feel the hammer coming down upon us, it will be too late.

So where does that leave us?

The characters who populate Carpenter’s films provide some insight.

Underneath their machismo, they still believe in the ideals of liberty and equal opportunity. Their beliefs place them in constant opposition with the law and the establishment, but they are nonetheless freedom fighters.

When, for example, John Nada destroys the alien hypno-transmitter in They Live, he delivers a wake-up call for freedom. As Nada memorably declares, “I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass. And I’m all out of bubblegum.”

In other words: we need to get active and take a stand for what’s really important.

Stop allowing yourselves to be easily distracted by pointless political spectacles and pay attention to what’s really going on in the country.

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, the real battle for control of this nation is taking place on roadsides, in police cars, on witness stands, over phone lines, in government offices, in corporate offices, in public school hallways and classrooms, in parks and city council meetings, and in towns and cities across this country.

All the trappings of the American police state are now in plain sight.

Wake up, America.

If they live (the tyrants, the oppressors, the invaders, the overlords), it is only because “we the people” sleep.

*

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 The Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at [email protected].

Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image is from Immunization.news

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Dictatorship in Disguise: Authoritarian Monsters Wreak Havoc on Our Freedoms

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.

***

Throughout the Horn of Africa state of Ethiopia millions of people joined government-endorsed demonstrations on October 22 calling for national unity and an end to the United States coordinated destabilization efforts.

These events took place just two days prior to the scheduled peace talks between the central government led by Prime Minister Ahmed Abiy and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), a rebel organization which has been fighting the administration based in the capital of Addis Ababa.

During the nationwide mobilizations on October 22, the marchers could be heard saying “Respect our sovereignty,” “TPLF is a mercenary group,” “TPLF is the cause!,” “End proxy war on Ethiopia,” “People in Tigray are our compatriots ; Junta [TPLF] is our enemy,” and “TPLF should not be given a chance to prepare for the fourth round of attack” are some of the words which echoed among the people while marching to Meskel Square in Addis Ababa.

Ethiopia is the headquarters of the 55-member African Union (AU) whose predecessor, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), hosted the founding summit nearly six decades ago in 1963. The same issues of national independence, sovereignty and continental unity remain on the top of the agenda for the 1.4 billion residents of the continent and its mass organizations, political parties and governments.

Since November 4, 2020, the TPLF has waged a war of regime-change against the now Prosperity Party and its allies within the central government. Ethiopia at the time of the attacks by the TPLF rebels, was poised to make fully operational the Grand Renaissance Dam Project GERD), the largest of such hydro-electric projects among all AU member-states.

On October 22, Ethiopians made a profound statement that they were firmly against the foreign policy of Washington aimed at fragmenting and removing its elected government. Prime Minister Abiy, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, is committed to achieving the national unity of Ethiopia along with its program of ending instability and terrorism in the entire Horn of Africa region.

Abiy came into office in April 2018 after a national uprising against the previous government in Ethiopia which was under the political domination of the TPLF. The TPLF-led Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) constituted the administration in the country between May 1991 until the early months of 2018. After taking office, Abiy has normalized relations with neighboring Eritrea which had been at war with the TPLF-EPRDF regime since 1998.

Eritrea, a former Italian colony, had waged a war of independence against Ethiopia since 1961, is now closely allied with the Abiy government. As a result of the collapse of the Workers Party of Ethiopia (WPE) administration under Col. Mengistu Haile Mariam, Eritrea declared independence which was recognized by the Organization of African Unity and the United Nations in 1993 after a national referendum. Reports indicate that the military forces of Ethiopia and Eritrea are working in alliance to counter the U.S.-supported TPLF rebels.

Ethiopians demonstrate in support of central government, Oct. 22, 2022 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

Since the initial military attacks in Mekelle, the capital of Tigray Province, in early November 2020, the Ethiopian National Defense Forces (ENDF) has been able to halt the advances of the TPLF. There have been several ceasefires between the Federal government and the rebels since 2021. However, on every occasion, the Abiy administration says that the TPLF has broken each agreement while refusing to negotiate for the conclusion of the conflict in good faith.

The attitude of the United States government under former President Donald Trump and the current administration of President Joe Biden has remained unchanged. Trump and Biden have continued Washington’s hostility towards Ethiopia. High-level officials within the U.S. have repeatedly threatened the Ethiopian government and people to the point of engaging in public histrionics at the United Nations and within the corporate as well as western media outlets.

In an October 23 article published by Borkena.com, it notes that:

“Renewed pressure against Ethiopia in connection with the war against the TPLF rebel groups is on the rise as the TPLF forces are losing ground militarily. The Ethiopian government confirmed earlier this week that the Defense Forces controlled three key towns (Shire, Alamata and Korem) in the Tigray region of Ethiopia. Local sources also indicate that the Ethiopian government has already started distributing food aid in the areas recaptured recently. Work to restore power to the aforementioned towns is also underway.”

Negotiations Are Being Held at the Aegis of the AU

The talks which were slated to begin on October 24 are an important challenge in the AU attempts to stabilize the situation in the Horn of Africa. The internal conflicts fueled by imperialist interference coupled with the impact of climate change where disruptions of rainfall, flooding and food deficits have further aggravated the overall social crisis in the region.

One prior attempt earlier in October to convene peace negotiations related to the Ethiopian situation was postponed due to what was said to have been logistical issues. Media reports on October 24 say that the TPLF’s delegation had arrived in South Africa.

Undoubtedly, the Biden administration will be monitoring the talks. Ethiopians in Africa and the U.S. have held mass demonstrations against a proposed bill that would impose sanctions on the government in Addis Ababa. The legislation as of now has been placed on hold. Nonetheless, it is a clear indication of the ongoing neo-colonial foreign policy directed towards Ethiopia and the entire African continent.

As in Ethiopia, the U.S. has continued to engage in military interventions in neighboring Somalia where the Biden administration upon taking office deployed hundreds of Pentagon troops to the country. The U.S. AFRICOM which has a major base in Djibouti, also in the Horn of Africa, at Camp Lemonnier, represents the commitment of Washington to maintain a military and intelligence presence in the Horn of Africa.

The region along with other areas of East Africa has been the source of recent findings of strategic minerals and energy resources. All along the coasts of East Africa there have been enormous discoveries of oil and natural gas.

In Mozambique, the northern Cabo Delgado province has been targeted by insurgents disrupting a massive Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) production project. Military forces from Rwanda and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have intervened in the struggle to defeat the rebel forces.

Unity and Stability are Key Elements in Securing East Africa’s Future

Any assessment of these internal conflicts in the Horn of Africa cannot be separated from the foreign policy imperatives of the U.S. and their allies in the European Union (EU). Since the late 19th century imperialist states have sought to colonize the territories which today are known as Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, Kenya and Sudan.

Kenya, Somalia, Djibouti, Eritrea, Kenya and Sudan were formally colonized by imperialist governments based in Europe. Ethiopia under the monarchical leadership of Menelik II, defeated the Italian imperialists culminating in the victory at the Battle of Adwa in early March 1896. In 1935, the colonial fascist regime of Benito Mussolini invaded once again the Ethiopian kingdom then under the leadership of His Imperial Majesty (HIM) Haile Selassie I. Although being forced to leave the country amid the Italian onslaught after 1935, Selassie and the Ethiopian people were able to mobilize international assistance from Allied governments and the anti-colonial movements leading to the defeat of Mussolini and the return of Selassie to the country by 1941.

In 1974, the masses rose up against the monarchy leading to a socialist-oriented revolution which attracted the support of the former Soviet Union, the Republic of Cuba and other anti-imperialist forces internationally. Monumental land reforms programs were implemented along with material assistance to the national liberation movements in Southern Africa still fighting for national independence.

 

The ascendancy of the EPRDF-TPLF administration in May 1991 was done under the tutelage of the U.S. administration of then President George W.H. Bush, Sr. In subsequent years during the 1990s through the uprising of 2018, the former government under the TPLF served as a conduit for the implementation of Washington and Wall Street’s foreign policies throughout East Africa.

It has been reported that the former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs under Bush, Sr., continues to serve as a consultant and promoter of the TPLF. This unwarranted interference into the internal affairs of Ethiopia is unacceptable.

The outcome of the talks must guarantee the territorial sovereignty and social stability of Ethiopia. A sustainable peace agreement in Ethiopia would have positive implications for developments in neighboring Somalia and Sudan.

*

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.

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Ethiopa mobilizes against US proxy war on Oct. 22, 2022 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Millions Demonstrate in Support of Ethiopia Against Western Interference
  • Tags: ,

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

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

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

***

On October 22, the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) ended in Beijing. The Politburo Standing Committee approved the continuation of the Xi Jinping’s government, reelecting him for a third term as Party leader and President of the People’s Republic of China. The next day, the new members of the Central Committee and Politburo were named, thus announcing the institutional arrangement that will guide China for the next five years.

“China cannot develop without the world, and the world also needs China. After more than 40 years of unwavering efforts towards reform and opening up, we have created two miracles – rapid economic development and long-term social stability”, Xi said commenting on his victory. He also emphasized that the CPC is able to perform “new and greater miracles during a new march into a new era” and urged the party to “strengthen its historical confidence and initiative, as well as fight boldly and achieve victories”.

Although contested in the West, with journalists and pro-US propagandists accusing China of maintaining a dictatorial and anti-democratic political structure, the result in Beijing was applauded by international leaders, especially by the leaders of non-aligned countries.

As expected, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was one of the first to publicly comment on the topic, sending his congratulation to Xi:

“Please accept my warmest congratulations to you on the happy news that the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of China has been successful and you have been reelected as General Secretary of the Party Central Committee”.

Russian President Vladimir Putin also commended the Chinese Congress’ outcome and made clear his aim to continue current Russian-Chinese comprehensive cooperation:

“I will be glad to continue our constructive dialogue and close joint work on the development of comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation between our countries”.

In the same vein, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi congratulated Xi and praised the importance of bilateral cooperation in order to achieve common goals:

“The realization of the goals of Comprehensive Strategic Partnership between Iran and China creates a model of an all-out expansion of ties based on mutual interests and respect”.

As far as India is concerned, the official government’s press channel published a note on the internet expressing congratulations:

“Chinese President Xi Jinping re-elected as General Secretary of Communist Party of China for a record third five-year term”.

It is important to note that, although both countries have historical rivalries and several frictions have occurred in recent years, the bilateral situation has improved substantially in latest months. China and India have mutually engaged in the construction of a multipolar world and for that they have agreed to alleviate local tensions. Not long ago, both sides demilitarized the border zone as a mutual gesture of diplomatic goodwill. So, the continuity of Xi’s leadership may be a positive sign to India-China relations.

In fact, Xi’s victory was extremely significant because it not only represented a formal presidential reelection, but also a victory for his project for China. The few changes that took place during the Congress were aimed at further strengthening the pro-Xi coalition and isolating the liberal anti-government parliamentarian wing. With this, Xi acquires greater capacity both to deepen existing projects and to initiate new political and economic activities.

Since the economic reopening, there has been a power struggle in China between the national elite and the Party bureaucracy. Xi has gradually managed to isolate lawmakers committed to the interests of the Chinese bourgeoisie, who often diverge from the government’s strategic plans. The current management has strengthened the party bureaucratic formation and reduced the political relevance of the owners of national private companies. With another five years in power, economic projects are expected to advance in this direction, deepening the so-called Chinese “people-centered economy”, which prioritizes projects to combat poverty both domestically and in other emerging nations involved in the Belt and Road Initiative.

In addition to the economy, Chinese foreign policy also seems to continue to grow in the direction of cooperation projects with emerging nations interested in contesting the US unipolar order. Wang Yi remains as the head of foreign affairs, which signals stability for the current projects. Xi made it clear in several speeches that the Chinese objective in international relations is to build an order without any hegemonic power, where states cooperate freely, based exclusively on pragmatism.

With his reelection, the Chinese President becomes one of the strongest and most enduring leaders in the history of his country. Domestically, Xi is expected to continue his project of modernizing China’s political and economic governance. Internationally, his leadership strengthens Beijing’s position as one of the main players in the global transition towards multipolarity.

*

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.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

Featured image is from New Eastern Outlook

Why India Punishes the Afghan Sikhs?

October 25th, 2022 by Sajjad Shaukat

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.

***

After the Taliban regained power in Afghanistan in August, 2021, they had announced general pardon for all Afghans, clarifying that they would not seek revenge and would not harm those who had previously worked for foreign forces in Afghanistan.

Despite it, tens of thousands of people, including more than 100,000 urban Afghans, mostly well-off and educated professionals as well as skilled persons crossed into Pakistan seeking asylum and a resettled status abroad. Several persons also left Afghanistan due to deteriorated economic conditions.

However, the case of Afghan Hindus and especially Sikhs is quite different which shows Indian double game and delusive strategy against them.

Although the Taliban had assured the Sikh community of their right to remain in Afghanistan and to practice their religion, yet Taliban’s return reignited presumed fears of resurgence in violence which could target the community. It was because the propaganda of the US-led some western countries, including New Delhi.

Afghan Sikhs were numbered in the tens of thousands during the 1980s when they ran well-established businesses. But, only a few hundred were left when the Taliban took power last August.

In a Sikh temple (gurdwara) tucked in the narrow lanes of the Indian capital, New Delhi, 60-year Harbans Singh offered a prayer of gratitude. The temple has become his temporary home after he fled Afghanistan, where his family had lived for generations.

He said: “We have left our homes, our shops and come here to save ourselves…We have arrived empty-handed.”

Singh and his other family members were in a group of 55 Afghan Sikhs who arrived in India in late September, 2022.

The latest exodus of the Afghan Sikhs was sparked by a deadly terror attack in June, this year on gurudwara (Sikh temple) in Kabul which killed one worshipper and wounded seven others. The Islamic State group (Also known as ISIL, ISIS or Daesh) claimed responsibility for the attack.

Even before Taliban rule, Sikh’s gurudwaras had been the target of terror assaults by this Sunni Muslim militant outfit, which also accepted responsibility by for those attacks.

ISIS terror group also attacked Shia’s mosques, religious processions—Shia of Hazara community in Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to create sectarian divide and riots. After the Taliban seized power in Afghanistan, they not only condemned ISIS, but also started war against their militants.

Before the Taliban took control of Afghanistan, New Delhi had well-established it espionage system in that war-torn country led by its secret agency RAW whose agents were penetrated in the ISIS and as part of the double game were behind terrorism-related acts both in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

However, Press Trust of India pointed out on June 19, 2022;

“On priority basis…India has given e-visas to over 100 Sikhs and Hindus living in Afghanistan following a deadly terror attack on a gurudwara in Kabul on Sunday…Several blasts tore through Gurdwara Karte Parwan in Kabul’s Bagh-e Bala neighbourhood on Saturday while Afghan security personnel thwarted a bigger tragedy by stopping an explosive-laden vehicle from reaching the place of worship of the minority community…The three attackers were killed by the Taliban forces.”

In this context, like the previous terrorism related assaults, RAW could be behind these terror attacks.

Nevertheless, as part of the dual strategy, the Indian government has facilitated the repatriation of Sikhs, including Hindus fleeing Afghanistan by offering visas, residency permits and organizing evacuation flights—the birthplace of Sikhism, India is home to most of the world’s Sikh population.

Singh, who had never visited India, felt safe in the Sikh temple where they had got refugees. It has long been the first stop for those leaving Afghanistan.

But, fleeing a country they had called home for generations was also hard. In this regard, Harminder Singh who also took asylum in India stated:

“We had our temples there [Afghanistan], our community and we used to organize fairs on special occasions. Leaving our life there makes me feel sad”.

While New Delhi offered safety, the future may not be easy for my family because the wait for citizenship can be long and uncertain, as Singh added.

In a hopeful sign, some Sikhs have returned to Kabul in 2021 from exile in New Delhi, where many faced myriad problems amid a devastating wave of the coronavirus pandemic.

In this respect, Sandeep Singh, 25, told Radio Free Afghanistan:

“We were facing many problems [In India]. We didn’t had access to a doctor or medicines and had to pay our house rent…Finding work was difficult because as refugees we had to obtain visas and were required to register with the police.”

According to Partap Singh,

“They don’t have proper homes, work, or citizenship papers that would facilitate their rehabilitation. Even educating their children is a challenge…They are facing so many hardships. Some are setting up pavement stalls or selling street food to earn a living.”

Singh has returned to the same temple complex, where the Afghan government is now providing him with security and aid to start a new life. For now, he lives off the $80 he can make each month as a shopkeeper.

Gulraj Singh, another young Sikh man, returned to Kabul three weeks ago after spending more than nine months in New Delhi.

Last year, Canadian and US officials had voiced concerns over the plight of Afghan Sikhs as some 200 families from the community moved to India.

In the recent weeks, 50 Afghan Hindus which include a majority of Sikh families have come back to Afghanistan.

Radio Free Afghanistan said that one Afghan Sikh man still living in India stated that the remaining members of their community are likely to return because of the challenges they face in India.

A Sikh remarked:

“It is very difficult to invest in India or set up a business while we are expected to pay for our children in private schools because we are not allowed into state schools…In Afghanistan, I had my own business.”

Reliable sources suggest that Afghan Sikhs and Hindus who were on exile in India met the Taliban who have assured them security, aid, and economic opportunities by the Afghan authorities.

Earlier, taking cognizance their plight the Taliban have urged its minorities–Sikhs and Hindus to come back to Afghanistan, claiming that the security situation has been solved.

In fact, although India’s Modi-led regime has disheartened the Afghan Hindus too, but his main target is Afghan Sikhs.

Notably, four referendums have been held in UK, Geneva, Italy and Canada in which almost 208,000 Sikhs actively participated and favoured an independent state of Khalistan in the Indian Punjab.

Particularly, the huge turnout for the Sikh referendum, organised by the pro-Khalistani advocacy group Sikhs For Justice (SFJ) was held on September 18, this year in Brampton city-in the Canadian province of Ontario, which depicted that the issue of the Sikh independence movement which is becoming a mainstream movement, as more than 110,000 Canadian Sikhs participated in the voting. During the referendum, the Sikh community raised anti-India and pro-Khalistan slogans.

In interaction with media entities, Sikh leader Gurpatwant Singh Pannun-General Counsel to SFJ indicated that the voting in Punjab for the Khalistan referendum will start from January 26, 2023, coinciding with India’s 74th Republic Day.

Undoubtedly, the referendum campaign by the SFJ has raised awareness in a global community regarding atrocities committed against Sikhs by New Delhi.

And besides mistreatment with other religious and ethnic minorities by acceleration of violence, and massacre, Sikhs have, continuously, been persecuting in India since extremist Narendra Modi-the leader of the fanatic ruling party BJP became the Indian Prime Minister.

In this connection, in its annual report of 2017, Human Rights Watch which conducted investigative work in 2016 pointed out Indian government’s failure to control growing attacks on Dalits and religious minorities—Sikh community. Some latest reports of rights group have also pointed out violent assaults by the BJP radicals and other Hindu extremists on the various religious minorities, especially Sikhs.

According to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom’s report: “Religious tolerance deteriorated and religious freedom violations increased in India…Minority communities, especially Sikhs experienced numerous incidents of intimidation, harassment, and violence, largely at the hands of Hindu nationalist groups.

It is surprising to note that after hundreds of thousands of farmers of various faiths began protesting against the government’s new farm laws in November 2020, senior BJP leaders, their supporters on social media, and pro-government media, started blaming the Sikhs. They accused Sikhs of having a Khalistan agenda-a reference to a Sikh separatist movement in Punjab in the 1980s and 90s.

Now, Sikhs have understood the shrewd diplomatic tactics of the Modi-led government which is punishing them. Hence, desperate to come to India, they are returning to Afghanistan.

*

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.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Afghan Sikh, running a shop in Kabul (Photo by koldo hormaza from madrid, españa, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0)

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.

***

 

Let’s Hope History Does Not Repeat

This month marks the 75th anniversary of the start of the Hollywood Blacklist. On October 27, 1947, screenwriter John Howard Lawson, the first member of what came to be known as the “Hollywood Ten,” testified before the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC).

The contentious, testy testimony before a gavel-banging congressman in Washington launched the Hollywood Blacklist, in which members of the motion picture industry who refused to “cooperate” with HUAC by informing on themselves and others about their leftist politics were forbidden from working in the movies until roughly 1960.

This was when the Hollywood Ten’s Dalton Trumbo received screen credits under his real name (instead of a pseudonym) for writing Spartacus (1960) and Exodus (1960).

The Hollywood Ten served prison time and were fined for refusing to answer questions such as “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?” and for declining to rat out others.

This conservative cancel culture, enforced by the movie studios and the U.S. government with the aid of the FBI, prevented about 300 talents from being able to earn a living in the cinema—because of their politics and beliefs.

Photo courtesy of Ed Rampell

The inquisition in Tinseltown in turn paved the way for the larger repressive Red Scare of McCarthyism during the 1950s, which decimated the American left and fostered the rightward shift in American politics away from the New Deal.

A couple of men holding signs Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Reds-under-the-beds zealotry of the Blacklist period. [Source: oscars.org]

Commemorations of the 75th anniversary of the Hollywood Blacklist kick off on October 13, 2022, as Turner Classic Movies launched a film series with the premiere of the excellent short, High Noon on the Waterfront. This compelling 14-minute documentary co-written/co-directed by David C. Roberts and Billy Shebar shows how two artists ensnared in the Blacklist metaphorically expressed their stands regarding the motion picture purge through their films.

Elia Kazan, the quintessential informer who collaborated with HUAC and “named names” of other suspected radicals, directed On the Waterfront (1954), a movie that justified informing.

Source: wikipedia.org

Carl Foreman, who was blacklisted and eventually moved overseas in order to be able to continue making movies, wrote the allegorical Western High Noon (1952), with the frontier town of Hadleyville—where Gary Cooper is forsaken by the townsfolk and must take a stand against evil by himself—symbolizing Hollywood during the Blacklist.

A picture containing text, book Description automatically generated

Source: wikipedia.org

Using the actual written words of the talents, Kazan is voiced by John Turturro, while Ed Norton speaks Foreman’s lines. The short creatively intercuts between scenes of High Noon and On the Waterfront. Here is the TCM schedule:

On October 21 a movie about the production of the Orson Welles-directed 1936 play that came to be known as Voodoo Macbeth opens. In it, Texas Congressman Martin Dies, who co-started what came to be HUAC, is depicted as race-baiting and red-baiting Voodoo Macbeth’s all-Black cast and its crew. About 11 years later, the congressional committee Dies set into motion turned from the stage and set its sights on the screen. The film Voodoo Macbeth is being theatrically released October 21. For more information, see voodoomacbethfim.com.

L.A.’s new Academy Museum, dedicated to film culture and history, is also reportedly planning a Blacklist series in Spring 2023. Oona Chaplin—whose grandfather Charlie directed and starred in 1957’s anti-HUAC A King in New York—is presenting a BBC podcast on the Blacklist in 2023.

Members of the Hollywood community who formed the Committee for the First Amendment flew from L.A. to Washington during the 1947 HUAC hearings to support and defend the Hollywood Ten. At the bottom of the airstair is actress Marsha Hunt, a civil libertarian who was blacklisted even though she was never a Communist Party member. Marsha died in September 2022 at age 104 and is chronicled in the documentary TCM is airing, Marsha Hunt’s Sweet Adversity, on October 13. [Source: Photo courtesy of Ed Rampell]

As book banning, media blacklisting and school board prohibitions on teaching history accelerate, and as a new cold war with Russia is being launched, it is important for Americans to remember when the First Amendment was forgotten in Hollywood.

Stay tuned—and down with censorship!

*

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.

Ed Rampell is an L.A.-based film historian and critic who also reviews culture, foreign affairs and current events. Ed can be reached at [email protected].

Featured image: A demonstration to free the Hollywood Ten along with members of the Ten and their supporters. [Source: indiewire.com]

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 75th Anniversary of the Hollywood Blacklist Takes on Added Significance With Escalation of New Cold War
  • Tags:

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.

***

 

 

America and UK invaded Iraq on 20 March 2003. Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022. Which was worse?

Let’s first examine the invasion of Iraq:

U.S. President George W. Bush seems to have been informed, in advance, about a New York Times article (which was the lead-story in the newspaper on Sunday, 8 September 2002), titled “U.S. SAYS HUSSEIN INTENSIFIES QUEST FOR A-BOMB PARTS”, in which the sources were anonymous “Administration officials.” The story concerned “aluminum tubes” that were “intended as casing for rotors in centrifuges, which are one means of producing highly enriched uranium …  to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.”

So, on Saturday, September 7th, of 2002, U.S. President Bush said, while standing beside British Prime Minister Tony Blair,

We just heard the Prime Minister talk about the new report. I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied — finally denied access, a report came out of the Atomic — the IAEA that they were six months away from developing a weapon. I don’t know what more evidence we need [in order for Congress to authorize an invasion of Iraq].

PRIME MINISTER BLAIR: Absolutely right.

Then, as soon as the weekend was over, on Monday 9 September 2002, was issued by the IAEA the following:

Related Coverage: Director General’s statement on Iraq to the IAEA Board of Governors on 9 September 2002 [this being a republication of their notice three days earlier, on 6 Sep.].

Vienna, 06 September, 2002 – With reference to an article published today in the New York Times [which, as usual, stenographically reported the Administration’s false allegations, which the IAEA was trying to correct in a way that would minimally offend the NYT and the U.S. President], the International Atomic Energy Agency would like to state that it has no new information on Iraq’s nuclear programme since December 1998 when its inspectors left Iraq [and verified that no WMD remained there at that time]. Only through a resumption of inspections in accordance with Security Council Resolution 687 and other relevant resolutions can the Agency draw any conclusion with regard to Iraq’s compliance with its obligations under the above resolutions relating to its nuclear activities.

Contact: Mark Gwozdecky, Tel: (+43 1) 2600-21270, e-mail: [email protected].

It even linked to the following statement from the IAEA Director General amplifying it:

Since December 1998 when our inspectors left Iraq, we have no additional information that can be directly linked without inspection to Iraq’s nuclear activities. I should emphasize that it is only through resumption of inspections that the Agency can draw any conclusion or provide any assurance regarding Iraq’s compliance with its obligations under these resolutions.

So, this was proof of the falsehood of Bush’s and Blair’s reference, on September 7th, to the IAEA, in which Bush-Blair were saying that, upon the authority of the IAEA itself, there was “the new report … a report came out of the Atomic — the IAEA that they were six months away from developing a weapon. I don’t know what more evidence we need.”

Because of the news-media’s ignoring the IAEA’s denial of the President’s statement, the author of the IAEA’s denial, Mark Gwozdecky, spoke again nearly three weeks later, by phone, with the only journalist who was interested, Joseph Curl of the Washington Times, who headlined on 27 September 2002, “Agency Disavows Report on Iraq Arms” — perhaps that should instead have been “President Lied About ‘Saddam’s WMD’” — and Curl quoted Gwozdecky:

“There’s never been a report like that [which Bush alleged] issued from this agency. … When we left in December ’98 we had concluded that we had neutralized their nuclear-weapons program. We had confiscated their fissile material. We had destroyed all their key buildings and equipment.” Other news-media failed to pick up Curl’s article. And, even in that article, there was no clear statement that the President had, in fact, lied — cooked up an IAEA ‘report’ that never actually existed. Actually, the IAEA hadn’t even so much as been mentioned in that New York Times article.

Bush had simply lied, and Blair seconded it, and the ‘news’-media stenographically accepted it, and broadcasted their lies to the public, and continued to do so, despite the IAEA’s having denied, as early as September 6th, that they had issued any such “new report” at all. (The IAEA had, apparently, somehow known in advance that someone would soon be saying that the IAEA had issued a report alleging that Iraq was resuming its nuclear program.) Virtually all of the alleged news-media (and not only the NYT) entirely ignored the IAEA’s denial (though it was not merely one bullet, but rapidly fired on four separate occasions, into the wilderness of America’s ‘news’-media) that it had issued any such “report.” All of them were actually only propaganda-media: they hid the fact that George W. Bush was simply lying. Both the U.S. Government and its media were frauds.

The day after that 7 September 2002 unquestioned lie by Bush, saying Iraq was only six months from having a nuclear weapon, and citing the IAEA as his source for that, the New York Times ran their article. It included such hair-raisers as

“‘The jewel in the crown is nuclear,’ a senior administration official said. ‘The closer he gets to a nuclear capability, the more credible is his threat to use chemical or biological weapons. Nuclear weapons are his hole card.’”

The fake ‘news’ — stenography from the lying Government and its chosen lying sources (in this case anonymous Administration-officials) — came in an incessant stream, from the U.S. Government and its ‘news’ media (such as happened also later, regarding Honduras 2009, Libya 2011, Yemen 2011-, Syria 2011-, Ukraine 2014, and Yemen 2015-). Do the American people never learn — ever — that their Presidents and ‘news’-media) now lie routinely?

Also on Sunday, September 8th, of 2002, the Bush Administration’s big guns were firing off against Iraq from the Sunday ‘news’ shows; and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice delivered her famous “we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud” statement, which was clearly building upon the lying Bush allegation of the day before, that the International Atomic Energy Agency had just come up with this ominous “Atomic” “new report.”

Then, President Bush himself, on 12 September 2002, addressed the U.N. General Assembly, seeking authorization to invade:

We will work with the U.N. Security Council for the necessary resolutions. But the purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced — the just demands of peace and security will be met — or action will be unavoidable. And a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power.

Events can turn in one of two ways: If we fail to act in the face of danger, the people of Iraq will continue to live in brutal submission. The regime will have new power to bully and dominate and conquer its neighbors, condemning the Middle East to more years of bloodshed and fear. The regime will remain unstable — the region will remain unstable, with little hope of freedom, and isolated from the progress of our times. With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to terrorist allies, then the attacks of September the 11th would be a prelude to far greater horrors.

Bush (and Blair) failed to win any authorization to invade, but did it anyway. They should be hung for it. They were atop a bi-national and entirely bipartisan (in each of the two countries) public-deception operation, like had occurred in Germany during Hitler’s time. (Hitler was a boon for the nation’s armaments-makers then, just as America’s Presidents now are for America’s armaments-firms.)

And both of America’s political Parties are controlled by their billionaires, who fund the political careers of the politicians whom those mega-donors want to become s‘elected’ by the public to win public offices. For example, whereas George W. Bush lied America into invading and destroying Iraq, Barack Obama and Joe Biden lied America into believing that their coup overthrowing and replacing Ukraine’s democratically elected Government in February 2014 was instead a ‘democratic revolution’ there. It’s so bad that even the progressive Democratic Party site, David Sirota’s “The Daily Poster,” has NEVER exposed anything about that Obama coup and about those Obama-Clinton-Biden lies about Ukraine, and about the U.S. Government’s planned conquest of both Russia and China — the things that might actually produce WW III (in other words: are even more important than what they do report about). In fact, Sirota had the nerve, on 15 February 2022, to post to Vimeo an anti-Republican-Party propaganda video, “The Pundits Who Lied America Into A War”, against the Republican Party’s liars who deceived the American people into invading and destroying Iraq in 2003 — though almost all leading Democrats, including Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton, had voted in the U.S. Senate for (not against) that lie-based invasion, and though all Democratic-Party ‘news’-media (and not ONLY the Republican-Party ones) unquestioningly transmitted the Bush-Administration’s lies to the American people, against Iraq, in order to fool Americans into supporting the then-upcoming U.S. invasion.

That Sirota video entirely ignores the Democratic-Party “Pundits” — such as the Party’s think tank, the Brookings Institution, whose Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack, propagandized on TV and elsewhere to invade Iraq (such as in Pollack’s Council on Foreign Relations article, “Invasion the Only Realistic Option to Head Off the Threat from Iraq, Argues Kenneth Pollack in The Threatening Storm” did). Whereas Democrats blame Republicans, and Republicans blame Democrats, it’s the billionaires of BOTH Parties who actually fundall of these lies and liars — and who continue to fund those liars’ careers, and to present them on their ’news’-media as ‘experts’, to fool the public to okay the trillions of dollars that the U.S. Government pays to those billionaires’ corporations such as Lockheed Martin, to profit from those wars. It’s hypocrisy on top of lying, so as to convey an impression that neoconservatism — U.S. imperialism — is a ‘Republican’ (or else a ‘Democratic’) evil, when it’s ACTUALLY an evil by the billionaires who fund BOTH Parties AND who fund the ’news’-media, both liberal and conservative, and who profit from those invasions.

It’s not just the lies of America’s Presidents; it is the lies that are funded by America’s billionaires, who placed such people as that into Congress and the White House. This regime is an aristocracy, and imperialism is second nature to aristocrats. But an aristocracy is a dictatorship by the very rich — NOT any sort of democracy. This is the type of dictatorship that America now has — NOT a Republican dictatorship, or a Democratic dictatorship, but a dictatorship by the aristocracy, of BOTH Parties. They have made a mockery of their ‘democracy’. Practically everything they do is fake, except the vast harms that they produce.

That’s what led up to America’s invasion of Iraq. Here and here is what led up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

So: which is worse?

Were America and UK sanctioned for invading and destroying Iraq on the basis of lies? Should Russia be sanctioned for doing what the U.S. forced it to do in order to protect Russia’s national security?

*

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.

Featured image is from CovertAction Magazine

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Is Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine “Really Worse” Than America’s & UK’s Invasion of Iraq?

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.

***

Media are reporting that pregnancy complications have spiked during the COVID pandemic, but claim the cause is unknown

Most blame the virus itself. But even then, they fail to address the fact that it’s the spike protein that is the most likely culprit. The obvious reason for that is because the spike protein is also what your body produces in response to the COVID shots

Around the world, women are reporting abnormal menses and vaginal hemorrhaging, both post-COVID and after exposure to the jab or someone who got the shot. Birth rates have significantly dropped, and we’re seeing upticks in preeclampsia, miscarriages, premature births and early puberty, as well as maternal and infant deaths

Despite the clear risks of vaccinating during pregnancy, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved a whooping cough vaccine for newborns that is given to mothers in the third trimester. This is the first vaccine aimed at infants that is to be preemptively given to the mother during pregnancy

While U.S. media celebrated the FDA’s authorization of COVID shots for infants under the age of 5 last summer, European countries had long since stopped caring about the pandemic, and the head of public health in Denmark admitted it was a mistake to vaccinate children between the ages of 5 and 11

*

As soon as it was announced that COVID-19 would be combated with novel mRNA gene transfer technology, a number of scientists spoke out against it with dire warnings about potential health ramifications, including the theory that fertility might be adversely impacted.

In the two years since the rollout of these COVID shots, our worst fears have come true. Still, mainstream media feign surprise. Case in point: The Washington Post recently reported that “Pregnancy complications spiked during the pandemic” and “no one knows exactly why.”1

Aside from COVID-19 itself, the COVID shots are the only thing that has impacted a vast majority of the population worldwide during this timeframe, and everywhere the same effects are reported. To claim “no one knows why” is to ignore the proverbial elephant in the room as its tail is swatting you in the face and its trumpet sound threatens to shatter your eardrums.

Both Virus and Shots May Have Similar Impacts on Pregnancy

The Washington Post seems to go out of its way to not implicate the COVID shots, laying all the blame on the virus itself. But even then, they fail to address the fact that it’s the spike protein that is the most likely culprit. The obvious reason for that is because the spike protein is also what your body produces in response to the COVID shots.

However, when you read things like, “last fall and winter, Amy Heerema McKenney, a Cleveland Clinic pathologist … began receiving eerily similar reports of stillbirths,” you realize that “last fall and winter” refers to the winter of 2021, not 2020 or 2019.

In other words, we’re talking about a time when most people had received one or more mRNA shots, while the virus itself had mutated into milder forms that were rarely associated with severe blood clotting issues and other anomalies.

That said, it’s by no means impossible that SARS-CoV-2, even in its milder expressions, might have an adverse impact on pregnancy. After all, we’re likely talking about a genetically engineered bioweapon.

The respiratory effects may have mutated to be less severe while other organs may still be more adversely impacted by the spike protein. We also have the “shedding” issue to contend with, so just because a woman is unjabbed doesn’t mean she’s not affected by COVID jab spike protein.

Unique Damage to the Placenta

The Washington Post goes on to describe what McKenney was finding in the winter of 2021:

“Almost as soon as she began looking into [the stillbirths], Heerema McKenney recalled, she became ‘pretty panicked.’ A normal placenta is spongy and dark, reflecting the nourishing blood flowing through it. The ones she was looking at in her lab from the mothers who lost their babies were like nothing she had ever seen before: firm, scarred and more of a shade of tan.

‘The degree of devastation was unique,’ she said. Flipping through case files, she noted that most of the women were in their second trimester, unvaccinated or only partially vaccinated, and infected with the coronavirus within a two-week window before their pregnancies ending.

Heerema McKenney herself saw fewer than 20 potentially coronavirus-related stillbirths over about six months. But her findings matched up with cases colleagues were seeing in other parts of the world.

And they also echoed those in a paper from Ireland that looked at seven cases — six stillbirths and one second-trimester fetal death in pregnant people infected with the coronavirus — resulting from what the authors called ‘a readily recognizable pattern of placental injury.’ She said, ‘That’s when we realized we were all looking at the same thing.’”

While McKenney claims most were either unjabbed or partially jabbed, other evidence clearly implicate the COVID shots. For example, in November 2021, Lions Gate Hospital in North Vancouver, British Columbia (BC), delivered an astonishing 13 stillborn babies in a 24-hour period, and all of the mothers had received the COVID jab.2 In a typical month, there may be one stillborn baby at the hospital, making 13 stillbirths in 24 hours highly unusual.

Types of Pregnancy Complications on the Rise

That something is terribly wrong is clear from global statistics. Around the world, women are reporting abnormal menses3 and vaginal hemorrhaging,4 both post-COVID5 and after exposure to the jab6 7 or someone who got the shot. Birth rates have significantly dropped, and we’re seeing significant upticks in preeclampsia,8 miscarriages,9 10 11 12 13 premature births,14 early puberty, as well as maternal and infant deaths.

According to a research letter15 in JAMA published in late June 2022, maternal deaths in the U.S. rose from 18.8 per 100,000 live births prepandemic, to 25.1 per 100,000 live births during the second, third and fourth quarters of 2020, a relative increase of 33.3%.

That increase can be attributed to COVID-19, since no COVID shots were available in 2020. We don’t yet have the statistics for 2021 and 2022, but based on obituaries and social media posts, it seems many new mothers are now dying “suddenly” and for no apparent reason. Time will tell, but I doubt the trend has gotten any better after the rollout of the COVID shots for pregnant women.

More Vaccines for Pregnant Women

Despite the clear risks of vaccinating during pregnancy, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently approved a whooping cough vaccine for newborns that is given to mothers in the third trimester. This is the first vaccine aimed at infants that is to be preemptively given to the mother during pregnancy. According to Pharmacy Times:16

“Since children aged 2 months of age or younger are not eligible to receive an actual vaccine themselves, administering the Tdap vaccine to the mother can boost the infant’s immune system by boosting antibodies in the mother, who then transfers the antibodies to the developing fetus …

According to the CDC, although only 4.2% of US cases occur in this age group, 31% of infants who contract the disease who are also younger than 6 months go to the hospital due to the illness.”

Swedish Journalist Critiques American Reporting

In an early October 2022 commentary in the Swedish newspaper Sydsvenskan,17 18 journalist and author Johan Anderberg expressed being perplexed by The New York Times’ jubilant announcement this past summer that toddlers could finally get the COVID shot.

“For a reader on the other side of the Atlantic, the reporting on infant vaccination appeared somewhat puzzling,” Anderberg writes. “In most European countries, citizens had long since stopped caring about the pandemic, and in Denmark, the head of public health, Soren Brostrom, had even said that it was a mistake to vaccinate children between the ages of 5 and 11.

But for the New York Times — and its subscribers — this was a big event. When the magazine asked its readers to send in stories about what it was like to live with unvaccinated toddlers, they received 1,600 responses. Several of them said their children had never been allowed to play with friends or meet their relatives indoors.

At the end of the summer, the first numbers came out on how many Americans had actually vaccinated their toddlers in the first month. It turned out fewer than 5% of American children under the age of 5 had received their first injection.

Not so long ago, those kinds of numbers would have been thought provoking for a newspaper like the New York Times: Did we have an incorrect picture of the mood in the country? … Was there a perspective on the issue that we missed? But it no longer works that way.”

He goes on to describe how The New York Times has changed from “all the news that’s fit to print” into a publication that cherry picks its stories based on political bias and a preconceived agenda, and rarely ever presents more than one viewpoint anymore.

Had they been more journalistically inclined and less biased, they would not have gotten the COVID-jab-for-infants’ story so wrong. Many Americans also “received a blatantly incorrect picture of the risks with the new coronavirus through The New York Times reporting,” Anderberg writes.

The New York Times’ fallacies spread as far and as high as the Supreme Court, where Supreme Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor publicly overstated the number of serious COVID infections among children by 2,000%. That enormous flub was a direct result of depending on mainstream sources with an agenda to spread fear rather than truth.

Vaccines and Bioweapons Are One Industry

The fact that we have no real independent press anymore has become painfully clear over the past three years. What we have are corporate-government propaganda outlets and censored alternative media. There’s not much in between.

Certainly, you rarely ever find both sides of an issue covered by the same media outlet anymore. Media has become incredibly polarized and, with it, the population at large. As noted by Anderberg, the mainstream press has played a key role in this polarization, as it has abandoned rules of journalism such as unbiased research and reportage and presenting more than one side of every story.

The reason for this appears to be because media are owned and controlled by those who benefit from the pandemic. In short, media’s refusal to state the obvious is because the obvious doesn’t fit the narrative that we must surrender our freedom for biosecurity’s sake.

But the promise of biosecurity is itself a lie. Not only is SARS-CoV-2 a bioweapon, but the COVID shot is too. Once people realize that the vaccine industry and the bioweapons industry have become one and the same, the big picture will become clearer.

COVID Shots Are Weapons of Mass Destruction

These shots may have many purposes, but none of them is to protect your health. They may be part of a depopulation agenda. They may be part of an ongoing experiment to perfect some aspect of the transhumanist goal to merge man with AI and synthetic biology. They may have a social engineering purpose. They’re undoubtedly part of the global takeover effort by the New World Order/Great Reset cabal.

But they’re not part of a benevolent public health program. If they were, the corporate-government alliance would not have spent billions to first entice and bribe people into taking the shots (remember those million-dollar lotteries?), and later shame, bully and threaten to ostracize from society or outright kill the unvaccinated.

If COVID-19 were a naturally-occurring virus, then scientists, media, Big Tech and bioweapons chief Dr. Anthony Fauci would not have gone out of their way to suppress and censor debate about its origin.

Similarly, if the COVID shots were a novel but beneficial intervention for an unprecedented health crisis, the input and feedback of scientists around the world would have been welcomed rather than censored. (Ditto for doctors’ feedback on successful treatments. If saving lives was the goal, all suggestions would have been welcomed.)

The reason no one, regardless of qualifications, is permitted to speak about the dangers of these shots is because they’re supposed to be dangerous. They’re bioweapons. The mindset of those pushing for a post-human transhumanist world may be complex (if not incomprehensible), but the strategy to achieve their desired ends is that simple.

Mankind Is Being Regressed Into Oblivion

Mankind is being decimated by not just one but several different bioweapons — the original virus and a steady stream of ever-changing gene influencing shots. In the process, survivors of the next generation, children born and growing up in these times, are being robbed of intelligence, health and life span.

Mankind is quite literally being regressed. The Big Pharma-biotech-bioweapons complex are risking everything, the very future of mankind itself, in this effort to “reset” the world and shape it to their own liking and benefit.

Many worry about a nuclear World War III between nations but, in reality, World War III has already begun. The transhumanist-centered pharma-bioweapons industry has spent the last two years decimating its enemy — mankind — using the most sophisticated biowarfare and social engineering tools the world has ever seen.

Learn to Say No

The primary defense we have against these attacks is the word “no.” If enough of us simply reject whatever they roll out next and work on building our own parallel systems, we can preserve life and liberty for coming generations.

The globalist cabal is using bioweapons, but we can refuse to take them. They’re using sophisticated social engineering, but we can educate ourselves on their tactics, thereby insulating ourselves against their programming. They’re tearing down the infrastructure we depend on for life, including the financial system, the health care system and the food system, but we can replace them with ethical and pro-human alternatives.

We don’t have to agree to their “solutions,” which are coming, and will include living in smart cities with digital identities, a social credit score, surveillance down to your biological processes and a programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC), all of which will render you into a 21st century slave with a digital choke chain around your neck. Avoiding that fate won’t be easy. It certainly won’t be convenient. But it’ll be worth 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.

Notes

1 Washington Post October 8, 2022

2 The Phaser November 18, 2021

3 Science July 15, 2022

4 OpenVAERS Vaginal Hemorrhage data

5 Reproductive BioMedicine 2021 Jan; 42(1): 260–267

6 Obstetrics and Gynecology April 1, 2022: 139(4):481-489

7 BMJ 2021;374:n2211

8 New Yorker August 12, 2022

9 Obstetrics & Gynecology April 20, 2021

10 OpenVAERS Miscarriage reports

11 Pierre Kory Substack August 20, 2022

12 Wayback NEJM Letter to the Editor June 27, 2021

13 Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law November 2021; 4: 130-143

14 Health Day July 26, 2022

15 JAMA June 28, 2022; 5(6): e2219133

16 Pharmacy Times October 7, 2022

17 Sydsvenskan October 2, 2022

18 Twitter Anthony LaMesa October 9, 2022

Featured image is from NaturalNews.com


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

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

Price: $11.50 

Purchase directly from the Global Research Online Store

You may also purchase directly at DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page(NOTE: User-friendly)

Fake News, Fake Putin Nuclear Threat

October 25th, 2022 by Kurt Nimmo

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.

***

If one reads the news with an uncritical eye, he or she would more than likely believe Vladimir Putin intends to nuke Ukraine. Of course, Putin never said he would use nukes in Ukraine, only if his country faces an existential threat, undoubtedly the same policy followed the USG.

The lies and hysteria spread by the corporate war propaganda media have resulted in frightening millions of people in Europe and America.

The fear campaign went so far as to insinuate there will be a nuclear attack staged against New York.

The NYC Emergency Management Department played its part by releasing an entirely ludicrous PSA instructing New Yorkers what to do in response to a nuclear attack. Go inside, stay inside, and stay tuned, the video instructs.

Left unsaid is the fact that “sheltering in place” during a nuclear explosion is less than worthless. The PSA assumes a single nuke would be targeted at New York. More fear porn and stupidity. If its existence is threatened, Russia would use its Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile, designed to replace it SS-18 Satan ICBM. The new missile can travel 6,000 miles and carry 16 independently targeted warheads. It has the capability to destroy and area the size of France.

Needless to say, those “sheltering in place,” from Manhattan to Queens and beyond, would die in place. It is conservatively estimated 4 million people would be killed with an additional 5 million injured. A couple of these nukes targeted at America’s east coast would kill more than 10 million people.

The bogus assertion making the rounds is that Putin will, as Foreign Policy (owned by Graham Holdings Company, an Operation Mockingbird production) puts it, “blow up the world.” Nothing of the sort will happen unless it is the result of a false flag.

It appears that the prospect of a false flag is a distinct possibility. “Russia’s defense chief on Sunday alleged that Ukraine was preparing a ‘provocation’ involving a radioactive device, a stark claim that was strongly rejected by Ukrainian and British officials amid soaring tensions as Moscow struggles to stem Ukrainian advances in the south,” Free Press Journal reported on October 23.

Russia’s defense ministry said [Sergei] Shoigu voiced concern about “possible Ukrainian provocations involving a ‘dirty bomb,’” a device that uses explosives to scatter radioactive waste. It doesn’t have the devastating effect of a nuclear explosion, but it could expose broad areas to radioactive contamination.

Telling lies and making omissions for political oneupmanship is hardly a recent development. One of America’s most revered presidents, John F. Kennedy, wasn’t straight with the media during the so-called Cuban Missile Crisis. Greg Mitchell writes for The Daily Beast (Newsweek),

While Kennedy drew wide praise for his handling of the Soviet missiles in Cuba, he had, in the process, sparked wide resentment among the media for how the White House had manipulated or even lied to the press about it while it was transpiring. Reporters had reluctantly gone along with repeated requests from Pierre Salinger, the White House press secretary, for self-censorship during the crisis and acceptance of a formal 12-point list of “guidelines” for withholding news. Surely, with the crisis over, the administration might admit it went a little too far—even lying about the president’s health and travel—or at least quickly shed the crisis-spawned secrecy demands.

Arthur Sylvester, a public affairs spokesman for the Pentagon, “set off a firestorm when he admitted the control of information was even tighter than in World War II” during the “crisis,” a practice he defended. “And he used a loaded term in speaking favorably of government ‘management’ of the news. (He stopped short of revealing that Kennedy himself had used the phrase ‘news management,’ and favored the practice.)”

“Journalists of all political persuasions raised a hew and cry, declaring that they were now expected to act as little more than government propagandists.”

There is no “hew and cry” today in corporate media suites over state-produced fake news.

The vast majority of “journalists” simply churn out lies and misinformation handed down by the state without complaint, lest their careers and livelihood arrive at a sudden dead end.

The American public, considered ignoramuses (and, admittedly, many are) by the state and its owners, must be fed a constant stream of big and little lies in order to shield the national security state (NSS) from criticism and public indignation.

Kennedy disliked the media and, in regard to the supposed missile crisis in Cuba, he wanted the CIA to verify the Soviets had removed all missiles from the embattled Caribbean island.

Behind the scenes, JFK continued to rail against the press. There were media reports that some Cuban refugees were claiming the Soviets were hiding some of the missiles they had purportedly removed from the island. In a meeting at the White House with national security aides, Kennedy complained that the American people were “bound to think it’s true” if it appeared in the press and that this could raise tensions with the Soviets again, even “possibly a war.” Such media reports made the Kennedy team appear “incompetent or liars.” He asked CIA Director McCone to verify the removal of the missiles and debunk the news accounts.

Kennedy wanted a “new system” to control what the media told the American people. “Aides argued, however, that it might not be a good idea for the White House to start refuting news scoops by attempting to prove the negative.” Kennedy eventually backed down on his demand the media turn over to the state evidence to back assertions made in news articles.

Naturally, due to the fact The Daily Beast (Newsweek) is a component of the big and small lie propaganda media coopted by the NSS (beginning in the 1950s under the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird), the article quoted above ends with harsh criticism of then president Trump.

Kennedy retreated on this. Even if he’d had his own Twitter feed at that time, one can’t imagine, unlike the current occupant of the White House, that he would have charged that the press “is the enemy of the American people” or that it is “frankly disgusting the press is able to write whatever it wants to write.”

There is no longer an adversarial relationship between the corporate media and the state. The current effort, ongoing for several years now, is to eradicate the “alternative” media by all means necessary. The information space must be sanitized and made safe for the dissemination of lies and misinformation favorable to the actions of the state, no matter how psychotic or murderous.

The above PSA is a textbook example of the sort of propaganda and scare tactics employed, no matter how absurd or at odds with reality, by the state and its media. The video leaves the impression Putin will nuke New York and much of the east coast. Fear is the preferred template, as it produces an emotional and irrational reaction on the part of the public and forms consensus for illegal and immoral wars abroad and further police state actions at home.

*

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 Kurt Nimmo 

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.

***

Unter der Schirmherrschaft des „Belgrader Forums für eine Welt der Gleichen“ präsentierte Prof. Michel Chossudovsky am 21. Oktober 2022 im Belgrader Hotel Moskva sein bereits ab 2019 als E-Book erhältliches (1) und 2021 im Belgrader Forum erschienenes zweisprachiges Buch (Englisch und Serbisch) „THE US-NATO WAR OF AGGRESSION AGAINST YUGOSLAVIA“.

Die Präsentation fand vor dem Hintergrund internationaler Spannungen und der Diskussion über die Mitgliedschaft Serbiens in EU (und NATO?) statt – weil der Druck der USA und der EU auf das Land immer stärker wird. Aus diesem Grund war der Zeitpunkt der Promotion des einzigartigen und faktenreichen Buches gut gewählt. Buch und Präsentation waren für die Anwesenden und das serbische Volk ein wertvolles Geschenk. Dem Belgrader Forum mit seinem Präsidenten Zivadin Jovanovic und dem Autor Prof. Michel Chossudovsky gebühren Dank und Ehre.

Image is from the author

Kinderkrankenhaus sowie historisches und kulturelles Erbe Jugoslawiens als strategische Ziele

Prof. Chossudovsky begann seine Präsentation mit denselben bewegenden Worten, die er bereits im Vorwort seines Buches fand:

„(…) In den frühen Morgenstunden des 24. März 1999 begann die NATO mit der Bombardierung der Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien. ‚Die Operation trug den Codenamen ‚Allied Force‘ – ein kalter, uninspirierter und perfekt beschreibender Spottname‘, so Nobosja Malic.

Als 1999 Belgrad bombardiert wurde, war das Krankenhaus Ziel von Luftangriffen. Es war von Militärplanern als strategisches Ziel ausgewählt worden.

Die NATO erklärte, um ‚das Leben der Neugeborenen‘ zu retten, bombardierten sie nicht den Teil des Krankenhauses, in dem die Babys untergebracht waren, sondern zielten auf das Gebäude, in dem sich der Stromgenerator befand, was bedeutete, dass die Inkubatoren keinen Strom mehr hatten. Das bedeutete, dass das gesamte Krankenhaus für alle Zwecke zerstört wurde und viel der Kinder starben.

Ich habe dieses Krankenhaus ein Jahr nach dem Bombenanschlag im Juni 2000 besucht und mit eigenen Augen gesehen, wie sie es mit äußerster Genauigkeit gemacht haben. Das sind Kriegsverbrechen, bei denen sogenannte Smart Bombs der NATO eingesetzt werden.

In Jugoslawien war die zivile Wirtschaft das Ziel, Krankenhäuser, Flughäfen, Regierungsgebäude, Fertigung, Infrastruktur, ganz zu schweigen von Kirchen aus dem 17. Jahrhundert und dem historischen und kulturellen Erbe des Landes.

Die Ursachen und Folgen dieses Krieges waren Gegenstand einer umfassenden Desinformationskampagne in den Medien, die versucht hat, die Kriegsverbrechen der NATO und der USA zu tarnen.

Es ist wichtig anzumerken, dass ein (korruptes) Segment von selbsternannten ‚Progressiven‘ in Westeuropa und Nordamerika Teil dieser Desinformationskampagne war und die militärische Intervention der NATO als eine notwendige humanitäre Operation darstellte, die darauf abzielt, die Rechte der ethnischen Albaner im Kosovo zu schützen.

Die Intervention verstieß gegen internationales Recht. Präsident Milosevic hatte bei den Gesprächen in Rambouillet 1998 die Stationierung der NATO-Truppen in Jugoslawien abgelehnt.“ (2)

Kosovo „Unabhängigkeit“

Image is from the author

Im Vorwort des Buches schreibt Prof. Chossudovsky zum Thema Kosovo:

„Die Bilanz der US-NATO-Kriegsverbrechen ist wichtig für die Bewertung der jüngsten Entwicklungen im Kosovo.

Seit Beginn ihrer jeweiligen Mandate im Juni 1999 haben sowohl die NATO als auch die UN-Mission im Kosovo (UNMIK) die UCK, die zahlreiche Gräueltaten begangen hat, aktiv unterstützt.

Seit 1999 ist der Staatsterrorismus im Kosovo zu einem integralen Bestandteil des NATO-Konzepts geworden.

Die Zerstörung der Bundesrepublik Jugoslawien ist durch drei zusammenhängende Prozesse gekennzeichnet:

  • die Destabilisierung der jugoslawischen Volkswirtschaft, die in den frühen 1980er Jahren begann,
  • die verdeckte Unterstützung bewaffneter Aufstände in Bosnien, Kosovo und Mazedonien,
  • die NATO-Bombenkampagne von 1999.

Dieses Buch ist ein Rückblick. Es versetzt den Leser in die Geschichte zurück. Einige der Texte wurden auf dem Höhepunkt der Bombenangriffe von 1999 oder kurz danach geschrieben.“ (3)

Ein Referent, dessen Gedanken und Gefühle die Mitmenschen einbeziehen

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky ist nicht nur ein unabhängiger Denker, ein unermüdlicher Aufklärer und ein Kämpfer für Frieden, Freiheit und Gerechtigkeit, der die komplexen politischen, wirtschaftlichen und finanzpolitischen Machenschaften der kriminellen Machthaber und Geheimdienste bestens durchschaut. Er ist vor allen Dingen ein Mitmensch, der sich in die Freuden und Nöte seiner Mitmenschen weltweit einfühlen kann und stets bereit ist zu helfen. Man spürt mit jedem Satz, dass hier ein Menschenfreund spricht – und somit auch ein Freund der Serben.

