Joseph Biden, a Champion of Human Rights?

June 23rd, 2021 by Manlio Dinucci

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.

***

On June 16 in Geneva the US-Russia Summit was defined by President Biden “good, positive” and by President Putin “quite constructive”. Should we, therefore, feel a little reassured in a situation where Europe is at the forefront of what NATO called “the lowest point in our relationship with Russia since the end of the Cold War”? The facts tell us otherwise. At the same time when the US-Russia Summit was underway in Switzerland, the Baltops 50 was underway in the Baltic, one of the 20 major US-NATO military exercises in Europe in 2021. 

The Baltops 50 was organized and directed by the US-African naval forces commander with headquarters in Naples-Capodichino, Admiral Robert Burke, who at the same time is head of the NATO Command in Lago Patria (JFC-Naples). From June 6 to 18, over 4,000 soldiers with 40 ships and 60 aircraft – belonging to 18 NATO member and partner countries, including Italy – practiced the air-naval war in the Baltic and surrounding regions”, close to the Russian territory. Warships and bombers with nuclear capability took also part in the maneuver, and for the first time, the new NATO Space Center was integrated into the exercise.

While this big war exercise was underway, clearly directed against Russia, President Putin declared in the press conference after the Summit: “We conduct military exercises within our territory, we do not bring our equipment and personnel close to the borders of the United States of America, as the USA and its partners are now doing near our borders”. 

The geographic location of the military forces, especially nuclear ones, is of primary importance: a tactical missile deployed 10,000 km away cannot hit the target but, if deployed at 1,000 km. has the same destructive effect as an ICBM.  The two presidents’ declaration on “strategic stability“, including the extension of the New Start Treaty for the control of nuclear weapons, will be nullified if the US installs new “tactical” nuclear weapons in Europe as it has planned. 

This and other key issues have been ignored by the media who according to Washington’s direction used the Summit as a kind of trial with Putin in the dock. The President of the United States is a public minister who did not just answer the questions like Putin, after refusing to hold the traditional joint press conference, but presented his own report on the Summit. According to  Biden, he told Putin how he reacts anytime he sees violations of human rights in Russia and elsewhere: «How could I be the President of the United States of America and not speak out against human rights violations? Defending fundamental freedoms is part of the DNA of our country».

This is solemnly declared by the current President of the United States, the Democrat Joseph Biden who in 2001 supported the war of Republican President Bush in Afghanistan and, in 2002 promoted a bipartisan resolution that authorized President Bush to invade Iraq on charges (later proved false) that it possessed weapons of mass destruction.

This was solemnly declared by Joseph Biden who was one of the architects of the US-NATO wars against Libya and Syria as vice president of the Obama Administration,   he supported Islamic fundamentalist groups to undermine these countries from within, he favored the use of  neo-Nazis in Ukraine for the putsch that opened the new confrontation with Russia. He was one of the architects of the “kill list”, including people from all over the world who were secretly killed because they were judged harmful for the United States (The New York TimesPresident Obama’s Kill ListMay 29, 2012). These wars and covert operations have caused directly and indirectly millions of deaths and the worst human rights violations. However, good feelings are not lacking: in a long official obituary on Twitter (reported in full by Ansa), President Biden announced: “Our hearts are heavy today as we let you know that our beloved German shepherd Champ died peacefully at home”.

*

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.

This article was originally published in Italian on Il Manifesto.

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

Featured image is from news.cn

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.

***

Since the onset of the covid-19 pandemic, governments around the world, along with a handful of unelected medical experts, have been behaving as though they are the social engineers of totalitarian regimes.

To be more precise, this select group of political leaders and medical experts have upended economies, as well as the lives of billions of ordinary people, by implementing extremely coercive and restrictive lockdowns and physical distancing measures for the stated purpose of bringing the pandemic under control and preventing future outbreaks.

Specific measures have included curfews; police patrols on the streets; the compulsory closure of businesses deemed nonessential, as well as workplaces, schools, and institutions of higher education; the banning of social gatherings; the cancelation of sporting and cultural events; the suspension of religious services; and restrictions on personal movement and interactions at the local, national, and international levels.

In many parts of the world, people have been subjected to mandatory stay-at-home orders, requiring them to spend most of the day confined and isolated in their homes. Lockdown measures have also been used to prohibit people from engaging in public protests and freely expressing their opinions, as failure to comply with limits on social gatherings has led to people being arrested, detained, and fined. It has also not been uncommon to see excessive police force being used to enforce lockdowns and curfews, and to disperse protests against unreasonable restrictions. Some governments have also set up detention centers for international travelers entering into their countries, where they are forced to quarantine at their own expense while they wait for the results of their covid-19 tests. Shockingly, in early June 2021, the provincial government in Ontario, Canada, went so far as to announce that residents in long-term care homes would soon be permitted to engage in “close physical contact, including handholding” and “brief hugs” with visitors when both parties are fully immunized.

Unfortunately, instead of criticizing this state of affairs, the mainstream media and major social media platforms are fully on board. They have turned out to be willing collaborators of the governments in these matters by glorifying their oppressive and punitive measures, censuring critical viewpoints, and fostering a culture of surveillance, all while spreading fear. They have also been ceaselessly promoting the injection of experimental vaccines as the only solution that will bring totalitarian lockdown measures to an end.

If Karl Popper and Friedrich Hayek had witnessed the type of central planning that has taken place since the beginning of the pandemic, they would have called it “holistic social engineering.” They were convinced that supporters of the concept of a social engineer sought to extend “the power of the State” in controlling and reshaping society as a whole in accordance with their own ideals, goals, and wills.1 According to Popper, social engineers believe that they can diagnose the goals and needs of society, and then implement a strategy to achieve them through large-scale planning.2 However, such an undertaking would require social engineers to centrally coordinate the activities of millions of people by replacing the wills and ends of those individuals with their own. Meanwhile, Hayek stated that the best way to make everybody serve the ends of the social engineers is

to make everybody believe in those ends. To make a totalitarian system function efficiently it is not enough that everybody should be forced to work for the same ends. It is essential that the people should come to regard them as their own ends. Although the beliefs must be chosen for the people and imposed upon them, they must become their beliefs, a generally accepted creed which makes the individuals as far as possible act spontaneously in the way the planner wants. If the feeling of oppression in totalitarian countries is in general much less acute than most people in liberal countries imagine, this is because the totalitarian governments succeed to a high degree in making people think as they want them to.3

Social engineers of the pandemic have been largely successful in convincing the masses that the oppressive lockdown measures that they are being forced to endure are ultimately in the best interests of society as a whole. In many instances, they have managed to make many people believe that the goals of the lockdowns are in fact their own goals. At the same time, social engineers have been discouraging “criticism,” as they do not “easily hear of complaints concerning the measures” that they have instituted.4 Accordingly, the critical views put forth by some journalists, activists, dissenters, legal experts, medical professionals, and anybody else who cares about freedom, human rights violations, and the common good have been systematically silenced. Popper explained that the social engineer:

will have to be deaf to many complaints; in fact, it will be part of his business to suppress unreasonable objections. (He will say, like Lenin, “You can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs.”) But with it, he must invariably suppress reasonable criticism also.5

After nearly a year and a half of antiliberal, undemocratic, unethical, antiscientific, ahistorical, and oppressive governmental measures, while denying billions of people their basic human rights, freedom, and sovereignty, social and economic life has essentially been completely crippled in many countries and regions. Nonetheless, social engineers of the pandemic period have treated critics and complaints as “a blemish,” proof of irrationality, and violations of the common good.6

Hayek and Popper incessantly warned about the form of central planning that we are currently being subjected to, which has been used by numerous dictators and tyrants such as Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot. They specifically argued that it would not only lead societies down “the road to serfdom,” but also cause irreversible, large-scale social and economic damage.

In fact, since the lockdowns began, general freedom (e.g., freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, and intellectual freedom), negative freedom (i.e., freedom from coercion), positive freedom (i.e., freedom of self-development), subjective freedom (i.e., freedom to act based on one’s own will and views), objective freedom (i.e., freedom of “being with other”), and economic freedom (e.g., freedom to earn one’s living, to produce, to buy, to sell, etc.) have been all violated to some extent. Furthermore, hundreds of millions of people have lost their jobs or endured income reductions, many small and medium-sized companies have gone bankrupt, unemployment rates have increased across major economies, and most countries have gone into recession.

Moreover, the lockdowns have also had a number of unintended social and health consequences, including increases in domestic violence to unprecedented levels, in the form of both physical and emotional abuse; a significant rise in substance abuse and related deaths (i.e., overdoses); worsening mental health problems leading to depression and suicides; isolation and antisocial lifestyles and behavior, particularly in children; physical inactivity and weight gain; and, the cancellation or delay of medical procedures, surgeries, and consultations. The unexpected destructive consequences of the totalitarian lockdown measures will undoubtedly be felt for decades to come.

Hayek and Popper would not have been surprised that the lockdown measures generated so many adverse impacts on people, the economy, and society. In fact, they warned that social engineering could never successfully achieve its predetermined goals and ends in the real world for two main reasons: the limited and dispersed nature of human knowledge and the spontaneous forces of society. Based on the concept of dispersed knowledge, “we know little of the particular facts to which the whole of social activity continuously adjusts itself in order to provide what we have learned to expect. We know even less of the forces which bring about this adjustment by appropriately coordinating individual activity.”7

Hayek and Popper would have argued that social engineers of the pandemic could not realistically possess the type and the abundance of knowledge needed to plan such large-scale oppressive lockdowns. According to them, by ignoring the dispersed nature of human knowledge, social engineers falsely believed that they could possess all of the knowledge required to redesign an entire society while also having complete control over all efforts directed toward the achievement of teleologically evaluated goals. In fact, Hayek and Popper concluded that it was impossible to exercise complete control over society via social engineering because the limitations of human knowledge meant that nobody could foresee all of the possible consequences of human actions, which is necessary if common goals are to be achieved. These sentiments apply to contemporary social engineers of the pandemic, and could explain why they were unable to accurately predict the consequences of many of the oppressive policies and measures that were intended to mitigate the spread and impacts of covid-19.

Popper and Hayek argued that even if it were hypothetically possible for a social engineer to possess all the knowledge needed to centrally plan and organize an entire society, they would still be unable to attain their teleologically evaluated goals in the manner they envisioned on account of the spontaneous forces of society, which represent the second main obstacle to the success of large-scale central planning. The spontaneous forces of society would make it impossible to effectively collect detailed information about the constantly changing activities, private interests, particular circumstances, complex relationships, and preferences of millions of people. The unexpected and unplanned outcomes associated with the spontaneous forces of society mean that the original plans of any social engineer will end in failure, because “the real outcome will always be very different from the rational construction” of the social engineer. In order to realize their predetermined goals, social engineers would be forced to continuously modify and change their plans, while using their exclusive power to coerce individuals for the purpose of imposing increasingly restrictive measures. That is to say, they would need to constantly interfere in the choices that individuals make without having to obtain any input from them.

Hayek warned that the coercive measures employed by social engineers could “destroy those spontaneous forces which have made advance” and progress possible across history, and inevitably result in “a stagnation of thought and a decline of reason.”8 He wanted people to understand that while “it may not be difficult to destroy the spontaneous formations which are the indispensable bases of a free civilization, it may be beyond our power deliberately to reconstruct such a civilization once these foundations are destroyed.”9 This is why Popper called social engineering the “greatest and most urgent evil of society.”10 According to him, “even with the best intentions of making heaven on earth it only succeeds in making it hell—that hell which man alone prepares for his fellow-men.”11

*

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.

This article was originally published on Mises Wire.

Birsen Filip holds a Ph.D. in philosophy and master’s degrees in economics and philosophy. She has published numerous articles and chapters on a range of topics, including political philosophy, geo-politics, and the history of economic thought, with a focus on the Austrian School of Economics and the German Historical School of Economics. She is also the author of The Rise of Neo-liberalism and the Decline of Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan, 2020).

Notes

1. Birsen Filip, “Hayek and Popper on Piecemeal Engineering and Ordo-liberalism,” in Robert Leeson, ed., Hayek: A Collaborative Biography: Part XIV: Liberalism in the Classical Tradition: Orwell, Popper, Humboldt and Polanyi (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018), p. 244.

2. K.R. Popper, The Poverty of Historicism (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1960).

3. F.A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom: Texts and Documents, ed. Bruce Caldwell, vol. 2 of The Collected Works of F.A. Hayek, ed. Bruce Caldwell (1944; repr., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007), p. 157.

4. Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945; repr., London: Routledge, 2011), p. 149.

5. Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, p. 150.

6. F.A. Hayek, The Counter Revolution of Science: Studies on the Abuse of Reason (1952; repr., Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Press, 1979), p. 153.

7. F.A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, ed. Ronald Hamowy, vol. 17 of The Complete Works of F.A. Hayek (1960; repr. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011), p. 76.

8. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty, p. 90.

9. F.A. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order (1948; repr., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958), p. 25.

10. Popper, The Poverty of Historicism, p. 84.

11. Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, p. 157.

Featured image is from Mises Wire


coverThe Rise of Neo-liberalism and the Decline of Freedom

Author: Birsen Filip

Publisher: Palgrave MacMillan

ISBN: 978-3-030-61622-9

Number of Pages: VI, 357

Click here to purchase.

Canadians Aren’t Being Told About Vaccine Risks

By Dr. John Cunnington, June 22, 2021

At the top of the medical hierarchy is the neurosurgeon. Neurosurgeons are surrounded by a mystique of omniscience and omnipotence. Imagine my surprise, therefore, as a lowly medical student, to discover that the senior neurosurgeon in our institution, Robert Hughes, was being sued for malpractice.

Malian Whirlwinds: AFRICOM and the Military Presidency

By Abayomi Azikiwe, June 22, 2021

Mali has been a center of attention by the United States and its former colonial rulers in France for many years. The most prevalent notion about the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and Paris’ Operation Barkhane in West Africa is that these foreign military forces are there to assist in the wars against Islamic rebels.

Big Pharma White Coats: The Psychology of Unquestioningly Obeying Depraved Authority

By Teodrose Fikremariam, June 22, 2021

Stanley Milgram conducted a psychological experiment in 1961 that was truly mind-numbing in terms of revealing the depths of evils people are able to commit in order to comply with authority. Referred to as the Milgram experiments, the aim of the study was to see how far participants were willing to go when they were given orders that were appalling and unconscionable.

Uncensored History: Who Were the Khazars?

By Timothy Alexander Guzman, June 22, 2021

There is an unknown empire that is barely mentioned in western history books, education institutions, in the media or in Hollywood.  The name is not mentioned anywhere especially in the West, and that is why most people never heard about it.  It was called Khazaria, it was an empire that still remains relatively unknown today.

Video: What’s the Latest on Variants and COVID Vaccine Safety?

By Dr. Peter McCullough and Fox News Insider, June 22, 2021

Peter McCullough, MD, MPH appears on the Ingraham Angle on June 21, 2021 to explain why we don’t need to panic about the “Delta variant” and what younger individuals should know about the mRNA vaccines.

15,472 Dead 1.5 Million Injured (50% Serious) Reported in European Union’s Database of Adverse Drug Reactions for COVID-19 Shots

By Brian Shilhavy, June 22, 2021

The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50, although there are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe. So as high as these numbers are, they do NOT reflect all of Europe. The actual number in Europe who are reported dead or injured due to COVID-19 shots would be much higher than what we are reporting here.

Defending International Order: U.S., British, Dutch Warships Converge in Black Sea

By Rick Rozoff, June 22, 2021

U.S. Naval Forces Europe-Africa reported that the guided-missile destroyer USS Laboon, deployed to the Black Sea on June 11, engaged in passing and communications exercises with two warships assigned to the carrier strike group of the new HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier currently in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea.

Change in the Middle East?

By Philip Giraldi, June 22, 2021

The media focus on the Summit meeting between Presidents Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin has to a certain extent crowded out news about the new government in Israel, headed by hardline nationalist Naftali Bennett. In those media outlets that are actually discussing the change there is an odd sort of perception that Israel’s new government will have to adjust to the new regime in Washington.

Defining “Down Freedom”. Handouts and Social Submission in the Covid Era

By James Bovard, June 22, 2021

Will the Great Pandemic permanently unleash governments around the world? Covid-19 is enabling politicians to turn freedom from an individual right into a conditional bureaucratic dispensation. Defining down freedom was exemplified by the G-7 Summit that became a ludicrous and hypocritical Lockdowners Victory Lap.

US Digital War Against China: A Means to Preserve World Domination?

By Eric Sommer, June 22, 2021

In September 2020, the US imposed a draconian ban on export of crucial materials needed by China’s leading chip manufacturer Semiconductor Manufacturing International Company (SMIC). The ban was instigated at the behest of the US Department of Defense on the alleged grounds that Chinese chips posed a threat to the US. This move also came in the wake of an earlier ban on export of chips for use by leading Chinese telecommunication company Huawei.

Open Letter to Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany Dr. Angela Merkel, on Whose Behalf Are You Acting?

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, June 22, 2021

I therefore ask you: on whose behalf are you acting? Certainly not on behalf of the German people, which, as you know, would be your task. How is it possible that you have been able to stay at the head of the German government for so long despite your actions being against the interests of the German people? Personally, I could no longer stand your politics and therefore left my fatherland.

Have We Learned Nothing? Biden Backs Mass Murder in the Middle East

By Connor Freeman, June 21, 2021

Since 2007, Israel has imposed a full blockade on Gaza from the air, land, and sea. The two million Palestinians living there (half of which are under the age of 18) are trapped in an open air prison where food, potable water, electricity, medicine, building materials, etc. are severely restricted by the Israeli authorities.

“Experimental Explosion” by the US Navy: 3.9 Magnitude Earthquake Measured Off Florida’s East Coast

By Action News Jax, June 21, 2021

A reported 3.9 magnitude earthquake off the Florida’s east coast Friday was actually an “experimental explosion,” the U.S. Navy confirmed. A spokesperson with the Navy told Action News Jax that what was measured were a result of military “shock trials” and they are not unusual, nor is it unusual for them to register as earthquakes.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Canadians Aren’t Being Told About Vaccine Risks
  • 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Collusion by the White House, the Pentagon, and the mainstream media resulted in disparagement, denial, and suppression of eyewitness testimony confirming that most POWs were actually well-treated by their North Vietnamese captors (in contrast to the brutal torture and death often meted out to North Vietnamese POWs by U.S. forces).

When numerous U.S. POWs began to understand the truth about the war they had been fighting, they spoke out against it—voluntarily—as an act of conscience. But they were cynically portrayed as traitors, turncoats and “camp rats,” their reputations and lives destroyed, driving many to despair and even suicide.

Among the few memories that most Americans still retain of the Vietnam War—now nearly 60 years in the past—one of the most vivid centers around the torture suffered by Senator John McCain at the hands of his brutal Vietnamese captors while a prisoner of war in Hanoi’s Hoa Lo prison (AKA The Hanoi Hilton).

This story has been told, retold, and continually burnished countless times by admiring media interviews and a flood of books and memoirs, including several by McCain himself.

Another memory of the war, still believed by millions of Americans, is that hundreds or even thousands of American soldiers classified as MIA (Missing in Action) are actually being held and tortured in secret North Vietnamese POW camps, callously abandoned by our government and desperately praying to be rescued—preferably in a Hollywood-style rescue by Chuck Norris or Sylvester Stallone, who starred in the spate of Commie-hating blockbuster movies inspired by their plight.

This belief is continually reinforced by POW/MIA flags which fly at every post office, and a ready supply of new books and movies, such as the 2018 release of the film M.I.A. A Greater Evil.

But both memories of the Vietnam War are false memories. However passionately believed, they were cynically manufactured fantasies implanted in all-too-willing American minds for political purposes.

How and why these counter-factual beliefs were so successfully foisted on the American public is the subject of the new myth-shattering book by Tom Wilber and Jerry Lembcke, Dissenting POWs: From Vietnam’s Hoa Lo Prison to America Today (New York: Monthly Review Press, 2021).

Wilber is the son of a dissenting POW, Walter “Gene” Wilber, who is featured in the book, and has contributed to the award-winning documentary film The Flower Pot Story by Ngọc Dũng. Lembcke is a distinguished sociologist from College of the Holy Cross who has written a number of books debunking popular myths about the Vietnam War.

The two start their book by noting that the dominant war hero image of the POW—who endured torture and resisted service to enemy propaganda—was to a large extent created by high-ranking men like McCain who were captured early in the conflict.

McCain’s oft-told story of ill-treatment and torture is contradicted by Nguyen Tien Tran, the chief prison guard of the jail in which McCain was held. In a report by The Guardian, “[Tran] acknowledged that conditions in the prison were ‘tough, though not inhuman’. But, he added: ‘We never tortured McCain. On the contrary, we saved his life, curing him with extremely valuable medicines that at times were not available to our own wounded’. . . . [H]e denied torturing him, saying it was his mission to ensure that McCain survived. As the son of the US naval commander in Vietnam, he offered a potential valuable propaganda weapon.”

Most of the others promoting a heroized image of U.S. POW’s were graduates of service academies and came from privileged backgrounds. They included a) James Stockdale, who ran for Vice President in 1992 as the running mate of Ross Perot; b) Robinson Risner, a double recipient of the Air Force Cross, the second highest military decoration for valor; and c) Jeremiah Denton, who went on to become the first Republican Senator from the state of Alabama and a close ally of President Ronald Reagan.

John McCain fit well with this group because he was also academically privileged and his family included high-ranking military officers like his father, Jack, who was an admiral and the Commander of the U.S. Pacific Command.

James Stockdale, Medal of Honor, Vietnam War | Military.com

James Stockdale while in captivity. [Source: military.com]

With post-war military careers at stake, these high-ranking officers played up the alleged barbarity of the North Vietnamese, demanded resistance to interrogations from other captives, and threatened so-called deviants with disciplinary charges after release to the U.S.

The Nixon administration advanced their credibility and status in a desperate ploy to stir up support at home for an unpopular conflict abroad; and further concocted a story—announced in a press conference by Defense Secretary Melvin Laird on May 19, 1969—that 1,300 American soldiers deemed “missing in action” were believed to be prisoners of war.

Melvin Laird was first to publicize plight of POWs in Vietnam - Hartford Courant

Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird gives the opening statement of a press conference on May 19, 1969, to publicize the plight of U.S. POWs and MIAs in North Vietnam. [Source: courant.com]

The unaccounted for would now publicly be described as “POW/MIA,” implying that any serviceperson missing in Vietnam could also be a prisoner of war. This transformed the war from a political issue into a humanitarian one, trading public support for sympathy. It didn’t matter why we were there in the first place: Our boys were there, and by God were we going to do anything to get them home.

Suddenly, the public image of Vietnam looked very different. The very real footage of brutalized Vietnamese bodies, wailing children, and napalmed villages was traded for a fantasy—all of the violence that had been done in Uncle Sam’s name was now being done to him.

Kim Phuc, the napalm girl: 'Love is more powerful than any weapon'

Images like this famous one of a Vietnamese girl, Phan Thi Kim Phúc, running from a U.S. napalm strike, were supplanted by the fixation with the plight of American POW/MIAs. This was a brilliant public relations maneuver by the Nixon administration in collusion with the media. [Source: irishtimes.com]

The POW issue soon became a cause célèbre. In the early 1970s, millions of “POW bracelets” were sold by a student group called VIVA (Voices in Vital America), each branded with the name of a missing American serviceman.

Washington Memorial Park | Pow mia, My childhood memories, Baby boomers memories

POW/MIA bracelet. [Source: pinterest.com]

These shiny nickel bracelets were spotted on the wrists of celebrities like Sonny and Cher—who had often before dressed like hippies—and Sammy Davis, Jr, and allegedly Princess Grace of Monaco put in an order for two bracelets.

The silver bracelets could even be spotted on the fashion runway, where models with an interest in political activism took to wearing them. A New York Times profile from the day quotes a model named Astrida Woods, who said she was “dissatisfied” with her life as a model and felt the urge to give back. “I began to do some work with Ralph Nader, and now [wearing the bracelets]. It’s a way to contribute something.”

Many U.S. GIs and pilots, however, reported being humanely treated during their captivity, with access to adequate food, recreation facilities and reading material.

Wilber and Lembcke conclude that “instances of brutal treatment” were “less common than [has been] purported” and that evidence of systematic torture drawn from visitor reports, POW statements, and oral histories was scant.

Those POWs who questioned the war were dismissed by the military for their supposedly “weak personal character” and “lack of education and backgrounds in broken and poor families,” a typical case of “psychologizing the political.”

These men were in turn stigmatized and then forgotten by the public amidst the manufactured concern about POW/MIAs who were supposedly brutalized and then kept in captivity and abandoned by their government.

Camp Rats?

The ranks of the POW dissenters included Lt. Col. Edison Miller, a recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross and Purple Heart from California who spent six years in captivity after his fighter plane was shot down over North Vietnamese skies on October 13, 1967.

A contemporary described Miller, a Californian who flew previously over Korea, as a “first-rate pilot with a zeal for combat but an independent sort.”

John McCain falsely accused Miller of being a turncoat because he appeared in North Vietnamese propaganda.

In his 1999 best-selling book Faith of My Fathers, McCain wrote about Miller as one of two “camp rats”—the other being Tom’s father Gene, who had been executive officer of a squadron of F-4s when he was shot down over North Vietnam on June 16, 1968.

McCain said both “had lost their faith completely.”

“They not only stopped resisting but apparently crossed a line no other prisoner I knew had even approached,” McCain wrote. “They were collaborators, actively aiding the enemy.”

Miller told the Orange County Register in response to these charges that McCain had “lied about me … The attacks on my character and integrity are totally without merit or justification. I did stand up and say the war was wrong. I would speak against the war, but I never spoke against my country. And I gave up no secrets.”

McCain accused Miller of receiving eggs, bananas and other delicacies to eat from camp guards. Miller says, however, that he never saw eggs during his internment and that McCain was never in a position to see the food brought to him.

McCain further claimed that Miller turned him into a North Vietnamese guard when McCain tried to befriend him, and that the guard then beat McCain. Miller said: “I never ratted out a fellow American. McCain has fabricated and exaggerated his experience for political advantage.”

Miller’s anti-war views had been sharpened in conversation with Navy Commander Robert Schweitzer, a captive from 1968 to 1973 who died a year after his release while still on active duty in San Francisco.

Schweitzer felt that, because the U.S. had never declared war, there could not legally be any North Vietnamese prisoners of war, only “Americans detained by a foreign power,” Miller said.

A tape of a conversation between Miller and Schweitzer was played for other prisoners, who heard not only an anti-war message but a challenge to the legality of the U.S. military action in Vietnam.

In 1970, when Miller and Gene Wilber were interviewed on national television, Wilber called for an immediate U.S. troop withdrawal “so that the Vietnamese can solve their own problems.”

U.S. journalists at the time, however, did not take their interview seriously, regarding it rather as a North Vietnamese propaganda show.

The two men along with Schweitzer continued to write protest statements and together with fellow dissenters met with American peace activists visiting North Vietnam, including actress Jane Fonda and former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark.

Jane Fonda in Nghe An, North VN 1972 | manhhai | Flickr

Jane Fonda (center) during trip to North Vietnam in 1972. [Source: flickr.com]

Empathy for the War’s Victims

Most dissenting POWs came from a working-class background.

James A. Daly, an African-American infantryman from the Bedford-Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn, for example, was raised in poverty by a single mother.

His 1975 book, Black Prisoner of War, describes his three years of jungle confinement after his capture by North Vietnamese soldiers and the South Vietnam-based National Liberation Front (NLF), followed by a two-month trek north to Hanoi on the Ho Chi Minh trail where he experienced what it was like to be on the receiving end of U.S. ordnance.

Bob Chenoweth, from a white working-class family in Oregon, similarly developed an empathy for the Vietnamese people and a distaste for the racist views of most Americans toward the Vietnamese.

A helicopter crew member, before he was shot down and captured, Chenoweth said he “couldn’t see how U.S. forces could possibly be helping the Vietnamese given the attitude that GIs had, viewing them as ‘subhuman’ and disparaging them as ‘gooks and dinks.’”

Chenoweth and other of his contemporaries authored anti-war statements, wrote messages to GIs asking them to follow their consciences, sent letters to politicians, and recorded tapes to be aired via Radio Hanoi.

Higher ranking POWs responded by trying to isolate the dissenters from other American prisoners while charging them with participating in a conspiracy against the United States.

One of the dissidents, Abel Kavanaugh, committed suicide as a result of the intense pressure and prospective stigma of a dishonorable discharge only a few months after coming home from Vietnam.

Charges against the POW dissidents were eventually dropped, Wilber and Lembcke believe, so as to not jeopardize the hero-prisoner story with too much attention on dissent and through a possible exposure of inconsistencies in the accusers’ own prison biographies.

Fear of Communist Infiltration

A critical trope in Cold War America was the fear of communist infiltration and internal subversion through brainwashing and mind control.

This trope was fortified by a CIA propaganda effort that depicted Korean War POWs who defected to the North Korean and Chinese side as having been brainwashed in interrogation.

Brainwashing by Edward Hunter

CIA propaganda tract accusing Communist China of brainwashing U.S. POWs. The stereotype of cunning and evil Oriental communists endured through the Vietnam War and beyond and impacted how Americans viewed the dissenting POWs in Vietnam. [Source: goodreads.com]

Most of these defectors were in fact African-Americans who did not want to return to the Jim Crow South, while others were attracted by communist ideals or saw the U.S. war as immoral.[1]

Clarence Adams with Korean prisoners of war and communist captors, in 1954. Photos: SCMP; Della Adams; UPI

Clarence Adams with Korean POWs and Communist captors in 1954. Adams lived in China for 12 years. He said he was well treated in captivity and stayed on in China because he was offered the chance at education there. Later he made propaganda broadcasts for Radio Hanoi, eventually returning to his hometown of Memphis, Tennessee, where he ran a chain of successful Chinese restaurants. [Source: u.osu.edu]

The stereotype of the brainwashed POW of the Korean War turned collaborator and traitor because of his weak character would become the backdrop for the discrediting of the dissident POWs of the Vietnam War.

In an appearance on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Gene Wilber was grilled on whether he had given in to the enemy to make antiwar statements. That he had acted on his own “conscience and morality” was drowned out by host Mike Wallace’s implications of collaboration and opportunism.

When he was subsequently invited to the White House POW reception, Wilber found his hotel room broken into and marked with accusations of treason when he returned from the reception.

In the summer of 1973, James Stockdale charged Wilber and Edison Miller with collaborating with the enemy, mutiny, and inciting personnel to insubordination. However, military judges found insufficient evidence to prosecute the case, and Wilber and Miller instead received letters of censure for their failure to meet the standard expected of officers.

Hollywood Revisionism

POW films starting from this time focused on returnees’ estrangement with their families and society and were told as stories of spousal infidelity, representing both individual drama as well as a sense of “home-front betrayal.”

These films were part of a post-war revisionism, which included a spate of films that contributed to the legend of American servicemen left behind in Vietnam.

In the 1980s, a new subgenre emerged focused on Vietnam veterans heroically taking on the task of returning to Indochina and liberating the left-behind POWs, who had been betrayed on the home front and abandoned by the U.S. government.

The POWs were depicted as victimized and emasculated captives who needed to be rescued by individualist heroes and whose honor as Americans was to be restored.

This image, Wilber and Lembcke argue, fits the post-war efforts to psychologize the once political conflicts of the Vietnam War and to depict the veteran as a victim and loser.

More of a heroized image and the POWs’ endurance of torture was revived with the 1987 film, The Hanoi Hilton, which starred Michael Moriarty, Ken Wright and Paul Le Mat as U.S. POWs who defy their captors while enduring brutal treatment at Hanoi’s Hoa Lo prison (aka The Hanoi Hilton).

The Hanoi Hilton (1987) - IMDb

[Source: imdb.com]

This film meshed particularly well President’s Ronald Reagan’s characterization of the Vietnam War as a “noble cause,” fought by noble men, with the POW dissenters by implication being ignoble.

Persistence of the Hero-Prisoner Story

In their quest to comprehend the persistence of the hero-prisoner story, Wilber and Lembcke take their readers back to American colonial history and the captivity narratives emerging during that time.

These stories are about a complex mix of violence against captives, temptations to stay with their captors, the ideal to remain loyal with their fellow colonists, and their Christian beliefs.

Indian Captives

Illustration of captives in the Indian Wars. [Source: legendofamerica.com]

Such tensions and correlations between the Self and the Other were critical in the making of an American identity. The wars in Korea and Vietnam and the POW experiences there can be understood as a new chapter of this identity-making process. Here, too, Americans must prove their will and ability to endure the brutality of a racialized Other.

A wrench in the story, however, is revealed in the autobiographical accounts of POW-heroes like Stockdale, Denton, and Risner. They wrote about fasting as a way of enforcing self-discipline and self-assurance, sometimes with a religious subtext.

More bizarrely, they also wrote about self-mutilation—the deliberate infliction of physical wounds on themselves that would be visible during filmed interviews.

The aim was to make it appear to other POWs (and to the U.S. public) that they had been tortured. One officer wrote of how he purposely damaged his vocal apparatus so he could not be forced to make propaganda statements.

In addition to some high-ranking officers attempting to portray themselves as heroes by means of self-mutilation, Wilber and Lembcke also noted that they tried to keep political literature and news of dissent back home away from other POWs, fearing that these would enhance critical positions on the war and against their authority within the prison population.

Moreover, these ranking officers often despised the more humane view of the Vietnamese displayed by other prisoners, including an interest in their language and culture, and an understanding of why they were fighting back against an invasion of their country by the most powerful military force in the world.

Bringing Back Forgotten Dissenters

Wilber and Lembcke’s book helps restore these forgotten POW dissenters to their rightful—and honored—place among the large and diverse Vietnam generation of dissidents, draft resisters, oppositional GIs, veteran activists, deserters, and all those who supported them.

Antiwar Resistance Within the Military During the Vietnam War

[Source: vietnampeace.org]

The book also shows that, despite all destruction and death brought by the invaders from the sky, North Vietnam maintained a moral superiority through oftentimes fair treatment of the captured Americans. This was in stark contrast to the more systematic adoption of torture methods by USAID and CIA-trained police under the Operation Phoenix and like-minded programs.

A group of people holding signs Description automatically generated with low confidence

Vietnam War protesters create mock Tiger Cage, replicating one in the USAID-run Con Son prison where Vietnamese inmates were tortured in a way American POWs claimed they had been tortured. [Source: easyyolktoofiles.wordpress.com]

The POW/MIA flag that flies today over the White House is intended to honor the men who endured captivity; however, it continues to perpetuate a distorted understanding of a war that was as abominable as it was unjust, and helps to advance a dangerous nationalist ideology that will lead to future Vietnams.

*

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.

Paul Benedikt Glatz is the author of Vietnam’s Prodigal Heroes: American Deserters, International Protest, European Exile, and Amnesty (Lexington Books, 2021).

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].

Steve Brown is a member of the Editorial Board of CovertAction Magazine.

Notes

1. See Clarence Adams, An American Dream: The Life of an African American Soldier and POW Who Spent Twelve Years in Communist China (Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 2007).

The Great Barrier Reef Wars

June 23rd, 2021 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Great Barrier Reef Wars

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.

***

.

 

*

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 TruePublica

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on MPs Message to PM Boris Johnson on Balfour Project Call for the Strict Application of International Law, Including via the ICC, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
  • Tags: , , , ,

Armenia’s Next Government

June 22nd, 2021 by Andrew Korybko

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.

***

Incumbent Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party won the most votes in Sunday’s parliamentary elections by far though it’s unclear at the time of writing whether he has enough to form a government, but in any case, there are top five priorities that the next administration should focus on in order to improve the situation for everyday Armenians.

Pashinyan Pounds The Opposition

The latest snap parliamentary elections in Armenia last Sunday saw incumbent Prime Minister Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party come out far and ahead of its rivals with almost 54% of the vote, though it’s unclear at the time of writing whether he passed that crucial threshold in order to form a government. Some tallies have him just 0.08% short of that constitutional benchmark while an election official said the day afterward on Monday that he had actually just passed it. The second-place finisher, former President Robert Kocharyan’s Armenian Alliance, only obtained around 21% of the vote though they’ve publicly alleged that fraud might have been committed. These accusations might delay the final results and create some political turbulence in the short term, but they probably won’t result in Pashinyan’s lead being reduced by much, if at all.

The Karabakh Context

The elections were basically a referendum on Pashinyan, the Western-friendly Color Revolutionary who rose to power in 2018 on the back of large-scale protests that he helped organize. He campaigned on fighting corruption and improving the lives of everyday Armenians, both of which he failed to do. Even worse, he embroiled his country in another war over Azerbaijan’s universally recognized western region of Nagorno-Karabakh late last year which resulted in Armenia’s dismal defeat. Its servicemen were saved from certain slaughter solely through the decisive diplomatic intervention of their Russian allies who helped mediate a ceasefire agreement in early November. Their loss of control over this territory that they’ve always contentiously claimed as their historic own was psychologically traumatic for every Armenian.

Negative Narratives

The aftermath of that conflict ironically saw large-scale protests organized against Pashinyan who himself had come to power through such means. His security services were able to successfully quell the unrest, but he ultimately felt pressured to call for snap elections in order to see whether he still has his people’s support to continue governing. His opponents were more nationalistically inclined and some even accused him of being personally responsible for their country’s recent defeat. The emerging narrative ahead of the elections was that he’s actually a threat to not only Armenia’s national security, but perhaps even its very existence. As the latest results showed, however, the majority of voters didn’t agree with this interpretation of events even if they’re still extremely saddened by their loss of control over what had previously been a fifth of Azerbaijani territory.

The Zangezur Corridor

Extrapolating upon this, it can be said that they voted for continuity and stability, intending to give Pashinyan the mandate to continue his domestic reforms and move ahead with their country’s obligations under last November’s Russian-mediated ceasefire agreement. These importantly include unblocking all economic and transport links in the region, especially between Western Azerbaijan and its Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic. Azerbaijan regards that particular clause as mandating the establishment of what it calls the Zangezur Corridor while Armenia contests that description. Pashinyan had hitherto procrastinated on his country’s obligation to open up that corridor, perhaps as some speculated in order to appeal to some nationalists ahead of Sunday’s snap parliamentary elections who suspected that it would compromise Armenia’s sovereignty.

Border Issues

Recent border issues between the rival nations also figured prominently in the run-up to the vote, with Armenia and Azerbaijani accusing one another of violating their mutual frontier which had yet to be formally delineated as a result of the Karabakh Conflict which exploded in the years prior to their independence. Some observers also speculated that these disputes were provoked by Armenia itself in order for Pashinyan to appear tough and thus court some nationalist voters away from the opposition. Others, however, blamed Azerbaijan for putting pressure on Pashinyan during the most politically sensitive time of his career. Whatever one’s interpretation of events may be, it’s clear that Armenia’s relations with Azerbaijan – and particularly as they manifested themselves through Pashinyan’s policies – were the most important electoral issue.

Bungled “Balancing”

It should also be mentioned that Armenia recently sought to “balance” Russia’s influence in the country by more actively reaching out to France in the aftermath of last year’s conflict. Pashinyan had originally campaigned on lessening Armenia’s dependence on its historical Russian strategic partner though he’d hitherto been unable to make much progress on this front owing to how closely integrated these two countries have become over the past few decades since their independence from the Soviet Union. Nevertheless, it seemed to some that he was finally trying to make good on this prior promise by taking advantage of the anger that some of his compatriots felt towards Russia’s refusal to militarily support the continuation of their illegal occupation of Azerbaijani territory, ergo Pashinyan’s latest outreaches which ultimately didn’t lead to anything tangible.

Armenia’s Top Five Priorities

With Pashinyan likely remaining at the helm of the next government, either led entirely by his own party or in partnership with another one in order to pass the 54% constitutional threshold for leading the country, it’s clear that there are five priorities that Armenia should focus on in the immediate future. The country is caught in a very difficult situation largely of its own making. It’ll therefore require effective leadership, visionary thinking, patience, and perhaps even a little bit of sacrifice from its people in order to comprehensively improve the situation for everyone with time. There’s no better moment than the present to get started on the hard work that’s surely ahead, especially considering the mandate that Pashinyan once again received from his people. That being the case, these should be the top five priorities for Armenia’s next government:

1. Fully Implement The Terms Of Last November’s Russian-Mediated Ceasefire Agreement

There is no realistic alternative to fully implementing the terms of last November’s Russian-mediated ceasefire agreement if Armenia desires to save its struggling economy. Whether one chooses to call it the Zangezur Corridor or whatever else, this route must be opened as soon as possible so that the country can begin benefiting from its geo-economic destiny as one of the South Caucasus’ chief transit hubs. The concerns of some nationalists that Armenia’s sovereignty might be compromised by doing so are groundless since the ceasefire agreement stipulates that Russia’s Border Guard Services will be responsible for control over transport communication. Moreover, Armenia’s mutual defense alliance with Russia through the CSTO means that Moscow will protect its partner from any speculative acts of aggression by either Azerbaijan or Turkey.

2. Refocus On Russia

It’s understandable why Armenia would seek to balance between Great Powers in the New Cold War, but the country is too small and geopolitically contained to ever be able to do so effectively. In addition, it’s also too closely integrated with Russia to ever realistically “decouple” from its ally without experiencing tremendous self-inflicted economic damage that could realistically provoke a genuinely grassroots Color Revolution against whichever government would dare to attempt this. While some Armenians might still be bitter that Russia didn’t militarily support the continuation of their illegal occupation of Azerbaijani territory despite having no such obligation to do so, they must nevertheless accept that their fate is forever tied with Russia’s. Refocusing on relations with the Eurasian Great Power is therefore the only realistic grand strategy for Armenia.

3. Continue Waging The Anti-Corruption Campaign

Armenia’s economy has been strangled by corruption, which is more responsible for its people’s deteriorating living standards than anything else. It must therefore be completely wiped out if the country is ever to prosper once again. The failure to do so will only leave Armenia economically handicapped and forever unable to fully benefit from its geo-economic destiny as one of the South Caucasus’ chief transit hubs. That being the case, Armenia also mustn’t use its anti-corruption campaign as a cover for cracking down on the opposition. There will likely be cases where opposition members are involved in corruption, but these must be publicly proven beyond any reasonable doubt lest the people begin to suspect Pashinyan of ulterior motives for cleaning up the country.

4. Curtail & Counteract Pernicious Ultra-Nationalist Influences (Including From Abroad)

Some members of Armenian society have fallen under the influence of ultra-nationalist narratives in the aftermath of their country’s traumatizing loss in last year’s conflict, but the latest elections show that they still remain in the minority. These individuals could pose latent domestic and international security threats if they become radicalized and decide to attack their own government or Azerbaijan’s. While some degree of ultra-nationalist sentiment always existed just under the surface of Armenian society, members of the diaspora and some of their allies abroad are clearly manipulating these feelings for ideological reasons. Their efforts must be curtailed and counteracted with creative narratives which address these people’s somewhat understandably nationalist reaction to last year’s war but also seek to gradually deradicalize them.

5. Promote A New National Narrative

The final priority of Armenia’s next government should be to promote a new national narrative that respects the historical one but also concentrates more on a positive outlook for the future than dwelling so much on the past’s many traumas. Armenia has to move ahead in spite of its history, and it finally has the chance to do so with the unblocking of regional economic and transport corridors. Instead of being landlocked, the country can become land-linked just like Laos (which first popularized this concept). The comparatively freer movement of goods and people throughout the region will inevitably bring benefits to Armenia, which can then be invested into improving the living standards for all of its people if these are properly managed by the new government. At all costs, Armenia must look towards the future and take tangible steps to inspire optimism in its people.

Concluding Thoughts

Armenia’s disastrous loss in last year’s Karabakh Conflict was a turning point in its post-independence history. For as traumatic as it was for every Armenian, they need to accept that the outcome is irreversible. Dwelling on speculative scenarios of what could have been done better won’t help everyone move past what happened like they urgently need to do. Now’s the time for the country’s next government to take Armenia into the future, which can only happen through the five suggested steps articulated in this analysis. The strategic situation has forever changed, and the sooner that Armenia acknowledges this, the better that it’ll be. The country must learn to live within this new reality in order to not only survive but most importantly thrive, which is more credible of a possibility than ever if it finally embraces its geo-economic destiny with its Russian ally’s help.

*

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.

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

Malian Whirlwinds: AFRICOM and the Military Presidency

June 22nd, 2021 by Abayomi Azikiwe

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.

***

In the aftermath of a second military coup within nine months in the West African state of Mali both the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU) are calling for a speedy return to civilian rule.

ECOWAS and the AU suspended the coup leaders from the regional organizations while France has threatened to reduce its military presence in Mali until the political situation is stabilized while suggesting that a more “internationalized” force is needed.

Mali has been a center of attention by the United States and its former colonial rulers in France for many years. The most prevalent notion about the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and Paris’ Operation Barkhane in West Africa is that these foreign military forces are there to assist in the wars against Islamic rebels.

Yet long before the threat of armed groups in northern Mali, the U.S. was already making preparations to militarize the country. Concurrently, France has always sought to maintain a military involvement in its former colonies and other independent states for the purpose of protecting and expanding its economic interests in the region.

An attack on Operation Barkhane forces in central Mali on June 21 may give the imperialist power pause in regard to its downsizing of military troops. A car bomb explosion was reported in the Kaigourou neighborhood in the city of Gossi injuring several troops. Eyewitnesses say that there was a flurry of military helicopters racing towards the scene of the attack to evacuate wounded soldiers. (See this)

Such operations are attributed to the Islamist armed groups which are ostensibly fighting the central government in the capital of Bamako which is in the south of the vast country. Several days prior to this incident, France had reported the arrest of a rebel leader inside of Mali.

The group which the rebel leader was heading is known as the Islamic State in the Greater Sahara (EIGS). This is one of several rebel organizations which have been battling the Malian government and its French military backers since 2013.

Mali is not the only state within the Sahel region which is facing similar security issues. An area which connects Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso has been a focal point for jihadist activity prompting the interventions of Operation Barkhane and AFRICOM.

These three states have resources which are important to the western industrial complex. Mali and Burkina Faso have gold and Niger is a major source for uranium. The basis for colonial intervention on the African continent beginning in the 15th century was to acquire slave labor, mineral resources, agricultural commodities, and new avenues for transnational commerce.

After the collapse of the Atlantic Slave Trade and classical colonialism during the 19th and later 20th centuries, the phenomenon of neo-colonialism came to the fore. This new form of economic and political domination can only be carried out if the African continent and other nationally oppressed regions remained under the domination of the global capitalist system.

The imperialist governments have consistently interfered in the internal affairs of the AU member-states to the extent that the national security of these nations remain elusive. Since 2012, France has admitted that 5,100 troops under their command have served in the tri-state territories of Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso along with Mauritania and Chad. Yet these countries remain sources of instability throughout the West and Central African regions.

With specific reference to the present situation in Mali and other contiguous states, the news agency France24 says:

“Dadi Ould Chouaib, also known as Abou Dardar, was arrested on June 11 in the flashpoint ‘tri-border’ region between Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso, the site of frequent attacks by jihadist groups, according to the French military….  The extremists, affiliated with al-Qaida and the Islamic State militant group, have moved from the arid north to more populous central Mali since 2015 where their presence has stoked animosity and violence between ethnic groups in the area.”

Therefore, the ongoing role of Operation Barkhane and AFRICOM is not resolving the security issues in the Sahel region. Quite to the contrary, not only is the level of uncertainty escalating, the conflicts between various groupings within these states are worsening.

Malian Coup Leader Trained by the Pentagon

Of course, the situation in Mali and throughout the Sahel region in Africa illustrates the detrimental impact of imperialist militarism. Since the military coup led by Col. Assimi Goita even the Voice of America (VOA), a U.S. propaganda radio, television and print media outlet funded by the State Department, has openly admitted that this individual who has staged two coups in contravention of the protocols of the AU and ECOWAS was indeed trained by the Pentagon.

According to an article published on August 22, 2020 by the VOA, it notes that:

“[T]he Pentagon acknowledged that Goita previously has participated in training with U.S. Africa Command and its special forces as part of multinational efforts to counter violent extremism in the region. But the Pentagon also condemned the mutiny, which it said runs counter to the training it has provided. ‘Colonel Goita and many other Malians have participated in Flintlock training exercises focused on countering violent extremist organizations, the rule of law in armed conflict, professionalism, and the primacy of civilian authority,’ Col. Christopher P. Karns, spokesperson for the U.S. Africa Command, said in an email to VOA. Flintlock is an annual special forces exercise organized by AFRICOM. ‘U.S. Africa Command has had a partnership and engaged with the Malian armed forces to confront violent extremism in the Sahel, a common interest and mutual concern.’”

Although the Pentagon and the U.S. government as a whole are saying they disapproved of the military usurpation of power by Col. Goita, this is not the first instance of Pentagon-trained officers in Mali seizing power from an elected administration. In 2012 a similar situation developed when lower-ranking army officers took control of the government after an escalation in attacks by Tuareg and Islamist fighters in the north of the country.

The 2012-2013 recrudescence of military coups against civilian governments was linked to the failure of the administration of President Amadou Toumani Toure to quell the Tuareg rebellion in the north of the country. Another mid-level military officer, Amadou Sanogo, led a coup against the government in March of 2012.

Sanogo as well was given instructions in Pentagon-controlled military training facilities in the U.S. where he purportedly studied counter-terrorism tactics. Therefore, the link between counter-terrorism training, military coups against civilian governments and the continuing problems of insurgencies indicate that the existing policies towards Africa by the imperialist states can only result in more underdevelopment and political stagnation.

Whither Mali and the Sahel?

These are profound lessons for the post-colonial African administrations attempting to build their state structures and economies in a world system still controlled by international finance capital. In the U.S., the newly elected administration of President Joe Biden has yet to articulate a foreign policy towards Africa which distinguishes itself from the previous regimes of Donald Trump and Barack Obama.

In fact, it was the Obama administration which engineered the imperialist war against Libya resulting in the destabilization of North and West Africa. The dislocation from Libya has been cited in the resurfacing of the regional conflict in Mali only this time it involves the presence of Islamist rebel groups.

These same Islamist groupings were utilized in Libya as a means to justify the sanctions, blanket bombings and overthrow of the former government of Col. Muammar Gaddafi. Since 2011, the problems of displacement have intensified leading to the migration of tens of millions of people not only from Libya and neighboring states, notwithstanding the initiation of a war in Syria and Yemen, contributing to further instability and forced migration as refugees.

During the 1950s and 1960s, Mali under the political leadership of Modibo Keita, was a leading force in Pan-Africanism and non-capitalist development. Keita along with President Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana and President Ahmed Sekou Toure of Guinea-Conakry formed a coalition known as the Ghana-Guinea-Mali Union. They pledged to integrate the economies and political structures of their countries as a first step towards continental unification.

President Modibo Keita was overthrown by the military leader Moussa Traore in November 1968. Nkrumah was removed from office at the aegis of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in February 1966. President Toure of Guinea died in April 1984 in the U.S. while receiving medical treatment and his government headed by the Democratic Party of Guinea (PDG) was removed from office by lower-ranking military officers soon after his death.

All three countries: Ghana, Mali and Guinea-Conakry, have never been able to reclaim their vanguard role within the African Revolution since these respective time periods when they fell victim to imperialist intrigue and opportunism. Consequently, the role of the military in post-colonial Africa has largely been a reactionary one. These historical trends can only be reversed when the masses of workers, farmers and youth take control of the state structures to construct socialism and African unification.

*

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.

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

Featured image is from the author

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

U.S. Naval Forces Europe-Africa reported that the guided-missile destroyer USS Laboon, deployed to the Black Sea on June 11, engaged in passing and communications exercises with two warships assigned to the carrier strike group of the new HMS Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier currently in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea.

The latter ships are the British destroyer HMS Defender and the Royal Netherlands Navy’s De Zeven Provinciën-class frigate HNLMS Evertsen.

Laboon is the fifth American ship sent to the Black Sea so far this year and the fourth guided-missile warship (three destroyers and a cruiser), all four Aegis Combat System vessels equipped with Standard Missile-3 interceptor missiles.

Last week Queen Elizabeth and its carrier strike group engaged in joint exercises in the Mediterranean with France’s nuclear aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle and its carrier strike group which included 15 ships and 57 aircraft from Britain, France, the U.S., Greece, Italy and the Netherlands. The British group represents the largest-ever deployment of F-35 combat aircraft and the largest fifth-generation fighter carrier air wing in the world.

In addition to Defender and Evertsen, the Queen Elizabeth strike group includes the British destroyer HMS Diamond, the U.S. destroyer USS The Sullivans and the British frigates HMS Richmond and HMS Kent.

Laboon is assigned to the carrier strike group of the USS Dwight D. Eisenhowernuclear aircraft carrier as are fellow destroyers USS Mitscher, USS Mahan and USS Thomas Hudner and cruiser USS Monterey. Thomas Hudner and Monterey were deployed to the Black Sea earlier this year.

In addition to the four guided-missile warships assigned to Dwight D. Eisenhowerand the one to Queen Elizabeth, the U.S. maintains four more destroyers at the Naval Station Rota in Spain. So the U.S. currently has ten guided-missile ships in the Mediterranean and Black Seas capable of firing 55 Tomahawk cruise missiles apiece and Standard Missile-3 interceptors of the sort that earlier this month was used to conduct “a ballistic missile intercept in outer space.”

The recent exercise in the Black Sea with British, U.S. and Dutch warships was described by its British commander in these anything but modest words:

“This opportunity for ourselves and the HNLMS Evertsen to operate with the USS Laboon in the Black Sea has again demonstrated the agility and flexibility that exists between NATO allies to be able to work seamlessly together on Maritime Security operations in order to defend international order and promote global peace and stability”

Defending the international order in a region where only one adversary is targeted: Russia.

*

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.

Rick Rozoff, renowned author and geopolitical analyst, actively involved in opposing war, militarism and interventionism for over fifty years. He manages the Anti-Bellum and For peace, against war website

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

Featured image is from US Navy

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Defending International Order: U.S., British, Dutch Warships Converge in Black Sea
  • 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The European database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, which also tracks reports of injuries and deaths following the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines.”

A subscriber from Europe recently emailed us and reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.

The total number of countries in Europe is much higher, almost twice as many, numbering around 50, although there are some differences of opinion as to which countries are technically part of Europe.

So as high as these numbers are, they do NOT reflect all of Europe. The actual number in Europe who are reported dead or injured due to COVID-19 shots would be much higher than what we are reporting here.

The EudraVigilance database reports that through June 19, 2021 there are 15,472 deaths and 1,509,266 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots:

From the total of injuries recorded, half of them (753,657) are serious injuries.

Seriousness provides information on the suspected undesirable effect; it can 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.”

Health Impact News subscriber in Europe ran the reports for each of the four COVID-19 shots we are including here. This subscriber has volunteered to do this, and it is a lot of work to tabulate each reaction with injuries and fatalities, since there is no place on the EudraVigilance system we have found that tabulates all the results.

Since we have started publishing this, others from Europe have also calculated the numbers and confirmed the totals.[1]

Here is the summary data through June 19, 2021.

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2,Comirnaty) from BioNTechPfizer: 7,420 deaths and 560,256 injuries to 19/06/2021

  • 16,133   Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 81 deaths
  • 12,637   Cardiac disorders incl. 964 deaths
  • 101        Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 6 deaths
  • 7000      Ear and labyrinth disorders incl. 4 deaths
  • 265        Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
  • 8,122     Eye disorders incl. 17 deaths
  • 51,030   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 348 deaths
  • 155,486 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 2,290 deaths
  • 468        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 31 deaths
  • 6,110     Immune system disorders incl. 32 deaths
  • 17,549   Infections and infestations incl. 762 deaths
  • 6,275     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 104 deaths
  • 13,249   Investigations incl. 285 deaths
  • 4,162     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 139 deaths
  • 79,125   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 88 deaths
  • 325        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps) incl. 23 deaths
  • 100,895 Nervous system disorders incl. 780 deaths
  • 384        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 10 deaths
  • 107        Product issues
  • 9,928     Psychiatric disorders incl. 105 deaths
  • 1,765     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 115 deaths
  • 2,696     Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 23,689   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 848 deaths
  • 26,641   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 66 deaths
  • 846        Social circumstances incl. 10 deaths
  • 281        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 19 deaths
  • 14,987   Vascular disorders incl. 289 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273 (CX-024414) from Moderna: 4,147 deathand 122,643 injuries to 19/06/2021

  • 2,239     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 29 deaths
  • 3,315     Cardiac disorders incl. 446 deaths
  • 39           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 1,454     Ear and labyrinth disorders
  • 82           Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
  • 1,883     Eye disorders incl. 7 deaths
  • 10,655   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 142 deaths
  • 33,936   General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 1,759 deaths
  • 209        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 11 deaths
  • 1,117     Immune system disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 3,835     Infections and infestations incl. 234 deaths
  • 2,480     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 77 deaths
  • 2,670     Investigations incl. 89 deaths
  • 1,297     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 85 deaths
  • 15,131   Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 77 deaths
  • 128        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps) incl. 15 deaths
  • 21,684   Nervous system disorders incl. 424 deaths
  • 255        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 2 death
  • 20           Product issues
  • 2,437     Psychiatric disorders incl. 69 deaths
  • 807        Renal and urinary disorders incl. 52 deaths
  • 459        Reproductive system and breast disorders incl. 1 death
  • 5,640     Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 399 deaths
  • 6,538     Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 28 deaths
  • 504        Social circumstances incl. 13 deaths
  • 397        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 38 deaths
  • 3,432     Vascular disorders incl. 141 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental vaccine AZD1222/VAXZEVRIA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/ AstraZeneca3,364 deathand 793,036 injuries to 19/06/2021

  • 9,136     Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 132 deaths
  • 12,135   Cardiac disorders incl. 396 deaths
  • 95           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 8,797     Ear and labyrinth disorders
  • 309        Endocrine disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 13,459   Eye disorders incl. 12 deaths
  • 81,806   Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 161 deaths
  • 212,663 General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 891 deaths
  • 525        Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 25 deaths
  • 3,085     Immune system disorders incl. 11 deaths
  • 17,791   Infections and infestations incl. 217 deaths
  • 7,854     Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 77 deaths
  • 16,731   Investigations incl. 79 deaths
  • 9,765     Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 50 deaths
  • 123,637 Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 45 deaths
  • 332        Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps) incl. 8 deaths
  • 169,286 Nervous system disorders incl. 532 deaths
  • 223        Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 4 deaths
  • 103        Product issues
  • 14,931   Psychiatric disorders incl. 27 deaths
  • 2,809     Renal and urinary disorders incl. 29 deaths
  • 5,967     Reproductive system and breast disorders
  • 26,631   Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 387 deaths
  • 36,457   Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 22 deaths
  • 772        Social circumstances incl. 4 deaths
  • 671        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 16 deaths
  • 17,066   Vascular disorders incl. 235 deaths

Total reactions for the experimental COVID-19 vaccine JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S) from Johnson & Johnson541 deaths and 33, 331 injuries to 19/06/2021

  • 306        Blood and lymphatic system disorders incl. 16 deaths
  • 496        Cardiac disorders incl. 56 deaths
  • 14           Congenital, familial and genetic disorders
  • 177        Ear and labyrinth disorders
  • 8             Endocrine disorders incl. 1 death
  • 383        Eye disorders incl. 3 deaths
  • 3,086     Gastrointestinal disorders incl. 23 deaths
  • 8,761     General disorders and administration site conditions incl. 137 deaths
  • 52           Hepatobiliary disorders incl. 4 deaths
  • 85           Immune system disorders
  • 392        Infections and infestations incl. 13 deaths
  • 320        Injury, poisoning and procedural complications incl. 8 deaths
  • 2,003     Investigations incl. 37 deaths
  • 184        Metabolism and nutrition disorders incl. 10 deaths
  • 5,718     Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders incl. 17 deaths
  • 16           Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl. cysts and polyps)
  • 7,093     Nervous system disorders incl. 68 deaths
  • 9             Pregnancy, puerperium and perinatal conditions incl. 1 death
  • 9             Product issues
  • 355        Psychiatric disorders incl. 5 deaths
  • 119        Renal and urinary disorders incl. 8 deaths
  • 114        Reproductive system and breast disorders
  • 1,130     Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders incl. 43 deaths
  • 804        Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders incl. 2 deaths
  • 72           Social circumstances incl. 3 deaths
  • 336        Surgical and medical procedures incl. 26 deaths
  • 1,289     Vascular disorders incl. 60 deaths

*

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

Notes

[1] These totals are estimates based on reports submitted to EudraVigilance. Totals may be much higher based on percentage of adverse reactions that are reported. Some of these reports may also be reported to the individual country’s adverse reaction databases, such as the U.S. VAERS database and the UK Yellow Card system. The fatalities are grouped by symptoms, and some fatalities may have resulted from multiple symptoms.

Featured image is from Ali Raza from PxHere.

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.

***

Cuba’S economy lost more than $9 billion (£6.5bn) amid the coronavirus pandemic last year, due to the impact of the six decade-long US blockade, government officials said on Thursday.

The losses in 2020 were up from $5.6bn (£4bn) in 2019, according to Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez.

“The human damage, suffering and deficiencies caused to Cuban families are incalculable,” he said.

Cuba has lost some $754bn (£543bn) since the economic blockade was first imposed in 1962 by then US president John F Kennedy.

He intended it to strangle the nascent Cuban revolution and oust the government of Fidel Castro, which had swept the power in 1959 by overthrowing the US-backed Batista dictatorship.

The blockade was a retaliatory measure in response to the nationalisation of property carried out by the revolutionary government. Despite widespread international condemnation, it has remained in place ever since.

Former US president Donald Trump ratcheted up the pressure on the Cuban economy in 2019 by enacting title three of the so-called Helms-Burton Act, which, although passed into law in 1996, had been suspended by successive US administrations.

It placed severe restrictions on foreign companies, essentially banning them from doing business with Cuba on pain of US lawsuits for alleged “trafficking” if they failed to comply.

Last year, Washington was accused of an act of “Wild West brutality” after it used the Act to block a ship carrying vital medical aid from China from docking on the socialist island.

The supplies, including two million masks, 400,000 rapid diagnostic kits and 104 ventilators, were destined for some 24 countries, including Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, the Dominican Republic and Peru.

Days before leaving the White House, the Trump administration placed Cuba on a list of state sponsors of terrorism, despite a lack of credible evidence.

Hopes of a shift in policy have been dashed by President Joe Biden, who has so far failed to remove Cuba from the list, despite promising a review, as his government pursues an increasingly aggressive foreign policy.

Last month, the State Department listed Cuba as among those countries “not co-operating fully with United States anti-terrorism efforts.”

Havana’s economic figures will be presented to the United Nations general assembly as part of an annual resolution condemning the blockade. The motion usually receives the support of all member states except the US and Israel.

*

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.

***

Will the Great Pandemic permanently unleash governments around the world? Covid-19 is enabling politicians to turn freedom from an individual right into a conditional bureaucratic dispensation. Defining down freedom was exemplified by the G-7 Summit that became a ludicrous and hypocritical Lockdowners Victory Lap. 

The G-7 leaders, meeting in Cornwall, issued a communique pledging to “protect individuals from forced labour and to ensure that global supply chains are free from the use of forced labour.” But the political bosses had no concern about “forced non-labor” – their own decrees that destroyed tens of millions of jobs. That was no problem because, as the G-7 leaders boasted, “We have provided unprecedented support to citizens and businesses… totalling over $12 trillion including fiscal support and liquidity measures.”

But handouts are no substitute for freedom and self-reliance. Government aid is always only one decree away from mandating terms of submission. In 1942, the Supreme Court declared, “It is hardly lack of due process for the government to regulate that which it subsidizes.” The G-7 Summiteers proclaimed a boatload of environmental goals. Will future “stimulus payments” be restricted to people who reduce their “carbon footprint” or abandon their non-electric vehicles?

The Biden administration was thrilled that G-7 Summiteers adapted its slogan, “Build Back Better,” in the communique. That slogan will entitle politicians to snare more revenue and power to repair the damage from the shutdowns they inflicted. Biden-style rebuilding presumes that any government spending confers vast benefits, at least on politicians. Biden’s colleagues also seconded his call for placing at least 30% of all land and water under government restrictions in the name of conservation.

G-7 leaders enjoyed parties and plenty of backslapping – privileges denied to nearby British citizens whose lives continue semi-paralyzed by pervasive government restrictions. Brits were told that their lockdown misery would end on June 21, which became known as “Freedom Day.” But British politicians have invoked the fear of new variants to justify extending the lockdown at least another month and possibly far longer. Prime Minister Boris Johnson declared on Monday, “Now is the time to ease off the accelerator,” regardless of how many individual rights become roadkill. Spiked editor Brendan O’Neil declared that “this further suspension of liberty, is only possible in a society that has thoroughly devalued freedom” and derided the “creeping embrace of the lockdown lifestyle among significant sections of the Smart Set.”

In the U.S., President Joe Biden designated the Fourth of July as Americans’ shrink-wrapped “Freedom Day.” On March 11, Biden declared that, if people obey government decrees, “there’s a good chance you, your families and friends, will be [permitted] to get together in your backyard or in your neighborhood and have a cookout or a barbecue and celebrate Independence Day.” Biden repeated his declaration on April 21: “To celebrate our independence from this virus on July 4th with family and friends in small groups…. We all need to mask up… until everyone has a chance to get their shot.”

Biden converted the Fourth of July into a benchmark of submission to presidential decrees. On May 4, Biden announced that he wanted 70% of American adults to have at least one Covid vaccine by July 4. On June 2, Biden declared that people should “exercise your freedom” to get vaccinated so Americans can enjoy a “summer of freedom.” Freedom to get politically-mandated injections was not one of the clauses included in the Bill of Rights. Regardless of the Biden administration’s alarmism, most states have already lifted lockdown orders.

Biden’s attempted expropriation of Independence Day had no impact on his honeymoon with the media. When the Pulitzer Prizes were bestowed last Friday, no awards were given for exposing the frauds and follies of repressive Covid-19 policies that ravaged prosperity and freedom. Instead, the Pulitzer for Public Service was awarded to a New York Times team that included Donald McNeil. As Jeffrey Tucker reported, early during the pandemic, McNeil fanned fear with a bizarre article headlined, “To Take On the Coronavirus, Go Medieval on It.” He urged American policymakers to rely on tactics “from the era of the Black Death… pen terrified citizens up inside their poisoned cities… Harsh measures horrify civil libertarians, but they often save lives, especially when they are imposed in the early days.” McNeil turbocharged his alarmism by overestimating the likely death toll by over 20-fold. Ironically, at a time when the American media has become far more critical of police power, pundits have consecrated bureaucratic power.

In the Covid era, destroying freedom is a negligible loss, akin to a government agency misplacing a few hundred filing cabinets. Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti faced minimal criticism last December when he banned all unnecessary “travel, including, without limitation, travel on foot, bicycle, scooter, motorcycle, automobile, or public transit.” The mayor offered no evidence to justify placing four million residents under house arrest. Similar restrictions hit residents of Michigan, New York, Oregon, and other states. Federal judge William Stickman IV aptly declared last September, “Broad population-wide lockdowns are such a dramatic inversion of the concept of liberty in a free society as to be nearly presumptively unconstitutional.” But the scant controversy over lockdowns is a sign that many media outlets are happy to see liberty “inverted” into unquestioning obedience to any command issued by any government official.

Politicians could decimate freedom because their Covid-19 decrees almost instantly became hallowed with the aura of “science” – regardless of how often the official guidance changed. Since Biden became president, Covid vaccines have also become sacrosanct and casting any doubts on their safety or efficacy is portrayed as proof of idiocy or villainy. Politicians and their media allies now talk as if the only reliable gauge of health and safety is the percentage of Americans who have been injected (ignoring the natural immunity that the 115 million people who had Covid infections enjoy). The result is a long series of socialist-style victory proclamations, substituting the number of arms injected for bogus statistics on the wheat harvest from collective farms. And anyone who refuses to be vaccinated is the new Kulak, reviled and portrayed as a dire threat to the survival of everything decent. It would not be surprising if politicians limited future Covid handouts to individuals who could prove they were vaccinated.

Many Americans presume that the political travails of Covid are mostly in the rearview mirror. The small print of the G-7 Communique is hell on such optimism. “The COVID-19 pandemic is not under control anywhere until it is under control everywhere,” the Summiteers warned. And as long as the pandemic is out of control, rulers must remain unleashed. If anyone has the virus, then no one is free – or at least no one should be permitted to be free. The prerogatives and precedents that multiplied during the Covid pandemic are waiting to be exploited for the next viral outbreak – or maybe simply to make some really dramatic gestures on climate change.

The G-7 Communique endlessly promised “transparency” but only fools should expect official candor during pandemics or other politically-proclaimed emergencies. British scientists who shaped government Covid policies recently admitted using “unethical” and “dystopian” fearmongering to terrorize people into submission. One scientist declared that “using fear smacks of totalitarianism,” and another scientist admitted being stunned by the weaponization of behavioral psychology” to enforce compliance with Covid dictates. 

American politicians and government agencies relied on many of the same fear tactics in this country. Docile media helped sway people to view other Americans’ freedom as the deadliest threat to their own health. Instead, the biggest danger citizens faced was that their rulers would not have sufficient power to force everyone else to stop working, stop worshipping, stay inside, and get injected.

No-fault Czars are no substitute for individual liberty. Politicians vindicated lockdowns by claiming that all the sacrifices are justified if they “save just one life.” But what about “just one freedom” – especially freedoms previously enjoyed by hundreds of millions of people? Instead of “Build Back Better” further empowering reckless rulers, we need to “Build Back Freer.”

*

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.

James Bovard is the author of ten books, including Public Policy Hooligan, Attention Deficit Democracy, The Bush Betrayal, and Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty. He has written for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Playboy, Washington Post, New Republic, Reader’s Digest, and many other publications. He is a member of the USA Today Board of Contributors, a frequent contributor to The Hill, and a contributing editor for American Conservative.

Featured image is from AIER

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.

***

Last week, the Federal Reserve announced it will maintain an interest rate target of zero to 0.25 percent for the rest of 2021. The Fed said it will also continue its monthly purchase of 120 billion dollars of Treasury and mortgage-backed securities.

Some Fed board members are forecasting a rate increase by late 2022 or 2023, though with the rate still not reaching one percent. The Fed will neither allow interest rates to rise to market levels nor reduce its purchase of Treasury securities. A significant increase in interest rates would make the government’s borrowing costs unsustainable.

The Fed also raised its projected rate of inflation to three percent, although it still insists the rise in prices is a transitory effect of the end of the lockdowns. There is some truth to this, as it will take some time for businesses to get back to full capacity. However, the Fed began taking extraordinary measures to prop up the economy in September of 2019, when it started pumping billions of dollars a day into the repo market that banks use to make short-term loans to each other. The lockdowns only postponed and deepened the forthcoming Fed-caused meltdown.

Germany’s Deutsche Bank recently released a paper warning about the Federal Reserve continuing to disregard the inflation risk caused by easy money policies designed to “stimulate” the economy and facilitate massive government spending. Germans have reason to be sensitive to the consequences of inflation, including hyperinflation. Out-of-control inflation played a major role in the collapse of the German economy in the 1920s, which led to the rise of the National Socialists.

This pattern could repeat itself in America where we have already witnessed the rise of authoritarian movements. Last summer, groups exploited legitimate concerns about police misconduct to ferment violence across the country. Can anyone doubt that an economic crisis that leads to mass unemployment, foreclosures, and maybe even shortages will result in large-scale violence? Or that the violence will be exploited by power-hungry politicians? Or that many people will once again fall for the big lie that preserving safety requires giving up their liberty?

The apparatus of repression already exists in the form of a surveillance state, police militarization, and big tech’s cooperation with big government to stamp out dissent. Now, President Biden and his congressional allies want to use the January 6 US Capitol turmoil to justify expanding government powers in the name of stopping “domestic terrorists.” Part of this new campaign is expanding censorship of “extremism,” defined as any views that threaten the status quo. The Biden administration has taken a page from the Communist playbook in suggesting people report their friends and family who are becoming “radicalized.”

We may still have time to prevent collapse in America, or at least to make sure the collapse leads to a transition to a free society. The key to success is spreading the ideas of liberty until we have the ability to force the politicians to dismantle the welfare-warfare state and the fiat money system that is the lifeblood of authoritarian government.

*

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.

Dr. Hassan Diab to Trial prolongs a 13-year Miscarriage of Justice

June 22nd, 2021 by Hassan Diab Support Committee

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.

***

The unjust decision earlier this year by a French Court of Appeal to send Dr. Hassan Diab to trial prolongs a 13-year miscarriage of justice. The decision ignored overwhelming evidence of Hassan’s innocence, and engaged in contradictory reasoning and unfounded speculation. Even France’s own avocat général had asked the Cour de Cassation to quash the Court of Appeal decision due to its legal flaws. However, the Cour de Cassation upheld the Court of Appeal decision.

Hassan’s Kafkaesque nightmare highlights the human cost of unjust prosecution due to politics, aided and abetted by a Canadian extradition law deficient in human rights protections. 

We need to exert pressure on the Canadian government to end Hassan Diab’s persecution and prevent a wrongful conviction!

We have an ongoing Parliamentary petition and letter-writing campaign. If you haven’t done so already, please to sign the petition below:

And please send a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. You may write your own letter, or send the online letter at:

Thanks to everyone who already signed the Parliamentary petition and sent a letter to PM Trudeau! 

*

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 Ottawa Citizen

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Dr. Hassan Diab to Trial prolongs a 13-year Miscarriage of Justice
  • Tags: ,

Joseph Biden paladino dei diritti umani

June 22nd, 2021 by Manlio Dinucci

Il Summit Usa-Russia, il 16 giugno a Ginevra, è stato definito dal presidente Biden «buono, positivo» e dal presidente Putin «abbastanza costruttivo». Dovremmo quindi sentirci un po’ rassicurati in una situazione in cui l’Europa è in prima linea in quello che la Nato definisce «il punto più basso della nostra relazione con la Russia dalla fine della guerra fredda»? I fatti ci dicono il contrario. Nel momento stesso in cui in Svizzera era in corso il Summit Usa-Russia, nel Baltico era in corso la Baltops 50, una delle 20 grandi esercitazioni militari Usa-Nato in Europa nel 2021.

La Baltops 50 è stata organizzata e diretta dal comandante delle Forze navali Usa-Africa con quartier generale a Napoli-Capodichino, l’Ammiraglio Robert Burke, che allo stesso tempo è a capo del Comando Nato di Lago Patria (JFC-Naples). Dal 6 al 18 giugno, oltre 4.000 militari con 40 navi e 60 aerei – appartenenti a 18 paesi membri e partner della Nato, tra cui l’Italia – si sono esercitati alla guerra aeronavale nel Baltico e nelle regioni circostanti», a ridosso del territorio russo. Hanno preso parte alla manovra navi da guerra e bombardieri anche a capacità nucleare, e, per la prima volta, è stato integrato nell’esercitazione il nuovo Centro Spaziale Nato.

Mentre era in corso questa grande esercitazione di guerra chiaramente diretta contro la Russia, nella conferenza stampa dopo il Summit il presidente Putin dichiarava: «Noi conduciamo le esercitazioni militari all’interno del nostro territorio, non portiamo i nostri equipaggiamenti e il nostro personale vicino ai confini degli Stati Uniti d’America, come invece stanno facendo ora vicino ai nostri confini gli Usa e i loro partner». La dislocazione geografica delle forze, soprattutto di quelle nucleari, è di primaria importanza: un missile tattico dislocato a 10.000 km di distanza non può colpire l’obiettivo ma, se dislocato a 1.000 km, ha lo stesso effetto distruttivo di un missile intercontinentale.

La Dichiarazione dei due presidenti sulla «stabilità strategica», che include l’estensione del Nuovo Trattato Start per il controllo delle armi nucleari, sarà vanificata se gli Usa, come hanno in programma, installeranno in Europa nuove armi nucleari «tattiche». Questa e altre questioni chiave sono state ignorate dai media che, secondo la regia di Washington, hanno usato il Summit quale una sorta di processo, con Putin sul banco degli imputati.

Pubblico ministero il Presidente degli Stati uniti che, dopo aver rifiutato di tenere la tradizionale conferenza stampa congiunta, non ha come Putin solo risposto alle domande, ma ha presentato una sua relazione sul Summit. Secondo quanto riferisce, Biden ha detto a Putin come reagisce quando vede violare i diritti umani in Russia e altrove: «Come potrei essere il presidente degli Stati Uniti d’America e non parlare contro la violazione dei diritti umani? Difendere le libertà fondamentali fa parte del DNA del nostro paese». Lo dichiara solennemente l’attuale Presidente degli Stati Uniti, il democratico Joseph Biden che nel 2001 sostenne la guerra del presidente repubblicano Bush in Afghanistan e, nel 2002, promosse una risoluzione bipartisan che autorizzava il presidente Bush a invadere l’Iraq con l’accusa (poi dimostratasi falsa) che esso possedeva armi di distruzione di massa.