Die vielen Hintergrundinformationen, von denen die meisten Teilnehmer der Promotion vielleicht das erste Mal gehört haben, kann man in dem zweisprachigen Buch des Belgrader Forums nachlesen oder in den Interviews, die Prof. Chossudovsky während seines mehrtägigen Aufenthalts in Belgrad den serbischen Zeitungen gab (4).

*

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. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel ist Lehrer (Rektor a. D.), Doktor der Pädagogik (Dr. paed.) und Diplom-Psychologe (Dipl.-Psych.). Viele Jahrzehnte unterrichtete er und bildete Fachkräfte fort. Als Pensionär arbeitete er als Psychotherapeut in eigener Praxis. In seinen Büchern und pädagogisch-psychologischen Fachartikeln fordert er eine bewusste ethisch-moralische Werteerziehung sowie eine Erziehung zu Gemeinsinn und Frieden. Sein Lebensmotto (nach Albert Camus): Geben, wenn man kann. Und nicht hassen, wenn das möglich ist.  

Noten 

1. https://www.globalresearch.ca/twenty-years-ago-natos-war-of-aggression-against-yugoslavia/5671987

2. a.O.

3. a.O.

4. Siehe u.a. „Politika“ vom 22. Oktober 2022, S. 1 und 7


The US-NATO War of Aggression against Yugoslavia 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Centre  for Research on Globalization, Global Research E-Book Series,  Montreal, March 2021

Twenty-two years ago in the early hours of March 24, 1999, NATO began the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. “The operation was code-named “Allied Force ” – a cold, uninspired and perfectly descriptive moniker” according to Nebosja Malic. 

In 1999, when Belgrade was bombed, the children’s hospital was the object of air attacks. It had been singled out by military planners as a strategic target.

NATO stated that to “save the lives” of the newly borne, they did not bomb the section of the hospital where the babies were residing, instead they targeted the building which housed the power generator, which meant no more power for the incubators. What this meant that was that the entire hospital was for all sakes and purposes destroyed and many of the children died.

I visited that hospital, one year after the bombing in June 2000 and saw with my own eyes how they did it with utmost accuracy. These are war crimes using NATO’s so-called smart bombs.

Click here to read the Ebook.

  • Posted in Deutsch, English
  • Comments Off on Präsentation des Buches von Prof. Michel Chossudovsky: “The US-NATO War of Aggression Against Yugoslavia”
  • Tags:

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.

***

Under the auspices of the “Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals”, Prof. Michel Chossudovsky presented his bilingual book (English and Serbian) “THE US-NATO WAR OF AGGRESSION AGAINST YUGOSLAVIA”, already available as an e-book from 2019 (1) and published by the Belgrade Forum in 2021, on 21 October 2022 in Belgrade’s Moskva Hotel.

The presentation took place against the background of international tensions and the discussion about Serbia’s membership in the EU (and NATO ?) – because the pressure from the USA and the EU on the country is getting stronger. For this reason, the timing of the promotion of the unique and fact-filled book was well chosen. The book and the presentation were a valuable gift for those present and for the Serbian people. The Belgrade Forum with its President Zivadin Jovanovic and the author Prof. Michel Chossudovsky deserve thanks and honour.

Image is from the author

Children’s hospital and Yugoslavia’s historical and cultural heritage as strategic goals

Prof. Chossudovsky began his presentation with the same moving words found in the preface of his book:

“(…) In the early hours of 24 March 1999, NATO began the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. ‘The operation was code-named “Allied Force” – a cold, uninspired and perfectly descriptive mockery,’ Nobosja Malic said.

When Belgrade was bombed in 1999, the children’s hospital was the object of air attacks. It had been singled out by military planners as a strategic target.

NATO stated that to ‘save the lives’ of the newly borne, they did not bomb the section of the hospital where the babies were residing, instead they targeted the building which housed the power generator, which meant no more power for the incubators. What this meant that was that the entire hospital was for all sakes and purposes destroyed and many of the children died.

I visited that hospital, one year after the bombing in June 2000 and saw with my own eyes how they did it with utmost accuracy. These are war crimes using NATO’s so-called smart bombs.

In Yugoslavia, the civilian economy was targeted, hospitals, airports, government buildings, manufacturing, infrastructure, not to mention 17th century churches and the historical and cultural heritage of the country.

The causes and consequences of this war against the people of Yugoslavia have been the object of a vast media desinformation campaign, which has sought to camouflage NATO and the US war crimes.

It is important to note that a (corrupt) segment of self-proclaimed ‘progressives’ in Western Europe and North America were part of this disinformation campaign, presenting NATO’s military intervention as a necessary humanitarian operation aimed at protecting the rights of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.

The intervention violated international law. President Milosevic had rejected the deployment of NATO troops in Yugoslavia at the Rambouillet talks in 1998.” (2)

 

Kosovo “independence

Image is from the author

In the preface of the book, Prof. Chossudovsky writes on the subject of Kosovo:

“The record of US-NATO war crimes is important in assessing recent developments in Kosovo.

Since the beginning of their respective mandates in June 1999, both NATO and the UN Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) have actively supported the UCK, which has committed numerous atrocities.

Since 1999, state terrorism in Kosovo has become an integral part of NATO’s concept.

The destruction of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is characterised by three interrelated processes:

1) the destabilisation of the Yugoslav national economy, which began in the early 1980s,

2) the covert support of armed insurgencies in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia,

3) the NATO bombing campaign of 1999.

This book is a retrospective. It takes the reader back into history. Some of the texts were written at the height of the 1999 bombing campaign or shortly afterwards.” (3)

A speaker whose thoughts and feelings involve fellow human beings

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky is not only an independent thinker, a tireless enlightener and a fighter for peace, freedom and justice, who sees through the complex political, economic and financial machinations of the criminal rulers and secret services.

Above all, he is a fellow human being who can empathise with the joys and needs of his fellow human beings worldwide and is always ready to help. One senses with every sentence that a philanthropist is speaking here – and thus also a friend of the Serbs.

The much background information, which most participants in the promotion may have heard about for the first time, can be read in the bilingual book of the Belgrade Forum or in the interviews Prof. Chossudovsky gave to Serbian newspapers during his stay of several days in Belgrade (4).

*

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.

Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a teacher (retired headmaster), doctor of education (Dr. paed.) and graduate psychologist (Dipl.-Psych.). He taught and trained professionals for many decades. As a retiree, he worked as a psychotherapist in his own practice. In his books and educational-psychological articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral values education as well as an education for public spirit and peace. His motto in life (after Albert Camus): Give when you can. And not to hate, if that is possible. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

(1) https://www.globalresearch.ca/twenty-years-ago-natos-war-of-aggression-against-yugoslavia/5671987

(2) op. cit.

(3) Op. cit.

(4) See, among others, “Politika” of 22 October 2022, pp. 1 and 7.


The US-NATO War of Aggression against Yugoslavia 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Centre  for Research on Globalization, Global Research E-Book Series, Montreal, March 2021

Twenty-two years ago in the early hours of March 24, 1999, NATO began the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. “The operation was code-named “Allied Force ” – a cold, uninspired and perfectly descriptive moniker” according to Nebosja Malic. 

In 1999, when Belgrade was bombed, the children’s hospital was the object of air attacks. It had been singled out by military planners as a strategic target.

NATO stated that to “save the lives” of the newly borne, they did not bomb the section of the hospital where the babies were residing, instead they targeted the building which housed the power generator, which meant no more power for the incubators. What this meant that was that the entire hospital was for all sakes and purposes destroyed and many of the children died.

I visited that hospital, one year after the bombing in June 2000 and saw with my own eyes how they did it with utmost accuracy. These are war crimes using NATO’s so-called smart bombs.

Click here to read the Ebook.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “The US-NATO War of Aggression Against Yugoslavia”. Belgrade Children’s Hospital was a “Strategic Target”. Michel Chossudovsky

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.

***

As the UK faces another round of austerity to schools and hospitals from the new chancellor Jeremy Hunt, amid a growing cost of living crisis, tens of billions of pounds of public money are being wasted on unusable and extravagant weapons systems, irrelevant to modern conflict.

The government wants to award the armed forces close to £200bn extra by 2030 – the biggest increase in their budget since the start of the Cold War. By then their spending would double to £100bn a year.

Threatening to resign – along with his boss, defence secretary Ben Wallace – if the armed forces did not get these huge increases, defence minister James Heappey says: “There is no prosperity without security”.

The reverse is true; there is no security without prosperity. Influence in today’s world, as one of Britain’s most senior diplomats has said, is composed of many things, notably a strong economy. And nuclear weapons are among the least relevant.

The demands of the armed forces, and arms companies and lobby campaigns on their behalf, are particularly astonishing as they are made against the background of such profligacy that would be embarrassing had it not been so successfully ignored.

If Jeremy Hunt wants to seek “efficiency savings” in government, he does not have far to look. There have been years of damning reports from MPs and parliament’s spending watchdog, the National Audit Office, on the waste of public money by the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

The Ajax debacle

To take one current example: the ministry has spent more than £3bn of the public’s money, with the prospect of having to pay out £2bn more, on an armoured car called Ajax. The vehicle, tests show, deafens and injures the occupants, it cannot reverse over obstacles more than 20 centimetres high, and is too unwieldy to fit in the RAF’s transport aircraft.

The project was conceived in 2010 and due to be completed in 2017. By December 2021 the MoD had paid £3.2bn for just 26 Ajax vehicles, none of which it can use.

Defence minister Alec Shelbrooke said recently he “cannot determine a realistic timetable” about when the Ajax would be operational. Some defence industry commentators say it never will be.

The company pocketing billions from the Ajax is the UK subsidiary of the American company, General Dynamics. The company’s manager of the project is Carew Wilks, a former army general in charge of the MoD’s “land equipment” department. General Sir Peter Wall, a former head of the army, was appointed a non-executive director of the company.

The Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) castigated the MoD in a recent report:

“We have seen similar failings again and again in the Department’s management of its equipment programmes”, it said.

“The Ajax programme also raises serious concerns about the Department’s processes and culture for testing whether new equipment is safe to use.”

It continued:

“The recent Russian invasion of Ukraine only reinforces the urgent need for the Department to reform, prioritise and effectively manage its expenditure to ensure the Armed Forces can secure all the equipment that they need in the quickest possible time.

Edward Arnold​, a research fellow with the partly UK government-funded Royal United Services Institute, said the Ajax saga had moved “from a technical problem to a cultural one at the heart of the MoD.”

He added: There still appears to be an inability for individuals to show leadership, moral courage and accountability…It’s time for the MoD to learn lessons, rather than simply identifying them”.

‘Wastage of taxpayers’ money’

It is not the first time the criticism has been levelled at the MoD. The devastating Chilcot report into the 2003 invasion of Iraq noted: “The MoD is good at identifying lessons but less good at learning them.” It has still not learned.

In a report last year the PAC said it was “extremely disappointed and frustrated by the continued poor track record of the MoD and its suppliers…and by wastage of taxpayers’ money running into the billions.”

It was “deeply concerned about departmental witnesses’ inability or unwillingness to answer basic questions and give a frank assessment of the state of its major programmes”.

The Committee also said the ministry did not know how the extra £16.5bn it was awarded in the 2020 Spending Review would benefit the armed forces. It warned that the money “could be swallowed whole by the up to £17.4bn funding black hole at the centre of our defence capabilities.”

‘Unaffordable vulnerable metal cans’

The allure of notionally prestigious weapons systems has seduced Labour as much as the Conservatives. Gordon Brown enthusiastically backed Blair’s agreement to build two aircraft carriers, the largest warships built for the Royal Navy, in Rosyth, close to Brown’s Scottish constituency.

Their combined cost, initially estimated at less than £4bn, rose to more than £6bn.

They are designed to carry the short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) version of US F35 Lightning II jets. This version of Lockheed Martin’s F35s has a shorter range and smaller payload than the alternative catapult and arrester gear (“cats and traps”) version that was abandoned on grounds of cost.

The MoD’s plan to buy 48 jets for the two carriers – the Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales – is estimated to cost £13bn over 30 years.

The carriers are extremely vulnerable to long range missiles being developed notably by China, making a mockery of the “show of strength” hailed by the MoD when the Queen Elizabeth was deployed to the Pacific in 2021.

Lord Richards, the former chief of the defence staff, described the carriers to me as “behemoths…unaffordable vulnerable metal cans”.

And at precisely the moment we are at greatest risk of war with Russia, one of the carriers is marooned in Rosyth, being repaired for a leaking propeller – a problem that has persistently plagued the vessel.

The government says the Prince of Wales carrier has spent 267 days at sea and 193 days undergoing repairs since it was commissioned in December 2019.

Disastrous decisions

In another egregious waste of money, a fleet of new and much-delayed Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft were scrapped at a cost of £4bn in the 2010 defence review on the grounds they would cost too much.

The MoD wastes public money even when it comes to providing the most basic services. The National Audit Office revealed in 2018 that the ministry was £4.2bn worse off for selling married quarters to a Guernsey-based company – at a time there was a £40bn black hole in its weapons programme.

The MoD has been forced to apologise for the squalid and even dangerous state of the homes for armed forces families.

I have estimated, taking into account National Audit Office and PAC reports that at least £300bn over the past 20 years have been wasted on disastrous defence and military decisions, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Labour and nuclear arms

Labour has belatedly pointed to the MoD’s abuse of public money, raising the £13bn the ministry has admitted wasting since 2010.

What Labour is not doing is questioning the cost, of at least £200bn, of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme, a figure not disputed by the MoD. Sir Keir Starmer has stated that Labour’s “support for nuclear deterrence is non-negotiable”.

Tony Blair commented in his memoir, A Journey, that Trident’s military use was “non-existent” but to give it up was “too big a downgrading of our status as a nation”.

The leadership of both main parties has conspired to prevent any meaningful Commons debate about the credibility of a British “nuclear deterrent”.

Successive governments have described nuclear weapons as the “ultimate insurance” against a nuclear attack. Yet they have failed to insure against very real threats, most recently of a pandemic, and invest adequately in weapons relevant to modern conflict, including drones and countering cyber attacks.

Instead, the government continues to feed the profits of arms companies by indulging in the sheer hypocrisy of supporting lucrative arms contracts with Saudi Arabia and other despotic states of the Gulf.

While loudly attacking the abuse of human rights in China and elsewhere, it promotes British arms sales to some of the world’s biggest abusers of human rights – under the guise of protecting Britain’s security. And Labour leaders turn away.

*

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.

Richard is a British editor, journalist and playwright, and the doyen of British national security reporting. He wrote for the Guardian on defence and security matters and was the newspaper’s security editor for three decades.

Featured image: One of Britain’s two aircraft carriers is currently being repaired. (Photo: MOD)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Britain’s Ministry of Defense £300BN Waste of Public Money. No Resources for Schools and Hospitals
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

Time is running out. We urge you to take the necessary steps to create legislation that ensures the human rights and freedoms of your country’s citizens.

In March 2022, paralyzed Australian Philip O’Keefe was the first man in history to post a message on Twitter, using only his mind to type it out. To transmit thoughts from the brain to the internet or cell phone system, you just need to collect the electromagnetic waves emitted by the brain during its activity, convert them into written words and transmit them to the cell phone or its display or the internet system. To reverse this process, it suffices to transmit in the brain electromagnetic signals at the frequencies of the activity of the targeted neurons, which will absorb this energy and thus, the new neuronal activity produced from outside will appear in the brain.

Already in 1962 sounds were produced in human brains by microwaves pulsed in the frequencies of the nervous activity of the human auditory systems.

In 2007, the Washington Post wrote: „in October 1994 at the Air Force laboratory… scientists were able to transmit sentences in the heads of human subjects, albeit with marginal intelligibility”. If these transmitted sentences were converted into ultrasound, people would not hear them and moreover, they would not realize it, but their brain would accept them and in this way they would become the “thoughts” of the targeted individuals. In many countries it is forbidden to use ultrasound to manipulate peoples’ minds, but there is no similar ban on the manipulation of the human nervous system, brain and thought by pulsed microwaves.

In 2020, the American Academy of Sciences wrote in the report on attacks of American diplomats in Cuba and China, well known as the Havana syndrome, that the most likely cause of their problems was pulsed microwaves. It is well known that these attacks are accompanied by artificially produced sound hallucinations. It proves that pulsed microwaves are being used as a weapon already today.

In 2018, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari warned in his speech about the rise of a new totalitarianism based on access to the human brain. According to Mr. Harari, “Once we have algorithms that can understand us better than ourselves, they could predict our desires, manipulate our feelings, and even make decisions on our behalf. And if we’re not careful, the outcome may be the rise of digital dictatorships”.

At present, there is no legislation prohibiting the use of mind control technologies and for this the scientists in the matter feel free to work on the development of “nanobots”, nanoparticles that can enter the blood and connect the brain to the Internet. Once connected to the internet the human brain’s activity may be manipulated from there as well, especially if the internet is transmitted by pulsed micowaves, as it actually happens (though probably not yet in the brain frequencies, but there is a plan to connect brains to internet in the sixth generation of cell phone telephony and then the cell phone signals will be transmitted in the brain frequencies – this should happen within 10years).

In October 2018 a scientist from the American military research agency DARPA  James Giordano said in a lecture to cadets that his agency produced nanomaterial, which can be aerosolized and when breathed in, penetrate the human brain and make it controlable from outside.

This material evidently works as an antenna, which can collect pulsed microwaves transmitted from an outside antenna in the brain. This nanomaterial is more than probably graphene which is so small that it can penetrate the blood-brain barrier. Scientists say: „The graphene implants are designed to interpret brain signals with exceptional accuracy to provide a therapeutic response adapted to the clinical condition of each patient”.

In 2021 the International Bioethics Committee of UNESCO wrote: „External tools that may interfere with our decisions can call into question, or even challenge, an individual’s free will, and consequently an individual’s responsibilities. In this way, neurotechnology could affect freedom of thought, decision-making and action. Taken together, these could have a profound impact on justice systems and social organizations” (pg. 36) and it encourages member states to guarantee neurorights to their citizens” (pg.38).

In September 2021, the Chilean Parliament approved a law guaranteeing Chilean citizens the rights to personal identity, free will and mental privacy.

Evidently it is now your urgent task to follow Chilean example and prove to your citizens that you are not planning to transform your state, (eventually based on democracy and respect for human rights), into a totalitarian state where the elite turn citizens into bio-robots, controlled by supercomputers.

Legislation, which is lacking in your state, should provide for the creation of teams capable of detecting electromagnetic or other attacks that produce electrical currents in the human brain or body that would deprive them of their freedom of thought and privacy or injure their body.

On March 20 2021,the Human Rights Council of the United Nations wrote: “to ensure the adequate implementation of the prohibition of torture and related legal obligations in present and future circumstances, its interpretation should evolve… also in areas such as artificial intelligence, robotics, nanotechnology and neurotechnology” (par 76). In paragraph 73 it wrote: „In practice, cybertechnology already plays the role of an ‘enabler’ in the perpetration of both physical and psychological forms of torture, most notably… and increasingly also through the remote control or manipulation of… medical implants and, conceivably, nanotechnological or neurotechnological devices”..

Since there are thousands of people worldwide who complain about being exposed to this kind of torture, the teams you should create should also be able to find sources of harmful radiation and should include representatives of human rights organizations, to ensure their independence from powerful state agencies.

We call on you to pool your efforts and create such legislation in order to fulfill the principles embedded in our Constitution and guarantee the citizens of our state their very basic rights and freedoms, including freedom of thought, in a fast changing world.

Please contact military neurotechnologists in your country, if you are looking for more information.

Thank you.

Mojmír Babáček for Citizen’s Association for the Ban of Manipulation of Human Nervous System by Radiofrequency Radiation https://zakaz.webgarden.cz/

Co-signed by:

Harald Brems for Schutzschild e.V.
Germany
Schutzschild

Richard Lighthouse for Targeted Justice
United States
Targeted Justice

Saroja Angadi MS.MT(ASCP), PMP for Society of safe Bharath against covert torture and energy weapons
India
Society of safe Bharath against covert torture and energy weapons

Peter Mooring for STOPEG Foundation (STOP Electronic weapons and Gangstalking)
Netherlands
STOPEG

Melanie Vritschan for International Coalition Against Electronic Torture and Robotization of Living Beings (ICATOR)
Avenue Paul Hymans 120/47, B – 1200 Brussels
Belgium
ICATOR

Derrick Robinson for PACTS, International
United States
PACTS, International

Terukatsu Ishibashi for the Board of Directors of Technological Crime Victims Network Specified Nonprofit Organization
Japan
Technological Crime Victims Network

Stéphane Mille for ADVHER (Association de Defense des Victimes de Harcélement Electromagnétique et en Réseau)
France
ADVHER (Association de Defense des Victimes de Harcélement Electromagnétique et en Réseau)

Paolo Dorigo for ACOFOINMENEF (association against all forms of mental and neurophysiological interference and control)
Italy
Acofoinmenef (ex AVae-m)

Giuseppe Palmieri for MOVIMENTO AMPIO CONTRO LA TORTURA TECNOLOGICA PSICOLOGICA E MENTALE
Italy
movimento ampio contro la tortura tecnologica psicologica e mentale

Mikael Eleman for Föreningen för hjärnans integritet i Sverige
Sweden
Society for brain integrity in Sweden

Zofia Filipiak for Stowarzyszenie STOP Zorganizowanym Elektronicznym Torturom
Polska
https://stopzet.pl/

Stanislav Kalinovsky for Stop-torture, Canada
Canada
Stop-torture, Canada

Alicia Cruz Sánchez
VIACTEC ESPAÑA

*

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 Graphene Flagship

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Create Legislation to Protect People’s Brains and Bodies Against Attacks by Neurotechnologies

Big Pharma’s Child-Vax Windfall

October 24th, 2022 by Prof. Samira Kawash

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

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

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

***

On Oct. 20, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention handed another huge gift to Big Pharma: In a little-publicized meeting, the agency’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices voted to recommend adding the Covid vaccine to the childhood and adolescent immunization schedule. This makes the Covid vaccine market vast and indefinite—exposing children to unnecessary risks while shielding drug companies from liability.

“There is no reason to inject children with this novel therapeutic.”

Throughout the pandemic, the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration rubber-stamped every iteration of the vaccines that came through the door. So this final outcome is hardly surprising. And yet it still has the power to shock. It never should have come to this. Despite all the “sciencing” that led us here, it is a completely perverse outcome. The Covid bonfire is down to its last fading embers—and now the CDC effectively decrees that every child forever should receive this novel, barely tested, potentially dangerous injection.

The potential profits flowing from this approval are enormous. The Covid injections were all approved under emergency laws that effectively shielded the corporate developers from any liability. This temporary shield would expire in October 2024. When the CDC officially adds the shots to the childhood immunization schedule, all future liability transfers to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, or VICP. The shield extends to adult shots, as well; once the product is covered under VICP, manufacturers become immune against all consumer legal challenges, shifting damages claims to US taxpayers. Having already received FDA approval as “safe and effective,” and with no concern for liability, the manufacturers are free to churn out mRNA injections as they will. Shots and boosters from birth until death, multiplied by every citizen in the nation. Childhood Covid vaccination is the 2021 windfall compounded into eternity.

Children are at minuscule risk from the novel coronavirus and transmit it at lower rates than adults. That much we have known since the early days of the pandemic. Public-health authorities also acknowledge that the Pfizer/Moderna products don’t prevent infection or transmission of the virus, that the mRNA formulation doesn’t grant any lasting immunity, that the benefit of the shot against severe disease is only evident for older patients, and that there are risks of significant adverse events, including heart inflammation, neurological impairment, autoimmune disease, and death. There is no reason to inject children with this novel therapeutic.

Parents have spoken with their feet; the uptake of these injections for children under 11 has been well below what officials were hoping. Despite a massive publicity campaign that likened vaccination to a “super-power” and recruited Sesame Street characters to the cause, by September, only 6 percent of children under 5 had received even a single dose, and fewer than 2 percent were “fully vaccinated.” Dr. Peter Hotez, CNN’s go-to vaccine advocate, thinks the reason is a failure to scare parents enough. As he told The Washington Post, “we haven’t done a good job explaining the long-term developmental consequences of long covid for younger children.” Or, maybe parents can see what is hiding in plain sight: Kids don’t need this shot, and the risk of harm is real.

If Elmo and fun bandaids were the carrots, the childhood vaccination schedule is the stick. While childhood vaccines aren’t mandated per se, states require adherence to a state-determined vaccination schedule as a condition for school enrollment, and have been expanding and tightening these requirements over the last 20 years. Some states may not add the Covid shot to their mandatory schedule, but the routinization of childhood vaccination compliance means that for all but the most contrary-minded, the Covid shot is no longer a matter of parental choice in any meaningful sense. There is a glimmer of hope here, though. On Thursday, Twitter was lighting up with the battle cries of furious parents determined to take the fight to their state governments and try to keep the Covid shot off the mandatory schedule. Governors of more than 10 states including Florida, Virginia, Colorado, and Tennessee have publicly come out against adding the Covid shot to their school mandates.

Cui bono? It isn’t the kids. They assume all the risk of adverse effects in the name of vaporous and hypothetical benefits that run counter to common sense and observation. The only answer that makes any sense at this point is Big Pharma. It is certainly not the first time that the health and safety of children has been treated as road kill on the path to capital accumulation.

We know who is at risk for serious Covid outcomes: the aged, the infirm, the obese. These are the people who die from Covid; these are the deaths the Covid shot might possibly prevent. Requiring children to get the Covid shot in perpetuity is an inversion of protection and risk. It is the final act in the perverse practice of public health for the last two years that has sacrificed children’s well-being in order to “stop Covid” and “protect the vulnerable.”

It is often said that children are “priceless,” that “the children are our future.” But the people in charge don’t act like they believe it. The most recent bivalent booster was never tested on children. In fact, it was never tested on any human. Which might be fine for adults, who can decide for themselves whether an antibody response in the eight mice Pfizer bothered to test is good enough. Now, children in many states won’t really have that option. Forcing this drug on children via the childhood vaccination schedule is, at best, a reckless disregard for the well-being of some of society’s most vulnerable members.

Something beyond recklessness and corporate greed is coming into the light as the Covid endgame plays out on children’s bodies. The harm isn’t accidental, even if it is dressed up in the white coat of medicine. It is the price that must be paid to “end Covid,” to regain security and safety—not for children, but for adults who quiver at the prospect that some day they will have to die, and who look to the miracles of science to beat back the ravages of time and decay. If children matter at all these days, it is only as raw material to be consumed in a desperate grasp at a quickly vanishing immortality.

*

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.

Samira Kawash is a professor emerita of women’s and gender studies at Rutgers University.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

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

Price: $11.50 

Purchase directly from the Global Research Online Store

You may also purchase directly at DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page(NOTE: User-friendly)

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 White House has deployed thousands of American soldiers just miles from Ukraine to prepare for war, according to CBS News. Officers speaking with the outlet revealed they were there for combat against Russia.

Brigadier General John Lubas confirmed nearly 5,000 troops from the 101st Airborne recently joined the 100,000 American soldiers already deployed to Europe. Lubas described his troops as being on “full deployment,” and they are preparing to fight Russian soldiers in Ukraine. “This is not a training deployment, this is a combat deployment for us. We understand we need to be ready to fight tonight,” he said.

CBS Reporter Charlie D’Agata was embedded with the American forces as they conducted military drills – at a forward operating base – within four miles of Ukraine’s border. The 101st Airborne is engaged in joint exercises with Romanian forces, simulating Ukrainian soldiers’ combat against Russian troops.

Colonel Edwin Matthaidess said his forces have been “closely watching” the Russian soldiers, “building objectives to practice against” and conducting war games that “replicate exactly what’s going on” in Ukraine.

CBS News reported, “[Russia’s] goal is to cut off all Ukrainian access to the sea, leaving the country and its military forces landlocked.” CBS News did not provide a source for that assertion. The Kremlin has publicly said its war goal is limited to eastern Ukraine.

Lubas declared the division was “ready to defend every inch of NATO soil.” However, Moscow has never threatened to invade a NATO country. Ukraine is not a NATO member. When President Zelensky said Ukraine should be allowed into the North Atlantic alliance last month, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg rejected Kiev’s proposal.

The 101st Airborne is a light infantry division. It carries the nickname the “Screaming Eagles” as the Pentagon utilizes the 101st as a force that can deploy around the world within hours. Lubas described his division as bringing a “unique capability, from our air assault capability… We’re a light infantry force, but again, we bring that mobility with us, for our aircraft and air assaults.”

Romanian Major General Lulian Berdila told CBS News that the presence of American troops was reminiscent of WWII, “The real meaning for me, to have the American troops here, is like if you were to have allies in Normandy before any enemy was there.” The 101st has not deployed to Europe since the last world war.

*

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.

Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com, news editor of the Libertarian Institute, and co-host of Conflicts of Interest.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

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 premise behind COVID shot mandates and vaccine passports was that by taking the shot, you would protect others, as it would prevent infection and spread of COVID-19

In early October 2022, during a COVID hearing in the European Parliament, Dutch member Rob Roos questioned Pfizer’s president of international developed markets, Janine Small, about whether Pfizer had in fact tested and confirmed that their mRNA jab would prevent transmission prior to its rollout

Small admitted that Pfizer never tested whether their jab would prevent transmission because they had to “move at the speed of science to understand what is happening in the market … and we had to do everything at risk”

We’ve known for well over two years that the shots were never tested for transmission interruption. In October 2020, Peter Doshi, associate editor of The BMJ, highlighted that trials were not designed to reveal whether the vaccines would prevent transmission. Yet everyone in government and media insisted they would do just that

It was never about science or protecting others. It was always about following a predetermined narrative that sought to get experimental mRNA technology into as many people as possible

*

February 9, 2021, I published an article that clarified the medical and legal definitions of a “vaccine.” In the article, I noted that mRNA COVID-19 jabs did not meet those definitions, in part because they don’t prevent infection or spread. In reality, they’re experimental gene therapies. In July that year, The New York Times published a hit piece on me citing that February 9 article:1

“The article that appeared online on Feb. 9 began with a seemingly innocuous question about the legal definition of vaccines. Then over its next 3,400 words, it declared coronavirus vaccines were ‘a medical fraud’ and said the injections did not prevent infections, provide immunity or stop transmission of the disease.

Instead, the article claimed, the shots ‘alter your genetic coding, turning you into a viral protein factory that has no off-switch.’ Its assertions were easily disprovable …”

Pfizer Moved ‘at the Speed of Science’

Fast-forward to early October 2022, and my claims were officially confirmed during a COVID hearing in the European Parliament. Dutch member Rob Roos questioned Pfizer’s president of international developed markets, Janine Small, about whether Pfizer had in fact tested and confirmed that their mRNA jab would prevent transmission prior to its rollout.

As noted by Roos, the entire premise behind COVID shot mandates and vaccine passports was that by taking the shot, you would protect others, as it would prevent infection and spread of COVID-19. Small replied:

“No. We had to really move at the speed of science to understand what is happening in the market … and we had to do everything at risk.”2

As noted by Roos, “This means the COVID passport was based on a big lie. The only purpose of the COVID passport: forcing people to get vaccinated.” Roos added that he found this deception “shocking — even criminal.”3

In the video below, biologist and nurse teacher John Campbell, Ph.D., reviews this growing scandal. He points out that U.K. government officials emphatically assured the public that everything that was normally done in clinical trials for a vaccine was done for the COVID shots. Now we’re told that was not the case after all.

The question is why? According to Small, these basic trials were not done because they “had to move at the speed of science.” But just what does that mean? As noted by Campbell, these are “just words without meaning.” It’s complete nonsense.

Moreover, what does it mean to “do everything at risk”? Campbell admits he has no idea what that means. I don’t either, but were I to venture a guess, I’d guess it means they knowingly skipped certain testing even though they knew the risks of doing so.

Government and Media Promulgated a Blatant Lie

Over the past three years, mainstream media have promulgated the lie that the COVID shots will prevent infection and transmission, telling us that anyone who doesn’t get the shot is selfish at best, and at worst, a potential murderer at large. Anyone who refuses poses a serious biomedical threat to society, hence the need for heavy-handedness.

Alas, it was all a lie from the start. The frustrating part is that we’ve KNOWN for well over two years that the shots were never tested for transmission interruption, yet everyone in government and media insisted they would do just that.

In October 2020, Peter Doshi, associate editor of The BMJ, highlighted the fact that the trials were not designed to reveal whether the vaccines would prevent transmission, which is key if you want to end the pandemic. He wrote:4

“None of the trials currently under way are designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths. Nor are the vaccines being studied to determine whether they can interrupt transmission of the virus.”

So, by October 2020, at the latest, it was clear that no studies had been done to determine whether the shots actually prevented transmission, which is a prerequisite for the claim that you’ll save the lives of others if you take it.

By then, Moderna had also admitted they were not testing its jab’s ability to prevent infection. Tal Zaks, chief medical officer at Moderna, stated that this kind of trial would require testing volunteers twice a week for long periods of time — a strategy he called “operationally untenable.”5

So, neither Pfizer nor Moderna had any clue whether their COVID shots would prevent transmission or spread, as that was never tested, yet with the aid of government officials and media, they led the public to believe they would. Below is just one example where Pfizer clearly obfuscated the truth.6 If stopping transmission was their “highest priority,” why didn’t they test and confirm that their shot was accomplishing this priority?

pfizer inc tweet

Similarly, in an Israeli interview7 (below), Bourla stated that “The efficacy of our vaccine in children is 80%.” The reporter asked him to clarify, “Are you talking about efficacy to prevent severe disease or to prevent infection?” and Bourla replied, “To prevent infection.” How could he say that when preventing infection has never been tested? Is that not evidence of fraud, caught on camera?

COVID Shots Have Been Fraudulently Marketed

As I stated in February 2021, the shots are a medical fraud. A true vaccine prevents infection; COVID shots don’t. Hence, they’ve also been fraudulently marketed. Governments around the world enabled this marketing fraud and media promulgated it.

As a result of mandating COVID shots and vaccine passports based on a blatant lie, millions have suffered potentially permanent harm and/or have died. Millions have also lost their jobs, forfeited careers and missed out on educational opportunities. This all happened because we DIDN’T follow the science.

Massive Conflicts of Interest Have Been Allowed

Why did government agencies go along with what was, to anyone with a microgram of critical thinking skills, an apparent fraud? Probably, because they’re in on it. As reported by investigative journalist Paul Thacker, the same PR company that serves Moderna and Pfizer also staffs the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Division of Viral Diseases team:8

“Early last month [September 2022], CDC Director Rochelle P. Walensky endorsed recommendations by the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for updated COVID-19 boosters from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna.

‘This recommendation followed a comprehensive scientific evaluation and robust scientific discussion,’ Dr. Walensky said in a statement. ‘If you are eligible, there is no bad time to get your COVID-19 booster and I strongly encourage you to receive it’ …

[The] PR firm Weber Shandwick, which has long represented Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies and began providing public relations support to Moderna sometime in 2020.

In an odd case of synchronicity — and let’s be honest, a whiff of undue influence — Weber Shandwick employees are also embedded at the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD), the CDC group that implements vaccine programs and oversees the work of ACIP [CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices] …

The CDC has refused to respond to questions explaining this apparent conflict … ‘[It] is irresponsible of CDC to issue a PR contract to Weber Shandwick, knowing that the firm also works for Moderna and Pfizer,’ emailed Public Citizen’s Craig Holman. ‘It raises legitimate questions of whose interests Weber Shandwick will put first — their private sector clients or the public’s interest at NCIRD.’”

Incidentally, Weber Shandwick was in 2016 found to have ghostwritten a drug study for Forest Pharmaceuticals — another unethical practice that has undermined the foundation of medical science for decades.

One PR Company, One Consistent Message

Weber Shandwick’s responsibilities at the CDC include but are not limited to “generating story ideas, distributing articles and conducting outreach to news, media and entertainment organizations” to boost vaccination rates.9 The company provides similar services to Moderna.

For example, it helped generate 7,000 news articles internationally after Moderna applied for emergency use authorization (EUA) for its jab.

In June 2022, Moderna announced a “cross-discipline team drawing on talent and expertise from Weber Shandwick” would “drive the brand’s narrative globally,” and “support Moderna in activating and engaging key internal and external audiences, including employees, consumers, health care providers, vaccine recipients and policymakers.”10

Considering the primary COVID jab makers have the same PR company as the CDC, is it any wonder that the messaging has been so consistently one-sided? As noted by Doshi in a recent interview on German television,11 mainstream media have consistently ignored COVID jab data and have “not done a good job in providing balanced coverage” about the shots.

“We’re not getting the information we need to make better choices and to have a more informed understanding of risk and benefit,” he told the interviewer, adding:12

“It was very unfortunate that from the beginning, what was presented to us by public health officials was a picture of great certainty … but the reality was that there were extremely important unknowns.

We entered a situation where essentially the stakes became too high to later present that uncertainty to people. I think that’s what set us off on the wrong foot. Public officials should have been a lot more forthright about the gaps in our knowledge.”

Reanalysis of Trial Data Confirms COVID Shot Dangers

In late September 2022, Doshi published a risk-benefit analysis focused on serious adverse events observed in Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID trials. Reanalysis of the data showed 1 in 800 who get a COVID shot suffers a serious injury. As detailed in Doshi’s paper:13

“Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 respectively.

Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated; risk ratio 1.43.

The Pfizer trial exhibited a 36 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group … The Moderna trial exhibited a 6 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group … Combined, there was a 16 % higher risk of serious adverse events in mRNA vaccine recipients …”

Doshi and his coauthors also concluded that the increase in adverse events from the shots surpassed the reduction in risk of being hospitalized with COVID-19. So, in short, the shots confer more harm than good.

Sen. Rand Paul Promises Investigation

A spokesperson for Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., replied to an inquiry by Thacker stating, “[T]hat CDC had a contract with the same PR firm representing the manufacturers of the COVID-19 vaccine raises serious concerns,” adding that “these conflicts of interest will be thoroughly investigated” by the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) — which oversees the CDC — sometime next year.

After the November midterms, Paul will be next in line as the top Republican on this committee. It’s well worth noting that, at bare minimum, this kind of conflict of interest should have been disclosed by both parties. At best, it should have been avoided altogether. The CDC did neither. It didn’t disclose its relationship with the PR firm and it didn’t prevent the conflict of interest from developing in the first place.

What Was the COVID Jab Push All About?

The rational take-home from all this is that the massive push to inject the global population with these experimental jabs was never about following science and protecting others.

It was always about promoting a false, invented narrative designed to allow for the implementation of a top-down directive to inject every person on the planet with a novel mRNA technology. This, in turn, brings up two central questions:

  • Who’s at the top? — We don’t yet know. All we can say for sure is that they have a very powerful and global influence — powerful enough that government officials have willingly lied and sacrificed their own populations in an incredibly risky medical experiment.
  • Why is injecting everyone with mRNA technology so important to the anonymous decision-makers? — Again, we don’t know, but it’s quite clear that there’s a reason for it, that it’s supposed to accomplish something.

As detailed in previous articles, the only rational reason for why the CDC is allowing COVID jab EUA’s for young children is because they’re assisting drug makers in their effort to obtain liability shielding by getting the shots onto the childhood vaccination schedule.

ACIP is poised to add COVID shots to the childhood vaccination schedule any day now,14 and once on the childhood schedule, vaccine makers will not be liable for injuries and deaths occurring from their shots, whether they occur in children or adults.

Also, remember that even though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted full approval to Pfizer’s Comirnaty COVID shot, Comirnaty was never released to the public. The Pfizer shot being given is still under EUA.

Why was Comirnaty never released? Probably because once the shot has full FDA approval, liability kicks in. It appears they’re trying to avoid liability by getting the EUA shot on the childhood schedule before Comirnaty is rolled out and starts injuring and killing people.

Now, if they’re concerned about liability, that means they know the shot is dangerous. And if they know it’s dangerous (which all available data clearly show it is), then why do they want every person on the planet to get it?

Following this line of questioning to its logical conclusion leads us to the shocking conclusion that even though we don’t know the reasons why, the injuries and deaths from these jabs are intentional.

Vaccine Makers Continue to Spread Lies

Despite Small’s unequivocally clear admission that Pfizer has not tested its COVID shot to ascertain whether it prevents transmission, Pfizer’s CEO still does not shy away from insinuating as much. Here’s what he tweeted out October 12, 2022.15 He’s not saying the shot has been confirmed to prevent COVID, but he insinuates that it does by saying the FDA authorized it for the prevention of COVID. This is also known as lying by omission.

albert bourla tweet

Meanwhile, so-called fact checkers are trying to salvage Pfizer’s reputation by saying the company never actually stated the shot would stop transmission.16 That may be so, but government officials and media DID claim it would prevent both infection and spread, and Pfizer never corrected them, even as people were being fired and ostracized from society for not taking the jab.

If they were truly on the up-and-up, Pfizer officials would have clarified that the shot had not been tested to confirm it would prevent transmission, and until that was known, mandates and passports had no basis. Pfizer didn’t do that. Instead, they went along with it.

The Jabs Were Always To Be Pushed — ‘By Fair Means or Foul’

In conclusion, there’s no reason to trust government ever again, at least not in the U.S., which stands alone in pushing the jab on toddlers. (The reason for that, as mentioned earlier, is probably to get the jabs onto the childhood vaccination schedule, which will shield the vaccine makers from financial liability for harms.)

As noted by GB News host Neil Oliver in the video above, the very basis for COVID mandates or vaccine passports — that everyone had to get jabbed for the greater good, to protect others and help end the pandemic — was a deliberate lie from the start.

Many of us realized this early on, but our voices were drowned out as government, Big Tech and media pulled out all the stops, censoring anyone who told the truth. And all who have participated in this grand deception remain unrepentant to this day.

In a recent Twitter thread, a Twitter user named Daniel Hadas lays out an excellent description of what the last three years were really about:17

“The debate over whether, when, and to what extent lies were told about COVID vaccines preventing transmission misses a central point: No matter what the trial data showed, the vaccines were ALWAYS going to be pushed on entire populations, by fair means or foul.

Very early on, the COVID response was locked into a specific narrative. The world would lock down and stay safe, while brave scientists hammered away at a vaccine … You may recall that, in the first months of COVID, there was a lot of breathless talk about whether there would EVER be a vaccine.

This was all nonsense … Our authorities would not have adopted the strategy of lockdown-till-vaccine unless they were certain a vaccine could and would be made …

The purpose of sowing fear that there might never be a vaccine was to increase gratitude and enthusiasm when one came along. Indeed, every part of the early COVID response can be understood as (in part) pre-release marketing for the vaccine …

That’s why COVID risks for the young were wildly amplified. That’s why there was unending obfuscation of the central role of infection-conferred immunity both in protecting individuals and in ending the pandemic.

The plan was that the vaccine would be met by a perfectly primed population: immunologically naive, desperate to be released from lockdowns, terrified of COVID, eager to do the right thing, i.e. protect others through taking the shots.

Once so much effort had gone into priming, it is UNIMAGINABLE that authorities would have pivoted to telling us … ‘Well, actually, the vaccine’s safety profile is only so-so, efficacy is murky, and most people don’t need to worry about COVID anyway. So best most of you not take this … Sorry about the lockdowns.’

That was not in the script. So it was inevitable that the vaccine be pushed on everyone, and inevitable that the best arguments for universal vaccination would be used. Those arguments were: COVID is super-dangerous for YOU. Distrust in this vaccine is distrust in science. Refusing to get vaccinated is immoral, because you will infect others.

The veracity of these claims didn’t matter: they were in the script, and it was too late to deviate … Accordingly, the stage was also set for vaccine mandates.

None of this is conspiratorial. It is descriptive … Clarifying the details won’t alter the essence of the picture — The COVID response was determined by a script of vaccine salvation, and societies’ investment in that script was too deep for mere realities to divert its execution.”

The primary questions that still remain unanswered are: Why was this script created? What are its intended consequences? And, who created it? As mentioned earlier, the evidence suggests harm is an intended outcome — harm to our economy, our social order, our health, our life span and reproductive capacity.

As for “why,” we can just look at what has been accomplished so far. Assuming the consequences were intentional, the “why” appears to be wealth transfer, depopulation and the creation of a one world government.

*

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.

Notes

1 New York Times July 24, 2021 (Archived)

2 News.com.au October 12, 2022

3 Twitter Rob Roos October 11, 2022

4, 5 The BMJ 2020;371:m4037

6 Twitter Pfizer January 13, 2021

7 Twitter Dr. Eli David October 18, 2022

8, 9, 10 Disinformation Chronicle October 11, 2022

11, 12 Maryanne Demasi Substack October 17, 2022

13 Vaccine September 22, 2022; 40(40): 5798-5805

14 Steve Kirsch Substack October 17, 2022

15 Twitter Dr. Eli David October 13, 2022

16 Twitter Lewis U October 14, 2022

17 Twitter Daniel Hadas October 15, 2022

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

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

Price: $11.50 

Purchase directly from the Global Research Online Store

You may also purchase directly at DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page(NOTE: User-friendly)

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 court approved a request Friday to depose Dr. Anthony Fauci, former White House press secretary Jen Psaki, and a bevy of other Biden administration officials in a free speech case.

The attorneys general for Missouri and Louisiana have accused the Biden administration of “colluding to suppress freedom of speech” with major tech companies and first filed in May. The duo has specifically alleged Big Tech and the Biden administration worked to suppress speech about COVID-19, election integrity, and other matters unfairly.

“After finding documentation of a collusive relationship between the Biden Administration and social media companies to censor free speech, we immediately filed a motion to get these officials under oath,” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said. “It is high time we shine a light on this censorship enterprise.”

He backed the lawsuit along with fellow Republican Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana approved the deposition request.

The lawsuit alleged that the collusion amounted to an infringement upon the First Amendment rights of everyday people. It also alleged Action in Excess of Statutory Authority Administrative Procedure Act Violations by Health and Human Services officials and Administrative Procedure Act violations by Department of Homeland Security officials.

In addition to Fauci and Psaki, the court also approved the deposition of the Director of White House Digital Strategy Rob Flaherty, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Director Jen Easterly, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, and FBI supervisory special agent Elvis Chan.

In a lengthy 26-page order, U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty, appointed by former President Donald Trump, went through the list of officials requested for deposition and concluded that Schmitt and Landry satisfied the burden of proof for testimony.

For example, Doughty agreed with the plaintiffs’ arguments that there were “compelling reasons that suggest Dr. Fauci has acted through intermediaries” to communicate with Big Tech.

Purported Big Tech censorship has become a rallying cry for conservatives over recent years. Meanwhile, liberals, including the Biden administration, have fretted over the prevalence of misinformation online and have pushed social media platforms to crack down on it.

Two examples cited in the suit were the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story and efforts to curb mentions of the so-called lab leak theory, which hypothesized COVID-19 originated from a lab in Wuhan, China.

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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.

***

 

 

 

 

Refugee organisations have balked at new proposals by the British government to ban refugees who cross the English Channel from seeking asylum.

Home Secretary Suella Braverman set out the new plans at the Conservative Party conference on Tuesday in a bid to cut down the number of migrants taking the dangerous journey from France.

“If you deliberately enter the United Kingdom illegally from a safe country, you should be swiftly returned to your home country or relocated to Rwanda. That is where your asylum claim will be considered,” she said in her speech.

“UK policy on illegal migration should not be derailed by abuse of our modern slavery laws, Labour’s Human Rights Act, or orders of the Strasbourg Court.”

She said she would overhaul the Modern Slavery Act to prevent asylum seekers claiming to be victims in order to prevent deportation.

The Times reported on Monday that any legislation would be worded in such a way as to not put the UK in violation of the 1951 Refugee Convention, although a number of party sources told the newspaper that the country could be forced to leave the convention in order to implement it.

A spokesperson from the Refugee Council told Middle East Eye that refugees should not be “criminalised” and expressed concern that the move would put further pressure on the country’s obligations under international law.

“Prime ministers since Winston Churchill have committed to the Refugee Convention – which we were a founding signatory of – and we should be strengthening our commitment to this, not seeking to break from it,” said Enver Solomon, the organisation’s CEO.

Others suggested that the country could end up in breach of any number of international legal requirements.

“Banning anyone who crossed the Channel from applying for asylum here is unlawful as it’s in breach of the Refugee Convention, the Human Rights Act and common law,” said Beth Gardiner-Smith, CEO at Safe Passage International, speaking to MEE.

“Trashing Britain’s record on human rights, and as one of the architects of the Refugee Convention, is reckless – it will cost lives and is bad news for us all.”

A violation of international law?

Refugee groups had already been highly critical of existing government legislation targeting the Channel crossings.

A policy of deporting refugees who arrived in the UK by irregular means to Rwanda was widely condemned and ran into legal problems, with the first attempted flight in June being blocked by court action.

However, Braverman has repeatedly boasted of her willingness to confront legal blocks on the government’s policies, threatening even withdrawal from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

So far, the only countries to have withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the ECHR are Russia earlier this year, following the invasion of Ukraine, and Greece in 1969 following a military coup (it was later re-admitted).

No country has taken the step of withdrawing from the Refugee Convention, though many countries are not party to it.

According to Daniel Sohege, a lawyer and director of Stand For All, a consultancy firm specialising in immigration, the emphasis on penalising potential asylum seekers based on their method of entering the country was very likely illegal under international law.

“The Convention sets out very clearly that someone seeking asylum must not be penalised for their manner of entry. That is one of the most crucial aspects of international refugee law, as it recognises that the majority of refugees are not in a position to wait until someone decides that they can travel by a ‘resettlement route’,” he explained.

He added that the current existing Rwanda scheme – which has still yet to be fully implemented as a result of its own legal problems – would be inadequate under the new proposals.

“Would someone fleeing persecution from Iran, of which a high proportion of those crossing the Channel are, be sent back there?” he asked.

“This would clearly contravene the European Convention on Human Rights, among other things, regarding inhumane treatment.”

Legal travel near impossible

At least 30,000 people have reportedly made the crossing over the Channel in small boats so far this year, an increase on 2021.

Though polling has generally shown sympathy for refugees among the wider British public, the ruling Conservative Party has repeatedly focused on the issue and argued that tackling them is necessary to save migrants from exploitation by people smugglers.

However, rights groups argue that the ultimate impact of the policies has simply been to make seeking asylum in the UK at best unattractive and, at worst, impossible.

Yumna Kamel, legal education officer at Right to Remain, told MEE that what Braverman was proposing was largely a “continuation” of the policies pursued by her predecessor, Priti Patel, and the Nationality and Borders Act (NABA) passed earlier this year.

“Unless the reason for seeking asylum arises after a person’s arrival in the UK, according to NABA, it is now near impossible to enter the UK ‘legally’ with a view to claiming asylum,” she explained.

“Most people arrive clandestinely, via lorry or small boat, or by using a false passport – which the Refugee Convention pardons in many circumstances, but NABA has curbed in the UK – because most people are fleeing danger.”

Sohege said that the new policy, much like those previously implemented by Patel, had little to do with protecting migrants.

“It is a policy designed to stoke outrage in its inhumanity and illegality, not to be a practical means by which to reduce Channel crossings, which would require a focus on providing safer routes and simpler access to the UK asylum system,” he said.

*

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: Official portrait of Suella Braverman MP 3×4 portrait of Suella Braverman (Photo by David Woolfall, licensed under CC BY 3.0)

Russia’s Homage to Nord Stream Pipelines

October 24th, 2022 by M. K. Bhadrakumar

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.

***

David Brinkley, the legendary American newscaster with a career that spanned an amazing fifty-four years from World War II once said that a successful man is one who can lay a firm foundation with the bricks others have thrown at him. How many American statesmen ever practised this noble thought inherited from Jesus Christ remains doubtful. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s stunning proposal to Turkish President Recep Erdogan to build a gas pipeline to Turkiye to create an international hub from which Russian gas can be supplied to Europe breathes fresh life into this very “Gandhian” thought.  

Putin discussed the idea with Erdogan at their meeting in Astana on October 13 and since spoke about it at the Russian Energy Week forum last week where he proposed creating the largest gas hub in Europe in Turkey and redirecting the volume of gas, the transit of which is no longer possible through the Nord Stream, to this hub.

Putin said it may imply building another gas pipeline system to feed the hub in Turkiye, through which gas will be supplied to third countries, primarily European ones, “if they are interested.” 

Prima facie, Putin does not expect any positive response from Berlin to his standing proposal to use the string of the Nord Stream 2, which remained undamaged, to supply 27.5 billion cu. metres of gas through the winter months. Germany’s deafening silence is understandable. Chancellor Off Scholz is terrified about President Biden’s wrath. 

Berlin says it knows who sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines but won’t reveal it as it affects Germany’s national security! Sweden too pleads that the matter is far too sensitive for it to share the evidence it has collected with any country, including Germany! Biden has put the fear of God into the minds of these timid European “allies” who have been left in no doubt what is good for them! The western media too is ordered to play down Nord Steam saga so that with the passage of time, public memory will fade away. 

However, Russia has done its homework that Europe cannot do without Russia gas, the present bravado of self-denial notwithstanding. Simply put, the European industries depend on cheap, reliable supplies of Russian for their products to remain competitive in the world market. 

Qatar’s energy minister Saad al-Kaabi said last week that he cannot envisage a future where “zero Russian gas” flows to Europe. He noted acerbically, “ If that’s the case, then I think the problem is going to be huge and for a very long time. You just don’t have enough volume to bring (in) to replace that (Russian) gas for the long term, unless you’re saying ‘I’m going to be building huge nuclear (plants), I’m going to allow coal, I’m going to burn fuel oils.’” 

Quintessentially, Russia plans to replace its gas hub in Haidach in Austria (which Austrians seized in July.) Conceivably, the hub in Turkiye has a ready market in Southern Europe, including Greece and Italy. But there is more to it than meets the eye. 

Succinctly put, Putin has made a strategic move in the geopolitics of gas. His initiative rubbishes the hare-brained idea of the Russophobic European Commission bureaucrats in Brussels, headed by Ursula von der Leyen, to impose a price cap on gas purchases. It makes nonsense of the US’ and EU’s plans to put down Russia’s profile as a gas superpower. 

Logically, the next step for Russia should be to align with Qatar, the world’s second biggest gas exporter. Qatar is a close ally of Turkey, too. At Astana recently, on the sidelines of the summit of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA), Putin held a closed-door meeting with the Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. They agreed to follow up with another meeting soon in Russia. 

Russia already has a framework of  cooperation with Iran in a number of joint projects in the oil and gas industry. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak recently disclosed plans to conclude an oil and gas swap deal with Iran by the end of the year. He said that “technical details are being worked out – issues of transport, logistics, price, and tariff formation.” 

Now, Russia, Qatar and Iran together account for more than half of the world’s entire proven gas reserves. Time is approaching for them to intensify cooperation and coordination on the pattern of the OPEC Plus. All three countries are represented in the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF). 

Putin’s proposal appeals to Turkiye’s longstanding dream to become an energy hub at the doorstep of Europe. Unsurprisingly, Erdogan instinctively warmed up to Putin’s proposal. Addressing the ruling party members in the Turkish parliament this week, Erdogan said,

“In Europe they are now dealing with the question of how to stay warm in the coming winter. We don’t have such a problem. We have agreed with Vladimir Putin to create a gas hub in our country, through which natural gas, as he says, can be delivered to Europe. Thus, Europe will order gas from Turkey.” 

Apart from strengthening own energy security, Turkiye also can contribute to Europe’s. No doubt, Turkiye’s importance will take a quantum leap in the EU foreign policy calculus, while also strengthening its strategic autonomy in regional politics. This is a huge step forward in Erdogan’s geo-strategy — the geographic direction of Turkish foreign policy under his watch.  

From the Russian viewpoint, of course, Turkiye’s strategic autonomy and its grit to pursue independent foreign policies works splendidly for Moscow in the present conditions of western sanctions. Conceivably, Russian companies will start viewing Turkiye as a production base where western technologies become accessible. Turkiye has a customs union agreement with the EU, which completely removes customs duties on all industrial goods of Turkish origin. (See my blog Russia-Turkey reset eases regional tensions, Aug 9, 2022)

In geopolitical terms, Moscow is comfortable with Turkiye’s NATO membership. Clearly, the proposed gas hub brings much additional income to Turkiye and will impart greater stability and predictability to the Russia-Turkey relations. Indeed, the strategic links that tie the two countries together are steadily lengthening — the S-400 ABM deal, cooperation in Syria, the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant, Turk-stream gas pipeline, to name a few. 

The two countries candidly admit that they have differences of opinion, but the way Putin and Erdogan through constructive diplomacy keep turning adverse circumstances into windows of opportunity for “win-win” cooperation is simply amazing. 

It does need ingenuity to get the US’ European allies source Russian gas without any coercion or boorishness even after Washington buried the Nord Stream gas pipelines in the depths of the Baltic Sea. There is dramatic irony that a NATO power is partnering Russia in this direction. 