Lo dichiara solennemente Joseph Biden che, quale vicepresidente dell’amministrazione Obama, è stato uno degli artefici delle guerre Usa-Nato contro la Libia e la Siria, del sostegno ai gruppi fondamentalisti islamici per scardinare questi paesi dall’interno, dell’impiego dei neonazisti in Ucraina per il putsch che ha aperto il nuovo confronto con la Russia, della «kill list» comprendente persone di tutto il mondo che, giudicate nocive per gli Stati uniti, erano segretamente uccise (The New York Times, President Obama’s Kill List, 29 maggio 2012), Guerre e operazioni segrete che hanno provocato, direttamente e indirettamente, milioni di morti e le peggiori violazioni dei diritti umani. Non mancano però i buoni sentimenti: in un lungo necrologio ufficiale su Twitter (riportato per intero dall’Ansa), il presidente Biden annuncia: «I nostri cuori sono pesanti oggi mentre vi facciamo sapere che il nostro amato pastore tedesco, Champ, è morto in pace a casa».

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Joseph Biden paladino dei diritti umani

Forest Service Protections Sought for Wolves in Idaho, Montana Wildernesses

June 22nd, 2021 by Center For Biological Diversity

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

A coalition of wildlife advocacy groups, represented by the non-profit environmental law firm Earthjustice, today asked the U.S. Forest Service to issue new protections for wolves in designated wilderness areas following Idaho and Montana’s enactment of a rash of aggressive anti-wolf laws.

The groups’ petition, submitted to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and top Forest Service officials, asks the agency to enact measures to protect wolves in National Forest wilderness areas from new Idaho and Montana laws authorizing use of professional contractors and private reimbursement programs resembling 19th-Century wolf bounties to dramatically reduce wolf populations in the two states.

During their 2021 sessions, the legislatures of Idaho and Montana both enacted harsh anti-wolf laws that target up to 1,800 wolves across the two states. One goal of the laws is to artificially inflate elk populations to levels last seen in the mid-1990s, before wolves were reintroduced to their historic range in the Northern Rockies.

“A wilderness is supposed to be a wild place governed by natural conditions, not an elk farm,” said Earthjustice attorney Timothy Preso. “We are calling on the Forest Service to prevent Montana and Idaho from taking the wild out of wilderness through their aggressive wolf-removal campaigns.”

The groups’ petition focuses on a guarantee in the 1964 Wilderness Act that the Forest Service must manage designated wilderness as “an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, … retaining its primeval character and influence, … which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions.” New laws that authorize professional contractors and subsidized trappers to drive down wolf populations threaten to degrade wilderness conditions by upsetting the balance of predator and prey and eliminating a keystone wildlife species that is an icon of the wilderness landscape.

The petition asks the Forest Service to issue new regulations and closure orders to prevent wolf killing by professional and subsidized hunters and trappers across nearly 8 million acres of designated wilderness in Idaho and Montana, including such flagship areas as the Bob Marshall Wilderness in northwest Montana and the Frank Church-River of No Return and Selway-Bitterroot Wildernesses in central Idaho.

“Wolves need wildernesses to serve as a refuge where they can be safe from the slaughter they face across Idaho and Montana,” said Andrea Zaccardi, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Protecting wilderness requires the Forest Service to also protect wolves, which are so ecologically important to our national forests.”

“The state-sanctioned killing of wolves in Idaho and Montana threatens to needlessly damage the natural balance within our wilderness areas in these states for years to come,” said McCrystie Adams, managing attorney at Defenders of Wildlife. “We urge the U.S. Forest Service to abide by its duty and take immediate action to safeguard the unique character of our wilderness areas against these states’ wolf-killing measures.”

“The wild Clearwater region is the northern half of the largest relatively intact ecosystem in the lower 48 states,” said Gary Macfarlane, ecosystem defense director for Friends of the Clearwater. “Wolves and other species make places like the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness truly wild. This petition seeks to keep it that way.”

“Dispatching trappers and private contractors to cruelly and ruthlessly kill wolves on public lands threatens both the survival of the species and the character of the wilderness areas where they range,” said Nicholas Arrivo, managing attorney for the Humane Society of the United States. “The Forest Service must take action to mitigate the damage that Idaho and Montana’s reckless wolf-killing legislation will cause.”

“The Forest Service has long recognized that the presence of the Northern Rockies’ treasured wolves on the landscape enhances and preserves congressionally designated wilderness areas,” said Keisha Sedlacek, director of regulatory affairs for the Humane Society Legislative Fund. “The agency must carry out Congress’ intent to protect wolves from commercially driven slaughter.”

“The Montana Wildlife Federation supports ethical, fair chase hunting of wolves, but this is anything but ethical or fair chase,” said Nick Gevock, conservation director of Montana Wildlife Federation. “Paying contractors to go into wilderness areas and kill wolves amounts to an all-out eradication effort that harkens back to the 19th Century. These are wild areas that offer some of the best hunting in the country for all species, and these moves degrade that. It’s disgraceful and it needs to be stopped.”

“Wolves are essential to the overall health of ecosystems, but Montana and Idaho’s new laws aim to decimate their populations in the Northern Rockies. We cannot allow the modern equivalent of a bounty system for wolf killing to operate in wilderness areas— the very places meant to provide refuge for wildlife to thrive,” said Dan Ritzman, director of lands, water and wildlife at the Sierra Club. “With the extinction crisis bearing down, we need wilderness areas to remain intact and in support of life-sustaining biodiversity more than ever.”

“Wilderness is a place where natural processes should prevail, and the howl of the wolf should echo from peak to vale,” said Erik Molvar, executive director of Western Watersheds Project. “Healthy populations should be allowed to thrive throughout the range of the gray wolf, and their ability to flourish should not be impeded by commercially-driven killing, especially in Wilderness.”

“Montana and Idaho have declared a despicable war on wolves and on the very idea of Wilderness itself,” said George Nickas, executive director of Wilderness Watch. “The Forest Service has the authority and mandate to protect these special places and their wildlife. It needs to put a stop to this ugly slaughter.”

“Americans need to know that wolves can exist unmolested by man in our few remaining wildernesses,” said Marc Cooke, representative of Wolves of the Rockies.

The petitioner groups include the Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife, Friends of the Clearwater, Humane Society of the United States, Humane Society Legislative Fund, International Wildlife Coexistence Network, Sierra Club, Western Watersheds Project, Wilderness Watch, and Wolves of the Rockies.

*

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: Photo courtesy of Jacob W. Frank, National Park Service.

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.

***

The foreign ministers of Turkey and Ukraine, Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu and Dmytro Kuleba, met during the weekend’s three-day Antalya Diplomacy Forum in Turkey to discuss yet further strengthening bilateral military cooperation.

The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry disclosed this about the content of the meeting:

“Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu assured that Turkey would continue to support Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic integration in all possible ways. The ministers discussed the possibilities of enhanced cooperation between the Ukrainian and Turkish navies which will help implement NATO standards in the Ukrainian Navy, increase their defense capabilities and interoperability with NATO member states, and generally strengthen cooperation between the countries for security in the Black Sea.”

Foreign Minister Kuleba expressed gratitude to Turkey for its steadfast support for its admission to NATO leading up to and during the June 14 NATO summit in Brussels. Ankara’s backing for Ukraine’s NATO accession is second to none in the 30-nation military bloc.

Kuleba told reporters at the conference that his nation is purchasing Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones “because Turkish drones are very good,” and very good precisely in this context:

“Drones are needed to deter Russia so that Russia thinks twice, before planning, any escalation or any large-scale attack on Ukraine.”

The foreign minister added that Turkey and Ukraine are collaborating “very closely” on exploiting the issue of Crimean Tatars to give Moscow an additional headache. Turkey, fresh from supporting the 44-day Azerbaijani war against Nagorno-Karabakh, would surely not object to replicating the model of “liberating” a Turkic/Muslim brother people from Russian occupation. Ukraine’s designation of Crimea, one which Turkey faithfully echoes, is that of temporarily-occupied territory: the same way Turkey views that portion of Nagorno-Karabakh not yet “liberated,” and Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which its Georgian ally also proclaims occupied territories.

Turkey is accommodating Ukraine’s military buildup, assisting its war in the Donbass, facilitating its entrance into NATO and preparing it to confront Russia in the Black Sea as it incites Tatar separatism in Crimea.

The Turkish and Ukrainian foreign ministers also discussed plans for the impending 10th meeting of the High-Level Strategic Council chaired by presidents Volodymyr Zelensky and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, and the next meeting of the two nations’ Quadriga format consisting of the defense and foreign ministers of both countries.

In April the Turkish and Ukrainian heads of state met in the Turkish capital for the most recent meeting of the High Level Strategic Council, which produced a twenty-point statement. In that document Turkey fully backs the position of Ukraine and its sponsors in the U.S., NATO and European Union in regard to forcing the Donetsk and Lugansk republics to return to Ukraine, driving Russia out of Crimea and granting NATO membership to Kiev. The Joint Declaration of the 9th meeting of the High-Level Strategic Council between Ukraine and the Republic of Turkey demands “the de-occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, as well as the territories in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.”

After the April 10 meeting, the web page of the Ukrainian president confirmed that “all aspects of the strategic partnership between the two countries were considered at today’s meeting.” Zelensky was cited emphasizing commitments to joint work in the energy sphere and in weapons manufacturing. The energy factor involves among other matters the prospect of Ukraine connecting with the 1,100-mile Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan oil pipeline and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline running from the Caspian Sea region to Turkey.

Zelensky stated that Turkish-Ukrainian defense cooperation is “the locomotive of the strategic partnership between the two countries.”

The last meeting of the Quadriga (2 + 2) was held on March 24, also in Ankara. The four ministers issued a joint statement afterward which in part reads:

“National coordinators discussed ways to deepen cooperation between Ukraine and Turkey in the field of security and defense to restore stability and security in the Black Sea region, and to further develop cooperation in the defense industry. A separate topic of the consultations was the current situation on the Crimean peninsula temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation and the territories of Donetsk and Luhansk regions….The participants in the consultations exchanged views on the prospects for resolving conflicts in the regions of the Middle East, North Africa, the Eastern Mediterranean and the Caucasus.”

Shortly before that meeting Armenian Lebanese scholar Yeghia Tashjian warned:

“[My] greatest fear is on a regional level. It is no secret that Ukraine is preparing for war or at least triggering an armed conflict in Russian-controlled Donbass with Turkish and Western blessings. It has been two weeks since I began monitoring the Ukrainian and Russian army’s supply routes and deployment of heavy weapons near Donbass. Kyiv, motivated by the Turkish and Azerbaijani victory in Artsakh [Nagorno-Karabakh], tried to establish military relations with Turkey and bought Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones. Russia, aware that it may engage in a two-front war and knowing well that Armenia cannot defend itself against another Turkish-Azerbaijani invasion, is consolidating its presence in southern Armenia by building military posts and reopening the abandoned airfield of Sisian in Syunik.”

When the news about the discussions between the Turkish and Ukrainian foreign ministers became public, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued this characteristically tepid statement:

“We have made our position in regards to attempts to pull Ukraine into NATO very unambiguous. I have no doubts that serious, responsible states understand very clearly, what we mean. We plan another contact within our regular dialogue with the Turkish colleagues. I believe we will discuss this topic as well, of course.”

A couple of days earlier, when asked about Turkey considering opening a military base in conquered Nagorno-Karabakh – the statement was made by the Turkish president himself and published in the Turkish press – Lavrov shrugged his shoulders and said, “I don’t respond to rumors.”

As to how truly concerned the Russian government is about the behavior of its Turkish colleagues, this effusion by President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov a few weeks ago should clarify matters:

“Turkey and Turkey’s commitment to its independent course of development, which is quite firm, are generally the subject for heightened attention and, perhaps, concern at NATO. And, of course, this is a subject of US concern and the way the United States is trying to raise its voice at Ankara…obviously indicate that Washington does not like how [Turkish President Recep Tayyip] Erdogan is confidently leading Turkey forward and that they would prefer a more compliant Turkey.”

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.

***

On June 23, the United Nations General Assembly will vote to condemn the six-decade-long United States embargo of Cuba. Again.

The world has been doing this since 1992. In 2019, 187 countries supported the motion, with only three (the US, Israel and Brazil) opposing.

What makes this year’s vote more pressing, and more distressing, is that US President Joe Biden—who vowed during last year’s presidential campaign he’d reverse 240 Trump administration measures that “inflicted harm on the Cuban people and [did] nothing to advance democracy and human rights”—is now making life worse instead of better for the Cuban people.

In May, Biden renewed Trump’s determination that Cuba is not “cooperating fully” in US anti-terrorism efforts. It’s a bogus claim that has everything to do with winning favour with South Florida voters and nothing to do with anti-terrorism or reality.

But it inflicts harm on the Cuban people by penalizing companies and countries that dare trade with the socialist island state.

The original intent of what is now the longest lasting trade embargo in modern history was to force regime change in Cuba. In 2018, the United Nations calculated the embargo had cost Cuba over $130 billion.

The US has not achieved its regime change ambition. But it has succeeded in making life ever harder for the Cuban people.

Cuba is facing especially difficult times. Tourism has dried up. COVID continues. The embargo exacerbates every hardship.

Consider just a few examples.

Because of the embargo, Cuba has to source supplies from around the world instead of its more convenient (and cheap) next-door neighbour. But global suppliers, nervous about US extra-territorial laws, often refuse to trade with Cuba. If they do, they tack on a large markup to cover their risk. The US government has also slapped sanctions on dozens of companies and financial institutions simply for doing business with Havana.

But perhaps the most troubling aspect of the escalating embargo is its escalating impact on the health of Cubans.

In 1997, the American Association for World Health issued a detailed 300-page report, subtitled “Denial of Food and Medicine” which condemned the “de facto embargo on medical supplies” that “has wreaked havoc” on the Cuban medical system.

It’s worse now.

When two traditional European suppliers of ventilators for Cuban hospitals—IMT Medical AG and Acutronic—were purchased by an American company recently, for example, they immediately announced they would no longer sell to Cuba.

Last year, when the Cuban government sought to update contracts with US-based drug companies, pharmaceutical firm Eli Lilly refused to have further commercial dealings with the island. Elsewhere, Bayer claimed its licence no longer permitted it to deal with Cuba, and Pfizer and Merck Sharp didn’t even bother to respond to requests to purchase badly needed medicines.

Last March, as COVID spread across the world, a Chinese company, Alibaba, tried to donate badly needed ventilators, diagnostic kits and masks to Cuba. But the major shareholder in the airline it hired to deliver those medical supplies was American. Fearing US retaliation, it refused to fly them to Cuba.

In April, several Swiss banks (UBS, Banque Cler and Basler Kantonalbank) also fearing sanctions, refused to transfer funds so local organizations there could purchase testing equipment and personal protective equipment for Cuba.

In January, Congressman James McGovern—who described US efforts to block humanitarian assistance to Cuba as an “outrage”—urged Biden to “act early, quickly and comprehensively” to reverse all Trump-imposed anti-Cuba measures and “immediately end the application of any sanctions against food, medicine and other humanitarian assistance to Cuba.”

He hasn’t.

Nor has Biden responded to a March letter signed by 80 House Democrats calling for an immediate end to restrictions on travel and travel remittances. “With the stroke of a pen, you can assist struggling Cuban families and promote a more constructive approach,” they wrote.

When Biden was vice president, his boss, Barack Obama, recognized the obvious and, in 2014, declared US efforts to isolate Cuba a failure. “It’s time for a new approach,” he said.

That is even more true today. The question is, will Joe Biden finally listen to the united voice of the world?

*

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.

Stephen Kimber is a professor of journalism at the University of King’s College and the author of 11 books, including the award-winning What Lies Across the Water: The Real Story of the Cuban Five.

John Kirk, a professor emeritus of Latin American studies at Dalhousie University, is the author or co-editor of 18 books on Latin America.

Featured image: Plaza de la Revolución, Havana. Photo by Gilbert Sopakuwa/Flickr.

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.

***

Peter McCullough, MD, MPH appears on the Ingraham Angle on June 21, 2021 to explain why we don’t need to panic about the “Delta variant” and what younger individuals should know about the mRNA vaccines.

Click here to watch the video.

*

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.

Change in the Middle East?

June 22nd, 2021 by Philip Giraldi

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.

***

The media focus on the Summit meeting between Presidents Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin has to a certain extent crowded out news about the new government in Israel, headed by hardline nationalist Naftali Bennett. In those media outlets that are actually discussing the change there is an odd sort of perception that Israel’s new government will have to adjust to the new regime in Washington. That would imply that the Israelis will have to mitigate some of their more outrageous behavior to accommodate themselves to Biden’s intention to take actions that will be disapproved of in Jerusalem, to include a possible rapprochement with Iran over its nuclear program and a White House reengagement with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) of 2015.

The New York Times has an interesting article written by its Washington bureau diplomatic correspondent Michael Crowley with contributions from its new correspondent in Jerusalem Patrick Kingsley. The article is entitled “Shift in Israel Provides Biden a Chance for Better Ties” with a sub-heading that reads “The departure of Benjamin Netanyahu as prime minister is a relief for Democrats, but Iran and the Palestinians could test Mr. Biden’s relations with a fragile new Israeli government.”

The article argues that the fact that Biden did not call Netanyahu for three months after his own inauguration but called Bennett within three hours is significant. In the phone call Bennett reportedly blamed Netanyahu for “poisoning” the relationship with the United States, which should surprise no one as that was one of the issues hammered at repeatedly by Bennett during his own electoral campaign.

But one has to look beyond that and ask where is the evidence that Netanyahu’s admittedly acidic personality and arrogance led to any retribution by the White House, either under Barack Obama, Donald Trump or Joe Biden? It was generally reported and probably quite correct that Obama deeply disliked Netanyahu, even once being caught on an open mike speaking to French President Nicolas Sarkozy and regretting the fact that he had to interact with the petulant Israeli Prime Minister every week. Yet Obama then turned around and did something that no American President had ever done, arranging to give the Israeli’s a guaranteed $38 billion in military assistance over the course of ten years. The money was not conditional on Israeli behavior, did not reflect actual US interests, and was then sweetened by another half billion per year to support the Jewish state’s Iron Dome air defense system.

In 2015 the Obama Administration did indeed enter into the JCPOA, a multilateral agreement to monitor and limit Iran’s existing nuclear program, a move that was strongly opposed by Israel, but the only time the White House actually demonstrated any annoyance with Israel was when it abstained on a United Nations vote critical of the Jewish state’s settlements shortly before Obama left office. And it should be observed that Obama was duly punished by Israel for his bad attitude, with Netanyahu showing up at a joint session of Congress to denounce the impending Iran pact in March 2015. Bibi received twenty-nine standing ovations from a completely brainwashed gathering of the “peoples’ representatives.”

And then there is Donald Trump, who was probably the most pro-Israeli president in US history. Trump promoted Israeli interests repeatedly, moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights, de facto approving eventual incorporation of the Palestinian West Bank into Israel, and assassinating a senior Iranian general while also turning a blind eye to illegal settlement expansion and bombing attacks on both Syria and Lebanon. The US also repeatedly used its United Nations veto to prevent any criticism of Israel and its policies. Trump’s Ambassador to Israel David Friedman was notorious for his pander to Israeli interests, approving harsh measures against Palestinians and war crimes directed against its neighbors, so much so that he was perceived as a spokesman-apologist for Israel rather than the US.

Not much “poison” in the relationship as reflected by facts on the ground, is there? The money kept flowing, the political support hardly wavered, and the United States government at all levels could hardly stop gushing about how the Jewish state was a “democracy” and a “close ally,” both of which assertions were and are not true.

So now we come to Biden and talk about a reset. The Times oddly concedes that “The change in government in Israel will hardly wipe away deep differences with the Biden administration: The right-wing Mr. Bennett is ideologically closer to Mr. Netanyahu than to Mr. Biden. And it did not make the longstanding issues in the Middle East any less intractable. But the early interactions suggest a shift in tone and an opportunity, analysts said, to establish a less contentious relationship, with potential implications for dealing with Iran, the Palestinians and the wider region.”

Excuse me, but Bennett ran on a very hard line. He opposes any nuclear agreement with Iran and will not permit anything like a Palestinian state. He has been in office only a short time and has already approved airstrikes against targets in Syria and Gaza as well as a march by thousands of settlers through Palestinian East Jerusalem calling for “Death to Arabs.” A change in tone might be welcome, but as the United States already supinely agrees to support everything claimed by Israel, what will it mean on the ground? Nothing. And the “contentious relationship” is likewise hard to find. The thunder heard along the Potomac several weeks ago consisted of Congress and the White House’s synchronized chanting of “Israel has a right to defend itself!” And then there is the Iranian nuclear deal, which seems to be slipping away as Secretary of State Tony Blinken seemingly adds “conditions” to US reentry. So what are, in reality, the deep differences between Jerusalem and Washington that will be more manageable with “better tone?”

The Times argues perhaps more credibly that the damage has been done re the Israeli government relationship with the Democratic Party itself. It says “Mr. Biden has long considered Mr. Netanyahu a friend, albeit one with whom he often disagrees. But many administration officials and Congressional Democrats viscerally disdain the ousted Israeli leader, whom they came to see as a corrosive force and a de factopolitical ally of Republicans, including former President Donald J. Trump.”

Excuse me yet again, but such thinking is pie in the sky. To be sure a handful of Democratic Party progressives have come down hard on Israel’s recent slaughter of Gazans, but those who have any real power in the party have not voiced a single criticism of the war crimes committed. Biden might have been able to intervene to shorten the conflict, but he did nothing in reality to put pressure on Israel. His view of the Palestine problem is to give them a state though he is inevitably fuzzy on the details and will put no pressure on the Israelis to take any peace initiatives. In short, he and the Israelis will likely work behind the scenes to reduce the tension so there is no more mass killing and therefore no more negative media. If they are successful, that will make the Palestinians go away.

Joe Biden has called himself a “Zionist” and is proud of it and his first move after Israel was through killing Arabs was to send them $735 million on top of what they already receive from the US taxpayer. And, most important to him is all those Jewish donors whose hands are clutching their checkbooks while their hearts are in Israel, contributing something like two-thirds of all the money going to the Democratic Party. They are led by Hollywood producer Israeli-American Haim Saban who has said unambiguously that he is a “one issue guy and that issue is Israel.” In a sense, Washington is also run by a duopoly that has “one issue” in foreign policy and that issue is also Israel.

*

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.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]

Featured image is from The Unz Review

India’s Options Beyond the “Quad Alliance”

June 22nd, 2021 by Karsten Riise

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.

***

The following commentary looks at the QUAD alliance in great detail to understand India’s position within this alliance and the more significant geopolitical relevance and significance. This article also examines the complex politics of the Asia-Pacific and the role the US partnership has to play in this complex setup.

Quad – is there anything in the name? There are many talks; some would call it to hype about the “Quad” these days. The Quad is a semi-formalized grouping organized by the USA involving Japan, Australia – and India. Without the USA to organize it, there would be no Quad.

Geostrategy is an excellent old tool for evaluating the Quad. To start, let us look at the map. Does India have common borders for shared army operations with Japan or Australia, or the USA? No – far from. Do these countries share “common waters” for India’s navy to operate in with them? Not at all – except, of course, if one thinks that all waters in the world are territorial waters of the USA. Do these countries share a common air space? Not that either.

What about a mutual logistics chain? No, not even that. Any Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC) between India and Japan would, in case of conflict, be cut off in the South China Sea, which China controls. Is India reliant on US-Japanese-Australian armament producers? No – fortunately not.

Does India need the US F-35 aircraft or the US Patriot / THAAD missile systems? No – they are nearly worthless. Is the Quad a kind of alliance where Japan will guarantee to come to India’s aid? No. Is that about to change? No. Is there a grand strategy, cultural heritage or big vision tying India to Japan, Australia, and the USA? Far from. Very far from. The US has decided to strive for US global primacy for the indefinite future. India is and always will be against the US’ agenda of unipolar primacy. China is rising, and that is the problem of the USA. It is all about size.

Shortly after the Soviet Union disappeared, on 8 March 1992, the US Department of Defence in the Pentagon developed a new global objective for the USA:

“… the Defense Department asserts that America’s political and military mission in the post-cold-war era will be to insure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge in Western Europe, Asia or the territory of the former Soviet Union.” (emphasis added)

Evidently, the U.S. objective was to continue US primacy indefinitely by ensuring that no other power would ever emerge or be able to emerge to rival the USA.

The US strategy of thwarting any new rival power from emerging is consistent with all US foreign policy and political actions since then. Moreover, it covers the whole world, including all of Europe, China—and even India.

What China does or does not do is evidently only an excuse for the USA. Since 1992, the USA has accepted no power to rival or surpass it. The real problem for the US is simply that China is rising and will soon surpass the USA. They can always invent further arguments in each case. China is, of course, a concern for India, too, especially due to the old wounds about an unsettled border. But we must remember that India is rising too. One day in this century, India will surpass the USA.

This is India’s vision, and the USA will be against it. There is no shared strategic vision. The Quad has no material content. When something is devoid of material content, what remains is pure imagination.

This is why I call the Quad a thing from Disneyland. Despite being devoid of material content, the Quad has been sold to the global media as something “new”. The Quad is a PR operation for influence. India already has options to work together with the USA in naval exercises, special forces methods, intelligence, etc. One of the objectives of the American Quad hype about “shared values” is to sell more US weapons like the F-35, which are decidedly not what India needs (or can afford). You are always invited to spend your money. There is no need for a “Quad”. India should, of course, be open to security cooperation with all relevant countries — the USA, Japan, and Australia. And not only with them but also with Russia and NATO. Even with Pakistan, one day, when you find peace together in your shared South Asian family.

Is the USA a Valuable Partner?

The USA has a lot of military expertise, technology, experience, practice, and intelligence. India should learn everything there is to learn from US “expertise”. However, it is worth noting that the US has not won a major war since 1945. There must be a reason for that. The Korean war ended in 1953 with a tie. The USA could not even win in Korea.

Vietnam was a significant defeat for the USA in 1975. The only winner after two US wars against Iraq was Iran. And now, the USA has lost its longest war ever in Afghanistan.

What is wrong with the US military? India needs to ask this question.

One thing is that the USA is obviously fighting the wrong wars – wars of (bad) “choice”. The USA also has unconditional and unattainable aims. The US also lacks a sense of equal partnership with other peoples and cultures globally, especially non-European cultures. It is also worth noting that the USA since 1945—except for minor actions like Grenada—has had nothing but bad military outcomes despite the American use of overwhelming military force. Enormous or oversized efforts and adverse US outcomes must indicate that the USA has an ineffective and deficient military. The most effective army in Europe was Germany until 1945.

In his book “Fighting Power”, Martin van Creveld compares the performances of the German and US armies during WW II.  Measured on several parameters, Martin van Creveld consistently found that the German Army during WW II was widely superior to the US Army in fighting power. Japan learned from Germany already in the late 19th century. Did the USA make a comprehensive effort to learn and adopt the German military’s methods, thinking, traditions, and doctrines?

No. The USA in World War I copied French methods, a static programmed thinking with amassed use of artillery (today bombardment from the air) and less movement, which led to defeat for France in two world wars. The USA back then also had a lack of competent officers and soldiers. Therefore, the USA developed enormous oversized military staff, detailed planning for how those in contact with the adversary should act in minor detail.

Precisely the opposite of the “Auftragstaktik” which Gerhard von Scharnhorst instituted in Prussia, Germany, building on well-educated officers and soldiers, who were given a mission (Auftrag), had high education, trust from above, and leeway to act optimally in the ever-changing circumstances of conflict, as long as they pursued the “commander’s intent”. Carl von Clausewitz was a pupil of Scharnhorst.

It is a well-known phenomenon that Generals often prepare to fight the last war over again. I will assert that the USA is mentally still fighting wars of the past. The US Pacific War of 1941-45 was won with massive strategic bombing (the B-29) and big aircraft carriers. Since 1950, the B-29 were upgraded to the B-52, which has been a backbone of US air strategy ever since. The US aircraft carriers are also more significant than they were in 1945. But basically, the structure of the US strategic setup is the same till today, 76 years later.

The USA now (with Biden) is also re-fighting the Cold War over again. The re-fighting of a new Cold War is also evident in the title and content of the “Longer Telegram” published in the Atlantic Council by a US government-related source called “Anonymous”. The “Longer Telegram” in the title, aim, and general approach overtly references George F. Kennan’s “Long Telegram” about containment of the Soviet Union, which kicked off the first Cold War on 22 February 1946.

This time, however, the USA will not prevail victorious in a Cold War. Biden is making a fatal mistake of trying to repeat it. As Kishore Mahbubani rightly points out, China is better prepared internally and better integrated with the world economy than the USA.

*

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.

This article was originally published on Usanas Foundation.

Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden. At the time of appointment, he was the youngest and the first non-German in that top position within Mercedes-Benz’ worldwide sales organization. He writes regularly for the Russian International Affairs Council.  

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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.

***

Stanley Milgram conducted a psychological experiment in 1961 that was truly mind-numbing in terms of revealing the depths of evils people are able to commit in order to comply with authority. Referred to as the Milgram experiments, the aim of the study was to see how far participants were willing to go when they were given orders that were appalling and unconscionable. The experiment involved one authority figure who donned a lab coat, participants who were instructed to electrocute someone each time that person got an answer wrong and an actor who pretended to writhe in pain and scream each time he or she received shocks.

Participants were shown the electric chair the person they thought they were shocking was strapped into; they even went as far as giving participants mild shocks to convince them that the exercise was real. Once the participants were manipulated to believe that the shocks they were about to give to the recipient were authentic, they were separated by a partition to ensure that the participants could only hear the agonizing pleas for mercy not see the whole thing was staged. Each time the actor who was supposedly sitting in an electric chair answered a question incorrectly, the authority figure instructed participants to press a button that supposedly delivered a shock to the person who got the answer wrong.

Astonishingly, every participant administered at least 300-volts to the person they thought they were shocking—a level so high that it has the potential of inducing severe harm or even death. What was even more shocking, excuse the pun, is that 65% of participants complied with the lab coat wearing overseers and delivered a lethal 450-volts, depending on the Amps, to the poor soul they believed was being electrocuted. Each time participants resisted and wanted to stop upon hearing the person they thought was getting shocking scream out in anguish and banging the wall in agonizing pain, the authority figure leveraged his status and ordered them to keep torturing the out of sight subject.

Milgram conducted these experiments because he wanted to see if the sheer number of Germans who complied and followed orders during the era of Hitler was an outlier or a universal human trait. What was discovered through his experiments, as unethical as they were, is that regular people have an innate ability to commit mass-atrocities not out of wonton desire but because they are being compelled to do so by people in a positions of power. Milgram used a scientific method to arrive at a conclusion that anyone who studies genocides understands very well; opinion leaders are able to condition society to commit unspeakable acts of terror against their fellow citizens through division, fear and indoctrination.

Human beings are able to commit unspeakable acts of terror against their fellow humans when they are given orders by depraved leaders

Milgram’s illuminating results are very germane to what is taking place at this precise moment. Authority figures—from heads of state like Biden to unelected technocrats like Fauci  and beyond—weaponized their status and clout to condition billions of people around the world to be paralyzed by fear, give up their freedoms and eventually turn themselves into lab animals by receiving experimental “vaccines” into their arms. The unethical treatments that Milgram subjected participants in his study to is nothing compared to the criminal ways that the ruling class have conducted a psychological operation against the global population over the past 18 months.

Instrumental in this malicious biotech driven scheme were medical professionals who were convinced to take part either out of greed or out of fear of repercussion. There is a reason why Milgram had the authority figures in his experiments wear lab coats; doctors have a nearly unparalleled ability to convince people to follow their advice even if they feel unsure about the instructions they are being given. This almost God-like power to oblige society to act without questioning is the reason that doctors were enlisted from the outset in order to effectuate this insane mass-“vaccination” campaign. Such is the case with Dr. Leana Wen—who is intimately associated with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—who is outrageously recommending that children get “vaccinated” even though Covid-19, outside of outlier cases, has not impacted the young. Nuremberg Trials 2.0 cannot come fast enough!

Realizing that society has lost trust in politicians and mainstream media, biotech corporations along with Bill and Melinda Gates funded and paraded a litany of doctors to impel us to socially isolate, mask up and ultimately get jabbed. They turned to the very tactics used by Stanley Milgram 50 years ago; they made sure that the authority figures who were leading this “vaccine” crusade were doctors with white coats. They then tormented us with “breaking news” as mainstream media took their turn by channeling images of death and carnage on a 24 by 7 basis. This is a type of social conditioning that Nazis perfected and incorporated by the United States government thanks to Operation Paperclip.

We stood no chance! The same way participants in Milgram’s studies submitted to the demands of authority figures even as they resisted, we too buckled when the pressure was applied. If you see people driving in their cars with masks on, don’t judge them too harshly, they are victims of a psychological war that has been conducted on us for a year and a half. What is being done to us is a carbon copy of the propaganda techniques perfected by Joseph Goebbels mixed with the good cop/bad cop technique used by the police to break a suspect they are interrogation. By alternating between “benevolence” as they reopen businesses and “allowing” us enjoy the freedoms we once took for granted only to announce a new outbreak and go back to lockdowns, the establishment are crushing our will to fight and gaslighting us into total submission.

After a year and a half of unending fears and anxieties that have been imbued in our minds, we have allowed our rights to be stripped away for the sake of security that will never come

It’s not an accident that about one-third of the participants in Milgram’s gruesome experiments opted out once the orders crossed the boundary and strayed into the realm of barbarity. The same phenomenon is evident now; most polls show that about 33% of Americans are either hesitant or outright hostile against the idea of getting jabbed. Over the coming months, the government-media-corporate complex are going to really turn up the heat to persuade at least 70% of the population to get “vaccinated”; the closer they get to that number, the easier it is for them to coerce the holdouts to get jabbed. They will do so by demonizing the unvaccinated, taking away their rights and potentially using force to arrive at their preferred outcome.

There to assist this pernicious agenda are Gates funded doctors and industry insiders like John Mattison, Leana Wen, Haney Mallemat and Danish Nagda who are running afoul of their Hippocratic oath and the AMA doctor-patient guidelines. Though there are countless number of doctors who are either very concerned or outright alarmed over these experimental “vaccines”, the only medical professionals you see on TV and given blue checkmarks on social media are the ones who are completely in the tank when it comes to these gene therapy snake oils that are being peddled to the world as a panacea.

I pray we wake up from this collective psychosis that we are in and challenge people in positions of authority. Having a PhD doesn’t make anyone infallible, especially when these doctors have conflicts of interests they are not telling us about. Billions of people around the world have become like the actors in Milgram’s experiments who were pretending to be tortured; except this time around the electrocutions we are getting are very real. If we do not push back and defend our rights, a 450-volt shock will come for us by the time autumn arrives.

The ruling class are already setting the pretext for the abuses they have in store as they sow fear about the Delta variant. They will let us enjoy summer and get a taste of freedom before lowering the hammer. A potential first wave of “vaccine” deaths will be attributed to the Delta variant; the “unvaccinated” will get blamed even though people who are “vaccinated” continue to contract and transmit Covid-19. Facts will matter little when they enact draconian measures to address a crisis they created in a lab. Winter is coming; the only question is will people defy and rise up or will they do like the Germans did last century and follow orders.

“When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon.” ~ Thomas Paine

*

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.

Teodrose Fikremariam is the co-founder and editor of the Ghion Journal. Prior to launching the Ghion Journal, he was a political organizer who once wrote a speech idea in 2008 that was incorporated into Barack Obama’s South Carolina primary victory speech. He is originally from Ethiopia and a direct descendent, seven generations removed, of one of Ethiopia’s greatest Emperors Tewodros II.

All images in this article are from Ghion Journal

Inventor of mRNA Interviewed About Injection Dangers

June 22nd, 2021 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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.

***

Dr. Robert Malone invented the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology. He has grave concerns about the lack of transparency of side effects, censoring of discussion and the lack of informed consent that these bring

Free SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is biologically active — contrary to initial assumptions — and causes severe problems. It is responsible for the most severe effects seen in COVID-19, such as bleeding disorders, blood clots throughout the body and heart problems. These are the same problems we now see in a staggering number of people who have received the COVID-19 “vaccine”

The spike protein also has reproductive toxicity, and Pfizer’s biodistribution data show it accumulates in women’s ovaries. Data suggests the miscarriage rate among women who get the COVID “vaccine” within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy is 82%

Israeli data show boys and men between the ages of 16 and 24 who have been vaccinated have 25 times the rate of myocarditis (heart inflammation) than normal

The COVID-19 injections have emergency use authorization only, which can only be granted if there are no safe and effective remedies available. Such remedies do exist, but have been actively censored and suppressed

*

Watch the video here.

In the video above, DarkHorse podcast host Bret Weinstein, Ph.D., an evolutionary biologist, interviews Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology,1 and Steve Kirsch, an entrepreneur who has been researching adverse reactions to COVID-19 gene therapies.

I realize that this is an absolutely epic three-hour interview but if you ever valued what I have been teaching, you must at a bare minimum very carefully read this entire article.

Malone is the scientist that actually invented the technology that makes the COVID jab possible and he spills the beans on just how this introduction has been ethically compromised to make informed consent absolutely impossible for the average person. Watch the interview if your schedule allows, but carefully read this article for sure.

Kirsch recently published the article, “Should You Get Vaccinated?” in which he reviews how and why he has changed his mind about the COVID-19 “vaccines.” This after he got both doses of the Moderna shot, as have his three daughters.

If you or someone you know is equivocal about the COVID jab, then please, you simply MUST read Kirsh’s article as it is clearly one of the best pieces written on the topic and provides the other side of the story that is NEVER given in the mainstream media. Remember, without full disclosure of the vaccine’s risk, it is impossible to have informed consent.2 If you read Kirsch’s article, you will get, in great detail, the other side that the conventional media refuses to share. He writes:

 “I recently learned that these vaccines have likely killed over 25,800 Americans (which I confirmed 3 different ways) and disabled at least 1,000,000 more. And we’re only halfway to the finish line. We need to PAUSE these vaccines NOW before more people are killed.

Based on what I now know about the miniscule vaccine benefits (approximately a 0.3% reduction in absolute risk), side effects (including death), current COVID rates, and the success rate of early treatment protocols, the answer I would give today to anyone asking me for advice as to whether to take any of the current vaccines would be, ‘Just say NO.’

The current vaccines are particularly contraindicated if you have already been infected with COVID or are under age 20. For these people, I would say ‘NO! NO! NO!’

In this article, I will explain what I have learned since I was vaccinated that totally changed my mind. You will learn how these vaccines work and the shortcuts that led to the mistakes that were made.

You will understand why there are so many side effects and why these are so varied and why they usually happen within 30 days of vaccination. You will understand why kids are having heart issues (for which there is no treatment), and temporarily losing their sight, and ability to talk. You will understand why as many as 3% may be severely disabled by the vaccine.”

The Spike Protein Is a Bioactive Cytotoxin

As explained by Malone, many months ago he warned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that the spike protein — which the COVID-19 “vaccines” instruct your cells to make — could be dangerous. The FDA dismissed his concerns, saying they did not believe the spike protein was biologically active. Besides, the vaccine makers specifically designed the injections so that the spike protein would stick and not float about freely.

Well, they were wrong on both accounts. It’s since been well-established that, indeed, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein gets free, and that it is biologically active and causes severe problems. It is responsible for the most severe effects seen in COVID-19, such as bleeding disorders, blood clots throughout the body and heart problems.

These are the same problems we now see in a staggering number of people having received one or two shots of COVID-19 “vaccine.” For more in-depth information about how the spike protein causes these problems, please see my interview with Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., and Judy Mikovits, Ph.D.

Using the word vaccine isn’t really appropriate here, and I don’t want to contribute to the misuse of that word. These injections are clearly not vaccines. They don’t work like any previous conventional vaccines. As the actual inventor of the mRNA vaccines clearly says in the interview, they are gene therapy. So, please understand that when I say vaccine or vaccination, I’m really talking about gene therapy.

Spike Protein Disseminates Throughout Your Body

In a recent interview3 with Alex Pierson, Canadian immunologist and vaccine researcher Byram Bridle, Ph.D., discussed previously unseen research obtained from the Japanese regulatory agency through a freedom of information act request.

The study was a biodistribution study done by Pfizer, which showed that the mRNA in the vaccine does not stay in and around the vaccination site but is widely distributed in the body, as is the spike protein.4

This is a serious problem, as the spike protein is a toxin shown to cause cardiovascular and neurological damage. Once in your blood circulation, the spike protein binds to platelet receptors and the cells that line your blood vessels. When that happens, it can cause platelets to clump together, resulting in blood clots, and/or cause abnormal bleeding. I detailed these and other findings in “Researcher: ‘We Made a Big Mistake’ on COVID-19 Vaccine.”

Dangerous Corners Were Cut

The spike protein also has reproductive toxicity, and Pfizer’s biodistribution data show it accumulates in women’s ovaries. Kirsch cites data suggesting the miscarriage rate among women who get the COVID “vaccine” within the first 20 weeks of pregnancy is 82%.5 The normal rate is 10%, so this is no minor uptick. Kirsch writes:6

“It is baffling that the CDC says the vaccine is safe for pregnant women when it is so clear that this is not the case. For example, one our family friends is a victim of this. She miscarried at 25 weeks … She had her first shot 7 weeks ago, and her second shot 4 weeks ago.

The baby had severe bleeding of the brain and other disfigurements. Her gynecologist had never seen anything like that before in her life. They called in a specialist who said it was probably a genetic defect (because everyone buys into the narrative that the vaccine is safe it is always ruled out as a possible cause).

No VAERS report. No CDC report. Yet the doctors I’ve talked to say that it is over 99% certain it was the vaccine. The family doesn’t want an autopsy for fear that their daughter will find out it was the vaccine. This is a perfect example of how these horrible side effects just never get reported anywhere.”

Disturbingly, the Pfizer biodistribution data package reveals that corners were cut in the interest of speed, and one of the research facets that were skipped was reproductive toxicology. Yet, despite the lack of an initial reproductive toxicology investigation and a rapidly growing number of reports of miscarriages (which is likely to be a significant undercount), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is still urging pregnant women to get vaccinated. Why is that?

Is There Purposeful Suppression of VAERS Data?

What’s more, as discussed in the interview, there’s evidence that data in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is being manipulated as reports that were filed are now missing. Why were they removed? And without the filers’ consent?

Even with that manipulation, the number of deaths reported post-vaccination against COVID-19 is beyond anything we’ve ever seen. According to Kirsch, the rate of death from COVID-19 shots exceeds that of more than 70 vaccines combined over the past 30 years, and it’s about 500 times deadlier than the seasonal flu vaccine,7 which historically has been the most hazardous.

Other serious effects are also off the charts. For example, Israeli data show boys and men between the ages of 16 and 24 who have been vaccinated have 25 times the rate of myocarditis (heart inflammation) than normal.8 Additionally, many young people are actually dying as a result of this myocarditis.9

Malone points out that, in re-reading the most current version of the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that governs these COVID shots, he discovered that the FDA opted not to require stringent post-vaccination data collection and evaluation, even though they had the latitude to do so.

As noted by Weinstein, this is yet another anomaly that needs an answer. Why did they opt for such lax data capture, because without it, there’s no way of evaluating the safety of these products. You cannot identify the danger signals if you don’t have a process for capturing effects data and evaluating all of it.

“The whole logic of EUA is you’re basically substituting real-time capture of key information for prospective capture of key information,” Malone explains. “But to do that, you’ve got to get the information and it has to be rigorous.”

Other Anomalies

Furthermore, as noted by Weinstein, if you release a vaccine under emergency use — because you say there’s an unprecedented health emergency and there are no other options, therefore it’s worth taking a larger than normal risk — then you still would not give it to people who are at no or low risk of the disease in question.

This would include children, teens and healthy individuals under the age of 40, at bare minimum. Children appear naturally immune against COVID-1910 and have been shown to not be disease vectors,11 and people under 40 have an infection fatality ratio of just 0.01%.12 That means their chances of survival is 99.99%, which is about as good as it gets.

Pregnant women would also be excluded as they are a high-risk category for any experimentation, and anyone who has recovered from COVID would be excluded as they now have natural immunity and have no need for a vaccine whatsoever. In fact, a recent Cleveland Clinic study13,14 found people who had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at least 42 days prior to vaccination reaped no additional benefit from the jabs.

Yet all of these incredibly low-risk groups are urged and even inappropriately incentivized to get vaccinated, and this too is anomalous behavior. Part of the risk-benefit analysis is not only the risk of serious outcomes and death from the disease, but also the availability of alternative treatments, and here we have the third massive anomaly.

We’ve seen a clear suppression of information showing that there are not just one but several effective remedies that could reduce the risk of COVID-19 to a number of cohorts down to virtually zero. Examples include hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, both of which have been safely used for decades in many millions of people around the world.

The precautionary principle dictates that as long as a drug or treatment strategy doesn’t do harm, even if the positive effect may be small, it should be used until better data or better treatments becomes available. This is the logic they used with masks (even though the data overwhelmingly showed no statistical benefit and there are a number of potential harms).

But when it comes to hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, they suppressed the use of these drugs even though they are extremely safe when used in the appropriate doses and have been shown to work really well in many dozens of studies. As noted by Kirsch in his article:15

“Repurposed drugs [such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin] are safer and more effective than the current vaccines. In general, early treatment with an effective protocol reduces your risk of dying by more than 100X so instead of 600,000 deaths, we’d have fewer than 6,000 deaths. NOTE: The vaccine has already killed over 6,000 people and that’s from the vaccine alone (and doesn’t count any breakthrough deaths).”

Doctors are also being muzzled and their warnings suppressed and censored. Dr. Charles Hoffe has administered Moderna’s COVID-19 “vaccine” to 900 of his patients. Three are now permanently disabled and one has died. After writing an open letter to Dr. Bonnie Henry, the provincial health officer for British Columbia, in which he stated that he’s “been quite alarmed at the high rate of serious side-effects from this novel treatment,”16 his hospital privileges were yanked.

Bioethics Laws Are Clearly Being Broken

In a May 30, 2021, essay,17 Malone reviewed the importance of informed consent, rightly concluding that censorship makes it so that informed consent simply cannot be given. Informed consent isn’t just a nice idea or an ideal. It is the law, both nationally and internationally. The current vaccine push also violates bioethical principles in general.

“By way of background, please understand that I am a vaccine specialist and advocate, as well as the original inventor of the mRNA vaccine (and DNA vaccine) core platform technology. But I also have extensive training in bioethics from the University of Maryland, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, and Harvard Medical School, and advanced clinical development and regulatory affairs are core competencies for me,” Malone writes.

“Why is it necessary to suppress discussion and full disclosure of information concerning mRNA reactogenicity and safety risks? Let’s analyze the vaccine-related adverse event data rigorously. Is there information or patterns that can be found, such as the recent finding of the cardiomyopathy signals, or the latent virus reactivation signals?

We should be enlisting the best biostatistics and machine learning experts to examine these data, and the results should — no must — be made available to the public promptly. Please follow along and take a moment to examine the underlying bioethics of this situation with me …

The suppression of information, discussion, and outright censorship concerning these current COVID vaccines which are based on gene therapy technologies cast a bad light on the entire vaccine enterprise. It is my opinion that the adult public can handle information and open discussion. Furthermore, we must fully disclose any and all risks associated with these experimental research products.

In this context, the adult public are basically research subjects that are not being required to sign informed consent due to EUA waiver. But that does not mean that they do not deserve the full disclosure of risks that one would normally require in an informed consent document for a clinical trial.

And now some national authorities are calling on the deployment of EUA vaccines to adolescents and the young, which by definition are not able to directly provide informed consent to participate in clinical research — written or otherwise.

The key point here is that what is being done by suppressing open disclosure and debate concerning the profile of adverse events associated with these vaccines violates fundamental bioethical principles for clinical research. This goes back to the Geneva convention and the Helsinki declaration.18 There must be informed consent for experimentation on human subjects.”

Experimentation without proper informed consent also violates the Nuremberg Code,19 which spells out a set of research ethics principles for human experimentation. This set of principles were developed to ensure the medical horrors discovered during the Nuremberg trials at the end of World War II would never take place again.

Lines Have Been Crossed That Must Never Be Crossed

In the U.S., we also have the Belmont report,20 cited in Malone’s essay, which spells out the ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research, covered under the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations 45 CFR 46 (subpart A). The Belmont report describes informed consent as follows:

“Respect for persons requires that subjects, to the degree that they are capable, be given the opportunity to choose what shall or shall not happen to them. This opportunity is provided when adequate standards for informed consent are satisfied.

While the importance of informed consent is unquestioned, controversy prevails over the nature and possibility of an informed consent. Nonetheless, there is widespread agreement that the consent process can be analyzed as containing three elements: information, comprehension and voluntariness.”

Americans, indeed the people of the whole earth, are being prevented from freely accessing and sharing information about these gene therapies. Worse, we are misled by fact checkers and Big Tech platforms that ban or put misinformation labels on anyone and anything discussing them in a critical or questioning way. The same censorship also prevents comprehension of risk.

Lastly, government and any number of vaccine stakeholders are encouraging companies and schools to make these experimental injections mandatory, which violates the rule of voluntariness. Government and private businesses are also creating massive incentives to participate in this experiment, including million-dollar lotteries and full college scholarships. None of this is ethical or even legal. As noted by Malone:21

“… as these vaccines are not yet market authorized (licensed), coercion of human subjects to participate in medical experimentation is specifically forbidden. Therefore, public health policies which meet generally accepted criteria for coercion to participate in clinical research are forbidden.

For example, if I were to propose a clinical trial involving children and entice participation by giving out ice cream to those willing to participate, any institutional human subjects safety board (IRB) in the United States would reject that protocol.

If I were to propose a clinical research protocol wherein the population of a geographic region would lose personal liberties unless 70% of the population participated in my study, once again, that protocol would be rejected by any US IRB based on coercion of subject participation. No coercion to participate in the study is allowed.

In human subject clinical research, in most countries of the world this is considered a bright line that cannot be crossed. So, now we are told to waive that requirement without even so much as open public discussion being allowed? In conclusion, I hope that you will join me; stop to take a moment and consider for yourself what is going on. The logic seems clear to me.

1) An unlicensed medical product deployed under emergency use authorization (EUA) remains an experimental product under clinical research development.

2) EUA authorized by national authorities basically grants a short-term right to administer the research product to human subjects without written informed consent.

3) The Geneva Convention, the Helsinki declaration, and the entire structure which supports ethical human subjects research requires that research subjects be fully informed of risks and must consent to participation without coercion.”

Again, if your schedule allows, I sincerely hope you take the time to listen to Weinstein’s interview with Malone and Kirsch. Yes, it is very long — about 3 ½ hours — but they are all astute in their observations, which makes for an enlightening conversation. And remember to read and widely share Kirsch’s article, “Should You Get Vaccinated?”22

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) recently posted more than 50 video presentations from the pay-for-view Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination held online October 16 to 18, 2020, and made them available to everyone for free.

The conference’s theme was “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century” and it featured physicians, scientists and other health professionals, human rights activists, faith community leaders, constitutional and civil rights attorneys, authors and parents of vaccine injured children talking about vaccine science, policy, law and ethics and infectious diseases, including coronavirus and COVID-19 vaccines.

In December 2020, a U.K. company published false and misleading information about NVIC and its conference, which prompted NVIC to open up the whole conference for free viewing. The conference has everything you need to educate yourself and protect your personal freedoms and liberties with respect to your health.

Don’t miss out on this incredible opportunity. I was a speaker at this empowering conference and urge you to watch these video presentations before they’re censored and taken away by the technocratic elite.

*

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.

Uncensored History: Who Were the Khazars?

June 22nd, 2021 by Timothy Alexander Guzman

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.

***

“You (the Jews) will never be able to live here in peace, because you left here black and came back white.” – Gamal Abdel Nasser, President of Egypt (1952)

There is an unknown empire that is barely mentioned in western history books, education institutions, in the media or in Hollywood.  The name is not mentioned anywhere especially in the West, and that is why most people never heard about it.  It was called Khazaria, it was an empire that still remains relatively unknown today.

So what was Khazaria?  Its origins date back to the middle ages (c.650-950), its inhabitants were mostly semi-nomadic Turkic people made up of multiple ethno-linguistic groups that came from Eastern, Western, Northern and Central Asia as well as from parts of Europe and North Africa.  Many languages that were spoken belonged to the “Turkic Language family” as they shared many cultural traits and similar histories that shared common ancestries.  Today, Turkic ethnicities include Azerbaijanis, Kazakhs, Kyrgyz people, Uyghurs, Uzbeks and several other groups.   However, during the eighth and ninth centuries, the Khazars, a warlike Turkic people converted to Judaism who had dominated a vast area in Southern Russia and the Ukraine in what was known as Khazaria until they were destroyed by Russia.

What happened to the Khazarian empire and its people since their destruction has been debated, in fact it is a conundrum, a mystery in a sense on what happened to the Khazars.  Some historians have speculated that the Khazars are the ancestors of the Ashkenazi Jews.  It was well-known that Jews were persecuted throughout Christian Europe which allowed some to migrate to the Middle East while others went to the Kingdom of Khazaria which was considered a “beacon of hope” for Jews who were able to live in peace since the ruling Khazars were considered tolerant of the Jews.  Khazar rulers had allowed Jewish refugees from Byzantine  and Persia to call Khazaria their home.

It was those actions of the Khazar rulers who discovered Judaism and soon adopted the religion.  In an interesting article from 2014 by Jim Wald from The Times of Israel ‘Leaked report: Israel acknowledges Jews in fact Khazars; Secret plan for reverse migration to Ukraine’ argues that “it is well known that, sometime in the eighth to ninth centuries, the Khazars, a warlike Turkic people, converted to Judaism and ruled over a vast domain in what became southern Russia and Ukraine” he continued “what happened to them after the Russians destroyed that empire around the eleventh century has been a mystery” a mystery indeedWald says that the Khazar hypothesis is an attempt by the Arabs to deny Jewish claims to the land of Palestine:

Arabs have long cited the Khazar hypothesis in attempts to deny a Jewish historical claim to the land of Israel. During the UN debate over Palestine Partition, Chaim Weizmann responded, sarcastically: “lt is very strange. All my life I have been a Jew, felt like a Jew, and I now learn that I am a Khazar.” In a more folksy vein, Prime Minister Golda Meir famously said:  “Khazar, Schmazar. There is no Khazar people. I knew no Khazars In Kiev. Or Milwaukee. Show me these Khazars of whom you speak”

Jim Wald claims that prominent researchers have come forward with their observations on the gene pool from today’s Jews that led them to the Khazars:

Contrarian Hungarian ex-communist and scientist Arthur Koestler brought the Khazar hypothesis to a wider audience with The Thirteenth Tribe (1976), in the hope that disproving a common Jewish “racial” identity would end antisemitism. Clearly, that hope has not been fulfilled. Most recently, left-wing Israeli historian Shlomo Sand’s The Invention of the Jewish People took Koestler’s thesis in a direction he had not intended, arguing that because Jews were a religious community descended from converts they do not constitute a nation or need a state of their own. Scientists, however, dismissed the Khazar hypothesis because the genetic evidence did not add up. Until now. In 2012, Israeli researcher Eran Elhaik published a study claiming to prove that Khazar ancestry is the single largest element in the Ashkenazi gene pool. Sand declared himself vindicated, and progressive organs such as Haaretz and The Forward trumpeted the results

Let’s begin with one of the books mentioned by Wald, Arthur Koestler’s ‘The Thirteenth Tribe’ which claims that “what is in dispute is the fate of the Jewish Khazars after the destruction of their empire, in the twelfth or thirteenth century” and that’s where the problem begins because its “various late mediaeval Khazar settlements are mentioned in the Crimea, in the Ukraine, in Hungary, Poland and Lithuania.”  This is where Koestler’s observation on the issue of where the Khazars settled over the years following their empire’s destruction by the Russians:

The general picture that emerges from these fragmentary pieces of information is that of a migration of Khazar tribes and communities into those regions of Eastern Europe – mainly Russia and Poland – where, at the dawn of the Modern Age, the greatest concentrations of Jews were found

So Khazar tribes ended up in parts of Eastern Europe, southern Russia and Poland:

This has led several historians to conjecture that a substantial part, and perhaps the majority of eastern Jews – and hence of world Jewry – might be of Khazar, and not of Semitic Origin. The far-reaching implications of this hypothesis may explain the great caution exercised by historians in approaching this subject – if they do not avoid it altogether

What was interesting about Koestler’s analysis points to the fact that the Khazars have bloodlines in Crimea, Poland and southern areas of Russia:

Thus in the 1973 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica the article “Khazars” is signed by Dunlop, but there is a separate section dealing with “Khazar Jews after the Fall of the Kingdom”, signed by the editors, and written with the obvious intent to avoid upsetting believers in the dogma of the Chosen Race: The Turkish-speaking Karaites [a fundamentalist Jewish sect] of the Crimea, Poland, and elsewhere have affirmed a connection with the Khazars, which is perhaps confirmed by evidence from folklore and anthropology as well as language. There seems to be a considerable amount of evidence attesting to the continued presence in Europe of descendants of the Khazars

Historian and Emeritus Professor of history at Tel Aviv University, Shlomo Sand published ‘The Invention of the Jewish People’, a controversial book that pinched a nerve among Israeli society.  In a 2014 article written by Sand in The Guardian, ‘Shlomo Sand: ‘I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew’ describes his thoughts on being a Jew in Israel which was a bold move by the historian.  Here is his opening statement on the matter:

During the first half of the 20th century, my father abandoned Talmudic school, permanently stopped going to synagogue, and regularly expressed his aversion to rabbis. At this point in my own life, in the early 21st century, I feel in turn a moral obligation to break definitively with tribal Judeocentrism. I am today fully conscious of having never been a genuinely secular Jew, understanding that such an imaginary characteristic lacks any specific basis or cultural perspective, and that its existence is based on a hollow and ethnocentric view of the world. Earlier I mistakenly believed that the Yiddish culture of the family I grew up in was the embodiment of Jewish culture. A little later, inspired by Bernard Lazare, Mordechai Anielewicz, Marcel Rayman and Marek Edelman – who all fought antisemitism, nazism and Stalinism without adopting an ethnocentric view – I identified as part of an oppressed and rejected minority. In the company, so to speak, of the socialist leader Léon Blum, the poet Julian Tuwim and many others, I stubbornly remained a Jew who had accepted this identity on account of persecutions and murderers, crimes and their victims.

Now, having painfully become aware that I have undergone an adherence to Israel, been assimilated by law into a fictitious ethnos of persecutors and their supporters, and have appeared in the world as one of the exclusive club of the elect and their acolytes, I wish to resign and cease considering myself a Jew

It can be said that Sand’s statement upset the Zionist community:

Although the state of Israel is not disposed to transform my official nationality from “Jew” to “Israeli”, I dare to hope that kindly philosemites, committed Zionists and exalted anti-Zionists, all of them so often nourished on essentialist conceptions, will respect my desire and cease to catalogue me as a Jew. As a matter of fact, what they think matters little to me, and still less what the remaining anti-Semitic idiots think. In the light of the historic tragedies of the 20th century, I am determined no longer to be a small minority in an exclusive club that others have neither the possibility nor the qualifications to join.

By my refusal to be a Jew, I represent a species in the course of disappearing. I know that by insisting that only my historical past was Jewish, while my everyday present (for better or worse) is Israeli, and finally that my future and that of my children (at least the future I wish for) must be guided by universal, open and generous principles, I run counter to the dominant fashion, which is oriented towards ethnocentrism

Sand’s controversial book ‘The Invention of the Jewish People’ which was published in 2009 explores how genetics research involved what he calls Zionist mythology corrupting the true outcome of  the common biological origin of what is a “real” Jew is by adopting genetic anthropology and linking it to stories found in the Holy Bible:

Zionist pedagogy produced generations of students who believed whole-heartedly in the ethnic uniqueness of their nation. But in the age of scientific positivism, nationalist ideology needed more substantial reification than the “soft” materials produced in the humanities. The biological laboratories were called upon to provide it, and at first they did so in fairly subduedmanner. Nurit Kirsh, who in recent years completed her doctoral dissertation at Tel Aviv University, has investigated the early stages of genetics research in Israel.^”* Her conclusion is unambiguous: genetics, just like archaeology at the time, was a tendentious science subordinated to the national historical concept, which sought at all costs to discover a biological homogeneity among the Jews in the world. The geneticists internalized the Zionist myth and, consciously or not, attempted to adapt their findings to it. As she sees it, the main difference between the Zionist anthropologists in the pre-State period and the new scientists in Israel was that genetics became less prominent in the public arena in Israel. Research findings that, despite their ideological bias, were published in international scientific journals were hardly noticed in the Hebrew-language media. This meant that their pedagogical function in the general education system was marginal

Sand gives another example of a British scholar by the name of Arthur E. Mourant who was influenced by a mentor who literally believed that the British people were the descendants of the “Ten Lost Tribes”, so you know where this is going:

In 1978 Oxford University Press published The Genetics of the Jews, by a team of researchers headed by Arthur E. Mourant.’ This British scholar was influenced by a much-loved mentor who belonged to a sect that believed the British people were descendants of the “Ten Lost Tribes,” hence his interest in the Jews. For much of his life, the enthusiastic Mourant believed that he and all the people around him were authentic Jews. When the British forces capturedPalestine, he was convinced that this signaled the beginning of salvation. Years later, he set out to discover the common biological origin of the “real” Jews, and adapted his genetic anthropology to the biblical story. As the Israeli genet-icist Raphael FaUc described it, the British scientist “first fired his arrows, then drew the target around them”^^ To Mourant and his colleagues, the marked differences between Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews notwithstanding, they all had to have a single common origin. By examining the frequency of A and B alleles in separate communities, he strove to show that the genes of Jews fromdifferent regions displayed a higher degree of uniformity than could be found when those same subjects’ genes were compared to those of their non- Jewish neighbors. But if the genetic findings did not exactly support the ideological purpose, it would be necessary to search for other results.

Although Mourant’s theory was weak and unfounded — the application of genetics to such diffuse categories as “Ashkenazi” and “Sephardic” was senseless, as they represent varieties of religious rituals — it legitimized and invigorated the search for the Jewish gene in the life sciences at Israel universities

The New York Times came out with a scathing article criticizing Sand’s book shortly after its release which claims that Jews from Central and Eastern Europe including American Jews can be traced to the Khazars in ‘Book Calls Jewish People an Invention’:

History of the Turkic peoples

History of the Turkic peoples (Public Domain)

Since Professor Sand’s mission is to discredit Jews’ historical claims to the territory, he is keen to show that their ancestry lines do not lead back to ancient Palestine. He resurrects a theory first raised by 19th-century historians, that the Jews of Central and Eastern Europe, to whom 90 percent of American Jews trace their roots, are descended from the Khazars, a Turkic people who apparently converted to Judaism and created an empire in the Caucasus in the eighth century. This idea has long intrigued writers and historians. In 1976, Arthur Koestler wrote “The Thirteenth Tribe” in the hopes it would combat anti-Semitism; if contemporary Jews were descended from the Khazars, he argued, they could not be held responsible for Jesus’ Crucifixion.

By now, experts who specialize in the subject have repeatedly rejected the theory, concluding that the shards of evidence are inconclusive or misleading, said Michael Terry, the chief librarian of the Jewish division of the New York Public Library. Dr. Ostrer said the genetics also did not support the Khazar theory

While the New York Times continued its attack on professor Sand, it does admit that the Jews of Khazaria where converts:

That does not negate that conversion played a critical role in Jewish history — a proposition that many find surprising given that today’s Jews tend to discourage conversion and make it a difficult process. Lawrence H. Schiffman, chairman of the Skirball department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies at New York University, said most historians agree that over a period of centuries, Middle Eastern Jews — merchants, slaves and captives, religious and economic refugees — spread around the world. Many intermarried with people from local populations, who then converted. 

There is also evidence that in antiquity and the first millennium Judaism was a proselytizing religion that even used force on occasion. From the genetic research so far, Dr. Ostrer said, “It’s pretty clear that most Jewish groups have Semitic ancestry, that they originated in the Middle East, and that they’re more closely related to each other than to non-Jewish groups.” But he added that it was also clear that many Jews are of mixed descent.

“The ancient admixed ancestry explains the blond hair and blue eyes of Ashkenazi Jews whose grandparents and great-grandparents all lived in shtetls two and three generations ago,” Dr. Ostrer said. They brought the genes for coloration with them to Eastern Europe. These genes were probably not contributed by their Cossack neighbors”

The conclusion from the article emphasizes that Professor Sand’s take on Jewish history is “A mingling of myth, memory, truth and aspiration similarly envelopes Jewish history, which is, to begin with, based on scarce and confusing archaeological and archival records” continued “Experts dismiss the popular notion that the Jews were expelled from Palestine in one fell swoop in A.D. 70. Yet while the destruction of Jerusalem and Second Temple by the Romans did not create the Diaspora, it caused a momentous change in the Jews’ sense of themselves and their position in the world.”  They accuse Sand of generating an old myth by using the same tactics as the Zionists in how they manipulate history to justify their narrative so that they are recognized as the indigenous people of Palestine which is now known as Israel:

Professor Sand accuses Zionist historians from the 19th century onward the very same scholars on whose work he bases his case of hiding the truth and creating a myth of shared roots to strengthen their nationalist agenda. He explains that he has uncovered no new information, but has “organized the knowledge differently.” In other words, he is doing precisely what he accuses the Zionists of shaping the material to fit a narrative.

In that sense, Professor Sand is operating within a long established tradition.  As “The Illustrated History of the Jewish People,” edited by Nicholas Lange (Harcourt, 1997), notes, “Every generation of Jewish historians has faced the same task: to retell and adapt the story to meet the needs of its own situation.” The same could be said of all nations and religions.  Perhaps that is why on both sides of the argument some myths stubbornly persist no matter how often they are debunked while other indubitable facts continually fail to gain traction

Review31 based in the UK interviewed Sand and asked him how he became interested in Israel’s historical background and the myths within the bible “What was it that made you go looking for that information?”his response was the following:

In the framework of the Masters Studies programme at Tel Aviv University I invited a very famous researcher on the Bible. This is the first time that something started to move inside me. This very, very careful guy gave a lecture and he said that the exodus from Egypt never happened. He said that the kingdoms of David and Solomon are myths. I decided to write a book about this discovery, to compose the Bible as a historical book, because Shlomo Sand and all the children in Israel are studying the Bible as a historical book, not as a theological book. Now, after Simon Schama accused me, and he wasn’t the only one, I understood also that the insistence of Zionism, of Zionist historiography, Zionist politics about the concept of a people, has to do with the fact that people have territories. And then I understood that I have to move into understanding what is a homeland, what is a national territory; and that is the second book.

I went back to the ancient times like always, and I could find the political concept of modern homeland only in two cases in the past in western civilization: the Greek one, and the Roman one before the empire, in the republic. In Judaism there isn’t any traditional patriotism, any tradition of homeland. Palestine, Judea, it wasn’t the homeland of the Jews. And I discovered that the Christians were much more attached physically to the land. And very quickly I discovered that the first Zionists were not Jews; they were your [British] ancestors 

In 2012, Eran Elhaik, an Israeli-American geneticist at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health at the time published a study titled ‘The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypothesesclaimed that the Khazar ancestry is one of the main elements in the Ashkenazi gene pool.  Sciencedaily.com ‘New study sheds light on the origin of the European Jewish population.’  The article explains Elhaik’s controversial findings, “Elhaik’s findings strongly support the Khazarian Hypothesis, as opposed to the Rhineland Hypothesis, of European Jewish origins.”  What the difference between the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypothesis?:

The Rhineland Hypothesis has been the favoured explanation for the origins of present-day European Jews, until now. In this scenario Jews descended from Israelite-Canaanite tribes left the Holy Land for Europe in the 7th century, following the Muslim conquest of Palestine. Then, in the beginning of the 15th century, a group of approximately 50,000 left Germany, the Rhineland, for the east. There they maintained high endogamy, and despite wars, persecution, disease, plagues, and economic hardships, their population expanded rapidly to around 8 million in the 20th century. Due to the implausibility of such an event, this rapid expansion was explained by Prof Harry Ostrer, Dr Gil Atzmon, and colleagues as a miracle. Under the Rhineland Hypothesis, European Jews would be very similar to each other and would have a predominant Middle Eastern ancestry.

The rival explanation, the Khazarian Hypothesis, states that the Jewish-convert Khazars — a confederation of Turkic, Iranian, and Mongol tribes who lived in what is now Southern Russia, north of Georgia and east of Ukraine, and who converted to Judaism between the 7th and 9th centuries — along with groups of Mesopotamian and Greco-Roman Jews, formed the basis of eastern Europe’s Jewish population when they fled eastward, following the collapse of their empire in the 13th century. European Jews are thus expected to exhibit heterogeneity between different communities. While there is no doubt that the Judeo-Khazars fled into Eastern Europe and contributed to the establishment of Eastern European Jewry, argument has revolved around the magnitude of that contribution

Elhaik defined his hypothesis by focusing on the origins of the Khazars that included various tribes:

The competing “Khazarian hypothesis” considers Eastern European Jews to be the descendants of Khazars. The Khazars were a confederation of Slavic, Scythian, Hunnic–Bulgar, Iranian, Alans, and Turkish tribes who formed in the central–northern Caucasus one of most powerful empires during the late Iron Age and converted to Judaism in the 8th century CE.  The Khazarian, Armenian, and Georgian populations forged from this amalgamation of tribes  were followed by relative isolation, differentiation, and genetic drift in situ. Biblical and archeological records allude to active trade relationships between Proto-Judeans and Armenians in the late centuries BCE, that likely resulted in a small scale admixture between these populations and a Judean presence in the Caucasus. After their conversion to Judaism, the population structure of the Judeo–Khazars was further reshaped by multiple migrations of Jews from the Byzantine Empire and Caliphate to the Khazarian Empire

Elhaik declared that the Jews are an “assortment of Tribes who accepted Judaism” in other words, converts:

Although both the Rhineland and Khazarian hypotheses depict a Judean ancestry and are not mutually exclusive, they are well distinguished, as Caucasus and Semitic populations are considered ethnically and linguistically distinct. Jews, according to either hypothesis, are an assortment of tribes who accepted Judaism, migrated elsewhere, and maintained their religion up to this date and are, therefore, expected to exhibit certain differences from their neighboring populations. Because both hypotheses posit that Eastern European Jews arrived at Eastern Europe roughly at the same time (13th and 15th centuries), we assumed that they experienced similar low and fixed admixture rates with the neighboring populations, estimated at 0.5% per generation over the past 50 generations. These relatively recent admixtures have likely reshaped the population structure of all European Jews and increased the genetic distances from the Caucasus or Middle Eastern populations. Therefore, we do not expect to achieve perfect matching with the surrogate Khazarian and Judean populations but rather to estimate their relatedness

Elhaik concluded in his hypothesis that European Jews have genes that trace back to the Khazarian empire:

We compared two genetic models for European Jewish ancestry depicting a mixed Khazarian–European–Middle Eastern and sole Middle Eastern origins. Contemporary populations were used as surrogates to the ancient Khazars and Judeans, and their relatedness to European Jews was compared over a comprehensive set of genetic analyses. Our findings support the Khazarian hypothesis depicting a large Near Eastern–Caucasus ancestry along with Southern European, Middle Eastern, and Eastern European ancestries, in agreement with recent studies and oral and written traditions. We conclude that the genome of European Jews is a tapestry of ancient populations including Judaized Khazars, Greco–Roman Jews, Mesopotamian Jews, and Judeans and that their population structure was formed in the Caucasus and the banks of the Volga with roots stretching to Canaan and the banks of the Jordan

After World War II, there was a vision, an idea for a Jewish homeland by mainly European Jews whose genes can be traced to several ancient populations including “Judaized Khazars, Greco–Roman Jews, Mesopotamian Jews, and Judeans” in a place called Palestine and the rest is history.

*

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.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Silent Crow News.

Timothy Alexander Guzman is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Alongside its trade war, the US government is also engaged in a digital war against China. A central target of this US war is microchips, the heart of all information technology devices and development.

In September 2020, the US imposed a draconian ban on export of crucial materials needed by China’s leading chip manufacturer Semiconductor Manufacturing International Company (SMIC). The ban was instigated at the behest of the US Department of Defense on the alleged grounds that Chinese chips posed a threat to the US. This move also came in the wake of an earlier ban on export of chips for use by leading Chinese telecommunication company Huawei.

On June 3, US President Joe Biden issued a revised and expanded list that forbids owning or trading any stocks or securities related to 59 Chinese companies, on the supposed ground of threat from “Chinese surveillance technology.” Major Chinese companies listed include SMIC, China Mobile, China Unicom, China National Offshore Oil Corp, Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology Co and Huawei.

On June 8, the US Senate passed a legislation containing a whole range of anti-China provisions, including a $52 billion “Chips for America Fund” intended to deprive China of access to high-end chips by subsidizing manufactures who locate either factories in the US. This legislation is expected to go to the US House of Representatives and become law. Grounds for this legislation also include claims that microchips in Chinese hands somehow constitute a security threat to the US.

Finally on June 9, Biden issued an order for foreign-based apps to be examined for “unacceptable national security risks they pose to US interests.” The Executive Order on Protecting American Sensitive Data from Foreign Adversaries explicitly points to Chinese apps as among ones that are antithetic to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the US.

The US seeks to justify its digital war with spurious, unsubstantiated claims that Chinese companies and technologies constitute a military or “security threat” to the US. The real objective, however, is to halt Chinese development of high-tech industries that the US regards as threatening its drive to exert economic and military dominance in Asia and around the world.

To understand just why Chinese high-tech is deemed a threat to US dominance, we need to look at the current path of technology development. Social, economic, political, military, educational, scientific, and personal life already increasingly rely on the internet. With the advent of the internet of things (IoT), the internet will rapidly become the fundamental infrastructure for all human life on earth.

It’s crucial to understand that – important as human-to-human interaction is – the internet is no longer primarily about human communication and information sharing. The internet is jumping down from our computer and phone screens into the entire world around us including the bodies, minds, and selves of human beings.

The IoT includes billions of networked entities of all kinds. Each of these entities interacts simultaneously with the real world around it and with one another via the online world. These networked entities typically include sensors to monitor the world around them, which allows them to act based on their information.

The IoT currently includes six million connected human beings and 50 billion other entities, which is projected to climb in the next few years to 500 billion. As artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics merge with the IOT, the world will soon consist of innumerable connected entities and increasing numbers of intelligent connected entities.

IoTs do not stand alone. They talk to one another online generally with little or no human intervention. They can be of almost any type, including bridges, buildings, cities, human bodies, cows, refrigerators and cars; government functions and military aircraft and missiles; factory machines, logistics and product distribution; science labs and education.

IoT technology is currently converging with artificial intelligence (AI), big data and robotics. IoT entities are typically equipped with a “controller,” which includes a set of sensors to monitor their immediate environment and an actuator, which can initiate action based on input from the sensors and online input and interactions with other online entities

These entities frequently generate “big data” – huge amounts of data – which human beings alone cannot effectively interpret. AI is then needed to manage and make decisions based on the big data. Robotics, previously a separate discipline, is also converging with the IoT as connected robots.

In the face of these world-changing developments, the US and China have opposite approaches.

The US’ approach is to exercise control of digital technology to ensure that it can be used to maintain its dominance of the planet. That approach is telegraphed in the phrase now used by Biden and other US politicians that “the US must win the 21st century.” The idea that one country must win – i.e. own – a century is disturbing to say the least.

China’s approach, on the other hand, is quite different. It is to develop and share the technology for the benefit of the Chinese people and to share it with the world for “building a community with a shared future for mankind.”

*

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.

This article was originally published on Global Times.

Eric Sommer is a Canadian scholar and a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Global Times

Canadians Aren’t Being Told About Vaccine Risks

June 22nd, 2021 by Dr. John Cunnington

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.

***

At the top of the medical hierarchy is the neurosurgeon. Neurosurgeons are surrounded by a mystique of omniscience and omnipotence. Imagine my surprise, therefore, as a lowly medical student, to discover that the senior neurosurgeon in our institution, Robert Hughes, was being sued for malpractice. In fact, Robert Hughes, to his chagrin, went on to make Canadian medical and legal history on the issue of informed consent.