The US foreign policy elite drawn from East European stock are rendered speechless by the sheer sophistication of the Russian ingenuity to bypass without any trace of rancour the shabby way the US and its allies — Germany and Sweden, in particular — slammed the door shut on Moscow to even take a look at the damaged multi-billion dollar pipelines that it had built in good faith in the depths of the Baltic Sea at the instance of two German chancellors, Gerhard Schroeder and Angela Merkel. 

The current German leadership of Chancellor Olaf Scholz looks very foolish and cowardly– and provincial. The European Commission’s Ursula von der Leyen gets a huge rebuff in all this which will ultimately define her tragic legacy in Brussels as a flag carrier for American interests.  This becomes probably the first case study for historians on how multipolarity will work in the world order.  

*

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: Who stands to gain? First pictures of Nord Stream pipeline show 50 metre hole after “powerful explosions” confirming sabotage.

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

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

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

***

On October 20, deadly clashes between security forces and demonstrations erupted in Chad. This is a major cause of concern for Paris and can also be seen as a sign of the challenges European powers are to face in Africa in general. In May there were major anti-French protests in the country, which has been under French military occupation. Protests in Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso (former French colonies) have included calls for greater military ties with Moscow instead of Paris.

Europe is considering relying more and more on African resources amid today’s energy crisis – and this could increase should the EU’s relations with China deteriorate, as seems to be Brussel’s desire if one takes seriously the recent anti-Chinese recommendations the European External Action Service issued to its member states.

From 1900 to the country’s independence in 1960 Paris controlled Chad. One could say in fact the country has hosted an almost non-stop succession of military operations since its independence.

In 1990, Paris went to great lengths to support Idriss Déby’s coup d’état against then president Hissene Habré. France, in the following years, offered its support to Déby against internal attempts to overthrow him and has kept a military presence in Chad. It also maintains an air force base at N’Djamena International Airport.

The country is located in a strategic area, and the relationship between Paris and the Chad authorities in N’Djamena has been mostly about military interests. Déby was not just a mere provider of troops to French regional wars. Chadian armed forces are today regarded as among the most efficient in the region and have played an important part in interventions in Central Africa, including in Mali. By means of its military interventionism and Déby’s role as a strongman, Chad was able to acquire global political capital as a partner of the West in the “war on terror”. N’Djamena has maintained regional stability, from a French perspective, by combating terrorist groups Boko Haram and other organizations. However, its interference elsewhere, particularly in the Central African Republic, could be described as having destabilizing outcomes instead.

Some analysts argue that N’Djamena diplomacy was succesfull in portraying the country and its government as indispensable to the West, and also argue that over the years Chad’s government has skillfully instrumentalized the “war on terror” by branding internal rebels and opposition as “terrorists”. French Operation Barkhane in the country, for example, has targeted several Chadian rebels that had nothing to do with the Jihadist organization in the Sahel with which Paris was really worried.

When Déby was killed by rebels in 2021, French President Emmanuel Macron attended his funeral and even Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield, US Representative to the UN, had very nice words to say about the departed leader (largely seen as a dictator). Upon Déby’s death, the government and the parliament were dissolved, and a Transitional Military Council was set up, headed by Mahamat Déby Itno, the deceased leader’s son. This opened the way to a troublesome transition crisis and conflict.

Paris and Washington cooperate and also sometimes compete for influence in Africa, but both powers see Chad as a major proxy – and now that it is haunted by the specter of instability and chaos, how will Paris respond?

We should expect an increase of European aggressive interventionism in Africa in general, but this could backfire and also expand the potential for US-European competition, as France has its own interests in Djibouti and nearing Somalia, while US President Joe Biden has escalated the American “forever war” in the latter – a situation that very much concerns Paris.

The African continent is targeted to become a major stage of great power competition, in a neocolonial manner, it would seem. However, things are changing. African nations and other emerging states are increasingly building on multi-alignment, non-alignment, and multilateralism while developing beneficial relations with China and Russia, as exemplified by the Egyptian Russian-built nuclear plant, while the West hypocritically campaigns against energy projects in the continent. In fact, despite green commitments, coal-fired plants are back in Europe – and so is Nazism, despite democratic commitments. These developments potentially undermine part of the Western soft power, as we have seen recently with the UN October 6 vote against a report (on China) written by its own human rights commissioner.

In fact, Europe today faces not only an economic, political and energy crisis, but a spiritual one, pertaining to its own values and self-perceptions – and this impacts on its very capacity to project its power abroad.

On October 13, Josep Borrell, the EU foreign policy chief, stated that “Europe is a garden” while most of the rest of the world “is a jungle”. He bluntly added that the jungle “could invade the garden.” This was of course not well received in Africa and elsewhere. Regarding Borell’s remarks, volumes could be spoken about European self-perceptions of exceptionalism and the implicit dichotomy of culture (or “civilisation”) versus nature or “barbarism”. One could argue that the so-called “garden” (of freedom, democracy and so on) already has to deal, from Brussel’s perspective, with inconvenient dissonances inside, exemplified by Hungary and Poland. By embracing Ukraine, with its long record of neo-Nazism and human rights infringements, the “garden” has already opened its gates, so to speak, according to its own standards. In any case, the political and diplomatic power of the West’s human rights narratives is wearing off.

Moscow and Beijing have much to gain from such a situation – as Europe seems to be bluntingly unmasking its neocolonialist tendencies and exposing the hypocrisy of its green and human rights narratives in broad daylight. And African states also have much to gain, by navigating the emerging polycentric world  through multialignment.

*

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.

Uriel Araujo is a researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Current Chaos in Chad Yet Another Challenge for France in Africa
  • Tags: , ,

Za NATO su dečje bolnice bile strateški ciljevi

October 24th, 2022 by Mina Ćurčić

Rat protiv Jugoslavije bio je generalna proba za mnoge ratove koji su se kasnije dešavali, glasi jedan od zaključaka s jučerašnje promocije knjige jednog od najvećih nezavisnih mislilaca savremenog sveta Mišela Čosudovskog, profesora Univerziteta u Otavi i direktora Centra za istraživanje globalizacije. Njegovo delo „Agresija SAD i NATO na Jugoslaviju” štampao je Beogradski forum za svet ravnopravnih i predstavljeno je juče u Beogradu, a profesor Čosudovski rekao je da je na mnogo načina rat koji je vođen u Jugoslaviji počeo znatno ranije, odnosno osamdesetih godina i da je bio generalna proba za oružane sukobe koji su se posle desili.

„Već početkom devedesetih godina počeo sam da istražujem ekonomske dimenzije o situaciji ovde i shvatio sam koliko je ona ključna u strateškom i vojnom pogledu”, rekao je profesor Čosudovski na početku svog izlaganja. On je ukazao na to da je NATO kategorički tvrdio da je cilj bio sačuvati živote, ali je dodao da je godinu dana posle rata posetio dečju bolnicu za koju je rekao da je bila strateški cilj tokom bombardovanja, jer su u slučaju te bolnice pogođeni generatori za struju.

Profesor Čosudovski navodi da je Jugoslavija bila ekonomija u usponu, a da nakon 1999. godine usleđuje šok-terapija Međunarodnog monetarnog fonda i da je ova institucija 1999. godine imala strategiju kojom je uništila fiskalnu politiku Jugoslavije. Čosudovski je kazao da je u periodu od 1990. do 1995. godine strategija SAD bila da se na ovu teritoriju uvedu teroristi Al Kaide i da su oni uključeni u bošnjačko-muslimansku vojsku. Podsetio je da je Dejtonski mirovni sporazum potpisan 1995. u vojnoj bazi u Ohaju, pod nadzorom američke vlade, vojske i – armije advokata.

Govoreći o prelazu sukoba s tla Bosne i Hercegovine na Kosovo i Metohiju, profesor Čosudovski je objasnio da su SAD, da ne bi bile direktno povezane s ratom, unajmile privatnu plaćeničku kompaniju, odnosno korporaciju za vojno profesionalno regrutovanje. „Oni su regrutovali Agima Čekua, a kasnije je postao glavnokomandujući tzv. Oslobodilačke vojske Kosova”, ukazao je autor knjige i dodao da je tzv. OVK bila finansirana zahvaljujući organizovanom kriminalu.

O knjizi „Agresija SAD i NATO na Jugoslaviju” govorili su general u penziji i ranije načelnik GŠ Vojske Jugoslavije Branko Krga, general u penziji i predsednik IO Kluba generala i admirala Srbije Luka Kastratović i predsednik Beogradskog foruma za svet ravnopravnih Živadin Jovanović. Krga je rekao da veruje da je javnost u Srbiji s posebnim odobrenjem prihvatila naslov knjige koji glasi „agresija”. „Pojam agresije predstavlja samu suštinu onoga što se dešavalo 1999. godine”, rekao je Krga i podsetio na to da postoje i drugačije interpretacije, poput one „humanitarna intervencija”. Krga je istakao da je u vreme rata bio na čelu vojnoobaveštajne službe i naglasio da nije bilo apsolutno nikakvog plana etničkog čišćenja, kao i da je to profesor Čosudovski zapazio u poglavljima svog dela.

Razloge za rat koji je vođen protiv nas mnogi autori pronalaze u reafirmaciji NATO-a, povodom obeležavanja 50 godina od formiranja, a između ostalog i u neutralisanju Rusije na ovom prostoru, testiranju modela neke buduće intervencije, ukazao je Krga. Govoreći o posledicama rata, istakao je da je jedna od posledica stradanje srpskog, nesrpskog i albanskog stanovništva od humanitarnih bombi sa osiromašenim uranijumom, o čemu se takođe govori u knjizi. Još jedna posledica rata, ukazao je, jeste da je time izvršena generalna proba za ratove u Avganistanu, Siriji, Jermeniji i u drugim zemljama.

Kastratović je naveo da je napisano mnogo knjiga o NATO agresiji. „Jako bitno je istaći da je to bila agresija SAD, a NATO je samo produžena ruka SAD”, rekao je Kastratović i dodao da nas je profesor Čosudovski podsetio na ovu činjenicu. Istakao je da je značaj knjige i u tome što je ona napisana tokom agresije na našu zemlju, kao i da je trenutak same promocije dela značajan zato što SAD i EU otvoreno prete Srbiji i ucenjuju je.

Predsednik Beogradskog foruma za svet ravnopravnih Živadin Jovanović rekao je da je knjiga s velikim zadovoljstvom i čašću objavljena u dvojezičnoj formi, odnosno na srpskom i engleskom jeziku. „Iz knjige i iz izlaganja koje smo čuli proizlaze neke ocene koje uvek moramo imati u vidu, pogotovu što smo žrtve jednostrane prozapadne i pronatovske propagande i nismo uvek u stanju da razlučimo šta je objektivno, a šta je propaganda”, istakao je Jovanović. Kao prvo i najvažnije, naveo je da SAD i NATO imaju odgovornost zato što su vratile rat na evropsko tlo, posle Drugog svetskog rata, a kao drugu bitnu činjenicu, Jovanović navodi da je taj rat ekspanzionistički, to je rat širenja i osvajački rat. „To je daleko od neke intervencije, bilo da se ona zvala humanitarna ili nekako drugačije. Ta strategija širenja NATO-a na Istok je osnova na osnovu koje je izvršena agresija NATO”, rekao je Jovanović i dodao da je lanac NATO baza koje su nicale, kako je rekao, „kao pečurke posle kiše” u Bugarskoj, Rumuniji, sve do baltičkih republika i Poljske, počeo od „Bondstila”.

*

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

  • Posted in Srpski
  • Comments Off on Za NATO su dečje bolnice bile strateški ciljevi

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.

***

проф. др Мишел Чосудовски у Београду 21. октобар 2022.

Агресија НАТО 1999. године је израз политике ширења на Исток која се наставља до данашњих дана и почетак милитаризације Европе.

Ово је, поред осталог, речено на представљању књиге “Агресија САД и НАТО на Југославију” познатог канадског економисте, научника и педагога, носиоца Ордена Златне медаље Србије, Мишела Чосудовског, данас одржана у сали хотела Москва у Београду.

Аутор овог двојезичног српско-енглеског издања проф. Чосудовски, окарактерисао је агресију као илегални и криминални чин а његове носиоце одговорне за цивилне жртве, убиство деце, разарање цивилне инфраструктуре и, како је рекао, за нуклеарни напад ниског интензитета.

О књизи и поводом књиге говорили су проф. генерал у пензији, Бранко Крга, генерал у пензији Лука Кастратовић, председник ИО Клуба генерала и адмирала Србије и Живадин Јовановић, у име Београдског форума за свет равноправних као издавача.

Генерал Крга истиче 3 главна утиска о књизи: први, пошто појам агресија представља саму суштину онога што се овде догађало те 1999. године, верује да је наслов књиге апсолутно примерен; други, аутор се потрудио да за сваки процес пронађе саму суштину или, како филозофи кажу, трагао је за одговором на онтолошка питања; трећи, аутор је обухватио широк географски простор и разрадио велики број тема које су у директној вези са агресијом НАТО на овим просторима. Те теме су политичке, геополитичке, економске, међународно – правне, кривично-правне, криминалне, војно-стратегијске, хуманитарне, еколошке, медијске, етичке итд. Генерал подвлачи да је свака од ових тема писана са низом интересантних података, који објективно указују на то шта се заиста догађало и који су узроци тих процеса.

Генерал Кастратовић је истакао да је значај ове књиге у томе што је део текстова написан у току агресије, што је професор Чосудовски од почетка агресије, када смо били усамљени, устао да осуди агресију САД и НАТО, указао на њен карактер, мотиве, циљеве и последице. Генерал из књиге као посебно значајно истиче поглавље које је написано шест година после агресије, под називом: ”Економски ратни злочини: Разбијање Југославије, реколонизација БиХ”, где је детаљно, са подацима, аутор описао ”уништавање и поделу Југославије, укључујући и режирани банкрот наметнут од Светске банке који је довео до пропасти производног сектора Југославије крајем 1980-тих годиха” као и ”шок третман” који је активирао ММФ 1. јануара 1990. године. Подвлачи цитирајући из књиге да су ”сецесионистичке тенденције које се хране друштвеним и етничким подјелама добиле на замаху управо у периоду бруталног осиромашења југословенског становништва, а економске реформе изазвале су економску и политичку пустош”.

Живадин Јовановић је рекао да су НАТО и САД одговорни за враћање првог рата на тло Европе после Другог светског рата, за илегалну сецесију српске покрајине Косово и Метохија и за урушавање архитектуре Европске безбедности и сарадње, која се ни до данас није опоравила од последица те агресије. Он је рекао да питање КиМ никад нико није изместио из надлежности СБ УН, нити предао било коме овлашћења за његово решавање. Генерална скупштина УН је својом саветодавном резолуцијом само констатовала интерес Европске Уније (ЕУ) да “олакшава дијалог страна” и ништа више од тога. Ово питање остаје у искључивој надлежности СБ УН. Додао је да све покушаје притисака, поготово ултиматума, Србији да призна илегално оцепљење КиМ, односно да дозволи његово чланство у УН и друге међународне организације, треба осудити и одлучно одбити у старту. Он је, такође, рекао да притиске и ултиматуме у најави треба одлучно осудити а не “објективистичким” регистровањем, призивати.

Професор Чосудовски, носилац Ордена Златна медаља, положио је данас цвеће на Споменик Деци жртвама агресије 1999. године у Ташмајданском парку.

  • Posted in Srpski
  • Comments Off on видео: Промоција књиге “Агресија САД и НАТО на Југославију”

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.

***

In Nicaragua, the population lives the daily reality of the country’s revolutionary development, the democratization of the economy, the modernization of the health and education systems, the transformation of infrastructure and a dynamic reaffirmation of culture, identity and national dignity. However, overseas and in the region itself, these tremendous socio-economic victories are practically invisible. It is instructive to look at this reality more carefully.

In a recent interview, Treasury Minister Iván Acosta observed that Nicaragua “is one of the countries that grew the most, we grew in the years of the pandemic a combined 8.3%, which is the highest growth in Central America, one of the highest in all of Latin America and probably internationally.” The data cited by Minister Acosta are endorsed by international financial institutions. Likewise, both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and the Central American Bank for Economic Integration confirm that Nicaragua is among the best countries in terms of the execution of their respective loan portfolios. Now too, the Financial Action Task Force has certified Nicaragua as a country free of money laundering.

A study in May 2021 by the World Health Organization and the University of Oxford included Nicaragua among the ten safest countries for travelers in relation to Covid-19. Nicaragua was the only Latin American country on the list. Nicaragua has the most extensive and well-equipped public health system in Central America. Six more major hospitals are expected to be completed in the coming months. Nicaragua has just inaugurated the first medical oxygen plant in Central America. The National Reference Diagnostic Center is one of the pioneer laboratories of molecular biology in Latin America, second in the region. In Nicaragua, public health care is free.

Education in the public school system from preschool and primary to secondary is also free, as is vocational technical education offered in the extensive national network of colleges of the National Technological Institute. Public universities guarantee equal access to higher education for all high school students. More than one million packages of scholastic supplies are delivered to students all over the country every year. Food is distributed to schools to guarantee a daily school meal to more than 1.2 million students, in a country with a population of 6.5 million.

Nicaragua is among the first countries in the world in gender equality. It is among the first countries in terms of citizen security in Latin America and the Caribbean. It has the best road network in Central America. About two million families are legally more secure because they have received title to their properties from the government. The country generates 70% of its electricity from renewable sources, with electricity distribution covering more than 99% of the population. The government maintains subsidies for the price of petrol and its derivatives, for public transport on both land and water transport and for electricity for low income families.

Nicaragua has the most advanced and democratic system of autonomy for indigenous peoples in Latin America with over 30% of the national territory titled in the name of 23 indigenous and Afro-descendant territories. It is a country practically self-sufficient in food production. Its food security initiatives include programs such as the Productive Bonus and the CRISSOL solidarity program for basic grains, involving more than 200,000 producers. The women’s credit program, Zero Usury, enables more than 115,000 women a year to improve the standard of living of their families.

One might think that this tremendous social and economic success of the People as President in the Sandinista Revolution in Nicaragua would be of great interest and general admiration at the regional and continental level. But in fact that is not the case, to the contrary. Of course, within Nicaragua, all these socio-economic victories are known and experienced day by day by the population. The victories of the People as President in Nicaragua are also recognized, although generally in a low profile way, by the respective international institutions concerned, such as the World Health Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), UNICEF and UNESCO among others.

The key thing to grasp is that Nicaragua has overcome centuries of colonial oppression and neocolonial exploitation in order to achieve these victories. Then, after the triumph of the Sandinista Popular Revolution in 1979, an endless campaign of harassment and aggression was unleashed by the United States and its allies. That is the origin of the systematic media, NGO, academic and institutional campaign to denigrate, belittle, undermine and ignore the unquestionable, outstanding success of the policies of the government of President Comandante Daniel Ortega and Vice President Rosario Murillo.

One is dealing not only with the routine psychological warfare waged by regional and international media, but  also with a determined propaganda offensive disseminated by the proliferation of NGOs, by the academic social sciences industry, and by institutions such as for example, the OAS or the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and several instances of the European Union. All these instances have abandoned the most basic rules of good faith reporting.

Genuine reporting is based on collecting good faith first-hand testimony, on the use of reliable documentation and data, on a process of adequate corroboration, on the recognition of contrary narratives and a constant effort to allow readers to decide for themselves. In the case of Nicaragua, as with Cuba and Venezuela, these norms have been replaced by a ruthless campaign of lies, omissions, arbitrary opinion, permanent bias and blatant manipulation. Perhaps the most emblematic case of this abandonment of good faith on the part of almost all sources of information in Latin America and internationally, was the beginning of the failed coup d’état in Nicaragua in April 2018.

In Nicaragua, we all remember that the initial pretext for the violent protests was the reform of the Social Security Law, which was distorted and misrepresented in such a way that the vast majority of people ended up believing the absurdity that big business wanted to defend the rights of pensioners and workers. In fact, the bosses’ organization, the Superior Council of Private Enterprise (COSEP), wanted to raise the retirement age from 60 to 65, eliminate the minimum pension and the reduced pension, the Christmas bonus and the maintenance of the value of pensions. They wanted to double the number of contributions to qualify for a pension from 750 to 1500 and proposed the privatization of the clinics of the Nicaraguan Institute of Social Security (INSS).

Regional and international information sources completely suppressed this reality and lied about the government’s proposals, which in truth were: a gradual increase in the employer’s contribution of 3.25% and of the workers of 0.75%; that people with high salaries pay a quota proportional to their income; increase the government contribution for the public sector by 1.25%; keep the number of weekly instalments to qualify for a pension at 750; keep the reduced pension and the minimum pension; keep the Christmas bonus and the index-linking of pensions to maintain their value; to guarantee complete medical care in the INSS clinics for retired people in exchange for a fee of 5% of their pension; and not to privatize the INSS clinics.

However, if one reads practically any journalistic or academic article or the cynical, false summaries of the OAS, the UN or the European Union, they all allege that it was the Nicaraguan government’s attack on the Social Security system that provoked the protests in April 2018. This remains the dominant narrative that prevails in almost all the material one encounters about the failed 2018 coup d’état in Nicaragua. In fact, what provoked the protests was a campaign for regime change promoted, financed and directed by the United States and its European allies. At that time in 2018, the only media that sought out the truth was Telesur, at the initiative of its director Patricia Villegas who consulted with Sandinista media to find out what was really happening.

For the rest, almost all the other Latin American media, across the entire ideological spectrum, swallowed the stupid lie that big business and US and EU funded NGOs were defending the INSS in Nicaragua in favor of the working class and pensioners. This is just one of the clearer examples of the wholesale abandonment of basic reporting standards by the vast majority of information sources in Latin America in relation to Nicaragua. The word “pathetic” doesn’t even come close to describing this collapse of moral and intellectual integrity at a continental level.

In the same way, the vast majority of information sources in the region and internationally speak of ”political prisoners” to refer to people in Nicaragua who received money directly or indirectly from various foreign governments and committed, among other offenses, the crimes of: misappropriation and improper withholding; laundering of money, property and assets; dishonest management and falsification by misrepresentation. All are crimes punishable under Nicaragua’s Criminal Code of 2007, approved by a legislature controlled by Nicaragua’s right-wing parties. Moreover, almost all of these people openly lobbied in favor of illegal coercive measures by foreign powers, who were also paying them directly or indirectly, against their own country, an offense of criminal treason punishable in practically all countries of the world.

Here in Nicaragua, we have in the Sandinista media first rate genuine reporters. But they are generally excluded as sources of information in Latin America and internationally on the pretext that they are media associated with the government. As if the lazy, dishonest and incompetent journalism that prevails in the region is not bought off by their countries’ various respective corporate and government interests, just like the NGO industrial complex or the academic social sciences industry, bought off and operating comfortably in disinformation networks manipulated by the corrupt coorporations and institutions that predominate in the region, answering to the interests of their Western masters.

The vast majority of information sources in the region research nothing in good faith, but look for what they want to find. In effect, they are just another despicable actor in the West’s psychological warfare offensive, recycled through an infinite feedback loop, into which they too feed their false reports. These are the main sources of the production and distribution of information in Latin America and the Caribbean and in the West in general. In the case of Nicaragua, they use sources almost entirely financed by the US and European governments but still have the audacity to describe those tainted sources as independent.

So Nicaragua is facing a system designed to make the victories of the Sandinista Popular Revolution invisible, and to the extent possible also to belittle the achievements of the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela and the Cuban Revolution. However, sooner or later, reality does prevail because the truth goes on existing behind and beyond the virtual phantasmagoria of disinformation. So, to the same extent that the radical democracy of the Cuban Revolution and the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela are steadily defeating the economic, psychological and political blockades of the West and its local proxies, so too will the Sandinista Revolution of the People as President in Nicaragua.

*

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 Tortilla con Sal, translated from Spanish.

Stephen Sefton, renowned author and political analyst based in northern Nicaragua, is actively involved in community development work focussing on education and health care. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image: Nicaragua’s public health system now has two linear accelerators to treat cancer patients, who receive their treatment free of charge. (Source: Tortilla con Sal)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Nicaragua in Latin America – The Invisible and the Reality
  • Tags:

The Last Temptation of Things

October 24th, 2022 by Edward Curtin

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.

***

“I cling like a miser to the freedom that disappears as soon as there is an excess of things.” – Albert Camus, Lyrical and Critical Essays.

Let me tell you a story about a haunted house and all the thoughts it evoked in me.

Do we believe we can save ourselves by saving things?

Or do our saved possessions come to possess their saviors?

Do those who save many things or hoard believe that there are pockets in shrouds?  Or do they collect things as a magical protection against the shroud?

These are questions that have preoccupied me for weeks as my wife and I have spent long and exhausting days cleaning out a friend’s house.  Many huge truckloads of possessions have been carted off to the dump. Thousands of documents have been shredded and thousands more taken to our house for further sorting. Other things have been donated to charity. This is what happens to people’s things; they disappear, never to be seen again, just as we do, eventually.

Tolstoy wrote a story – “How Much Land Does A Man Need’’ – that ends with the answer: a piece six feet long, enough for your grave.  As in this story, the devil always has the last laugh when your covetousness gets the best of you.  Yet so many people continue to collect in the vain hope that they are exceptions.  Ask almost anyone and they will reluctantly admit that they hoard to some degree.

In capitalist consumer societies, getting and spending and hoarding not only lays waste our powers, but it is done on the backs of the poor and destitute around the world.  It is a system built to inflame the worst human tendencies of acquisitiveness and indifference since it teaches that one never has enough of everything.  It denies the primal sympathy of human care for all humans as it teaches that if you surround yourself with enough things – have ten pair of shoes, twenty shirts, an attic filled with things in reserve – you will be safe from the fate of the majority of the world’s poor who have next to nothing. It is an insidious form of soul murder wherein one pulls the shades on the prison-house, counts one’s possessions, and shakes hands with the Devil.  And it is sadly common.

From attic to cellar to garage, every little cubbyhole, closet, and drawer in this relative’s house was filled with “saved” items.  Nothing was ever thrown away.  If you walked in the front door, you would never know that the occupants were compulsive keepers.  While there were plenty of knick-knacks in evidence like so many houses where the fear of emptiness rules (the emptiness that is the source of freedom and creativity), once you opened a drawer or closet, a secreted lunacy spilled out seriatim like circus clowns from a small car.  Like all clown shows, it was funny but far more frightening, as though all the saved objects were tinged with the fear of death and dissolution, were futile efforts to stop the flow of time and life by sticking a finger in a dike.

Let me begin with the bags.  Hidden in every corner and closet, there were bags stuffed in bags.  Big bags and little bags, hundreds if not thousands, used and unused, plastic, paper, cloth bags with price tags still on them.  The same was true for boxes, especially empty jewelry boxes.  Cardboard boxes that once held a little something, wooden boxes, cigar boxes, large cartons, boxes from every device ever purchased  – all seemingly being saved for some future use that would never come.  But the bags and boxes filled each other so that no emptiness could survive, although desolation seemed to cry out from within: “You can’t suffocate me.”

Tens of thousands of photographs and slides were squirreled into cabinets, closets, and their own file cabinets, each neatly marked with the date and place of their taking.  Time in a “bottle” from which one would never drink again – possessing the past in a vain attempt to stop time.  These photos were kept in places where their taker would never see them again but could find a weird comfort that they were saved somewhere in this vast collection.  Cold comfort by embalming time.

It so happens that while emptying the house, I was rereading the wonderful novel, Zorba The Greek, by Nikos Kazantzakis.  There is a passage in it where a woman has died, and while her corpse lies in her house, the villagers descend on her possessions like shrieking vultures on a carcass.

Old women, men, children went rushing through the doors, jumped through the open windows, over the fences and off the balcony, each carrying whatever he had been able to snatch – sauce pans, frying pans, mattresses, rabbits …. Some of them had taken doors or windows off their hinges and had put them on their backs. Mimiko had seized the two court shoes, tied on a piece of string and hung them round his neck – it looked as though Dame Hortense were going off astraddle on his shoulders and only her shoes were visible….

The avidity for things drives many people mad, to get and to keep stuff, to build walls around life so as to protect themselves from death. To consume so as not to be consumed.  Kazantzakis brilliantly makes this clear in the book.  Zorba, the Greek physical laborer and wild man, is different, for he knows that salvation lies in dispossession.  One day he encounters five little children begging in a village.  Their father has just been murdered.  “I don’t know why, divine inspiration I suppose, but I went up to them.”  He gives the children his basket of food and all his money.  He tells his interlocutor, a writer whom he calls “Boss,” a man whom Zorba accuses of not being able to cut the string that ties him to a life of living-death, that that was how he was rescued.

Rescued from my country, from priests, and from money. I began sifting things, sifting more and more things out. I lighten my burden that way. I – how shall I put it? – I find my own deliverance, I become a man.

In the jam-packed attic where there is little room to move with boxes and objects piled on top of each other, I found a large metal four-drawer file cabinet packed with files.  In one file folder there was a small purse filled with the following: four very old unmarked keys, six paper clips, two old unworkable watches, a bobby pin, a circular case that contained what looked like a piece of a human bone, a few old medallions, tweezers, four buttons, an eye screw, a safety pin, a nail, a screw, two ancient tiny photos, and a lock of human hair.  Similar objects were stored throughout the house in various containers, bags, boxes, the pockets of clothes, in old ancient furniture in the basement, on shelves, in cigar boxes, in desks, etc.  Old receipts for purchases made forty years ago, airline baggage tags, ticket stubs, school papers, jewelry hidden everywhere, old foreign and domestic coins, perhaps twenty-five old unworkable watches, clocks, radios, clothes and more clothes, more that anyone could ever have worn, scores of old pens and pencils, hand-written notes with no dates or any semblance of order or meaning, chaos and obsessive account-keeping hiding everywhere in contradictory forms shared by two people: one the neat freak and the other disorganized.  One dead and the other forced by fate to let her stuff go, to stand naked in the wind.

How does it help a person to record that they bought a toaster for $6.98 in 1957 or a bracelet for $20 in 1970 or that they called so-and-so some undated time in the past?  What good does it do to save vast correspondences documenting  your complaints, bitterness, and quarrels?  Or boxes upon boxes of Christmas cards received thirty years ago?  Or brochures and receipts from a trip taken long ago?  Old sports medals?  Scrapbooks?  Photos of long dead relatives no one wants?  Fashion designer shoes and coats and handbags hidden in a dusty attic where you don’t even know they are there.  An immigrant mother’s ancient sewing machine weighing seventy-five pounds and gathering dust in the cellar?

Nothing I could tell you can come close to picturing what we saw in this house.  It was overwhelming, horrifying, and weirdly fascinating.  And aside from the useful things that were donated to charity and some that were taken to the woman’s next dwelling, ninety percent was dumped in a landfill, soon to be buried.

In his brilliant novel Underworld, Don DeLillo writes about a guy named Brian who goes to visit a collector of old baseball paraphernalia – bats, balls, an old scoreboard, tapes of games, etc. – in a house where “a mood of mausoleum gloom” fills the air.  The man tells Brian:

There’s men in the coming years they’ll pay fortunes for these objects. Because this is desperation speaking …. Men come here to see my collection …. They come and they don’t want to leave. The phone rings, it’s the family – where is he? This is the fraternity of missing men.

Men and women hoarders, collectors, and keepers are lost children, trying desperately to secure themselves from death while losing themselves in the process.  In my friend’s house I found huge amounts of string and rope waiting to tie something up neatly someday.  That day never came.

Zorba tells the Boss, who insists he’s free, the following:

No, you’re not free. The string you’re tied to is perhaps no longer than other people’s. That’s all. You’re on a long piece of string, boss; you come and go and think you’re free, but you never cut the string in two. And when people don’t cut that string ….

It’s difficult, boss, very difficult. You need a touch of folly to do that; folly, d’you see? You have to risk everything! But you’ve got such a strong head, it’ll always get the better of you. A man’s head is like a grocer; it keeps accounts. I’ve paid so much and earned so much and that means a profit of this much or a loss of that much! The head’s a careful little shopkeeper; it never risks all it has, always keeps something in reserve. It never breaks the string. Ah, no! It hangs on tight to it, the bastard! If the string slips out of its grasp, the head, poor devil, is lost, finished! But if a man doesn’t break the string, tell me what flavor is left in life? The flavor of camomile, weak camomile tea! Nothing like rum – that makes you see life inside out.

On the way out the door on our final day cleaning the house, I found a beautiful boxed fountain pen on a windowsill.  I love pens since I am a writer.  This one shone brightly and seemed to speak to me: think of what you could write with me, it said so seductively.  I was sorely tempted, but knowing that I didn’t need another pen, I left it there, thinking that perhaps the next occupants of this house would write a different story and embrace Camus’ advice about an excess of things.

Perhaps.

*

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, Behind the Curtain.

Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). 

Featured image: Zero Waste Solution, Wareham, MA (PHOTO: DAVID RATCLIFFE)


He is the author of Seeking the Truth in a Country of Lies

To order his book, click the cover page.

“Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies is a dazzling journey into the heart of many issues — political, philosophical, and personal — that should concern us all.  Ed Curtin has the touch of the poet and the eye of an eagle.” Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

“Edward Curtin puts our propaganda-stuffed heads in a guillotine, then in a flash takes us on a redemptive walk in the woods — from inferno to paradiso.  Walk with Ed and his friends — Daniel Berrigan, Albert Camus, George Orwell, and many others — through the darkest, most-firefly-filled woods on this earth.” James W. Douglass, author, JFK and the Unspeakable

“A powerful exposé of the CIA and our secret state… Curtin is a passionate long-time reform advocate; his stories will rouse your heart.” Oliver Stone, filmmaker, writer, and director

Putin’s Winter Offensive

October 24th, 2022 by Mike Whitney

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.

***

“Every dead Russian and Ukrainian in this war, every family anywhere in the world that suffers the consequences of this war, every business that shuts down because of the economic damage this war is causing and the increased risk of nuclear annihilation, it’s all US Govt made.” Twitter @KimDotcom

Proxy War (def)– a war instigated by a major power which does not itself become involved.

***

Ukrainian gains on the battlefield have been met by a widely-anticipated Russian escalation. On September 21, in a rare national address, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the mobilsation of 300,000 reservists who would be called to serve in the war in Ukraine.

In recent weeks, the Russian army has suffered a number of setbacks due to its lack of sufficient manpower in the battlespace. Simply put, the Russians did not have enough combat troops to carry out their mission or to defend the vast area that has recently been annexed by Moscow. Russia’s Special Military Operation was never designed to seize and occupy great swaths of Ukrainian territory. In essence, the SMO was a police operation aimed at locating and eliminating the Ukrainian forces that had been bombarding and killing ethnic Russians living in east Ukraine.

After numerous clashes with advancing NATO-trained battalions, it’s clear that Russia needs significant reinforcements to roll back Ukrainian forces and impose a security buffer around its new provinces. Russia’s critics see the under-staffing as an indication of military incompetence but, in fact, Moscow is merely adapting to a fluid situation in which both parties continue to raise the stakes. Here is an excerpt from a post by Big Serge at Substack that helps to clarify what’s going on:

Of all the phantasmagorical claims that have been made about the Russo-Ukrainian War, few are as difficult to believe as the claim that Russia intended to conquer Ukraine with fewer than 200,000 men. Indeed, a central truth of the war that observers simply must come to grasp with is the fact that the Russian army has been badly outnumbered from day one…. On paper, Russia has committed an expeditionary force of less than 200,000 men, though of course that full amount has not been on the frontline in active combat lately.

The light force deployment is related to Russia’s rather unique service model, which has combined “contract soldiers” – the professional core of the army – with a reservist pool that is generated with an annual conscription wave….The transition from a Soviet mobilization scheme to a smaller, leaner, professional ready force was part and parcel of Russia’s neoliberal austerity regime throughout much of the Putin years.

…. This Russian contract force can still accomplish a great deal, militarily speaking – it can destroy Ukrainian military installations, wreak havoc with artillery, bash its way into urban agglomerations in the Donbas, and destroy much of Ukraine’s indigenous war-making potential. It cannot, however, wage a multi-year continental war against an enemy which outnumbers it by at least four to one, and which is sustained with intelligence, command and control, and material which are beyond its immediate reach…

More force deployment is needed. Russia must transcend the neoliberal austerity army. It has the material capacity to mobilize the needed forces – it has many millions in its reservist pool, enormous inventories of equipment, and indigenous production capacity undergirded by the natural resources and production potential of the Eurasian bloc that has closed ranks around it. But remember – military mobilization is also political mobilization.” (“Politics By Other Means; Putin and Clausewitz”, Big Serge Thoughts, Substack)

Russia’s critics, of course, will dismiss this explanation as nonsense, even so, the calling up of 300,000 reservists shows that Putin’s generals realize they cannot achieve their strategic objectives with merely an “expeditionary force” but must adjust to changes on the ground. And that is precisely what they are doing; they are beefing up their forces at a time when Putin’s public approval rating is at an eye-watering 77%. So, while an earlier mobilization would have undoubtedly been met with widespread condemnation and rejection, the great majority of Russians now fully support the policy. Simply put, Putin has won the hearts and minds of the Russian people. He has convinced them that their country, traditions, culture and lives face an unprecedented existential threat. Here’s more from Big Serge:

Putin and those around him conceived of the Russo-Ukrainian War in existential terms from the very beginning. It is unlikely, however, that most Russians understood this….

What has happened in the months since February 24 is rather remarkable. The existential war for the Russian nation has been incarnated and made real for Russian citizens. Sanctions and anti-Russian propaganda – demonizing the entire nation as “orcs” – has rallied even initially skeptical Russians behind the war, and Putin’s approval rating has soared. A core western assumption, that Russians would turn on the government, has reversed. Videos showing the torture of Russian POWs by frothing Ukrainians, of Ukrainian soldiers calling Russian mothers to mockingly tell them their sons are dead, of Russian children killed by shelling in Donetsk, have served to validate Putin’s implicit claim that Ukraine is a demon possessed state that must be exorcised with high explosives… The government of Ukraine (in now deleted tweets) publicly claimed that Russians are prone to barbarism because they are a mongrel race with Asiatic blood mixing.” (Big Serge, Substack)

In short, the establishment media and political class have made Putin’s job easier for him by persuading even left-leaning Russians that the western nations –led by the US– despise all-things Russian and are determined to destroy their country and subjugate their people. Here’s Putin:

I want to underscore again that their insatiability and determination to preserve their unfettered dominance are the real causes of the hybrid war that the collective West is waging against Russia. They do not want us to be free; they want us to be a colony. They do not want equal cooperation; they want to loot. They do not want to see us a free society, but a mass of soulless slaves….I would like to remind you that in the past, ambitions of world domination have repeatedly shattered against the courage and resilience of our people. Russia will always be Russia. We will continue to defend our values and our Motherland.

We have never agreed to and will never agree to such political nationalism and racism. What else, if not racism, is the Russophobia being spread around the world? What, if not racism, is the West’s dogmatic conviction that its civilisation and neoliberal culture is an indisputable model for the entire world to follow?…

Today, we are fighting so that it would never occur to anyone that Russia, our people, our language, or our culture can be erased from history. Today, we need a united society, and this unification can only be based on sovereignty, freedom, creation, and justice. Our values ​​are humanity, mercy and compassion.” (Speech on the Accession of the New Regions to Russia, Vladimir Putin, Unz Review)

According to Putin, the collective west wants to plunder Russia, enslave its people, and create a colony whose wealth can be siphoned off by tyrannical bigots and foreign profiteers. The media’s relentless attack on Russian athletes, scholars, scientists, musicians and even businessmen has only reinforced the view among ordinary Russians that they have entered the crosshairs of a violent and out-of-control western coalition that intends to deliver the same lethal death-blow to Russia that they did to Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and countless other nations. Putin’s soaring public approval ratings underscore the fact that most Russians think the threat is real and that the battle must be joined. Here’s more from Big Serge:

“Putin has … achieved his project of formal annexation of Ukraine’s old eastern rim. This has also legally transformed the war into an existential struggle. Further Ukrainian advances in the east are now, in the eyes of the Russian state, an assault on sovereign Russian territory and an attempt to destroy the integrity of the Russian state. Recent polling shows that a supermajority of Russians support defending these new territories at any cost.” (Substack)

The speed at which Putin annexed the four regions in Ukraine suggests that the real purpose of the action goes far beyond the expansion of Russia’s western border. The real reason Putin rushed through the measure was to fundamentally change the rules of engagement. Needless to say, a Special Military Operation is worlds apart from the defense of one’s own sovereign territory. In other words, the real purpose of the referendum was to indicate that “the gloves are off” and that Russia is going to respond to Ukraine’s attacks with unexpected ferocity. Here’s Serge again:

A political consensus for higher mobilization and greater intensity has been achieved. Now all that remains is the implementation of this consensus in the material world of fist and boot, bullet and shell, blood and iron.”

….. Russia is massing for a winter escalation and offensive, and is currently engaged in a calculated trade wherein they give up space in exchange for time and Ukrainian casualties.Russia continues to retreat where positions are either operationally compromised or faced with overwhelming Ukrainian numbers, but they are very careful to extract forces out of operational danger….

Russia will likely continue to pull back over the coming weeks, withdrawing units intact under their artillery and air umbrella, grinding down Ukrainian heavy equipment stocks and wearing away their manpower. Meanwhile, new equipment continues to congregate in Belgorod, Zaporizhia, and Crimea. My expectation remains the same: episodic Russian withdrawal until the front stabilizes roughly at the end of October, followed by an operational pause until the ground freezes, followed by escalation and a winter offensive by Russia once they have finished amassing sufficient units.

There is an eerie calm radiating from the Kremlin….. The disconnect between the Kremlin’s stoicism and the deterioration of the front are striking. Perhaps Putin and the entire Russian general staff really are criminally incompetent – perhaps the Russian reserves really are nothing but a bunch of drunks. Perhaps there is no plan.

Or perhaps, Russia’s sons will answer the call of the motherland again, as they did in 1709, in 1812, and in 1941.

As the wolves once more prowl at the door, the old bear rises again to fight.” (Big Serge, Substack)

Bottom line: Russia has now laid the groundwork for a broader and more violent conflict. 300,000 reservists have been called up, vast amounts of military hardware are being shipped to the front, and public opinion overwhelmingly supports the war-effort. All the signs point to a significant escalation in the fighting that will leave much of Ukraine in ruins while pushing Washington and Moscow closer to a direct confrontation.

Mearsheimer’s Chilling Prediction: “The Russians are going to turn Ukraine into rubble.” (2 minute video)

*

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).

Featured image is from The Unz Review

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.

***

Once the western media were full with the speculation that Boris Johnson will run for UK Premiership which he indeed announced – Boris pulled another trick.

Namely pulling out of the race.

Announced yesterday evening. Confirmed today all over the media.

This leaves the way free for his former close ally, Chancellor of the Exchequer, or Minister of Finance, Rishi Sunak, who is also currently the contest’s favorite.

According to RT of 24 October, in a statement released on Sunday evening, Johnson said on Sunday evening that he had cleared “the very high hurdle of 102 nominations” from MPs and could “indeed be back in Downing Street on Friday,” and would be “well placed” to bring his party a victory at the 2024 general election. “But in the course of the last days I have sadly come to the conclusion that this would simply not be the right thing to do. You can’t govern effectively unless you have a united party in parliament.”

This may be just another ruse of Johnson and the Tories, working hand in hand with Rushi Sunak, to continue the Globalist Agenda forced upon the world by the US-UK-NATO alliance in which the proxy war in Ukraine plays an important and deadly role.

*

After just 6 weeks in Office, the UK Prime Minister Liz Truss – a Tory – quits. The shortest ever PM in British history. Rumors have it, that Boris Johnson, her immediate predecessor – may also be the favored candidate as her successor.

Could well be.

It would be a little-veiled game.

And as usual, no coincidence; not that Boris resigned, not that Liz Truss entered, nor that she resigned after only a short period. And it will not be coincidence if Boris is reelected – and stay as British PM up to or close to 5 years.

The opposition – Labor – would like to call for new General Elections, but they will be overruled by the Tories’ almost two thirds majority in Parliament.

Boris Johnson was ideal for the tandem Washington-London on a rampage intent on demolishing Europe via the Russian war with Ukraine. Johnson was the brain, Biden and his hintermen the executioners. And as they were working on dismembering Europe, they also were, with NATO aid, simultaneously attempting to crush Russia.

The illusion of arrogance has no limits.

Britain’s exit from the EU was no coincidence either, It was part of the plan – the plan to act relatively undisturbed outside the EU on the very EU’s destruction. They have Germans, who do the same from inside – Ms. Ursula von der Leyen, (unelected, but appointed) President of the European Commission, former German Defense Minister; and Olaf Scholz, Chancellor of Germany. Amon his many high-ranking former political positions, he was Vice Chancellor under Angela Merkel, Minister of Finance and Mayor of Hamburg.

They are both involved from within, destroying Europe economically and socially.

*

Boris Johnson lost first popularity with the long-drawn-out EU-exit; then with his floppy handling of the “Covid crisis” – and a number of intended or not, other crises: An enormous budget deficit, a national debt of about 95% of GDP in 2022, the highest since 1960 (see this), an infamously decaying infrastructure throughout the country, as well as other plunders, including a sex-scandal of a senior lawmaker in Johnson’s Government.

When some 50 parliamentarians resigned within 48 hours in protest of the sex-scandal, Johnson resigned in July 2022, in what was considered a non-confidence manifestation.

British General Elections would have been due in January 2025, in a bit over two years. With Boris’ popularity in free fall, even within his own party, the Tories would have had next to no chance to win the elections. The Conservatives have currently about a 3 to 2 majority over Labor.

The British exit from the EU looks increasingly like the precursor to the plan currently being executed. Destroy Europe and “contain” Russia for the benefit of the big One World Order (OWO).

Remember – nothing is coincidence. It fits all into the Great Reset and, inter alia, into the UN Agenda 2030. The European Union, a block of 27 countries and half a billion population, would be too unwieldy to control, and does not fit into the OWO’s Command Center.

So, in response to the British crises earlier this year, better get Boris out and replace him temporarily with a “caretaker”. Ms. Liz Truss was a perfect fit for the scheme. She knew exactly what her role was, and she plaid it as good as she could.

*

Ms. Truss knew what to do as an immediate measure to earn immediate countrywide critic, namely reducing taxes for the rich.

The British economy is in a sharp down-turn, losing in August 2022 unexpectedly 0.3% in output, driven by a sharp decline in manufacturing and a small contraction in services, according to the Office for National Statistics recent assessment. See this.

Ms. Truss also knew that under such somber circumstances, certain measures like tax cuts for the rich, are a no-go. She did it anyway – to draw the ire of the public and of her own Parliament, even her Tory colleagues.

Her then newly appointed finance minister, Jeremy Hunt, reversed the decision on the tax cuts for the rich and said that the government will prioritize help for the most vulnerable, referring also to the high inflation of 10.1% in September – and projected to rise further until the end of the year. A British recession is in the making.

With all that self-made circus, the time had come for Liz Truss to go. Most media and political analysts predicting on Wednesday 19 October, that her ouster or resignation was not even a “question of days, but of hours”.

Yesterday, 20 October, Liz Truss resigned, “as planned”, leaving the field open for the new – old PM, Boris Johnson. After the Liz Truss disaster, he has gained new popularity. A socio-psychological trick. A majority of Tories want him back. And since the Tories will be Kingmakers – again – Johnson’s re-election is almost assured.

See this.

That means, the Washington-London-NATO Trio will be intact again, and able to continue their war game – with economic catastrophes for Europe, and by and large the global north. The key players US, EU and Germany are well aware and play the self-destructive game, as long as they can – or as long as they are allowed to do so by their still slumbering populace.

The visible people on top are following orders, coming silently down through the WEF – instrument of the gigantic Financial-IT Complex (FITC), running the world. Up to end 2019, they did it more or less clandestinely. Since 2020, the beginning of the dictatorial worldwide implementation of the insane Covid fear – paralleled by the deadly vaxx tyranny – this Cult of the Riches has become increasingly visible, hiding behind just a thin “veil of shame”.

*

If re-elected as PM, Boris and his party’s two third’s majority, would have a good chance to last through another 5 years. Enough time to drive the Elite’s Agenda forward. The proxy-war with Russia could be dragged on for several years – always with an “immediate threat” of turning nuclear. Initiated by Russia, of course.

The UN Agenda 2030 is in full implementation. All behind the curtain of war.

Nothing is coincidence. The dots connect. One just has to see them.

The media love to play right along with the propaganda song, keeping people around the (western) globe on their toes, diverted with fear from whatever else is going on behind the scene – in an attempt of completing the Great Cult Reset, including with the WEF’s planned 4th Industrial Revolution (4IR), and the consequential transhumanization.

To 4IR and transhumanization is intimately linked the rapidly expanding construction of 5G-antennas throughout the western world. Both 4IR and transhumanization depend on a 5G seamless and flawless coverage. The antenna proliferation is hardly visible and even less talked about. Construction often happens at night.

*

The duo, Biden – Johnson, representing the old but faltering British Empire, supported by an ever-expanding NATO, are hoping to prevail and reviving the Empire’s Dream back to reality.

It won’t happen. The Boris tactic of resigning to be re-elected is a clever ploy. But far from enough to face the dawning new world in the East – an era of collaboration and Peace – an era of cooperation and development. Development, as in seeking social balance and equity.

The future is in the East, where the sun rises. The East encompasses already about half the world’s population and a number of existing and emerging associations, like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the BRICS-plus, ASEAN, Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and many more.

The British-American Empire is on its last leg. Never mind the last-ditch Biden-Johnson efforts with NATO backing. Their economy is fake and broke. The economy of the emerging East is solid and real.

*

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

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

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

Selected Articles: The West Bank in Palestine Is Ready to Explode

October 24th, 2022 by Global Research News

The West Bank in Palestine Is Ready to Explode

By Steven Sahiounie, October 23, 2022

There is a battle brewing in the occupied West Bank of Palestine.  Thousands of Israeli occupation forces will be deployed to face a growing resistance force.  The ‘natives are restless’ and the Lions’ Den has mobilized to fight for their freedom and human rights.

A Political Solution for Assange: Jennifer Robinson at the National Press Club

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, October 24, 2022

In addressing the Australian National Press Club, Robinson’s address, titled “Julian Assange, Free Speech and Democracy”, was a grand recapitulation of the political case against the WikiLeaks founder.  Followers of this ever darkening situation would not have found anything new.  The shock, rather, was how ignorant many remain about the chapters in this scandalous episode of persecution.

US Rehearses Dropping Nuclear Bombs in Europe

By Andre Damon, October 24, 2022

On Monday, the NATO military alliance will hold a training exercise, known as Steadfast Noon, in which US B-52 bombers and F-16 fighters will simulate dropping atomic bombs over Europe amid a deepening nuclear standoff with Russia.

‘The Real Anthony Fauci’ — The Movie

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, October 23, 2022

The book and the film reveal how Fauci turned the National Institutes of Health into an incubator for pharmaceutical products and essentially sold the entire country to the drug industry.

Ukraine Proper Already in 1654 Opted for Russia

By Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović, October 23, 2022

The statehood of Ukraine like Ukrainian ethnolinguistic identity is one of the most problematic research topics. Ukraine herself has, in addition, extremely artificial state borders from very historical and political points of view. Even the name of the country and nation is very unusual and even unnatural as the Slavonic term “Ukraine” means in English “borderland” while “Ukrainians” are simply “people from borderland”.

Ukraine and Rules-based Fascism

By Kurt Nimmo, October 23, 2022

It is true the word “fascism” gets thrown a lot, often completely out of its definitional context. However, in the case of Ukraine, the word is applicable. Even a cursory look at the political and social landscape of Ukraine reveals the country—the most corrupt and poverty-stricken in Europe—has long practiced fascism, that is to say an authoritarian, racist, ultranationalist form of government and ideology.

US Economic War on China Threatens Global Microchip Industry

By Drago Bosnic, October 23, 2022

Ever since China emerged as an economic powerhouse in recent decades, the political West (particularly the United States) has been trying to curb its growth and development. With the world’s largest workforce and by far the most important production economy, China wields enormous power to affect economic trends on a planetary level.

Health Official Admits in Court That Millions of Canadians Have Been Experimented on with COVID Vaccines

By Rhoda Wilson, October 23, 2022

Court testimony reveals that Canada’s top health expert did not recommend a vaccine be a requirement before boarding a bus, train or plane. Even worse, the human trial for the Covid vaccine is now underway and millions of Canadians are part of the experiment.

Peace and Diplomacy Between the US and Russia or More Empire-building?

By Irwin Jerome, October 23, 2022

The US and its Western allies, with malevolent forethought, constantly try to totally negate or erode the sovereignty of nations for their own Empire’s endless expansion. One example of so many others one can cite, is the never-ending economic, political, ideological crisis in Haiti.

 

Kremlin: Putin Open to Talks on Ukraine From the Very Beginning

By Kyle Anzalone, October 23, 2022

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Friday that Putin appeared to be “much softer and more open to negotiations.” Ankara has been one of the few NATO members to try to retain some ties with Moscow. Erdogan led negotiations that nearly ended the war in Ukraine in its first months. In July, Turkey and the UN successfully mediated the grain export agreement between Kiev and Moscow.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: The West Bank in Palestine Is Ready to Explode

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.

***

It was telling.  Of the mainstream Australian press gallery, only David Crowe of the Sydney Morning Herald turned up to listen to Jennifer Robinson, lawyer extraordinaire who has spent years representing Julian Assange.  Since 2019, that representation has taken an even more urgent note: to prevent the WikiLeaks founder from being extradited to the United States, where he faces 18 charges, 17 confected from the archaic Espionage Act of 1917.

In addressing the Australian National Press Club, Robinson’s address, titled “Julian Assange, Free Speech and Democracy”, was a grand recapitulation of the political case against the WikiLeaks founder.  Followers of this ever darkening situation would not have found anything new.  The shock, rather, was how ignorant many remain about the chapters in this scandalous episode of persecution.

Robinson’s address noted those blackening statements from media organisations and governments that Assange was paranoid and could leave the Ecuadorian embassy, his abode for seven years, at his own leisure.  Many were subsequently “surprised when Julian was served with a US extradition request.”  But this was exactly what WikiLeaks had been warning about for some ten years.

In the Belmarsh maximum security prison, where he has resided for 3.5 years, Assange’s health has declined further.  “Then last year, during a stressful court appeal hearing, Julian had a mini stroke.”  His ailing state did not convince a venal prosecution, tasked with “deriding the medical evidence of Julian’s severe depression and suicidal ideation”.

The matter of health plays into the issue of lengthy proceedings.  Should the High Court not grant leave to hear an appeal against the June decision by Home Secretary Priti Patel to order his extradition, processes through the UK Supreme Court and possibly the European Court of Human Rights could be activated.

The latter appeal, should it be required, would depend on the government of the day keeping Britain within the court’s jurisdiction.  “If our appeal fails, Julian will be extradited to the US – where his prison conditions will be at the whim of intelligence agencies which plotted to kill him.”  An unfair trial would follow, and any legal process citing the First Amendment culminating in a hearing before the US Supreme Court would take years.

The teeth in Robinson’s address lay in the urgency of political action.  Assange is suffering a form of legal and bureaucratic assassination, his life gradually quashed by briefs, reviews, bureaucrats and protocols.  “This case needs an urgent political solution.  Julian does not have another decade to wait for a legal fix.”

Acknowledging that her reference to the political avenue was unusual for a lawyer, Robinson noted how the language of due process and the rule of law had become ghoulish caricatures in what amounts to a form of punishment.  The law has been fashioned in an abusive way that sees a person being prosecuted for journalism in a hideously pioneering way.  Despite the UK-US Extradition Treaty’s prohibition of extradition for political offences, the US prosecution was making  much of the Espionage Act.  “Espionage,” stated Robinson, “is a political offence.”

The list of abuses in the prosecution is biblically lengthy.  Robinson gave her audience a summary of them: the fabrication of evidence via the Icelandic informant and convicted embezzler and paedophile Sigurdur “Siggi” Thordarson; the deliberate distortion of facts; the unlawful surveillance of Assange and his legal team and matters of medical treatment; “and the seizure of legally privileged material.”

Much ignorance about Assange and the implications of his persecution is no doubt willed.  Robinson’s reference to Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, was apt.  Here was a man initially sceptical about the torture complaint made by Assange and his team.  He had been convinced by the libel against the publisher’s reputation. “But in 2019, he agreed to read our complaint.  And what he read shocked him and forced him to confront his own prejudice.”

Melzer would subsequently observe that, in the course of two decades working “with victims of war, violence and political persecution, I have never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law”.

The concern these days among the press darlings is not press freedoms closer to home, whether they be in Australia itself, or among its allies.  The egregious misconduct by Russian forces in the Ukraine War or China’s human rights record in Xinjiang are what counts.  Villainy lies elsewhere.