In 1970 Hughes performed a carotid endarterectomy (cleaning out of the carotid artery to the brain) on a 44-year-old man, John Reibl, who then went on to suffer a stroke that left him paralyzed on one side and unable to continue working. Reibl sued Hughes, claiming that he was not informed that he might suffer a stroke from this elective surgery, and that had he known this he would have delayed the surgery until he’d become eligible for a Ford Motor Company pension less than two years later.

Here is Reibl’s testimony to the Court:

Q. Did he talk to you about what would happen if you didn’t have the operation?

A. Yes, he said, “It is up to you if you want to have it or not. You can live a few years. You can live about 7 or 10 years or longer. One of these days you are going to fall on your nose, and that’s it. If you are going to do it now in the beginning you are not going to have any problem later.”

Q. Did Dr. Hughes say anything else about any risks of the operation?

A. He didn’t mention anything.

Reibl v Hughes went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada and in 1980 the Court articulated the current standard for informed consent, specifically that the physician (or other health care provider) “must give the patient sufficient information so that an objective, reasonable person in the patient’s position would be able to make an informed choice about a medical procedure”. The court defined failure to disclose the attendant risks as negligence.

Thus, in Canada, to receive a treatment or procedure, the subject must not just verbally agree and sign a consent form, but must give informed consent after having the risks explained to them.

Forty-one years after the Supreme Court decision our federal and provincial governments are engaged in a program of administering to the entire Canadian population above the age of 12, a completely new, untried, experimental, non-FDA approved, gene therapy treatment. This therapy, according to US and European government adverse vaccine reaction databases, is reasonably suspected of having killed thousands of people, and created serious injury in tens of thousands. Meanwhile, the long-term consequences of the therapy are simply unknown.

Are Canadians who are receiving this treatment getting this information? Are they being told what they need to know to give informed consent? A friend of mine recently got the injection. I asked him if he was informed of the possibility of side effects. He said none were mentioned!

As far as I can determine, Canadians are not being informed that there are risks. When they show up at the injection site it appears that they are told to sign a form and hold out their arm. Those giving the treatment are not discussing with them the pros and cons, the risks and benefits of the injection prior to “vaccine” administration. Most Canadians taking the shot have no idea that there is a risk of blood clotting disorders, such as pulmonary embolism and stroke, of life-threatening immune processes such as vaccine-induced thrombocytopenia, or that young people taking the shot are at risk of the potentially fatal complication of myocarditis (nor are they informed that the risk of Covid itself is almost negligible for the young and healthy). Such lack of information is a violation of the Supreme Court decision on consent. If you are injured by the vaccine and did not provide informed consent, you have grounds to sue your health authorities for negligence and damages.

Note: The onus is not on patients to do their own research. The onus is on the health care provider to inform patients of the risks so that an objective, reasonable person in the patient’s position would be able to make an informed choice. Does anyone really believe that a 12 to 15-year-old child is able to sufficiently understand the complex issues involved in experimental gene therapy to give informed consent? Does enticing children with ice cream (Toronto), or adults with a lottery (Alberta), constitute informed consent?

If Reibl v Hughes sets the standard for approved treatments, what then should be the standard for unapproved treatments, for experimentation on humans with new and untried technologies? As a consequence of experiments performed by Nazi doctors on concentration camp prisoners and the subsequent Nuremberg trials, that Court articulated ten research ethics principles to guide medical experimentation in humans. The first principle is that “the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential”. Although the Nuremberg Code, created more than 70 years ago, did not use the word “informed”, it did use the word “consent,” and it is hardly a stretch to conclude that the consent they spoke of was “informed consent”. Most Canadians taking these novel gene therapy injections have no idea that these “vaccines” are not an approved therapy, like a flu shot, and they are unaware that they are in fact being enrolled in clinical trials which are still ongoing.

Our federal and provincial governments, premiers, public health administrators and personnel are negligent in administering the Covid vaccines to tens of millions of Canadians without clearly informing them that this is an experimental therapy, one which could result in serious adverse events, including life-altering injuries or death, and that the long-term side effects, for example potential auto-immune diseases, are as yet unknown.

When governments use all the means in their power, including control of the media and widespread censorship of dissenting voices, to induce people to get a medical treatment without adequately informing them of the risks, they are violating the fundamental trust between the people and their government.

*

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.

John Cunnington is a former McMaster University associate professor. After a 38-year career as a respirologist and internal medicine physician, he retired in 2018.

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.

***

Meine Dame!

Als ich mir heute zum wiederholten Male ein Video von Rechtsanwalt Dr. Reiner Füllmich von der deutschen Stiftung Corona-Ausschuss ansah – dieses Mal ein Video von „Report 24 News“ vom 9. Mai 2021 mit dem Titel „Rechtsanwalt fragt: ‚Warum ordnete Regierung wissentlich tödliche Maßnahmen an?‘“ –, empfand ich, dass es jetzt reicht. Obwohl ich seit Anfang 2020 regelmäßig Kommentare, Artikel und Offene Briefe zur Corona-Thematik schreibe, die in den unabhängigen alternativen Medien wie „Global Research“, „Neue Rheinische Zeitung NRhZ“ oder „RUBIKON“ und einmal auch in „Epochtimes“ veröffentlicht wurden, habe ich Sie und Ihre Rolle in dem ganzen Wahnsinn bisher ausgespart.

Wie Sie sich sicher erinnern werden, hatte ich vor vielen Jahren bereits zweimal die Gelegenheit, Sie als damalige Familienministerin in Sachen „Verein zur Förderung der psychologischen Menschenkenntnis VPM“ zusammen mit Kollegen in Bonn und Berlin persönlich zu sprechen. Entschuldigen Sie meine Offenheit: Aber damals war ich sehr erstaunt darüber, dass Sie spontan nie zur Sache Stellung nehmen konnten, sondern stets darum baten, erst Ihre Berater befragen zu dürfen, um sich eine persönliche Meinung bilden zu können.

Heute bin ich davon überzeugt, dass Sie nach den vielen Jahren in einem sehr verantwortlichen Amt sehr wohl wissen, was Sie tun und voll und ganz hinter Ihren politischen Entscheidungen stehen. Angefangen bei Ihrer Entscheidung „Wir schaffen das!“, als Sie versuchten, die gewaltige Migrationskrise und den Bevölkerungsaustausch in ganz Europa klein zu reden bis heute, wo Sie – um nochmals Dr. Füllmich zu zitieren – zur vermeintlichen Bewältigung der ausgerufenen Pandemie zusammen mit den anderen Regierungsmitgliedern wissentlich tödliche Maßnahmen anordneten und weiterhin fordern.

Durch diese Maßnahmen wurde ein unermesslicher wirtschaftlicher, gesellschaftlicher und individuell-menschlicher Schaden angerichtet, dessen Ausmaß heute noch gar nicht abzusehen und der nicht wieder gut zu machen ist. Aber das ist von Ihnen und Ihresgleichen vermutlich gewollt, um die allseits bekannten diabolischen Pläne des „Great Reset“ und der „Neuen Weltordnung NWO“ durchzusetzen. Das eigene Volk dazu zu ermuntern, sich einem nur notfallmäßig zugelassenen Killer-„Impfstoff“ auszuliefern, ist nur die Spitze des Eisbergs eines gigantischen Betrugs und Verbrechens an der Menschheit.

Meine Dame!

Ich frage Sie deshalb: In wessen Auftrag handeln Sie? Ganz sicher nicht im Auftrag des deutschen Volkes, was ja bekanntermaßen Ihre Aufgabe wäre. Wie ist es möglich, dass Sie sich trotz Ihrer gegen die Interessen des deutschen Volkes gerichteten Handlungen so lange an der Spitze der deutschen Regierung halten konnten? Ich persönlich habe Ihre Politik nicht mehr ertragen und deshalb mein Vaterland verlassen.

*

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.

Dr. Rudolf Hänsel ist Diplom-Psychologe und Erziehungswissenschaftler.

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.

Translated from German by the author

***

My lady!

When I watched a video by lawyer Dr Reiner Füllmich of the German Corona Committee Foundation again today – this time a video from “Report 24 News” of 9 May 2021 entitled “Lawyer asks: ‘Why did government knowingly order lethal measures?'” –, I felt that enough was enough. Although I have been writing regular commentaries, articles and open letters on the Corona issue since early 2020, published in the independent alternative media such as “Global Research”, “Neue Rheinische Zeitung NRhZ” or “RUBIKON” and once also in “Epoch Times”, I have so far left you and your role in the whole madness out.

As you will surely remember, many years ago I already had the opportunity to speak to you personally twice as the then Minister for Family Affairs in matters concerning the “Verein zur Förderung der psychologischen Menschenkenntnis VPM” together with colleagues in Bonn and Berlin. Excuse my frankness: but at that time I was very surprised that you were never able to spontaneously comment on the matter, but always asked to be allowed to question your advisors first in order to be able to form a personal opinion.

Today I am convinced that after many years in a very responsible office, you know very well what you are doing and stand fully behind your political decisions. Starting with your decision “We can do it!”, when you tried to talk down the huge migration crisis and the population exchange throughout Europe, until today, when you – to quote Dr. Füllmich again – knowingly ordered and continue to demand lethal measures together with the other members of the government in order to supposedly cope with the declared pandemic.

These measures caused immeasurable economic, social and individual-human damage, the extent of which cannot even be foreseen today and which cannot be repaired. But this is probably what you and your kind want in order to push through the well-known diabolical plans of the “Great Reset” and the “New World Order NWO”. Encouraging your own people to turn themselves over to a killer “vaccine” approved only on an emergency basis is only the tip of the iceberg of a gigantic fraud and crime against humanity.

My Lady!

I therefore ask you: on whose behalf are you acting? Certainly not on behalf of the German people, which, as you know, would be your task. How is it possible that you have been able to stay at the head of the German government for so long despite your actions being against the interests of the German people? Personally, I could no longer stand your politics and therefore left my fatherland.

*

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.

Dr. Rudolf Hänsel is a qualified psychologist and educationalist.

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.

***

As Brussels seeks a new supply contract with Pfizer from 2022, the US pharmaceutical giant has hiked its EU prices on future orders of its vaccine, potentially raising the cost by more than 60%, to some $23 per dose.

*

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.

Video: Covid-19 “Pack of Lies”: Crimes against Humanity. Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, June 21, 2021

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

Majority of US Physicians Decline COVID Shots, According to Survey

By Association of American Physicians and Surgeon, June 21, 2021

Of the 700 physicians responding to an internet survey by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), nearly 60 percent said they were not “fully vaccinated” against COVID. This contrasts with the claim by the American Medical Association that 96 percent of practicing physicians are fully vaccinated. This was based on 300 respondents.

From G7 to NATO Meetings, Imperialist Powers Turn More Aggressive Towards China

By Anish R M, June 21, 2021

China has slammed G-7 leaders for pushing an aggressive agenda against itself and Russia. The 47th G-7 Summit in Carbis Bay, United Kingdom, concluded on Sunday, June 13. It was attended by the leaders of the seven global north nations and European Union, who form the core membership of the group, and with India, South Africa, South Korea and Australia as invitees.

Video: Ex-Pfizer Vice President Speaks Out! Children 50 Times More Likely to Die from Spike Protein!

By Dr. Mike Yeadon and Steve Bannon, June 21, 2021

Dr. Mike Yeadon walks us through the effects of COVID-19 vaccines on adolescents particularly for school-age children and younger. “I’m genuinely pro-vaccine but I’m pro-safety and these COVID-19 vaccines are not safe. Gene-based design makes your body manufacture virus spike proteins and we know that virus spike proteins trigger blood clots.”

Video: WHO Awaits Review of Italian Study If Virus Could Have Been Circulating in September 2019

By CGTN, June 21, 2021

The World Health Organization is awaiting an independent review of an Italian study indicating that COVID-19 could have been in circulation in the country as early as September 2019. The findings will form part of its investigations into the origins of the outbreak.

Pedro Castillo – A Teacher Elected to Dismantle Neoliberalism in Peru?

By Francisco Dominguez, June 21, 2021

As it typifies oligarchic rule in Latin America, whenever the elite faces a serious challenge to its dominance it resorts to authoritarian methods, including brutal repression and if need be, mass murder. This is what the Peruvian elite did when in the early 1990s it faced mass opposition to the imposition of neoliberal impoverishment; one of the most extreme manifestations of opposition was the Shining Path guerrilla insurgency.

Is the Danger COVID or the Vaccine?

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, June 21, 2021

Health care employees and many other Americans are experiencing pressure to accept vaccination or be fired. For example, a hospital in Texas has made vaccination a condition of employment. I can understand the reluctance of a nurse or doctor, who has witnessed severe injury and death to those who were vaccinated, being unwilling to subject themselves to the risk.

What Does Biden’s Summit Spree Tell Us About the Future of U.S. Empire?

By Walter Smolarek, June 21, 2021

Joe Biden took part in several key international meetings over the last week covering a wide range of issues but with one key goal in mind: intensify the new Cold War with China and construct a global front towards this end. This is the most intensive series of diplomatic summits for the Biden administration yet, and provides key insights about how it plans to manage the affairs of U.S. empire.

4 British Airways Pilots Dead Following COVID-19 Injections While Spain and Russia Prohibit “Vaccinated” from Air Travel

By Brian Shilhavy, June 21, 2021

A man claiming to be a friend with a British Airways pilot has stated that 3 pilots have just died within the past week shortly after receiving COVID-19 injections, and his recording has gone viral on social media. Here is the recording (let us know if Twitter takes it down as we have a copy.)

20 Factories Destroyed, 5,000 Jobs Lost Due to Israel’s Offensive on Gaza

By Middle East Monitor, June 21, 2021

Head of the General Federation of Trade Unions Sami Al-Amasi has confirmed that 20 factories were destroyed during the last offensive on Gaza, and 5,000 workers had lost their jobs.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Majority of US Physicians Decline COVID Shots, According to Survey
  • 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

With 100% of the votes counted, Castillo, candidate of left-wing coalition Peru Libre, won with 50.14 % of the votes, against Keiko Fujimori, daughter of infamous and disgraced corrupt dictator, Alberto Fujimori and right-wing candidate of Fuerza Popular, a coalition supported by the country’s oligarchic elite, obtained 49,86%.

To many, Castillo’s electoral robust performance in the first round with 18% of the vote was a surprise, since up to that point, the main contender for the left was Veronika Mendoza, candidate of the Juntos por el Perucoalition, who obtained slightly less than 8%. Below we examine the main events and developments that would culminate in this extraordinary victory for the Peruvian and Latin American Left.

The ongoing crisis of legitimacy

As it typifies oligarchic rule in Latin America, whenever the elite faces a serious challenge to its dominance it resorts to authoritarian methods, including brutal repression and if need be, mass murder. This is what the Peruvian elite did when in the early 1990s it faced mass opposition to the imposition of neoliberal impoverishment; one of the most extreme manifestations of opposition was the Shining Path guerrilla insurgency. State repression was substantially intensified with the election of Alberto Fujimori as president in 1990.

Fujimori’s dictatorial regime lasted a full decade (1990-2000) but it fell under the weight of its own corruption, engulfed in a constitutional crisis of legitimacy caused by his contempt for democratic procedure: he closed down congress, usurped judicial authority, promulgated a neo-liberal constitution and governed brutally and autocratically. He is currently serving a 25-year prison sentence for his role in killings and kidnappings by death squads during his government’s military campaign against leftist guerrillas.

Fujimori’s successor, president Alejandro Toledo (2001-2006) fared no better, even though, unlike Fujimori, he did not resort to underhand and brutal methods during his presidency. Nevertheless, he is under house arrest in San Francisco, awaiting extradition on charges of receiving multimillionaire bribes.

Then it was the turn of Alan Garcia, leader of APRA, an originally progressive populist party, who succeeded Toledo for the period 2006-2011, and who committed suicide in 2020 as the police came to arrest him for personal graft and corruption during his administration.

Ollanta Humala, briefly depicted as a sort of Peruvian Chavez and even publicly supported by the Comandante himself, defeated Keiko Fujimori at the 2011 elections thereby becoming the country’s president for the 2011-2016 period. But as it seems to befit Peru’s presidents, in 2017 he and his wife were arrested on charges of corruption and money laundering. Both are banned from leaving Peru and are awaiting trial.

The 2017 election crowned Pedro Pablo Kuczynski as the country’s president for 2016-2021, but he was not to break with the ‘cultural tradition’ and was forced to resign in 2018 (to avoid impeachment procedures began in 2017) for lying to congress and for receiving bribes in exchange for government contracts. Kuczynski also claimed to suffer from heart problems (as Fujimori, Toledo and Humala have done) thus benefiting from house arrest. It is evident that being the tenant of the House of Pizarro (the popular name for Peru’s presidential palace) is a tough job full of so many exciting incentives that can gravely affect their cardiac system.

Kuczynski had to be replaced by his vice-president, Martin Vizcarra, who launched an offensive against corruption but was impeached by Congress in November 2020 for taking bribes on several occasions in 2014 in exchange for awarding public work contracts. It is widely believed his impeachment was prompted by his decision to close down congress for obstructing the investigations against corruption.1

Vizcarra (who has not as yet claimed heart problems) accepted the congress decision and was replaced by the Congress’s President, Manuel Merino, as caretaker leader with a cabinet dominated by the business elite. Merino’s brief 6-day government sent strong hints of ignoring popular demands for the reform of the political and judicial systems and even entertained postponing the scheduled 2021 elections justified by the problems brought about by the Covid-19 pandemic.

The country exploded in huge mass demonstrations that were met by brutal police repression with two dead, dozens injured and many more arrested. Merino was forced to resign on 15 November 2020 and Congress then appointed Francisco Sagasti (who had voted against Vizcarra’s impeachment) as interim president, and was entrusted with the task of organising the presidential elections in April 2021.

Thus since Peru’s elite had for decades undermined the rule of law and the credibility of the nation’s institutions, the state key positions had been filled in by corrupt or corruptible members of the political class (involving all mainstream political parties), in a system overwhelmingly dominated by finance capital, mining concerns, raw materials exporters, one media monopoly, and multinational companies. These powerful groups pay almost no taxes whilst taking away the nation’s wealth, leaving the agricultural sector in a state of total neglect. Such was the context surrounding the election that elected Pedro Castillo as president of Peru.

The consequences of Peru’s neoliberal dictatorship

In the last two decades, the country’s economic performance has been impressive receiving praise from the IMF: “Peru continues to be one of the best-performing Latin American economies. With annual real GDP growth averaging 5.4 percent over the past fifteen years, Peru has been one of the fastest-growing economies in the region, which enabled it to make significant progress in reducing poverty.”2

However, a deeper look into it produces a different impression. In 1970 Peru’s level of poverty was 50%, and by 2000 had slightly increased to 54.1%;3 by 2006 poverty had barely declined to 49.1%, and though it went down to about 20% in 2019, with the pandemic it has gone right back up to 30%4. In short, half of the country’s population have remained in a state of poverty for almost two generations and about one third for the last decade. However, 30% is deceptive since the level of labour informality in the country’s economy is a staggering 70%, of people who live day to day as street vendors; they and their families have gone hungry during the lockdown.5

The two decades of macroeconomic economic success and social horror correlate to the coming to office of Alberto Fujimori who successfully defeated Mario Vargas Llosa’s comprehensive neoliberal privatisation plan, at the 1990 election. Fujimori’s government systematised the use of counterinsurgency state terror to purge society from rebellious constituencies, such as those in the Sierra (Peru’s highlands), inhabited predominantly by indigenous people. Already by the end of the 1980s the departments of Ayacucho, Apurimac and Huancavelica were under martial law.

The military campaign against the Left was aided by the combination of extreme sectarianism, intense dogmatism, and the insurrectionary and violent methods practised by the Shining Path, a splinter group from the Communist Party. They enjoyed strong support precisely in the highlands departments mentioned and by the early 1990s had made considerable inroads into Lima’s shanty towns not only challenging the state but also waging a vicious campaign against the rest of the country’s Left.

The government response was the Fujimorazo, a self-coup carried out on 5 April 1992, with the president dissolving Congress and dismantling the judiciary, assuming full executive and legislative powers. He also used these powers to decree stringent and repressive labour laws that destroyed the remnants of an already seriously weakened labour movement. Under Fujimori labour legislation was crafted so as to make Peru a paradise of labour flexibility, management’s right to fire, casualization of labour contracts and workers’ unionisation and collective bargaining action, difficult.6

By 1993 Fujimori had increased the provinces under a military state of emergency from 52 to 66 and by 1994, nearly half of the population lived in such zones, areas where the security forces repressed the whole of the Left not just the Shining Path. It is estimated that by 1995 “insurgents, state security forces, drug traffickers, death squads, and civilian paramilitaries had killed more than 27,000 Peruvians.” And according to Peru’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission the number of fatal victims of internal strife between 1980 and 2000 was 69,000.7 Peru had become a killing field.

The brutal state counterinsurgency offensive launched in 1980 had not only halted but also reversed the development of a Left that was becoming politically and electorally stronger. In the 1980 election it had obtained a combined vote of about 12-15%, though divided between 5 candidates, but in the 1985 election, a united left candidate got an impressive 24%. However, in the 1990 election the Left went down to 12% split between two candidates; it had almost no presence in the elections in 1995, 2000, 2006, and 2011 and began to painfully recover only in 2016.

Fujimori’s 1993 neoliberal structural reforms (the ‘Fuji-shock’) included the elimination of price controls, total deregulation of markets, privatisation of state-owned companies and activities, and a tight monetary policy. The privatisation programme attracted foreign investment (particularly from the US) in natural resources, finances and consumer markets. This resulted in intense concentration of ownership by foreign concerns thereby shrinking the influence and leverage of national industrial capital.8

Over time the country’s income distribution drastically worsened thus by 2019 the top 1% and 10% of income earners got 29.6% and 56.6% of GDP, respectively; 40% of middle income earners got 35.8% of GDP, whilst 50% of low income earners only received 9.4% of GDP; one of the most unequal in the world.9No wonder Covid-19 has wreaked havoc among the poor, since one lockdown day at home for the 70% working in the informal sector (this is millions of people and their families), means one day without income. Decades of neoliberal privatisation and cuts in state expenditure (health, education and the like) having thrown millions into precariousness and hardship made them the unavoidable victims of Covid-19: by 4 June Peru had the highest mortality rate in the world per million people (188,000 with 1,998,056 confirmed cases).10

Castillo’s Long March

It was reported that when it was announced that a teacher had won the first round of elections, the staff at CCN scrambled to obtain information about, and get hold of a photo of Pedro Castillo because they did not have even a picture of him in their database. How did Pedro Castillo and Peru Libre, managed to win the presidency, even though by a whisker? Castillo’s manifesto makes it even more puzzling since the key tenets of his government programme include a frontal attack on neoliberalism, proposes the election of a Constituent Assembly to draft and promulgate a new constitution to substitute the dominant neoliberal economic model, land reform, the nationalisation of the nation’s natural resources ensuring most of the wealth they produce remains in Peru so as to eradicate poverty, increase state expenditure on social services (health and education), and implement income redistribution.11 Even worse (or better) Castillo declares himself a Marxist and a mariateguista (follower of Peruvian intellectual, Jose Carlos Mariátegui, perhaps one the most original and influential Latin American Marxist thinkers).12

The Partido Nacional Peru Libre (PNPL) places political emphasis on the specific demands of Peru’s peasantry: land reform, social rights, education and health, thus expressing the demands and aspirations of the deep, rural, indigenous Peru. Mariátegui, writing in the 1920s, posited there would not be bourgeois revolution in Peru because there was no social class interested in carrying it out, thus the only concrete possibility of society’s structural transformation would come from a socialist revolution, the precondition of which was bringing in the indigenous people as a fundamental agent of such change.

This framework is still basically correct in 2021 Peru. Keiko Fujimori got strong support in key cities (for example, Lima and Callao, with 65% and 67%, respectively), but Castillo got a landslide in the Andean (indigenous) provinces such as Puno (89%), Huancavelica (85%), Cusco (83%), Ayacucho (82%), Apurimac (81%), Moquegua (73%), Cajamarca (71%), Huánuco (68%), and Pasco (66%). It was an indigenous victory13 that is not identical to a victory of rural against urban Peru, as some in the media have portrayed Castillo’s victory. After all, 73% of the population live in cities whilst only 27% live in rural areas, that is, the Marxist teacher could not have won without substantial support in the urban centres. The validity of the PNPL central tenet of refounding the nation as a Plurinational State along the basic lines of Ecuador and Bolivia is therefore undeniable: in Peru there are 4 indigenous languages in the Andes (Quechua, Aymara, Cauqui and Jaqaru) and 43 more in the Amazon region, 500 years after the Spanish Conquest.

The implementation of brutal neoliberal policies coupled with the DEA-inspired ‘war on drugs’ principally in the Amazon region (La Selva) from the 1990s onwards, meant that communities in Amazonia suffered the brunt of the ‘dirty war’ against the Shining Path and the army-led fight against drug trafficking, whilst in the Andes, indigenous communities were further marginalised by aggressive mining from the operation of multinational companies. The racism that supplemented these twin aggressions led to organised resistance and, therefore, to the rise of popular, communitarian and indigenous leaderships.

Hence, for example the election of some of these emerging leaders to the governorships of Puno, Junín and Moquegua. Many more such leaders were elected to lead provinces and municipalities with teachers playing a protagonist role in them (Castillo himself had been mayor of his town, Anguía, in Cajamarca).14 Thus, resulting from a decades-long political development, PNPL is a well-organised, militant, political outfit with strong territorial support in key areas, and with solid association and collaboration with peasant and indigenous communities and organizations (such as the ronderos15), and trade unions, especially, but not exclusively, among teachers. Castillo himself led the 2017 teachers’ strike to defend wages and demand budget increases in education.

In short, the PNPL has had access to local resources, has enjoyed an institutional presence in local, provincial and regional governments, and, since 60% of Peruvians do not have access to internet, for its election campaign it has relied on community radios, personal visits to small towns, and cultural events. Thus, in the context of the 2021 election (first and second rounds) Castillo was not only the outsider, but a breath of fresh air who, in the midst of a criminally managed pandemic and the deep institutional crisis the nation faced, gave hope and voice to the rural and urban downtrodden.16

The tasks ahead

The election result was incredibly tight: 8,883,185 for Castillo against 8,783,765 for Keiko Fujimori. Furthermore, the PNPL got a minority of 37 seats that together with the 5 obtained by Juntos por el Peru, president Castillo will command 42 out of the 130 seats in Congress, whilst Fujimori’s Fuerza Popular and the other right wing electoral coalitions have a combined parliamentary strength of at least 80 seats. The latter, with the full complicity and support of the country’s media, ran an intoxicating electoral campaign of fear charging Castillo with being a Shinning Path sympathiser, a “terruco”, pejorative slang term that means ‘terrorist’ used by Peru’s establishment to stigmatize the Left.

Days before the second round, Keiko deployed arch-reactionary Peruvian writer, Mario Vargas Llosa and Venezuelan extreme right-winger and outlawed coup-monger, Leopoldo Lopez, to support her electoral campaign so as to defeat Castillo’s “communism”. Keiko, with no evidence whatsoever, has persisted in accusing the PNPL of election fraud demanding the annulment of the votes of more than 800 voting points in the country’s interior. Then she mobilised 22 right-wing ex-presidents of Latin America and Spain (with Aznar and Uribe being prominent) who issued a statement making similar allegations, demanding Castillo was not proclaimed the winner. In desperation then, she staged marches to military barracks and to the Ministry of Defence (9 June 2021) to request the military to act to prevent the “victory of communism.” However, barely hours after Castillo proclaimed himself the winner, the Defence Ministry issued a statement confirming the political neutrality of the armed forces and calling for respect for the election results.

Such threats have been met with large demonstrations in Lima and the rest of the country with the ronderospromising a march on Lima if through electoral fraud, Castillo’s electoral victory is stolen. On 22 May 2021 the National Coordination of Army, Navy, Air Force and Police Reservists (Retired) – CONAFAP – issued a strong statement warning against any possible election fraud in the second round and in support of Pedro Castillo. Though it is not clear how strong Castillo’s support may be within the armed forces, there is a historic left-wing nationalist influence in them that stems from the Revolutionary Government of the Armed Forces led by General Juan Velasco Alvarado (1968-1975)17; many of PNPL’s proposals strongly resemble those of Velasco.

With his clean victory, Castillo and his programme of progressive structural change are now being noticed by millions of the poor in the main urban centres, particularly Lima (with 10 million out of a total population of 32). The more his government engages, mobilises and commits to the poor in supporting the implementation of his policies, the greater the chances of being adopted by them as their own political social objectives. This will allow him to prepare the ground for a referendum for a Constituent Assembly to draft an anti-neoliberal constitution as the basis for the creation of a Plurinational State, the premise for the carrying out of a mariateguista socio-economic transformation of Peru.

Contrary to media misrepresentation, the PNLP programme also includes, among many other interesting policies, the decriminalisation of abortion, a head-on attack on the traffic of persons – especially women, the elimination of patriarchy and machismo in state and society, the respect and promotion of women’s reproductive rights and the promotion of the self-organization of women at every level.18 This contrasts sharply with Keiko’s defence of her father’s legacy that among other stains, has his Eugenic plan that led to the forcible sterilization of about 350,000 mainly peasant and indigenous women carried out to deal with the nation’s ‘Indian problem’ (higher birth rates among indigenous people than Peruvians of European descent).19

Castillo’s immediate concern is to ensure a smooth transition of presidential power to guarantee the country’s governability, prevent a run on the currency, prevent financial panic, violent street demonstrations, destabilisation plans and such like that have characterised many electoral victories of presidential candidates of the Left in Latin America. A major cause for concern is the Biden administration’s ‘Trumpian inertia’, maintaining pretty much unchanged US’s aggression against governments of the left in the region of his predecessor, despite his promise to, for example, restore Obama’s constructive policies towards Cuba.

On the other hand, the coming Peru Libre administration does and will benefit from a changing relation of forces for the better in the region with robust left victories in neighbouring Argentina, Chile and especially Bolivia. Castillo has already received the open support of Nicaragua, Mexico, Cuba and from the mass parties of the Latin American Left organised in the Sao Paulo Forum and the Puebla Group, with the latter two issuing strong statements of support calling to respect the will of the Peruvian people. Castillo has also in his favour, the visible deterioration of the US regional machinery of intervention with Luis Almagro, Secretary General of the Organization of the American States (OAS), suffering massive discredit after his disgraceful and criminal complicity in the coup d’état that ousted Evo Morales in 2019 and facing a criminal accusation from Bolivia in the International Criminal Court. He has been openly and publicly repudiated by the governments of Argentina and Mexico, and with the US-inspired Lima group (set up to overthrow the Bolivarian government of Venezuela and led by Almagro) just having lost Lima to a party whose programme includes Peru leaving the OAS and going back to UNASUR. To top it all, the PNLP programme includes strong support for Cuba and Venezuela.

Our job in the imperialist North is to tell the truth about Pedro Castillo’s progressive, anti-neoliberal programme aimed at reversing decades of neoliberal policies to support his beleaguered nation and people by counteracting the unavoidable mainstream media misrepresentations; to remain vigilant and denounce and reject any external or domestic attempt to undermine the victory of the people of Peru by foul means (violence, coup d’état, lawfare, economic blockade, extra-territorial legislation, sanctions, the usual European Union shenanigans, and such like); and to help construct the broadest solidarity movement in their support.

*

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.

This article was originally published on Public Reading Rooms.

Notes

1 Milan Sime Martinic, The curious case of Peru’s persistent president-to-prison politics, The Week, 17 November 2020.

2 Peru, IMF Country Report No. 20/3, 10th Jan 2020,

3 Carlos Parodi Trece, “Perú: Pobreza y políticas sociales de la década de los 90”, Revista de Ciencias Sociales, Vol. VI, No.3, Sept-Dec. 2001, p.385.

4 Covid-19 and its impact on Poverty in Peru, Project Peru, 10th Jan 2021

5 Whitney Eulich, ‘We’re invisible’: Peru’s moment of reckoning on informal workers, The Christian Science Monitor, 30 June 2020

6 Bart-Jaap Verbeek, “Globalisation and Exploitation in Peru: Strategic Selectivities and the Defeat of Labour in the US-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement”, Global Labour Journal, Vol. 5, 31 May 2014, p.223-4.

7 Eduardo Silva, Challenging Neoliberalism in Latin America, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2009, pp. 236-245.

8 Bart-Jaap Verbeek, op.cit., p.221.

9 Income Inequality, Peru, 1980-2019,World Inequality Database, https://wid.world/country/peru/

10 Situation in Peru remains critical as world’s worst-hit COVID-19 country, Medecins Sans Frontiers, 4 June 2021, https://www.msf.org/peru-covid-situation-remains-critical-worst-hit-country

11 Plan de Gobierno de 100 días de Perú Libre: Los siete ejes de la propuesta, Gestión, 16 May 2021, https://gestion.pe/peru/politica/plan-de-gobierno-de-100-dias-de-peru-libre-los-siete-ejes-de-la-propuesta-noticia/

12 For an analysis of Mariátegui’s significance in Latin America see Francisco Dominguez, “Marxism and the Peculiarities of Indo-American Socialism”, in Mary Davis (ed.), MARX200 The Significance of Marxism in the 21st Century, Praxis Press 2019, pp.49-58.

13 Gilberto Calil, Mariátegui y la elección de Pedro Castillo en Perú, Rebelión, 9 June 2021, https://rebelion.org/mariategui-y-la-eleccion-de-pedro-castillo-en-peru/

14 The Aymara ecologist, Walter Aduviri Calisaya, was elected governor of Puno and current PNPL general secretary, Vladimir Cerrón, its key Marxist intellectual, was elected governor of Junín, but the élite resorting to lawfare, managed to imprison Aduviri, who served 8 years in prison, and Cerrón was suspended as a governor and was banned from being a presidential candidate.

15 Peasant, indigenous and communitarian self-defense organization present in the country that has exponentially grown in the last 10 years; it is claimed that it can mobilize two and half million people; Castillo was an active member.

16 Lautaro Rivara y Gonzalo Armúa, “Pedro Castillo y el Perú: Lo nuevo viene de lejos”, Todos Los Puentes, 15 April 2021, https://todoslospuentes.com/2021/04/15/pedro-castillo-y-el-peru-lo-nuevo-viene-de-lejos/

17 See the insightful analyses in Carlos Aguirre & Paulo Drinot (eds.), The Peculiar Revolution, Rethinking The Peruvian Experiment Under Military Rule, University of Texas Press, 2017.

18 See (in Spanish) especially Chapter XVI, The Socialist Woman, https://perulibre.pe/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/ideario-peru-libre.pdf; in interview Castillo said he personally was against abortion, but was prepared to bring the issue to the proposed Constituent Assembly to be discussed.

19 Anastasia Moloney, Haunted by forced sterilizations, Peruvian women pin hopes on court hearing, Reuters, 8 January 2021, https://www.reuters.com/article/peru-women-sterilizations-idUSL8N2JH4WB

Featured image is from Public Reading Rooms

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

A reported 3.9 magnitude earthquake off the Florida’s east coast Friday was actually an “experimental explosion,” the U.S. Navy confirmed.

A spokesperson with the Navy told Action News Jax that what was measured were a result of military “shock trials” and they are not unusual, nor is it unusual for them to register as earthquakes.

Shock trials test a ship to see how it holds up in an undersea explosion. This is to test strength of the ship’s hull, making sure it can perform in battle.

The United States Geological Survey measured the seismic event roughly 100 miles off the coast of Ponce Inlet.

Action News Jax has reached out to the Coast Guard for more information.

3.9 Experimental Explosion (USGS)

*

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.

***

The Gaza Strip, measures only 25 miles long and five miles wide. It is one of the most densely populated places on the planet.

Since 2007, Israel has imposed a full blockade on Gaza from the air, land, and sea. The two million Palestinians living there (half of which are under the age of 18) are trapped in an open air prison where food, potable water, electricity, medicine, building materials, etc. are severely restricted by the Israeli authorities.

The latest Israeli military operation in Gaza was called “Guardian of the Walls,” a reference no doubt to the walls enclosing the Palestinian population of mostly refugees, victims of Zionist settler colonialism, forcibly prevented from returning home. Highlighting the unfairness of the fight, at the war’s onset reports described Israeli tanks and 80 aircraft, including  F-35’s, being deployed against a people militarily conquered and occupied since 1967. The Gazans have no air force, no navy, and no control over their borders, airspace, or coasts.

Following 11 days of bombing, an Egypt brokered ceasefire was accepted after multiple offers were rejected by Tel Aviv.

Ethnic Cleansing in Jerusalem

Last month’s war on Gaza was largely precipitated by an ethnic cleansing campaign occurring in East Jerusalem, illegally occupied by Israel. The threatened evictions of dozens of families from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood sparked protests among the Palestinians.

Writer and researcher Yanis Iqbal provides some background;

Beginning from May 2, 2021, Israel has begun its attempts to forcibly evict 26 Palestinian families from their homes in Sheikh Jarrah. These families consist of refugees since the Nakba (the 1947-49 expulsion and forced exile of over two-thirds of the population by Zionist forces) and have been denied their United Nations (UN)-mandated right to return home. They were relocated in the neighborhood when it was under Jordanian control between 1948 and 1967.

Israeli propaganda attempts to present the idea that the homes being seized were once owned by Jews. This is a complete lie – the Jordanian authorities were the ones to finance the construction of the homes. Since the early 1970s, Palestinians in Sheikh Jarrah have been battling a series of Jewish settler organizations who filed lawsuits claiming the land belonged to them. Many Palestinians have been kicked out of the neighborhood and replaced by Israeli settlers. The current standoff and protests came about after an Israeli court ruled in favor of Nahalat Shimon International – an organization based in the US – and Ateret Cohanim, another settlement group that seeks to take over the properties.

In its bloody quest to eliminate Palestinians from Sheikh Jarrah, the settler state has left no stone unturned. Combat-clad murderers have been sent in to terrorize Palestinian sit-ins with skunk water, tear gas, rubber-coated bullets and shock grenades. Protesters have been physically assaulted, kneeled on, choked, and shot at with live rounds. On May 7, 2021, the Israeli police forced its way into the neighborhood as Palestinians and solidarity activists gathered to break their Ramadan fasting in solidarity with 40 Palestinians, including 10 children.

Far right violence had already been ramping up in Jerusalem. In one illustrative example from late April, a Israeli brownshirt-like group named Lehava led marches with memorable choruses such as “your village will be burnt down,” “may your village burn,” “Arabs get out,” and “death to Arabs.” The demonstrations saw large groups of Jewish youths hurling rocks at Palestinians, including inside their homes and vehicles. Participants were encouraged to arm themselves and get violent. Haaretz reported on a social media group administered by far right Knesset member, Itamar Ben-Gvir, that included somebody enthusiastically promoting plans to burn Palestinians with Molotov cocktails. A video shared on social media showed an Israeli man driving through East Jerusalem firing his gun in the air to frighten the occupied Palestinian residents. The Lehava event was explicitly promoted to “restore Jewish dignity” to Jerusalem. Palestinian counter protests at Damascus Gate in the Old City were responded to by police using similar measures to those deployed against the sit ins described above by Iqbal: 105 people were injured, with 22 hospitalized.

During Israel’s crackdown on early May protests against the planned dispossession in Sheikh Jarrah, settlers again chanted “death to Arabs” and the police used cannons to fire the aforementioned “skunk water” into people’s houses. The pervasive stink spray smells like sewage and remains for weeks. After drying, it is only made worse when it coming into contact with water making it especially arduous to clean.

Attacks at the Al Aqsa Mosque

Just prior to the war on Gaza, tens of thousands came to worship during the final days of Ramadan, at Jerusalem’s Al Aqsa Mosque (the third holiest site in Islam) and its surrounding compound. The Israeli police, four times over five days, stormed the holy site making the area a battleground. They fired off stun grenades, sound bombs, tear gas, and rubber bullets, including inside the Al Aqsa Mosque terrorizing the unarmed occupied population. These rubber coated steel bullets were often aimed at the heads, faces, and eyes of worshippers and protesters.

In an interview with Scott Horton, journalist Alan Macleod discussed the corporate media’s cynical efforts to create a “both sides narrative” despite the huge power disparity painted by vivid scenes of occupied civilians armed with “stones and prayer rugs” standing off with the Israeli security forces sporting their “machine guns and stun grenades.”

Even clinics were not spared. At Mondoweiss, Yumna Patel reported[v]ideos from a clinic in East Jerusalem where injured Palestinians were being treated showed Israeli forces firing sound bombs into the clinic itself.”

As a result of consecutive days of Israeli violence and “clashes,” hundreds of Palestinians were injured and hospitalized. On May 10th, even before the rockets and bomb attacks, those at the Mosque and the surrounding neighborhood described the area as a “war zone.”

Hamas Retaliates on Behalf of The Palestinians

The armed brigades of Hamas, the militant group ruling the Gaza Strip, gave Israel an ultimatum that evening to withdraw from Sheikh Jarrah, the al Aqsa Mosque, and release Palestinian prisoners. The Israelis refused. Hamas retaliated on behalf of Palestinians throughout the occupied territories. Those Palestinians have essentially no other armed force to deter or defend against Israeli aggression. The first of the crude rockets launched by Hamas into Jerusalem killed nobody and “lightly injured” one Israeli. Israel responded with airstrikes on Gaza that killed 20 people, nine of which were children.

As Al Jazeera reported:

Most of the children belonged to the same extended family. Two siblings, 11-year-old Ibrahim and seven-year-old Marwan, were the only children of Yousef al-Masri.

The children were playing outside their homes before the Ramadan iftar meal in Beit Hanoun, in the northern Gaza Strip, before two explosions rocked the street.

Youssef al-Masri, the father of the siblings was quoted in the media as well, “My children were martyred. I cannot find any justification whatsoever for targeting someone passing through overcrowded civilian neighborhoods where dozens of children usually play.”

For nearly two weeks Israel then proceeded to pummel Gaza with high explosives.

Disgracing The American People

Along with the already massive but growing military and financial aid to Israel, the American government underwrote every bit of the massacre with diplomatic cover as it ensued. At the U.N. Security Council, the U.S. blocked three successive statements urging a ceasefire and cessation of attacks against Palestinians in just the first week of bombings. The third statement blocked was introduced by Norway, China, and Tunisia.

The French later introduced a draft Security Council Resolution demanding a ceasefire which the U.S. threatened to veto.

On the domestic scene, mainstream media sprang into action providing an abundance of hasbara to American audiences attempting to muddy the waters sufficiently to keep people from taking the obvious moral position against the U.S. backed canned hunt.

Along with his underlings, though given countless opportunities, Biden, long known as “Israel’s man in Washington,” repeatedly refused, to condemn the apartheid state even as it mass murdered children.

Indeed, both the executive branch and much of the legislature are eager to provide “more for Israel” at the American people’s expense. In early June, Defense Minister Benny Gantz, who in a video messageduring the war threatened “Gaza will burn,” visited Washington D.C. to request another billion dollars in military aid. Many in Congress are thrilled at the opportunity to fulfill his request and Biden has promised to “replenish” Israel’s U.S. funded Iron Dome missile defense system.

Once again, Secretary of State Antony Blinken made a complete mockery of his post as America’s top diplomat. As Dave DeCamp, news editor at Antiwar.com, has written:

In a pathetic attempt to pretend that the Biden administration cares about the suffering Israel is causing… Blinken announced additional aid for the Palestinians after the truce was reached. The assistance includes about $5.5 million to rebuild Gaza, a pittance compared to what the US is poised to give Israel.

In an interview with Israel’s Channel 12, Blinken somehow claimed that Israel took “significant steps” to avoid killing civilians in Gaza. This ignores the deliberate targeting of civilian homes. In one Israeli air raid, bombs hit a residential building in the al-Shati refugee camp in Gaza, killing 10 people; two women and eight children…

The violence was not limited to Gaza. In the West Bank and East Jerusalem, at least 29 Palestinians were gunned down by Israeli security forces.

Not to be outdone by the Democrats, in the neoconservative wing of the Senate, Marco Rubio used Israel’s slaughter in Gaza as a political opportunity to sabotage renewed talks with Tehran. Rubio led an effort, backed by more than forty other Republican lawmakers, to thwart all sanctions relief and end talks with Iran. Rubio was hoping to preclude any U.S. return to the nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The JCPOA constitutes the most intrusive international inspections regime in history over Iran’s civilian nuclear program. Iran is a long time signatory of the Non Proliferation Treaty unlike Israel, who has a clandestine but well known nuclear weapons arsenal.

Killing Gazans

More than 250 people were murdered in Gaza, including 67 children, another 2,000 were wounded. Almost 17,000 homes were demolished, displacing tens of thousands within Gaza. The Israeli airstrikes and artillery onslaughts hit water supplies, refugee camps, apartment buildings, schools, Gaza’s only Covid-19 test center, a Doctors Without Borders clinic, and towers housing media offices.

On top of the annual $3.8 billion in military aid to Israel, five days before the war, Biden approved another $735 million weapons sale. The sale consists primarily of Boeing’s Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs). The JDAMs are used to convert unguided bombs into precision guided munitions or “smart bombs.” JDAMs were a weapon of choice during the assault on Gaza.

In one instance, Israel dropped a “smart bomb” on a building that contained offices used by the Associated Press, Middle East Eye, and Al Jazeera.

As Newsweek reported,

The targeting and destruction of Al-Jalaa Tower have been condemned by a number of local and foreign media groups, including two of its occupants, The Associated Press and Al Jazeera, which launched its own investigation identifying the weapon that wrecked its offices as a GBU-31, one of several JDAM variants known to have been exported by the U.S. to Israel in past years.

Israel even bombed roads around hospitals impeding ambulances from helping victims reach healthcare centers. A week into the war, Gaza’s Ministry of Information was reporting $18 million worth of damage done to streets and other key infrastructure alone.

“Why Do They Hate Us?” 20 Years Later

In the wake of the events of September 11th, 2001, Americans often pondered “why do they hate us?” The best way to answer this question is to analyze the words of Osama Bin Laden, the words he used to convince others to follow him and join his cause.

Throughout the 1990s, he called for violence against the U.S. explicitly for the U.S. Army and Air Force bases occupying Muslim holy land on the Arabian Peninsula. He railed against America, under then President Bill Clinton, for making the Peninsula a “staging post” for the bombing and blockade of Iraq that killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims. He also pointed to U.S. support for myriad authoritarian Middle East dictatorships such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt. He hoped to bait us into a protracted war that would bleed us dry. The plan is for us to eventually leave, but only after bankrupting ourselves and destabilizing the region, making al Qaeda’s long desired local revolutions more plausible. His plan is working better than expected.

In 1996, Bin Laden issued his first “fatwa” against the United States, he did not incite hate against Americans for their love of freedom and liberty. Contrarily, he specifically complained about U.S. support for Israel’s crimes against the Palestinians.

From his “Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places,”

The youths hold you responsible for all the killings, evictions, and displacements of the Muslims and the violation of their sacred places which were carried out by your Jewish brothers in Palestine using moneys and arms you supplied them with. [emphasis added]

Bin Laden later told CNN in 1997,

We declared jihad against the U.S. government because the U.S. government is unjust, criminal, and tyrannical. It has committed acts that are extremely unjust, hideous and criminal, whether directly or through its support of the Israeli occupation of [Palestine]… we believe the U.S. is directly responsible for those who were killed in Palestine, Lebanon, and Iraq. [emphasis added]

Along with some of the other fellow lead hijackers, Mohammed Atta, the man who piloted American Airlines Flight 11 into the North Tower of the World Trade Center, was motivated to attack Americans over their government’s support for Israel. In the book Enough Already: Time to End the War on Terrorism, Scott Horton details Atta’s trajectory,

…as Lawrence Wright reported in The Looming Tower, in April 1996, after Israel launched their Operation Grapes of Wrath campaign in Southern Lebanon,… Atta signed his last will and testament, a symbol of his willingness to die in the fight against those he blamed for the war. As journalist Terry McDermott explains in Perfect Soldiers, his book on Atta’s so-called “Hamburg cell” of September 11th plotters, they had all agreed it was the Americans who were responsible for what Israel was doing since the U.S. government gives Israel so many billions of dollars in military equipment and other financial aid.

During Operation Grapes of Wrath, in what is called the First Qana Massacre, the Israelis infamously bombed a U.N. compound killing more than one hundred civilians seeking shelter. Qana was referenced often by Bin Laden in the speeches and writings that influenced Atta and his associates to join up the jihad.

In reality, Israel is ruthlessly occupying about six million people in Palestine with virtually no rights while expanding settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The so called “Two State Solution” is dead. Human Rights Watch and B’Tselem, Israel’s top human rights organization, issued reports this year calling the situation in Israel/Palestine a one-state situation akin to apartheid. As Sheldon Richman says, one state “dedicated to Jewish supremacy or domination.” Lately, Israeli ultra-nationalism, with the accompanying street violence, has been on full display without the establishment media’s filters. During the war, evidence proliferated across social media with videos exposing, yet again, the dystopian reality that is the life of Palestinians not just in the occupied territories but, within the 1948 borders too, in what is called Israel proper. In cities like Bet Yam and Lod, Arabs were attacked in the streets by roving mobs of Israelis destroying Palestinian owned businesses and storefronts.

What Must Be Done

It’s been 20 years since the 9/11 attacks. On Memorial Day, neoconservative spokesman and Senator Lindsey Graham, with an ear to ear grin, stood next to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and lied to the American people’s faces. He said “nobody does more to protect America from radical Islam than our friends in Israel.” He was lobbying his own country for another billion dollars in weaponry for the Israelis. Ironically, Tel Aviv has, for years, supported al Qaeda during the war in Syria against their common enemy in Damascus. So much for our ‘greatest ally’ in the Middle East.

From the beginning, the al Qaeda/terrorism issue was framed in a kind of unreality that shared little to no resemblance with the truth. At the time of the 9/11 attacks, Al Qaeda was only a few hundred men, formally backed by Ronald Regan against the Soviets, tucked away in Nangarhar Province. It was the U.S. and its allies that started this fight when we supported Israel’s occupations, put troops on Saudi soil and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

And therefore, aside from dealing with those directly responsible for the attack, whom the Taliban offered to hand over anyway, there was no need to become further bogged down in the region. As it would only kill exponentially more innocent people, create more enemies, more war, more blowback, and destroy our economy.

But we were ceaselessly told by our government that September 11th, 2001 changed everything. Under the spell of the Cathedral, our society accordingly goosestepped into an era of totalitarianism at home to defeat the artificially inflated threat abroad. And what do we have to show for it? Record breaking “defense” budgets, unending mass surveillance, trillions of dollars in crushing debt, indefinite global wars against vaguely defined enemies, millions killed and displaced, torture prisons, assassinations of American citizens, thousands of dead and maimed soldiers, a suicide epidemic among veterans, militarized police, hyper divisive fake corporate news, ongoing economic crises and moral decay. In the end, we sacrificed our character and our way of life. And none of it was necessary.

U.S. support for Israel is a travesty, a stain on our history and present. And because of our own corrupt, imperialist government, Americans are still in the line of fire as Tel Aviv continues to kill men, women, and children on our dime and in our name. We can no longer morally, financially, legally, or strategically afford to offer aid to a regional superpower violating international law. Israel, an internationally notorious apartheid state, killing civilians, perpetually at war, armed with nuclear weapons, and comfortably surrounded by friendly dictatorships, has received well over $200 billion in U.S. money, adjusted for inflation, since its founding. Netanyahu himself once remarked, it is “absurd.”

As Jason Ditz, news editor at Antiwar.com, points out, “Israel’s relationship to the US has long centered around intense lobbying and getting embarrassingly large amounts of military aid ($58 billion in 20 years, more than all other US aid recipients combined).”

Israel uses its American taxpayer-funded, state of the art military to subjugate Palestinians, stealing their property in East Jerusalem and the West Bank while bombing those held prisoner in the Gaza concentration camp. Israel is also constantly attacking its neighbors, such as Syria, whom the Israelis conduct airstrikes against on a weekly basis.

It is a supreme disservice to the victims of 9/11, their memory, and their survivors, to continue down this road, year after year, still funding Israel’s atrocities and fighting the endless Middle East wars. It is time for the American people to not only renounce Washington’s permanent war agenda but emphatically refuse to foot the bill for Israel’s crimes against humanity.

Or have we learned nothing?

*

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.

Connor Freeman is a writer at the Libertarian Institute, primarily covering foreign policy. He has been featured in media outlets such as Antiwar.com and Counterpunch, as well as the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity. He has also been a guest on Conflicts of Interest. You can follow him on Twitter @FreemansMind96

Featured image is from The Libertarian Institute

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.

***

“The Peruvian people have raised their heads to say democratically that we are going to save this homeland,” farmer-turned-teacher, unionist organizer and socialist Pedro Castillo, 51, told supporters the evening of June 15, following the end of ten days of counting ballots.

“Tonight should not only be a night of joy and jubilation but also of great responsibility. We have to be cool because today begins the real battle to end the great inequalities,” Castillo said.

“We are not Chavistas, we are not communists, no one has come to destabilize this country,” he said, a reference to a common refrain from Fujimori’s party and supporters comparing him to Venezuela’s late leftist President Hugo Chavez.

“We are workers, we are entrepreneurs and we will guarantee a stable economy, respecting private property, respecting private investment and above all respecting fundamental rights, such as the right to education and health,” he told supporters.

On June 15, Peru’s National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE) concluded counting all votes cast in the June 6 elections. Free Peru candidate Pedro Castillo received 50.12% of the votes while Popular Force candidate Keiko Fujimori received 49.87%. (Details are shown here: ONPE)

In absolute terms, Castillo received 8,835,579 votes, 44,058 votes over the far-right politician charged with committing several crimes, Keiko Fujimori, 46, who garnered the support of 8,791,521 voters. This is her third time running for the presidency for the party she formed, Popular Force, following the 25-year sentence of her father, former President Alberto Fujimori. She was his First Lady and is charged with some of the same crimes that he was.

More than 18.8 million Peruvians cast their votes in the country and abroad. The electoral authorities counted 17.6 million valid votes, over one million invalid votes, and 121,477 blank votes.

This is a historic election for Peru, and an outstanding inspiration to workers like Castillo throughout Latin America and beyond. Non-politician Pedro Castillo is to take office on July 28.

Pedro Castillo en Chota. | Foto:DPA

Source: DPA

This historical moment for the poor, workers, indigenous could still be lost if it is up to right-wing militarists, former commanders, and pro-Fujimori judges.

As of June 20, still no final word of who actually is the next president. Keiko Fujimori appealed 200,000 votes at 943 polling stations for being “manipulated” with “fraudulent signatures,” and claimed that there were “impersonations of polling station members” in polling stations.

The Special Electoral Jury (JEE) completed its recount of those cases, on June 19, and found the claims all to be “inappropriate” and “unfounded.”

Fujimori appealed to the highest instance, the National Electoral Jury (JNE), which has so far not found any evidence of fraud. Still, Popular Force demands it count again. The JNE should come to a conclusion any day now. See Elecciones 2021: Fuerza Popular pierde en Jurado Electoral Especial y lanza arremetida judicial.

“The threat of political violence or even a military coup is real. Fujimori’s followers have staged fascistic demonstrations, replete with torches and the singing of the national anthem while giving the Nazi salute…” See Peru ending second week since presidential election with no declared winner.

“[Sixty-three] retired generals and other high-ranking officers issued a communique demanding the resignation of the head of the election board, warning of the danger of a Castillo victory and calling for the ‘strengthening of confidence in the armed forces and the police.’ The Defense Ministry felt compelled to issue a statement in response deploring the use of official military symbols in the communique.”

Telesur followed this announcement up on June 15:

“Peru’s Armed Forces on Monday stated their respect for the constitutional order and disassociated themselves from versions of a coup d’état in this South American country, which is still awaiting the official declaration of Free Peru candidate Pedro Castillo as the winner of the June 6 presidential elections.”

“’We regret the political use of the Armed Forces because this not only undermines their institutionality, but also generates alarm, anxiety, and division at a time when the country requires unity and calm,’ the Defense Ministry said.

“The statement pointed out that the Armed Forces had ‘an exemplary role’ in the elections guaranteeing the free exercise of the right to vote and protecting electoral officials. ‘Their mission in this electoral process has been fulfilled.’” See Peru’s Armed Forces Disassociate Themselves From Coup Attempts.

By June 18, the daily La Republica reported that nothing substantial had yet occurred to ward off this threat. Its front page article was headlined: “Retired former military high-ranking officers instigate rebellion of armed institutes!”

The next day, Minister of Defense Nuria Esparch “sent the letter to the Attorney General (Fiscalía) asking for it to determine if the letter is evidence of a ‘crime of conspiracy.” She also stated that there were no signatures on the letter and that six of those named were dead.

The current president since 2016, Francisco Sagasti, also condemned the letter as an “inacceptable incitement.” See Esparch sobre exmilitares: Habrían cometido delito vinculado a la conspiración.

Will Peru Be Part of a Renewed Pink Tide?

Although Ecuador’s socialist presidential candidate Andrés Arauz lost to Ecuador’s former Coca Cola director, banker millionaire Guillermo Lasso, last April, the Latin American pink tide from the beginning of the 21st century appears to be reviving after other recent defeats.

Bolivia’s new socialist President Luis Arce, Argentina’s President Alberto Fernandez, Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega, Ecuador’s former President Rafael Correa, Brazil’s ex-Presidents Lula Da Silva and Dilma Rousseff, and Colombia’s ex-Senator Piedad Cordoba sent joyful messages.

In the April 11 general election, Castillo led the race of 18 candidates with 19% of the voters. He had never engaged in parliamentary politics. Keiko Fujimori, a congresswoman from 2011 to 2016, took second place with 13.36%. In 2011, she barely lost to liberal-leftist Ollanta Humala with 51.5%. In 2016, Pedro Pablo Kuczynski squeaked by with 50.12% of the voters.

(See my background piece for this election: Left-Wing Populist, Pedro Castillo, Leads Polls Before June 6th Election in Peru – CovertAction Magazine)

The fact that the JNE has delayed announcing the official victor has encouraged turmoil and demonstrations in front of JNE and ONPE leaders’ houses.

“A group of supporters of the presidential candidate of The Popular Force, Keiko Fujimori, approached the exterior of the house of Magistrate Jorge Rodríguez Vélez, a member of the plenary session of the National Elections Jury (JNE), to hold a sit-in.” They shouted, “Respect my vote, JNE.”

“Another call is being made today, so I can say it’s a systematic thing … They are not going to scare us,” Rodríguez responded.

Protesta frente a la casa del magistrado Jorge Rodríguez Vélez. Foto: John Reyes/La República

Keiko Fujimori backers claim ”election fraud” in front of JNE president’s house. [Source: larepublica.pe]

Although election committee officials did not announce the new president victor the final day of counting, the national media did. The moderate La Republica headlined: “Pedro Castillo wins over Keiko Fujimori by ballots 100% counted.”

Peruvian voters were faced with two extremes unlike in previous elections, and many were unhappy that a moderate candidate did not make the run-off. Peruvians had the choice of taking a chance with a major change in the economy towards benefiting the poor and the working class, or bringing in the daughter of former President Alberto Fujimori.

He is serving time for ordering the murder of 25 persons by a secret death squad whose killers were military men, in addition to massive corruption, receiving bribes and other crimes committed while his daughter was his adviser.

On October 10, 2018, Keiko Fujimori was arrested on charges of money laundering, illegally receiving money for her 2011 and 2016 presidential campaigns from the Brazilian Odebrecht real estate and construction company, for several other corruption cases, including leading a criminal organization.

She was sentenced to three years’ pre-trial detention as a “high escape risk.” The prosecution seeks 30 years’ imprisonment. Keiko Fujimori was released on bail under house arrest on May 5, 2020.

On June 10, Peru’s anti-corruption prosecutor José Domingo Pérez asked the judiciary to order a new pre-trial detention for Keiko Fujimori’s interference in the ongoing criminal investigations.

“It has been determined once again that the defendant Fujimori Higuchi does not comply with the restriction of not communicating with witnesses,” said the prosecutor.

Fujimori is still under investigation for the Odebrecht case, one of the most significant bribery and graft scandals in Latin America. The prosecutor told the court that she “is communicating with Miguel Torres Morales,” a witness to alleged illegal campaign financing for Fujimori’s 2011 and 2016 presidential bids.

For Keiko Fujimori, this election determines whether she goes to prison for a long time or takes the reigns as chief of state.

Keiko Fujimori in prison, and awaiting the conclusion of judicial investigations into crimes of corruption, accepting bribes, leading a criminal band. She is out on house arrest. [Source: peruactu.com]

Daniel Espinosa, a Peruvian journalist compared what Keiko Fujimori is doing—“attempting to compel the masses into the streets in a move that is as irresponsible as it is dangerous”—to what Donald Trump did by “inciting his fanatics to storm the U.S. Capitol.”

La Republica cited what Washington Post columnist Marco Aviles wrote about Keiko Fujimori’s refusal to accept Castillo’s victory as part of her long history of racism towards indigenous peoples.

Keiko Fujimori originally filed a lawsuit of 802 cases of fraud against electoral authorities and requested a computer audit of the digitalized electoral records before the current 943 claims of fraud in the country and abroad.

The electoral juries rejected most of them, because they were presented after the legal deadline, and there was little or no evidence of fraud at the polling stations.

From the start of counting the votes following 12 hours of casting ballots on June 6, who led had been nip and tuck. One or the other candidate had led by from 0.1 to 0.5% of the votes. Following a short-held lead by Castillo, Fujimori led in urban areas.

She held the lead throughout Sunday evening and early Monday. Later in the day with more rural votes counted, the tide turned in Castillo’s favor. Fujimori immediately claimed that his party had “distort[ed] or delay[ed] results that reflect[ed] the will of the people.” How this was to have happened was not forthcoming, but she called upon her supporters to protest.

Peru’s currency (sol) “headed to its biggest drop in more than a decade and the S&P/BVL Peru General Index fell as much as 5.8%, the most since November, with mining companies and financial firms among the hardest hit.

Overseas bonds were steady in light trading while the cost to insure against a default edged higher … after investor favorite Keiko Fujimori saw her early lead over leftist opponent Pedro Castillo fade overnight and in the early morning.”

With almost 93% of votes counted [morning of June 7], Fujimori had 50.1% support to 49.9% for Castillo, a former farmer and then school teacher and union organizer from the Peruvian highlands. Castillo traded places once 94% were counted: 50.7% to Fujimori’s 49.92%.

Vote counting slowed. One day, only 451 votes were counted. In one example of alleged “fraud,” a village where 197 people voted, only one favored Fujimori. Vote counters, election observers and ONPE found no fraud. Even the pro-U.S. Organization of American States leadership stated that there had been no fraud.

While Fujimori won every district in Lima’s capital region, the unionist teacher, who had led an important teacher strike in 2017, and whose parents are illiterate peasants, is overwhelmingly supported in the countryside.

Castillo stands for reforming the economy with greater state control over markets and natural resources; curtailing mining; increasing public works and social welfare spending with a 30% cut from corporate profits gained from the use of fossil fuels; and increasing pensions and wages. Fujimori wants more of the same “free market economy,” and spreads fear of “communism” taking over the country internally.

The corporate and White House favorite is also supported by Peruvian middle and upper class urban women simply because she is a woman. Fujimori is supported by celebrities, wealthy players on the national soccer team, and the nation’s most famous author, Mario Vargas Llosa.

The former communist sympathizer turned extreme conservative was the recipient of the 2010 Nobel Prize in Literature. He even campaigned for Fujimori without regret. According to Vargas Llosa, she is the best of the “lesser of evils”; he said that her conduct is “very decent.”

Fear Tactics

Upon completion of voting, National Elections Board (JNE) chairman Jorge Luis Salas stated that there were 166 international observers and 1,400 Transparency Civil Association observers monitoring the voting process.

“Conditions for reasonable and transparent elections are in place,” Salas added.

Furthermore, tens of thousands of police and soldiers were on patrol on election day. They reported no instances of chaos or violence. There were, however, a few hundred reports of bringing candidate propaganda into voting areas.

Many people fear that the military, or parts of it, will align with Fujimori to prevent the worker socialist from leading the country.

Three days before the final count, Daniel Espinosa wrote:

“So far, the Peruvian military has respected its mandate as a non-deliberative body, and has avoided interfering in the political contest. Even the Organization of American States and Human Rights Watch, two bodies which normally side with right-wing candidates in Latin America have openly rejected Fujimori´s accusations of fraud and called for a swift resolution of her weak complaints. For their part, international observers agree that the poll was clean.”

Fujimorism mobs are attacking prominent figures on the streets who stand by Pedro Castillo. Some of their houses have been surrounded and threats shouted. A totalitarian atmosphere is developing, according to one of the few dailies not in Fujimori’s pocket.

Fujimori and her rich backers are endeavoring to destabilize the country, to prevent Castillo from assuming the presidency, or lay the basis for his overthrow once in office—a strategy she may have learned from the CIA and her years in the United States.

Fujimori received her college education in business administration. She married an American, Mark Villanella, an IBM consultant. She was involved with the Mossack Fonseca tax evasion shelters known from the Panama Papers. When she first ran for the presidency, she hired former New York City mayor and Donald Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani as an adviser.

In a June 14 editorial, the moderate daily The Republic called indirectly upon the Popular Force party to stop creating “instability”: “The chaos caused by a sector that intends to review what has been revised, to open up what is already legally closed and, finally, to deduct votes from the rival, in order to win, cannot be answered with indifference.”

Waya, another Peruvian paper, wrote that this election will be remembered for “citizen polarization, the psycho-socials, the false news and the fear campaigns that have been deployed at the national level to direct the vote towards the presidential candidate Keiko Fujimori.”

For the business elite, its media, the police and military leaderships, the only real danger to “democracy,” as they see it, is Pedro Castillo. All the endemic pro-capitalist political corruption, bribes, swindles and murders are apparently of no consequence when confronting socialism, which aims to equalize rights and benefits, end military “solutions” to struggles resisting poverty, injustices, and wars for profit.

The hundreds of U.S. businesses in Peru include scores of chemical companies. Peru is the world’s second largest copper producer. It is also a large source for silver, gold and zinc.

Conclusion

In the last days of the campaign, both candidates concentrated on promising total battle against the coronavirus, which, as of June 17, had taken 189,522 Peruvian lives and infected 2,015,190. Peru leads the world in percentage of deaths per capita: 572.3 per 100,000. Of its 33.3 million population, more than two million have been infected. Peru’s per capita death rate is nearly double that of Hungary, the country with the second highest rate of deaths per 100,000 population at 305.

At the end of the ballot tally, the state announced a curfew in Lima and Callao from 11 p.m. to 4 a.m., in an effort to curtail the spread of Covid-19 infections and deaths.

Peru’s ethnic makeup (self-identified) is 60% mestizo; 27% indigenous (85% are Quechuas, the remainder are Aymaras and Amazonians); 5% white, ca. 2% black/mulatto, and 6.7% others.

Voting is mandatory in Peru for all persons aged 18 to 70. Turnout in this election, at 74%, was lower than the 82% in 2016 but still high.

Latin America’s poor and Indigenous peoples will be watching with hope to see what this feisty farmer-teacher-unionist will attempt to accomplish as a socialist president. Peru’s rich, its military and police leaderships, and Wall Street/Pentagon/CIA will be watching too.

Just in the last generation, the U.S. has backed at least nine coups or coup attempts against progressive or socialist presidents.

In 2002 against Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez (unsuccessful); in 2004 against Haiti’s Jean-Bertrand Aristide (successful); in 2009 against Honduras’ Manuel Zelaya (successful); in 2010 against Ecuador’s Rafael Correa (unsuccessful); in 2018 against Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega—the former revolutionary and progressive (unsuccessful); and in 2019 against Bolivia’s Evo Morales (successful).

r/MapPorn - U.S. backed coups in Latin America: Costa Rica 1948, Guatemala 1954, Paraguay 1954, Brazil 1964, Peru 1968, Chile 1973, Uruguay 1973, Argentina 1976, El Salvador 1979, Nicaragua 1981, Panama 1989 (invaded), Venezuela: 2002...

[Source: reddit.com]

The U.S. has also blessed right-wing parliamentary coups—in 2012 against Honduras’s Supreme Court; in 2012 against Paraguay’s President Fernando Lugo; and in 2016 against Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff.

Records show, in the last century, at least 87 coups in South America and the Caribbean, all either conducted directly by the self-proclaimed “greatest democracy,” the United States of America, or by its wealthy Latin American and military proxies.

*

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.

Ron Ridenour is a U.S.-born author and journalist, anti-war and civil rights activist since 1961. After joining the U.S. Air Force at 17, he saw the inner workings of U.S. imperialism first hand and resigned. In the 1980s and 1990’s he worked with the Nicaraguan government and on Cuban national media. Ron can be reached at [email protected].

Is the Danger COVID or the Vaccine?

June 21st, 2021 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

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.

***

How many Americans are as brave as Buffalo Bills wide receiver Cole Beasley, who announced he would give up playing football before he submits to the NFL’s vaccine protocols? See this.

Health care employees and many other Americans are experiencing pressure to accept vaccination or be fired. For example, a hospital in Texas has made vaccination a condition of employment. I can understand the reluctance of a nurse or doctor, who has witnessed severe injury and death to those who were vaccinated, being unwilling to subject themselves to the risk. They have exposed themselves for 16 months to risk of infection by treating those who are infected. Now they are declared to be a risk to patients because they are not vaccinated and are pressured to accept the high risk of injury from the vaccine.

David Ramsey offers advice to one nurse:

Notice how quickly American corporations have taken to the idea that they have the right to make deeply personal decisions for employees.

It is no longer just US presidents, such as Bush and Obama, who claim authority to set aside our constitutional protections and throw us in prison and execute us without due process, private profit-making corporations are now asserting the right to make our personal decisions.

What does this tell us about the belief in freedom in America? It tells us that it is the last thing public and private leaders think about. Freedom? What is that? The right to disagree with the government, the boss, the media? That’s terrorism. That’s conspiracy theory. That’s being uncooperative. Take off the tinfoil hat and do as you are told.

This is what everyone who works for a US corporation experiences. Take the vaccine. Don’t use these pronouns. Go to sensitivity training. Submit! Submit! Submit!

That is America today. Notice how quickly it came on us. Compare today with 16 months ago and observe the rapid erosion of freedom.

During the 20th century Cold War, Americans heard about “captive nations.” Today America is a captive nation.

Employers’ demands that employees submit to vaccination are not merely assertions of authority over personal decisions and violations of freedom. A lot of evidence indicates that vaccination mandates endanger people’s lives. Much evidence indicates a high incidence of death and serious injury associated with Covid vaccination and that the vaccine itself is causing the variants. See below for one such warning.

The scientific evidence should be publicly debated. Instead, the evidence is suppressed. If the evidence is mistaken, it should be easy to show that to be the case. So why is it suppressed instead of examined and debated? How can it be that corporate executives and boards can be ignorant of the dangers to which they demand employees subject themselves?

Is this a plot against life as people increasingly believe, or is it just stupidity and incompetence on the part of those in leadership positions. Neither answer is reassuring.

Dr. Peter McCullough provides one of the many unambiguous warnings issued by highly qualified experts, people far more knowledgeable than Tony Fauci, a medical bureaucrat whose lifetime work has been to maximize the profits of the pharmaceutical industry: see this.

Dr. Peter McCullough – COVID Vaccines Have Already Killed 50,000 Americans. Is the United States gearing up to force people to submit to vaccination?

Dr. McCullough is Vice Chief of Internal Medicine at Baylor University, editor of Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, senior editor of the American Journal of Cardiology, editor of the textbook Cardiorenal Medicine, and president of the Cardiorenal Society.

“The first wave of the bioterrorism was a respiratory virus that spread across the world, and affected relatively few people—about one percent of many populations—but generated great fear,” McCullough explained during the Oval Media webinar with other doctors. He noted that the virus targeted “mostly the frail and the elderly, but for otherwise well people, it was much like having the common cold.”

Dr. McCullough has treated many patients with the disease, written papers on it, had the disease himself, and has also seen a death in his own family due to COVID.

He believes that fear of the virus was used very quickly to generate policies that would hugely impact human life, such as the draconian lockdowns.

“Every single thing that was done in public health in response to the pandemic made it worse,” he pointed out.

McCullough explained that early on, as a doctor treating COVID patients, he came up with an early treatment regimen for those struck with the virus, which reduced hospital stays by about 85 percent, and said he began publishing papers on what he had learned. The doctor noted that he was “met with resistance at all levels” in terms of actually treating patients and publishing his papers.

“Fortunately I had enough publication strength to publish the only two papers in the entire medical literature that teaches doctors how to treat COVID-19 patients at home to prevent hospitalization,” he said.

“What we have discovered is that the suppression of early treatment was tightly linked to the development of a vaccine, and the entire program—and in a sense, bioterrorism phase one— was rolled out, and was really about keeping the population in fear, and in isolation preparing them to accept the vaccine, which appears to be phase two of a bioterrorism operation.”

McCullough explained that both the coronavirus and the vaccines deliver “to the human body, the spike protein, which is the gain of function target of this bioterrorism research.”

He acknowledged that he couldn’t come out and say this on national television because the medical establishment has done such a thorough job of propagandizing the issue.

“What we have learned over time is that we could no longer communicate with government agencies. We actually couldn’t communicate with our propagandized colleagues in major medical centers, all of which appear to be under a spell, almost as if they’ve been hypnotized.”

“Good doctors are doing unthinkable things like injecting biologically active messenger RNA that produces this pathogenic spike protein into pregnant women. I think when these doctors wake up from their trance, they’re going to be shocked to think what they’ve done to people,” he said, echoing what he, and Dr. Harvey Risch, professor at the Yale School of Public Health, told Fox News host Laura Ingraham during an interview last month.

Last summer McCullolugh started an early treatment initiative to keep COVID patients out of the hospital, which involved organizing multiple groups of medical doctors in the United States and abroad.  The doctor noted that some governments tried to block these doctors from providing the treatments, but with the help of the Association of Physicians and Surgeons, they were able to put out a home patient guide, and in the U.S., organized four different tele-medical services, and fifteen regional tele-medical services.

This way, people who were stricken with COVID-19, were able to call in to these services and get the medications they needed prescribed to local pharmacies, or mail order distribution pharmacies, he explained.

“Without the government really even understanding what was going on, we crushed the epidemic curve of the United States,” McCullough claimed. “Toward the end of December and January, we basically took care of the pandemic with about 500 doctors and telemedicine services, and to this day, we treat about 25 percent of the U.S. COVID-19 population that are actually at high risk, over age 50 with medical problems that present with severe symptoms.”

“We know that  this is phase two of bioterrorism, we don’t know who’s behind it, but we know that they want a needle in every arm to inject messenger RNA, or adenoviral DNA into every human being,” he said. “They want every human being.” The doctor later warned that the experimental vaccines could ultimately lead to cancers, and sterilize young women.

Dr. McCullough said his goal is to set apart a large group of people that the system cannot get to, which would include those who have already had the virus, those with immunity, children, pregnant women, and child-bearing women.

The cardiologist went on to say that because there is no clinical benefit in young people whatsoever to get the vaccine, even one case of myocarditis or pericarditis following the shots “is too many,” yet even though the CDC is aware of hundreds of alarming reports of cases of heart swelling in teenagers and young adults, they’re only going to reevaluate the matter later on in June. He accused the medical establishment of neglecting to to do anything to reduce the risks of the vaccines.

As someone who has chaired over two dozen vaccine safety monitoring boards for the FDA, and National Institute for Health, McCullough had room to criticize how the vaccines have been rolled out.

“With this program, there is no critical event committee, there is no data-safety monitoring board, and there’s no human ethics committee. Those structures are mandatory for all large clinical investigations, and so the word that’s really used for what’s going on is malfeasance, that’s wrongdoing of people in authority,” the doctor explained.

“Without any safety measures in place, you can see what’s going on,” he continued.

“Basically it’s the largest application of a biological product with the greatest amount of morbidity and mortality in the history of our country.”

“We are at over 5,000 deaths so far, as you know, and I think about 15,000 hospitalizations. In the EU it’s over 10,000 deaths. We are working with the Center for Medicaid (CMS) data, and we have a pretty good lead that the real number is tenfold.”

McCullough explained that because the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database only amounts to about 10 percent of the bad reactions to the vaccines, his team has had to go to other sources for information.

“We have now a whistleblower inside the CMS, and we have two whistleblowers in the CDC,” the doctor revealed. “We think we have 50,000 dead Americans. Fifty thousand deaths. So we actually have more deaths due to the vaccine per day than certainly the viral illness by far. It’s basically propagandized bioterrorism by injection.”