The obscene conduct by US authorities, whose officials contemplated abducting and murdering a publisher, is an inconvenient smudge of history best ignored for consumers of news down under.  The Albanese government, which has continued to extol the glory of the AUKUS security pact and swoon at prospects of a globalised NATO, has shelved any “political solution” regarding Assange, at least in any public context.  The US-Australian alliance is a shrine to worship at with reverential delusion, rather than question with informed scepticism.  The WikiLeaks founder did, after all, spoil the party.

On a cheerier note, those listening to Robinson’s address reflected a healthy political awareness about the tribulations facing a fellow Australian citizen.  The federal member for the seat of Kooyong, Dr. Monique Ryan, was present, as were Senators Peter Whish Wilson and David Shoebridge.  As Ryan subsequently tweeted, “An Australian punished by foreign states for acts of journalism?  Time for our government to act.”

https://mobile.twitter.com/Mon4Kooyong/status/1582642982468976641

Others were those who have been or continue to be targets of the national security state.  The long-suffering figure and target of the Australian security establishment, Bernard Collaery, put in an appearance, as did David McBride, who awaits trial for having exposed alleged atrocities of Australian special service personnel in Afghanistan.

Such individuals have made vital, oxygenating contributions to democratic accountability, of which WikiLeaks stands proud.  But any journalism that, as Robinson puts it, subjects “power to scrutiny, and holding it accountable”, is bound to incite the fury of the national security state.  Regarding Assange, will that fury win out?

*

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

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

Featured image: Lawyer Jennifer Robinson (Source: ECCHR)

US Rehearses Dropping Nuclear Bombs in Europe

October 24th, 2022 by Andre Damon

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

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

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

***

On Monday, the NATO military alliance will hold a training exercise, known as Steadfast Noon, in which US B-52 bombers and F-16 fighters will simulate dropping atomic bombs over Europe amid a deepening nuclear standoff with Russia.

The training exercise comes just ten days after US President Joe Biden warned of a nuclear “apocalypse,” saying the risk of nuclear war is the greatest since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

“This is the exercise that practices NATO’s nuclear strike mission with dual-capable aircraft and the B61 tactical nuclear bombs the US deploys in Europe,” wrote Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists.

The aircraft will rehearse dropping B61 “tactical” thermonuclear bombs, each of which is up to 20 times more powerful than the weapon that destroyed Hiroshima in World War II, killing as many as 126,000 civilians.

While nuclear training exercises are usually presented as routine, nonthreatening, and not targeting any specific country, this year NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg made clear that the exercise is intended as a threat to Russia.

In a speech that mentioned Russia five times, Stoltenberg announced,

“Next week, NATO will hold its long-planned deterrence exercise, Steadfast Noon.” He added, “Russia knows that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”

As of 2019, the United States had 150 “tactical” nuclear warheads stationed throughout Europe as part of the NATO nuclear arsenal, including in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey.

On Sunday, one day ahead of the scheduled nuclear drill, China told its citizens living in Ukraine to evacuate the country, citing the “grave security situation.”

In June, the NATO alliance published a document pledging to “deliver the full range of forces” needed “for high-intensity, multi-domain warfighting against nuclear-armed peer-competitors.”

In announcing the Steadfast Noon exercise, NATO said the training flights include  “14 countries and up to 60 aircraft of various types, including fourth and fifth generation fighter jets, as well as surveillance and tanker aircraft.” It added that “US B-52 long-range bombers” will “fly from Minot Air Base in North Dakota” to take part in the exercise.

The flights will take place “over Belgium, which is hosting the exercise, as well as over the North Sea and the United Kingdom.”

NATO added, “No live weapons are used,” which is a relief because the weapons involved in the drill would irradiate several hundred square miles and disperse fallout in multiple countries.

On October 7, President Joe Biden said the world is at risk of nuclear “Armageddon,” implying that the rapid escalation of the war in Ukraine could lead to nuclear war between the United States and Russia.

“We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis,” Biden said.

Biden added that he did not think “there’s any such thing as the ability to easily (use) a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon.”

In February, he warned that sending offensive weaponry to Ukraine would trigger “World War III.” Since that time, the US has sent hundreds of armored vehicles, advanced long-range missile systems, and other high-end weapons to Ukraine.

In an article published last week in Politico, former CIA Director Leon Panetta wrote that the US intelligence agencies believe the odds of the war in Ukraine spiraling into a nuclear war are as high as one in four.

“Some intelligence analysts now believe that the probability of the use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine has risen from 1-5 percent at the start of the war to 20-25 percent today,” Panetta wrote.

On Friday, the Guardian reported that governments are making plans to prevent “panic” should the war in Ukraine escalate into a nuclear conflict. “West makes plans to avoid panic if Russia uses nuclear bomb in Ukraine” was the headline of its report, which cited an unnamed official as saying that governments are carrying out “prudent planning for a range of possible scenarios.”

The NATO nuclear exercise is set to occur at virtually the same time that Russia carries out its “grom” nuclear exercise. While NATO has been loudly announcing its nuclear bombing exercises, no similar announcement has come from Russia.

That has not, however, prevented NATO officials from vocally denouncing the as yet unannounced Russian exercise as a provocative escalation.

An unnamed US official told Reuters,

“Brandishing nuclear weapons to coerce the United States and its allies is irresponsible.”

He added,

“We think nuclear saber rattling is reckless and irresponsible. Russia may choose to play that game – but we won’t.” The US official said this just days before Washington planned to fly bombers to Europe to practice dropping nuclear bombs.

Josep Borrell, the EU’s foreign policy chief, last week threatened to “annihilate” the Russian military if nuclear weapons were used in Ukraine, saying, “Any nuclear attack against Ukraine will create an answer, not a nuclear answer, but such a powerful answer from the military side that the Russian Army will be annihilated.”

On October 7, the same day as Biden’s comment about nuclear Armageddon, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, at a meeting of an Australian think tank, called for NATO to carry out preemptive strikes on Russia to prevent the “possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons.”

“What should NATO do? Eliminate the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons,” Zelensky said. “We need preventive strikes, so they know what will happen to them if they use nukes, and not the other way around.”

In this super-heated atmosphere, the US-led nuclear training exercise raises the prospect of a major miscalculation. It is a well-known fact that the annual NATO Able Archer exercise during the Cold War almost led to a full-scale nuclear war in 1983, when the leadership of the Soviet Union became convinced that the United States was actually going to launch a nuclear attack.

The night the world almost ended – BBC REEL

The Washington Post noted that Soviet bomber crews “were ordered to load nuclear bombs on one squadron of aircraft in each regiment, and aircraft were placed at ‘readiness 3,’ meaning a 30-minute alert.”

In February 2021, the Historian’s Office of the US State Department declassified a letter by S. Lieutenant General Leonard H. Perroots that made clear Soviet forces had responded to the US buildup by loading nuclear warheads onto their bombers, and that if the United States had responded in kind, it could have triggered a nuclear war.

After being publicly released, the Perroots memo was taken offline by the State Department and a judge ruled that it should be reclassified as secret.

*

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 B-52 bomber releases a bomb during a training operation. (Source: WSWS)


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

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

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

‘The Real Anthony Fauci’ — The Movie

October 23rd, 2022 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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.

***

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book, “The Real Anthony Fauci,” became an immediate best-seller upon its release in 2021, and that despite Big Tech’s censoring of its advertising. Kennedy’s book has now been made into a movie

The book and the film reveal how Fauci turned the National Institutes of Health into an incubator for pharmaceutical products and essentially sold the entire country to the drug industry

The film explores “the carefully planned militarization and monetization of medicine that has left American health ailing and our democracy shattered,” and chronicles the troubling role of the dangerously concentrated mainstream media, which during COVID have seemingly morphed into full-blown propaganda centers

While the NIH and the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases are supposed to serve the public, the reality is that they’re partnered with private drug companies and act for their benefit. Both agencies own pharmaceutical patents that are then licensed to drug companies while the agencies themselves collect royalties on the sales. Fauci has personally filed patents on hundreds of new drugs his agency funded

Were it not for this symbiotic relationship with drug companies, the NIH/NIAID would not be working against public health and deceiving the public about drugs and vaccines

*

Click here to watch the film.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book, “The Real Anthony Fauci,” became an immediate best-seller upon its release in 2021, and that despite Big Tech’s censoring of its advertising. In it, Kennedy describes how Fauci turned the National Institutes of Health into an incubator for pharmaceutical products and essentially sold the entire country to the drug industry.

The book is an incredibly well-referenced record of Fauci’s history of decimating human health, and exposes him as a self-serving charlatan. Now, Kennedy’s book has been made into a nearly two-hour-long movie (above). You definitely won’t want to miss this one, especially if you didn’t read the book.

The Real Anthony Fauci

As explained by Kennedy in the film, the book was a product of his own “struggle to understand how the idealistic institutions our country built to safeguard both public health and democracy suddenly turned against artists, citizens and our values with such violence.”

The Kennedy family has been deeply involved in the American public health bureaucracy for 80 years, and even wrote many of the legal statutes that Fauci and others worked under. I enjoyed Kennedy’s last book, “American Values: Lessons I Learned From My Family¸” as it is an excellent review of his family’s legacy, and I highly recommended it if you were ever a fan of his dad and uncle.

Yet somehow, Kennedy notes, the drug industry managed to “systematically hollow out” the agencies that were supposed to regulate it, effectively “disabling the regulatory function and transforming them into sock puppets.”

In the book and the film, Kennedy explores “the carefully planned militarization and monetization of medicine that has left American health ailing and our democracy shattered.” He also chronicles “the troubling role of the dangerously concentrated mainstream media,” which during COVID have seemingly morphed into full-blown propaganda centers and nothing else.

Fauci’s Rise to Power

Fauci’s rise to power began in 1984. That year, the U.S. government declared that the National Cancer Institute had discovered the cause of AIDS, and Fauci became the director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is under the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

He quickly realized that by defining AIDS as an infectious disease, he could seize control over future AIDS research, including research to develop an AIDS vaccine. The NIAID was at that time floundering, as most infectious diseases had already been conquered. AIDS provided Fauci with a way to save the near-obsolete agency, while simultaneously benefiting his Big Pharma allies.

As noted in the film, while the NIAID’s and NIH’s job is to serve the public, the reality is that they’re partnered with private drug companies. They own pharmaceutical patents that are then licensed to drug companies while the agencies themselves collect royalties on the sales. Fauci has personally filed patents on hundreds of new drugs his agency funded.

While this intimate relationship with the drug industry is brushed off as a mere formality, it’s the very crux of the problem. Were it not for this symbiotic relationship, these agencies would not be working against public health and deceiving the public about drugs and vaccines.

The Parallels Between AIDS and COVID

The COVID propaganda, it turns out, has closely followed that of AIDS. AIDS was a new, lethal disease that you could have without being aware of it, and media scare stories about contracting AIDS from toilet seats fanned the flames of fear.

Government officials suggested suspending teachers and students with AIDS, and there were discussions about mandatory testing, reporting of AIDS cases and quarantining AIDS patients.

Similarly, COVID-19 has been portrayed as a viral infection that might not have any symptoms, and it’s been falsely claimed that it can spread via asymptomatic carriers. Mandatory testing, reporting and quarantining actually became everyday reality during COVID.

As it turns out, Fauci was largely responsible for spreading these fallacies in both cases. In the 1980s, he falsely suggested children and other family members could contract AIDS through regular household contact with an infected person. Likewise, he promoted the false idea of asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2.

Fauci, in the film, is described as a social engineer, because he “re-engineers how people think of human contact, touch, intimacy.” AIDS was such a terrifying disease, people had to avoid not just sex but all human contact. Ditto with COVID. Both AIDS and COVID were represented as Death, and having either marked you as a potential murderer, lest you isolate yourself.

Another noteworthy parallel is the use of the PCR test. People had to be tested using PCR to find out whether they had HIV. Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR technology, was outraged, as he knew the test could not be used to diagnose any infection of any kind.

He publicly spoke out against using PCR to diagnose HIV infection, and he spoke out against Fauci, personally, for insisting on its use. He repeatedly warned that you simply cannot use the PCR tests to diagnose clinical infection with viruses. Coincidentally, Mullis died in August 2019, mere months before the outbreak of COVID-19. In a 1980s interview, Mullis said:

“[Fauci] doesn’t know anything really about anything, and I’d say that to his face. The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope, and if it’s got a virus in there, you’ll know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and he doesn’t understand medicine, and should not be in a position like he’s in.”

What Really Causes AIDS?

The discovery of HIV, the human immunodeficiency virus, which was said to cause acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or AIDS, is a tumultuous story. The virus was initially discovered by Dr. Luc Montagnier, but Dr. Robert Gallo took credit for it.

After a contentious fight, the discovery was eventually credited to both. However, while Gallo and Fauci insisted the virus itself was the sole cause of AIDS, Montagnier believed other coinfections were required for AIDS to develop.

The film details how Fauci manipulated the science to explain away the anomaly of AIDS patients who tested negative for HIV. They had all the symptoms of AIDS, but no HIV infection. Fauci solved the problem by simply renaming the HIV-negative cases as “idiopathic CD4+ lymphocytopenia” (ICL).

Fauci’s Love Affair With Toxic Drugs

Analyzing Fauci’s role in the AIDS and COVID epidemics, it becomes clear he has a playbook, and he’s not creative enough to divert from it even slightly. He also has a penchant for overly toxic and lethal drugs, insisting on their use after research has established their lethality.

In the 1980s and ‘90s, his drug of choice for AIDS was AZT, a failed cancer drug with extreme toxicity. Despite that, Fauci recommended HIV-positive patients be offered the drug, even if they were healthy and asymptomatic. Many died from the side effects within a year or two.

At the same time, Fauci blocked the use of other treatments that showed significant promise, such as hyperthermia, vitamin C drips and ozone treatment, leaving patients with no alternatives other than AZT.

The same thing happened during COVID. Fauci championed remdesivir, a failed Ebola treatment with high lethality, making sure it was selected as the sole “standard of treatment” for COVID, while all other options were rejected, vilified and/or banned from use. This included readily available off-patent and inexpensive drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, but also things like vitamin D. In the film, Kennedy says:

“My uncle and Terry Burn spent a lot of time with Fauci trying to persuade him to have a parallel track. Their proposal was to create a parallel track approval system that would allow community AIDS doctors to conduct clinical studies on off the shelf drugs that neither pharma nor NIAID, wanted to test.

AZT at that time was the most expensive drug in history. It would cost $10,000 for a year of treatment, and for that drug to function, Fauci had to make sure that there were no competitors in the marketplace.

Part of the strategy for the NIAID, Anthony Fauci and his partners at Burroughs Wellcome was to make sure that those drugs did not get FDA [Food and Drug Administration] approval, because it would have killed AZT.”

The film goes on to detail how AZT forever altered the drug approval system at the FDA, which previously had insisted on long-term verification of safety and efficacy. Most drugs had to be studied for 10 years before the FDA would consider approval. That ended with AZT.

No long-term animal studies were ever completed on the drug, and Fauci declared the human AZT trial a success and shut it down after just four months. Not surprisingly, this was nowhere near long enough to detect side effects. The FDA gave it the green light and Fauci shut down any dissenting experts.

Fauci’s Unethical Torture of Children

In the late 1980s, Fauci also helped arrange for drug companies to get access to orphaned children and children in foster homes in seven states. Children, including infants, many of whom were deemed HIV-positive using PCR, but also children who weren’t, were used as guinea pigs for experimental HIV and AIDS drugs.

Fauci, together with drug companies, sponsored these ghastly and unethical experiments. As explained by Mary Holland, president of Children’s Health Defense, if the children refused to swallow the drugs by mouth, they would put in a gastric tube and force-feed them the drugs.

Many of these children died. One grave in New York contains at least 80 children — all children of color. And, while laws were clearly broken, no punishment of any kind was ever meted out. Fauci and the drug companies clearly regarded these children as disposable, because they treated them as such. Medical experimentation was also taking place on mentally handicapped children living in state institutions for the intellectually disabled.

The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act

In 1986, president Ronald Reagan signed into law the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which created a program for compensation of children injured by vaccines.

While the intention was to make vaccines safer, the law had the opposite effect, as it also gave blanket liability protection to the vaccine manufacturers. Freed from liability, vaccine makers became ever more reckless in their vaccine development. Safety doesn’t have to be a primary concern, as there’s no penalty for creating and selling a dangerous product. The COVID jabs are the just the latest and most glaring example of this.

Enter Gates

The film also details Fauci’s partnership with Bill Gates. As noted by Kennedy, the idea behind vaccines is not about providing a solution but about creating a permanent industry. Gates has spent over two decades building a vaccine market, and he clearly desires to monopolize the industry, just like he did with Microsoft. As noted by Dr. Robert Malone in the film:

“What he’s done is, [he’s] taken his toolkit that he developed in the pressure cooker of competition in the IT sector, and turned those same practices towards public health. [He] functionally has monopolized public health through his ‘philanthropic giving,’ that isn’t really philanthropy. It’s more of a screen behind which he has made other strategic investments that have produced a massive financial return.”

Gates has publicly admitted that vaccines are the most profitable investment he’s ever made, with a 20-to-1 return. In 2000, Fauci met with Gates, who asked to partner with the NIH in an agreement to vaccinate the entire population of the world with a battery of new vaccines.

In 2009, this agreement was rebranded as “The Decade of Vaccines,” the objective of which was to implement mandatory vaccinations for every adult and child on the planet by the year 2020 — the very year COVID spread around the world. Global vaccine mandates rolled out the following year, just one year behind schedule.

Gain-of-Function Research Under Fauci’s Watch

Fauci is responsible for an annual budget of about $6.1 billion. He gets another $1.6 billion from the military to do bioweapons research, which is where 68% of his $437,000 a year salary comes from. (Fauci is the highest-paid federal employee in the U.S. Second-highest is the U.S. president, at $400,000 a year.)

While gain-of-function research has never provided a single scientific or medical breakthrough that has helped us respond to a pandemic, Fauci continued to do it because it was critical both to his salary and to the NIAID funding stream.

The bulk of the NIAID’s funding was intended to be used to study American health and to improve it, to eliminate infectious allergic diseases and autoimmune diseases. Instead, under Fauci’s watch, the chronic disease epidemic has exploded.

This, despite the fact that between Fauci, Gates and the U.K. Wellcome Trust, they control 63% of the global biomedical research through their funding. Over his career, Fauci alone has distributed more than $930 billion in research grants through the NIAID. You could say they control all of it, really, because they also have the capacity to dry up funding to projects they don’t want done.

Fauci, in all his years at the NIAID has allowed chronic diseases rates to skyrocket. He’s done less than nothing for public health. Instead, as explained in Kennedy’s book and film, his agency was turned into an incubator for the drug industry. As noted by Kennedy, Fauci “was the architect of agency capture within a public health agency.”

COVID-19 — The Culmination of Fauci’s Criminal Enterprise

As for the COVID-19 pandemic, Kennedy equates it to the culmination of Fauci’s career. He recounts how Fauci has been a key figure in pandemic planning — not how to prevent one, but how to create it, as infectious disease mortality had dropped so dramatically that infectious diseases were becoming an increasingly low priority.

So far, every single pandemic that has been dramatized has turned out to be a complete fraud, and the same can be said for COVID. All the while, billions of dollars were spent on vaccines.

In October 2019, the Gates Foundation co-sponsored Event 201, a tabletop simulation of what was to become the COVID outbreak just six weeks later. Other sponsors included the World Economic Forum and Johns Hopkins School for Security, which is funded by the NIAID. Participants included Avril Haines, former deputy director of the CIA.

As noted by Kennedy, “What is the CIA doing hosting a simulation on public health? The CIA is not a public health agency. It is an intelligence agency, it does not do public health.”

Participants discussed many things, including how to quash anti-vaxxers and combat misinformation about the virus. What they did not discuss was how to actually treat the infection and save lives; how to corroborate with doctors in the field to ascertain the best courses of action.

That the exercise was not about preserving public health was also apparent by comments from one participant, who suggested that they would need to be on a “war footing.” The film goes on to review how the COVID pandemic followed the Event 201 script, and how it was used to strip the public of Constitutional rights and freedoms.

Gross Disregard for Human Life

The film reviews how successful COVID treatments were ignored, suppressed and vilified in favor of toxic remdesivir, and how doctors were (and still are) punished for treating and actually saving their patients. As explained by Dr. Paul Marik in the film, there’s a very clear incentive behind the suppression of successful treatments.

Emergency use authorization (EUA) can only be granted to drugs and vaccines if no viable alternatives are available. Were hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin to be accepted as viable treatments, neither remdesivir nor any of the COVID shots — both of which are multibillion-dollar enterprises — would have qualified for EUA.

So, to put it bluntly, the U.S. government and the drug companies placed profits ahead of human life, and media went along with it, running cover for Big Pharma rather than reporting on reality.

Criminal Cover-Ups

The documentary also reviews how the origin of SARS-CoV-2 was covered up and the central role Fauci played in that. He and other funders of gain-of-function research on coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology — NIH director Dr. Francis Collins and Wellcome Trust head Jeremy Farrar — were so paranoid about SARS-CoV-2 being traced back to that lab that they used burner phones to communicate with each other in the early days of the pandemic.

Big Tech has also played a key role, covering up for Fauci and doing the dirty work for him. Evidence shows social media platforms have colluded with government to censor on its behalf, which is completely illegal and a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution. Fauci himself has also pulled strings when necessary. As noted in the film:

“Fauci collaborated with Mark Zuckerberg. There were emails between them, and this is a complete conflict because Facebook is invested in the vaccines. Google is invested in the vaccines. They have a conflict of interest. Microsoft makes the vaccine passports.

And yet Dr. Fauci — who’s not supposed to be coordinating health policy with for-profit stakeholders who have a conflict of interest — was taking input and apparently aligning his message with what these tech companies wanted to have happen.”

‘A Wave of Death’

The film ends by reviewing the devastating effects seen around the world from these poorly tested experimental mRNA COVID shots. While scientists have been working on mRNA technology for a long time, they were never able to get it to work, at least not safely. When it’s effective, it’s also too toxic.

But Gates, Big Pharma and American health agencies are all too deeply invested in it. They view it as a revolutionary concept, and they’re not willing to let it go. And based on the staggering death toll exacted already, it doesn’t seem to matter how many people die in the process of perfecting it. My advice? Don’t let that be you.

*

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.

Ukraine Proper Already in 1654 Opted for Russia

October 23rd, 2022 by Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović

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 statehood of Ukraine like Ukrainian ethnolinguistic identity is one of the most problematic research topics. Ukraine herself has, in addition, extremely artificial state borders from very historical and political points of view. Even the name of the country and nation is very unusual and even unnatural as the Slavonic term “Ukraine” means in English “borderland” while “Ukrainians” are simply “people from borderland”. A focal question, therefore, became: How the country with such a name can be independent as the term “borderland” politically simply means the end land (like the German “mark” from the time of the Frankish Kingdom) of some country? Nevertheless, Ukrainian statehood has its own (short) historical background. 

The German occupation forces were those who have been the first to create and recognize a short-lived state’s independence of Ukraine in January 1918 during the time of their own inspired and supported anti-Russian Bolshevik Revolution of 1917−1921. As reoccupied by the Bolshevik Red Army, the eastern and southern parts of the present-day territory of (a Greater) Ukraine joined in 1922 the USSR as a separate Soviet Socialist Republic (without Crimea). According to the 1926 Soviet census of Crimea, the majority of its population were Russians (382.645).

The second largest ethnic group was the Tartars (179.094). Therefore, a Jew V. I. Lenin has to be considered the real historical father of Ukrainian statehood but also of contemporary nationhood. Ukraine was the most fertile agricultural Soviet republic but was particularly catastrophically affected by (Georgian) Stalin’s economic policy in the 1930s which neglected agricultural production in favor of the speed industrialization of the country. The result was a great famine (Holodomor) with around seven million people dead but the majority of them were of ethnic Russian origin. A territory of present-day Ukraine was devastated during WWII by the Nazi German occupation forces from 1941 to 1944 which have been supported by puppet and criminal groups around S. Bandera (1900−1959) under which genocide on Poles, Jews, and Russians was committed [on Stepan Bandera, see: Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe, Stepan Bandera: The Life and Afterlife of a Ukrainian Nationalist. Fascism, Genocide, and Cult, Stuttgart, ibidem, 2014]. For instance, the Ukrainian militia (12.000) directly participated in the 1942 holocaust of some 200.000 Volhynian Jews together with 140.000 German policemen. The Ukrainian mass killers learned their job from the Germans and applied their knowledge as well as on the Poles [Timothy Snyder, Tautų rekonstrukcija: Lieuva, Lenkija, Ukraina, Baltarusija 1569−1999, Vilnius: Mintis, 2009, 183].

After the war, J. V. Stalin, supported by the Ukrainian party cadre N. Khrushchev, deported about 300.000 Ukrainians from their homeland as they have been accused of collaborating with the Nazi regime during the war and participating in genocide done by S. Bandera’s armed nationalists.

However, after the war, the Ukrainians have been and directly rewarded by Moscow for their collaboration with the Germans and participation in S. Bandera’s organized genocide as the lands of Transcarpathia, littoral Moldova (Bessarabia), Polish Galicia, and part of Romania’s Bukovina in 1945 followed by Crimea in 1954 became annexed by the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine.

These territories, which never have been part of any kind of Ukraine and overwhelmingly not populated by ethnolinguistic Ukrainians were included in Soviet Ukraine primarily due to the political activity by the strongest Ukrainian cadre in the USSR – N. Khrushchev, a person who inherited Stalin’s throne in Moscow in 1953. On this place, a parallel with Croatia is absolute: for the Croat committed genocide on the Serbs, Jews, and Roma by A. Pavelić’s regime (a Croat version of S. Bandera) during WWII on the territory of the Independent State of Croatia a post-war (the Socialist Republic of) Croatia was awarded by a Croat-Slovenian dictator of Yugoslavia J. B. Tito with the lands of Istria, Adriatic islands, and Dubrovnik – all of them never have been in any kind of the state of Croatia before WWII.

Gorbachev’s policy of deliberate dissolution of the USSR from the time of Reykjavik bilateral meeting with Ronald Reagan in 1988 caused a revival of the ethnic nationalism of the Ukrainians who proclaimed independence on August 24th, 1991 (confirmed on a referendum on December 1st, 1991 only by those who did not boycott it) in the wake of anti-Gorbachev’s military putsch in Moscow (mis)using the political situation of the paralyzed central government in the country. The state’s independence of Ukraine was proclaimed and later internationally recognized within the borders of a Greater Stalin-Khrushchev’s Ukraine with at least 20% of the ethnic Russian population living in a compact area in the eastern part of the country and as well as making a qualified (2/3) majority of Crimea’s population. The coming years saw the rifts with neighboring Russia with the main political task by Kiev to commit as much possible as to the Ukrainization (assimilation) of ethnic Russians (similar to the policy of the Croatization of ethnic Serbs in Croatia orchestrated by the neo-Nazi government in Zagreb led by Dr. Franjo Tuđman in the 1990s). At the same time, the Russian majority in Crimea constantly required the peninsula’s reunification with mother Russia but getting only an autonomous status within Ukraine – a country that they never considered as their natural-historical homeland.

The Russians of Ukraine were becoming more and more unsatisfied with the conditions in which they have been leaving from the time when in 1998−2001 the Ukrainian taxation system collapsed which meant that the central government in Kiev was not able to pay the salaries and pensions to its own citizens. A very weak Ukrainian state became, in fact, unable to function normally (“failed state”) and as a consequence, it did not have the power to prevent a series of politically motivated assassinations followed by popular protests which had been also very much inspired by the economic decline of the country [on the history of Ukraine and the Ukrainians, see more and compare with: Andrew Wilson, The Ukrainians: Unexpected Nation, New Heaven: Yale University Press, 2009; Serhii Plokhy, The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine, New York: Basic Books, 2015; Anna Reid, Borderland: A Journey Through the History of Ukraine, New York: Basic Books, 2015].

As a matter of fact, it has to be stressed that the Ukrainian historiography of their own history of the land and the people is extremely nationalistic and in very cases not objective like many other national historiographies. It is basically politically colored with the main task to present the Ukrainians as a natural ethnolinguistic nation who have been historically fighting to create a united independent national state and unjustifiably claiming certain territories to be ethnohistorical the “Ukrainian”. A typical example of a such tendency to rewrite the history of East Europe according to the nationalistic and politically correct framework is, for instance, the book by Serhy Jekelčyk on the birth of a modern Ukrainian nation in which, among other quasi-historical facts based on the self-interpreted events, is written that the USSR in 1939−1940 annexed from Poland and Romania the “West Ukrainian land” [Serhy Jekelčyk, Ukraina: Modernios nacijos gimimas, Vilnius: Baltos lankos, 2009, 17]. However, this “West Ukrainian land” never was part of any kind of Ukraine before WWII as Ukraine as a state or administrative province never existed before V. I. Lenin created a Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine (in 1923) within the USSR but at that time without the “West Ukrainian land” as it was not a part of the USSR. Moreover, the Ukrainians were either not leaving or being just a minority on this land which means that Ukraine even did not have ethnic rights over the biggest part of “West Ukraine”. Even today around half of Ukraine’s state’s territory is not populated by the Ukrainians as a majority of the population. Moreover, in some regions, there are no Ukrainians at all. Therefore, the cardinal question became: On which principles the Ukrainian borders are formed?

Another example of the Ukrainian historiographic nationalistic misleading, we can find in an academic brochure on Bukovina’s Metropolitan’s residence, published in 2007 by the National University of Chernivtsi. In the brochure is written that this university is “…one of the oldest classical universities of Ukraine” [The Architecturial Complex of Bukovynian Metropolitan’s Residence, Chernivtsi: Yuriy Fedkovych National University of Chernivtsi, 2007, 31] that is true only from the present-day rough political perspective but not and from a moral-historic point of view.

Namely, the university is located in North Bukovina which in 1775 the Habsburg Monarchy had obtained. The land was since 1786 administrated within the Chernivtsi district of Galicia and one hundred years after the affiliation of Bukovina to the monarchy, the Franz-Josephs-Universitätwas inaugurated on October 4th, 1875 (the name day of the emperor). In other words, the university’s origin as a whole Bukovina has nothing to do with any kind of both historical Ukraine or/and ethnic Ukrainians as before 1940 it was outside of the administrative territory of Ukraine when the whole of North Bukovina on August 13th, became annexed by the USSR according to the Hitler-Stalin Pact (or the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact) signed on August 23rd, 1939 [Ibid.]. Therefore, two notorious bandits (one Nazi and another Bolshevik) decided to transfer North Bukovina to the USSR and the land became after WWII part of a Greater (Stalin’s) Ukrainian SSR. Nevertheless, while the Ukrainian nationalists claim that “Russia” (in fact anti-Russian USSR) occupied Ukraine, the annexation of the North Bukovina and other territories from Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania in 1940 is for them a legitimate act of historical justice done by the same “Russia” (i.e., the USSR). Here, we have to notice that according to the same pact, the territories of the independent states of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia are as well as annexed by the USSR that is considered by their historians and politicians as “occupation”, which means the (illegal) act of aggression that is breaking international law and legitimate order. Nevertheless, they never accused Ukraine of doing the same concerning occupied lands from its three western neighbors in 1940/1944 [see, for instance: Priit Raudkivi, Estonian History in Pictures, Tallinn: Eesti Instituut, 2004 (without numeration of the pages); Arūnas Gumuliauskas, Lietuvos istorija (1795−2009), Šiauliai: Lucilijus, 2010, 279−295].

Political assimilation of certain separate Slavonic ethnolinguistic groups in Ukraine was and is one of the standardized instruments for the creation and maintenance of the Ukrainian national identity in the 20th century. The most brutal case is of the Ruthenians (Rusyns) who are simply proclaimed as historical Ukrainians known under such name till WWII. Their land, which was in the interwar period part of Czechoslovakia, that was annexed by the USSR at the end of WWII and included into a Greater Soviet Ukraine is simply renamed from Ruthenia into the Sub-Carpathian Ukraine. However, the Ruthenians and the Ukrainians are two separate Slavonic ethnolinguistic groups as such officially recognized, for example, in Serbia’s Autonomous Province of Vojvodina where the Ruthenian (Rusyn) language is even standardized and studied together with Ruthenian philology and literature at a separate department at the University of Novi Sad. Unfortunately, the Ruthenian position in Ukraine is even worst in comparison with the Kurdish position in Turkey as the process of Ruthenian assimilation is much speedier than that of the Kurdish case.

From the current perspective of the Ukrainian crisis and in general from the point of solving the “Ukrainian Question” it has to be noticed a very historical fact that a part of present-day East Ukraine became legally incorporated into the Russian Empire in 1654 as a consequence of the decision by the local hetman of Zaporozhian territory Bohdan Khmelnytsky (c. 1595−1657) based on a popular revolt against the Polish-Lithuanian (the Roman Catholic) occupation of Ukraine which broke out in 1648 [Alfredas Bumblauskas, Senosios Lietuvos istorija, 1009−1795, Vilnius: R. Paknio leidykla, 2007, 306; Jevgenij Anisimov, Rusijos istorija nuo Riuriko iki Putino: Žmonės. Įvykiai. Datos, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras, 2014, 185−186]. It means that the core of present-day Ukraine (Ukraine proper) voluntarily joined Russia, therefore escaping from the Roman Catholic Polish-Lithuanian oppression. Subsequently, B. Khmelnytsky’s ruled territory has to be considered from a historical point of view as the motherland of all present-day Ukraine – the motherland which already in 1654 chose 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.

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

Featured image is from Al Mayadeen English

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Ukraine Proper Already in 1654 Opted for Russia
  • Tags: ,

Ukraine and Rules-based Fascism

October 23rd, 2022 by Kurt Nimmo

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.

***

General Mark Miley, the USG chief of staff at the Pentagon, has flatly stated that if Ukraine “falls,” the so-called “rules-based international order” will fall with it.

It is true the word “fascism” gets thrown a lot, often completely out of its definitional context. However, in the case of Ukraine, the word is applicable. Even a cursory look at the political and social landscape of Ukraine reveals the country—the most corrupt and poverty-stricken in Europe—has long practiced fascism, that is to say an authoritarian, racist, ultranationalist form of government and ideology.

In essence, Miley is saying that the fate of the “rules-based international order” hinges on saving fascist Ukraine and its illegitimate government, installed in 2014 by a USG-sponsored coup. Every “elected” government put in place after the Maidan coup is in fact illegitimate.

Miley has underscored an effort by the national security state to retain Ukraine’s special role in undermining Russia, beginning with the Soviet Union following WWII and during the “Cold War,” itself a ruse to further build and strengthen the national security state (NSS) obsessed with world domination.

The CIA, the subversion apparatus of the NSS (the Pentagon being the muscle), has a long and sordid history of support for murderous Ukronazis and their particularly repulsive version of ultranationalism (organized torture, murder, and disappearance).

A declassified CIA document reveals details of Operation Belladonna and how, according to a summary by Red Street Journal,

[in 1946] the United States had already made contact with Ukrainian Nationalists that were keen to ally with the Americans against the USSR, primarily through influencing the development of the Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council (UHVR). The subject discussed in the document was used to gather intelligence on the USSR and Soviet operations both at home and abroad.

The UHVR, an umbrella organization of Ukronazis and “anti-Soviet partisans,” included the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA). FOIA Research notes:

The OUN collaborated with the Germans right up from the Polish invasion in September 1939. In December 1939, the Gestapo trained Mykola Lebed and [Stepan] Bandera supporters in sabotage, guerrilla warfare and assassination techniques in Zakopane. Lebed personally supervised the torture and execution of Jews to harden his men.

For the CIA, it was irrelevant that the OUN-UPA carried out the Wołyń Massacre, the organized murder of 100,000 Poles and Jews, or OUN’s collaboration with the Nazis during Operation Barbarossa (the Nazi invasion, the largest in history, of Eastern Europe and Russia in 1942; estimated to have killed 5,000,000 Russians, Slavs, Jews, Poles, and others considered “Untermenschen”).

The psychopathy of Stepan Bandera and Andriy Melnyk was a good match for Abwehr, the German military intelligence service for the Reichswehr and the Wehrmacht, and later the CIA. In 1949, “the CIA decided, in partnership with the British MI6, to mount ‘joint’ operations with [OUN] to send agents into the Soviet Union,” operations that were disastrous failures.

Given the scale of Soviet penetration of [OUN and other ultranationalist groups], it could not be expected that such operations would benefit anybody but the KGB, and of course for the next four years or so CIA and MI6 suffered one disaster after another… resulting in many lost lives.

In 2016, the CIA declassified 3,800 documents providing “detailed proof that since 1953 the CIA operated two major programs intent on not only destabilizing Ukraine but Nazifying it with followers of the World War II Ukrainian Nazi leader Stepan Bandera,” writes Wayne Madsen.

In fact, the CIA ran a number of anti-Soviet operations in Ukraine. In addition to Operation Belladonna, mentioned above, there were a number of other operations, including Project Cartel (later Project Aerodynamic), Project Aebath, and others, several with long timelines.

As the CIA expanded its operations in Ukraine, additional projects came to light, Notably, Project AERODYNAMIC (formerly CARTEL, ANDROGEN, AECARTHAGE), which operated between the years of 1949-1970 before being reclassified under Project named QRDYNAMIC in 1970 and later PDDYNAMIC in 1974, and finally QRDYNAMIC/QRPLUMB (formerly AEBEEHIVE) as it operated until 1991.

There are thousands of documents that contain sensitive information regarding these project names and the activities involved. A treasure trove of United States history that seems to have gone under the radar of the mainstream press.

Indeed, a “mainstream press” the CIA had infiltrated in the 1950s under the direction of Cord Meyer.

A declassified CIA document from 1966 points out “the underlying objective [of Cartel/Aerodynamic] is ‘Nationalist flare-ups’ in widely scattered areas of the Soviet Union, particularly in Ukraine… As we can see, by the 1950s, the CIA had successfully established a network for counter intelligence with Ukrainian underground nationalists.”

The CIA used a number of acronyms or code names for participants in these operations. For instance, “Cartel-2” was a cryptonym for Mykola Lebed, a Ukrainian ultranationalist convicted and imprisoned for the assassination of Polish Interior Minister Bronisław Pieracki in 1934. In 2010, the Associated Press reported:

Declassified CIA files reveal that US intelligence officials went to great lengths to protect a Ukrainian fascist leader and suspected Nazi collaborator from prosecution after World War II and set him up in a New York office to wage covert war against the Soviet Union, according to a new report to Congress… The US government relocated Lebed to New York City in 1949, where he was safe from assassination, the report says. Through his CIA-funded organization, Prolog, he gathered intelligence on the Soviets into at least the late 1960s. In 1991, he was still considered a valuable asset to the agency, the report says.

Yaroslav Stetsko, Bandera’s second in command, denounced Marxism as a “practice by the Muscovite-Asiatic people with Jewish assistance, and that Moscow and the Jews are the carriers of the international ideas of the Bolsheviks.” His virulent antisemitism wasn’t a problem for the CIA or the USG.

Gerald Sussman writes for CovertAction Magazine:

The OUN, in particular the faction led by the German ally Stepan Bandera and his second in command, Yaroslav Stetsko, OUN-B, was a violently anti-semitic, anti-communist, and anti-Russian organization, which collaborated with the Nazi occupation and actively participated in the slaughter of millions of Poles, Ukrainian Jews, and ethnically Russian and Ukrainian communists in the region. Nonetheless, The Washington Post treated Stetsko as a national hero, a “lonely patriot.”

A friendly encounter between then vice president George H. W. Bush and Stetsko.

The CIA, of course, was not particularly interested in elevating Ukraine’s ultranationalists (that would occur much later, during the orchestrated Maidan coup of 2014). Instead, they were interested in exploiting Ukronazis to undermine the Soviet Union (a dismal failure).

It’s no secret the CIA recruited the Nazi Gehlen Organization after WWII. In the manufactured Cold War, the fact that many Nazis imported clandestinely into America, under Operation Paperclip, were serious war criminals did not make a difference to the CIA. Martin A. Lee writes Foreign Policy in Focus:

The CIA reports show that U.S. officials knew they were subsidizing numerous Third Reich veterans who had committed horrible crimes against humanity, but these atrocities were overlooked as the anti-Communist crusade acquired its own momentum. For Nazis who would otherwise have been charged with war crimes, signing on with American intelligence enabled them to avoid a prison term.

The same can be said for the CIA and USG’s activities in Ukraine. The inheritors of the genocidal religion of Stepan Bandera—mass murder, torture, ethnic cleansing—were artificially elevated to positions of power and influence by way of a USG-arranged coup.

The NSS needs an endless Cold War. It doesn’t matter Russia is no longer communist. Russia and China are perennial enemies of “rules-based” authoritarianism. General Miley, in the above video, has stated that the proxy war in Ukraine is essential, otherwise, the NSS will teeter and fall, which is, of course, pure balderdash.

It will not be reported in the New York Times or any other war propaganda outfit that the neoliberal order is rapidly crumbling and its “enemies” are building their own financial and transaction structures outside of the corrupt influence of the western “international order,” an order that coddles and exploits psychopaths in its doomed to fail effort to prop up its parasitical and violent system of domination.

*

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.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Kurt Nimmo 

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.

***

Ever since China emerged as an economic powerhouse in recent decades, the political West (particularly the United States) has been trying to curb its growth and development. With the world’s largest workforce and by far the most important production economy, China wields enormous power to affect economic trends on a planetary level.

However, just like any other country, it’s still part of a globalized system which is essentially a network of interdependent economies. This has resulted in accelerated growth around the world, but it also created the risk of economic butterfly effects, as what may seem like a mere hiccup in one industry could cause a ripple that has the potential of turning into a tsunami of economic problems. It seems this is precisely the direction we are headed to, as the US is targeting China’s microchip industry.

On October 7, US President Joe Biden announced additional restrictions on American companies selling semiconductors to China. The move also includes restrictions on US citizens working for Chinese microchip manufacturers. Given the importance of these technologies in our era, such actions can only be seen as a declaration of full-blown economic war.

The US clearly hopes this will either severely slow down or even halt China’s rise as a technological superpower. According to Bloomberg, the country’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) is already working with top microchip producers and is devising a joint plan of action to evaluate the damage and find solutions to maintain production. CEOs of major Chinese companies working in the sector have held a series of emergency meetings with the MIIT, including the executives from Yangtze Memory Technologies and Dawning Information Industry.

Western media claim that the Biden administration’s strategy to “paralyze China’s industrial capacity could be promising.” Allegedly, unnamed sources “familiar with the closed-door discussions between MIIT and CEOs of China’s top microchip manufacturers” claim there is “a lot of uncertainty on how to move forward.” For now, there had been no mention of possible countermeasures, as MIIT is said to believe there are no shortages and that domestic microchip needs will be met. The discussions supposedly revealed that some Chinese companies fear the US restrictions could harm the country’s plans to accelerate the development and production of its own advanced microchips, which could negatively affect China’s economic growth and in turn the global markets as well.

It appears that some companies are already in danger of directly being affected by the restrictions. Shanghai-based Biren Technology, specializing in artificial intelligence (AI), graphics rendering, high-performance general-purpose computing and other relevant services, initially planned to release a new graphics processing unit (GPU) and also “set a new record in global computing power.” However, as the company contracted the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) to produce its microchips using advanced 7-nanometer technology, there’s a risk that TSMC may halt the project due to US restrictions. At the moment, Biren Technology has no capacity to manufacture advanced GPUs on its own, which also endangers the company’s other projects.

Last week, US personnel pulled out of China’s Yangtze Memory Technologies, while Netherlands-based ASML Holding NV stopped shipments for Chinese microchip companies. Recent reports also indicate that Dawning Information, the country’s top supercomputers manufacturer, is trying to find alternatives to US-designed microchips. Rhodium Group China expert Jordan Schneider claims that the Biden administration’s restrictions are a “massive blow to CCP’s science and technology ambitions.” He also stated:

“Long story short, every advanced node semiconductor company is currently facing comprehensive supply cut-off, resignations from all American staff, and immediate operations paralysis. This is what annihilation looks like: China’s semiconductor manufacturing industry was reduced to zero overnight. Complete collapse. No chance of survival.”

Naturally, such doom-and-gloom statements should be taken with a grain of salt, as many Chinese corporations, such as Huawei, have already experienced US sanctions in previous years. Although these companies have suffered damage as a result of such actions, they managed to find alternatives and continued operating even under new conditions of a complete lack of access to US technologies. Still, the sanctions affected certain companies only, while the most recent restrictions are nationwide and are affecting all China-based manufacturers.

Advanced microchips are used in virtually every sector of any country’s production economy and China is certainly no exception. The Biden administration’s restrictions are most likely aimed not just against China’s economic growth, but also its rise as a military superpower, as fighter jets, missiles, drones and many other types of weapons require microchips. In addition, China’s recent dominance in AI research and development could also be in jeopardy.

Still, Beijing is certainly not without options and is yet to respond to America’s escalating belligerence. The US already proved to be vulnerable to counter-sanctions, as evidenced by the presence of key Chinese components in US weapons, including F-35 fighter jets.

*

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

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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

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.

***

Court testimony reveals that Canada’s top health expert did not recommend a vaccine be a requirement before boarding a bus, train or plane. Even worse, the human trial for the Covid vaccine is now underway and millions of Canadians are part of the experiment.

It’s an astounding revelation, according to lawyer Keith Wilson, who is representing former Newfoundland Premier Brian Peckford’s lawsuit against the federal government for what they describe as the most far-reaching breach of charter rights in Canadian history. It prevented six million people’s right to freedom of movement because of a ban against unvaccinated people from travelling on buses, trains and planes.

Wilson also recalled his cross-examination of Dr. Celia Lourenco, director general for Health Canada that approves vaccines. She argued that the vaccination approval process changed for the Covid vaccines. Until Covid, all vaccines were approved following animal trials and two human trial phases. But for the Covid vaccine, the human trials were skipped.

Dr. Lourenco confirmed under oath that the human trial is going on right now as data is being compiled with the general population and Canadians were not told of the risks, Wilson said. “That was a big one for us to get her to confirm that this is a huge experiment that’s going on.”

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

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

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

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

Price: $11.50 

Purchase directly from the Global Research Online Store

You may also purchase directly at DonorBox “Worldwide Corona Crisis” Campaign Page(NOTE: User-friendly)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Health Official Admits in Court That Millions of Canadians Have Been Experimented on with COVID Vaccines
  • Tags: ,

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 World’s in a Sorry State of Affairs

The on-going 75 year-long uprising in Palestine and Israel by dispossessed Palestinians, horribly treated no better than if they were inmates in a Nazi death camp, is a reflection of how the current War in Ukraine is so typical of a major proto-fascist shift going on everywhere in the Human Race’s tectonic plates. The tremors between the West & East in Ukraine, as well as everywhere else in the world, are head’s up warnings of the “Big One” that’s on its way. The cacophony of what all is happening is like the wailing groans, moans and shudders a torpedoed, mortally-wounded, ship makes as it breaks up in its slow descent into the abyss of a watery grave.

Israel’s terrorism against Palestinian people is the same quantitative violence being waged by the total military might of the U.S., NATO and their Western Ukrainian puppet regime against Russia and the Russian-speaking people of Eastern Ukraine. In fact, early on in the U.S.-instigated and manipulated war in Ukraine, President Zelensky himself stated as one of his dream objectives for Ukraine was to “become a Big Israel”, with its own police state to include having armed forces in “all institutions, supermarkets, cinemas, there will be people with weapons.”

In one way or the other, the same ideological forces constantly seek to destroy the sovereignty and democracy of people as well as whole countries, such as in: Haiti and Cuba in the Western Hemisphere; Ukraine in Eastern Europe; Syria and Yemen in the Middle East, as well as everywhere else in the world. The list to be cited is indeed a long, grim one. The objective, in all cases, is the eventual subjugation of all oppressed peoples until they’ve been turned into U.S. vassal states.

The US and its Western allies, with malevolent forethought, constantly try to totally negate or erode the sovereignty of nations for their own Empire’s endless expansion. One example of so many others one can cite, is the never-ending economic, political, ideological crisis in Haiti.

Another blatant example is how the oppressive, meddling Monroe doctrine of the United States is constantly at work, as it has been ever since the birth of the U.S, is its ever-attentive and quick to punish Western Hemisphere nations like Cuba and whomever others have ever dared to go their own way, political or ideologically; such as the punitive 60 year-old economic embargo ruthlessly waged by the U.S. against the Republic of Cuba since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.

Its outrageous, but the world’s mainstream corporate press remains either dumbed down, brain dead, or totally bought out when it comes to speaking truth to power about all this. If it wasn’t so dismally sad and pathetic, it would be totally outrageous and unacceptable. So, what’s new!

Now, the $64,000 dollar question is, “When will Russia, the United States, and its NATO allies, finally reach that flashpoint moment of truth in Ukraine; when they, or some more malevolent Deep State ideological force behind them, decides it’s time to take the next colossal step of empire-building in Ukraine and against Mother Russia, and its “Geronimo! Bombs Away!”

The truth of the matter is that the United States and every other European Caucasian settler nation that ever re-formed itself in the New World was born and still remains in a constant state of empire-building aggression. First it was aggression against: the indigenous First Nations of the New World and everything in their natural world; then it was against Black Africans violently imported in chains to do all the back-breaking work of the ruling White imperialists who rushed to the New World to aggressively lay claim to whatever piece of it they could.

As time has moved on, these self-branded New World Americans have continued, with ever  more cleverly-devised laws and doctrines, like: the Monroe Doctrine; Manifest Destiny; Declaration of Independence, which really translates to mean a Declaration of Perpetual Expansionism and Subjugation; the more recent declaration of a Project for a New American Century, and; now an even newer 21st Century, Madrid-NATO-Summit devised, Strategic Concept of U.S.-led Militarism that, so far, has emerged from out of the virtual World War in Ukraine. Still forever left unaddressed and unresolved, however, are the more critically-important human life crises, such as uncontrolled exponential population explosion and total Biosphere collapse. Both ultimate examples of Homo sapien’s on-going evolutionary savagery in the 21st Century!

Glasnost, the Game of Soviet-American Peace and Diplomacy

“Glasnost The Game” is a strategy board game invented by Yiannis Laouris, a Cypriot neuroscientist, that depicts a modified political map of the Earth, divided into 166 territories, grouped into five continents. Players begin with ownership of 25 industries and 25 armies. Industries represent economic power, while armies are used to colonize/capture adjacent countries or apply political pressure in order for every player to reach the ultimate goal of disarmament. Players attempt to colonize territories from other players to do so. Though the game can still be purchased through Amazon.com or EBay.ca, the concept of Glasnost and Disarmament, in either game form or real life. is still a very, very long way from catching on.

In the Real Game of Life, It’s Who Throws the First Nuclear Sucker Punch

On October 7th, Ukraine’s ultra-nationalist President Zelensky, once again appealed, “To the international community, as I did before February 24th, that we need preventative strikes, so the Russians will know what will happen to them if they use nukes, and not the other way around.”

The U.S., NATO and Western Ukraine obviously continue to remain nuclear-poised, ready to utterly annihilate Eastern Ukraine and Russia the moment Russia makes the wrong move.

If Only America Had Another President Like Dwight Eisenhower in Charge

President Dwight ‘Ike’ Eisenhower, former General of the U.S. Army during WWII, once was referred to as “The Peace President’ because in 1953 he refused to use the Atomic Bomb during the Korean War. ‘Ike’, as he was familiarly called, is still fondly remembered for his many pronouncements about how to act or how not to react to the dangers of the nuclear age, and for his brave and courageous stand not to use the Bomb against the Koreans and Chinese.

Eisenhower believed the United States should never bankrupt itself to: finance the military; guard against the rise of the military-industrial complex, and; not allow the dominance of its bloated defense budget to become, as Eisenhower said, “the disgraceful theft of our children’s heritage, and future well-being”. ‘Ike’ once commented, “in the rocket age we must not fail to comprehend the grave implications of this growing complex to the very structure of American society.”

Eisenhower recognized any war with the Soviets or Chinese would be the end of civilization as human beings know it. When American politicians were discussing how to restructure the U.S. Dollar and economy after such a potential nuclear war, Eisenhower quipped, “Wait a minute, boys. We’re not going to be restructuring the dollar, we’re going to be grubbing for worms.”

During the Korean War, Ike refused to use the Atomic Bomb, even when the brilliant American General Douglas MacArthur of WWII fame in the Pacific believed he could swiftly end the Korean War with his controversial military ‘blitzkrieg’ strategy that he believed could have ended the war in a mere 10 days if he had been allowed to use the Atomic Bomb against China and North Korea. Macarthur prophetically warned in 1953 that unless China was decisively dealt with at that point, within 50 years time, China would become a serious threat to world peace and security. Within the context of war, MacArthur was absolutely spot on, but within the context of the survival of the human race he was absolutely dead wrong.

MacArthur’s radical Dr. Strangelove plan called for: 30 to 50 tactical atomic bombs to be dropped on the borders of the Yalu River between North Korea and China; then call on a half-million Chiang Kai-shek’s troops, sweetened with two U.S. Marine Divisions, to seal off Chinese reinforcements from assisting the North Koreans; further spreading a belt of radioactive cobalt to create a radioactive defense perimeter all along the Yalu with a life of 60 to 120 years that would have made it impassible for any invasion from the North for at least 60 years or more.

When asked about the fear of Russia coming to the Chinese and North Koreans defence, MacArthur declared, “Russia? It makes me laugh!” MacArthur pointed out the only way Russia could ever have moved troops, weapons and material to resupply them would have been along the then one-lone track of the Trans-Siberian railway that only led onto a peninsula to the sea.

In any case, General MacArthur’s military action plan was never carried out because of what he referred to as “The Great Betrayal” between the American and British governments who leaked his bold military plans to the Chinese and Russians before it ever happened and that was that.

Two good resources to better know what transpired back then, nearly 70 years ago, are:

All Civil and World Wars Boil Down to Failures to Communicate, to Negotiate

Yet, sadly, now in the midst of an ever-escalating war in Ukraine, by yet other military and political madmen and their master war plans, Eisenhower’s forewarnings seem all but forgotten as the world continues to threaten to blow itself up.

Since the onset of the Civil war between Western and Eastern Ukraine, that, in modern times, began in earnest with the Western World’s fascist Maidan coup in 2014, proponents on all sides have argued in favor of using a pre-emptive nuclear sucker punch before the other side ever gets the chance. As the war in Ukraine continues, the palpable madness and insanity only continues to ramp up, while the contrary, level-headed, sober-minded political and military analysts in the world continue to be ridiculed, minimized, or relegated to the sidelines.

It’s important to keep in the back of one’s mind the age-old ‘pre-nuclear’ pattern of how dangerous nationalistic civil wars in history have invariably led to even greater, ‘world wars’ that ended up radically shaping the history of the entire human world. To name but a few: Caesar’s Civil War in 49 B.C.; Scottish ‘Wars of the Three Kingdoms’ (1639-1651) the English Civil Wars (1642-1651); the Peninsular War (part of Napoleon’s War of 1808-1814); the Balkan Civil War (1912-1913) that led to WWI; the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939), that presaged World War II. Imagine what could ensue in this current civil war or others like it in these post-nuclear times.

Unfortunately, “Glasnost, The Game” has never caught on amongst the imperialist rulers of the world, especially the Americans and other leaders in the West. Long before the outbreak of the current Civil War in Ukraine, and ever since, the United States and its NATO allies have consistently refused to enter into any meaningful ceasefire, peace or disarmament negotiations with the Russians or Russian-speaking Eastern Ukrainians. Since long before the 2014 coup, U.S. and NATO have been methodically manipulating geo-political-military events in Ukraine because they recognize it as being the soft vulnerable underbelly of the Russian Empire and so the best way to finally ‘check mate’ Mother Russia herself.

A recent example of this glaring gap in the dialogue between them is the vote recently taken by the U.N. General Assembly that overwhelmingly voted (143-5, with 35 abstentions), calling the recent democratic vote of 93% of the four regions of Eastern Ukraine, who voted to become annexed by Russia, that the U.N. instead preferred to call, “a sham, conducted on occupied land amid warfare and displacement.”

But elections today, everywhere in the world, even so-called ‘democratic’ ones, are commonly negated wherever the will of the people is said to truly express itself. They don’t carry any weight anymore among the propagandists, especially those autocratic, authoritarian powers-that-be who don’t like the results, just as a majority of American voters still resolutely contend President Trump’s defeat at the polls was a stolen election. There simply exists today too much political propaganda, misinformation and disinformation to ever know what the real truth is about anything.

Glasnost, Perestroika and Monroe Doctrine Are Keys to Understanding the War

The reader should briefly consider some things about the history of Glasnost and Perestroika. Such as how both concepts continue to play an integral part in Ukraine’s evolution as an ideological, political, cultural entity, or how their related histories continue to play an integral part in the life of modern Russia as well as the Ukrainian State.

This is especially true given the current Civil War between Western and Eastern Ukraine. Especially in regard to the overwhelmingly and understandable results of the recent vote, as free and democratic as one can expect in the middle of a war, by the Russian-speaking people of Eastern Ukraine, who opted, for a multitude of political, cultural, economic and military reasons, to return back to Mother Russia, for her cultural sustenance and physical protection.

This means, regardless of the fact that 143 countries of the UN’s General Assembly may have rejected Russia’s annexation of four regions of Eastern Ukraine, doesn’t alter the fact that for the Ukrainian Army of Western Ukraine, and its NATO allies, to continue to militarily mount attacks against the much-hated Russian-speaking regions of Eastern Ukraine and Mother Russia herself, still must objectively be considered “Acts of War” in anyone’s books, even that of the United Nation’s own charter. It leaves unanswered the question, “who now and in the future will protect the human rights and welfare of the Russian-speaking Eastern Ukrainians seeking justice for themselves who, long before even WWII, have been very much hated because of their Russian heritage?

It also calls into question what the legal status will be in the future once the U.S. and its NATO Allied-proxy combatants decide to supply the Western Ukraine’s Army with tactical nuclear weaponry. If, or when, it happens it puts the legal status of the conflict in a whole different light.

War in Ukraine Is One Strand in the US’s Long Tapestry of Its Monroe Doctrine

The propaganda, misinformation and disinformation surrounding the war in Ukraine is so thick it can barely be cut with even the sharpest of journalistic knives. It’s truly mind-boggling. This writer hasn’t ever seen anything quite like it in his lifetime. It should be as frightening a wake-up call, to citizens of all ages in the world to grasp, before it’s too late, how and why the United States, as the Western World’s main instigator in the NATO-led proxy war in Ukraine, has become such an all-encompassing fascist dark force in this war.

The American Empire’s imperialist-corporate expansionism doesn’t rest, never has, never will. The reality of its still existent Monroe Doctrine, and “Project for a New American Century” codicil, are crystal-clear indicators of that fact.

It’s instructive to take a brief walk down the avenues of time to see exactly how the Monroe Doctrine, as a smothering, frustrating influence in the evolution of democratic, left-leaning social movements in the New World continues to threaten to expand all the more in the Old World. In the days of the old Soviet Union there always remained a dynamic counterbalancing force in the struggle between communistic, communalistic, progressive movements and those imperialistic, fascist-leaning, corporate movements more favored by the Americans and the United States.

Two Centuries of Brutal, Predatory, US-led Imperialism in the New World

A simple fact is that long before the United States was even formerly born as a nation in the New World, the imperialist European forces who first arrived, and later would form that so-called “shining city on the hill”, began importing, from the get-go, Black African slaves to the New World as its first financial, corporate, institutionalized enterprise that since has continued to expand in an endless multitude of forms that have made its much-hallowed Bill of Rights a mockery.

But all this came in the beginning with the blessings of Europe’s Catholic Pope and heads of other European religions, who all gave their blanket blessings as to why their faithful European Christian followers, and their descendants, had the right, forever more, in the eyes of God, to slaughter, enslave, divest and depose the New World’s First Nation peoples, as needed.

By 1823, while the U.S. was still only in its infancy, John Quincy Adams, an original signatory of the nation’s Declaration of Independence, who would go on to become the 6th President of the United States, signed the Monroe Doctrine, on behalf of President James Monroe and all the other imperial leaders of the United States, who had signed the young nation’s original Bill of Rights and its Declaration of Independence.

Furthermore, the Monroe Doctrine originally declared, as a primary principle of US policy, that, henceforth, any intervention by external powers in the politics of the America’s would be considered a potentially hostile act against the United States itself. Secondly, the America’s would forever remain distinctly separate spheres of influence and any effort by any other European power, besides itself, to control or influence sovereign states in the Western Hemisphere would be viewed as a very threat to US security. Thirdly, it further added that the United States in the Western Hemisphere would recognize and not interfere with any existing European colonies, nor meddle in the internal affairs of those European countries.

But it all was a grandiose lie from the outset. On all three counts, the inherent hypocrisy of the Monroe Doctrine and its tenets, as an integral part of American foreign policy, still exists and, unilaterally, is ruthlessly-enforced by the United States. The Cuban Nuclear Missile Crisis in 1962 is one poignant example, not to mention the innumerable times the United States has ruthlessly punished or unilaterally overthrown whatever democratic, leftist, revolutionary social movement that ever dared to question or challenge America’s dominant fascist corporate rule of law.

What since has emerged from the Monroe Doctrine, and its offspring, is a whole set of beliefs and mindsets that have made themselves known in whatever country of the America’s ever has had the temerity to challenge the hegemony of American exceptionalism. The US consistently has supported only those colonial right-wing governments opposed to whatever home-grown communistic, revolutionary social movement and its philosophy from ever gaining any meaningful ground in the America’s that might challenge the proverbial ‘American Dream’. The list of U.S.-supported, CIA-assisted, violent regime-changes of left-wing governments is long and reads like a horror story.

Cases in point: 1895: Armed revolt by Native Hawaiians tried to stop the U.S. unilateral annexation of Hawaii but were militarily put down and never allowed to vote on the annexation of their country; 1898: U.S. unilaterally claimed the Philippines, again without any vote by the people themselves, with the U.S. arrogantly claiming it as “a ceded territory”; 1898; U.S. military invaded Puerto Rico that had been granted “self-rule” by Spain. But the Treaty of Paris, under U.S. pressure, denied their self-rule and officially approved the cession of Puerto Rico to the U.S.; 1912: U.S, military occupation of Nicaragua during the Banana War sought to protect fascist U.S. Dell Monte corporate business interests over the people’s rights; 1947-1977: U.S. military supported and trained Paraguay’s right-wing military in counter-intelligence and counter-insurgency for its opposing communism more strongly than any other nation in the world; 1948: US supported Paraguay’s dictator Alfredo Stroessner and the regime change of its former left-wing government; 1954: CIA-assisted the U.S.-endorsed overthrow of Guatemala’s President Jacobo Arbenz; 1961: Dominion Republic’s dictator Rafael Trujillo, once he fell out of grace with his American political handlers was assassinated by conspirators sponsored by the CIA; 1962 to 2022: an on-going oppressive, punitive economic embargo has been waged against the Republic of Cuba; 1964: CIA-assisted right-wing failed coup d’etat of President Joao Goulart of Brazil; 1970: CIA-assisted right-wing coup of Chile’s President Salvadore Allende; 1971; CIA-assisted coup of Bolivian President Juan Jose Torres; 1976: CIA-assisted right-wing coup and overthrow of Argentina’s democratically-elected President Isabel Peron; 1989: U.S.-supported invasion of Panama in attempt to overthrow Manuel Noriega and imprison him once he had served his purpose for corporate America; 1990’s: CIA-backed death squads terrorized Haiti’s attempt to form democratic government; 2004: CIA-assisted bloody coup and forced removal of Haiti’s President Jean-Bertrand Aristead by the U.S. military who physically removed Aristead against his will from the America’s under U.S. military escort, exiling him to the Central African Republic and South Africa.

This is but a partial list of the brutal predations of U.S.-led imperialism that have not only gone on in the America’s since the birth of the United States, but throughout the world as it and its allies have continued to expand an ever-widening Monroe Doctrine-style imperialism into places like: the overthrow of the leftist government of Mossadegh in Iraq; the Taliban in Afghanistan, and; Gaddafi in Libya; while, each time, American and Western governments, banks and financial Wall Street institutions, have descended like vultures, to utterly cannibalize their national coffers.

It’s a truly ugly tale to tell, especially within the context of Manifest Destiny, as coined by advocates of the New World Order, who still deeply believe the United States is inevitably destined, by God himself, to forever expand its dominion and corporate brand of democracy and capitalism throughout the New & Old Worlds.

This same curious mindset of American philosophy is what also: led to the: Cold War Domino Theory, that, in turn, led: to the Vietnam War against the Vietnamese people and their Chinese allies; then led to the Cold War against the Soviet Union; then led to the Hot War against Russia in Ukraine and perhaps, in the near or not too distant future, even China over the tensions that continue to build in the South Pacific around Taiwan.

US Western Hemisphere Militarism Seeks to Expand into the Old World

The War in Ukraine speaks to a U.S. imperialist-run Western Hemisphere of The America’s, that continues to expand now into a NATO-dominated Eastern European-Eurasian world, with even greater, more far-reaching imperial goals and objectives for the future.

To know something about how the American Empire’s early objectives were originally laid out in the Monroe Doctrine is to begin to better understand what its new objectives now are in Ukraine and beyond, as has now been more clearly spelled out in the recent historic NATO Summit in Madrid, that seeks to further shore up US Militarism in the 21st century and beyond with its new Strategic Concept that now has identified, as the key threat to Western Civilization’s interests and values being, as they always have been: the continued existence of Russia and China.

Noam Chomsky, one of the world’s pre-eminent Peace & War intellectuals, without mincing his words, recently modestly quipped, upon reading the conclusions of Madrid’s NATO Summit, “The Empire Doesn’t Rest!” A remarkable understatement, to say the least.

But what does the Human Race’s flashpoint moment of truth in Ukraine now mean? If a nuclear threat suddenly could turn into a calamitous slaughter, what will be the ultimate cost of lives lost, and who will have the stomach of another General MacArthur, to exact that cost with some Nuclear Sucker Punch, or ultimate tit-for-tat by a multitude of others that will surely follow?

*

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.

Jerome Irwin is a Canadian-American writer who, for decades, 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.

All images in this article are from the author

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Peace and Diplomacy Between the US and Russia or More Empire-building?

The West Bank in Palestine Is Ready to Explode

October 23rd, 2022 by Steven Sahiounie

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

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

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

***

There is a battle brewing in the occupied West Bank of Palestine.  Thousands of Israeli occupation forces will be deployed to face a growing resistance force.  The ‘natives are restless’ and the Lions’ Den has mobilized to fight for their freedom and human rights.

500,000 illegal Jewish settlers now live in the West Bank in some 130 settlements.  Today, the Israeli forces said dozens of settlers ran through Hawara, near Nablus, throwing rocks at Palestinian cars. The settlers used pepper spray on the Israeli commander as well as another soldier and sprayed another two soldiers at a nearby checkpoint.  Settlers are allowed to intimidate Palestinians and destroy their property, while Palestinians are hunted down and killed by Israeli occupation forces.

The Palestinian youth have grown up under brutal military occupation and an apartheid state.  The resistance in Jenin, Nablus, and Hebron has inspired rebellion against sieges and attacks. The Palestinian people living under the iron hand of oppression are ready to fight the Israeli occupation and are frustrated with their leadership which is seen as collaborating with the Israelis in keeping the status quo firmly in place.  The resistance movement sees no benefit in maintaining the occupation and demands a dramatic change in their future.

The Palestinian youth reject the divisions among the factions in the politics of Palestine.  The recent unity deal in Algeria has given them hope that political parties can work together in brigades such as the Lions’ Den, which has fighters from Hamas, Fatah, and others fighting together for a single goal of freedom.

On October 11, an Israeli soldier was killed in an attack north of Nablus, and two other shooting attacks against Israeli forces took place in Beit Ummar, near Hebron, and in Sur Baher, a neighborhood in Jerusalem.

On October 14, Israeli forces killed 20-year-old Mateen Dabaya in a raid on the Jenin refugee camp. Dr. Abdallah Abu Teen, 43, rushed to the aid of Dabaya in front of the Jenin hospital and was also shot and killed by the Israelis in his attempt to give medical care to the injured young man. Two Palestinian paramedics and several civilians were also wounded in the attack by the Israelis at the entrance to the hospital.

On October 15, a Palestinian in his twenties was killed north of Ramallah, and Israeli forces raided Nablus and arrested a Palestinian man while continuing to impose movement restrictions on Palestinians in the West Bank, which is a hallmark of an apartheid state.

On October 16, Mohammad Turkman, 20, died of his wounds while in Israeli custody. He had been wounded and captured by Israeli forces in Jenin in late September.

On October 20, Mohammed Fadi Nuri, 16, died after being shot in the stomach last month by Israeli troops near the city of Ramallah.

The Shuafat refugee camp in Jerusalem is completely sealed in a siege by Israeli forces as a form of collective punishment following an attack there, and Israeli police announced that it arrested 50 Palestinians in Jerusalem recently.

Riyad Mansour, the representative of Palestine to the UN, has denounced attacks by Israeli occupation forces and called on the UN to comply with international law and Security Council resolutions. Mansour noted that Israeli forces and settler militias “are relentlessly harassing, intimidating and provoking the Palestinian people in a ruthless manner,” and condemned the new attack against the city of Jenin

The US enables Israel to remain an apartheid state

The United States of America, the champion of freedom and democracy, is currently sending billions of dollars worth of weapons to Ukraine to fight for democracy.  But, you won’t see the US sending a bullet to the Palestinians for their fight for democracy.  The US is also the champion of ‘double standards’.

According to the various international human rights groups, which are often cited by the US as evidence of war crimes and atrocities by American foes, the Jewish State of Israel is an apartheid state.  The US and her western liberal allies were the chief critics of the former apartheid state of South Africa, and the western criticism helped to fulfill the dreams of freedom and democracy in the land of Nelson Mandela.

The US is like a parent who allows Israel to continue self-destructive behavior.  Some parents of teenage drug addicts will buy drugs for their children to protect them from danger and arrest.  The parents are not willing to go through the tortuous procedure of rehab for the child, so they minimize the danger and make the drug addiction as safe as possible. This is known as enabling, and this is the role the US has chosen for itself in its relationship with Israel and Palestine.  On the one hand, the US claims to support the democratic aspirations of all peoples but is unwilling to stand up to Israeli policies of racism, collective punishment, blockades, imprisonment without trial or legal aid, and other crimes perpetrated against the Palestinian people under occupation.  The enabling stance of the US is destructive for both the US and the Palestinians, as the reputation of America suffers from global ridicule and shame.

Palestinian unity deal

Arab unity might be too much to ask for, but Palestinian unity has been agreed on in Algeria.  Hamas, Fattah, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the PLO, and others signed the deal brokered by Algerian President Abdulmajeed Tabboune.  This deal resolves a 15-year political dispute among the various factions and looks forward to new elections.

“Jenin has demonstrated to the [Palestinian] leaders meeting in Algeria that national unity is built in the field,” Palestinian prime minister Mohammad Shtayyeh said.

Why is the west bank resisting?

The Palestinian Authority has lost control in Nablus and Jenin the West Bank.  The Palestinians view their leadership as an extension of Israeli control and oppression.  The Lions’ Den in Nablus has claimed responsibility for the latest resistance operations against Israeli occupation forces.

On October 16, the Jenin Brigade announced they will support the Lions’ Den in their resistance to occupation, and this has raised the prospect of increased Israeli raids on Jenin and Nablus.

Benny Gantz, Israeli Defense Minister, trivialized the threat of the Lions’ Den when he made statements on how his occupation forces will capture and eliminate the members.  Israel has depended on the divisions among the Palestinian factions. However, Israel has never before faced a unified force of motivated youth who are willing to die for freedom and a chance to create a new future for themselves and their families. Revolutions occasionally succeed.

According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, over 170 Palestinians were killed in the West Bank and Gaza, since the beginning of 2022, making this year the deadliest since 2015.

UK embassy move proposed

Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Cardinal Vincent Nichols, Archbishop of Westminster, have both expressed concern over the proposed UK embassy move from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.  Liz Truss, the embattled British Prime Minister, proposed the idea in her meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid last month.

Pope Francis, the UK churches, and the 13 denominations of Christians in Jerusalem have always maintained a position supporting a UN resolution for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine firstly, and secondly a final status of Jerusalem to be decided afterward. Previously the Christians of Jerusalem stated concern over moving embassies to Jerusalem,

“We are certain that such steps will yield increased hatred, conflict, violence and suffering in Jerusalem and the Holy Land, moving us farther from the goal of unity and deeper toward destructive division.”

Truss has wanted to follow in the footsteps of President Trump who defied international law when he shifted the US embassy to Jerusalem. The Truss plan was first suggested in her letter to the Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI), a pro-Israel lobby group, similar to the pro-Trump AIPAC in the US.

Australia reverses its position on embassy move

Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong has announced Australia has reversed its recognition of West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Wong also told reporters that

“the Australian government remains committed to a two-state solution in which Israel and a future Palestinian state can coexist in peace and security within internationally recognized borders. We will not support an approach that undermines this prospect.”

*

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.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

The Bottomless Pit of War Spending

October 23rd, 2022 by Manlio Dinucci

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

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

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

***

The European Union is giving Ukraine €5 billion in exceptional macrofinancial assistance. Another 9 billion has been provided by the EU-sponsored fundraising campaign. However, this is not enough to cover the budget hole; Zelenski is immediately asking for another 55 billion euros. The US and EU have already donated 100 billion euros in military supplies to Kiev.

Add to that billions more spent by the EU on training and arming Ukrainian forces, plus those spent for the same purpose by individual EU countries. In the U.S., a bill is passing in the Senate that allows the Pentagon to purchase, without specific congressional authorization, huge quantities of weapons for Ukraine directly from the war industries-a colossal business for the military industrial complex, which will further increase its profits with NATO’s Ten-Year Plan to arm Ukraine by repurposing its war industry.

These huge funds, coming directly and indirectly from our pockets, serve to fuel the war in the heart of Europe. The risks are growing. The NATO nuclear war exercise directed against Russia is taking place in Europe: 14 countries are participating under U.S. command with 60 aircraft, including F-35 nuclear attack fighters, including Italian ones, which will soon be armed with the new U.S. B61-12 nuclear bombs, and U.S. B-52 strategic bombers armed with nuclear cruise missiles.

At the same time, the most important strategic report released in recent days by the White House-“U.S. National Security Strategy”-leaves no doubt about Washington’s pursued goal: “Around the world, the need for American leadership is greater than ever. Our armed forces are the strongest the world has ever known. America will not hesitate to use force when necessary to defend our national interests.”

*

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

This article was originally published on byoblu.

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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.

***

 

Accounting for all the myriad ways Liz Truss leaves Britain worse off would take longer than the amount of time she spent inside Number 10.

Her brief tenure has been characterised by an exhilaratingly rapid pace of record-breaking, from establishing an unprecedented Labour lead in the polls to presiding over the highest rates of inflation in 40 years, to driving the pound down to its lowest-ever level against the dollar, and culminating in her resignation as the shortest-serving prime minister in UK history.

The story of the Free Enterprise Group (FEG) – the neo-Thatcherite Tory faction founded by Liz Truss in 2011 and closely associated with Tufton Street think tanks such as the Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) – makes for satisfying schadenfreude. A decade after a gaggle of newly elected Tory MPs, among them Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng, co-authored ‘Britannia Unchained’, which outlined the FEG’s vision for the country, the group’s internal politicking saw them slowly ascend to the head of the table.

Twelve long-time supporters of the FEG would occupy cabinet positions in Truss’s government, with Kwarteng, Thérèse Coffey and Nadhim Zahawi rewarded with some of the choice senior roles. The head of IEA’s public policy openly and gleefully boasted about dictating the political course. At last, it was time for them to realise the hyper-neoliberal Britain they’d dreamed about for so long, one which could boast of the bare minimum in taxation, regulation and public spending.

Their vision promptly dissolved on contact with reality, immediately tanking the economy and coming to a humiliating and abrupt halt to the experiment after all of 44 days. Their hubris might make for an enjoyable bit of political theatre, but beyond the spectacle, the consequences of Truss’ fleeting premiership cannot be neatly undone.

Though the pound began to rally against the dollar almost instantly after her resignation, the damage caused by Trussonomics, which led to a collapse in gilt government prices, has only thrown fuel on the raging fire of the cost of living crisis. Britain is by no means alone in facing such crises – particularly in the wake of various economic and supply chain shocks resulting from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – but economists have begun to refer to the upshot of Truss’ response as a ‘moron risk premium’. The UK has become a cautionary tale in how to exacerbate an already perilous economic situation.

The Bank of England had to pledge that it was prepared to spend up to £5bn a day over 13 days (to a total of £65bn) in an attempt to prevent various pension funds from going under. It is now expected to raise interest rates from 0.25% to 5% by early 2023, with the Resolution Foundation anticipating that five million households could face an average annual mortgage bill increase of £5,100.

Many homeowners may be forced to sell up. But since lenders responded to the mini-budget by withdrawing 1,700 products (roughly 40% of the market) before reintroducing 900 of them at far higher prices, eligible buyers might be in much shorter supply. As well as exposing mortgage-owners to a much higher risk of defaulting (the bank has already warned of increases in the coming months) this could have a severe short-term effect on renters, too, should these rising costs be passed on by landlords. A sharp increase in people being unable to afford rent and mortgages – particularly as other living costs simultaneously soar in tandem – has the potential to not only lead to a large spike in homelessness, but to collapse the property market; a market with which many pension funds are also inextricably linked.

There is a potential that interest rates might not be raised in line with market expectations to avoid such a scenario, but this carries a risk of higher inflation, which has already climbed to 10.1% under Truss – the highest in 40 years. Annual food prices have risen by almost 15%, the highest rise since 1980, which has certainly not been helped by the weakening of the pound leading to significantly increased import costs.

The true impact of spiralling energy costs hasn’t been truly felt yet, given we are only in October and winter hasn’t really drawn in. Consumers being battered on numerous fronts of essential costs (housing, fuel, food) are likely to make spending cutbacks, meaning many employers could see a significant downturn in business. This – when combined with a business’s own increases in energy and supply costs – might have disastrous consequences for its staff, whether in depressed wages or cutbacks. Losses in earnings beget losses in spending power begets more losses in earnings. Truss’ ‘Growth Plan’ ostensibly sought to prevent a recession, but looks only to have made one more inevitable, and more sharply felt.

It would be unfair to lay blame for all of these scenarios squarely at the feet of Liz Truss. She is a symptom, rather than a direct cause, of our current situation – and of an ideology that has for decades been busy organising the economy in a precarious way for the benefit of all those she last month sought to hand tax cuts to. In just 44 days, Truss has given us all a glimpse of what that 40+ year political project could look like if allowed to be taken to its logical conclusion.

*

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 by Tim Hammond / No10 Downing Stree  / licensed under Creative Commons

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on In Just 44 Days, Liz Truss Has Made the UK Immeasurably Worse
  • Tags: ,

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 Kremlin spokesperson said Russian President Vladimir Putin has been open to talks over Ukraine since the war began. Meanwhile, America’s top diplomat claimed there has been “no evidence” Moscow wishes to engage in diplomacy.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Friday that Putin appeared to be “much softer and more open to negotiations.” Ankara has been one of the few NATO members to try to retain some ties with Moscow. Erdogan led negotiations that nearly ended the war in Ukraine in its first months. In July, Turkey and the UN successfully mediated the grain export agreement between Kiev and Moscow.

Responding to the Turkish leader’s remarks, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters. Peskov said “Putin, in fact, has been open to talks from the very beginning. The president has repeatedly said so himself.” Moscow attempted to initiate talks with NATO prior to Russia invading Ukraine, he added.

Peskov pointed out the Kremlin was agreeable to a document produced by representatives from Kiev and Moscow. The Russian news agency TASS, quoted Peskov saying

“Putin was open to talks when the text of the document between Russian and Ukrainian negotiators was actually agreed upon. So here, in this respect, nothing has changed.”

In March, Ankara hosted talks with negotiators from both Moscow and Kiev. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and former US official Fiona Hill have separately confirmed that the broad outlines of a deal was reached. Several sources have reported that then-UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson traveled to Kiev and told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky not to pursue the agreement.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken argues that Russia is to blame for the lack of progress in negotiations. “We have seen no evidence of that in this moment. On the contrary, we see Russia doubling and tripling down on its aggression,” America’s top diplomat said at a press conference with his French counterpart.

Peskov added that current diplomacy is being stifled by a new statute signed by Zelensky. “The Ukrainian side has enshrined not continuing talks with Russia. That is, the Ukrainian law now prohibits any negotiations,” the Kremlin spokesperson said. On October 4, Zelensky signed a decree that barred talks with Putin’s government. “We are ready for a dialogue with Russia, but with another president of Russia,” the Ukrainian leader said.

*

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.

Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com, news editor of the Libertarian Institute, and co-host of Conflicts of Interest.

15 Seconds Until Nuclear Armageddon

October 23rd, 2022 by Robert C. Koehler

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.

***

“When militarism is addressed as a psychosocial disease, the absurd irrationality of its symptoms is clearly exposed.”

These words are from a 1992 essay by N. Arther Coulter published in a journal called Medicine and War. Who would have guessed? They’re as relevant now as they were three decades ago.

God bless Armageddon.

As war wreaks hell in Ukraine—and the threat of a nuclear confrontation between superpowers continues to intensify—NATO is in the process of prepping for the end of the world. It’s an annual two-week training event called Steadfast Noon—a nuclear practice run that gives European flight crews a chance to practice loading and dropping “non-strategic” nuclear bombs. Russia is expected to conduct its own annual nuclear drill, known as Grom (that is, Thunder), soon as well.

I can’t read about this without summoning what I call “the big why?” from deep within. Endless resources are devoted annually to nuclear deterrence, a.k.a., the big bluff: “If you mess with me, you’re gonna get it.” The point, allegedly, is to prevent war, which is absolutely paradoxical in a global political system based on the psychosocial disease of militarism, i.e., the pursuit of national interest and the maintenance of safety primarily via force and violence.

No matter that this is the nuclear age, that force and violence could—oh so easily—go too far and wreak horror on everyone. The preparation for nuclear war continues unabated, while the voices of opposition remain merely cries from the political margins. There’s no actual “debate” here, just a lot of powerless anguish, or so it seems.

For instance, two years ago an open letter, signed by 56 former political leaders (including former prime ministers) of 20 NATO countries, as well as Japan and South Korea, was released to the world, pleading to current NATO countries—to all the nuclear-armed nations—to sign the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which the U.N. passed in 2017 by a vote of 122-1. The nations represented by the letter’s signatories have, of course, totally ignored the treaty, which was ratified last year, making nuclear weapons technically “illegal,” which seems to mean nothing at all.

The letter concludes thus: “With close to 14,000 nuclear weapons located at dozens of sites across the globe and on submarines patrolling the oceans at all times, the capacity for destruction is beyond our imagination. All responsible leaders must act now to ensure that the horrors of 1945 are never repeated. Sooner or later, our luck will run out—unless we act. The nuclear weapon ban treaty provides the foundation for a more secure world, free from this ultimate menace. We must embrace it now and work to bring others on board. There is no cure for a nuclear war. Prevention is our only option.”

Stunning words! They were signed by former leaders of the following countries: Albania, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain and Turkey.

They also wrote: “. . .we appeal to current leaders to advance disarmament before it is too late.”

“We appeal . . .?” And suddenly the whole letter crawled back into the political margins. These were former prime ministers, former defense ministers, speaking the deepest possible political truth, but seemingly they had no more power to bring about the change—global nuclear disarmament—than I do.

Behind the formal language was a simple plea: “Come on, guys. Nuclear militarism doesn’t work. You know it as well as we do.” But nothing has changed. Perhaps only when you’re no longer in power do you become free of the psychosocial disease of militarism. And thus “nuclear deterrence,” along with enormous, bloated military budgets, remains the way of the developed world.

Militarism—including nuclear militarism—remains the way of the world, accompanied by an enormous shrug. This being the case, it strikes me as appropriate to revisit fifteen seconds in the life of Stanislav Petrov, a lieutenant colonel of the Soviet Air Defense Forces, who, on Sept. 26, 1983, essentially saved the world from nuclear war.

He was on duty at the command center outside Moscow where nuclear threat was monitored. Several hours into his shift that morning, the alarm went off. Oh my God! Computers immediately warned that the U.S. had just launched five ICBMs at the Soviet Union.

“For fifteen seconds, we were in a state of shock,” he later said. These were fifteen seconds in which the fate of humanity—your fate, my fate—were up for grabs. As the New York Times noted, this was a deeply tense period of the Cold War. Three weeks earlier, the Soviet Union had shot down a Korean Air Lines commercial flight flying over Soviet territory, killing all 269 people on board. And President Reagan had recently declared that the Soviet Union was an “evil empire” and refused to freeze the arms race. Uh oh.

According to protocol, Petrov should have reported the alert up the military chain of command, with nuclear retaliation the likely result. But the computer warning seemed odd. It indicated that only five missiles had been launched, which made no sense. Why so few? In those fifteen seconds, as he recovered from his shock and pulled himself together, he studied the flashing maps. His gut instinct was: no, this isn’t real. It’s a false alarm. The Times wrote:

“As the tension in the command center rose—as many as 200 pairs of eyes were trained on Colonel Petrov—he made the decision to report the alert as a system malfunction.”

And yes, his gut instinct proved accurate. Some clarity and sanity well down the military chain of command kept the world out of nuclear war. That time.

From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

*

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

Robert Koehler is an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist and nationally syndicated writer. Koehler has been the recipient of multiple awards for writing and journalism from organizations including the National Newspaper Association, Suburban Newspapers of America, and the Chicago Headline Club.  He’s a regular contributor to such high-profile websites as Common Dreams and the Huffington Post. Eschewing political labels, Koehler considers himself a “peace journalist. He has been an editor at Tribune Media Services and a reporter, columnist and copy desk chief at Lerner Newspapers, a chain of neighborhood and suburban newspapers in the Chicago area. Koehler launched his column in 1999. Born in Detroit and raised in suburban Dearborn, Koehler has lived in Chicago since 1976. He earned a master’s degree in creative writing from Columbia College and has taught writing at both the college and high school levels. Koehler is a widower and single parent. He explores both conditions at great depth in his writing. His book, “Courage Grows Strong at the Wound” (2016). Contact him or visit his website at commonwonders.com.

Featured image is from ICAN/Aude Catimel


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

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

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

Ukraine War Is ‘Biden’s War’ Now

October 23rd, 2022 by M. K. Bhadrakumar

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 most obvious explanation to the mysterious air dash of the UK Defence Minister Ben Wallace to Washington on Tuesday could be that he was canvassing for the support of the Biden Administration for his pitch to succeed Liz Truss as Britain’s next prime minister. But another plausible explanation can be that the secret, hurried trip marked a defining moment in the conflict in Ukraine, which is showing all signs of turning into a full-fledged war. 

To be sure, the Biden team cannot but be worried that London is drifting into chaos and the Conservative Party’s faction leaders scurry around like headless chicken looking for a substitute to Truss who stepped down on Thursday. 

The British economy is disintegrating and the Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt anticipates that a cut on the defence budget is inevitable. That is to say, the Deep State’s fun and frolic in Kiev is no longer affordable. The UK is heading for hard times, the rubric of Global Britain looks delusional. 

Enter President Biden. The reports from Moscow suggest that Russians have hard intelligence to the effect that Washington has demanded from President Zelensky some spectacular performance on the battlefield as the midterms in the US on November 8 is round the corner. 

That adds to the enigmatic comment by a second defence minister in London James Heappey that the conversations that Wallace would be having in Washington were “beyond belief,” hinting that particularly sensitive and serious issues were on the agenda.  

Indeed, after arrival in Washington, Wallace headed straight for the White House to meet up with National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, Biden’s point person for the Ukraine war. A White House readout said the two officials “exchanged views on shared national security interests, including Ukraine.  They underscored their commitment to continue providing Ukraine with security assistance as it defends itself against Russian aggression.” 

As British politics descends to skulduggery that will extend into months, the US will be a stakeholder. Historically, since the World War 2, Britain led the US from the rear in critical  situations involving Russia. 

Indeed, Biden issued a rare statement on Truss’ exit, which stated that the US and the UK “are strong Allies and enduring friends — and that fact will never change.” He thanked her “for her partnership on a range of issues including holding Russia accountable for its war against Ukraine.” Biden underscored that “We will continue our close cooperation with the U.K. government as we work together to meet the global challenges our nations face.” 

Biden has sent a powerful message to Britain’s political class signalling that he expects them to come up with a new prime minister who will faithfully adhere to the compass set by Boris Johnson on Ukraine. In immediate terms, what does it signal for the Anglo-American project in Kherson? Will it go ahead? That is the big question. 

The situation in Kherson is assuming the nature of a large-scale military confrontation, as Zelensky is throwing everything into it in an attempt to wrest control of the strategic Kherson city, which has been under Russian control since March, before the midterms in the US. 

At a press conference in Moscow on Tuesday, Army general Sergei Surovikin, the newly-appointed theatre commander for Ukraine operations, conceded that there was a danger of the Ukrainian forces advancing toward Kherson city. 

To quote the general,

“A difficult situation has arisen. The enemy deliberately bombards infrastructure and residential buildings in Kherson. The Antonovsky Bridge and the dam of the Kakhovskaya hydroelectric power station were damaged by HIMARS missiles, traffic there was stopped. 

“As a result, the supply of food in the city is difficult, there are certain problems with the water and electricity supply. All this greatly complicates the lives of citizens, but also poses a direct threat to their lives. 

“The NATO leadership of the Ukrainian armed forces has long been demanding offensive operations against Kherson from the Kiev regime, regardless of casualties… We have data on the possibility that the regime in Kiev will use prohibited methods of war in the area of the city of Kherson — preparation for a big missile attack on the Kakhovskaya hydroelectric dam, massive and indiscriminate missile and artillery attacks on the city…

“In these circumstances, our top priority is to preserve the life and health of citizens. Therefore, the Russian army will first of all ensure the safe, already announced departure of the population according to the resettlement program being prepared by the Russian government. Our further plans and actions regarding the city of Kherson itself will depend on the current military-tactical situation. I repeat, it is already very difficult today. [Emphasis added.]

“In any case, as I said, we will start from the need to protect the lives of civilians and our military as much as possible. We will act consciously and in a timely manner, without excluding difficult decisions.” [Emphasis added.] 

The full interview of Gen. Sergey Surovikin to Russian media is below:

The Kremlin thinking gets echoed in a public appeal by the head of the Kherson region Vladimir Saldo where he explained that the evacuation of civilians was not only for people’s safety but also for the operational freedom of the military:

“Dear compatriots, I want to say again that our army has very strong capabilities to repel any attack. But in order for our military to work quietly and not to think that civilians are behind their backs, you MUST get out of these neighbourhoods I mentioned and allow the military to do its job properly, with fewer casualties for the civilians. Our cause is just and we are sure we will win!” 

The message here is that the Russian military is prepared to expand the scope of the conflict in Kherson, if need arises. There has been talk about a massive Russian offensive circa mid-November. The new security measures announced by Putin this week and the establishment of a special coordination council headed by Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin to support the needs of Russia’s Armed Forces imply that time future is being put on a war footing.

Significantly, Gen. Surovikin said at one point in his press conference:

“The enemy does not give up trying to attack the positions of the Russian troops. This concerns, first of all, the directions Kupyansk (Kharkov oblast), Krasnolimansky (Donetsk oblast) and Mykolaiv-Krivoy Rog (neighbouring Kherson oblast.) Our enemy is a criminal regime that is killing the citizens of Ukraine. We are one people with Ukrainians and we wish Ukraine to become a state independent of the West and NATO, friendly to Russia… [Emphasis added.]

“The Ukrainian regime is trying to break through our defences. To this end, the AFU is pulling all available reserves to the front lines. These are mainly territorial defense forces that have not completed full training. In fact, the Ukrainian leadership is condemning them to destruction.” 

Then, he added,

“We have a different strategy. The Commander-in-Chief [President Putin] has already talked about this. We don’t aim for high advance figures, we take care of every soldier and methodically “grind” the advancing enemy. This not only limits our losses, but also significantly reduces the number of civilian casualties.” 

That is to say, specifically, the set parameters of the special military operations with focus on “demilitarisation” and “denazification” remain unchanged while also aiming at the replacement of Zelensky’s regime. 

Russia will be keenly watching the profound political crisis developing in Europe, of which the paroxysms in Britain are an early harbinger, which could erode the rock-like UK support for Zelensky, as the western capability and interest to bankroll the Ukrainian economy and fuel the military conflict may also be on the wane. 

Nonetheless, Surovikin did not take to hyperbole but instead chose to communicate directly, realistically. He echoed Putin’s priority to take all necessary measures and resources in accordance with the operational and tactical situation at the front with the supreme objective of saving the lives of Russian soldiers and local civilians. 

The general conveyed the impression that the Russian command is ready for every development of the situation in Kherson — both tactical withdrawal and heavy city fighting. 

In political terms, with the UK bogged down in a domestic quagmire, Biden has the option to shift to diplomacy. This is “Biden’s war” now. He is about to script his presidential legacy as the fifth of the 14 American presidents in office since World War II to “own” a war — after Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, George HW Bush and George W. Bush.

*

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 Libertarian Institute

Il pozzo senza fondo della spesa per la guerra

October 22nd, 2022 by Manlio Dinucci

L’Unione Europea sta dando all’Ucraina 5 miliardi di euro di assistenza macrofinanziaria eccezionale. Altri 9 miliardi sono stati forniti dalla campagna di raccolta fondi promossa dalla UE. Non bastano però a coprire il buco di bilancio: Zelenski chiede immediatamente altri 55 miliardi di euro. USA e EU hanno giù donato a Kiev 100 miliardi di euro di forniture militari. Si aggiungono altri miliardi spesi dalla UE per l’addestramento e armamento delle forze ucraine, più quelli spesi allo stesso scopo da singoli paesi della EU. Negli Stati Uniti sta passando al Senato una legge che consente al Pentagono di acquistare, senza specifica autorizzazione del Congresso, enormi quantità di armi per l’Ucraina direttamente dalle industrie belliche: un business colossale per il complesso militare industriale, che accrescerà ulteriormente i suoi profitti con il Piano decennale della NATO di armare l’Ucraina riconvertendo la sua industria bellica.

Questi enormi fondi, provenienti direttamente e indirettamente dalle nostre tasche, servono ad alimentare la guerra nel cuore dell’Europa. I rischi sono crescenti. Si sta svolgendo in Europa l’esercitazione NATO di guerra nucleare diretta contro la Russia: vi partecipano sotto comando USA 14 Paesi con 60 aerei, tra cui i caccia F-35 da attacco nucleare, compresi quelli italiani, che tra poco saranno armati delle nuove bombe nucleari USA B61-12, e i bombardieri strategici B-52 degli Stati Uniti armati di missili nucleari da crociera.

Contemporaneamente, il più importante rapporto strategico pubblicato in questi giorni dalla Casa Bianca – “Strategia per la sicurezza nazionale degli Stati Uniti d’America” – non lascia dubbi sul fine perseguito da Washington: “In tutto il mondo, il bisogno della leadership americana è più grande che mai.  Le nostre forze armate sono le più forti che il mondo abbia mai conosciuto. L’America non esiterà a usare la forza quando sarà necessario per difendere i nostri interessi nazionali”.

Manlio Dinucci

 

 

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Il pozzo senza fondo della spesa per la guerra

Covid Vaccine: Graphene Oxide Detection in Aqueous Suspension

October 22nd, 2022 by Prof. Dr. Pablo Campra Madrid

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 on July 8, 2021

***

Below are excerpts of the Spanish Team’s research report on Graphene Oxide with links to the full document.

Background

Mr. Ricardo Delgado Martin requests PROVISION OF RESEARCH SERVICES to the UAL named: “DETECTION OF GRAPHENE IN AQUEOUS SUSPENSION SAMPLE”

  • On 06/10/2021 1 vial was received by courier, labeled with the following text:
    • “COMIRNATY™ .Sterile concentrate. COVID-19 mRNA. 6 doses after dilution.
    • Discard date / time: PAA165994.LOT / EXP: EY3014 08/2021 ”
  • Origin and traceability: unknown
  • State of conservation: refrigerated
  • Maintenance during the study: refrigerated
  • Coding of the problem sample to be analyzed: RD1

Preliminary observations of the test sample RD1

Description:

  • Sealed vial, with rubber and aluminum cap intact, of 2 ml capacity, containing a 0.45 ml cloudy aqueous suspension.
  • RNA extraction and quantification is performed
  • Presence of uncharacterized nanometric microbiology is observed, visible at 600X in optical microscope

Click screenshot above to access full document in English

Sample processing

1. Dilution in 0.9% sterile physiological saline (0.45 ml + 1.2 ml)

2. Polarity fractionation: 1.2 ml hexane + 120 ul of RD1 sample

3. Extraction of hydrophilic phase

4. Extraction and quantification of RNA in the sample

5. Electron and optical microscopy of aqueous phase

Preliminary analysis: extraction and quantification of Rna in the sample

1. RNA extraction: Kit https://www.fishersci.es/shop/products/ambion-purelink-rna-mini-kit-7/10307963

2. Quantification of total UV absorbance in spectrophotometer NanoDrop™ https://www.thermofisher.com/order/catalog/product/ND-2000#/ND-2000

3. Specific quantification of Rna by fluorescence QUBIT2.0: https://www.thermofisher.com/es/es/home/references/newsletters-and-journals/bioprobes-journalof-cell-biology-applications/bioprobes-issues-2011/bioprobes-64-april-2011/the-qubit-2-0 fluorometer-april- 2011.html

UV absorption spectrum of the aqueous phase of the RD1 sample (Nanodrop team)

Maximum absorption of SAMPLE RD1 (260-270 nm)

  • RNA. It presents usual maximums at 260 nm. Total concentration estimated by QUBIT2.0 fluorometry: 6 ng / ul
  • The spectrum reveals the presence of a high quantity of substances or substances other than Rna with maximum absorption in the same region, with a total estimated at 747 ng / ul (uncalibrated estimate)
  • Reduced graphene oxide (RGO) has absorption maxima at 270 nm, compatible with the spectrum obtained (Thema et al, 2013. Journal of Chemistry ID 150536)
  • The maximum absorption obtained DOES NOT ALLOW TO DISCARD the presence of graphene in the sample. The minimum amount of RNA detected by QUBIT2.0 only explains a residual percentage of the total UV absorption of the sample.

OBJECTIVE: Microscopic identification of graphene derivatives

METHODOLOGY:

1. Imaging in optical and electron microscopy

2. Comparison with literature images and reduced graphene oxide standard sample

TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY (TEM)

Electron microscope JEM-2100Plus

Voltage: 200 kV

Resolution 0.14 nm

Magnification up to x1,200,000

TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY (TEM)

Electron microscopy (TEM) is commonly used to image graphene nanomaterials. It has become a fairly standard and easy to use instrument that is capable of imaging individual layered graphene sheets.

Conclusions and Recommendations

1. Microscopic study of the sample provides strong evidence for the probable presence of graphene derivatives, although microscopy does not provide conclusive evidence. The definitive identification of graphene, oxidized graphene (GO) or reduced oxidized graphene (rGO) in the RD1 sample requires the STRUCTURAL CHARACTERIZATION through the analysis of specific spectral standard sample comparable to those published in literature and those obtained from the standard sample, obtained with spectroscopic techniques such as XPS, EDS, NMR, FTIR or Raman, among others.

2. The analyzes in this report correspond to ONE SINGLE SAMPLE, limited in total volume available for processing. It is therefore necessary to carry out a significant sampling of similar vials to draw conclusions that can be generalized to comparable samples, recording origin, traceability and quality control during storage and transport prior to analysis.

Read the full report here.

*

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” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

 

***

.

There is ample evidence that the so-called Covid-19 mRNA vaccine is a killer vaccine.

A mass movement against the Covid mandate is unfolding Worldwide.

***

Below is the Important statement by Doctors for Covid Ethics (D4CE).

This statement must be endorsed Worldwide.

First published on 21 July 2021, latest update 3 April 2022

Urgent Open Letter For The Information Of:

All Citizens Of The European Union (EU), The European Economic Area (EEA) And Switzerland

All Citizens Of The United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern Ireland (UK)

All Citizens Of The United States Of America (USA)

To:

The European Medicines Agency (EMA)

The Medicines And Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)

The United States Food And Drug Administration (FDA)

The Centers For Disease Control And Prevention (CDC)

From:

Doctors For Covid Ethics (D4CE)

21 July 2021

Dear Sirs/Mesdames,

1. Official sources, namely EudraVigilance (EU, EEA, Switzerland), MHRA (UK) and VAERS (USA), have now recorded many more deaths and injuries from the COVID-!9 “vaccine” roll-out than from all previous vaccines combined since records began.

Below are the latest data as at 3 April 2022 – seventh update (the earlier data appear in the Appendix below):

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 15 March 2022 – 41,834 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 3,858,407 injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 9 March 2022 – 2,061 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 1,471,106 injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 4 March 2022 – 25,158 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 5,667,613 injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 69,053 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 10,997,126 injuries reported as at 3 April 2022.

Nota Bene:

It is important to be aware that the official figures above (reported to the health authorities) are but a small percentage (1 to 10%) of the actual figures.

Furthermore, people continue to die (and suffer injury) from the injections with every day that passes.

Please bear in mind, therefore, that the official figures are higher at the time of writing (3 April 2022) than on the cut-off dates shown above i.e. 15 March 2022 (EU/EEA/Switzerland), 9 March 2022 (UK), 4 March 2022 (USA).

This catastrophic number of injection related deaths has NOT been reported by the mainstream media, despite the official figures above being publicly available.

2. The signal of harm is now indisputably overwhelming, and, in line with universally accepted ethical standards for clinical trials, Doctors for Covid Ethics demands that the COVID-19 “vaccination” programme be halted immediately worldwide.

3. Continuation of the programme, in the full knowledge of ongoing serious harm and death to both adults and children, constitutes Crimes Against Humanity/Genocide, for which those found to be responsible or complicit will ultimately be held personally liable.

IMPORTANT MESSAGE TO THE PEOPLE:

1. Governments worldwide are lying to you the people, to the populations they purportedly serve.

2. The figures above demonstrate that the gene-based vaccines are deadly.

Yours faithfully,

Doctors for Covid Ethics


Appendix

Data at time of original publication, 21 July 2021:

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 17 July 2021 – 18,928 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.8 million injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 7 July 2021 – 1,470 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1 million injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 9 July 2021 – 10,991 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 2 million injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 31,389 Covid-19 injection related deaths and almost 5 million injuries reported as at 21 July 2021.

Data at time of first update, 1 August 2021:

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 31 July 2021 – 20,595 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.94 million injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 21 July 2021 – 1,517 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.1 million injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 23 July 2021 – 11,940 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 2.4 million injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 34,052 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 5.46 million injuries reported as at 1 August 2021.

Data at time of second update, 30 August 2021:

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 28 August 2021 – 23,252 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 2,166,285 injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 18 August 2021 – 1,609 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 1,165,636 injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 20 August 2021 – 13,627 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 2,932,001 injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 38,488 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 6,263,922 injuries reported as at 30 August 2021.

Data at time of third update, 15 September 2021:

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 11 September 2021 – 24,528 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 2,292,967 injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 1 September 2021 – 1,632 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 1,186,844 injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 3 September 2021 – 14,506 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 3,146,691 injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 40,666 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 6,626,502 injuries reported as at 15 September 2021.

Data at time of fourth update, 19 October 2021:

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 9 October 2021 – 27,242 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 2,536,526 injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 29 September 2021 – 1,698 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 1,222,566 injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 1 October 2021 – 16,310 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 3,659,888 injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 45,250 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 7,418,980 injuries reported as at 19 October 2021.

Date at time of fifth update, 28 January 2022:

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 15 January 2022 – 37,927 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 3,354,705 injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 5 January 2022 – 1,982 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 1,414,293 injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 7 January 2022 – 21,745 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 4,986,087 injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 61,654 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 9,755,085 injuries reported as at 28 January 2022.

Data at time of sixth update, 24 February 2022:

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 12 February 2022 – 39,997 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 3,626,014 injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 9 February 2022 – 2,017 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 1,458,428 injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 4 February 2022 – 23,615 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 5,355,200 injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 65,629 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 10,439,642 injuries reported as at 24 February 2022.

Please note that all correspondence should be addressed to the author Dr. C Stephen Frost [email protected]

*

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.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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.

***

Introduction

For centuries, Koreans have been asking the Almighty to bless them with a true leader who would provide daily necessities, hope for the future, courage to fight for the justice and self- respect and self confidence.

During the 500-year of Choseon dynasty, kings could not perform properly their duty as national leaders because of the corruption of the “Yang-ban” (aristocrats). 

King Kojong, the last king of the Choseon dynasty was a failure, because he could not prevent Lee Wan-yong from selling Korea to Japan for his own political and financial greed.

During the 35-year Japanese colonial rule, Korea was governed by pro-Japan Korean bureaucrats who collaborated with Japanese for the oppression of Koreans. 

After 1945, Korea was ruled, for 62 years, by former pro-Japan collaborators and their descendents who regarded the rest of the Korean people as enemies and who were more concerned with their own interests than with those of the rest of the Korean population. 

There are also a great number of Japanese who remained in Korea, adopted Korean names to keep their wealth cumulated during the 35-year Japanese occupation. This group is one of the key elements of the pro-Japan corrupted conservative South Koreans. In other words, these Japanese have been an integral part of the pro-Japan conservative government.

Moon Jae-in came along and, for Koreans, he was the true national leader they had been waiting for so long. He came in order to give  the country to back to the people, a country which was stolen by the corrupted pro-Japan conservative forces in South Korea.

President Moon has left his office on May 9, 2022.  I thought that it is right time to discuss what and how he has accomplished his historical tasks.

As the legacy of President Moon, I would point out the following achievements:

  • Fight against the corruption culture
  • Fight against the COVID-19 Virus

Social Reform

  • New Economic System
  • Crisis Management
  • North-South Relations
  • The Northern Policy and the Southern Policy
  • Korea-Japan Relations
  • Unfinished Task of President Moon Jae-in

Fight against the Corruption Culture

Before we discuss the corruption culture, we should remember its historical background.

In 1948, South Korea was deeply divided between the pro-Japan conservative South Koreans (PJCSK) and the pro-Korea liberal South Koreans (PKLSK).

The PJCSK was composed of those Koreans who had collaborated with the Japanese colonial government (the traitors), those Japanese who remained in Korea after WWII by adopting Koreans names, the descendents of these two core groups and other groups. I will elaborate the composition of the PJCSK later.

On the other hand, the PKLSK was composed of those Koreans who fought against the Japanese and the vast majority of Koreans who suffered from humiliation, oppression and exploitation by the Japanese. The leader of the PKLSK was Kim Gu who was president of the Korean Provisional Government fighting against the Japanese in China and Manchuria.

The PJCSK were able to win the election in 1948 by not only assassinating Kim Gu but also arresting most of the PKLSK leaders and rigging the election. Sygnman Rhee became the first post-war Korean president and formed a government run by the traitors and the Japanese who remained in Korea

On the other hand, in North Korea, under the leadership of Kim Il-sung, the traitors were executed and there were few Japanese remained by fear of execution. The core of the North Korean society was composed of those who fought with arms against Japan.

You may wonder how come the traitors could become members of the government.

To understand this, we have to go back to 1945, the year of the establishment of the American military government. Being ignorant of Korea and Korean history, the military government hired the traitors who were around and who had experience in running the government.

Thus, important positions of the government including the police were given to collaborators. This was how the collaborators (traitors) were not punished, while, in other countries including France, the traitors were severely punished.

The military government left in 1948 and the presidential election was coming. The PKLSK revolted and organized a committee to identify the traitors and succeeded in making a part of the list of traitors. But, the traitors, under the leadership Syngman Rhee, destroyed the list. Thus, the collaborators were not punished.

Coming back to the question of corruption culture, it is important to understand the psychic of the traitors. These traitors knew that they were enemies of most of the Koreans. They knew that, to survive, they had to keep power. They knew also that they would never be elected through normal democratic political process. Under these circumstances, it was necessary to grab power by force and eliminate those who opposed them.

This explains the police dictatorship of Syngman Rhee, the military dictatorship of Generals Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-whan, rigged election of Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye.

There was another important means of survival for the PJCSK, the money and the corruption. To survive, the traitors have formed community which cumulated, through illegal or immoral ways, enormous wealth. To increase and protect their wealth, they have developed what I call “corruption community” and “corruption culture.”

The corruption community is a very solid organization. At the core, we have the descendents of Lee Wan Yong and his friends, who were knighted by the Japanese emperor in 1929 for their efforts for the annexation of Korea to Japan in 1910. At the core, we find also large corporations, namely, the Chaebols.

The modus operandi of the corruption community is essentially based on the corrupted relations between politicians and the business corporations. The role of the politicians is to provide privileges including all sorts of permits, policy loans, grants, tax allowances and illegal and immoral land ownership. On the other hands, the role of corporations is to provide bribes and other forms of illegal or immoral money to the politicians.

There are the secondary groups around the core group including bureaucrats, business dealers, families of the core group and a host of other groups including academics, NGOs and others.

There are two institutions which are vital for the survival and the expansion of the corruption community, namely the media and the judiciary system.

The role of media is to hide, justify and protect wrong doings of the corruption community in exchange of bribe money. In Korea, at present, perhaps 90% of mainstream media is an integral part of the corruption community.

On the other hand, the role of the judiciary system is to identify the dissidents, fabricate all sorts of crimes to imprison them on the one hand; on the other, overlook the crimes of the members of the corruption community.

Most of the key positions in the police, the court and the office of prosecutors are occupied by the member of the corruption community or supporters of the corruption community.

The source of the power of the corruption community is, of course, the money. The core members of the community cumulated their wealth during the Japanese occupation and continue to do so for last 70 years since WWII through bribes and embezzlement of public money.

There is a well known investigative media, Newstapa, which has investigated the living conditions of known traitors. No less than 43% live in Gangnam area which is the richest district in Seoul. The most scandalous finding is that they own land of 400,000 km2, which is 30.8 time the area of Seoul city of 13,000 km2..  This gives some idea of how rich they are. By law, this land must be returned to the state, but only 3% has been returned.

The investigation has also revealed some interesting sides of 1,117 descendents of these traitors. As many as 33% went to the Korean Ivy league universities, the SKY universities (Seoul National University, Yonsei University and Koryo University).

No less than 27% have studies abroad. The interesting aspect is that they prefer career in business. In fact, 32% are in businesses. This is understandable, for they are eager to hide their identity, which is difficult to do in civil service.

Nobody knows how much wealth the corruption community of the PJCSK has cumulated for 70 years. Some estimates claim hundreds of billions of USD. In fact, it could be trillions of dollars. This immense wealth has allowed the corruption community to keep power and continue to stack up more wealth. In a way, the fight against corruption is the war against money, which is quasi impossible to win.

One of the most challenging tasks faced by President Moon Jae-in was the fight against the deep rooted corruption culture in South Korea. The corruption culture has been developed, refined and strengthened by the PJCSK who ruled South Korea for 62 years since 1948.

But, the PKLSK did not remain idle. They fought back risking death against the leaders of PJCSK and they were successful in making the end of PJCSK presidency shameful.

President Syngman Rhee (1948-1960) was kicked out of his presidential office by students for corruption and police dictatorship.

President General Park Chung-hee (1962-1979) took power through coup d’état. He was the worst kind of human right violator, military dictator, immoral sexual aggressor and abuser of power. He was assassinated in 1979 by his CIA director. But, he played important role for Korea’s economic take-off.

President General Chun Doo-han (1980-1987) was sentenced to death, later commuted but imprisoned for coup d’état, corruption, human right violation and embezzlement of public funds.

President Rho Tae-woo (1987-1992) was imprisoned for corruption embezzlement of public money.

President Lee Myung-bak (2008-2013) was in prison for corruption, embezzlement of public money and abuse of power.

President Park Geun-hye (2013-2017) was impeached and sentenced to imprisonment for 25 years for corruption, abuse of power and her incapacity to govern. But, in 2022 she was freed due to her health condition.

All these presidents were pro-Japan conservative presidents. This shows how deep and wide the corruption culture developed by the pro-Japan conservatives.

As soon as President Moon Jae-in took power, he declared the war against the corruption culture and applied the following measures.

First, the key positions of the Moon government were filled by those individuals who fought against the corrupted conservative government and spent years in prison.

President Moon has spent much of his life to defend, as human right lawyer, those who were oppressed and abused by the conservative government. He himself was imprisoned for having defended the victims of the conservative government.

The amazing thing is that, in the progressive government of Moon, there has been no single case of corruption among the cabinet members and presidential advisors. This is amazing; this shows how clean the government of Moon was.

Second, he modified the law on CIA (now National Intelligence Services-NIS) so that it will limit itself to the management of foreign intelligence and that it should not gather information on citizens.

Third, as pointed above, the Moon’s government imprisoned the two conservative presidents (Lee Myong-bak and Park Geun-hye) for their abuse of power and corruption.

Fourth, he imprisoned a great number of high ranking civil servants for abuse of power and corruption.

Fifth, he modified the laws on government’s subsidies so that the subsidy- recipients cannot embezzle the subsidy funds.

Sixth, he has fought for the reform of the judiciary system with some success. For instance, he was able to establish a mechanism allowing the investigation of high ranking public servants (Corruption Investigation Office for the High-Ranking Officials-공수처). But, it was just beginning of the long and hard process of cleaning the corrupted lake of bureaucracy.