Dr. McCullough said he’s seen people in his office with cases of portal vein thrombosis, myocarditis, and serious memory problems post-vaccination. “It’s so disconcerting,” he said.

“If you said this is all a Gates Foundation program to reduce the population, it’s fitting very well with that hypothesis, right? The first wave was to kill the old people by the respiratory infection, the second wave is to take the survivors and target the young people and sterilize them,” he said.

“If you notice the messaging in the country, in the United States, they’re not even interested in old people now. They want the kids. They want the kids, kids, kids, kids kids! They’re such a focus on the kids,” he said, noting that in Toronto, Canada, last month, they lured the children with promises of ice-cream to get the jab. According to one report, the government of Ontario—-which doesn’t require parental consent for children to get vaccinated—-encouraged the kids to get the Pfizer vaccine at a pop-up vaccine event.

“They held the parents back, and they were vaccinating the kids,” the doctor reported. He said his Canadian wife’s mother was forcibly vaccinated against her will.

McCullough predicted that the United States is gearing up to force people into getting the injections.

“We have to stop it, and we have to see what’s behind it,” he concluded.

*

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.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

We have uploaded a copy of the film Cancer: The Forbidden Cures, to our Rumble and Bitchute channels.

This film was produced years ago, but it still stands as one of the best documentaries explaining how the FDA and Big Pharma have gone out of their way to suppress effective therapies that have been proven to treat cancer, to protect their monopoly on the Cancer Drug industry.

Here is the 3 and half minute trailer:

Since the roll out of the COVID-19 Plandemic at the end of 2019 and beginning of 2020, the COVID-19 bioweapon shots have become the new cash cow for the pharmaceutical industry, and in order to get the FDA to issue emergency use authorizations to use the public as lab rats to complete their Phase 3 trials, they had to pull out a very familiar and often-used page from their playbook in the past: suppress natural and effective treatments so that consumers have only one source, creating a monopoly on a disease that only the FDA can approve “cures” to be sold to the public.

To understand their strategy, one only needs to review their monopoly on the cancer industry, and this documentary is an excellent source to understand it.

Here is a review on the documentary that we published back in 2013.

REVIEW BY DAVID BONELLO – INTERNATIONAL WELLNESS DIRECTORY

Not what it seems. When I popped in the DVD, I went to the chapters to see what they were. I felt, no, not again…the same old stuff.

What a pleasant surprise. I’ve researched and written about these “forbidden” cures for years. What a delight to actually see an interview with Rene Caisse. We even see a party thrown for Rene a year before she died filled with people whom she had helped with their cancers.

Harry Hoxsey shows up, and you get to see scenes from a rare movie that Hoxsey himself made in 1957 called You Don’t Have to Die. It is so rare, you can’t even find a mention of it at the Internet Movie Database.

I loved the research they did on this film. It must have taken years to compile all the archived photos, audio, and films.

They even got Morris Fishbein on film. This is the creep who ran medicine for nearly 50 years. He destroyed many people, many companies, and the damage he did to the health care system of the time killed untold numbers of suffering humans. However, the Hoxsey affair was his downfall. He was forced to resign after libeling Hoxsey and eventually had to admit that Hoxsey was curing cancer.

The section on Max Gerson was interesting, especially the deja vue section: they borrowed scenes from Dying to have Known. The scenes they used were the most powerful, the contraposed scenes of so-called medical experts proclaiming that no one has ever been cured of cancer at the Gerson clinic, juxtaposed with patients telling their story.

Finally, you’ll see some of the latest advances in alternative therapies, including a physician who is curing cancer with baking soda even after he’s lost his license to practice medicine. For you history buffs, this is a must have. For you people looking for options outside of conventional medicine, this could save your life. It is very well done and well worth a watch.

– David Bonello, International Wellness Directory

Here is the full length film.

*

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.

BlackRock in the White House

June 21st, 2021 by Sundance

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.

***

With Joe Biden in the White House you can expect to hear the name “Blackrock” in the headlines connected to a variety of issues from real estate purchasing to green energy projects with massive domestic and international investments.

BlackRock, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries) is a massive publicly traded multinational investment firm with over $8.68 trillion in assets under management [December 31, 2020 financial statement] in more than 100 countries across the globe.  To say that Blackrock is invested in globalism, climate change and leftist politics, would be a severe understatement {See Here}.  Larry Fink is the CEO and people like Cheryl Mills, Hillary Clinton’s attorney of record, are on the board.

Inside BlackRock there is a division called the BlackRock Investment Institute (BII) {See Here}.

Essentially the role of the BII is to tell BlackRock what is going to happen around the globe, and be the tip-of-the-spear in directing BlackRock where to invest money by predicting political events.

The Chairman of the BlackRock Investment Institute is Tom Donilon, President Obama’s former National Security Advisor (before Susan Rice), and a key advisor to Joe Biden throughout his career in politics.

You cannot get more deeply connected in the swamp financial schemes than Tom Donilon.

Donilon has been in/around government for 35+ years, deeply connected.  Before joining the Obama administration Donilon was a registered lobbyist from 1999 through 2005 for O’Melvney & Myers. {Bio Here} Tom’s sole client was Fannie Mae.  Fannie Mae is a government-backed private corporation that sells mortgages to investors.

Donilon took the lobbying gig because he was previously Executive Vice President for Law and Policy at Fannie Mae where he was responsible for Fannie Mae’s legal, regulatory, government affairs, and public policy issues.  Tom Donilon’s BlackRock Biography reads like a who’s-who of connections to the swamp {READ HERE}

Here’s where it really gets interesting.

  • Tom Donilon’s brother, Mike Donilon is a Senior Advisor to Joe Biden {link} providing guidance on what policies should be implemented within the administration.  Mike Donilon guides the focus of spending, budgets, regulation and white house policy from his position of Senior Advisor to the President.
  • Tom Donilon’s wife, Catherine Russell, is the White House Personnel Director {link}.  In that position Donilon’s wife controls every hire in the Office of the Presidency.
  • Tom Donilon’s daughter, Sarah Donilon, who graduated college in 2019, now works on the White House National Security Council {link}

So let me just summarize this….  The Chairman of the BlackRock Investment Institute, the guy who tells the $8.7 trillion investment firm BlackRock where to put their money, has a brother who is the Senior Advisor to Joe Biden; has a wife who is the White House Personnel Director; and has a daughter who is now on the National Security Council.

Put another way… Tom Donilon’s literal job description for BlackRock is to: “leverage the firm’s expertise and generate proprietary research to provide insights on the global economy, markets, geopolitics and long-term asset allocation,” and his wife is in charge of White House personnel, his brother is Senior Advisor to the President, and his daughter is on the National Security Council.

You seeing this?  Conflicts and insider information much?

The only thing missing is Hunter Biden being moved to the BlackRock board.

Now, I say again: Watch Where “BlackRock” and Biden Put Their Money…

*

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 The Last Refuge

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.

***

The World Health Organization is awaiting an independent review of an Italian study indicating that COVID-19 could have been in circulation in the country as early as September 2019.

The findings will form part of its investigations into the origins of the outbreak.

CGTN’s Hermione Kitson spoke with scientists in Tuscany at the forefront of the study.

*

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.

***

Dr. Mike Yeadon walks us through the effects of COVID-19 vaccines on adolescents particularly for school-age children and younger.

“I’m genuinely pro-vaccine but I’m pro-safety and these COVID-19 vaccines are not safe. Gene-based design makes your body manufacture virus spike proteins and we know that virus spike proteins trigger blood clots.”

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Jakarta Method: Mass Murder in the Service of Washington

China’s Space Program Makes Its Mark

June 21st, 2021 by Ulson Gunnar

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on China’s Space Program Makes Its Mark

Inventor of mRNA Technology: Vaccine Causes Lipid Nanoparticles to Accumulate in ‘High Concentrations’ in Ovaries

By Megan Redshaw, June 18, 2021

On the “Dark Horse Podcast,” Dr. Robert Malone, creator of mRNA vaccine technology, said the COVID vaccine lipid nanoparticles — which tell the body to produce the spike protein — leave the injection site and accumulate in organs and tissues.

United Nations Security Council: World Peace and Security Ignored (1950-2021)

By Carla Stea, June 18, 2021

From 1950 through May 23, 2021, the mandate of the UN Security Council has been either violated or ignored, contributing to the gross destabilization of the world, and the Security Council has authorized four virtually genocidal wars through resolutions based upon fabricated justifications.

A Group of Florida Parents Cultured Their Children’s Masks and Found Dangerous Bacteria

By Daniel Horowitz, June 18, 2021

The idea of children, including preschoolers, walking around with bacteria traps on their breathing orifices all day so shocked the conscience that last summer, a bunch of internet parodies were produced illustrating such absurdity. Then, within weeks, most local governments mandated this cruel form of child abuse for an entire year without any study of the side effects.

Video: Covid-19 Pandemic and Vaccine: Report on Health Whistleblowers. Canadian MP Derek Sloan

By Derek Sloan, June 18, 2021

Independent MP Derek Sloan holds a news conference on Parliament Hill to raise concerns about the alleged censorship of doctors and scientists as well as medical information related to vaccines.

Fear Is Contagious and Used to Control You

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, June 18, 2021

Governments are using fear to control and manipulate their citizens. That has now been admitted by members of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behavior (SPI-B), a subcommittee that advises the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) in the U.K. And they should know, because they advocated for it, and now say it was a regrettable mistake.

Nazi Germany Set to Invade Russia, Analysing Hitler’s Access to Oil Sources

By Shane Quinn, June 18, 2021

On 3 June 1941 a meeting of the Soviet Supreme Military Council was chaired in Moscow. Its goal was to ratify instructions for the Red Army’s political workers, which would stress the need for vigilance and caution against the growing Nazi threat.

NATO Has Been Called Greatest Threat to World Peace: Now Biden Plans Dangerous Expansion That Will Increase Military Spending and Escalate the Risk of War

By Jeremy Kuzmarov, June 18, 2021

From the moment he was elected to the U.S. Senate, Joe Biden was groomed for high office by his mentor, Averell Harriman, a fabulously wealthy investment banker, governor of New York, coordinator of the Marshall Plan, and one of the original U.S. representatives to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) after its formation in 1949.

Video: Analysis of the Covid-19 Crisis: Dr. Peter McCullough with Dr. Reiner Fuellmich

By Dr. Peter McCullough and Reiner Fuellmich, June 18, 2021

Good doctors are doing unthinkable things like injecting biologically active messenger RNA that produces this pathogenic spike protein into pregnant women. I think when these doctors wake up up from their trance, they’re going to be shocked to think what they’ve done to people.

The FBI’s Mafia-Style Justice: To Fight Crime, the FBI Sponsors 15 Crimes a Day

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, June 18, 2021

Almost every tyranny being perpetrated by the U.S. government against the citizenry—purportedly to keep us safe and the nation secure—has come about as a result of some threat manufactured in one way or another by our own government. Think about it.

NATO Declares China as Global Security Challenge

By M. K. Bhadrakumar, June 18, 2021

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) summit in Brussels on Monday reminds us once again of what a hoax the United States had perpetrated on the former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 by assuring him that the western alliance would expand “not one inch eastward” once Moscow allowed German Unification and disbanded the Warsaw Pact.

Palestine: Smashed Houses, Crushed Orchards, A Trail of Unrestrained Malice

By Barbara Nimri Aziz, June 18, 2021

Residents of Sheikh Jarrah’s resistance to eviction by Israeli Jews evolved into a military confrontation so lopsided, the Israeli bombardments against Gaza so terrifying, it drew widespread condemnation (the US government excepted).

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Inventor of mRNA Technology: Vaccine Causes Lipid Nanoparticles to Accumulate in ‘High Concentrations’ in Ovaries
  • 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

A man claiming to be a friend with a British Airways pilot has stated that 3 pilots have just died within the past week shortly after receiving COVID-19 injections, and his recording has gone viral on social media. Here is the recording (let us know if Twitter takes it down as we have a copy.)

This brought out the usual corporate media “fact-checkers” to try and debunk the man’s claims.

Reuters responded with a “fact-check,” but in their own investigation and report they confirmed that not only did these three die, but a fourth one as well.

They gave the usual corporate media response by quoting some health “authorities” who categorically stated that their deaths had “nothing to do” with the shots, while not denying that they died, nor giving any other explanation for their deaths.

Shared in the form of a voice recording on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, an unidentified male says he has spoken to a “friend who’s a BA pilot” and explains “things are getting crazy” after three fellow pilots passed away (here , here and here).

“They’ve had the third BA pilot die in the last seven days, yeah? Third pilot dead in the last week,” says the man heard in the recording. “The first two guys were in their forties and fifties; this guy, mid-thirties, perfectly fit, no underlying conditions. He gets his second jab and he’s dead within days, exactly the same with the first two.

“Because of this, BA are now in crisis talks with the government about whether to allow vaccinated pilots to fly. The issue with that of course is that about 80%, according to my friend in BA, 80-85% have been injected.”

The man then goes on to say only “10% of pilots will be able to fly,” branding it a “serious issue”.

Reuters presented the claims to British Airways, which said they were unfounded and that no such talks were underway with the government.

The spokesperson, however, confirmed the authenticity of the four condolence books, as four company pilots had recently passed away.

“Our thoughts are with their family and friends,” they said, adding that none of the deaths was linked to vaccines.

In a statement to Reuters, the UK’s Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) also denied any such crisis talks with Britain’s flagship air carrier.

We have not been made aware of deaths of BA pilots after receiving the Covid-19 vaccine and have not had discussions with BA or other airlines, about preventing pilots from flying after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine,” said Dr. Sarah Branch, the director of vigilance and risk management of medicines for the MHRA. “There are currently no restrictions on aviation or other industries and activities post vaccination.” (Source -Emphasis added.)

Meanwhile, Sky News out of Australia is reporting that airline companies in Spain and Russia are warning COVID-19 “vaccinated” people not to travel because of the risk of blood clots.

*

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” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Ethiopian government is committing massacres and other crimes against humanity in different regions of the country. At the recent G7 meeting in Britain over 1,000 protestors marched outside calling for urgent action to prevent more killings of civilians in the Tigray region of Ethiopia. The United States and its allies ignored this.

Instead, they repeated their claims that China is guilty of massive human rights violations in Xinjiang and Hong Kong. This reveals their fear at the threat posed by China to American hegemony over the global economy.

The G7 discussed plans to contain China’s economic development through the “Build Back Better World’’ initiative. This infrastructure programme is designed to counter China’s Belt and Road project. This reveals their fear at the threat posed by China to American hegemony over the global economy.

Last November Ethiopia’s army launched an invasion a devastating war on the Tigray region that has led to the deaths of tens of thousands, mass ethnic cleansing and weaponized rapes of women.

Both the ineffectual UN and pro western human rights group Amnesty International have called for urgent investigations into the massive wave of violence directed against civilians in the Tigray region.

Goytom Teklu writing for the online journal Ethiopia Insight has pointed out the horrors facing the Tigrayan people at the hands of Ethiopia’s army:

“Thousands have been killed, millions displaced, cities demolished and looted, and millions are starving and suffering from a lack of essential services. ”

Since then the central government’s bloody repression has triggered another civil war in the Oromia region which wants independence for its region.

Investigative journalist Rene Lefort has commented:

“While more than half of the country is under a de facto state of emergency managed by martial law (“Command Post”), basic order is still far from prevailing in these [non-war] zones. Barely a week passes without a massacre, or pogrom, with dozens of victims.’’

Ethiopian journalist Gebrekirstos Gebremeskel has declared that the international community needs to take decisive action to prevent the Ethiopian government committing further crimes against humanity:

“The conditions for genocide against Tigrayans are ripe, and there really are intentions and deeds to destroy Tigray, and cleanse and exterminate Tigrayans. International intervention is needed to avoid a 21st century genocide of Rwandan proportions and a silent massacre of millions of Tigrayans by starvation.’’

The civil wars engulfing the country also encompasses the Oromia region where the Oromo Liberation Army has advanced to the Shewan part of Ormomia near the capital Addis Ababa. This is in response to civilian deaths caused by the violent repression of the Ethiopian army in the region.

The US and its Western allies claim that China is guilty of genocide in its Xinjiang region without producing any solid evidence to support these claims. Meanwhile, they ignore the atrocities being committed by the Ethiopian government on a daily basis. The hubris and hypocrisy of American imperialism and its allies knows no bounds as they step up their Cold War propaganda against China and Russia.

*

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 OneWorld

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.

***

Vaccine: Residents of Pakistan’s Punjab and Sindh provinces who refuse to take the covid-19 vaccine could have their cell phone signal blocked. The measure was one of the solutions found by local authorities to encourage the population to immunize, as reported by The New York Times on Tuesday (15).

With 216 million inhabitants currently, the Asian country began vaccination for covid-19 in February, with the expectation of serving between 45 and 65 million people by the end of this year. However, only 3 million had received the two doses in early June, according to official data.

The suspicions regarding the immunization against the new coronavirus are related to the fake news about the subject circulating in the country, according to the publication. One of the most talked about conspiracy theories among Pakistanis is that whoever receives the doses will die within a period of up to two years.

But misinformation about vaccines is old in Pakistan, mainly associated with polio, resulting in a large number of cases there. Believing that it is a formula produced by the United States for the purpose of sterilizing children, many parents prohibit their children from being vaccinated against the polio virus.

Pay cut

Cutting the cell phone signal for those who do not get vaccinated should be just one of the efforts of Pakistani authorities to encourage immunization. In Sindh, the government also plans to suspend pay for civil servants who refuse to be served.

Sanctions are expected to start in July, but there is not much information yet on how they will work. While the measures do not go into effect, many Pakistanis rush to get fake vaccination certificates, sold for the equivalent of US$12 each (just over R$60 in direct conversion, at the rate of the day).

*

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 Inga – stock.adobe.com

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.

***

Royal Caribbean’s Odyssey of the Seas was scheduled to leave Port Everglades on July 3rd. The cruise was halted after eight crew members tested positive for COVID. Strange enough, all eight COVID-positive crew members were “vaccinated” for COVID, proving yet again that these spike protein bioweapons do not stop people from testing positive for COVID or transmitting infection. Royal Caribbean has discovered that the VACCINATED cause outbreaks, and vaccines are not magic elixirs that prevent infection at all times.

The good news is that only two of the positive COVID cases showed any kind of symptoms, and these symptoms were mild, like any other cold virus. Testing positive for COVID and not having any sign of sickness is a pattern that has occurred for both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated populations for over a year. Even though NONE of these positive cases on the Odyssey of the Seas represent a viable public health concern, the CDC has quarantined hundreds of non-infected, vaccinated crew members and halted the ship’s operations! The ship’s inaugural sailing date is now July 31st. Under the current testing standards, the CDC will always find a “COVID CASE” no matter if a person is vaccinated or not. Under the current quarantine standards, ships will never sail again and people’s lives will be disrupted for no reason!

Cruise ship industry and basic human liberties are under attack

For over a year, Royal Caribbean and the rest of the cruise ship industry have begrudgingly acquiesced to the CDC’s unlawful medical edicts and false authority, hoping that the agency would give people their basic liberties back. But as the industry comes to rely on the CDC for basic economic and personal freedoms, more of those individual liberties are taken away. The cruise ship industry has not been allowed to operate at all under the CDC guidelines, as thousands of cruise ship employees are forced to take part in an experiment that alters their cells and distributes spike proteins into their blood. All this time, the CDC guidelines advertise “safety” while continuing to violate bodily autonomy and informed consent principles.

By targeting the cruise ship industry specifically, the CDC is contradicting their own guidance and discriminating against one industry over all other industries. The CDC no longer responds to infectious disease outbreaks in an evidence-based manner. This rogue agency of unelected officials has abused their authority, locking down an industry without giving individuals a choice to assume their own risks. Individuals have assumed risks with infectious viruses, bacteria and fungi for centuries, without having to take part in an experiment and passport system that further enslaves them and promotes future outbreaks.

There are many reasons someone might seek medical attention on a cruise ship, (including heart attacks, aneurysms, and blood clots caused by COVID vaccines) but in the case of Odyssey of the Seas, COVID is not one of the reasons. Nevertheless, the CDC has the power to shut down the entire cruise for another two months and isolate vaccinated people who did everything to their body that the CDC wanted.

Florida fighting back against CDC to ensure that unvaccinated people aren’t segregated

The CDC has kept the cruise ship industry locked down for over a year in order to implement Fourth Reich vaccine passports in the United States. The Florida state legislature has fought back against vaccine passports, and has passed a law to punish any rogue entity (such as the CDC) which threatens to violate the medical privacy of an individual or discriminate against a person based on their vaccination status. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is poised to enforce that law, putting the rogue CDC on notice. Consequentially, all cruise ships that sail out of Florida cannot legally require passengers to prove their vaccination status. Individuals in Florida will NOT be segregated or abused. They will be treated with dignity and can assume their own level of risk, as was always the case. As for the vaccinated: They will continue to test positive for COVID and spread spike proteins and other diseases; therefore, they SHOULD NEVER receive preferential treatment or be given special privileges.

*

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 NaturalNews.com

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.

***

China has slammed G-7 leaders for pushing an aggressive agenda against itself and Russia. The 47th G-7 Summit in Carbis Bay, United Kingdom, concluded on Sunday, June 13. It was attended by the leaders of the seven global north nations and European Union, who form the core membership of the group, and with India, South Africa, South Korea and Australia as invitees.

In the three-day long summit, leaders led by United States president Joe Biden pushed for an aggressive stance against China and Russia, two of the emerging global powers. In the final joint communique that was released the seven governments and the EU pushed for “collective approaches” to counter policies of the Chinese government that allegedly “undermine the fair and transparent operation of the global economy.”

The communique also made sweeping statements on the situation in Hong Kong and Xinjiang, made unsubstantiated allegations of forced labor, called for an investigation into man-made origin theories of COVID-19, and called for a “free and open Indo Pacific” in the context of stained relations between mainland China and Taiwan.

The language in the communique and by Biden himself resurrected the same unsubstantiated allegations raised by the previous US administration under Donald Trump.

In response to the meeting, the Chinese embassy in the UK commented that the “days when global decisions were dictated by a small group of countries are long gone.” They added that any matter of global affairs needs to be decided in consultation with all nations as per the “basic norms of international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, not the so-called rules formulated by a small number of countries.”

The embassy also countered the statements on Taiwan, Xinjiang and Hong Kong and alleged that the leaders distorted the facts, exposing the “sinister intentions of a few countries such as the United States.”

The G-7 nations also pledged a long overdue spending commitment of USD 100 billion for poorer nations to transition to cut carbon emissions and mitigate global warming. In 2009, as part of the Copenhagen Accord, advanced economies had made a pledge to contribute USD 100 billion per year until 2020.

The target was never met, and the G-7 nations have often deliberately derailed the commitments, which led to the 26th Conference of Parties (COP26) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This long overdue funding is now revived as part of measures to counter competition from China and its trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative.

The G7 meeting was followed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit on June 14, Monday, where again the same leaders continued to push an aggressive stand against China and Russia. In the final communique by the 30-member organization, the leaders of the summit called China’s “stated ambitions and assertive behavior present systemic challenges to the rules-based international order.”

Sweeping statements on “lack of transparency and use of disinformation” and “coercive policies” were made in the communique, reiterating the same allegations made in the G7 communique.

Unlike the G7, which emerged as a platform for economic cooperation among some of the richest nations, NATO is a military bloc that emerged during the Cold War with an explicit purpose to contain the Soviet influence and growing communist movements around the world. This, along with a contentious NATO military exercise in South China Sea, indicates that the US and its allies wish to expand their aggression with China into a militaristic competition as well.

Campaign against cold war tactics grow

In the meanwhile social movements and peace movements are coming together to oppose these latest escalation of tensions by western powers. A public meeting scheduled to be held on June 16, Wednesday, will launch the No Cold War Britain campaign, to oppose the “increasingly aggressive statements and actions” towards China by the US.

The organizers of the meeting have described the newly-emerging Cold War with China as “an obstacle to humanity successfully dealing with extremely serious common issues which confront it such as climate change, control of pandemics, racist discrimination and economic development.”

Several prominent progressive public figures including Vijay Prashad from the Tricontinental Institute, Andrew Murray of the Stop the War Coalition UK, Fiona Edwards of the No Cold War, Jodie Evans of CODEPINK, and Ben Chacko (editor of the Morning Star) among others, will be speaking at the event.

“In the midst of a pandemic, the only way forward is for the states of the world to collaborate with each other rather than to intensify competition,” insisted Vijay Prashad, while speaking to Phoenix Media Co-op. “The conflict imposed on China is a distraction from the many compelling problems we face, at the heart of it all being the virus and the economic collapse that has come as a consequence. We need collaboration to deal with both.”

The plan to launch a unified campaign against cold war aggression in the UK, comes at a time when the British government has sent its largest warship, HMS Queen Elizabeth, along with other warships to South China Sea to participate in NATO naval exercises.

Pointing out how the decision to participate in the exercise is both “aggressive and a total waste of resources” Fiona Edwards stated that “instead of wasting billions of pounds on weapons of mass destruction and supporting the US’s military build-up against China, Britain should genuinely pursue dialogue and global cooperation with China to tackle the immense problems facing humanity.”

Medea Benjamin of CODEPINK questioned the anti-China push by Biden.

“Biden says at G7 press conference that the only way we will meet global threats, including ending the pandemic and combating climate change, is by working together. Then why all the trashing of Russia and China?,” she asked in a tweet.

*

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: Anti-NATO and anti-war protest in Brussels, on the day of the NATO summit in the city on June 14, 2021. Photo: PTB

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.

***

Before entering the Trump administration to serve as U.S. envoy to Venezuela and Iran, Elliott Abrams penned a revealing essay in May 2017, entitled “Why I’m Rooting for the Hardliner in Iran’s Elections: Two cheers for Ibrahim Raisi!” 

Abrams was well aware of Raisi’s bloody track record as a judiciary official, where he was among the judges who oversaw the execution of thousands of political prisoners in the 1980s. Abrams was also well aware that a Raisi presidency could make him the apparent successor to the aging Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, which could have far-reaching consequences for decades to come.

However, Abrams’ support boiled down to his belief that Raisi represents “the true face of the Islamic Republic, while Rouhani is a façade.” According to Abrams, elevating a hardliner like Raisi would bring the Islamic Republic closer to collapse and provide a “clearer view” of the nature of the regime. Such an understanding would make it easier to advance the pressure policies that Abrams and his like-minded compatriots favored, regardless of their interlocutor in Iran and what could be achieved through diplomacy.

Abrams was far from alone in his belief. The Foundation for Defense of Democracies, the architect of Trump’s maximum pressure policies, published a memo for the Trump administration arguing that Iran was susceptible to “coerced democratization” and suggesting that the administration “work to prevent Rouhani’s reelection.” This dynamic was not new, either, as some U.S. hawks revealed their preference for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ahead of Iran’s notorious 2009 election.

Of course, Raisi was soundly defeated by the incumbent and relatively moderate President Hassan Rouhani four years ago, 57 to 38 percent. Amid high turnout, that outcome signaled continued support for international compromise, the lifting of sanctions, and promises of domestic reforms at home.

But what a difference four years, and a damaging U.S. pressure campaign, makes.

While Rouhani entered his second term with a mandate to pursue broader sanctions relief, U.S. hardliners promptly scuttled his prospects. At the urging of hawks like John Bolton and Mike Pompeo inside the Trump administration, and outside groups like FDD, Trump exited the nuclear deal that many Iranians had publicly celebrated just a few short years before. In the months that followed, sanctions increased to heights not even seen during the height of the Obama administration. Rouhani’s moderation had been met with pressure, vindicating Rouhani’s critics who had warned that the United States could never be trusted.

Now, Rouhani is set to leave office with little to show for his engagement, and people in Iran are desperate and disillusioned amid continuing repression, dramatic sanctions-induced inflation, and a devastating pandemic. Amid widespread voter apathy triggered in large part by the continuation of sanctions, Iran’s leaders have brazenly rigged the game to the benefit of the candidate that U.S. and Iranian hardliners have actively rooted for: Ibrahim Raisi.

Now that the project of installing a hardline Iranian president with minimal voter participation is near complete, U.S. hawks will undoubtedly urge President Biden to finish what Trump started. Even in the face of continual blowback — on the nuclear issue, across the region, and for the people of Iran — direct military confrontation and the removal of the regime in Iran is the only outcome that will satisfy U.S. hawks.

As Abrams’ essay shows, U.S. and Iranian opponents of diplomacy pursue mutually reinforcing policies. Raisi recovered from a decisive defeat in large part thanks to maximum pressure, vaulting to the top of powerful judiciary and, almost certainly, soon to the presidency while the people of Iran bore the brunt yet again of America’s powerful sanctions. And, as Iran tips in a reactionary direction, U.S. hawks will find further justification to push even more escalatory policies.

President Biden has signaled a desire for a new approach and rightly invested significant energy in reviving the nuclear deal with Iran. But he also moved slowly, failed to take significant steps to open up humanitarian trade amid the pandemic and kept his predecessor’s sanctions in place. Now, with Raisi’s elevation, Biden’s options narrow even further. He can continue his predecessor’s pressure-only approach that decimated moderates, empowered Raisi and his fellow hardliners, and closed the door on broader diplomacy. Or he can restore the agreement Trump worked so hard to kill, ease the pressure on the people of Iran and restore some semblance of faith that diplomacy can deliver for each country. Only the latter has delivered any success — for both the United States and the people of Iran.

*

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 lev radin via shutterstock.com


150115 Long War Cover hi-res finalv2 copy3.jpg

The Globalization of War: America’s “Long War” against Humanity

Michel Chossudovsky

The “globalization of war” is a hegemonic project. Major military and covert intelligence operations are being undertaken simultaneously in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia and the Far East. The U.S. military agenda combines both major theater operations as well as covert actions geared towards destabilizing sovereign states.

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-6-0
Year: 2015
Pages: 240 Pages

List Price: $22.95

Special Price: $15.00

Click here to order.

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.

***

As the U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday easily passed a bill by Rep. Barbara Lee to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, peace advocates called on Congress to enact similar legislation to end the 2001 AUMF upon which the open-ended so-called Global War on Terror has been waged for nearly 20 years.

Appearing on NBC‘s “Meet the Press Daily” on Thursday, Lee (D-Calif.), who was the only member of Congress to vote against the post-9/11 AUMF (pdf)—passed one week after the September 11, 2001 al-Qaeda attacks on the United States—told host Chuck Todd that H.R. 256, her bill repealing the 2002 AUMF that passed by a bipartisan vote of 268-161, “is an important step toward repealing the 2001 authorization.”

“We must keep up our fight to repeal the 2001 AUMF so that no future president has the unilateral power to plunge us into endless wars,” Lee said separately ahead of Thursday’s House vote.

Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) also called to repeal the 2001 AUMF, tweeting Thursday that “the power to declare war belongs to Congress because we are the branch most accountable to the people.”

“Today, the House voted to repeal the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force, which has enabled endless war in Iraq,” Porter added. “Let’s do the 2001 AUMF next.”

The anti-war group Peaceful Tomorrows, founded by relatives of 9/11 victims, published a statement Thursday calling for a repeal of the 2001 authorization.

“It has been almost two decades since the deaths of our loved ones, and for the entirety of that time, the U.S. has been at war,” the group tweeted. “These wars have not brought justice for the crimes of 9/11. Instead, they have caused untold suffering and deaths among innocent civilians who bore no responsibility for 9/11. Rather than keeping Americans and other people throughout the world safer, these wars have inflamed and provoked violence.”

Peaceful Tomorrows noted that while the 2001 AUMF gave then-President George W. Bush “the authority to use force against those responsible for the 9/11 attacks,” the law “has been used by the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations to authorize the use of force in 19 countries, against groups that did not even exist in 2001, and have no connection to the attacks.”

“To end the forever wars and end this chapter in American history, Congress must sunset the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force,” the group said.

In 2001, Lee presciently warned that the AUMF would allow presidents to wage war “anywhere, in any country, without regard to our nation’s long-term foreign policy, economic, and national security interests, and without time limit.”

“That was a blank check; it was passed right after the horrific attacks of 9/11, it was 60 words, and it just authorized the use of force forever,” Lee told Todd of the 2001 authorization. “So it set the stage for perpetual war.”

The U.S.-led anti-terror war—which includes the Afghanistan War, the longest in U.S. history—continues to this day. At least 800,000 Afghan, Iraqi, Libyan, Pakistani, Somali, Syrian, and Yemeni people, as well as thousands of U.S. and allied troops, have died, at a cost exceeding $6.4 trillion, according to the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs.

Stephanie Savell, co-director of the Costs of War Project, told Esquire in an article published Wednesday that the 2001 AUMF is even more important than the 2002 authorization because it “grants the president broad authority to extend the war wherever and however he pleases.”

Esquire politics editor Jack Holmes wrote:

The move to repeal the 2002 AUMF is welcome, particularly because, as the Trump administration demonstrated, it can also be exploited by the executive to justify unilateral decisions of war and peace. But if [Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York]  is serious about reclaiming the war powers of Congress—and ending our endless wars—then the 2001 AUMF will have to go, too.

The Biden White House, like every administration, is fused to the extended military and intelligence apparatus… When the smoke clears, there are always new enemies. More bombs to drop, and give to our friends to drop. Eventually, this has to stop. It would help if the legislative branch, and its many individual members who have absolved themselves of responsibility for these endless conflicts by ensuring they never have to go on the record about them, would take some of that responsibility back.

On the House floor ahead of Thursday’s vote, Lee cited some of the “lies and misinformation” disseminated by the Bush administration in its attempt to sell the Iraq War to a largely skeptical American public. And while it was not based on as many outright lies as the Iraq War, the Bush administration nevertheless brushed off multiple opportunities to avoid a protracted war in Afghanistan.

In the weeks following 9/11, the Taliban—whose members were previously supported by the U.S. government and courted by American business interests despite their human rights crimesoffered first to try al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, and then to turn him over to the United States as Bush launched the invasion of Afghanistan.

In April, President Joe Biden announced he plans to withdraw all regular American combat troops from Afghanistan by this year’s anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks. According to the Costs of War Project, the nearly 20-year war has claimed an estimated 241,000 lives and cost the U.S. $2.26 trillion.

*

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.

End the Draft Permanently

June 21st, 2021 by Jacob G. Hornberger

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.

***

Recently the U.S. Supreme Court declined to consider a challenge to the all-male draft. The plaintiffs in the case argued that excluding women from the draft was unconstitutional. Apparently the Court is simply letting Congress decide the issue. 

I’ve got an idea — an idea grounded in freedom. How about abolishing the draft — and, of course, draft registration? In fact, better yet, how about enacting a constitutional amendment prohibiting the draft from ever being enacted again?

Young people might think the matter is irrelevant, given that there hasn’t been conscription since the Vietnam War. That is naive, wishful, and dangerous thinking. Every 18-year-old male is required, on pain of a felony conviction, to register for the draft. The reason? Because in the event of some major foreign war, make no mistake about it: The Pentagon will not hesitate to restore the draft because it will need soldiers to fight, kill, and die. Young men — and also most likely young women — will begin receiving draft notices ordering them to report to military facilities for training and “service” to “their country.”

The fact that the national-security establishment continues doing everything it can to gin up such a war — like with Russia, China, Iran, or North Korea — makes the the possibility of a draft even more likely. And once it happens, there is little anyone will be able to do to stop it. In fact, in the event of another major foreign war, I wouldn’t be surprised if they started jailing people for just challenging the draft, as U.S. officials did in World War I.

There is no way to reconcile conscription with the principles of a genuinely free society. Either people are the masters of their own lives or the government is their master. It’s one or the other.

With conscription, the government wields the power to order a person to leave his family and his regular life and report to a government facility to serve the state. That is the opposite of freedom. In a genuinely free society, a person has the right to live his life the way he wants — free of governmental interference, so long as his conduct is peaceful and non-fraudulent.

In fact, there is actually no difference between slavery and conscription. Under slavery, a person is being force to serve his master. That’s what conscription is based on. It’s a system in which the individual is being forced to serve his master, with the master being the federal government, and specifically the Pentagon.

Under 19th-century slavery in America, the slave’s service usually consisted of work on a plantation. Under conscription, the work consists of military training on a Pentagon-run facility and then killing, maiming, or torturing people on orders in some faraway land. But that’s just a distinction without a difference. What matters is that under both systems, the individual is being forced to serve his master. 

Proponents of the draft say that sometimes it is necessary to force people to fight for “freedom.” But that’s ridiculous because if you have a system where the government can conscript people, you no longer have a free society. Freedom has been destroyed in the name of protecting freedom. 

Moreover, when you have a genuinely free society, you don’t need to force people to fight for their freedom. A free people will fight vociferously to protect their freedom. In fact, foreign regimes that attack and invade a genuinely free society soon find that they have swallowed a porcupine. 

The problem is that the U.S. government wages foreign wars — that is, wars in faraway lands, where no foreign regime has attacked or invaded the United States. In those wars, many Americans aren’t interested in giving up their lives to fight the “enemy.” World War I, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam come to mind.

In every one of those wars, Americans had to be forced to go fight, kill, and die. Oh, yes, they were all told that they were fighting for their “freedom,” but that was palpable nonsense. 

If any of the enemies in those wars were really invading the United States, there would have been more than enough Americans ready and willing to defend their country, their lives, and their freedom. No one would have had to have been forced to fight.

Yes, I know, in World War II Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. But my hunch is that many Americans realized that President Roosevelt had manipulated Japan into attacking in order to circumvent widespread American opposition to entry into the war. Moreover, many Americans realized that Japan never intended to invade and take over the United States, Instead, it was simply trying to knock out the Pacific fleet to give Japan a free hand to secure oil in the Dutch East Indies, as a way to overcome FDR’s pre-war oil embargo on Japan. Moreover, if FDR had not been successful in maneuvering Japan into “firing the first shot,” Germany would not have declared war on the United States.

If you’ve never read the essay “Conscription” by Daniel Webster, I highly recommend it:

Today, the American people have a unique opportunity to lead the world to a genuinely free society. A great place to begin would be a constitutional amendment, modeled after the 13th Amendment, that prohibits conscription forever. 

*

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.

Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.