However, President Moon has provided a strong moral and political support of the people devoted to the reform of the judiciary system.

Fight against the COVID-19 Virus

The world has admired Korea’s remarkable success in its fight against the COVID-19 virus. Such success is attributable to the following factors: rapid government reaction to the outburst of the virus, the government reliance on science and technology, inspiring leadership of President Moon Jae-in, citizens’ deep trust in the president Moon and his government and voluntary cooperation of the people.

On January 20, 2020, a woman affected by COVID-19 virus from China was discovered.

On January 27, 2020, the government reacted immediately. A special meeting was held in Seoul Train Station to discuss the proper measure.

On January 30, 2020, the inter-ministry task force was formed. On February 4, 2020, the first test kit appeared and by the end of February, as many as 10,000 test kits became available. This shows the rapidity with which the government acted.

One episode shows to what extent President Moon respected science and experts in public health. By the end of February 2020, most of the countries blocked the entry of people. President suggested to the director of the Korean Disease Control Prevention Agency (KDCPA-질병관리청) to let the people to come in. But the KCDCPA director said “no” and President agreed.

President Moon was one of the very few national leaders who really loved and cared for the people. I am one of those who believe that the most important qualification of a national leader is the love of people.

On February 2, 2020, President Moon visited Daegu, the city which was the most infected city due to the deliberate refusal of test by a politically motivated religious entity, Shinchonzi. Daegu city needed 1,000,000 masks. President Moon mobilized the whole government including the military to get the masks. He got these masks for the citizens of Daegu city.

What surprised the world was the fact that Korea had the general election in April, 2020 despite the persistent spread of the virus. Some other countries tried the same with no success. This was possible in Korea, because the people loved the president and they had trust in the president.

Moreover, President Moon was much concerned for the infected people of the world. By March, 2020, President Moon had 50 calls from the heads of states for help. For instance, the President of France, Emmanuel Macron called for help on March 24, 2020. President Donald Trump called President Moon to ask for masks which Korea could not provide. Instead, Korea sent 300,000 test kits for which President Trump was very grateful.

Under President Moon’s leadership, Korea sent masks and test kits to 170 countries free of charge in case of developing countries. He sent masks to veterans of the Korea war and their families.

Another achievement of President Moon was the non-confinement of business firms allowing the continuation of business activities, although limited. As a result, the economic performance of Korea was the best in the world.

The growth rate of GDP of developed countries in 2020was as follow: the U.S. (-3.4%), UK (-6.3%), France (-8.1%), Germany (-0.4%), Japan (-6.0%), Korea (-0.3%).

The superior performance of Korea in the anti-Coronavirus war was reflected in the casualties of the Pandemic.

As of June 2020, the death rate (number of death per number of infected): The U.S. (1.2%), UK (0.8%), France (0.5%), Germany (0.5%), Canada (1.1%), Japan (0.3%) and Korea (0.1%).

On the other hand, the number of death per 100,000 people was as follow: the U.S. (306.35), UK (264.66), France (229.32), Germany (167.80), Canada (108.0) and South Korea (47.41).

These data show how the government of Moon Jae-in had such a surprising success both in the anti-virus war and the promotion of economic growth.

Social Reform

For President Moon, social reform was very important for two reasons.

First, it is the sacred responsibility of the state to assure the economic, social and cultural rights recognized by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) of 1948. These rights are the access to a decent life and the state should provide such decent life to all citizens, at least, provide conditions conducive to these rights. The best way to achieve social reform is fair income distribution.

Second, the fair distribution of income is difficult to assure under the present neoliberal economic system. Under this system, the power of large corporations is greater than that of the government and therefore, the income distribution is more determined by the large corporation than by the government.

Now, in neoliberal economic system, the corporation has to make profit. To make profit, the corporation must reduce the labour cost. To reduce labour cost, the corporations rely on labour cost-saving technology including robots and artificial intelligence on the one hand and, on the other, restrict the role of labour unions. This has led to the concentration of income and wealth in the hands of business leaders.

Moreover, the income and the wealth tend to be concentrated in the hands of decreasing number of business leaders. This is due to intense competition. As competition continues, the number of winners decreases. As a result, the income and the wealth tend to be concentrated in the hands of further decreasing number of winners.

This trend is dramatically observed in Korea. For instance, in the period between 2107 and 2021, the asset share of the top 1% of households had rose from 23.2% to 25.4%.

In the same period, the wealth of the top 20% rose from USD 7.04 million to USD 9.6million, while the wealth of the bottom 20% de decreased from USD 54,000 to USD 39.200.

In other words, the wealth of the top 20 rose by 37.1%, while the wealth of the bottom 20% fell by 21.8%.

However, as far as income distribution is concerned, due to President Moon’s social reform, it has shown some improvement.

One of the popular indictors of the inequality of income distribution is the Gini coefficient. It varies from 0 to 100. The higher the Gini, the more unequal income distribution becomes in favour of the rich. Conversely, the lower the Gini, the more equal income distribution becomes in favour of the poor.

In Korea, between 2017 and 2021, the Gini coefficient of income distribution fell from 35 to 33. This is a sharp contrast to the Gini for asset distribution; it remained at 57. In short, President Moon was not able to affect the lopsided asset distribution, although he did better for the distribution of income.

Table 1 shows some of the measures taken by President Moon for the promotion of welfare of workers. In this table, we see two objectives of these measures, namely the increase of worker income and the improvement of the workers’ life quality.

The minimum wage increased from USD 5.26 in 2016 to USD 5.90 in 2021, a modest increase of 12.2%. The original idea was to increase it to USD 9.0 but it appeared to be too early to do so.

The farm household annual income rose in the same period from USD 29,900 to 35,100, an increase of 17.4%.

Table 1. Welfare of Workers, 2016 and 2021

The annual amount of allowance for workers’ children increased from USD 2.4 billion to 3.9 billion, a rise of 62.5%.

One thing which attracts our attention is the narrowing gap between the wage of workers who work for small and medium companies (SMEs) and the wage of large company workers. In 2016, the wage at the SMEs was as low as 61.9% of wages paid by large companies. But, in 2021, wage paid by SMEs became 74.4% of wage paid by large companies. So, the gap narrowed by 20.2%

One interesting aspect is the decreasing poverty rate of workers which fell from 23.5% to 16.0%. This is indeed a great surprise.

In the same Table 1, we see also a number of measures which have improved the quality of life or lessened the cost of living.

For instance, the annual number of work hours fell from 2,031 hours to 1,925 hours or a fall of 5.2%. As a result, the leisure hours available per day was made to rise from 3.6 hours to 4.2 hours, an increase of 16.7%.The number of employment insurance adherence rose by 14.2%.

Thus, President Moon has made important contribution to the welfare of the workers and farmers.

Table 2 below gives us an idea on the improvement of the welfare of minority groups.

First of all, what strikes us is the sharp fall in the poverty rate of children and the elderly. The poverty rate of children decreased by 35.5% in the period, 2016-2021, while that of the elderly fell by 10.8%. The amount of the basic pension rose from USD 159.3 to USD 237.5 per month, an increase of 49.2%. This is indeed a surprise for all.

Table 2. Welfare of Minority Groups, 2016 and 2021

The medical cost coverage paid by cancer patients fell by 22.8%. The overall medical coverage ratio increase from 62.5% to 65.3%, an increase of 4.5%.

On the other hand, the number of beneficiary of nursing homes increased dramatically from 799,000 to 1,207,000 a jump of 51.1%.

The monthly allowance for war veterans rose from USD 171.8 to USD 275.8, an improvement of as much as 60.5%. What is more impressive is the increase in monthly payment for soldiers in active duty from USD 168.8 to USD 528.1, an increase of 212.9%.

All these measures have certainly led to more money to spend and strengthen the domestic demand for goods and services thus contributing to the growth of the economy.

President Moon was much concerned with the safety of the people. For instance, the annual number of death by traffic accidents came down from 4,292 cases to 2,900 cases, a decrease of 32.4%.

Moreover, the number of persons whom a safety-related civil servant has to look after fell from 5,637 to 3,957, a fall of 29.8%.

New Economic System 

For last four decades, the Korean economic system has been the regime of neo-liberal economic system.

Korea needed a new economic system based on the development of SMEs, better integration of the SMEs into the Chaebol-led production chain, diversification of products to be exported and the expansion of export market including the ASEAN countries and the Northern countries.

In Korea, there are 6.6 million SMEs in 2018. They account for as much as 99% of the number of enterprises, create more than 80% of jobs, account for 20% of GDP .and 18% of exports.

President Moon promoted the Bureau of SMEs to the status of Ministry of Small and Medium Venture Enterprises (SMVEs) with a competent minister Park Young-sun to run it.

Table 3 shows President’s strategy of structural change in exports as well as the promotion of SMEs’ exports.

In the period, 2016-2021, the overall exports rose by 6.6%, but, SMES’ exports increased by 9.3%.

The exports of weapons had an increase of 133.3%. Korea is becoming a significant weapon exporter.

Table 3. Exports, 2016 and 2021

It is to note that the exports of bio and future cars including electric cars rose by 7.6 times and 14 times, respectively. I may add that the exports of cultural products (contents) increased by 35.2%.

As we will see below, another interesting aspect is the success of President Moon’s Southern policy and Northern policy. The exports to the ASEAN countries roe by 53%, while the exports to Northern countries including Central Asian countries increased by as much as 95.8%.

Crisis Management

President Moon showed also his remarkable leadership in his handling of the crisis of the shipping industry and the trade war with Japan.

The 2010s were bad decade for Korean shipping industry which creates 20,000 jobs. But, the shipping industry was losing its global market due to bad management and increasing competition.

The bankruptcy of Hanzin Sipping in February 2017 created panic in the ocean going shipping industry, which was a vital element for the Korean manufacturing industry. This was a crisis.

The shipping industry was not able to cope with the crisis. Under such circumstance, strong government leadership was needed. President Moon provided this leadership. He created the Korean Ocean Business Corporation which was a financial corporation funded by three state banks including the Korea Development Bank, the Export and Import Bank and the Korea Asset management Corporation. These banks provided USD 5.3 billion in accordance with 5-year planning.

This fund was invested in three shipbuilders, namely, the Hyundai Heavy Industries, the Daewoo Shipbuilding & Maritime Engineering and the Samsung Heavy Industries. The success of this planning was symbolized by the construction of the largest NLG shipping ship, HMM Hanul of 16,000 TEU.(Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit).

To be frank, President Moon took a gamble but this gamble was the winner. This shows his courage and wisdom of handling a major crisis.

The plan was a big success. The amount of shipping capacity rose from 500,000 TEU in 2019 to 1,500,000 TEU by 2030.

There is another legacy of President Moon. During the Pacific War (1941-1945), several hundred thousand Koreans were taken by force to be sent to work like slaves in Japanese mines and factories in Japan under less than sub-human living conditions. The victims have appealed to the Japanese court for compensation with no success.

But, on October 30, 2018, the Supreme Court of Korea ordered the responsible Japanese companies, the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, the Sumimoto Metal & Steal and the Nippon Steal to make compensation payment to the victims.. But they refused.

Shinzo Abe, the Japanese Prime Minister, then, declared trade war against Korea in July 1, 2019 by ordering the restriction of exports chemical products vital to the production of smart phones, TV sets and especially semiconductors which were the key items of Korea’ exports. To make matter worse, on August 2, 2021, Abe put Korea out of the “White List” which provided special advantage to the exports of the listed countries.

This was a crisis and Abe knew it. The pro-Japan conservative media and politicians argued that Korea should give in and forget about the compensation payment to the victims of labour slavery.

But, President Moon declared August 7, 2021:”We will never surrender to Japan”.

Korea retaliated by putting Japan out of Korean white list on September 18, 2019. The position taken by President Moon inspired the Korean population by boycotting the purchase of Japanese goods. For instance, the sales of Japanese cars dropped by 57% in 2021; the sale of Japanese beer had free fall of 97%; the volume of Korean tourists going to Japan fell by 90%. In short, in Korea, the government and the people fought together against Japan.

Moreover, President Moon encouraged SMEs to innovate and produce the controversial chemical products. No less than USD 5 billion was injected and, as a result, Korea’s trade dependency on Japan for intermediary goods fell from 33.5% in 2017 to 24.9% in 2021.

Korea won in its trade war against Japan. This was the beginning of the end of Japanese neo-colonialism of which Korean has been victim ever since 1945 I will come back to this issue later in this paper.

North-South Relations

One of the important legacies of President Moon is what he accomplished for the North-South relations.

Actually, his role in the promotion of friendly relations with the North began on May 28, 2017 in his Berlin declaration for inter-Korea economic cooperation.

However, his North Korea diplomacy began with his invitation of Kim Jung-un to the Pyong-chang Winter Olympics; this invitation took place on August 15, 2017.

In fact, early that month, North Korea expressed its interests in participating in the Winter Olympics. After the delicate diplomacy of Kim Yo-jung, sister of Kim Jung-un, the athletics of both Koreas entered into the opening ceremony by waving a flag of the Korea peninsula.

Moreover, the world had the opportunity to see the joint ice-hockey game which was beautiful to watch, because it demonstrated the potential of peace on the Korean peninsula.

The game looked like a prelude to reunification of one people who had been united for 5,000 years but separated for 70 years.

Right after the Winter Olympics, President Moon sent on March 3, 2018, a strong delegation led by the NSC advisor to Pyongyang where North Korea expressed its readiness to negotiate for the denuclearization.

Right after this, Mr.  Chung Eui-yong, National Security Director and Suh Hoon, Chief of the National Information Service (NIS) went to Washington to communicate Pyongyang’s intention. This was the opening of the series of summits which gave the world the hope of peace on the Korean peninsula.

North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un and Moon shake hands inside the Peace House. (Photo by Cheongwadae / Blue House, licensed under KOGL Type 1)

President Moon met Kim Jung-un met twice in Panmunjom (April 27, 2018 and May 26, 2018) and once in Pyongyang on September 18-20, 2018. These three summits have led to the demilitarization of the Western coast, the Eastern coast along with the Joint Security Area (JSA) in DMZ. It was agreed that as far as the two Koreans were concerned, the Korean War was over.

In both Koreas, the hope of the reunification was rising. In Pyongyang, president Moon was greeted on September 19, 2018 by 150,000 North Koreans at the historical Mass games. President Moon declared “We have been united for 5,000 years but separated for 70 years. Let us reunite!”

It was a highly emotionally-charged declaration. Most of North Koreans who were there cried with hope of ending the nightmare of the separation imposed by foreign powers.

This hope was followed by the unexpected reaction of President Donald Trump of the U.S. who met Kim Jung-un three times: Singapore (June 12, 2018), Hanoi (February 27-28, 2019) and Panmunjom (DMZ) (June 30, 2019).

There were four items agreed upon at the Singapore summit which attract our attention, namely, new Pyongyang-Washington relations, lasting peace on the Korean peninsula, complete denuclearization and the recovery of POW/MIA remains.

None of these agreements was practical enough; they were mere statement of possibilities. But, the recovery and the repatriation of POW/MIA remains were done. Moreover, the joint military exercises were made less extensive and less threatening.

For the Hanoi summit, Kim Jung-un travelled six thousand kilo meters to show his sincerity of effectuating denuclearization. But, President Trump broke the Summit after having consulted a piece of paper presented by John Bolton who was known to be the most anti-peace in the Korean peninsula.

We do not know if President Trump was really interested in creating peace in the Korean peninsula. But, he came to Panmunjom on June 30, 2019 to shake hand with Kim Jung-un.

It is true that the Kim-Moon summits and the Kim-Trump summits have not been able to assure denuclearization despite the sincere wish of North Korea to exchange denuclearization with peace and economic development.

However, President Moon has left the following legacies.

First, through the mediation of President Moon, the world realized that Kim Jung-un was bona fide leader to whom one can talk and that North Koreans were normal people like any other people.

Second, the world saw that the blood and cultural bond of North-South was above ideology and politics.

Third, the North-South peace process and economic cooperation are feasible, if there were no outside interference.

Fourth, despite the failure of the denuclearization and persistence of sanctions, for three years, there were no nuclear tests or major missile launching until the Yoon Suk-yeol took over the power in May 2022.

Fifth, the only feasible way to assure peace on the Korean peninsula, promote North-South economic cooperation and eventual reunification of Koreas is to carry out the North-South peace process by Koreans without being unduly influenced by foreign powers.

Innovative Foreign Policy

Before President Moon took over the power in 2017, Korean foreign policy had been confined to relations with countries which were directly related to the issues of the Korean peninsula. It was the first time that Korea began to undertake diplomacy with countries which were far from the Korean peninsula and Korean affairs.

To be more precise, President Moon undertook actively his Northern policy and Southern Policy. For his Southern policy, he visited with a large delegation of business community to each of the ASEAN countries which were becoming more and more visible in international affairs. The objective was not only the trade promotion but also Korea’s active political leadership in South East Asian region.

Owing to President Moon’s productive diplomacy, as pointed above, Korea’s exports to the Asian countries rose from USD 134.6 billion in 2016 to USD 206.3 billion in 20201, an increase by 53.2%.

Moreover, President Moon was not only respected but also liked by the leaders of ASEAN countries. During the ASEAN Summit held in Busan on November 25, 2021, the Indonesian President, Joko Widodo, called President Moon as “hyung-nim” which is the affectionate way calling a respected person; it means “my elder brother”. This shows the warm leadership and the personal charm of President Moon.

For the first time in modern Korean history of foreign relations, President Moon actively pursued diplomatic relations with the Northern countries which are the center of the Eurasian Economic Community. President Moon visited each of the northern countries including Russia, Belarus, Mongol, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Rumania, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan. These countries will be at the centre of the largest economic bloc.

President Moon being aware of importance of these countries visited them and he was successful in promoting trade. As shown above, Korean exports to these countries rose from USD 7.2 billion in 2016 to USD 14.1 billion in 2021, an increase of 95.8%.

With President Moon, Korean diplomacy has become more autonomous and avoided being a mere cheer leader of the diplomacy of the U.S. or Japan.

The leadership of President Moon has allowed Korea to play significant leadership in international affairs.

In 2019, the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) promoted Korea from the status of “developing country” to the status of “developed country”.

It was the first time that UNCTAD promoted developing country to the status of developed country since it was established in 1963. Moreover, for last three years, Korea was invited as observer to G7 summit meetings.

There is no doubt that President Moon has shown us the courage and the wisdom of pursuing sovereign diplomacy without unduly hurting the interests of major powers which are involved in Korean affairs

Korea-Japan Relations

The history of Korea-Japan is long and bumpy at times. But, until the annexation of Korea to Japan in 1910, it had been relatively peaceful with exception of the 1590s marked by the invasion of Toyotomi Hideyoshis in Korea.

But, since the annexation of Korea in 1910, the Korea-Japan relations have been unstable, insecure and even hostile.

This paper is interested in discussing the two periods of Korea-Japan relations, the period of colonialism (1910-1945) and the period of neo-colonialism (1946-2022). To be more specific, my chief concern is with the impact of Japanese colonialism and its neo-colonialism  on the collective life in Korea.

There can be multitude impacts of the Japanese colonialism in Korea. But, the horrible impact was the danger of losing completely the identity of Korea and Koreans. The Japanese were trying to force Koreas to forget about Dan-gun (founder of Korea five thousand years ago), Korean names, Korean culture. They even wanted to replace the Korean trees with the Japanese trees. The Japanese wanted to become the master in the Korean peninsula well served by Korean slaves.

However, the impact which hurt Korea most was the fatal division of Koreans into two hostile camps, namely, pro-Japan camp who collaborated with the Japanese invaders and sold Korea for their personal wealth and might on the one hand and on the other, the anti-Japan camp including those who fought against the Japanese risking their lives.

The pro-Japan group camp led by Lee Wan-yong and high ranking politicians, military officers, newspaper owners and bureaucrats worked for the Japanese interests. By the way, Lee Wan-yong and 39 others were knighted in 1929 by the Japanese Emperor for giving Korea as a gift to the Emperor-God.

I call them “traitors” who collaborated with the Japanese in stealing houses, lands other precious assets belonging to Koreans, capturing teen age girls to be sent to the hellish military camp of “comfort women”, conscripting young Korean men to be sent to kill Korean patriots, forcing hundreds of thousands of Korean worker to die in Japanese mines and factories due to over work, hunger, disease and torture carried out by the Japanese masters.

This is the tragic legacy of the 35-year Japanese occupation in Korea.

The nightmare of Japanese brutal beastly aggression was over in 1945. At least, it was what Koreans thought. The Koreans were dancing and singing in the street to celebrate the freedom. Yes, Koreans were happy. But, soon, they had to face the dark clouds of fear and despair covering the peninsula and saddening their hearts.

Right from the beginning of the post-war era, the two groups had to fight to the end. Their hostile feelings were too strong and too deep to find conciliation.

The pro-Japan conservative South Koreans (PJCSK) being a minority group and hated by the pro-Korea liberal South Koreans (PKLSK) knew that, to survive, they had to take power.

Now, to take power, the PJCSK needed money. So, Park Chung-hee asked the help of Kishi Nobuske who was the most brutal racist and merciless ruler in Manchuria in the 1930s. He was maternal-side grandfather of former assassinated prime minster of Japan, Shinzo Abe. He was a A-Class war criminal but escaped hanging due to his utility to serve the U.S. interests.

Kishi Nobuske gave, in 1963, to Park Chun-hee as much as USD 66 million to create the first major political party in Korea, the Democratic Republican Party (DRP), which was given the role of making South Korea a neo-colony of Japan.

By neo-colonialism, I mean the state of colonialism without the coloniser country being present in the colonized country.

Since 1963, the political parties of the PJCSK changed many times the party name, probably, to hide their connection with Japan.

The post-war Korea-Japan relations were peaceful under the PJCSK government and rather frictional under the government of the PKLSK.

Since 1945, the PJCSK ruled South Korea for 62 years while the PKLSK governed South Korea for 15 years.

Under the rule of the PJCSK, the Korea-Japan relations have been the maintenance of the Japanese neo-colonialism, while the Korea-Japan relations under the PKLSK have been the fight against the Japanese neo-colonialism.

There are three kinds of neo-colonial relations between Korea and Japan: economic, political and security neo-colonial relations.

The economic neo-colonialism: From the beginning, Japan established the Korea-Japan production chain which made Korea economy dependent on the Japanese economy. In this arrangement, Korea imports high value-added input goods (intermediary goods) from Japan and exports final products produced by assembling the inputs to produce finished products.

Now, in the case of high tech product such as portable telephone, the value added of the assembling work is about 5% of the sale price.

For example, let us assume that Korea imports input goods from Japan by paying $95 and that it exports to Japan the finished product for $ 100.

Korea’s net gain is only $5, while the Japan’s surplus is $90. So, Korea’s trade deficit with Japan is $ 90.

Under this situation, it is impossible to have trade surplus with Japan. In fact, Korea has never had trade surplus with Japan since 1945.

It is true that despite the chronic trade deficit, the Japanese neo-colonialism has nevertheless contributed to the Han River Miracle.

But, to assure sustained and healthy economy, Korean economy should become more autonomous.

In fact, Korean economy has been becoming more and more independent from the Japanese economy. This trend has been enforced by President Moon Jae-in.

Under President Moon, Korea’s dependence on Japanese input goods fell from 30% to 23%. Korea’s dependence on Japan for total exports fell from 7.0% in 2012 tp 4.8% in 2018. Japan’s trade surplus (Korea’s deficit) fell from 2.49 trillion yen in 2017 to 1.33 trillion yen in 2020.

The political neo-colonialism: The Japanese political neo-colonialism refers to a situation in which Japanese political interests are promoted by the PJCSK. The political interests of Japan is the denial of war crime committed by Japan against Korea, especially the beastly collective rape of 200,000 Korean girls at the Japanese military camp of comfort women.

Shinzo Abe is notorious for his denial of Japanese war crimes.. What is difficult to swallow is the fact that Shinzo Abe denies the war crime of comfort women despite five prominent Japanese politicians’ admission of the crime and their apologies for the crime.

In 1992, Koichi Kato, the, chief cabinet secretary, stated this,

“Government has been involved in the establishment of comfort stations, the control of those who recruited comfort women, the construction and enforcement of comfort facilities, the management of comfort stations… and that the government wanted to express its sincere apology and remorse to all those who have suffered indescribable hardship, so called wartime comfort women.”

In 1993, Yohei Kono, former chief secretary of the prime minster office, made the following statement,

“The Japanese military was directly or indirectly involved in the establishment and management of comfort women. The recruitment of comfort women was entrusted mainly by private recruiters of the comfort women. In many cases, they were recruited against their will coercing. At times, administrative/military personnel took part in the recruitment. They lived in misery at comfort station under a coercive atmosphere.”

Thus, Kato and Kono made it crystal clear that the sub-human treatment of 200,000 young girls mostly from Korea was imposed not only by the military but also administration of Japan. What these two former chiefs of cabinet secretaries did was the proof of the hellish atrocity committed to the poor girls by Japan. Kato even offered an apology.

In 1995, Tomichi Murayama, former prime minister, said this,

“In the hope that no such mistakes made be in the future, I regret in spirit of humility these un-refutable facts of history and here once again my feeling of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apologies.”

In 2005, Junichiro Koizumi, former prime minster, made an apology,

“Sincerely facing these facts of history, I once again express my feeling of deep remorse and heartfelt apology.”

Both Murayama and Koizumi were highly respected prime ministers. In fact, Koizumi was Shinzo Abe’s boss.

Let us see what Shinzo Abe shad to say about the crime. In 2015, Shizo Abe said this,

“I bow my head deeply before the souls of all those who perished both at home and abroad. I express my feeling of profound grief and sincere condolence.”

This was not an apology for the war crime for the surviving victims of the beastly collective rapes.

Although Abe has never explained his rational reasons for such irrational behaviour, I argue that, for him, the admission of such crime is not compatible with the integrity of the Yamato race, the race of the Emperor-God. Therefore, he has taken out from the school history text book the crime against the comfort women so that the future generation can rule Asia again with no guilty feeling.

Now, to conquer Korea again, it is important to beautify Japan’s colonialism. Sinzo Abe wanted to tell Koreans that the annexation of Korea was beneficial for Koreans and the Japanese military cannot do commit such crime as the sex slavery of Korean girls.

Since Japan cannot convince the Koreans by itself, Japan has asked the PJCSK to do it for Japan. This is the political neo-colonialism.

Japan has been funding a lot of money to far-right research centers, academics, religious group and NGOs in Korea. These groups are a part of the PJCSK and they established a pro-Japan force in Korea called “New-Right”.

This pro-Japan group has made the PJCSK government of Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye to take out from the school history text books the crime story of comfort women and put emphasis on the goodness of the Japanese colonialism in Korea.

Fortunately, President Moon Jae-in has put back in the School history  text books the story of comfort women and the atrocity of the Japanese colonial power.

The security neo-colonialism: Finally, there is the security neo-colonialism.  Japan is fearful of the reunification of Koreas for unified Korea mean a serious threat to Japan’s security and its regional influence. The best way of preventing the reunification is the prevention of the North-South peace process.. In other words, the way of preventing the peace process is to sustain North-South tension.

Since the North-South relations are Korean internal problems, Japan has asked the PJCSK to demonize North Korea so that the North-South tension is kept. In fact, the PJCSK has been doing their best to maintain the North-South tension.

But, the governments of Kim Dae-jung (1098-2003) and Rho Moon-hyun (2003-2008) were able to begin the peace process.

President Moon Jae-in went even farther in the promotion of the peace process with North Korea. Thus, President Moon was able to stop security neo-colonialism from going any further.

Unfinished Tasks of President Moon Jae-in

Five years are an extremely short period of time to make major national reforms, but President Moon Jae-in has made gamechanging reforms.

He has challenged the corruption culture which has been developed, refined and fortified over the past 70 years by the PJCSK.

He has shown to the world how a country can combat successfully the pandemic through science, people’s trust in the government, the president’s love of people and people’s mutual supports.

He has made decent social reform which is necessary not only for the justice, equality but also for prosperity.

He has established a new economic regime allowing the creation of jobs, the generation of income of the ordinary people through the development of SMEs and productive production chain in which the SMEs are well integrated with Chaebols.

He has shown his remarkable ability to handle crisis, namely, the shipping industry crisis and the crisis of trade war with Japan.

He has been able to establish the basis for the permanent peace on the Korean peninsula.

He has opened a new chapter of Korean foreign relations making it possible not only to promote trade but also enhance Korea’s international leadership.

He has liberated Korea from Japan’s economic, political and security neo-colonialism.

Thus, President Moon has done a lot for Korea and Koreans. He has done something no other presidents have done.

He has made major contribution to the transformation of Korea into a country deserving to be a country (nara-da-oon-nara-나라다운 나라).

Korea has been owned by the powerful and wealthy pro-Japan conservatives. The vast majority of South Koreans have been bystanders watching the fruit of their hard work and sacrifice flowing into the hand of the pro-Japan conservatives and they had to endure the “gap-jil” (harsh mistreatment of the weak by the strong).

President Moon has been successful in giving Korea back to its owners, the Korean people.

President Moon wanted to do more, much more for Korea and the Korean people whom he respected and loved. But, the deep rooted problems did not allow him to go further in given time of five years.

Former President Moon shakes hands with his successor Yoon Suk-yeol after Yoon’s inauguration, 10 May 2022. (Photo by Republic of Korea, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0)

President Moon has shown that with proper policy and strong political will power, it is possible to make Korea a country for all, not just for the pro-Japan conservatives.

President Moon has shown that it is possible to make Korea a country of justice, equality and prosperity for all. But, there are problems which he could not solve. They are the problems of the judiciary system and the media.

It must be pointed out that the Korean prosecutor office is the most powerful and the most corrupted in the world. The prosecutor has the monopoly of criminal investigation right and indictment right. Recently, a law was adopted to limit the abuse of power by the prosecutors. But, under the new PJCSK government of Yoon Suk-yeol, the law is likely to ignored.

In most countries, the criminal investigation is performed by the police. Being powerful, the prosecutor is the best ally of the corruption community.

The prosecutor is mighty, because there is no operational mechanism to supervise them and bring them to the court.  To make matter even worse, many of the court judges are also member of the corruption community.

The prosecutor is the best profession for becoming millionaires in a few years.. The bribe money for not indicting the accused is very high. The amount of bribe money increases in function of the reduction of culpability recommended by the prosecutor.

In fact, the abuse of power by the prosecutor has been debated for long and by every government. Even some of the conservative lawmakers have tried to institute a legal mechanism to investigate and punish the prosecutors along with other high ranking bureaucrats and politician who are corrupted. This has been a reform which the people have been asking for decades.

Moon’s government has made the National Assembly to establish by law, on November 10, 2020, the Corruption Investigation Office for High- Ranking Officials (CIOHRO). This is one of many historical achievements of President Moon.

There is one reform which is even more difficult to reform. It is the reform of the media. We all expect from the media the production and the diffusion of information which is professional, objective, critical, unbiased useful for public policies designed to promote the welfare for all citizens.

Unfortunately, the Korean media do not have these virtues for the simple reason that for last 70 years they have been managed by the conservative governments. The conservative government’s media policy is to glorify the conservatives and demonize the progressives.

The core of the conservative media policy may be summarized.

First, it encourages the creation of small media outlets so that they depend on the conservative corruption community for their income.

Second, it sets up a mechanism of information coordination. The Chosen Ilbo, the Jung-ang Ilbo and the Tong-ah Ilbo (Cho-Jung-Tong) have the function of coordinating the production and the diffusion of information favourable to the corruption community and demonizing the opposition force.

Third, the main source of media income is the conservative corruption community, especially, the major Chaebols.

Fourth, illegal and immoral activities of the media are seldom punished because of the collusion between the conservative camp and the penal and judiciary system.

In fact, the media has been the most formidable enemy of the anti-corruption war of Moon-Jae-in. The reform of media has not yet begun. The government, if it is the progressive one, will have the colossal task of reforming the corrupted media.

To sum up, President Moon Jae-in has done a lot for Korea and Koreans to keep his promise of giving Korea back to its owners, the Korean people. He has been successful in doing just that.

He has given Korea back to Koreans. But, the new PJCSK government of Yoon Suk-yeol is trying hard to steal it again. That is what makes me worried and sad.

*

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.

Dr. Joseph H. Chung is professor of economics at Quebec University in Montreal (UQAM) and member of the Center of Research on Integration and Globalization (CEIM) of UQAM. He is Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Legacy of President Moon Jae-in. He Came to Give the Country Back to the People.
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

President Xi Jinping’s work report at the start of the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) this past Sunday in Beijing contained not only a blueprint for the development of the civilization-state, but for the whole Global South.

Xi’s 1h45min speech actually delivered a shorter version of the full work report – see attached PDF – which gets into way more detail on an array of socio-political themes.

This was the culmination of a complex collective effort that went on for months. When he received the final text, Xi commented, revised and edited it.

In a nutshell, the CPC master plan is twofold:

finalize “socialist modernization” from 2020 to 2035; and build China – via peaceful modernization – as a modern socialist country that is “prosperous, strong, democratic, culturally advanced, and harmonious” all the way to 2049, signaling the centenary of the foundation of the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

The central concept in the work report is peaceful modernization – and how to accomplish it. As Xi summarized,

“It contains elements that are common to the modernization processes of all countries, but it is more characterized by features that are unique to the Chinese context.”

Very much in tune with Confucian Chinese culture, “peaceful modernization” encapsulates a complete theoretical system. Of course there are multiple geoeconomic paths leading to modernization – according to the national conditions of any particular country. But for the Global South as a whole, what really matters is that the Chinese example completely breaks with the western TINA (“there is no alternative”) monopoly on modernization practice and theory.

Not to mention it breaks with the ideological straitjacket imposed on the Global South by the self-defined “golden billion” (of which the really “golden” barely reach 10 million). What the Chinese leadership is saying is that the Iranian model, the Ugandan model or the Bolivian model are all as valid as the Chinese experiment: what matters is pursuing an independent path towards development.

How to develop tech independence

The recent historical record shows how every nation trying to develop outside the Washington Consensus is terrorized at myriad hybrid war levels. This nation becomes a target of color revolutions, regime change, illegal sanctions, economic blockade, NATO sabotage or outright bombing and/invasion.

What China proposes echoes across the Global South because Beijing is the largest trade partner of no less than 140 nations, who can easily grasp concepts such as high-quality economic development and self-reliance in science and technology.

The report stressed the categorical imperative for China from now on: to speed up technology self-reliance as the Hegemon is going no holds barred to derail China tech, especially in the manufacturing of semiconductors.

In what amount to a sanctions package from Hell, the Hegemon is betting on crippling China’s drive to accelerate its tech independence in semiconductors and the equipment to produce them.

So China will need to engage in a national effort on semiconductor production. That necessity will be at the core of what the work report describes as a new development strategy, spurred by the tremendous challenge of achieving tech self-sufficiency. Essentially China will go for strengthening the public sector of the economy, with state companies forming the nucleus for a national system of tech innovation development.

‘Small fortresses with high walls’

On foreign policy, the work report is very clear: China is against any form of unilateralism as well as blocs and exclusive groups targeted against particular countries. Beijing refers to these blocs, such as NATO and AUKUS, as “small fortresses with high walls.”

This outlook is inscribed in the CPC’s emphasis on another categorical imperative: reforming the existing system of global governance, extremely unfair to the Global South. It’s always crucial to remember that China, as a civilization-state, considers itself simultaneously as a socialist country and the world’s leading developing nation.

The problem once again is Beijing’s belief in “safeguarding the international system with the UN at its core.” Most Global South players know how the Hegemon subjects the UN – and its voting mechanism – to all sorts of relentless pressure.

It’s enlightening to pay attention to the very few westerners that really know one or two things about China.

Martin Jacques, until recently a senior fellow at the Department of Politics and International Studies at Cambridge University, and author of arguably the best book in English on China’s development, is impressed by how China’s modernization happened in a context dominated by the west: “This was the key role of the CPC. It had to be planned. We can see how extraordinarily successful it has been.”

The implication is that by breaking the west-centric TINA model, Beijing has accumulated the tools to be able to assist Global South nations with their own models.

Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, is even more upbeat: “China will become a leader of innovation. I very much hope and count on China becoming a leader for innovation in sustainability.” That will contrast with a ‘dysfunctional’ American model turning protectionist even in business and investment.

Mikhail Delyagin, deputy chairman of the Russian State Duma Committee on Economic Policy, makes a crucial point, certainly noted by key Global South players: the CPC “was able to creatively adapt the Marxism of the 19th century and its experience of the 20th century to new requirements and implement eternal values with new methods. This is a very important and useful lesson for us.”

And that’s the added value of a model geared towards the national interest and not the exclusivist policies of Global Capital.

BRI or bust

Implied throughout the work report is the importance of the overarching concept of Chinese foreign policy: the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and its trade/connectivity corridors across Eurasia and Africa.

It was up to Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin to clarify where BRI is heading:

“BRI transcends the outdated mentality of geopolitical games, and created a new model of international cooperation. It is not an exclusive group that excludes other participants but an open and inclusive cooperation platform. It is not just China’s solo effort, but a symphony performed by all participating countries.”

BRI is inbuilt in the Chinese concept of “opening up.” It is also important to remember that BRI was launched by Xi nine years ago – in Central Asia (Astana) and then Southeast Asia (Jakarta). Beijing has earned from its mistakes, and keeps fine-tuning BRI in consultation with partners – from Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Malaysia to several African nations.

It is no wonder, that by August this year, China’s trade with countries participating in BRI had reached a whopping $12 trillion, and non-financial direct investment in those countries surpassed $140 billion.

Wang correctly points out that following BRI infrastructure investments, “East Africa and Cambodia have highways, Kazakhstan has [dry] ports for exports, the Maldives has its first cross-sea bridge and Laos has become a connected country from a landlocked one.”

Even under serious challenges, from zero-Covid to assorted sanctions and the breakdown of supply chains, the number of China-EU express cargo trains keeps going up; the China-Laos Railway and the Peljesac Bridge in Croatia are open for business; and work on the Jakarta-Bandung High-Speed Railway and the China-Thailand Railway is in progress.

Mackinder on crack

All over the extremely incandescent global chessboard, international relations are being completely reframed.

China – and key Eurasian players at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), BRICS+, and Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) – are all proposing peaceful development.

In contrast, the Hegemon imposes an avalanche of sanctions – not by accident the top three recipients are Eurasian powers Russia, Iran and China; lethal proxy wars (Ukraine); and every possible strand of hybrid war to prevent the end of its supremacy, which lasted barely seven and a half decades, a blip in historical terms.

The current dysfunction – physical, political, financial, cognitive – is reaching a climax. As Europe plunges into the abyss of largely self-inflicted devastation and darkness  – a neo-medievalism in woke register – an internally ravaged Empire resorts to plundering even its wealthy “allies”.

It’s as if we are all witnessing a Mackinder-on-crack scenario.

Halford Mackinder, of course, was the British geographer who developed the ‘Heartland Theory’ of geopolitics, heavily influencing US foreign policy during the Cold War: “Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; Who rules the World Island commands the World.”

Russia spans 11 time zones and sits atop as much as one third of the world’s natural resources. A natural symbiosis between Europe and Russia is like a fact of life. But the EU oligarchy blew it.

It’s no wonder the Chinese leadership views the process with horror, because one of BRI’s essential planks is to facilitate seamless trade between China and Europe. As Russia’s connectivity corridor has been blocked by sanctions, China will be privileging corridors via West Asia.

Meanwhile, Russia is completing its pivot to the east. Russia’s enormous resources, combined with the manufacturing capability of China and East Asia as a whole, project a trade/connectivity sphere that goes even beyond BRI. That’s at the heart of the Russian concept of Greater Eurasia Partnership.

In another one of History’s unpredictable twists, Mackinder a century ago may have been essentially right about those controlling the Heartland/world island controlling the world. It doesn’t look like the controller will be the Hegemon, and much less its European vassals/slaves.

When the Chinese say they are against blocs, Eurasia and The West are the facto two blocs. Though not yet formally at war with each other, in reality they already are knee deep into Hybrid War territory.

Russia and Iran are on the frontline – militarily and in terms of absorbing non-stop pressure. Other important Global South players, quietly, try to either keep a low profile or, even more quietly, assist China and the others to make the multipolar world prevail economically.

As China proposes peaceful modernization, the hidden message of the work report is even starker. The Global South is facing a serious choice: choose either sovereignty – embodied in a multipolar world, peacefully modernizing – or outright vassalage.

*

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 The Cradle.

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 from The Cradle

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

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

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

***

On 25 October 2001, less than 3 weeks after the United States launched an attack on Afghanistan, a very large majority in the US Congress passed the Patriot Act, which was promptly signed into law by president George W. Bush. This inflicted a blow upon America’s domestic legal structure by violating the US Constitution.

The Patriot Act enlarged the powers of the state for increased surveillance of its own citizens, to be conducted through the National Security Agency (NSA), an intelligence apparatus of the US Department of Defense. The Patriot Act formulated the new crime in America of “domestic terrorism”, and in such an expansive fashion that it could be used against any perceived civil misdemeanour.

The Patriot Act laid the groundwork for the de facto creation of a police state. The Pentagon, whose base of operations had centred on the military, was now focusing somewhat on internal issues in the American political system which was an infringement of US law, violating the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. This legislation forbids the US Armed Forces from interfering within domestic political activities, unless the military has authorisation from the US Congress.

On 17 September 2002, president Bush announced the National Security Strategy of the United States. He declared that the “war on terror” could not be won by defensive methods, and that the US reserved the right to wage pre-emptive or preventive wars unilaterally, even if such actions were unprovoked and located on the other side of the world (Afghanistan, Iraq), including the right to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states.

This year Western media and politicians have repeatedly accused Russia of launching an “unprovoked invasion” of its Ukrainian neighbour, a region that for centuries had been part of Russia, an historical fact which is persistently overlooked in the West. Neither do they mention the roots of the Ukraine crisis: NATO’s continual expansion from the 1990s to rest upon the frontiers of Russia itself. The philosopher and analyst Alexander Dugin highlighted,

“From where the land leaves, the sea comes there. This is the law. Three Baltic territories were immediately included in NATO. The rest got in line”.

It was openly planned at NATO conferences to incorporate the former Soviet republics, the Ukraine and Georgia, into the military organisation. The NATO-armed and supported AFU have regularly bombarded areas like the Donbass, which has been under threat of a large-scale AFU ground assault. Over a number of years this has represented a severe provocation of Russia, discrediting Western allegations that the Russians launched an unprovoked military intervention.

It seems clear that Kiev and its NATO sponsors cannot be victorious in the conflict versus Russia, without access to the critically important areas that the AFU have retreated from. Michel Chossudovsky, a geostrategist and economist, wrote convincingly,

“In regards to the Ukraine War, Russia’s control of the Kerch Strait plays a key role. In recent developments (June 2022), Russia now controls the entire basin of the Sea of Azov. Ukraine has no maritime access to the Sea of Azov and Eastern Ukraine, nor does it have naval power in the Black Sea. Without a navy (and without an Air Force which was destroyed at the outset in late February), Ukraine is not in a position to win this war”.

Meanwhile, president Bush’s support of waging preventive wars had not been a recent phenomenon. It instead constitutes a traditional hallmark of imperial powers. Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel, a prominent World War II German commander, wrote in his memoirs in 1946 that against the USSR the Wehrmacht from 1941 had launched “the preventive war which alone would suffice to halt the Bolshevik steamroller in its tracks, before Europe had succumbed to it”. Keitel maintained further that the USSR had made “preparations to attack us”.

Keitel’s claims are not true. Soviet Russia was not planning an offensive against Nazi Germany. The Soviet leader Joseph Stalin hoped, in reality, to delay war with the Third Reich for as long as necessary. Vyacheslav Molotov, the Soviet Foreign Minister, recalled how Stalin had strongly hinted, shortly after the Fall of France, that he wanted to put off war with the Germans until 1943 if possible, in order to give the Soviets more breathing space. Stalin was aware that a conflict with Nazi Germany was inevitable and entailed much risk. The Soviet Union and the Third Reich were the two strongest military powers in the world.

As Keitel indirectly referred to, the Soviet Army was lavishly equipped with weaponry in 1941, a rearmament policy which Moscow had correctly pursued because of the fear of war being unleashed on Soviet Russia, not only by the Germans; the Russians suspected too, with good reason, that the Western states would support a Nazi invasion of Russia, or participate in it alongside Germany. European nations like Spain, Italy, Romania and Croatia each sent forces to fight with the Nazis against Russia.

Very little American Lend-Lease aid was shipped to Russia in 1941, as the Red Army that year prevented the Germans from capturing Moscow and Leningrad, and in doing so turned the war around in Russia’s favour. US military hardware started to appear in modest amounts in Russia during 1942, only after the Red Army had overcome the worst of the Nazi onslaught.

There were crucial gaps in 1942, primarily during the autumn and early winter periods, when the US military assistance to Russia was significantly reduced, which prompted renewed suspicions in Moscow. During a 3 and a half month period in 1942, when the fighting was raging in the Caucasus and Stalingrad, less than 40 ships carrying Lend-Lease cargo entered the Russian ports of Murmansk and Arkhangelsk. This suggests the Americans had very mixed feelings about an alliance with Russia. Moreover, considerable amounts of US military equipment sent to Russia was of poor quality, like the P-40 fighter aircraft.

President Bush claimed in September 2002 that his administration was intent on “fighting terrorists and tyrants” wherever needed, actions which could only be achieved through military force. On 19 March 2003 the Bush White House, with the firm backing of the Tony Blair regime in London, sent the US Air Force to bomb the Iraqi capital Baghdad, and the following day a huge ground assault on Iraq began. Washington demanded that Saddam Hussein and his sons, Uday and Qusay, surrender and leave Iraq within 2 days. The Anglo-American invasion was initiated without the support of their key NATO allies, France and Germany, or the UN Security Council.

On 29 September 2006, following approval by the House of Representatives, the US Senate ratified the Military Commissions Act (MCA) by 65 votes against 35 as part of the “war on terror”; and president Bush then signed the MCA on 17 October 2006. It granted him with unprecedented powers in the history of the US. Washington could deny the right to habeas corpus for US citizens detained as “unlawful enemy combatants”, and not merely for those partaking in combat but also for people who “purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States”.

With the passing of the Military Commissions Act, those imprisoned in Afghanistan and sent to the Guantanamo Bay military prison could not appeal to the courts of justice in America. US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said before that “technically unlawful combatants do not have any rights under the Geneva Convention”.

The White House was bestowed with the power to detain indefinitely any American or foreign national, in the US and overseas, who was discovered in possession of material supporting activities against America; and the act sanctioned the use in prisons of torture (“enhanced interrogation techniques” [ETI]) relating to sleep and sensory deprivation, solitary confinement, waterboarding and forced medication.

US military personnel and CIA operatives were allowed to commit “enhanced interrogation techniques”, and the testimonies extracted under such circumstances were used in trials by military commissions. The Center for Constitutional Rights, headquartered in New York, felt the Military Commissions Act to be “a massive legislative assault on fundamental rights, including the right to habeas corpus – the right to challenge one’s detention in a court of law”.

Guantanamo received dozens of prisoners under the age of 18. For example sent to Guantanamo early in 2003 was Mohamed Jawad from Pakistan, who the Americans purported had thrown an explosive device at a US-owned military vehicle in Kabul, Afghanistan, which wounded 2 American soldiers and their interpreter. Jawad’s family insisted he was 12-years-old when arrested, while the Pentagon stated that Jawad’s age was about 17 according to a bone scan.

Jawad was not released from Guantanamo until nearly 7 years later in 2009. Erik R. Saar, a US Army sergeant based at Guantanamo, wrote that he “had to wonder about the wisdom of keeping kids so young in a place like Gitmo [Guantanamo]”. In 2008 there were 21 prisoners at Guantanamo below the age of 18.

The White House’s excuse when criticised for severe breaches of human rights in places like Guantanamo, located on the shores of south-eastern Cuba, is that since it is not officially part of the US, the area does not fall under the jurisdiction of America’s courts of justice or international law. The establishment of US control over Guantanamo, which is a major Cuban port, has allowed Washington to evade US law and the Geneva Convention.

The CIA established other secret prisons in NATO states such as Poland, Romania and Lithuania, and in the Middle East and Asia. Agents from the CIA and FBI along with other government officials could interrogate prisoners as they saw fit.

The Bush administration was advancing its military and political ambitions in the highly-prized Caucasus region. This led inevitably to rising tensions between Washington and Moscow. The US failed to respect the Kremlin’s legitimate concerns regarding a region that is on Russia’s doorstep, and which president Vladimir Putin believes to be within his country’s sphere of interest, as the Caucasus has been historically.

President Bush sent 200 military advisers to Georgia, and Russian officials, aware of the encroachment, complained to Washington about the presence of US troops on Georgian soil. The US established NATO’s Partnership for Peace Program (NATO-PfP) pertaining to the ex-Soviet republics, and the US military had been conducting exercises in the former territories of the Soviet Union since 1997.

Yet Bush’s government was aware that other means were needed to reach their goals, rather than solely armed persuasion. Interfering once more on the international scene was the liberal billionaire George Soros and his Open Society Institute, renamed Open Society Foundations in 2011. The policies of Soros and his Open Society groups are usually compatible with Washington, nor do they feel the need to always go about their business diplomatically, something which USAID at least keeps up the pretence of doing.

Soros’ Open Society groups have funnelled tens of millions of dollars into the former Soviet republics. In the autumn of 2003 alone, Soros poured $42 million into assisting the so-called Rose revolution in Georgia, which helped the US-friendly Mikheil Saakashvili to come to power in January 2004. Soros was involved too in the Ukrainian “Orange revolution”, that enabled the pro-Western Viktor Yushchenko to become president in Kiev in January 2005. The next month Yushchenko spoke of his desire to seek Ukrainian accession to NATO.

Also setting in motion the above color revolutions were American and European organisations like USAID, the Poland-America-Ukraine Cooperation Initiative, Freedom House, and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). These groups managed to sustain the electoral campaign of Yushchenko, which otherwise would probably have failed.

The color revolutions actually resembled something like coups d’etat, and drew similarities with the Anglo-American-led 1953 putsch in Iran. Here, the British MI6 and CIA had funded demonstrations and other unrest in the capital Tehran, in order to topple the Iranian prime minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and replace him with someone more obedient, the Shah as it turned out. Mosaddegh had put Iran’s precious oil reserves under state control.

*

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.

Shane Quinn obtained an honors journalism degree and he writes primarily on foreign affairs and historical subjects. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Sources

Wilhelm Keitel, The Memoirs of Field Marshal Keitel (William Kimber and Co. Limited; 1st edition, 1965)

Michel Chossudovsky, “The Kerch Strait and the Sea of Azov: Black Sea Geopolitics and Russia’s Control of Strategic Waterways”, Global Research, 12 October 2022

Robert Service, Stalin: A Biography (Pan; Reprints edition, 16 April 2010)

Alexander Dugin, “NWO And The Change Of The World Order”, Geopolitica, 10 October 2022

Chris Bellamy, Absolute War: Soviet Russia in the Second World War (Pan; Main Market edition, 21 Aug. 2009)

Guardian, “One of Guantanamo’s youngest inmates to sue US over seven lost years”, 28 August 2009

Washington Post, “The Prisoner Question”, 3 February 2002

Luiz Alberto Moniz Bandeira, The World Disorder: US Hegemony, Proxy Wars, Terrorism and Humanitarian Catastrophes (Springer; 1st ed., 4 Feb. 2019)

Guardian, “Ukraine seeks NATO relationship”, 22 February 2005

Luiz Alberto Moniz Bandeira, The Second Cold War: Geopolitics and the Strategic Dimensions of the USA (Springer; 1st ed., 23 June 2017)

Featured image: George W. Bush declares victory in Iraq War, USS Abraham Lincoln, San Diego, May 1, 2003


History of the World War II

Operation Barbarossa, the Allied Firebombing of German Cities and Japan’s Early Conquests

By Shane Quinn

The first two chapters focus on German preparations as they geared up to launch their 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union, called Operation Barbarossa, which began eight decades ago. It was named after King Frederick Barbarossa, a Prussian emperor who in the 12th century had waged war against the Slavic peoples. Analysed also in the opening two chapters are the Soviet Union’s preparations for a conflict with Nazi Germany.

The remaining chapters focus for the large part on the fighting itself, as the Nazis and their Axis allies, the Romanians and Finns at first, swarmed across Soviet frontiers in the early hours of 22 June 1941. The German-led invasion of the USSR was the largest military offensive in history, consisting of almost four million invading troops. Its outcome would decide whether the post-World War II landscape comprised of an American-German dominated globe, or an American-Soviet dominated globe. The Nazi-Soviet war was, as a consequence, a crucial event in modern history and its result was felt for decades afterward and, indeed, to the present day.

Read the e-reader here.

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 real world is an idealist’s nightmare.

Nonetheless, idealism represents one of the purest and most admirable of human traits, provided that it is grounded in the pursuit of the Good.

As we come more and more to see unimaginable Evil enacted around us on a global scale – an evil manifested by wide-scale murder via biological weapons masquerading as vaccines that are now being pushed upon our children thanks to thoroughly corrupt and malicious institutions tasked with the goal of protecting us – we are more and more dependent upon groups of resistance. In fact, we will not be able to survive the onslaught without the strength and wiles of organized groups, lest we succumb one by single one.

In this context it seems imperative to explore some of the challenges, both practical and psychological, that beset groups, that vitiate them, siphon away their potential, and that render them ineffectual. If there was ever a time when we, who have perceived the reality of the genocidal and reductionist agenda of the Few against us, required unadulterated efficiency in our battle for survival, it is now.

When I speak of groups I am not referring to a mob whipped into froth and frenzy by a military leader (or a Facebook algorithm?), but a group whose members are united by a shared purpose, a common goal, a pressing mission.

I myself am currently a member of several Resistance groups whose goals overlap: a formal group of doctors (www.nzdsos.com), an informal group of local citizens in the Wellington region concerned about fundamental human rights, and a political group of aspirants seeking to effect change within the New Zealand parliament. Each of these entities has protested against the dictatorial position of the New Zealand government during the Corona War, and its anti-human and unscientific mandates, which have included lockdowns, masking, distancing, mass inoculation and a ‘vax apartheid’ system that split society asunder into two classes of citizens.

In the past I happened to be the leader of a relatively large group of psychiatrists in Philadelphia for nearly a decade. This experience informs my observations.

One: the self-interest of the individual member of a group is always paramount. Individuals sacrifice only when sacrifice is essential to their own survival, and very few will risk suffering any diminution of their own well-being for the ‘greater good’, no matter how good that greater good may be.

Two: most group members are content to delegate authority to a handful of others – for example, a Steering Committee or a Board of Trustees – as long as their own perceived well-being is not compromised.

Three: each individual group member possesses a formidable Ego, and some Egos are ‘more equal than others’, which inevitably leads to conflict. I have often observed that there is considerable competition for notoriety and fame, as well as personal advantage, among group leaders.

Four: nobody wants to give up money unless he or she feels they will get a return. Some, when they receive a return acquired as a result of group membership, may even be content to let their membership lapse. I recall very clearly an instance wherein a psychiatrist obtained a very good part-time job as a result of my group’s connections. Once this job was secured he stopped paying the modest annual dues that were a requirement of ongoing membership.

Is there, or has there ever been, an ideal group?

Perhaps.

And perhaps an example is a musical Chorus wherein each choral singer is devoted to the optimal execution of the composer’s musical ideas, an execution generally – but not necessarily – mediated intrepretively by a conductor.

I had the wonderful good fortune to have sung in a Chorus many years ago. It would have been unthinkable for a soprano or baritone to veer off into an individualistic expression that departed from the score and/or the conductor’s direction. All were united by an unremitting dedication to the fulfillment of the composer’s musical intentions, within an interpretive framework that was relatively narrow.

Because of the war that has been thrust upon us, battles are being waged on many fronts. Because of the uniqueness in scale and reach of this global war, most of us in the Resistance have had to react quickly and at times in scattershot fashion to the various and relentless offensives.

If we are to succeed in our battle against Globalist Hegemony, Total Surveillance, Universal Digital Identification and Universal Inoculation – in essence, slavery – we must form and battle in groups, groups whose missions must be exquisitely focused, the better to unite, and whose leaders must be dedicated to the ideal, at the expense of the personal.

If we are to win and to rescue our humanity from the assaults against liberty, autonomy and love, we must fight each in accordance with his or her abilities – some at the front, others in support from behind – but all with the least interference of Ego and self-aggrandizement.

This is, make no mistake, a tall and rather impossible order. But the stakes have never been higher and the time frame never narrower. The closer we may approximate this Ideal, the greater our chance of success.

May this selfless Force be with us.

*

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.

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.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from American Friends Service Committee

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Idealism and the Battle of Our Lives: Resistance to the “Vaccines” Pushed Upon Our Children

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.

***

“We believe that the Chinese and American people have the wisdom, the opportunity and capability to find a way for peaceful coexistence. But China will not allow others to bully it and the historic process of China’s national rejuvenation cannot be held back by anyone or any force,” said Sun Yeli, a Communist Party spokesman in Beijing on October 15.

The US has been committed to providing Taiwan with the means of defending itself, although it does not officially recognize the island as a country, while the US maintains diplomatic relations with Beijing.

With increased US rhetoric, including high level Congressional delegations visiting Taiwan, the tensions between the two superpowers is at fever-pitch.  Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Ararat Kostanian to gain insight into the pressing issues between the US and China.

Ararat Kostanian is an expert on Middle Eastern studies and International Relations. He currently works as a Junior Fellow and a PhD candidate at the Institute of Oriental Studies, National Academy of Science of Armenia, and has published essays and articles on Political Islam, Turkey, the Syrian War, and the emergence of multipolar world and on Armenian foreign policy.

*

Steven Sahiounie (SS): Chinese President Xi Jinping has addressed the Chinese Communist Party Congress, and is seeking his third term as leader. When he restated the opposition to Taiwan independence he received a great deal of applause in support of the position. The Biden administration has continued to support Taiwan in an increasingly threatening display of antagonism. In your opinion, how far will China go to prevent Taiwan independence?

Ararat Kostanian (AK):  The Chinese officials and the President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping have mentioned repeatedly that China sees the reunification of Taiwan with the mainland as an evolutionary process that must be achieved under peaceful manners. And that concept does not belong to the Chinese government or country’s elite per se, but also a belief rooted in the Chinese population entirely. Moreover, it is necessary that the U.S. administration is performing a double standard on the Taiwan issue as well. While the U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and other senior officials have affirmed that the U.S. does not support Taiwan’s independence; conversely, an American senior official with a long history of anti-China rhetoric such as Nancy Pelosi, pays a visit to Taiwan that not only fueled the tension between the United States and China, but also the visit was meant to provoke China and drive the Chinese government to take military action by using force against Taiwan. Thus, Taiwan in the eyes of the American policy makers is a card to not only contain China and alienate its regional influence, but also a territory where a great conflict with China could occur.

The scenario played by the United States on the Taiwan is very similar to what is happening in Ukraine currently. Unfortunately, the United States is not acting as a mature and responsible superpower in such an uncertain global condition where pandemics and its negative impacts are not vanished, the social paranoias are rising, and the economic crisis is targeting the global middle class. The United States is continuing its old realist game by prioritizing to win the battle only by using military force and ignite wars in different parts of the world. It seems that for the United States it is preferable to be engaged or to create situations for catastrophic wars that will not benefit any side, rather than a peaceful emergence of a multipolar world which could bring an atmosphere of fair competition, peace, and institutional global order.

SS: Security was a major theme of the conference. President Xi Jinping put great emphasis of keeping China secure from threats. In an increasingly unpredictable world, what are the main threats China faces, and are they mainly foreign, or domestic?

AK:  One of the core elements for China in its path of development has been maintaining stability inside the country. For that reason, the Chinese officials has been repeating that China must have and perform harmony within the country and with the outside world, in order to achieve the modernization plan, set to bring China as one of the most advanced countries globally in many spheres. Currently, the security issue becomes more relevant as I have mentioned above, when the United States is willing to keep its supremacy and hegemony at all costs and the problem is that the United States will never tolerate a more powerful China that could have its influence over Asia in general and globally in particular. Reuters mentioned that Xi Jinping has used the world security 89 times in his report-speech this year, whereas it was 55 in 2017. Indeed, China is highly concerned about the accelerated tension by the Taiwanese from one side in urging to go for a full Independence and the provocative American foreign policy to draw in China into a military action that could be catastrophic for all countries in the region.

At the same time, the Chinese president had mentioned in his speech that China is ready for all scenarios, and they will respond if there will be any threat against China’s territorial integrity and any action against the reunification of Taiwan. Moreover, the People’s Liberation Army is in command. There is no domestic conflict in China, since in the last two decades China continues to provide rights to the ethnic and religious minorities and they have been fully integrated in the Han society. The only concern for Chinese government is the Uyghurs of Xinjiang that is being fueled by the United States again to create inner conflict in China and to reduce China’s development. Since the Chinese governments have done tremendous work in improving the Xinjiang province,

I believe that issue could be solved when Uyghurs give up their terror actions and reach to a conclusion with the Chinese authorities, instead of allying themselves with the United States or Turkey.  Thus, as we can see, even some domestic issues have geopolitical implications.

SS: President Xi Jinping spoke about the Chinese socialist economy, but also the need to develop the private sector, along with public ownership and encouraging the markets to play a role. What is your take on the near future of the Chinese economic developments?

AK:  It is indeed a unique case where China did not only maintain the socialist ideology, but also it has been able cautiously to implement some elements from liberal market system. In fact, that was the key component of China’s success. I believe the role in economy will be given further to the private sector, simply because the innovations and startups today are mainly managed and run by the private enterprises and in this sense the advancement in the private sector could be achieved in a faster mode. Moreover, giving opportunities to the private sector means that the middle class will have a greater chance to perform. In terms of China, the majority are in middle class category, and we all know well that the current crisis harmed the middle class at most.  In general, although nearly all the countries are affected from the situation created since the pandemic such as the bankruptcy of companies, the shift in petrol prices, the collapse of the healthcare systems etc., China is one of the few countries that maintained its economic growth. Furthermore, the current economic crises affected the One Belt One Road Initiative as well, since countries started to run a strategy that is based on national or local products. Although these obstacles have global shape. I believe China is capable of pursuing its development plan and generating its global megaproject to the end.

*

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.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “US foreign policy might draw China into catastrophic military action,” Interview with Ararat Kostanian
  • Tags: ,

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

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

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

First published in May 2022

***

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, the foreign policy blogs were abuzz with the news that Scott Ritter had done “an about-face in his assessment of the war”. It appears that the ex-Marine had examined recent developments in Ukraine and concluded that it’s going to be much harder for Russia to win than he had originally thought…

Naturally, the news of Ritter’s reversal sent shockwaves across the internet, especially among the people who follow events in Ukraine closely and who greatly admire his even-handed analysis. Some of these people clearly felt betrayed by Ritter’s comments and blasted him as a “concern troll” which refers to a person who feigns sympathy while actually feeling the opposite. This is a terrible way to treat a guy who’s devoted so much of his time to informing people about an issue of which they might know very little without his research. Besides, Ritter is no hypocrite. Quite the contrary.

It’s fair to say, however, that Ritter has probably been the most outspoken proponent of the “Russia is winning” theory, a hypothesis that runs counter to everything we read in the legacy media or see on the cable news channels. Unfortunately, Ritter’s views on the matter have changed dramatically, and that’s due almost entirely to developments on the ground. As Ritter candidly admits, “The military aid the west is providing to Ukraine is changing the dynamic and if Russia doesn’t find a way to address this meaningfully… the conflict will never end.”

That’s quite a turnaround from a statement he made just weeks earlier that, “Russia is winning the war, and winning it decisively.”

So, what changed? What are the so-called developments that led to Ritter’s volte-face?

Here are a few excerpts from the interview that triggered the fracas. Ritter was joined by Ray McGovern and host Garland Nixon on Saturday Morning Live. (The quotes are copied from video. I accept blame for any mistakes.)

Scott Ritter (start at 47:50 minute mark) — “The thing that frustrates me… is that, it was my assessment that it would be very hard for Ukraine to absorb this new equipment and material (Material– the additional lethal weapons that have recently been shipped to Ukraine) but the howitzers are already operating against Russia. (And) They are having an effect in the Kharkov region. Not all 90 of them, but they have several batteries in place that are being used.

How did this happen?

And this is why I have radically changed my overall assessment, because I had been operating on the assumption that Russia would be able to interdict the vast majority of this equipment, but Russia has shown itself unable or unwilling to do this and– as a result– the Ukrainians are having meaningful impact on the battlefield. Not in the areas of main contention, like the Donbass, but on the periphery. This is why Russia has carried out tactical withdrawals north of Kharkov, because in order to match Ukraine’s best capabilities, Russia would have to divert resources from its main effort which Russia has decided not to do. So, they are re-configuring the battlefield. (trading land in different areas)…(“Saturday Morning Live with Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern, You Tube)

So, while Ritter’s sympathies have not changed in the slightest, it’s clear that his analysis has. At first, he didn’t think that the deluge of lethal weaponry would affect the outcome of the war. Now he’s not so sure. It’s a honest mistake but, still, he needed to ‘come clean’ and explain the factors that contributed to his U-turn. Here’s more from the same interview:

Scott Ritter– This is a transformative moment in the war, because what it means is that demilitarization is not taking place. For all the forces Russia is destroying in the east, Ukraine is rebuilding significant capability (in the west) I liken this to Moscow in December 1941, when the Germans were moving towards Moscow and the Russians just started throwing things at them., sacrificing everything to slow the German offensive. until General Winter and the combination of Siberian divisions gave them the ability to counterattack. The Germans were bled white and they were stopped and turned back. If Russia doesn’t change the calculation, then that is the trajectory we are heading on.,because 200,000 troops–however capable they may be, are only capable of doing so much. And the fighting that’s taking place right now –even though it is slaughtering Ukrainians– it isn’t cost free to the Russians. They’re losing equipment, they’re losing men, they’re losing material, and unless Putin mobilizes or transfers forces in, those aren’t being replaced. So, instead of having 200,000 online, Russia might have 180,000 men. And if you don’t think removing 20,000 men doesn’t change the options available to the Russian leadership, then you don’t know anything about war.”

So, I believe Russia is going to win in the east, they are grinding them down as we speak, they are slaughtering them; the amount of death and destruction that is being dealt to the Ukrainians is unimaginable, but I believe the Ukrainians are willing to take these losses in order to buy time to reconstitute a military that will challenge Russia Because unless Russia is willing to jump across the Dnieper River and head into western Ukraine where it can eliminate the strategic depth that the Ukrainians are being gifted by the Russians, then demilitarization of Ukraine is not going to take place. It can’t take place when tens of billions of dollars of equipment is pouring in and Russia is not able to interdict it. The fact that these advanced howitzers are operating on the front lines right now, shows there’s something wrong with the Russian methodology. And–unless they alter that methodology– I think we’re in for a very long summer.” (“Saturday Morning Live with Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern, You Tube)

It’s hard to grasp what Ritter is saying here. Is he actually suggesting that Putin expand the current “special operation” into a full-blown World War? At one point, he casually opines that Russia will have to mobilize 1 and a half million men (Note: Russia currently only has 200,000 in Ukraine) if they want to prevail in Ukraine and then move on to Finland. It’s impossible to tell by Ritter’s tone whether he is simply making an objective observation of ‘what is needed’ to succeed or if he is making an explicit recommendation that he thinks Russia’s High Command should consider. I can’t answer that. Here’s more from the interview:

Scott Ritter (5:20 mark)– “The idea that the Ukrainian military has been eliminated as an effective fighting force is a flawed concept, and unless Russia broadens its special military operation– probably to the point of changing it form a special military operation to a war which includes the totality of Ukrainian battle-space–(then) this is a conflict that is dangerously close to becoming unwinnable by Russia which means that while they can complete their objectives in the east with 200,000 troops, they aren’t able to prevent Ukraine from rearming and reequipping when Ukraine is being provided with tens of billions of dollars of equipment by NATO —Whenever you provide your enemy with “safe space” to rebuild military capability, you’re never going to win. …

Yes, Russia is winning in the east which is what they said their objective was all along. And they are accomplishing that. That is the special Military Operation. But now we’re talking about “war”, and I don’t think Russia has made that transition yet. This is a defacto proxy war between the west and Russia using Ukrainian forces as NATO’s sword. The object of this is to “bleed Russia dry”. And if Russia doesn’t change the dynamic, Russia will be bled dry.” Zelensky has indicated that he’s willing to mobilize a million people, at a time when the west is ready to provide the funding and equipment to turn those million men into a real military threat.

So, I see what has been happening in the last few weeks as being decisive.

The military aid the west is providing is changing the dynamic and if Russia doesn’t find a way to address this meaningfully, and to eliminate it as a military capability… then the conflict will never end.” (“Saturday Morning Live with Scott Ritter and Ray McGovern, You Tube)

There it is from the horse’s mouth. Readers will have to draw their own conclusions.

IMHO, Scott Ritter is gradually adjusting to the idea that the conflict in Ukraine is not a just regional skirmish between two quarrelsome neighbors, nor is it a proxy-war between NATO and Russia. No. Ukraine is the first phase of a broader plan for crushing Russia, collapsing its economy, removing its leaders, seizing its natural resources, splintering its territory, and projecting US power across Central Asia to the Pacific Rim. Ukraine is about hegemony, empire, and pure, unalloyed power. Most important, Ukraine is the first battle in a Third World War, a war that was concocted and launched by Washington to ensure another unchallenged century of American primacy.

*

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.

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).

Featured image is from TUR

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 @crg_globalresearch.

***

Today our thoughts are with Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, who passed away on June 30th, 2022 at age 48.

He was a powerful voice. His Legacy will Live.

Below is his outstanding analysis together with Dr. David Sorensen, first  published by Global Research on December 6, 2021

 

***

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to document how all over the world millions of people have died, and hundreds of millions of serious adverse events have occurred, after injections with the experimental mRNA gene therapy. We also reveal the real risk of an unprecedented genocide.

Facts

We aim to only present scientific facts and stay away from unfounded claims. The data is clear and verifiable. Over one hundred references can be found for all presented information, which is provided as a starting point for further investigation.

Complicity

The data suggests that we may currently be witnessing the greatest organized mass murder in the history of our world. The severity of this situation compels us to ask this critical question: will we rise to the defense of billions of innocent people? Or will we permit personal profit over justice, and be complicit? Networks of lawyers all over the world are preparing class-action lawsuits to prosecute all who are serving this criminal agenda. To all who have been complicit so far, we say: There is still time to turn and choose the side of truth. Please make the right choice.

Worldwide

Although this report focuses on the situation in the United States, it also applies to the rest of the world, as the same type of experimental injections with similar death rates – and comparable systems of corruption to hide these numbers – are used worldwide. Therefore we encourage everyone around the world to share this report. May it be a wake-up call for all of humanity.

At least 5 times more deaths, CDC whistleblower signs sworn affidavit

VAERS data from the American CDC shows that as of September 17, 2021, already 726,963 people suffered adverse events, including stroke, heart failure, blood clots, brain disorders, convulsions, seizures, inflammations of brain & spinal cord, life-threatening allergic reactions, autoimmune diseases, arthritis, miscarriage, infertility, rapid-onset muscle weakness, deafness, blindness, narcolepsy, and cataplexy.

Besides the astronomical number of severe side effects, the CDC reports that 15,386 people died as a result of receiving the experimental injections.

However, a CDC healthcare fraud detection expert named Jane Doe investigated this and came to the shocking discovery that the number of deaths is at least five times higher than what the CDC is admitting. In fact, in her initial communications to professor in medicine Dr. Peter McCullough, this whistleblower said that the number of deaths is ten times higher. The CDC health fraud detection expert signed an affidavit, in which she stated her findings. She carefully chose the wordings ‘…under-reported by a conservative factor of at least five’, but as she revealed initially, the factor could also be ten. Here is an excerpt of the affidavit: 1

‘I have, over the last 25 years, developed over 100 distinct healthcare fraud detection algorithms. … When the COVID-19 vaccine clearly became associated with patient death and harm, I was inclined to investigate the matter. It is my professional estimate that VAERS (the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database, while extremely useful, is under-reported by a conservative factor of at least 5. … and have assessed that the deaths occurring within 3 days of vaccination are higher than those reported in VAERS by a factor of at least 5.’

According to this CDC health fraud detection expert the number of vaccine deaths in the U.S. is not 15,386 but somewhere between 80,000 and 160,000.

The CDC is also vastly underreporting other adverse events, like severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis). The Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) reported that a study showed how the actual number of anaphylaxis is 50 to 120 times higher than claimed by the CDC.2, 3 On top of that, a private researcher took a close look at the VAERS database, and tried looking up specific case-ID’s. He found countless examples where the original death records were deleted, and in some cases, the numbers have been switched for milder reactions. He says:

‘What the analysis of all the case numbers is telling us right now is that there’s approximately 150,000 cases that are missing, that were there, that are no longer there. The question is, are they all deaths?’ 4

How criminal the CDC is, was also revealed a few years ago, when researchers investigated the link between vaccines and autism. They found that there indeed is a direct connection. So what did the CDC do? All the researchers came together and a large dustbin was placed in the middle of the room. In it they threw all the documents that showed the link between autism and vaccinations. Thus, the evidence was destroyed. Subsequently, a so-called ‘scientific’ article was published in Pediatric, stating that vaccinations do not cause autism. However, a leading scientist within the CDC, William Thompson, exposed this crime. He publicly admitted:

‘I was involved in misleading millions of people about the possible negative side effects of vaccines. We lied about the scientific findings.’ 5

The worst example of criminal methodology used to hide vaccine deaths is the fact that the CDC doesn’t consider a person vaccinated until two weeks after their second injection. This means that anyone who dies during the weeks before or the two weeks after the second injection, are considered unvaccinated deaths, and are therefore not counted as vaccine deaths. By doing this, they can ignore the vast majority of deaths following the injection. This is the nr 1 method used in nations worldwide to hide the countless numbers of vaccine deaths. 6,7

300,000 adverse events, Moderna hides hundreds of thousands of reports

A whistleblower from Moderna made a screenshot of an internal company notice labelled “Confidential – For internal distribution only”, showing there were 300,000 adverse events reported in only three months:

‘This enabled the team to effectively manage approximately 300,000 adverse event reports and 30,000 medical information requests in a three month span to support the global launch of their COVID-19 vaccine.’ 8

50,000 Medicare vaccinated died, US death rate probably near 250, 000

Attorney Thomas Renz received information from a whistleblower inside the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service (CMS), which reveals how 48,465 people died shortly after receiving their injections. He emphasized that these death numbers are from only 18% of the U.S. population.9 If we apply this to the entire U.S. population, that would mean a death rate of ± 250,000. Other factors also play a role of course, such as the age of the Medicare patients, and the younger members of the American people, so we can’t simply extrapolate this to the entire U.S. population. But we do see that something extremely serious is going on.

Less than 1% is reported, the actual number is 100x higher

All this information already shows us that the number of adverse events and deaths is a multitude of what is being told to the public. The situation is however still far worse than most of us can even imagine. The famous Lazarus report from Harvard Pilgrim Health Care inc. in 2009 revealed that in general only 1% of adverse events from vaccines is being reported: 10

‘Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.’

According to this study, numbers of adverse events and deaths should be multiplied with a factor of 100, in order to understand the true prevalence of serous vaccine injuries.

Reasons for underreporting, the population is misinformed

The reason that less than 1% of adverse events is reported, is first of all because the majority of the population is not aware of the existence of reporting systems for vaccine injuries. Secondly, the pharmaceutical industry has been waging an unrelenting media war over the past decades against all medical experts, who attempted to inform the public about the dangers of vaccines. One deployed strategy is name-calling, and the negative label ‘anti-vaxxer’ was chosen to shame and blame all scientists, physicians, and nurses who speak out about the devastation caused by vaccinations.

Because of this criminal campaign of aggressive suppression of adverse events data, the majority of the population is clueless that vaccines can cause any harm at all.

The widespread propaganda by the vaccine companies, who use government agencies as their main carousel, simply told humanity for decades that adverse events are a very rare occurrence. When vaccinated people, therefore, suffer from serious adverse events, it doesn’t even occur to them that this could be from previous injections, and naturally don’t report it as such.

During the current world crisis the attacks on medical experts who are warning about vaccines, have gone to an even higher level. Medical experts are now being completely de-platformed from all social media, their websites are deranked by Google, entire YouTube channels are deleted, many have lost their jobs, and in some countries, medical experts have been arrested in an attempt to suppress the truth about the experimental covid injections.

Several countries are now labeling scientists who speak out against vaccines ‘domestic terrorists’. It is clear that all means have to be deployed by the criminal vaccine cartel to suppress what is going on with these injections.

As a result, countless medical professionals are afraid to report adverse events, which further contributes to the underreporting of these side effects.

Additionally, the amount of scientific information warning for these dangerous biological agents, and the number of medical experts warning humanity, is so overwhelming and almost omnipresent – despite the aggressive attempts to silence them – that it is virtually impossible for any medical professional to not be at least somewhat aware of the risk they are taking, by administering an untested DNA altering injection, without even informing their patients of what is being injected into their body. If they then see their patients die or become disabled for life, they are naturally afraid of being held accountable, and therefore have yet another motivation for not reporting the adverse events.

Lastly: many medical professionals receive financial incentives to promote the vaccines. In the United Kingdom for example nurses get ₤10 per needle they put into a child. That again is a reason for them to not report adverse events.

250,000 vaccine comments, Facebook reveals tsunami of adverse events

A local ABC News Station posted a request on Facebook for people to share their stories of unvaccinated loved ones that died. They wanted to make a news story on this. What happened was totally unexpected. In five days time over 250,000 people posted comments, but not about unvaccinated loved ones. All the comments talk about vaccinated loved ones that died shortly after being injected, or that are disabled for life. The 250,000 comments reveal a shocking death wave among the population, and the heart wrenching suffering these injections are causing. The post was already shared 200,000 times, and counting… 11

Notice in the last comment how the lady says that everybody in the hospital is afraid to report this as a vaccine reaction, and another person says ‘the doctors can’t report it’.

That is proof of what I explained earlier: Most medical professionals are either too terrified to report adverse events, or they are simply corrupt. This causes the true prevalence of vaccine injuries to remain hidden from the world, which is powerful real life evidence fot what the Lazarus report revealed: only 1% of vaccine injuries are reported to the authorities. The 250,000+ comments show that once people find a place to report suffering caused by the injections, we see a tsunami…

Vaccine deaths summary, it is far worse than we think

 

  • VAERS published 726,963 adverse events, including 15,386 deaths as of September 17, 2021
  • CDC fraud expert says that number of deaths is at least five times, and possibly ten times higher
  • A whistleblower from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service (CMS) revealed how almost 50,000 people died from the injections. They represent only 20% of the U.S. population, meaning
  • that if this data is applied to the entire population 250,000 have died 150,000 reports have been rejected or scrubbed by the VAERS system
  • The actual number of anaphylaxis is 50 to 120 times higher than claimed by the CDC
  • Everyone who dies before two weeks after the second injection, is not considered a vaccine death, which causes the majority of early vaccine deaths to be ignored
  • Moderna received over 300,000 reports of adverse events in only three months-time
    The Lazarus Report shows that only 1% of adverse events is being reported by the public The majority of the population is not aware of the existence of systems where they can report vaccine adverse events
  • Aggressive censorship and propaganda told the public that adverse events are rare, causing people to not understand how their health problems stem from past injections
  • The shaming and blaming of medical professionals who say anything against the vaccines, cause many in the medical community to avoid reporting adverse events
  • The fear of being held accountable after administering an injection that killed or disabled patients, further prevents medical personnel from reporting it
  • Having accepted financial incentives to promote, and administer the covid vaccines, also stops medical personnel from reporting adverse events
  • Profit driven vaccine manufacturers have every reason not to report the destruction their untested experimental products are causing
  • 250,000+ Facebook users comment about vaccine deaths and serious injuries

World experts warn humanity, leading scientists issue grave warnings

This alarming data leads world experts, like the Nobel Prize Winner in Medicine, Dr. Luc Montagnier, to issue a grave warning that we are currently facing the greatest risk of worldwide genocide, in the history of humanity.12 Even the inventor of the mRNA technology, Dr. Robert Malone, warns against these injections that are using his technology.13,14 The situation is so severe that former Pfizer vice president and chief scientist Dr. Mike Yeadon came forward to warn humanity for these extremely dangerous injections. One of his best known videos is titled ‘A Final Warning’.15 Another world renown scientist, Geert Vanden Bossche, former Head of Vaccine Development Office in Germany, and Chief Scientific Officer at Univac, also risks his name and career, by bravely speaking out against administration of the covid shots. The vaccine developer warns that the injections can compromise the immunity of the vaccinated, making them vulnerable for every new variant.16, 17 World War II holocaust survivors wrote to the European Medicines Agency demanding the injections to be stopped, which they consider to be a new holocaust. 18

Vaccine deaths worldwide, the same goes for nations around the world

The situation we described in the United States illustrates the destruction caused by these injections. We will briefly touch upon some other countries, to prove that the situation in America is not unique.

European Union

In the European Union (which consists of only 27 of the 50 European countries) the official reports of EudraVigilance officially admit as of August 18th 2021 that approx. 22,000 people died and 2 million suffered side effects, of which 50% are serious. 19, 20 What are serious injuries?

‘It be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life- threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.’

In The Netherlands, one of the smallest nations in the European Union, an extra parliamentary research committee set up a platform for citizens to report vaccine adverse events. This is no initiative from the government and has received no attention in the media. The majority of the Dutch population is therefore unaware of its existence. Yet, despite its limited influence, this private initiative has already received reports of 1,600 deaths and 1,200 health damages, often permanently disabling the people.21

United Kingdom

Shortly before the national vaccination campaign started, the MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare

Products Regulatory Agency) published the following request:

‘The MHRA urgently seeks an Artificial Intelligence (AI) software tool to process the expected high volume of COVID-19 vaccine Adverse Drug Reaction (ADRs) and ensure that no details from the ADRs’ reaction text are missed.’ 22

The British government published a report of the first series of adverse events, including blindness, strokes, miscarriages, heart failure, paralysis, autoimmune disease, and more. Shortly after the first wave of immunization over 100,000 adverse events were reported, including 1260 cases of loss of eyesight (including total blindness). The first part of the report praises the vaccines to be the best way to protect people from COVID-19, and then continues to show the incredible destruction these vaccines are causing. The hypocrisy is mindboggling.23, 24

Also in the U.K. miscarriages increased by 366% in only six weeks, for vaccinated mothers.25 Furthermore the British Office for National Statistics inadvertently revealed that 30,305 people have died within 21 days of having the injection, during the first 6 months of 2021.26 And a British scientist with 35 years of experience did an in depth analysis of the British Yellow Card reporting system and found it to be unreliable.27

‘We can conclude that the Yellow Card reporting scheme can provide some limited information that may be useful for alerting the UK public to possible adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines. However, the initial conception of the scheme as a purely descriptive rather than as an experimental undertaking means that it cannot address the real issues that are of crucial importance to the UK public. These issues are whether there are causal relationships between vaccination with the PF and AZ vaccines and serious adverse effects such as death, and if so, what are the size of these effects.’

Israel

The Israeli Peoples Committee is a team of doctors, attorneys, criminologists, epidemiologists and academic researchers, determined to perform an investigation, inquiry, and exposure for the benefit of the public. Although they are a relatively unknown group, they still received 3754 reports, including 480+ deaths, as of August 5th, 2021.28 The IPC states that these numbers represent only 2- 3% of the true prevalence in the population, which means that the number of deaths in Israel is around 48,000 and adverse events around 375,400.

Also in Israel, statistics from Worldometers.info shows a massive spike in deaths when the vaccinations started. Before the immunizations began, there were hardly any daily covid deaths in Israel. Once the vaccinations began, the daily death toll rose from 1-3 to 75-100 deaths a day!

Another Israeli website reporting vaccine injuries is Seethetruth.club/covid-19-vaccine-victims where one can see a rapidly growing number of testimonials of people who suffered greatly from the

shot. In the U.S. a similar website called 1000covidstories.com shows an ever increasing amount of videos from people who died or had severe reactions to the covid shots. Also the website called TheCovidWorld.com shows the personal stories of a large number of people who died from the shots. We must understand that nothing like this has ever happened before in history, where thousands of people come forward to share their suffering following an immunization. The reason people do this now, is because their adverse reactions are not at all, like the criminal ‘health’ agencies say ‘headaches, dizziness and flu like symptoms.’ The reactions are extremely severe, often disabling people for life. The injuries are in fact so severe, that people around the world are stepping forward to warn humanity.

Brazil

In Brazil the official vaccine death count is 32,000 during a 5 month period. The report was published on uol.com.br, which reportedly has about the same number of pageviews as CNN.com, according to data from SimilarWeb. Despite these high amounts of deaths following vaccination, the report states: ‘Vaccination is still the best way to control the disease.’ 29

Science proves vaccine damage, strokes, heart attacks, cancer,…

A study by the University of San Francisco, or Salk Institute, shows that the vaccines turn the human body into a spike protein factory, making trillions of spikes that cause blood clots, which cause strokes and heart attacks.30 Another study confirms how the vaccines can cause deadly blood clots, that in turn cause heart attacks and strokes.31,32 The New England Journal of Medicine shows how the jabs cause heart inflammation,33 and the same journal published a study about the dramatic increase of miscarriages.34 Several studies prove the reality of antibody dependent enhancement. 35,36,37 Also the occurrence of infertility and reduced sperm count is confirmed.38,39 Lastly a study showed that the injections cause cancer.40 And these are just a few examples…

Exempt from liability, no vaccine manufacturer takes responsibility

In the past decades, several official government agreements were signed, in nations across the world, that provide every vaccine manufacturer with 100% protection from all liability. It doesn’t matter how much destruction their products cause, nobody has any recourse. On top of that, no health insurance will ever cover the costs resulting from vaccine damage. They simply do not reimburse the vaccinated, when they get into trouble. Yet… the same governments that refuse to protect you from possible destruction of your health, life, and beloved ones, mandate these deadly injections and require them for shopping, travel, gatherings, and even banking services.

Do the injections even work? Health officials say they are not effective

World-renowned vaccine developer Geert Vanden Bossche MVD, PhD warns that these injections destroy the body’s immune system, making the vaccinated vulnerable for every new variant of the disease.41 He also says:

‘Mass vaccination campaigns during a pandemic of highly infectious variants fail to control viral transmission. Instead of contributing to building herd immunity, they dramatically delay natural establishment of herd immunity. This is why the ongoing universal vaccination campaigns are absolutely detrimental to public and global health.’ 42

The Nobel prize winner in medicine Dr. Luc Montagnier sounds the alarm that these vaccines are creating dangerous new variants.43 And in Israel the statistics show clearly a dramatic increase in covid deaths once immunizations started (see earlier in this report). The Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennet even says that the people who are most at risk now, are those who received two doses of the vaccine.. 44

In the island nation Seychelles there were hardly any covid deaths, but once they started vaccinating the population, the deaths increased a hundred fold.

In Australia, a young couple was refused access to their newborn baby for eight days, even though they were fully vaccinated. The chief health officer from Australia, Dr. Jeannette Young, gave the following revealing explanation for this inhumane situation: 45

‘Just because you are vaccinated, doesn’t mean that you won’t get infected. That’s why we could not allow that family to go and visit their baby.’

Anthony Fauci also made it crystal clear: ‘the CDC is considering mask mandates for the vaccinated’,46 ‘the vaccinated increasingly test positive for covid, therefore they will need to keep wearing masks’,47 ‘the vaccinated still need to avoid eating in restaurants’,48 and ‘the vaccinated carry the Delta variant as much as the unvaccinated’.49 So according to Fauci the vaccines do nothing. Yet he insists on mandating these useless injections for travel.50 The same was publicly stated by the UK’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who said: 51

‘Can I now meet my friends and family members indoors if they are vaccinated? There I am afraid the answer is no, because we’re not yet at that stage, we’re still very much in the world where you can meet friends and family outdoors, under the rule of six, or two households. And even if your friends and family members may be vaccinated, the vaccines are not giving 100% protection and that’s why we need to be cautious.’

A research article published in ‘Trends in Internal Medicine’ by Dr. J. Bar Classen MD, is titled: 52
‘US COVID-19 Vaccines Proven to Cause More Harm than Good Based on Pivotal Clinical Trial Data

Analyzed Using the Proper Scientific Endpoint, “All Cause Severe Morbidity”’

Even the CDC admitted that the injections offer no protection against the Delta variants, and coming variants, and all covid measures, therefore, need to stay in place.53 Yet they keep insisting that everybody must be vaccinated. The chief health officer of New South Wales, Australia said we have to prepare to live with a constant cycle of ongoing covid booster injections for the foreseeable future.54 Moderna’s chief medical officer, Dr. Tal Zaks, said that the vaccines do not bring life back to normal.55 This was confirmed by the director of the World Health Organization Tedros Adhanom, who said: 56

‘A vaccine on its own will not end the pandemic. Surveillance will need to continue, people will still need to be tested, isolated and cared for. Contacts will still need to be traced and quarantined, communities will still need to be engaged.’

A study by The Lancet showed that the Delta variant is freely transmitted among the vaccinated.57 This was confirmed by a study that showed how a in July 2021, following multiple large public events in a Barnstable County, Massachusetts, town, 469 COVID-19 cases were identified among Massachusetts residents who had travelled to the town during July 3–17; 346 (74%) occurred in fully vaccinated persons.58

Click here to read the full report.

*

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.

Featured image is from Mercola

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

October 21st, 2022 by Global Research News

Many People Fully Vaccinated for COVID Are Now Going Blind

Ethan Huff, October 17, 2022

The Rise and Fall of the Great Reset — Professor Arthur Noble

Prof. Arthur Noble, October 19, 2022

US Rejection of Moscow’s Offer for Peace Talks Is Utterly Inexcusable

Caitlin Johnstone, October 13, 2022

Biden Signs Executive Order Designed to Unleash “Transhumanist Hell” on America and the World

Leo Hohmann, October 17, 2022

“Shrink the World’s Population”: Secret 2009 Meeting of Billionaires “Good Club”

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 15, 2022

The US-Nazi Connection Since World War II: From Inspiring the Third Reich to Supporting the Neo-Nazis of Ukraine

Timothy Alexander Guzman, October 20, 2022

PfizerGate: Official Government Reports prove Hundreds of Thousands of People Are Dying Every Single Week Due to COVID-19 Vaccination

The Expose, October 9, 2022

U.S. Regime Now Applies Maximum Brutality to the Ukrainian People

Eric Zuesse, October 20, 2022

Some of Us Don’t Think the Russian Invasion Was “Aggression.” Here’s Why.

Mike Whitney, October 17, 2022

Vaccine Narrative Collapses as Harvard Study Shows Jab More Dangerous than COVID

Jonas Vesterberg, October 9, 2022

UK Documentary Exposes Lies Behind ‘Safe and Effective’ COVID Vaccine Narrative

Dr. Suzanne Burdick, October 18, 2022

Israeli Report: “The mRNA Experimental Vaccine from Pfizer Killed “About 40 Times More (Elderly) People Than the Disease Itself Would Have Killed” During a Recent Five-week Vaccination Period”

Dr. Paul Elias Alexander, October 7, 2022

America’s Diabolic Plan to Subjugate and Break Up Russia

Chaitanya Davé, October 18, 2022

Thousands More Children Die as EU Drags Out Europe-wide Investigation Into Why There’s Been an 8x Increase in Excess Deaths Among Children Since EMA Approved COVID Vaccine for Kids

The Expose, October 16, 2022

The Top Ten Creepiest and Most Dystopian Things Pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF)

Vigilant Citizen, October 17, 2022

VIDEO: Man Made Destruction of the West: Something BIG is happening in Germany, the WEF Makes it Worse

Global Research News, October 14, 2022

U.S. Act of War against the European Union: President Biden Ordered the Terror Attack against Nord Stream. High Treason against the People of Europe

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 21, 2022

COVID-19 Vaccines: Proof of Lethality. Over One Thousand Scientific Studies

SUN, October 15, 2022

Digitization Is Humanity’s Demise. The “Smartphonization” of Humanity. The QR code is Everywhere

Peter Koenig, October 18, 2022

Video: Accused of “Covid Misinformation”, Dr Meryl Nass Fights for Her Medical License

Dr. Meryl Nass, October 15, 2022

US-NATO vs. Russia: The Weaponization of Western “Freedom and Democracy”

By Dragan Filipovic, October 20, 2022

During the signing ceremony on the accession to the Russian Federation of the four new regions on September 30th president Vladimir Putin declared that a ‘revolutionary transformation of the world’ is underway and stated that there will be ‘no return to the old order’.

Irish MEPs Tell Truth to Power. The USG, EU, and Israel Are the Real Terrorists.

By Kurt Nimmo, October 21, 2022

In America, it is becoming increasingly dangerous to express opposition to the insanity of the national security state and its partners in the EU and Israel. Journalists in America are now disappeared, the same as they are in other authoritarian nations. If you doubt this, non-Google search “James Gordon Meeks.”

Ukraine’s “Neo-Nazi Summer Camp”. Military Training for Young Children

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, October 21, 2022

Unknown to most Americans, the US government is channeling financial support, weapons and training to a Neo-Nazi entity –which is part of The Ukraine National Guard– The Azov Battalion (Батальйон Азов). Canada and Britain have confirmed that they also are providing support to the National Guard.

Invalid COVID Data Drives Catastrophic Public Policies Globally

By Mark Taliano, October 20, 2022

As for the WHO which is the fountainhead of the global plandemic, even this institution of corruption, funded in large part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, has admitted to the failings of the PCR tests.

“Humanitarian Interventions” and the 1994 Rwandan Genocide

By Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović, October 20, 2022

By 1995 it had become clear that the (Western) international community’s experiment with multilateralism was under serious threat and, in fact, it failed in many cases like Rwanda, ex-Yugoslavia, Cyprus, etc. Nevertheless, continuing problems in different parts of the globe have meant that the OUN has had to remain committed to alleviating some of the worst atrocities.

What Was the Halloween Death Smog Disaster? And Other Questions Related to the Fluoridation Chemicals That Are Added to U.S. Water Supplies

By Jenny Miller, October 20, 2022

The fluoride products used in water fluoridation (sodium fluoride or fluorosilicic acid) are classified as hazardous waste products of the fertilizer, aluminum, and nuclear industries. They are even more toxic than naturally-occurring fluoride, since they contain other components, such as arsenic, lead, barium, and/or aluminum.

Russia’s Romance with Africa After Soviet Collapse

By Prof. Abdullahi Shehu, October 20, 2022

The collapse of the Soviet Union and the decades of the 90s seemed to have reversed the gains made in Africa-Soviet Relations and by extension, in Africa-Russia relations. Understandably, it was a period of politico-ideological downturn and harsh economic realities for Russia, the successor-nation to the Soviet Union.

French Labor Unrest Illustrates Worsening Economic Crisis Within the EU

By Abayomi Azikiwe, October 20, 2022

French workers affiliated with the General Confederation of Labor (CGT) held a “Day of Action” work stoppage on October 18. This action came on the heels of an oil workers strike which demanded a rise in salaries amid the escalating rate of inflation that has impacted people throughout the western capitalist states.

 

Martial Law in Russia’s Newly Reunified Novorossiya Region

By Andrew Korybko, October 20, 2022

President Putin just introduced martial law in Russia’s newly reunified Novorossiyan region along with ordering a “mid-level” response in the other ones bordering Ukraine that’ll give officials special authorities to ensure security there.

A Letter to a Relative on 27 June 2021″ About COVID in the Thick of the Corona War

By Dr. Emanuel Garcia, October 20, 2022

I think it is important to reflect upon the past from time to time, and I think that this letter of mine, to a close relative while in the thick of the Corona War, in mid-2021 is as relevant now as it was then. Here goes.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: US-NATO vs. Russia: The Weaponization of Western “Freedom and Democracy”

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

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

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

***

This sort of criticism of US-EU-Israeli foreign policy would never be allowed in the USG Congress. Quite frankly, I am surprised the European Parliament didn’t cut the mic on MEPs Mick Wallace and Clare Daly.

Yes, indeed. The USG, EU, and Israel are the real terrorists. The historical record is clear, although largely ignored, especially here in America where it is now impossible to elect people speaking truth to power like Daly and Wallace.

In America, it is becoming increasingly dangerous to express opposition to the insanity of the national security state and its partners in the EU and Israel.

Journalists in America are now disappeared, the same as they are in other authoritarian nations. If you doubt this, non-Google search “James Gordon Meeks.”

Mr. Meeks, a national security reporter for ABC, has not been seen since the FBI raided his apartment in April.

Julian Assange is wasting away in Belmarsh prison for the crime of telling the world about the horrible deeds of the USG in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is increasingly perilous to comment in public or social media on the manifest crimes of the USG and its junior partners in torture and mass murder.

It’s possible Mr. Meek, following the FBI raid, supposedly in search of classified documents on his laptop, is hiding out somewhere, keeping a low profile, afraid of the government and the FBI (the USG’s political police).

Then again, the case of Assange is demonstrative.

*

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 

What Would a Nuclear War Look Like?

October 21st, 2022 by Jeff Thomas

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

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

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

First published on September 22, 2022

***

For eight years, NATO has backed puppet rulers in Ukraine, funded attacks on Donbass, repeatedly violated the Minsk Treaties, outlawed the speaking of Russian in the Luhansk and Donetsk Republics, and has destroyed democratic opposition and free media in Ukraine, leaving it a one-party government, essentially owned and financed by the US and administrated by US operatives.

Not much subtlety there.

Yet, somehow, the US has managed to convince the people of the US and other Western countries that Russia is the bad boy, is out of control and must be stopped.

In spite of all the above, Russia remained stoic and sought continually to keep a lid on the situation. It did, however, state firmly that the “red line” would be if Ukraine were to go nuclear, becoming a direct threat to Moscow. That would not be tolerated.

Surely, this was a sober heads-up to any sensible country that the one thing that must not happen would be for Ukraine to go nuclear. After all, once that Pandora’s Box was opened, the last barrier to possible nuclear war would be crossed.

For eight years, Russia had been goaded again and again by the West, yet they did not take the bait. Then, in February of 2022, at the annual Munich Security Conference, the President of Ukraine announced his intent to make Ukraine a nuclear country.

Five days later, Russia invaded Ukraine. Immediately, the US propaganda arm went into operation, and for months, even as Ukraine was consistently losing the war, at every turn, the Western media renewed its claims that the war was turning; that Russia was faltering, and the heroes of Ukraine were beating back the Great Bear.

But all the above is old news. Why, at this juncture, should we be reviewing it?

Well, its continued significance is that NATO (or the US – they are virtually interchangeable at this point) has, from the beginning, behaved recklessly with the prospect of nuclear conflict.

Are they mad? Or are they so foolish as to think that they have some sort of “edge” in a nuclear conflict? Or do they see this as a game of one-upmanship in which the only important concern is which antagonist has the greater bluster?

We can only speculate as to the answer to this quandary. But, setting this aside, we should be questioning, a) what is the likelihood that the West would be so foolhardy as to actually push the button and, b) what would the outcome look like?

As to the first question, considering that it’s now becoming increasingly evident that the West have been misrepresenting the progress of the war; that the trained Azov forces are spent and replacements cannot be trained fast enough to go against the experienced Russian forces, the US is going to have to come up with another plan… and it will need to be something dramatic.

At this point, the one card they have not played is the nuke card.

They’ve claimed that the Russians have been either firing on or causing explosions in the Zaporizhzhya nuclear plant that they have held for some time. In essence, they’re being accused of bombing themselves in a facility that has long-since been taken.

At this point, not many listeners are buying this explanation. So, what do they have left in their toolbox?

I’ve long felt that, as an end-run, what the West might do would rely on an old favourite technique – a false flag attack. Create a narrative and videos of an attack on, say, Kiev by Russia with a small nuclear warhead. Then announce that the warhead had been fired, killing hundreds of thousands. Then let loose the pre-prepared media blitz and invoke Article 5, justifying nuclear warfare.

It just might turn the tide of sympathy. But it would also open a door that could not once again be closed.

For decades, both Russia and the US have had large numbers of nukes aimed at each other, with a system of timed releases. Once the first button is pushed, interrupting the progression is difficult.

So, as to that second question – “What would a nuclear war look like?” there are many studies, but the most illustrative one I’m familiar with was produced by Princeton.

It begins with a random single release in Eastern Europe and demonstrates the sizes and numbers of nuclear warheads, along with the release patterns.

It shows the trajectories and, in addition, shows diameters representing the degree of devastation by each missile.

The smaller nukes would cover all of Europe, leaving very little intact. Then the larger transatlantic nukes would take over – the state-of-the-art Sarmat missiles. Sarmat has the capacity to elude anti-missile defense systems. It travels at five times the speed of sound, weighs more than 200 tonnes and each one has multiple breakaway warheads.

The West has nothing like it.

So, what would the outcome be?

Well, each major US city would be targeted with multiple ICBMs, each big enough to destroy it. Most of the US would be carpeted with other ICBMs. The US would be destroyed within a few hours. An estimated 90 million people would be killed initially.

Those at ground zero would be vapourised. Those on the periphery of a bomb could escape if they were to get to concrete shelter very quickly. They would then need to remain sealed up for weeks, if not longer, until the majority of fallout had settled. It would be a gamble as to when exiting the building would be safe.

The northern border of the US would be destroyed, taking in Canadian border cities, such as Vancouver and Toronto. The southern border, with Mexico, would also go.

Next would be the movement of fallout.

As the video shows, those who live in or near a direct target would have no hope, but as can be seen, there are locations outside the US that are not targeted at all. Those locations that have no strategic advantage would not be targeted. So, if you were located in, say, Jamaica, you would not be hit, but, just as importantly, the Caribbean weather system – the trade winds – would carry any northern fallout away from you, as would the Gulf Stream.

Better still, the world is separated at the Equator by two weather systems that do not mix. Fallout in the north will be unlikely to travel to the south.

If you’re located in South America, there are very few likely targets. It’s unknown whether, say, Rio de Janeiro or Buenos Aires would be targets, but if not, South America may be the best place to be in the Western Hemisphere.

If anything, Europe and the Middle East would fare worse than North America.

Finally, there is the question of nuclear winter. No one can know whether this would last months or years and whether it would be localized or global.

Nuclear war is not a certainly, yet the West has been dangerously rattling sabres as though they are invincible and only others can be destroyed. This is quite false.

We cannot be certain that nuclear war will be undertaken, but if so, it will be quick. There will be no time to create an escape plan. You must already be in a location that you deem to be as safe as possible.

Editor’s Note: The US government is overextending itself by interfering in every corner of the globe. It’s all financed by massive amounts of money printing. However, the next financial crisis could end the whole charade soon.

The truth is, we’re on the cusp of a global economic crisis that could eclipse anything we’ve seen before. That’s exactly why New York Times best-selling author Doug Casey and his team just released a guide that explains what could come next and what you can do about it.

Click here to download the PDF now.

*

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.

Featured image: The world’s first nuclear explosion – the U.S. ‘Trinity’ atomic test in New Mexico, July 16, 1945. If a nuclear war breaks out today, the devastation caused by modern nuclear weapons would make Trinity’s power look small by comparison. Most life on Earth would likely be wiped out. | U.S. Department of Energy


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

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

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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 all history, there is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare. – Sun Tzu, ‘The Art of War’ 

The Four New Regions of the Russian Federation

During the signing ceremony on the accession to the Russian Federation of the four new regions on September 30th president Vladimir Putin declared that a ‘revolutionary transformation of the world’ is underway and stated that there will be ‘no return to the old order’. As expected, his oration was largely ignored or distored by Western mainstream media:

“Our compatriots, our brothers and sisters in Ukraine who are part of our united people have seen with their own eyes what the ruling class of the so-called West have prepared for humanity as a whole. They have dropped their masks and shown what they are really made of.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, the West decided that the world and all of us would permanently accede to its dictates. In 1991, the West thought that Russia would never rise after such shocks and would fall to pieces on its own. This had almost happened. We remember the horrible 1990s, hungry, cold and hopeless. But Russia remained standing, revived, grew stronger and occupied its rightful place in the world.”

Signing ceremony for the accession of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and the Zaporozhye and Kherson Regions at the Grand Kremlin Palace’s St George Hall

“Meanwhile, the West continued to look for another chance to strike a blow at us, to weaken and break up Russia… to set our peoples against each other and to condemn them to poverty and extinction. They cannot rest easy knowing that there is such a great country with this huge territory and its natural wealth, resources and people who cannot and will not do someone else’s bidding.

Western countries have been saying for centuries that they bring freedom and democracy to other nations. Nothing could be further from the truth. Instead of bringing democracy they suppressed and exploited, and instead of giving freedom they enslaved and oppressed. The unipolar world is inherently anti-democratic and unfree; it is false and hypocritical through and through.

Do we want to have in Russia, ‘Parent number one, parent number two and Parent number three’ instead of Mother and Father? Do we want our schools to impose on our children perversions that lead to degradation and extinction? Do we want to drum into their heads the idea that other genders exist besides Female and Male, and to offer them gender reassignment surgery? This is all unacceptable to us. We have a different future of our own.

Let me repeat that the dictatorship of the Western elites targets all societies, including the citizens of Western countries themselves. This is a challenge for us all. This complete renunciation of what it means to be human, the overthrow of faith and traditional values, and the suppression of freedom are coming to resemble the reverse of religion – pure Satanism. Exposing false messiahs, Jesus Christ preached in the Sermon on the Mount: “By their fruit ye shall know them.” These poisonous fruits are already obvious to people, and not only in our country but in all countries, including many people in the West itself.

The world has entered a period of a fundamental, revolutionary transformation. New centers of power are emerging. They represent the majority of the international community. They are ready not only to declare their interests but also to protect them. They see in multipolarity an opportunity to strengthen their sovereignty, which means gaining genuine freedom, historical prospects, and the right to their own independent, creative and distinctive forms of development, to a harmonious process.

There are many like-minded people in Europe and the United States, and we feel and see their support. An essentially emancipatory, anti-colonial movement against unipolar hegemony is taking shape in the most diverse countries and societies. Its power will only grow with time. It is this force that will determine our future geopolitical reality.“

“The destruction of the Western hegemony is irreversible,“ Putin concluded.

JFK’s Forgotten ‘Peace For All Time Speech’

President John F. Kennedy, under the influence of the Cuban Missile Crisis when the world was brought to the brink of annihilation, made an equally momentous speech at the American University on June 10, 1963:

“I have chosen this time and place to discuss a topic on which ignorance too often abounds and the truth is too rarely perceived – yet it is the most important topic on earth: world peace.

What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave.

I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children – not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women – not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.”

“I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age when great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an age when a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.

Today the expenditure of billions of dollars every year on weapons acquired for the purpose of making sure we never need to use them is essential to keeping the peace. But surely the acquisition of such idle stockpiles – which can only destroy and never create – is not the only, much less the most efficient, means of assuring peace.

…wherever we are, we must all, in our daily lives, live up to the age-old faith that peace and freedom walk together. In too many of our cities today, the peace is not secure because the freedom is incomplete. It is the responsibility of the executive branch at all levels of government – local, State, and National – to provide and protect that freedom for all of our citizens by all means within their authority…

All this is not unrelated to world peace. ‘When a man’s ways please the Lord,’ the Scriptures tell us, ‘he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.’ And is not peace… basically a matter of human rights – the right to live out our lives without fear of devastation…?

The United States, as the world knows, will never start a war. We do not want a war. We do not now expect a war. This generation of Americans has already had enough – more than enough – of war and hate and oppression. We shall be prepared if others wish it. We shall be alert to try to stop it. But we shall also do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just. We are not helpless before that task or hopeless of its success. Confident and unafraid, we labor on – not toward a strategy of annihilation but toward a strategy of peace.”

“Man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life.” – JFK in his 1961 Inaugural Address

Rise and Fall of a Hegemon

Kennedy’s speech was quickly relegated to the memory hole after his assassination only five months later with his successor Lyndon B. Johnson quickly ramping up the war in Vietnam, chosing to ignore painful French colonial lessons there a decade earlier as well as president Charles de Gaulle’s warning that “…you will sink step by step into a bottomless military and political quagmire”. LBJ forged full steam ahead, using a false flag attack in the Gulf of Tonkin in August 1964 to commit a half a million U.S. troops to the jungles of Indochina.

An alleged North Vietnamese attack on the USS Madoxx was used as an excuse to ramp up the Vietnam war which ended up costing 58,220 American and over two million Vietnamese, Laotian and Cambodian lives

Even though it was done under the banner of ‘defending democracy and freedom’, it nevertheless gave the lie to JFK’s assertion that the United States would never start a war.

Shock and Awe on full display in Baghdad, March 2003 at the start of the war to rid the world of Saddam’s non-existent WMD’s; when the kinetic phase of a war is completed it is replaced by an economic shock and awe, when the target country’s economy is plundered

Former Austrian foreign minister Karin Kneissl concurs with Putin’s portrayal of the West’s exploitative colonial mindset:

“The era of the ‘Seven Sisters,’ a cartel of oil companies that divided up the oil market, came to an end (in the 1970’s). However, for US policymakers – at least, psychologically – this era still persists. ‘It’s our oil,’ is an expression I often hear uttered in Washington. Those voices were particularly loud during the illegal US-led 2003 invasion of Iraq. To really understand the core of the conflict in Ukraine – where a proxy war rages – one must break down the confrontation thus: The US and its European allies, who represent and back the global financial sector, are essentially engaged in a battle against the world’s energy sector. “ Kneissl wrote for the The Cradle on October 13th.

Political Studies professor Radhika Desai lectures in the same vein:

“The conflict that the West calls Russia’s invasion of Ukraine… is not a conflict between Ukraine and Russia; it is a phase in the hybrid war that the West has been waging for decades against any country that chooses an economic path other than subordination to the United States. In its current phase, this war takes the form of a US-led NATO war over Ukraine. In this war, Ukraine is the terrain, and a pawn – one that can be sacrificed. This fact is hidden by wall-to-wall Western propaganda portraying Russian President Vladimir Putin as either mad or a devil hell-bent on recreating the Soviet Union. This pre-empts any questions about why Putin might be doing this, about the rationale for Russian actions.

The United States, having sought without success to dominate the world, wages this war to stall its historic decline, the loss of what remains of its power. This decline has accelerated in recent decades as neoliberalism turned its capitalist economic system unproductive, financialised, predatory, speculative, and ecologically destructive, massively diminishing Washington’s already dubious attractions to its allies around the world.“

With an annual budget approaching a trillion dollars, the U.S. military is far removed from its Hollywood image of a ‘mean, lean fighting machine‘, and has turned into a bloated dinosaur mired in monumental corruption. This was confirmed by no less an auhority than the former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld who, on September 10, 2001, revealed that Pentagon auditors found that 25% of the military budget could not be accounted for, and that $2.3 trillion were missing.

The very next day, however, the war on waste was overtaken by the ‘war on terror’ and everything was forgiven and forgotten. Business continued as usual.

The current decrepit state of the U.S. military is aply reflected in its dismal recruitment figures, with the army announcing on October 1st that – despite offering sign-up bonuses of up to $50,000 – it had still managed to miss its enlistment target by 25%.

The most likely causes: one in three Americans are overweight or otherwise unfit, the Covid ‘vaccine’ mandates, and lastly, Pentagon’s advocacy of LGBTQ/transgender ideology which has become the centerpiece of Biden regime’s ‘numerous accomplishments’ but which a priori eliminates potential conservative and religious-minded candidates who usually form the backbone of the military.

After obligatory inoculations recruits must undergo doctrinal inculcation emphasizing ‘equity and minority rights’ prior to being unleashed to sow death and destruction in defense of human rights around the globe

The New Normal: ‘Drag Queens’ are now in charge of teaching biology to kids, including that 72 genders exist – according to polls, a third of Generation Z consider themselves ‘gender fluid’ – which is what Putin was referring to in his speech

Winner Takes All

Ukraine’s Blitzkrieg Means That Russia Cannot Win The War,” runs a typical headline used by the mainstream media as it downplays Russia’s strategic success and amplifies the tactical setbacks in order to make it look like the war is turning into a quagmire for Putin.

This is something which geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar takes issue with:

“ … in only 7 months, Russia annexed 120,000 km2 – or 22% of Ukrainian territory – that produces nearly 90% of GDP and has over 5 million citizens. Along the way, the allied forces basically destroyed the Ukrainian army, which they continue to do 24/7; billions of dollars of NATO equipment; accelerated the demise of most Western economies; and evaporated the notion of American hegemony…”

The U.S. military has shown itself incapable of beating a ragtag Taliban force in Afghanistan and does not stand a chance against Russia, as the military expert Scott Ritter confirmed in 2017:

“NATO would be totally outmatched in a conventional war with Russia… Today, NATO and American anti-armor weapons continue to play catch up to new innovations being fielded by the Russians. The Americans like to quantify the Russian Army as being ‘near peer’ in terms of its capabilities; the fact of the matter is that it is the U.S. and NATO armored forces that are ‘near peer’ to their Russian counterparts, and there are many more Russian tanks in Europe today than there are NATO and American.”

Instead of Russia running out of missiles and ammunition as is often claimed, it is the U.S. and NATO which have emptied out their warehouses and run out of weapons, as reported by CNBC:

“In the U.S. weapons industry, the normal production level for artillery rounds for the 155mm howitzer – a long-range heavy artillery weapon currently used on the battlefields of Ukraine – is about 30,000 rounds per year in peacetime. The Ukrainian soldiers… go through that amount in roughly two weeks.”

Pentagon is now looking for U.S. companies to build more shells, while new HIMARS systems promised to Ukraine won’t arrive for years.

The painful truth for NATO is that the decades-long offshoring of manufacturing to low-wage countries has left it with insufficient industrial capacity required to wage a protracted war against a ‘near-peer’ adversary.

All this is ignored by the Western media which, through sensationalistic headlines like “In Washington, Putin’s Nuclear Threats Stir Growing Alarm” and “Putin Prepared to Use Nuclear Weapons”, is creating the illusion that Russia is losing badly and will resort to anything to turn things around.

Former CIA director and retired general David Petraeus was thus interviewed by ABC News on October 2nd and stated how Russia is “desperate after a string of setbacks” and then promised that if it used nuclear weapons, the US would destroy the Russian military in Ukraine and sink its naval fleet.

What Petraeus – better known for having lost both ‘surges’ in Iraq and Afghanistan – fails to mention is that the U.S. is the one nuclear superpower with a first strike policy which is defined as an “…attack on an enemy’s nuclear arsenal that effectively prevents retaliation against the attacker. A successful first strike would cripple enemy missiles that are ready to launch and prevent the opponent from readying others for a counterstrike by targeting the enemy’s nuclear stockpiles and launch facilities.”

Under this policy,

“The U.S. president has the auhority, without consulting anyone, to order a pre-emptive nuclear strike – not merely in retaliation… Our warheads could be launched in defense of allies, after the onset of a conventional war involving our troops… or in response to a bellicose threat posed by a nuclear state.”

On the other hand, Russia’s Basic Principles doctrine does not allow for unprovoked use of  nuclear weapons – tactical or strategic. In any case, Russia has absolutely no need to resort to tactical nukes as it possesses the most powerful conventional weapon in existence, nicknamed FOAB – Father of All Bombs – a thermobaric bomb with a blast yield of 44 tons TNT; more importantly, these weapons do not emit any radiation, as nuclear fallout would pose both an immediate and lingering threat to their troops as well as to local civilians – most of whom are expected to one day become loyal Russian citizens.

FOAB dropped from a Tu-160 bomber at the Opuk training range, Black Sea in 2016; this ordnance is designed to vaporize targets and collapse structures by igniting a fuel-air mixture in midair

 

Some 150 U.S. B61 nuclear bombs are located in six air bases throughout Europe

Warning from an American in Novorussia 

American Russel ‘Tex’ Bentley, who has been living in the Donbass for the past eight years, posted this warning on his Telegram channel – October 2, 2022:

Look – here is the most important thing about Liman – coming on the heels of the Bucha and Kharkov retreats and the disgraceful prisoner swap, it makes it look like Russia is losing. And that is a strategic fuckup. Because if Russia only looks like it’s losing, the US Nazis can and will detonate a tactical nuke on Ukrop soil and blame it on Russia, saying “The Rusians had to use nukes because they were losing.” And all the idiots in the world will believe it.

Then, US/NATO say “And now we have to respond in kind (with nukes) and they vaporize all 500,000 new Russian troops before they even get deployed. And of course, the “Russian decision making HQ in Ukraine” also gets nuked – my hometown, Donetsk.

The tactical nukes are already in Ukraine. The USA using a nuke false flag is absolutely not just possible but probable to the point of inevitability. They have the means, motive and opportunity, and a long history of false flags. In fact, it would be stupid to think they wouldn’t. And if Russia looks like it’s losing the conventional war, it makes the USA false flag more credible and more inevitable.

And then Russia nukes USA Navy ships in the Black Sea and Med, then USA bases in Germany and Poland, the US/NATO hits Sevastopol, Kaliningrad and Rostov. Then Russia hits Washington and USA hits Moscow, and it’s all over but the screaming and the crying for all of us.

And this is what is going to happen if Russia does not regain the military initiative and start winning the conventional war (if it still can) in the next couple of weeks.

As goes Donbass, so goes the world. And only an idiot cannot understand this. You have been warned. Again.

Artist Marina Abramovich and Jacob Rotschild posing in front of a painting titled ‘Satan Summoning His Legions’ by Thomas Lawrence at the Royal Academy of Arts; Lord Rotschild & Co. control most of the planet’s assets

High Noon for NATO, Midnight for Humanity?

NATO has on October 17th launched ‘Steadfast Noon’,  its annual nuclear drills set to last until October 30th which is taking place 600 miles from the Russian border with “14 countries and air forces from across NATO to exercise nuclear deterrence capabilities involving dozens of aircraft, including fourth and fifth generation fighter jets as well as surveillance and tanker aircraft,” as per the NATO press release.

As luck would have it, ‘Steadfast Noon’ will likely coincide with Moscow’s own annual nuclear drills dubbed ‘Grom’, when Russia tests its nuclear-capable bombers, submarines and missiles.

This is a Do-or-Die moment for the western hegemon which is not willing – or rather, cannot – back down under any circumstances. Conscious of its inability to win a conventional war against Russia, it will resort to any measure in order to win, even if it means setting the world ablaze.

The U.S. has managed to convince itself that it can emerge victorious from a pre-emptive nuclear war, but cannot afford be seen as the aggressor in the eyes of the global community; a ‘False Flag’ event is therefore set to be staged in Ukraine using a low-yield device for which Russia would quickly be blamed, triggering an immediate NATO response. As inadvertently confirmed by Ukrainian president Zelensky while addressing the Australian Lowy Institute on October 6th, the scheme involves a ‘decapitation strike’ on Moscow against Putin and his Cabinet, after which the rest of the regime would collapse like a house of cards.

Assuredly, if this suicidal policy is ever applied outside a computer simulation, the world would have to concur with Mr. Putin’s assertion that the collective west is being run by satanists.

Sadly, that realization will have come too late to save humanity.

2017 Deagel.com forecast in which the U.S. is projected to lose two-thirds of its population by 2025; Deagel is a branch of the US military intelligence, preparing briefs for agencies such as the NSA, NATO, UN, and the World Bank. This forecast has been purged after the founder Edwin Deagel passed away in 2021

“There are decades where nothing happens; and then there are weeks where decades happen.” – Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

*

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.

Featured image is from Pax Christi


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

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

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

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

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

Reviews

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

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

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

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

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.

***

Why would anyone be opposed to water fluoridation? Doesn’t fluoride occur in the water naturally anyway?

The fluoride products used in water fluoridation (sodium fluoride or fluorosilicic acid) are classified as hazardous waste products of the fertilizer, aluminum, and nuclear industries. They are even more toxic than naturally-occurring fluoride, since they contain other components, such as arsenic, lead, barium, and/or aluminum. See this.

However, even naturally-occurring fluoride, in areas with high concentrations (over 1 ppm) has been found to have extremely adverse health effects. Even before additional fluoride is added, the level of natural fluoride in the water in many areas in the U.S. is already equal to the amount of naturally-occurring fluoride that has been found to cause skeletal fluorosis in other countries.

Studies done in India and China found skeletal fluorosis in areas containing naturally occurring fluoride as low as .7 ppm. (Gupta et al 2007, Skeletal fluorosis mimicking seronegative arthritis. Scandanavian Journal of Rheumatology 36(2):154–5.) That same amount, .7 pmm is the current amount recommended by the CDC to be added to community water supplies.

In addition to the natural fluoride in groundwater, most people are exposed to multiple sources of fluoride (pesticides in wine and food, tea, some ceramics, anti-depressants, antibiotics, pollution from manufacturing, soft drinks, Teflon pans, waterproof items, dental gels, mouthwash,  toothpaste etc.). They presumably are being exposed to well over the equivalent of 1 ppm before any fluoride is added to the water, however no industry or government testing has ever been done to find out how much fluoride the public is absorbing from all sources. This massive exposure to fluoride did not exist in the 1950’s, when fluoride was first introduced.

Don’t all advanced countries fluoridate their water? And hasn’t it been proven that countries that do fluoridate their water have better dental health than countries that don’t?

No. Fluoridation has been almost completely abolished in Europe. You can read statements from government officials in those countries about why they don’t add fluoridation chemicals to water here.

Statistics gathered by the World Health Organization do not show any difference in rates of dental caries in fluoridated vs. non fluoridated countries. (WHO Collaborating Center for Education, Training, and Research in Oral Health, Malmo Univ., Sweden, 2012.) Where fluoridation has been discontinued in communities like Canada, the former East Germany, Cuba and Finland, dental decay has not increased but rather has continued to decrease (Maupomé 2001; Kunzel & Fischer, 1997; Kunzel 2000; Seppa 2000).

In the U.S., the state of Kentucky, which has been fluoridating the longest, and has achieved almost complete fluoridation of its water supply, has the worst dental health of any state in the country. From an article appearing in the Lexington Herald Leader (10/14/09): “Governor Beshear said Kentucky led the nation in 2004 in terms of the number of people age 65 or older who had lost teeth. About 27 percent of Kentuckians of all ages had lost six or more teeth to decay or gum disease, compared with 18 percent in the rest of the nation.”

Yet, ‘In 2004, 99.6% of Kentucky’s public water systems were providing fluoridated water to their customers. This ranked Kentucky first among all states.” (Kentucky Epidemiologic Notes and Reports, Vol. 40. №8, Dept. of Public Health.)

Similar results were reported in Texas: “After 9 years and $3 million of adding fluoride, research shows tooth decay hasn’t dropped among the poorest of Bexar County’s children, it has only increased — up 13 percent this year.” (Conger J., 2011, San Antonio: Added to our drinking water: a chemical ‘more toxic than lead? ’KENS 5 News.)

A study of children in Canada comparing fluoridated vs. non-fluoridated communities showed dental caries decreased in non-fluoridated areas, stayed the same in fluoridated communities. See this.

Levels of tooth decay continued to decrease after Cuba ended fluoridation, see this.

These studies found no increase in tooth decay after fluoride was discontinued: NatureBritish Medical Journal

In all countries listed in the links below, as in the U.S., dental disease continued to decline, whether or not the countries were fluoridated. These non-fluoridated countries had rates of dental problems lower than the U.S.—The Netherlands, the UK (10% of the country is fluoridated), Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland. These non-fluoridated countries had rates that were about the same as the US—Italy, Finland, Iceland, France. See this and this.

For the best article analyzing the research on fluoridation worldwide, see the article by John Colquhoun, DDS, Phd (former Chief Dental Officer of Auckland, NZ): Why I changed my mind about water fluoridation (Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 41 29–44 1997, University of Chicago Press). Colquhoun studied the effects of fluoridation around the world, with the intention of proving how beneficial it was, but discovered, to his astonishment, that people in countries using fluoridation had the worst teeth. He then began crusading to put an end to the practice. See this.

Since 2010, over 240 communities in North America have abolished (or voted to prevent) the practice of fluoridation.  (See www.fluoridealert.org for a constantly updated list).

Where did the idea of fluoridating the water come from?

Industrialists in the aluminum and nuclear industries were under fire because of the harmful effects of the fluoride waste products being emitted from their plants — animals and people were being sickened for miles around. See this.

They hired Edward Bernays, who was the inventor of mass public relations campaigns (Bernays also happened to be the nephew of Sigmund Freud) to convince the American people that putting toxic waste in our water supply was good for us.

Bernays had organized a successful campaign, on behalf of Lucky Strike cigarettes, to convince American women that smoking was both glamorous and liberating. He hired models to pose as debutantes in a march for women’s rights. When Bernays gave the signal, all the women lit up their cigarettes. Another successful propaganda campaign that he orchestrated was the overthrow of a democratically-elected government in Guatemala on behalf of United Fruit. The Nazis studied and made use of Bernays’ techniques for their propaganda programs. (A more in-depth discussion of Bernays’ role in the campaign to convince the public to accept fluoridation can be found in the video “The Fluoride Deception” at youtube.com, and the book with the same name by Christopher Bryson, Seven Stories Press).

For information describing the origin of water fluoridation as a way of disposing of industrial waste, see this.

OK, so maybe fluoridation hasn’t been proven to be effective in improving dental health, and its origins are sketchy, but what harm can it do to add it to our water supply?

First there is the cost factor. At a time when there is not enough money for schools, dental treatment for kids, support for the homeless and other basic community services, counties are spending millions of dollars to fluoridate the water. Even worse, fluoridation has been associated with increased rates of bone cancer, cardiac problems, diabetes, immune disorders, damage to the thyroid, increased bone fractures, hyperactivity, neurotoxicity, and decreased IQ:

Study showing higher rates of bone cancer in male children exposed to higher levels of fluoride, see this.

Study showing higher rate of bone fractures in women living in high fluoride areas compared to low fluoride areas. See this.

Study showing increased hyperactivity in children in fluoridated vs. non-fluoridated areas: see this.

Harvard meta-study showing significantly lower IQ in children living in high fluoride areas as opposed to low fluoride areas in China.

NIH/EPA study finding significantly lower IQ in children of mothers exposed to higher levels of fluoride.

Survey of scientific literature indicated a causal connection between fluoridation and bone damage (fluorosis, bone cancer, skeletal fluorosis). See this.

UK study which found the rate of hypothyroidism was double the rate in a fluoridated city as compared to  non-fluoridated city. See this.

Study finding patients with kidney problems cannot properly excrete fluoride. See this.

This comprehensive review of the medical literature (including documentation) indicates a long list of harmful health effects of fluoride and discussion of ethical concerns regarding its use. See this.

In 2016, a number of health, consumer, and environmental organizations (including Fluoride Action Network and Food and Water Watch) petitioned the EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act, to eliminate fluoridation in drinking water due its neurotoxic effects at the level currently designated as safe by the U.S. government.  The petition identified 76 (out of a total of 85) human studies that found an association between cognitive decline and higher levels of fluoride in the water supply.

After the EPA rejected their petition, the groups sued the EPA in federal court in 2017.  A seven day trial was held in 2020, but the court has yet to issue a decision, as of Oct. 2022.  The next hearing on the case, after much re-scheduling, is scheduled for Oct. 26, 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.  You can find a list of all the studies showing neurotoxic effects, and the groups’ arguments—that adding fluoridation chemicals to our water must be discontinued—here.

While adding hazardous waste to our water is not beneficial to anyone, it is particularly harmful to people with kidney disease (who can’t excrete it properly), infants (when mixed with formula it far exceeds the safe amount of fluoride), farmworkers (already exposed to fluoride in pesticides), tea drinkers, people taking anti-depressants, people with low thyroid, industrial workers who are exposed to high levels of fluoride at work, and those who have chemical sensitivities. Also adversely affected are people who drink lots of water such as diabetics, athletes, and manual laborers.  The Environmental Working Group has gone on record as opposing fluoridation as unsafe for many population groups. See this.

In addition to the previously listed ailments, fluoride in the water supply can cause a disfiguring condition called fluorosis or mottling of the teeth. Because black and Hispanic children are more susceptible to fluorosis, some civil rights organizations and leaders have come out against the practice.

On July 1, 2011, The League of Latin American Citizens, the largest Hispanic organization in the U.S. passed a resolution strongly opposing the practice of fluoridating water supplies, in part because of the disproportionate harmful effects on Hispanic members of the community. See this.

Numerous studies, including a national survey by the CDC, have found that black children suffer significantly higher rates of dental fluorosis than white children. (Martinez-Mier 2010; Beltran-Aguilar 2005; Kumar 2000, 1999; Williams 1990; Butler 1985; Russell 1962).

Not only do black children suffer higher rates of fluorosis, they suffer the most severe forms of the condition, which are marked by dark brown staining and deterioration of the enamel. Black civil rights leaders in Georgia campaigned against water fluoridation due its harmful effects on black children. (See Letter from Andrew Young to Chip Rogers, Senate Majority Leader, Georgia State Capitol, March 29, 2011.)

The Journal of the American Dental Association noted increased detrimental effects of fluoridation on low-income and/or malnourished children. See this.

Shouldn’t we leave it to the experts? Don’t they support water fluoridation?

Experts in many countries around the world concluded that the practice is harmful and supported its elimination. When the top water toxicologist in the Environmental Protection Agency, William Marcus, disclosed that the reports showing the safety of fluoridation had been doctored to hide its harmful effects, he was immediately fired. A judge later ordered him to be reinstated, since there was no basis for the firing other than his refusal to hide the facts.

Marcus’ union, which represents 1500 scientists and professionals who work for the EPA, came out with a strong position against fluoride as well, as have numerous other leading scientific, medical, judicial, and government experts. The story of William Marcus’ firing from, and re-instatement to, the EPA is documented in the movie “Fluoridegate,” which includes video interviews with him (available on youtube).

In Sept. 2017, an NIH/EPA 12-year study was released which validated the findings of previous human studies concerning the effects of fluoridation on children’s IQ.  This study found that when the exposure was prenatal, even very low doses of fluoride (e.g. that found in “optimally fluoridated communities”) resulted in lowered IQ.  (Bashash et al 2017).

Although dentists have been slow to keep up with the research on harmful effects of fluoridation, in 2017 the US-based International Association of Oral Medicine and Toxicology came out with a position opposing water fluoridation, with included 500 citations.  Their position paper has quotes from a long list of experts which discuss the dangers of fluoridation.  https://files.iaomt.org/wp-content/uploads/Fluoride-Position-Paper-Slideshow-Summary.pdf

It’s not like fluoride is actually poisonous is it?

The FDA requires a warning on all tubes of fluoride toothpaste — to immediately call Poison Control — in the event even a small amount of FL is swallowed. Fluoride is one of the main poisonous ingredients in Sarin nerve gas. See this.

According to the Material Safety Data Sheet for Mallinkrodt Chemicals, sodium fluoride is classified under “extreme danger,” and can be fatal if ingested.

Bizarrely, bottled “Nursery Water” for babies, which was being sold in grocery stores everywhere, has sodium fluoride added. Even the proponents of fluoridation acknowledge that it is toxic to give babies infant formula that has been mixed with fluoridated water.  See, for example, the Journal of American Dental Association recommendation to not use fluoridated water for infants receiving formula. See this.

The state of New Hampshire is unusual in that it specifically requires warnings about mixing fluoridated water with infant formula to be included in every water department statement sent to customers. In the unlikely event that all mothers nationwide were to be educated about the danger of giving fluoridated tap water mixed with formula to their babies, and they were able to afford buying cases of bottled water, this would add greatly to environmental pollution as a result of all the plastic being discarded in the landfill.

Until fluoridation of the water supply was introduced, the main use for fluoride was as a rat poison.

What was the “Halloween Death Smog Disaster”?

During the Halloween weekend in 1948, twenty people in and around Donora, PA died, and an estimated 6,000 were sickened, as a result of an accidental release of fumes from the Donora Zinc works. As Christopher Bryson describes in his book “The Fluoride Deception,” independent scientists who investigated concluded that fluoride emissions were the cause of the deaths. An almost identical industrial accident occurred in the Meuse Valley in Belgium, where 63 people died after a high release of fluoride emissions.

A Public Health Service report — heavily influenced by industry and cold war government leaders, who required the products of fluoride-producing industrial and nuclear plants — concluded that the deaths in Donora had been caused by the weather. The families of the dead were compensated less than $3000 each by U.S. Steel, the owner of the zinc plant, which did not admit any responsibility for the injuries and fatalities.

The head of the Public Health Service, Oscar Ewing, was a former lawyer for Alcoa Aluminum, an industry that would greatly profit as a result of selling its toxic waste for purposes of community fluoridation. It was he who wrote the introduction to the PHS report on Donora that attributed the deaths to weather conditions. Ewing announced nine months after the deadly disaster that the Public Health Service was reversing a long-held position and now was supporting adding fluoride to drinking water across the U.S.

*

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 Dissident Voice.

Jenny Miller is an activist and writer who lives in Northern CA. She has worked as a lobbyist, patient advocate, legislative assistant, editor, and dog walker.

Featured image is from EWG

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on What Was the Halloween Death Smog Disaster? And Other Questions Related to the Fluoridation Chemicals That Are Added to U.S. Water Supplies
  • Tags: , ,

“Humanitarian Interventions” and the 1994 Rwandan Genocide

October 20th, 2022 by Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović

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.

***

By 1995 it had become clear that the (Western) international community’s experiment with multilateralism was under serious threat and, in fact, it failed in many cases like Rwanda, ex-Yugoslavia, Cyprus, etc. Nevertheless, continuing problems in different parts of the globe have meant that the OUN has had to remain committed to alleviating some of the worst atrocities. Nonetheless, before the US/UK military intervention in Afghanistan in 2001, there was a growing belief that there were too few humanitarian interventions. However, the failure to prevent atrocities in Rwanda and ex-Yugoslavia served as a stain on the conscience of many in the international community – since then there has been the perception that there have been too many humanitarian interventions because of the controversial wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq were justified at least in part on humanitarian grounds.  

Simultaneously with the ongoing Rwandan genocide in 1994, the Tutsi RPF (Rwandan Patriotic Front) invaded Rwanda from Uganda and Burundi, occupied the capital Kigali, set up a new Government, and then chased the Hutu militias out of Rwanda. On assuming power in Rwanda, the RPF, led by the Tutsi Paul Kagame, intensified a program of widespread retribution killings of Hutu. Nevertheless, the Hutus have been in any case so terrified of what the Tutsi would do to them that they fled in the millions to neighboring Tanzania, Uganda, and particularly Zaire.

It is estimated that some up to 1.5 million Hutu civilians, plus the more or less intact civilian Government and army structure, including many of the most radical organizers of the Rwandan genocide, fled to East Zaire taking refuge status while as many as a million Hutus did the same in Tanzania. However, the refugee camps in Zaire soon have been turned into the centers of Hutu governance and anti-Tutsi political ambitions. Nevertheless, the horrors of the Tutsi-Hutu Rwandan civil war have continued for many years in East Zaire/Congo, complicated by underdevelopment, the lure of mineral wealth, territorial ambitions of the Rwandan Government, and the ineffectiveness of both Congolese authorities and the international community.

The Western international and external factors created chaos in Africa after the end of the Cold War 1.0 without seeing that, in many cases, African people must be held accountable for their lives on the continent. Whether it is genocide, enslavement, abuse of women, or political corruption, not only Africans but the international community in general and the Great Powers, in particular, must be in a position to prevent the crime like in Rwanda in 1994. The Rwandan genocide stands out as historically significant not only because of the huge number of killed civilians who were exterminated during only of hundred days but as well as because of the way both America and Europe responded to the atrocities. Despite the intelligence provided before the genocide started, and international news media coverage reflecting the true scale of violence as the genocide unfolded, unfortunately, all Western Governments refused to intervene. The OUN itself refused to allow its peacekeeping operation in Rwanda, under Canadian General Roméo Dallaire, to take positive and useful action to stop the killing. Further, there were bitter recriminations and enough blame to go around in the world for allowing the murders to continue.

Later, US President Bill Clinton went to Rwanda and apologized for the inaction of the US authorities during the genocide calling the failure to intervene in Rwanda the greatest regret of his presidency (the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999 was probably for him his greatest success being in office). Following the Rwandan genocide and once the Tutsi RPF had gained control of most of the country, the French established a “safe zone” for Hutu refugees to flee to (Operation Turquoise).

Only by mid-July, over a million Hutus had fled to squalid camps in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (at that time Zaire). There, Hutu militias took control of the camps and launched attacks into Rwanda, and, therefore making it impossible for civilians (refugees) to return home. In the autumn of 1996, Tutsi-led Rwandan armed forces invaded several camps, forcing Hutu refugees either home or deeper into the Democratic Republic of the Congo and routing the Hutu militias that fled further westward into jungles. Consequently, the Hutu-Tutsi civil war became linked to politics in Zaire, which had been disintegrating politically and economically since the early 1990s and where dissatisfaction with long-time dictator Mobutu Sese Seko had grown.

Tutsi-related ethnic groups in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Zaire), aided by the Rwandan Government, clashed with elements of Zaire’s army that tried to force them out of the country. By late October 1996, anti-Mobutu forces had formed under the command of Mobutu’s long-time foe, Laurent-Désiré Kabila whose rebels, aided by several African states and the USA, all angered by Mobutu’s support of rebels in their countries, started to move against him.

All of them have been seeking influence in Zaire with the intention to share Zaire’s natural resources, especially diamonds, timber, and tantalum – a metal that is vital in making cell (mobile) phones. East Zaire fell into rebel hands quickly. The Government of Zaire in the capital Kinshasa, long unable to exercise authority over both its own forces and the country’s huge hinterland, became no longer able to exercise sovereignty. By the spring of 1997, all Zaire’s major cities had fallen to Kabila’s forces while Mobutu fled, and Kabila declared himself president. In this year, Zaire became renamed the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

However, Kabila himself soon lost popularity owing to his authoritarian rule. He alienated his Rwandan and Ugandan allies by turning against them and Congo’s Tutsis as he sought to shore up his support among the Congolese. In mid-1998, Tutsis, aided by Rwanda and Uganda, moved against Kabila in a reply to what had happened two years earlier. Kabila, in turn, was aided by Angola, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Chad, and Sudan. Therefore, the initial conflict in which Rwandan militias of both Hutus and Tutsis had a significant impact had become a genuinely transnational war in which between 1998 and 2008, about seven million people died. Consequently, state failure has had tragic consequences, giving rise to bloody violence against civilians in front of the eyes of the (Western) international community which did simply nothing to stop the violence and mass killings of the civilians.

*

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.

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.

Russia’s Romance with Africa After Soviet Collapse

October 20th, 2022 by Prof. Abdullahi Shehu

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 collapse of the Soviet Union and the decades of the 90s seemed to have reversed the gains made in Africa-Soviet Relations and by extension, in Africa-Russia relations. Understandably, it was a period of politico-ideological downturn and harsh economic realities for Russia, the successor-nation to the Soviet Union. The speech of H. W Bush on December 25, 1991 was clear and unambiguous. He summarized the victory of the value-based American/Western model thus:  “This is a victory for democracy and freedom. It is a victory for the moral force of our values. Every American can take pride in this victory.”

Following the collapse of the USSR, a new wave of democratic change blew all over Africa. Old ideological friends of the Soviet Union changed camps in line with the changing political dynamics. Party models became transformed from single party to multiparty systems in Africa.

Interestingly, ideologues became transformed in favour of the capitalist-democratic model. The United States sub-committee on Foreign Relations in March 1998 commended Laurent Kabila of Democratic Republic of Congo, Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, Paul Kagame of Rwanda, Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia and Isaiah Afwerke of Eritrea as examples of the power of democracy in Africa. Incidentally, relations with Russia’s traditional friends and those with which it had diplomatic ties were at its lowest ebb. Many Russian missions in Africa were closed down; those unclosed were severely pruned down.

ln the case of Angola, for instance, where the USSR had made tremendous financial, material, technical and military investments, the Soviet-backed Cuban military and technical personnel were all withdrawn at short notice. Demand was made for the repayment of debts owed to Russia by African countries, including her traditional partners, at a seemingly odd time when Africa’s debt burden was unbearable. These measures facilitated a new romance between Africa and western partners the latter of which were all too eager to entrench themselves in the vacuum left behind by Soviet Union.

Old Music, New Dance

There are at least two specific commendable initiatives towards Africa designed by the government of H.E President Vladimir Putin to re-launch Russia into Africa’s geopolitical space. These initiatives, in my view, tally with the personality of H.E President Vladimir Putin who, as an agent of the former KGB (now FSB), saw the collapse of the Soviet Union as “the major geopolitical catastrophe of the century”. In this sense, a new partnership with Africa could be defined not in terms of ideology but by alternative economic and developmental options which give Africa competitive parity.

The two initiatives are: H.E President Vladimir Putin’s debt cancellation of twenty billion dollars ($20 billion) owed to Russia by African countries which, in his very own word “was not only a mark of generosity but also a manifestation of pragmatism”. In 2019, Russia held the first ever “Russia-Africa Summit” in Sochi in which it committed $12.5 billion in business deals, mainly in Arms and grains.

Analysts may be quick to interpret this as the usual trend, more in the fashion of United States-Africa, China-Africa, Japan-Africa, France-Africa summits, etc; but as observed by Landry Signé between 2005 and 2015, Africa’s trade with Russia grew by 185% a “reawakening” which commenced since 2000s.

Though this trade surge is worthy of note; the volume of trade between Russia and Africa was $14.5billion per annum in 2020. This figure however pales into insignificance when compared with China whose trade with Africa has attained the $165billion per annum during the same period and $254billion in 2021 even with its late-comer status in Africa. This is to say that the doubling of trade relations within the next five years between Africa and Russia as stated by Vladimir Putin in 2019 in Sochi is not only a vision in the right direction of growing Russia’s partnership with Africa, it is also a desirable imperative.

As argued by Emman El-Badawy in the article ‘Security, Soft Power and Regime Support: Spheres of Russian Influence in Africa,’ “two distinct, now common explanations, have emerged to explain Russia’s growing interest in Africa. The first argues that Russia is intent on rekindling old Soviet-era ties to the continent to extract resources in return for security assistance – a mutually beneficial yet opportunistic strategy that is, short term and transactional…

The alternative suggests that Putin considers Africa a so-called second frontier, after Eastern Europe for encircling Western Europe…” These reasons may sound strategic yet they remain largely speculative and conjectural. Understandably, the perceived geopolitical irrelevance of Africa by Russia has changed and new dynamics have beckoned on both sides of subsisting opportunities for increased collaboration between Africa and Russia. One clear thing therefore is that Africa-Russia relations are on the ascendancy again after the post-Soviet era of passivity and inaction.

Between 2015 and 2019, a total of 20 bilateral military cooperation agreements were signed between Russia and African states. Many Russian companies such as Lukoil, Gasprom, Rosatom and Restec are some of Russia’s energy and power industry which are actively engaged in Nigeria, Egypt, Angola, Algeria and Ethiopia. Here, it must be stressed that in 2018, “Nigerian oil and gas Exploration Company Oranto Petroleum announced that it would be cooperating with Russia’s largest oil producer, Rosneft to develop 21 oil assets across 17 African countries.”

Unfortunately, this has not materialized due to Rosneft’s lack of interest in doing business in Africa. Additionally, Russian Rosatom has signed nuclear energy agreements with 18 African countries including Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia and Rwanda to address the power needs of those countries.

In summarizing the Russian strategic policy interest in Africa and given the strong limitation of its current capability, according to Paul Stronski, one time Senior Analyst for Russian domestic politics for U.S State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research, “in many respects, Russia’s reemergence in Africa, is an earnest attempt to resume relations where they were left when the Soviet Union departed the scene.”

Continuing, Paul Stronski further argues that “the Horn of Africa represents an opportunity for Russia to secure a springboard for projecting power into the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden and the Persian Gulf. In sub-Saharan Africa, its priority is on exploiting new commercial opportunities and securing diplomatic support for its positions in multilateral institutions.”

The visible signs of Russian activities in Central African Republic, Mali, Libya and Angola lend incredulity to Stronki’s assertion judging from the concrete deliverables so far enjoyed from Africa-Russia relationships. For instance, when United States was unwilling to supply Nigeria arms in 2014 to execute the war against Boko Haram because of allegation of human rights violation, Nigeria was able to place an order for 12 attack helicopters from Russia. To my Russian friends, I say thank you. Thank you on behalf of H.E Muhammadu Buhari whom I represent. Thank you on behalf of the Nigerian people whom it is my privilege to serve in Russia.

Africa and Neo-Colonialism

Africa may have divested itself majorly from the vestiges of colonial bondage, yet the yoke of neocolonialism continues to bring new challenging shackles which erode the gains of Africa’s independence. As observed by Charles McKelvey (2017), the new struggle is characterized by “core peripheral economic relations that in essence is a continuation of the economic relations imposed by conquest and force during the colonial era… it is a rule through a figure-head bourgeoisie that inserts itself into the structures of economic penetration and exploitation benefiting itself at the expense of the majority of the people in the nation. It finds expression in economic and cultural imperialism, in conditional aid designed to exert influence or indirect control.”

Although Africa is not alone in this new malaise, its emphatic vulnerability is more reflected in Africa by the weaknesses of its institutions and the pervasive invasion of the world order that keeps it in perpetual economic subjugation to the global north. One of the famous speeches of Julius Nyerere, the former President of Tanzania on “Ujamaa” aptly captures this situation when he said that before independence, fifteen tons of our maize could buy us a car, today, we have to produce twenty-five tons of maize to buy the same brand of car.

It is in the light of the foregoing that an international trading system that guarantees equity and fairness needs to be revisited and renegotiated. In this context, I commend the shift of BRICS in its new method of doing business. This is just a beginning and not an end in the long and tortuous road to the route along which a new world order that will be based on equity, fairness and justice will go. There is no doubt that, that long road towards a desired equitable world order of which only a step has been taken by BRICS, will have series of dangerous rivers to cross in its journey to maturation. The visibility of and the potent challenge against the current world order by BRICS is indicative of the order’s waning influence and its global loss of appeal.

Understanding The Realities

Despite the tidal surge in the new Africa-Russia relations and given the strategic role played by the defunct Soviet Union, now succeeded by Russia, in the attainment of the independence of many African countries, both parties must accept the constraints posed on the former (Russia) by the new economic cum geopolitical realities. The acceptance of these new realities is important in order to properly assist in the management of Africa’s expectations from Russia particularly in the short term.

The first reality is that though Russia is the successor to the defunct Soviet Union, it is not a substitute for the latter, economically, materially, geopolitically and financially. Africa’s mindset must therefore change from that of aid-recipient nations to the one of competitive trading nations in which there must be value addition to its primary products.

Next, is that, as demonstrated in the recent sanctions imposed on Russia by the West, Africa holds a good prospect for the viability and profitability of Russian manufacturing companies desirous of relocating to Africa in order to capitalize on the advantage of cheap African labour. If the west is declaring fortunes as profits in Africa, Russian companies can also do so only if they agree and are willing to venture out. The booming young population of Africa and its vast reserve of natural and mineral resources provide the catalytic appeal for such profitable venture.

Arms Sales and African Security

A very important component in Russia-Africa relations is the supply of military equipment such as battle tanks, warships, fighter aircraft and combat helicopters. Others are small arms such as pistols and assault rifles like Kalshnikov AK-200 series. Russian soaring arms interest in Africa can briefly be summarized as follows: arms export from Russia to Africa, contributes about 35% of global arms export to the African region while China accounted for 17%. Others are United States (9.6%) and France (6.9%).

This increasing export of arms to the African continent by Russia could, however, in a sense, exacerbate insecurity and instability, as well as escalate the level of crimes and the proclivity to criminality. It is therefore in the strategic interest of Russia to critically be selective in its arms sales to African countries. Of particular worry and strategic concern to Africa is the “deployment of private Russian mercenary groups” as well as other private military groups in countries like Libya, Sudan, Mozambique and CAR. As noted by Paul Stronski, “guns have opened many more doors for the Kremlin in Africa than butter.”

Support for Africa’s democratic institutions and agencies will lead to a more stable Africa which is in Russia’s own overall long-term interest and positive image than immediate short term economic and financial gain.

Changing the Narratives

Although Russia, through the defunct Soviet Union, has had long-standing warm relations with Africa, particularly during the cold war era, today’s realities offer long-term opportunities which can be explored and exploited by both sides to advantage. An example is that with Africa’s bourgeoning young population and the increasing quality of that population through education, the exportation of Africa’s raw materials to Europe and by extension Russia is no longer a feasible and sustainable trajectory in any meaningful Africa-Russian long-term relations. As a viable alternative and sustainable option, I foresee an Africa which will demand more of Russian direct engagement in the extractive and manufacturing sectors.

Today, for instance, Nigeria offers Russia the advantage of that cheap and robust labour. Given Russia’s recent experience of sanctions by America and its western allies, a new model of doing business with Africa through investment has become, not only sustainable but also imperative. Perhaps, one of the sectors where this model of doing business can be symbiotically harnessed is in the field of agriculture and its value chain as a result of the steep rise in the large African market and the projected certainty of huge returns on investment in this sector.

Africa holds a sizeable amount of the world natural resources. However, as noted by Jideofor Adibe, “Russia – just like other major powers – also covets many of Africa’s raw materials and is creating joint projects and investments in order to access them. From the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the Central African Republic, Russian companies are scaling up their activities in the mining of resources such as coltan, cobalt, gold and diamonds.

In Zimbabwe, for instance, a joint venture between Russia’s JSC Afromet and Zimbabwe’s Pen East Ltd is developing one of the world’s largest deposits of platinum group metal”. Such example of Russia’s visibility in the collaboration and the exploitation of African natural resources can be extended to the development of vast mineral deposits in, for example, Nigeria. In this connection, contacts have been initiated with the Hon. Minister for Solid Mineral Development of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to initiate business with JSC Afromet so as to jointly explore and exploit the comparative advantage which Nigeria enjoys in its solid minerals.

Given the challenges which most African countries face in providing adequate power and energy, the number of Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) that Rosatom, Russia’s nuclear power company, has signed with at least fourteen African countries is welcoming news. What will be more significant, however, is the extent of the implementation of the MOUs since, by their very nature, the construction and operation of nuclear plants are ventures with prospects for deepening long-term relationship.

Recommendations for Future

The rapid intervention of Russian SPUTNIK V Vaccine in Africa during the severe COVID 19 period was a magnificent show of solidarity with Africa and its people and thus demonstrates the importance of such collaboration and partnership in the face of future pandemic or calamity. Nigeria, for example, remains ever prepared to collaborate with Russia to deepen scientific knowledge in the areas of research on pandemics, such as we have in COVID 19.

Although there is no doubt that Africa has benefitted immensely from its collaboration with Russia, politically, educationally, militarily, financially and security-wise, yet, much circumspection and delicate balancing needs to be done by Russia between its commercial interests of arms exports to Africa and the latter’s security concerns. Africa’s long-term sustainability, stability and development, are in the overall interest of both parties and the fulcrum of their relations. Nigeria, nevertheless, remains eternally grateful for Russia’s arms assistance whenever its sovereignty was challenged and Russia was called to come to its assistance.

Nigeria offers Russia the economic advantage of “produce in Africa and export elsewhere.” Such a model was effectively used by United States of America in China. For example, imagine how many Russian pharmaceutical companies Nigeria can cheaply and conveniently service with starch as the world largest producer of cassava, the derivative of which is starch?

Part of Africa’s inability to optimize its economic opportunities is as a result of low energy and power. The subsisting contracts signed between Russian energy and power companies such as Lukoil, Gazprom, Rosatom and Restec and Nigeria, Egypt, Angola, Algeria and Ethiopia etc to help solve the power needs in Africa are steps in the right direction. Similarly, Rosneft agreement with Nigerian oil and gas Exploration Company Oranto Petroleum to develop 21 oil assets across 17 African countries should now move beyond agreement into concrete deliverables. Furthermore, Rosatom’s nuclear energy agreements with 18 African countries, including Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia and Rwanda to address their energy and power concerns should be transformed into measurable results.

Additionally, the establishment of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), which is the largest of its kind in the world, provides Africa the unique opportunity of intra African trade and hence, empowers Africa’s own capacities and investments. In this respect, there has been increased agreement by African leaders for a common African currency so as to protect Africa from the associated shocks due to the vulnerabilities of commodity prices. Such common currency will give Africa better voice in international trade and will significantly enhance Africa-Russia trade, as well as global competitiveness for foreign investment.

Meanwhile, according to the World Bank projection, by 2050, Nigeria’s population will be about 400 million making it the third world’s largest. Such a huge market provides sufficient grounds now for strong and strategic partnership to meet the beneficial ends of Africa and Russia. A further step in this partnership could be the gravitation from BRICS to perhaps a larger partnership that includes Nigeria – BRINCS.

Africa has remained, for too long, an inconsequential pawn on the chessboard of political-power play where the wishes and aspirations of the African people hardly mattered. Like other regions of the world, Africa’s wishes and desires, expressed in the choice of its leaders through free, fair and credible-election processes remain sacrosanct. Imposition, super-imposition or subversion of this order, challenges the sovereignties of member nations, undermines its people and questions the commonality of our shared humanity.

It is in this context that Africa and indeed Nigeria desires to assiduously walk and work with the Russian Federation toward the realization of this noble objective of fairly, equitably and creditably electing, (not selecting) Africa’s leaders in accordance with the aspiration of the African people. This is going to be a long walk and a hard work in which Africa will be at the vanguard or driver’s seat, conscious that on its own hands, lies its destiny.

Africa is aware of the inextricable correlation between bad leadership and poverty. Undoubtedly, therefore, many elected African leaders have failed the litmus test of good governance through their primitive accumulation of illegal state wealth, by evidential demonstration of corruption, nepotism, ethnicism and tribalism. They have, by doing so, thwarted the critical aspirations of the African people by bequeathing unto them abject poverty and hopelessness.

Yet, the cherished values of the democratic principles under which those leaders were elected, provides for the method of their removal from office. In Nigeria, for example, the government of Goodluck Jonathan was voted out of power after a term in office despite his incumbency. Furthermore, the fact that some countries in Africa have recorded certain democratic successes translates to the fact that Africa’s problem is not the system but the operators of the system.

It is therefore hoped that Russia along with other powerful actors in the continent will continue to respect the integrity and sacrosanct nature of Africa’s political-leadership recruitment and change processes. Such respect provides the solid foundation on which the future stability, progress and development of Africa will be anchored. It also helps to build up the accumulated reservoir of the body of knowledge so required in Africa’s leadership recruitment process and electoral change.

In conclusion, I have attempted to summarize the context and content that shape Africa-Russia Relations. In that context and content, I have discussed Africa’s resonating past, the struggle against colonialism, the independence of African nations and the role of the then Soviet Union and, by extension, Russia, in that struggle as well as the subtle emergence of neocolonialism of the global north against the south. Part of the major essence of this lecture was to look at the past with a view to charting a course for the future, inhaling the fresh aroma of the beauty of the ‘rose’ in Africa-Russia relationship, weeding out the thorns of inconvenience on which Africa and Russia have marched and straighten any crooked path along which both have passed so as to arrive faster to the desired destination.

Doing so calls for an atmosphere of cordiality and frankness, commitment and re-dedication. Africa-Russia relation has been a warm one with Russia offering Africa a lot of assistance often, on ideological basis, during Africa’s decolonization struggle. The immediate post-Soviet era marked a period of aloofness and indifference to Africa. However, the ascendancy of Africa to relevance marked by the competition for Africa’s resources in what has been described as the “New Scramble” for Africa, has launched Russia as an indispensable part of Africa’s developmental equation.

While Africa cherishes the important MOUs and agreements Russia has with Africa through ROSATOM, GAZPROM, ROSNEFT, etc, there is need to translate such agreements and MOUs into concrete realities. Additionally, balancing of Russia’s commercial interests of arms sales to Africa will ensure that the latter enjoys relative stability and peace so vital for its own development.

Equally important, is that the constitutions of African countries remain sacrosanct with respect to the political-leadership recruitment process. The constitutions of member states of Africa also specify the methods of leadership change rather than create leaders in perpetuity. Respect for the constitutions of African countries provides the basis for leadership legitimacy and the foundation for enduring democracy and hope in institutions and authority.

It is important to end with a quote from Joseph Siegle, the Director of Research, African Centre for Strategic Studies, “building more mutually beneficial Africa relations depends on changes in both substance and process. Such a shift would require Russia to establish more conventional bilateral engagements with African institutions and not individuals. These initiatives would focus on strengthening trade, investment, technology transfer and educational exchanges. If transparently negotiated and equitably implemented, such Russian initiatives would be welcomed by many Africans.”

*

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.

Professor Abdullahi Shehu, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to the Russian Federation with concurrent accreditation to the Republic of Belarus.

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.

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 liberal Prime-Minister Justin Trudeau surprised many with his ruthless suppression of the truckers protest in Ottawa last winter. But anyone who was surprised just hasn’t been paying attention.

Canada’s Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (2015-present) gained notoriety last year for activating the Emergencies Act for the very first time in Canadian history, which suspended the civil rights of the protesters and gave federal law enforcement the right to seize their bank accounts without a court order.

Trudeau’s conduct vis-à-vis the truckers unfortunately was not out of character for a man who has been called “Canada’s Barack Obama—meaning a vapid neoliberal politician who promotes a hollow identity politics that masks a fealty to corporate interests and support for imperial interventions across the globe.

While claiming to be advancing a “feminist foreign policy,” Trudeau supported misogynistic dictatorships in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia to whom the Liberal government sold $14 billion in light armored vehicles.

In his first five years in office, Trudeau raised Canada’s military budget by $62 billion—with a pledge to increase military spending by 70% over a decade.

The 2022 budget provided an additional $8 billion in defense spending, and Trudeau has announced plans to spend $40 billion over the next two decades on upgrading the North American Aerospace Defence (NORAD) bilateral command with the U.S., which is seen as critical for waging war with Russia and China.

The modernization plans will facilitate Canada’s participation in the U.S. ballistic missile defense shield, which in spite of its name is aimed at making a nuclear war waged by U.S. imperialism “winnable.”

Trudeau is particularly subservient to Canadian mining interests, which operate about 4,000 mineral projects abroad that routinely destroy farmland, harm endangered species, contaminate drinking water, undermine Indigenous self-determination and spur violence and killings in the nearby communities.

Trudeau’s government subsidizes these mining companies, blocked prosecution of a particularly corrupt one [SNC-Lavalin], and waited years to establish an ombudsperson who lacked any power to compel testimony from mining executives.

House of Mirrors

Trudeau’s sorry foreign policy record is laid bare in Yves Engler’s book, House of Mirrors: Justin Trudeau’s Foreign Policy (Montreal: Black Rose Books, 2020).

Engler is known as the Noam Chomsky of Canada. He points out that Trudeau’s government released a defense policy that called for 605 more special forces, and established a plan for Canada’s acquisition of armed drones and for spending more than $100 billion on new fighter jets and ships.

Trudeau’s government meanwhile launched a multi-pronged effort to overthrow Nicolås Maduro’s socialist government in Venezuela, aligning with the most reactionary political forces in South America, targeting Cuba and recognizing Honduras’s narco-dictator Juan Orlando Hernández, who stole elections and is now facing a long prison sentence in the U.S.

Trudeau claimed that Canadian foreign policy was designed to uphold an international rules-based order; however, his administration violated international law by intervening in Syria without UN Security Council or Canadian legislative approval.

The unilateral sanctions that Canada adopted against Venezuela, Russia, Nicaragua and other countries—which had terrible human consequences—violated international law too since they were never legitimized by the World Trade Organization (WTO) or UN Security Council.

Canada’s open interference in Venezuela’s political affairs to recognize an obscure opposition politician, Juan Guaidó, was also illegal—as the UN Charter and Organization of American States (OAS) prohibit interfering in the internal affairs of another state.

Trudeau’s government additionally refused to join 122 countries in outlawing nuclear weapons and refused to ratify the UN’s Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment—which would establish regular visits by monitors in places where human rights abuses are known to take place.

Canada under Trudeau’s leadership has further failed to sign a) the American Convention on Human Rights; b) the Basel Ban amendment, which tries to prohibit rich countries from exporting waste to poor countries; and c) the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, which seeks to standardize governance in oil, gas and mining resources.

Chrystia Freeland—Canada’s Hillary

If Trudeau is Canada’s Obama, then Chrystia Freeland is the country’s Hillary Clinton—a female hawk in a high position who is the power behind the throne.

A Harvard graduate and former journalist with the Financial Times, Freeland’s family was tied to the right-wing Ukrainian lobby—her grandfather Michael Chomiak wrote propaganda during World War II for the Nazis.

Freeland was promoted to the position of foreign minister in 2017 in large part because of “her strong U.S. contacts,” according to a declassified document.

In a major foreign policy address in 2017, Freeland said that Canada “required hard power” and a “readiness to fight wars to maintain the North American-led world order.” In the same speech, she praised the U.S.’s “outsized role in world affairs since World War II,” emphasizing that Canada was “grateful, to our neighbor for the outsized role it has played in the world.”

Freeland pushed for a particularly hard-line policy against Russia, accusing Russia baselessly â la Clinton of “meddling” in Canada’s 2019 election.

Calling “Russian military adventurism and expansion clear strategic threats to the liberal democratic world, including Canada,” Freeland rejected calls by Donald Trump to let Russia return to the G-7. She also pushed for sustaining sanctions, and for the expansion of Canada’s military presence on Russia’s doorstep, with the number of Canadian troops in Eastern Europe doubling in 2017.

Canada at the time began sending Canadian naval frigates into the Black Sea and increased its participation in NATO military exercises in countries bordering Russia. It has since sanctioned over 1,400 Russians as part of an economic war on Russia and regime change operation waged by NATO countries led by the U.S.

Super-Hawk on Ukraine

Canada’s role in the 2014 U.S.-backed coup in Ukraine, which triggered the political crisis leading to the current war, was underscored by the fact that opposition protesters backing the coup were camped in the Canadian embassy.

In 2017, Trudeau expanded the mandate of Canada’s military training mission and donated tens of millions of dollars in equipment to the Ukrainian military, which committed massive human rights violations in the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces whose people were demanding greater autonomy.

Justin Trudeau in 2016 photographed with Rada First Vice Chairman Andriy Parubiy on his right. Parubiy had a background with the far right and was accused of praising Adolf Hitler. [Source: ukrweekly.com]

Canada also funded and equipped Ukraine’s National Police, which was infiltrated by neo-Nazis, and trained members of the Azov Battalion.

Image

Canada’s military attaché in Kyiv, Brian Irwin, meeting with members of the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion in 2018. [Source: twitter.com]

Since full-blown war with Russia began in February 2022, Trudeau’s government has secretly dispatched Canadian Special Forces and provided $626 million in military aid to Ukraine, including anti-tank weapons, precision-guided excalibur shells, and drone cameras.

The aid has been justified on the grounds that Ukraine was seemingly “at the forefront of the struggle between democracy and authoritarianism,” as Freeland put it, and that “modern Ukraine is the country where the struggle is ongoing and the future of the rules-based international order and genuine democracy in the world will be determined.”

Chrystia Freeland at “Stand with Ukraine” rally. [Source: cbc.ca]

However, Ukraine was far from a model democracy; the Zelensky government banned eleven opposition parties and ran a Phoenix style assassination program while Ukraine was ranked the most corrupt nation in Europe.

Much of the Canadian equipment going to Ukraine has been funneled through a Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) hub in Prestwick, Scotland, an airport that was once a transfer point for victims of CIA “extraordinary rendition.”

Trudeau recently vowed that Canada would assist Ukraine in “liberating” all its territories, including Crimea, home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.

His Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly also provocatively declared Canada’s support for Ukraine joining NATO—when the moment Ukraine joined NATO, it would invariably invoke NATO’s Article 5 under which all member states are obliged to defend any NATO member under attack.

Double Standards on Human Rights—South America

Trudeau’s and Freeland’s double standards on human rights were apparent in South America, where they followed the U.S. lead in characterizing Venezuela’s elected socialist leader, Nicolás Maduro, as a “brutal dictator” while embracing Michel Temer of Brazil who did not have any pretense of electoral legitimacy, Honduras’s narco-dictator, Juan Orlando Hernández, and right-wing oppositionist forces in Venezuela which carried out acts of terrorism.

Colombian President Iván Duque, a right winger who undercut Colombia’s peace accord, was another Trudeau favorite along with Jovenal Moïse, Haiti’s repressive ruler from 2017 to 2021 whom Trudeau’s government supported with police aid—as a reward perhaps for offering Canadian companies lucrative mining concessions.

In Nicaragua, Canada applied sanctions and backed a 2018 coup against Daniel Ortega, a leader of the Sandinista Revolution whose government had improved the people’s quality of life.

In 2019, Trudeau backed another coup in Bolivia against Evo Morales—a socialist who had stood up to foreign mining interests on behalf of Bolivia’s Indigenous population.

Trudeau and Freeland preferred Jeanine Áñez, a right-wing Christian fundamentalist who ordered the massacre of Morales’s supporters and was sentenced in June to ten years in prison after being convicted of terrorism and sedition.

Fealty to Israel

According to Engler, the Trudeau Liberals possess the most anti-Palestinian voting record of any recent Canadian government.

In an August 2018 Canadian Jewish News article, Montreal Liberal MP Anthony Housefather boasted about the Trudeau government’s anti-Palestinian voting record at the UN, writing: “We have voted against 87% of the resolutions singling out Israel for condemnation at the General Assembly versus 61% for the Harper government [Trudeau’s conservative predecessor], 19% for the Martin and Mulroney governments and 3% for the Chrétien governments. We have also supported 0% of these resolutions, compared to 23% support under Harper, 52% under Mulroney, 71% under Martin and 79% under Chrétien.”

When Trudeau’s government did provide some aid to the Palestinians, it supported the pro-Israeli Palestinian security apparatus that was designed to protect the corrupt Palestinian Authority (PA) from popular resistance to its compliance with Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank.

Trudeau’s policies were not too surprising in considering that the chief fundraiser for Canada’s Liberal Party since 2013 was Stephen Bronfman, billionaire scion of an ardent Zionist family which had long connections to U.S. and Israeli intelligence.

Yet More Human Rights Double Standards

The Trudeau-led Liberals criticized Iran for human rights abuses, though they were silent about worse abuses in Saudi Arabia, which received large shipments of Canadian weaponry.

Trudeau’s government supported other repressive Gulf monarchies, including Kuwait and the UAE, which played a lead role, with the Saudis, in the genocidal assault on Yemen. It also sold weapons to Egypt and was silent about the massive human rights crimes committed by its dictator, Fatah al-Sisi.

Canada commanded NATO operations and sent Special Forces into Iraq that participated in an assault on Mosul, which was turned into rubble.

According to Engler, Canada’s Liberals have to date ploughed hundreds of millions of dollars—if not more than a billion—into Iraq, while also supporting U.S. missile strikes in Syria and jihadi-led opposition groups as part of U.S.-led regime-change operations there.

Needlessly Antagonizing China and North Korea

Canada’s Liberal-led government has gone along with the U.S. in provoking China, regularly deploying warships through waters that Beijing claimed in the South China Sea, Strait of Taiwan and East China Sea.

Trudeau’s government has also sought to bolster the U.S. campaign to isolate North Korea. Chrystia Freeland has claimed that “the dictatorship in North Korea…poses a clear strategic threat to the liberal democratic world, including Canada.” Freeland in turn endorsed Royal Canadian Navy surveillance missions and sanctions on North Korea that have caused severe hardship for the local population.

Buddies with Africa’s Most Ruthless Dictator

Trudeau’s favorite leader in Africa is Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame (1995-present), a cold-hearted killer who invaded and plundered the Congo twice, and triggered the 1994 Rwandan genocide by shooting down the airplane of then-Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana.

Kagame’s regime was so vile that his armed forces established open-air crematoria to dispose of the bodies of the legions of Hutu whom they killed.

Unperturbed, Trudeau was photographed with Kagame on at least four occasions at international summits in 2018 and 2019 where he affirmed the “importance of strong and growing bilateral relations” between Canada and Rwanda.

The reason for this strong bilateral relationship was geopolitical and economic: Kagame was a proxy of the U.S. which opened up Rwanda’s economy—and Congo’s—to foreign mining interests.

Corporate Liberal

Justin Trudeau may or may not be a nice guy.

When he became Prime Minister, he may or may not have set out to support dictators and regime change operations, or to ramp up military spending when Canadians were increasingly suffering from cutbacks in social services and heavy inequality.

Whatever his intentions when he started, the imperatives of power have led Trudeau into the moral abyss.

As Engler emphasizes, many of Trudeau’s policies have been driven by corporate interests which finance the Liberal Party.

Trudeau, for example, opposes a Socialist government in Venezuela that had tried to reign in gold extraction by Canadian mining corporations and threatened the interests of Scotia Bank, one of Canada’s biggest banks, which has many Canadian mining clients.

The Canadian military has meanwhile become increasingly integrated with the U.S. military, which has pressured Canada into spending more on its military.

Powerful lobbies in Canada like the right-wing Ukrainian lobby that Freeland is connected with, and the Israeli lobby, are further key determinants of Canadian foreign policy—like in the U.S.

For all the structural forces driving Canadian policy, Trudeau must shoulder a significant share of the blame for the gross injustices Canada has perpetrated around the world while he has been Prime Minister.

If he were a true leader, Trudeau would work to educate the public about the nefarious forces that warp government policy, and use his bully pulpit to stand up for what is right—which he is unwilling to do.

*

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.

Jeremy Kuzmarov is Managing Editor of CovertAction Magazine. He is the author of four books on U.S. foreign policy, including Obama’s Unending Wars (Clarity Press, 2019) and The Russians Are Coming, Again, with John Marciano (Monthly Review Press, 2018). He can be reached at: [email protected].

Featured image: Justin Trudeau: people.com; skull: fruugo.us; Collage courtesy of Steve Brown

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Hiding Behind A Mask of “Gentle Humanism”, Canada’s Prime Minister Sells Out His People to Corporate Interests and Eagerly Participates in U.S. Imperialistic Wars Around the Globe
  • Tags: ,