Featured image is from SnappyGoat.com

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on End the Draft Permanently
  • 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Joe Biden took part in several key international meetings over the last week covering a wide range of issues but with one key goal in mind: intensify the new Cold War with China and construct a global front towards this end. This is the most intensive series of diplomatic summits for the Biden administration yet, and provides key insights about how it plans to manage the affairs of U.S. empire. 

The first major event took place in the UK, where Prime Minister Boris Johnson hosted the other members of the “Group of 7” club of advanced imperialist economies from June 11 to 13. Biden took credit for pushing the other leaders to attack China by name for the first time in the closely-watched communique issued at the conclusion of the summit. The communique was designed to provocatively touch on the issues that China considers to be core to its sovereignty and the integrity of its national territory.

The G7 called on China “to respect … those rights, freedoms and high degree of autonomy for Hong Kong enshrined in the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law”. It also demanded that China “respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, especially in relation to Xinjiang”. The communique expressed support for “peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and encourage the peaceful resolution of cross-Strait issues. We remain seriously concerned about the situation in the East and South China Seas and strongly oppose any unilateral attempts to change the status quo and increase tensions.”

These words are dripping in hypocrisy. For 150 years Hong Kong was ruled in a completely dictatorial fashion by the British Empire with no guaranteed political rights for its residents, who were colonial subjects of the Queen of England. The city returned to Chinese sovereignty in 1997 after having been stolen in the infamous Opium Wars of the 19th century, a development the G7 leaders are effectively trying to undo by supporting the separatist protest movement. The manufacturing of the “Uighur genocide” issue by the United States and allied powers similarly seeks to slice off a major section of China’s northwestern territory and damage its reputation internationally. And far from promoting “peace and stability”, the United States and others routinely sail warships and fly military aircraft through the Taiwan Strait in deliberate provocations against China. Taiwan, formally known as the Republic of China, was seized by the defeated forces of dictator Chiang Kai-shek at the conclusion of the Chinese Revolution in 1949 with U.S. backing and is rightfully claimed by China as part of its national territory.

The Biden administration along with the other G7 leaders fueled the baseless conspiracy theory that Coronavirus was unleashed onto the world accidentally or intentionally by a virology lab in China. This is clearly intended to compensate for the imperialist countries’ woefully poor performance containing the pandemic relative to China. A similar logic was at play with the pledge by the G7 to donate one billion COVID vaccine doses to poorer nations. Especially considering how wealthy the major western powers are compared to China, the Chinese government’s extensive efforts to aid 66 other countries’ vaccination efforts has put them to shame.

A spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry strongly rejected the G7 communique, which it said sought to, “wantonly smear China and blatantly interfere in its internal affairs.” The ministry affirmed that, “Gone are the days when one country or a group of countries dictated the world.”

The United States and European powers made economic moves to deepen their aggressive posturing towards China. On June 15, a US-European Union Trade and Technology Council was established with the goal of coordinating policies to constrain China’s ability to trade with the rest of the world and pursue its economic development. The U.S. and European leaders pledged the “development and deployment of new technologies based on our shared democratic values”. It is ludicrous that the government that developed the monstrous NSA electronic surveillance state that spies on its own population along with much of the rest of the world feels the right to lecture China on democratic values in technology. To underscore their commitment to coordinating economic policy as part of a united front against China, U.S. and European officials brokered an end to their long-running dispute over subsidies for corporate giants Boeing and Airbus.

NATO Summit

On June 14, immediately after the conclusion of the G7 summit, the leaders of the NATO military alliance gathered in Brussels. There, the leaders declared for the first time that China constituted a “systemic challenge to the rules-based international order”. The “rules-based international order” is a euphemism frequently used to refer to the existing world order dominated by the U.S.-led bloc of imperialist powers.

This represents a historic shift in the mission of NATO. Founded in 1949, the goal of NATO was to prepare for a new world war with the Soviet Union, and ensure that all the major capitalist powers would be united in their global confrontation with the socialist countries of Eastern Europe. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, NATO has served in large part as a mechanism to threaten Russia — now capitalist but still outside of the control of the traditional imperialist powers.

The elevation of China to the status of a “threat” of the same magnitude as Russia is a serious escalation. It also further disproves NATO’s assertion that it is a “collective defense” organization for the North Atlantic, considering that it has now taken up stoking war in East Asia as a core task.

Biden-Putin meeting 

Biden capped his week of diplomacy with a highly-anticipated meeting with Russian president Vladimir Putin. Biden has a long history of hostility towards Russia. He was effectively put in charge of Ukraine by the Obama administration following the 2014 coup that installed an anti-Russian government, is a proponent of the debunked conspiracy theory that Russia colluded with the Trump campaign in the 2016 election, and shortly after taking office as president called Putin a “killer” — which led to the withdrawal of the Russian ambassador to the United States and subsequently the withdrawal of the U.S. ambassador to Russia.

Anti-Russia hardliners in the U.S. political elite were disappointed that Biden expressed something less than absolute, unmitigated hostility at the Putin summit. The tone of the meeting was in marked contrast to for instance the Alaska summit with top Chinese officials in March, where the U.S. side was senselessly belligerent and saw the meeting as little more than an opportunity to raise ideologically-charged criticisms of China’s system of government. But at the same time little was done in the way of concrete action to change the status quo of simmering tension.

Biden described his policy towards Russia as “strategic stability”. This essentially means the preservation of the status quo instead of a further deterioration in relations. Towards that end, Biden and Putin agreed to hold ongoing talks between their respective countries’ officials on the issues of cybersecurity and arms control. They also put Biden’s “killer” remark behind them and agreed to send their ambassadors back to their posts.

But the core issues that have put the United States and Russia on a collision course remain unchanged: the expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe, the conflict in Ukraine, efforts at regime change in Russia-aligned Belarus, the war in Syria, and others. “Strategic stability” suggests that Biden does not intend to make any major moves to resolve these conflicts.

Biden’s preference for “strategic stability” is likely motivated in large part by his desire to focus on the new Cold War with China. Russia and China have been developing progressively closer relations in the face of deepening hostility from the United States in recent years. Keeping China and Russia divided has long been a key goal of U.S. foreign policy, and its ability to achieve this was key to its success in the original Cold War. Momentarily softening pressure on Russia to foster suspicion in China (and vice versa) is a tried and true tactic in the toolkit of U.S. imperialism.

On the road to war

While Biden and his top officials were busy escalating global tensions with statements, press conferences and communiques; bombers, fighter jets and warships in East Asia were demonstrating the real-world consequences of these reckless moves.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Navy announced it had deployed the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier along with a guided-missile destroyer and a guided-missile cruiser to the South China Sea. The South China Sea is the site of numerous territorial disputes between neighboring countries including China, which the United States has long sought to inflame by sailing warships through contested waters.

Also on Tuesday, China’s air force flew 28 planes into an area around Taiwan’s airspace known as an Air Defense Identification Zone — the largest number of mainland aircraft yet to be sent into the ADIZ. This maneuver was carried out in retaliation to the G7 communique that raised the issue of Taiwan for the first time. China needed to demonstrate that it would not back down from its rightful claim to sovereignty over all of its territory.

Reports surfaced this week that the Pentagon was mulling the creation of a permanent naval task force to patrol the waters surrounding China. This task force would be led by the United States but also involve forces from U.S. allies. While it has yet to be confirmed, the task force is conceptualized along the lines of the Standing Naval Forces Atlantic that operated during the original Cold War. Should this come to pass, it would represent a major ratcheting up of military pressure on China.

The Biden administration is pursuing a foreign policy completely at odds with the interests of workers in the United States. If a war between the United States and China were to ever break out, the consequences for every person on the planet would be catastrophic. In the meantime, trillions of dollars that could otherwise be used to solve social problems will instead be wasted on instruments of destruction. And for what? The continued domination of U.S. banks and corporations over the whole world is not a cause worth dying for.

*

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: NATO heads of state at the alliance’s summit in Brussels (Source: Liberation News)

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.

***

Four years ago this weekend, I received a phone call. The panicked voice at the end of the line told me a terror attack had taken place.

Someone had rammed their van into worshippers as they left night prayers at Finsbury Park Mosque in north London, and one of the worshippers had been killed.

This was our mosque, our community hub, our space of solace, and my workplace. Now our sense of serenity had been shattered by an act of hate.

The days that followed saw a flurry of activity and chaos. The world’s media camped outside our mosque. Security was heightened, official visits took place, and promises of change were made.

Four years on, we are still waiting for those promises to be fulfilled.

The politicians and media may have moved on, but our community has not. Makram Ali, who was mowed down in the attack, is still dead.

His children are still without a father, and those who knew him and prayed beside him still live in fear that an attack like this could take place again and that their names will be the ones written in obituaries.

Our mosque has received endless calls from Muslim women in the area worried about being the victims of hate crimes and we have had to put on workshops and therapy sessions to help with the trauma people are experiencing.

Our lives as a community were changed forever on 19 June 2017, and we are still feeling the effect of that attack today.

Dark smog

It is why I was pained and horrified to see such a similar attack take place in Canada earlier this month where four members of the same family in London, Ontario, were killed because they were Muslim.

Reading about this incident gave me flashbacks to what took place outside our mosque and the unimaginable terror and horror unleashed that day.

Though these attacks took place hundreds of miles apart, the source of this hatred is the same: Islamophobia.

Islamophobia is the dark smog we have allowed to descend on our societies. What was once exclusively the rhetoric of the far right on the fringes of society has now infiltrated the mainstream and has become the acceptable face of racism.

The Islamophobic attacks that took place in Finsbury Park, Ontario, and Christchurch, to name a few, did not arise in a vacuum.

They are the culmination of decades of institutional Islamophobic discourse and racialised policies that have filtered down from the top to our streets.

Islamophobia is not simply surviving, it is thriving, and we put Muslims at risk when we fail to acknowledge the pattern of hate locally and across borders.

Here in the UK, we have a political class that still refuses to acknowledge Islamophobia and take it seriously, and a media that is complicit in spreading negative coverage of Muslims and demonising them.

Global inaction

From London to Jerusalem, from Christchurch to Oslo, the impact of Islamophobia is clear for everyone to see, yet the response to its rise globally has been met with inaction, silence, and in some cases, celebration.

Following the attacks in London, Ontario, the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared that Islamophobia has no place in our communities. But despite this, Ontario’s government blocked a motion condemning Islamophobia.

Similarly, leaders of the Conservative Party here in the UK reneged on their promise to carry out a truly independent inquiry on Islamophobia in the party, and our prime minister still refuses to apologise for several Islamophobic comments he has made.

Let us be clear: Muslims will never be safe from another attack until the issue of Islamophobia is taken seriously and tackled head-on.

For us at Finsbury Park Mosque and for many Muslims across the world, another Islamophobic attack taking place is not a case of if, but when.

Though these attacks are intended to cause terror and fear, they also draw out the best in people.

From the courage of Imam Mohammed, who protected the attacker from the anger of those he had nearly just killed, to those who sent flowers and cards from across the world to our mosque and Makram’s family, to the hundreds from our local community and beyond that gathered outside our mosque the day after the attack to show their solidarity.

Christchurch and London, Ontario, have their heroes and well-wishers too, and what these acts of solidarity show are that those who tried to divide us have failed.

I hope other communities around the world do not have to experience what we did in order to come together to fight the scourge of Islamophobia and I hope that governments around the world reflect the actions of their citizens who are calling out in one voice against this evil.

*

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.

Mohamed Kozbar is a community leader and chairman of the Finsbury Park mosque in North London.

Featured image: Darren Osborne was jailed for life for the attack in 2017 that killed Makram Ali, who was walking home from night prayers (Supplied to Middle East Eye)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Islamophobia: Four Years after Finsbury Park Attack, Canada Deaths Show Threat Undiminished
  • 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). 

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Head of the General Federation of Trade Unions Sami Al-Amasi has confirmed that 20 factories were destroyed during the last offensive on Gaza, and 5,000 workers had lost their jobs.

In a statement, Al-Amasi disclosed that the latest Israeli offensive inflicted a massive blow to the economic sector in the Gaza Strip. He noted that it aggravated the already weak economy, which has been suffering for more than one and a half decades, with increased adversity due to COVID-19.

Al-Amasi indicated that the economy was the main target for the Israeli attacks, pointing to the demolition of the offices of big companies located in the high-rise buildings destroyed during the offensive.

Meanwhile, he stated that the direct and indirect effects of COVID-19 affected more than 160,000 workers during the last year.

The economic losses of the pandemic hit NIS 200 million and raised unemployment to 55 per cent.

Al-Amasi called for Deputy Labour Minister Ihab Al-Ghussein to establish a fund to help workers affected by the Israeli offensive.

He also called for Arab, Islamic and international trade unions to support the Palestinians and their cause, as they are enduring harsh conditions under Israeli occupation.

*

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: Flames are seen after an Israeli air strike hit targets in Gaza City, Gaza on 15 June 2021 [Ali Jadallah / Anadolu Agency]

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.

***

Last week, the Venezuelan government announced that the Union Bank of Switzerland blocked its latest payments of 10 million USD towards the COVAX initiative for acquiring COVID-19 vaccines

The member countries of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America – People’s Trade Treaty (ALBA-TCP), on June 13, rejected the decision of the Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) to block the payment made by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to acquire COVID-19 vaccines through the COVAX initiative, a global access fund for anti-COVID-19 vaccines. The countries condemned the commercial, economic and financial blockade imposed by the US against Venezuela, which impeded the country from accessing vaccines, which are crucial in the global fight against the pandemic.

In an official statement, the member countries denounced that “the arbitrary blockade carried out by the financial institution” and said that “this illegal action is a consequence of the unilateral coercive measures imposed by the United States government, whose effects on the financial sector threaten the well-being, health, security and right to life of the people.”

The bloc reminded that all this is aimed at “promoting regime change and overthrow of a constitutionally, legally and legitimately elected government by the will of the people and in the exercise of their self-determination.”

The organization emphasized on “the need to fully respect all human rights, especially the right to life and health,” and called to “immediately lift the unilateral coercive measures that prevent the affected countries from combating COVID-19 effectively.”

Last week, on June 10, the government of President Nicolás Maduro denounced that the UBS blocked the last four installments of 10 million USD directed towards the COVAX mechanism to complete the payment of 120 million USD for COVID-19 vaccines.

Vice-president Delcy Rodriguez, during a press conference, reported that “we received a notification that the resources deposited for the acquisition of vaccines have been blocked and are under investigation.”

The representatives of the COVAX facility confirmed that Venezuela had transferred 110 million USD for over 11 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines and only 10 million USD remained to be paid. They also confirmed that the UBS bank blocked the last 4 payments and placed the money under investigation.

On June 11, during an event, President Maduro urged his US counterpart Joe Biden to “end the blockade of Venezuela’s financial resources” and allow the country to “purchase vaccines and accelerate the national immunization campaign.”

Venezuelan government is facing additional challenges in fighting the pandemic. The country’s capacity to purchase vaccines has been severely hindered by the commercial blockade and economic sanctions imposed by the US and the EU against it. The country is unable to use its foreign assets worth billions of dollars and resources frozen in foreign bank accounts due to these sanctions.

However, despite all the political maneuvers by the US and its allies, Venezuela has managed to secure Sputnik V and Sinopharm vaccines from Russia and China respectively. On June 5, the Bolivarian government and the Russian pharmaceutical company Geropharm signed an agreement to buy 10 million doses of EpiVacCorona vaccine. The government also plans to buy Soberana 02 and Abdala vaccines from Cuba, after the conclusion of their clinical trials.

Venezuela began inoculating its healthcare workers and other priority sectors against COVID-19 on February 18 with Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine. On June 1, it launched a mass vaccination campaign for the rest of the population. It hopes to vaccinate 70% of its population by the end of the year.

*

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 Peoples Dispatch

Video: Kill Kucinich, Take Light and Power

June 20th, 2021 by Dennis Kucinich

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.

***

Ex-Cleveland mayor Dennis Kucinich talks about his bombshell book, DIVISION OF LIGHT AND POWER, in which he describes being repeatedly thwarted by corrupt members of his city’s government while fighting against a relentless campaign to privatize Cleveland’s public electric power systems that included multiple attempts to assassinate him.

*

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).

***

First published on January 29, 2021

*

A recent study in the journal Cancer Discovery found that inhalation of harmful microbes can contribute to advanced stage lung cancer in adults. Long-term use of face masks may help breed these dangerous pathogens.

Microbiologists agree that frequent mask wearing creates a moist environment in which microbes are allowed to grow and proliferate before entering the lungs. Those foreign microbes then travel down the trachea and into two tubes called the bronchi until they reach small air sacks covered in blood vessels called alveoli.

“The lungs were long thought to be sterile, but we now know that oral commensals–microbes normally found in the mouth–frequently enter the lungs due to unconscious aspirations.” – Leopoldo Segal, Study Author and Director of the Lung Microbiome Program and Associate Professor of Medicine at New York University Grossman School of Medicine

According to the study, after invading the lungs these microbes cause an inflammatory response in proteins known as cytokine IL-17.

“Given the known impact of IL-17 and inflammation on lung cancer, we were interested in determining if the enrichment of oral commensals in the lungs could drive an IL-17-type inflammation and influence lung cancer progression and prognosis,” said Segal.

While analyzing lung microbes of 83 untreated adults with lung cancer, the research team discovered that colonies of Veillonella, Prevotella, and Streptococcus bacteria, which may be cultivated through prolonged mask wearing, are all found in larger quantities in patients with advanced stage lung cancer than in earlier stages. The presence of these bacterial cultures is also associated with a lower chance of survival and increased tumor growth regardless of the stage.

Additionally, research into the cultivation of Veillonella bacteria in the lungs of mice found that the presence of such bacteria leads to the emergence of immune suppressing cells as well as inflammatory ones such as cytokine IL-17.

“Given the results of our study, it is possible that changes to the lung microbiome could be used as a biomarker to predict prognosis or to stratify patients for treatment.” – Leopoldo Segal

As more evidence emerges pertaining to the long-term effects of mask mandates and lock downs, doctors and scientists are beginning to reconsider whether these authoritarian measures really are doing more harm than good. One Canadian public health expert named Dr. Aji Joffe found in a related study that lock downs cause “at least ten times” more damage than benefit.

In a recent working paper by researchers at Harvard, Duke, and John Hopkins Universities, academics concluded that “for the overall population, the increase in the death rate following the COVID-19 pandemic implies a staggering 0.89 and 1.37 million excess deaths over the next 15 and 20 years, respectively.”

Since forced mask wearing began, dermatologists have coined the term ‘maskne’ to describe an onset of pimples near the mouth caused by masks clogging up pores with oil and bacteria. This can be caused by either disposable or cloth masks.

Dentists have also been warning about a phenomenon known as ‘mask mouth’ in which patients are arriving back to the dental office with an increase in gingivitis and tooth decay as high as 50% in a period of just a few months since mask mandates began.

This discovery sheds light on the growing evidence of harm caused by long-term mask wearing.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Phillip Schneider is a staff writer for Blacklisted News. To see more of his work, you can follow his Facebook Page, become a subscriber on the free speech social network Minds, or support his efforts by becoming a contributor via Patreon.

Featured image is from Blacklisted News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Long-term Mask Use May Contribute to Advanced Stage Lung Cancer, Study Finds
  • Tags: ,

Raeisi Elected Iranian President

June 20th, 2021 by Stephen Lendman

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.

***

With nearly all votes counted from Friday’s presidential election, Ebrahim Raeisi triumphed by a 62% landslide as predicted by pre-election polls.

Rival aspirants Mohsen Rezaei achieved 11% support, Nasser Hemmati 8% and Amir-Hossein Ghazizadeh-Hashemi 3% — according to near-final results.

Raeisi’s four-year term begins on on August 3. He’ll succeed two-term President Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s head of state since August 2013.

In November 2019, the Trump regime sanctioned Raeisi and other Iranian officials for invented reasons.

No legitimate ones existed then or now.

Trump’s Treasury Department defied reality by falsely accusing targeted Iranian officials — including Raeisi — of “oppress(ing) the Iranian people (sic), export(ing) terrorism (sic), and advanc(ing) destabilizing policies around the world (sic).”

The above accusations apply to hegemon USA and its imperial partners, not nonbelligerent Iran.

In stark contrast to Washington’s war on humanity at home and abroad, the Islamic Republic prioritizes peace, stability, cooperative relations with other nations, and compliance with international law.

If US-dominated Western nations were governed like Iran, world peace would end preemptive wars against invented enemies.

Western societies would be fit to live in instead of the other way around, things worsening, not improving.

According to Iranian Interior Minister Rahmani Fazli, final results showed Raeisi getting 17.92 million votes.

Over 59.3 million Iranians were eligible to cast ballots — over 28.9 million participating for a turnout of 48.8%.

In response to Raeisi’s triumph, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the following:

“Dear Mr. Seyyed Ebrahim Raeisi, the president-elect of the Islamic Republic of Iran, accept my sincere congratulations on the election of Your Excellency as the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” adding:

“(O)ur countries are traditionally gifted with friendship and good neighborliness” — a relationship he looks forward to deepening ahead.

Along with electing a new president, Iranian voters also chose officials to fill vacant parliamentary and Expediency Council seats, as well as city and village council positions.

Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said

“(t)he great winner of (Friday) elections was the Iranian nation, which stood up once again in the face of the propaganda campaign waged by the enemy’s mercenary media and temptations of the ill-wishers and showed off its presence in the heart of the political field.”

Outgoing Iranian President Rouhani said anti-Iranian US/Western propaganda failed to prevent millions of voters from exercising their franchise on Friday.

He also praised national patience and fortitude in light of US/Western war on Iran by other means, and expressed best wishes to his successor.

Along with Vladimir Putin, other prominent officials congratulated Raeisi on his triumph.

Syria’s Bashar al-Assad said the following:

“I wish for your country to move forward on the path of progress and bring about prosperity in all fields for the people, who have withstood all the conspiracies and pressures mean to break their will.”

“I take this opportunity to express my eagerness for closer cooperation in promoting bilateral relations between the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic and pursuing common interests.”

Iraqi President Barham Salih and Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi sent congratulatory messages to Raeisi.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan tweeted the following:

“Congratulations to Excellency brother Ibrahim Raisi @raisi_com on his landmark victory in the Islamic Republic of Iran’s 13th Presidential elections.” 

“Look forward to working with him for further strengthening of our fraternal ties and for regional peace, progress and prosperity.”

Raeisi was also congratulated by leaders and officials of Kuwait, Qatar, Yemen, Oman, Azerbaijan, the UAE, Armenia, Turkey, Lebanon, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad.

Western nations ignored his triumph — except to unjustifiably criticize him and the Islamic Republic.

On a sour note, Iran’s Foreign Ministry summoned Britain’s envoy to Tehran to protest against Boris Johnson regime obstruction of the right of Iranian ex-pats in the country to vote on Friday.

He was sharply criticized for what Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh called “riotous and terrorist” conduct by UK “anti-Revolution terrorist elements and those opposing democracy.”

US/Western media press agents for power are militantly hostile toward Iran — for its sovereign independence from imperial control.

NYT propaganda falsely claimed that “many Iranians (viewed Friday elections) as rigged (sic),” adding:

President-elect Raeisi “has a record of grave human rights abuses, including accusations (of) mass executions of political opponents (sic).

The above is typical Times rubbish, based on falsified talking points supplied by US hardliners.

Other US/Western media report similar Big Lies against all nations free from US hegemonic control.

Ahead of Friday’s process, the selected — unelected — Biden regime criticized Iran’s electoral system while ignoring its own illegitimacy.

Raeisi has no friends in Washington.

Perhaps Biden regime hardliners will add new illegal sanctions to existing ones — to assure no softening in their war on the country and its people by other means.

*

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.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/how-wall-street-fleeces-america/

“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/banker-occupation-waging-financial-war-on-humanity/

Featured image is from Wikimedia Commons

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.

***

Three days after 9/11/2001 — the mother of all state-sponsored false flags to that time — Congress near-unanimously declared war on humanity.

The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) was passed by joint congressional resolution — signed into law by Bush/Cheney four days later.

The measure for endless wars on invented enemies authorized all “necessary and appropriate force (sic)” against parties responsible for “plann(ing), authoriz(ing), committ(ing)…aid(ing) (or) harbor(ing)” those involved in the 9/11 attacks (sic).

Falsely called “just wars,” US aggression on Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Somalia followed, along with deployment of US special forces death squads to around three-fourths of world community countries.

Guantanamo and dozens of other CIA torture prisons were established and continue operating extrajudicially.

Security Council member states alone may legally approve war by one nation against another — permitted only in self-defense, never preemptively.

UN Charter Article 51 allows the “right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a member” state.

It’s permitted “until the Security Council has taken measures to maintain international peace and security.” 

Self-defense is legally permitted — never an unprovoked attack by one nation on another. 

No foreign power attacked the US since Britain in 1812 — none on 9/11.

Nor was Osama bin Ladin or “crazed Arabs” involved in what happened on a day that will live in infamy.

On 9/11/2001, US dark forces were behind what the Nuremberg Charter calls “the supreme international crime against peace.”

Pre-9/11, Bush/Cheney regime officials planned to attack Afghanistan and Yemen in October 2001, then Iraq and other countries on their target list for regime change.

All that was needed was what the neocon Project for a New American Century (PNAC) called a “catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a New Pearl Harbor” — to wage endless war on invented enemies when no real ones existed, nor any today.

Former CIA head of counterintelligence, Vincent Cannistraro, later acknowledged that US war planners “cooked intelligence” to justify what’s always unjustifiable. 

At the time, CIA analyst Michael Scheuer said Langley knew in advance “that we were going to war” before 9/11.

By joint resolution in October 2002, Congress Authorized Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq to “defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat of Iraq(i)” WMDs that did not exist.

Bush/Cheney regime deputy war secretary Paul Wolfowitz later admitted that (nonexistent) WMDs were used as a pretext for war on Iraq because it was the thing everyone agreed on to justify what’s always unjustifiable.

He also acknowledged that war on Iraq was part of a larger plan for controlling regional oil by establishing a large-scale US Middle East military presence.

On Thursday, House members voted to repeat AUMF by a 268 – 161 majority.

On Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said the following:

“I strongly and fully support repealing the 2002 authorization for the use of military force…”

“It is my intention as majority leader to bring this matter to a floor vote this year.”

On Monday, the Biden regime’s White House said the following:

It “supports the repeal of the…AUMF, as the United States has no ongoing military activities that rely solely on” its use, adding: 

Its repeal “would likely have minimal impact on current military operations.”

They’re ongoing lawlessly in multiple theaters with no end of them in prospect — along with illegal sanctions wars on around three dozen nations.

*

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.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/how-wall-street-fleeces-america/

“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/banker-occupation-waging-financial-war-on-humanity/

Turkey, Pakistan Plot to Control Afghanistan

June 20th, 2021 by Rick Rozoff

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.

***

The three-day Antalya Diplomacy Forum started in southern Turkey on June 18. According to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, its participants include ten current and three former heads of state and government (presidents and prime ministers), 42 foreign ministers and over 50 representatives of international organizations.

Topics of discussion include the Balkans, the future of Europe, trans-Atlantic relations, refugees and migrants and terrorism (which with Turkey is usually a reference to the Kurdish Workers’ Party and affiliates). A session was scheduled on Turkey’s proposal for an Eastern Mediterranean conference as well.

The conference is another reflection of Ankara’s ambition to establish itself not only as a regional but a latent global power. Evidence of that policy has been seen from the military side in places ranging from Libya to the Caucasus and from Iraq and Syria to Afghanistan.

Speaking on the sidelines on the first day of the event, the foreign minister of Pakistan, Shah Mahmood Qureshi, called for joint Pakistani-Turkish cooperation in Afghanistan after all U.S. and other NATO forces (except Turkey’s) are withdrawn. Qureshi was quoted by a reporter from Daily Sabah as stating: “I will be meeting the Turkish foreign minister on June 20 and I have to hear him out about what is their proposal. I do not know the details yet.”

After meeting with the leaders of several other NATO countries at the June 14 NATO summit in Brussels, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said he intended to invite Pakistan and Hungary to join Turkey in playing a security role in Afghanistan after the departure of U.S. and NATO military forces. Pakistan is an obvious choice for him, as the two nations are solidifying cooperation in several spheres, including the military, but Hungary is not so obvious a selection. One possibility is that the nation has hosted the multinational NATO-supported Strategic Airlift Capability since 2008 and would be best qualified to share control of the Hamid Karzai International Airport with NATO ally Turkey.

Erdoğan, with characteristic lack of timidity, said that his nation was the only one that could continue a foreign security function in Afghanistan after the general withdrawal.

On June 17 the Afghan Foreign Ministry said that Cihad Erginay, the Turkish ambassador to Afghanistan, met with Afghan Foreign Minister Mohammad Haneef Atmar. Turkey advocated bringing Pakistan into the reconciliation process – by which it might be understood to mean negotiations between the government of President Ashraf Ghani and the Taliban – and its envoy spoke both of continuing a NATO role in the nation and recruiting “the support of regional countries, especially Pakistan” in Afghanistan.

The population of Afghanistan is over 40% Pashtun and some 12% Turkic (Uzbek and Turkmen). The first gives Pakistan and the second Turkey the influence of ethnic and linguistic affinity. The largely autonomous warlord in the north, ethnic Uzbek Abdul Rashid Dostum, has lived in Turkey and owns property there. He recently threatened Afghan President Ghani with the prospect of a South Turkestan (with Turkish backing) if Kabul doesn’t meet his demands.

Turkey dominates the Turkic Council, which also includes its de facto province Azerbaijan and three of Afghanistan’s neighbors in Central Asia: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.

Afghanistan has an estimated population of close to 40 million. Pakistan has a population of 225 million and Turkey of 85 million.

In what is a revealing indication of what may lie at the root of a Turkish-Pakistani alliance not only in Afghanistan but also much further afield, at the beginning of the month the speaker of the Turkish parliament, Mustafa Şentop, was in Pakistan where he met with Pakistani President Arif Alvi. The Turkish parliamentarian was quoted by the Daily Sabah as stating Turkey and Pakistan should lead the Islamic world together.

A Turkish-Pakistani axis, replete as it would be with nuclear weapons, would be a force – a military force – to contend with; a combination of NATO’s largest member state outside North America and the most populous of NATO’s forty partners.

*

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.

Rick Rozoff, renowned author and geopolitical analyst, actively involved in opposing war, militarism and interventionism for over fifty years. He manages the Anti-Bellum and For peace, against war website

He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

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.

***

VAERS data released today by the CDC showed a total of 358,379 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID vaccines, including 5,993 deaths and 29,871 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and June 11, 2021.

This week’s number of reported adverse events among all age groups following COVID vaccines surpassed 350,000, according to data released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The data comes directly from reports submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Every Friday, VAERS makes public all vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date, usually about a week prior to the release date.

Data released today show that between Dec. 14, 2020 and June 11, 2021, a total of 358,379 total adverse events were reported to VAERS, including 5,993 deaths — an increase of 105 deaths over the previous week. There were 29,871 serious injury reports, up 1,430 compared with last week.

Of the 5,993 deaths reported as of June 11, 23% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, 16% occurred within 24 hours and 38% occurred in people who became ill within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

From the 6/11/21 Release of VAERS data

In the U.S., 306.5 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of June 11. This includes128 million doses of Moderna’s vaccine, 167 million doses of Pfizer and 11 million doses of the Johnson & Johnson (J&J) COVID vaccine.

This week’s data, from Dec. 14, 2020 to June 11, 2021, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:

The most recent reported deaths include a 15-year-old male (VAERS I.D. 1383620) who reportedly died one day after receiving his second Pfizer dose, a 15-year-old male (VAERS I.D. 1382906) who received Pfizer and a 16-year-old male (VAERS I.D. 1386841) who reportedly suffered a hemorrhage and died four days after receiving a Pfizer vaccine. An autopsy is pending.

Other deaths include two 15-year-olds (VAERS I.D. 1187918 and 1242573), a 16-year-old (VAERS I.D. 1225942) and one 17-year-old (VAERS I.D. 1199455).

This week’s total VAERS data, from Dec. 14, 2020 to June 11, 2021, for all age groups show:

CDC reschedules emergency meeting to discuss reports of young people developing serious heart issues after mRNA vaccines

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) planned to hold an emergency meeting today to discuss the benefit-risk of COVID mRNA vaccines in adolescents and young adults. The agency rescheduled the meeting late Thursday, after Congress officially established Juneteenth National Independence Day (observed today) as a federal holiday.

The meeting will now be held during a regularly scheduled ACIP meeting on June 23 – 25.

The emergency meeting was announced last week after the CDC acknowledged a higher-than-expected number of reports of heart inflammation in young people after they received a Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.

The CDC on June 10 said it was aware of a total of 475 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis in patients 30 and younger. The disclosure was made during a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) hearing to consider what data the agency would need in order to extend Emergency Use Authorization of COVID vaccines for children under 12.

CDC data showed 196 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis among 18- to 24-year-olds through May 31, compared with an expected rate of between eight and 83 cases. Among 16- to 17-year-olds, 79 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis were reported through May 31. The expected rateamong people in this age group is between two and 19 cases.

A search of the latest available data in VAERS revealed 1,117 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis, among all age groups reported in the U.S following COVID vaccination between Dec.14, 2020 and June 11, 2021. Of the 900 cases reported, 686 cases were attributed to Pfizer, 391 cases to Moderna and 36 cases to J&J’s COVID vaccine.

Parents share horror stories of death, illness after Moderna vaccine

This week, The Defender reported on two cases of young people who developed heart complications after being vaccinated with the Moderna COVID vaccine, including a 19-year-old college freshman who died, and a 21-year-old student who is recovering.

On June 15, The Defender reported that Simone Scott, a 19-year-old freshman at Northwestern University, died of complications from a heart transplant she underwent after developing what her doctors believe was myocarditis following her second dose of the Moderna COVID vaccine.

Scott received the second dose on May 1, and on May 11, visited a doctor on campus because she wasn’t feeling well. On May 16, she texted her father complaining of dizziness and fatigue. He called campus police who, when they checked in on her, had to administer CPR.

After multiple interventions, including hooking Scott to an ECMO machine that mirrors the function of the heart so her own heart could rest, doctors determined she needed a heart replacement. She died June 11.

Scott’s mother told local media, “I still feel like she’s here, even though I know she’s not and it just feels like such a waste.”

Scott’s  doctors have not fully confirmed the cause of her death, but they said it appears she suffered from myocarditis.

On June 15, The Defender reported that a 21-year-old New Jersey student suffered severe heart inflammation after receiving his second dose of Moderna’s COVID vaccine. Justin Harrington, whose school required him to get the vaccine in order to attend classes in the fall, experienced flu-like symptoms followed by heart pain within eight to 12 hours of receiving the vaccine.

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Justin’s father, Timothy Harrington, said his son felt different after the second shot. Every time his heart beat it hurt and he felt pressure,” Harrington said. “Then he developed heart pain down both arms.”

Harrington said his son, who has no underlying medical conditions, did not experience heart pain with his first dose of the vaccine. Although Justin has since been released from the hospital, he has to wear a heart monitor and take four different medications for six months, has to sleep propped up, can’t exert himself and he’s missing out on one of the most important times of his life, his father said.

As for Justin’s recovery, Harrington said, “He has minor scarring on his heart and doctors hope they caught it early enough that there will be no other issues — but it’s pure conjecture at this point.”

8 fully vaccinated die of COVID in Maine, as U.S. breakthrough cases rise

As The Defender reported June 14, eight people in Maine died with COVID after being fully vaccinated, according to the latest numbers from Maine’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which confirmed a total of 457 breakthrough cases in the state.

Initial data suggest breakthrough cases in Maine are more common in older individuals and people with underlying health conditions — the same populations that, among the unvaccinated, are most at risk of hospitalization or death from the virus. About half of the vaccinated people in Maine who tested positive for COVID had not experienced symptoms when contacted by case investigators, according to the Maine CDC.

On June 3, Napa County California announced a fully vaccinated woman, who was more than a month past her second Moderna shot, died after being hospitalized with COVID. The 65-year-old woman had underlying conditions and tested positive for the Alpha variant.

As of June 9, the California Department of Public Health had identified more than 5,723 breakthrough COVID cases. Of the 5,723 cases, at least 417 people were hospitalized and least 47 died. Approximately 48% of cases were missing hospitalization data. It is not known if the primary cause of hospitalization or death was COVID or if there were other causes.

Other states continue to report breakthrough cases, among them Texas, which recorded  more than 768 breakthrough COVID cases through June 1, with 8% (61 cases) resulting in death.

In Washington, the state’s Department of Health reported 1,837 cases of breakthrough infection through June 9. Of those, 10% resulted in hospitalization and 31 people died from COVID-related illness. The majority of cases occurred in the 35 to 49 age group.

Health officials push vaccines, ignore natural immunity

The CDC conservatively estimates more than a third of Americans (at least 114.6 million) have been infected with SARS-CoV-2.

As The Defender reported June 16, there is ample reason to believe that in most of these individuals, SARS-CoV-2 infection “induces long-term immunity.”

For example, a December 2020 study by Singapore researchers found neutralizing antibodies (one prong of the immune response) remained present in high concentrations for 17 years or more in individuals who recovered from the original SARS-CoV.

More recently, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) published evidence of durable immune responses to natural infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Yet health authorities are largely ignoring this fact as they continue to push for everyone to get the vaccine. As the American Institute of Economic Research reported, it appears in order to promote the COVID vaccine agenda, key organizations are not only “downplaying” natural immunity but may be seeking to “erase” it altogether.

102 days and counting, CDC ignores The Defender’s inquiries

According to the CDC website, “the CDC follows up on any report of death to request additional information and learn more about what occurred and to determine whether the death was a result of the vaccine or unrelated.”

On March 8, The Defender contacted the CDC with a written list of questions about reported deaths and injuries related to COVID vaccines. After repeated attempts, by phone and email, to obtain a response to our questions, a health communications specialist from the CDC’s Vaccine Task Force contacted us on March 29 — three weeks after our initial inquiry.

The individual received our request for information from VAERS, but said she had never received our list of questions, even though employees we talked to several times said CDC press officers were working through the questions and confirmed the representative had received them. We provided the list of questions again along with a new deadline, but never received a response.

On May 19, a CDC employee said our questions had been reviewed and our inquiry was pending in their system, but would not provide us with a copy of the response. We were told we would be contacted by phone or email with the response.

We’ve contacted the CDC numerous times since and there is no change in the status of our questions, to re-submit our questions or to callback later. It has been 102 days since we sent our first email inquiring into VAERS data and reports and we have yet to receive a response.

*

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.

Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense