The sharp escalation by the Kuki militants in Manipur has shaken up the Indian establishment but the ensuing jingoistic outcry in sections of the media demands a muscular approach to addressing the problem of militancy. This is fraught with serious consequences. 

The editorial comment by a prominent Indian newspaper puts the government’s dilemma in perspective:

“Some positive gestures need to be made to settle the ethnic conflict, but [Chief Minister] Singh is totally opposed to the Kuki demand of autonomous administration. He ought to realise that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s advice to Russia and Ukraine that peace does not come from the battlefield, but through dialogue, applies to Manipur as well.” 

Coincidence or not, in next-door Myanmar, Delhi is getting a preview of what happens when dialogue is not the preferred course to conflict resolution. 

Last Thursday, the ethnic Arakan Army [AA] announced that it has seized the Navy Seal Training Center in southern Rakhine State after a month of intense fighting, overcoming resistance by government forces backed by Navy ships and aircraft. 

The AA cadres now control territories on the borders with Bangladesh, including towns such as Buthidaung and is threatening other important port cities/towns on the Bay of Bengal coastline such as Kyauk Phyu, Sittwe. 

Arkan is a highly strategic region. Oil and gas pipelines run from Kyauk Phyu to China’s Yunnan province; Kyauk Phyu is also a vital node in China’s Belt and Road Initiative, with proposals to expand the deep sea port and other related investments. Peace and stability in Sittwe is critical for the success of India’s Kaladan project, which seeks to connect Kolkata with Mizoram via Myanmar. 

The Arakan army may emerge as one of the key players in defining the regional security dynamic of the Bay of Bengal with its ability to impact the implementation of various infrastructure projects and the trajectory of the Rohingya crisis. 

So far, the Ethnic Armed Organisations and resistance groups such as the People’s Defence Forces supported by western intelligence agencies have refrained from declaring independence of territories under their control but this is to be understood as a tactical decision for the present.

Like in India’s northeast region, the ethnic geographies in Myanmar are complex. Given considerable movement of people internally through decades, there are no ‘pure’ ethnic homelands. Many geographies are multi-ethnic, and members of various ethnic groups often share urban spaces in towns and cities. 

Inevitably, the boundaries of homelands will be hotly contested, which will generate considerable inter-ethnic friction. Overall, with multiple armed groups contesting for and asserting power in different regions, Myanmar has become a space with fragmented sovereignty.

AA is a Buddhist ethnic group and Rakhine communities exist in India also. Historically, Arakan which was an independent kingdom, was conquered by Burma in 1784 but ceded to British India as war reparation just 42 years later after the First Anglo-Burmese War. However, in 1937, Arakan was made a Crown Colony of British Burma, split off from British India. The communal strife between majority Arakanese and Muslim communities dates back to the colonial era following the mass migration from present-day Bangladesh. 

Sinophobic Indian commentators are intentionally or unwittingly projecting a conflict of security interests between India and China. (Some analysts have eve conjured up from thin air a Chinese hand in the recent regime change in Bangladesh.) There is no empirical evidence pointing toward China fuelling the insurgent groups in India’s northeast region. 

China’s response to Myanmar has been to engage with multiple actors, given the huge stakes in its investments and economic interests as well as security concerns over criminal syndicates operating in Myanmar’s lawless borderlands. China’s primary worry is that Myanmar may descend into complete chaos with the military’s disintegration.

Thus, China keeps substantive relations with many armed groups, especially the United Wa State Army (UWSA) and the Three Brotherhood Alliance (of which AA is a constituent.) Interestingly, China visualises UWSA as a factor of border security and stability  and has even allowed it to procure commercial drones from the Chinese market and use them in their operations against the military, while, conceivably, UWSA also becomes a conduit through which Chinese arms would reach other rebel ethnic groups. 

However, all this does not preclude China from also ensuring a steady supply of defence equipment to Myanmar’s military. According to a UN report released this month, China has supplied ‘fighter aircraft, missile technology, naval equipment and other dual-use military equipment’ to Myanmar in the past two years. 

Arguably, there is a congruence of interests between China, India and ASEAN in engaging with the central authorities in Naypyidaw for the stabilisation of Myanmar. But it is only China that is proactive. India has episodic interaction with ASEAN, none at all with China and focuses almost entirely on engagement with the Myanmar military leadership. 

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s visit to Naypyitaw on August 14 aimed at giving a new push to resolve Myanmar’s crisis. Two days later, at a meeting on the sidelines of the Mekong-Lancang Cooperation Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Chiang Mai, Wang presented a 3-point approach before with his counterparts from Laos, Myanmar and Thailand that China: “Myanmar should not be subject to civil strife; should not be detached from the ASEAN family; and, should not be allowed to be infiltrated and interfered with by external forces.” 

Four days later, Wang met with UN special envoy for Myanmar Julie Bishop in Beijing, where he affirmed China’s commitment to a “Myanmar-owned, Myanmar-led” peace process. On the same day, the Southern Command of the People’s Liberation Army announced the successful conclusion of live-fire drills on China’s border with Myanmar. 

In the evolving situation, the regime change in Bangladesh is potentially a game changer. It is a matter of time before the new compradore regime in Dhaka jumps into the fray, abandoning Hasina’s policy of non-interference in Myanmar’s internal affairs. Carving out a proto-state in Rakhine along the highly strategic Bay of Bengal coastline as a cockpit of western interests is a distinct possibility.

.

.

Bangladesh already has a proposal on the table with the support of the International Committee of the Red Cross to secure three areas in Rakhine, home to the Rohingya Muslim community who constitute 35% of the population, suggesting that people displaced by the violence be relocated (close to a million people) there under the supervision of an international organisation, such as the United Nations. 

The AA, one of Myanmar’s most powerful armed groups, is opposed to  the idea. In Rakhine’s north, AA is already embroiled in a complex three-way battle that also involves Rohingya Muslims. AA’s modest goal is to create an autonomous enclave for the Buddhist population who comprise 65% of Rakhine’s population. 

The AA presently holds nine entire townships in the centre and north, as well as much of the Bangladesh border. It could soon take Sittwe, the state capital, as well as the military’s regional command headquarters farther south. AA is extremely popular among Rakhine people. There is a looming danger of a brutal war pitting the Buddhist Rakhine against the Muslim Rohingya in which external powers are sure to get involved.   

In a statement, the Brussels-based think tank International Crisis Group estimated in May that from the refugee camps in Bangladesh, “in recent months thousands of would-be fighters have crossed the border into Myanmar… (and) the recruitment campaign has escalated dramatically in recent days… Bangladeshi law enforcement agencies have done little to stop this.” This was while Hasina was in power.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”!  

Featured image: Young Arakan Army soldiers, 2021 (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

It is easy to peruse the state of human affairs and fail to perceive the catastrophic state in which we find ourselves.

After all, it is the responsibility of various Elite agents and agencies to ensure that the bulk of humanity remains unaware of the state of our world and that even those relatively few with some level of awareness in one or two domains are not aware in others. See ‘The Elite’s 5,000-Year War on Your Mind is Climaxing. Can We Defeat it? (Parts 1 & 2)’.

Beyond the problem of limited awareness, however, the Elite also has a substantial array of tools to ensure that the few who do become aware, whether of one problem or even something approaching the whole, remain powerless to respond effectively.

And so our future and even our very humanity are now threatened in ways that have eluded virtually everyone.

And the effective resistance to this multitude of threats is zero.

The Primary Threats

In culmination of a program that has been unfolding, sporadically, over the past 5,000 years and in accordance with its long-planned, detailed and comprehensive blueprint labeled ‘The Great Reset’, the Global Elite is currently implementing its program to reshape world order, kill off a substantial proportion of the human population, enclose the Commons ‘forever’, transfer all remaining wealth to the Elite and enslave those left alive in one of their technocratic ‘smart city’ prisons.

To achieve these outcomes, a wide range of weapons is being used. These weapons are psychological, political, economic, military, biological, pharmaceutical, electromagnetic and technological in nature and constitute a profound threat to our humanity and our future.

I have listed below just fourteen threats – starting with those more obviously recognized in some quarters and proceeding to those virtually unknown – none of which I will elaborate (beyond the briefest of explanations of those threats that are less familiar) but for all of which I will offer further reading/viewing:

1. The threat posed by the US-provoked war in Ukraine which now has Russia and NATO on the brink of nuclear war. See Russian President Putin’s

‘Answer to a media question [regarding Ukrainian use of NATO long-range weapons to strike deeply into Russia]’ and ‘Did Putin just issue the most serious warning to date?’ which follow a long sequence of commentary on the extraordinary dangers of nuclear war posed by the NATO-driven escalation. See, for example, ‘Watching Washington Foment Nuclear War’.

For background explaining how the war advances the Elite program and a nonviolent strategy to resist this war, see ‘

The War in Ukraine: Understanding and Resisting the Global Elite’s Deeper Agenda’.

2. The threat of the genocide currently being inflicted on the people of Palestine igniting a wider war in the Middle East that could then become a ‘second front’ in a war between the US and Russia which could also go nuclear. See ‘The insane recklessness of Collective Biden’.

Again, for context explaining the genocide’s role in the overall Elite program and a nonviolent strategy to end this genocide, see

‘Nonviolent Strategy to Halt the Genocide in Gaza, Liberate Palestine and Defeat the Global Technocracy’.

3. The threat posed by rapidly increasing methane emissions, compounded by several feedback loops, causing major disruption to Earth’s climate and hence life on Earth, with some prominent climate scientists deeply concerned. See

‘Will humans be extinct by 2026?’

But even if your own analysis of this evidence leaves you unconvinced that these methane emissions pose the threat claimed, consider the geoengineering threats to the climate too, as touched on below.

4. The vast range of threats to ecological systems precipitating the ongoing collapse of biodiversity. See the six-part ‘Our Vanishing World’ series of articles, which include strategies for halting the threats, all accessible from

Our Vanishing World (Part 6): Oceans’.

5. The threats posed by the endlessly-rising prescription and use of pharmaceutical drugs, notably including ‘psychiatric’ drugs. See

Brain Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry: Drugs, Electroshock, and the Psychopharmaceutical Complex,

‘The Elite Strategy to Physically Ruin Our Brains, Minds, and Willpower’ and

‘Defeating the Violence of Psychiatry’.

6. The threats posed by the ongoing program to inject the human population with a range of toxic agents designed to kill, incapacitate or transhumanize those injected. See, for example, ‘Covid-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere’ which carefully estimated 17,000,000 deaths from Covid-19 injection to September 2023 and watch, for example, Jonathan Otto’s interview of Dr David Martin ‘

MonkeyPox is a coverup for the fatalities of the Covid injected’ which includes these words: ‘What we have to realize is that this entire thing is programming the public to accept a genocide of global proportions.’

7. The threats posed by electromagnetic radiation as 5G, and now 6G, are being rolled out around the world. See

‘Deadly Rainbow: Will 5G Precipitate the Extinction of All Life on Earth?’

8. The threats posed by the many forms of geoengineering weapons. In her extensive work on the subject, geoengineering researcher Elana Freeland has classified seven categories of geoengineering (involving macro and micro dimensions): weather engineering, chemical/electromagnetic engineering, planetary/geophysical engineering, directed energy weapons, artificial intelligence (AI) surveillance/neural engineering, biological/transhumanist engineering (including nanotechnology and synthetic biology), and detecting and hiding exotic propulsion technologies. See

Geoengineered Transhumanism: How the Environment Has Been Weaponized by Chemicals, Electromagnetism & Nanotechnology for Synthetic Biology.

9. The threats posed by the introduction of ‘the building blocks of self-assembling nanotechnology’ into the human body through the Covid-19 injections. Despite the history of scientific research and use of nanotechnology being long, schools in the United States, for example, ‘do not teach about nanobiotechnology, even though it is ubiquitous. It is in our food supply. It is in our water supply. You know there’s nanoparticle plastics in our water supply. It is in our clothing, it is in our injections and they spray it [through geoengineering]. It is absolutely everywhere, probably one of the most prevalent products on the planet, yet no-one’s ever taught about it…. When you read their documents and you read their patents, they’re telling you this… nanoparticle technology [is] going to edit the human genome. It is trackable and controllable devices that are inside the body that can be controlled from an external source.’ Watch Dr Ana Maria Milhacea ‘The Health Impacts of Nanotechnology’ and, for background, see ‘A brief history of nanotechnology’.

10. The threats posed by synthetic biology. In an interview, long-time researcher Karen Kingston observed (from the 27 minute mark) that ‘mRNA is the AI software code’ and ‘is to usher in synthetic biology into human and all biological life forms…. The thing about this gene-editing technology and the mRNA: one of the first things that we used in the food supply… I remember as a child we always had tons of seeds in the watermelon and in our oranges and we complained about it as we were spitting out the seeds. Now with GMO and gene-editing technology we have seedless fruit. The fruit is sterile; it’s infertile fruit. That’s what they’re doing to humans.’ Watch ‘AI Exterminating Humans Through Synthetic Biology’.

11. The threats posed by Artificial Intelligence. Watch, for example, ‘The Scary Different Stages between AI + AGI [artificial general intelligence] + ASI [artificial super intelligence] + Singularity’ which includes the words that the AI Singularity represents a ‘Hypothetical future point in time when technological  growth becomes uncontrollable and irreversible…. a point where an ASI is not only smarter than humans but also capable of continually improving itself at a rate far beyond human comprehension. The singularity is often associated with dramatic predictions such as the end of humanity.’ And ‘50% of A.I. researchers believe there is a 10% or greater chance that humans go extinct from our inability to control AI.’

12. The threats posed by the ongoing destruction of healthy farming practices and food while ongoing effort is being made to ‘familiarize’ us with the plan to force us to eat a combination of lab-processed and genetically mutilated food-like substances as well as insects. See Food, Dispossession and Dependency: Resisting the New World Order.

13. The threats posed by the ongoing destruction and ransacking of the world economy. See ‘Historical Analysis of the Global Elite: Ransacking the World Economy Until “You’ll Own Nothing.”’

14. The threats posed by the multifaceted array of technologies – including 5G, the Internet of Things, Digital Identity, Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), surveillance and facial recognition cameras, geofencing, transhuman and technocratic policing – being introduced to enslave us in the Elite’s technocratic ‘smart city’ prisons. See ‘The Brave New World of 1984 2030: “You’ll Own Nothing. And You’ll Be Happy.”’

Why Is Humanity So Powerless to Resist These Threats?

Even if your consideration of the evidence in relation to the severity of one or more of the threats nominated above leaves you unconvinced in relation to one or some of them, there is a solid basis for claiming that humanity faces an extraordinary series of threats (and, probably, others not nominated) that are designed to interfere with our humanity and terminate our future in the near term (while replacing us with a much smaller population of transhuman slaves).

In these circumstances, it is unfortunate that so few individuals have been able to devote effort to alerting the world to the underlying drivers of these conflicts and how they might be meaningfully addressed.

Of course, this only highlights, once again, the central problem in human affairs.

The role of (unconscious) fear in shaping perception of, and response to, the world around us.

You cannot consider a subject when a primary function of your fear is to direct your attention away from what is frightening.

And because this fear incapacitates virtually all humans, including the insane members of the Global Elite – see ‘The Global Elite is Insane Revisited’ – humanity continues on its path to oblivion, by one means or another, without the widespread benefit of common sense, intelligence, insight, awareness and courage that are the birthright of all humans.

How has humanity ended up in this fearful state?

In essence, because virtually all human adults (unconsciously) believe that terrorizing children into submissive obedience – to make them ‘fit into’ their existing society – is the correct way to raise a child. Of course, the far more palatable term ‘socialize’ is preferred to the word ‘terrorize’ because it enables what is really taking place to be obscured.

The idea of parenting a child to nurture a powerfully Self-aware individual simply never occurs to most parents who can do little more than consider the best educational options and ‘career choice’ for their child. And, of course, the capacity to parent powerfully is beyond them.

The briefest explanation of why this has occurred is in the article ‘Time to End the Adult War on Children’ but you can read a longer version in ‘Why Violence?’ and ‘Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practice’ with plenty of other relevant reading, including about how to parent powerfully, on the ‘Feelings First’ website.

Conclusion

The human genome is under siege on various fronts. Beyond that, a human future worth living hangs in the balance.

If the briefest evidence on any one point cited above does not convince you, I can only encourage you to research that particular subject for yourself. There is plenty more evidence to consider, in each field.

Of course, I am well aware that this is a problem in itself.

The threats faced by humanity are now so multifaceted and complex that it takes considerable time and effort, not to mention a level of fearless intelligence, to remain abreast of them.

Beyond that, however, is the need to resist each threat.

This is challenging, especially taking into account that each of these threats is fundamentally driven by the Global Elite, not international organizations (such as the United Nations and World Health Organization) and national governments which simply act as Elite agents. This means that popular avenues of ‘appeal’ – lobbying/petitions, legal challenges and even public protests – cannot succeed.

See ‘The Elite Coup to Kill or Enslave Us: Why Can’t Governments, Legal Actions and Protests Stop Them?’

If you wish to help defeat the advancing technocracy, the ‘We Are Human We Are Free’ campaign identifies the foundational components of the Elite’s technocratic program that must be strategically resisted. At an absolute minimum, the One-page Flyer in 23 languages identifies the critical basics for action.

Homo sapiens is now living in its twilight. Whether or not we can fight back to experience another glorious new dawn is in serious doubt.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of ‘Why Violence?’ His email address is [email protected] and his website is here. He is a regular contributor to ‘Global Research’.

 

[This was first published on GR in May 2024.]

The most senior medical oncologist in Japan recently slammed the COVID-19 mRNA shots as “the work of evil” that has caused “essentially murder.”

In an interview published April 19, Dr. Masanori Fukushima, who spearheaded the first cancer outpatient clinic at Kyoto University and launched the first course in pharmacoepidemiology there, listed a slew of problems with the COVID mRNA jabs, evidencing what he called an evil “abuse of science.”

Click here to watch the video

He pointed out that “turbo cancers,” a kind “previously unseen by doctors” that progress extremely quickly and are typically in stage four by the time they are diagnosed, have started to appear after the jab rollouts. These “turbo cancers” are emerging along with excess mortality due to cancer in general, which Fukushima says cannot be explained only by lost opportunities for screenings or treatment during the COVID outbreak.

As a tragic example of the fatal danger of the COVID shots, the oncologist shared the story of a 28-year-old man who was found dead by his wife when she tried to wake him in the morning, five days after he received his second Pfizer shot. 

“The doctor who did the autopsy said that when he tried to remove the heart, it was soft and had disintegrated,” Fukushima said. “And even just one case like this shows how dangerous this vaccine can be.”

He pointed out that these severe harms, including death, have been afflicting people – post-jab – who have a history of good health.

“It’s serious. It’s essentially murder. In the end, I want to state clearly that this is my view,” the doctor said.

He lamented that the media, including newspapers, generally have not reported on these harms, and that in fact those who question the safety of the COVID shots – just as with the flu shots – have been characterized as anti-science “heretics.” He described the attitude of those who shut down the voices COVID “vaccine” critics, however, as far from scientific, and “more akin to faith, hysteria or even cult behavior.”

“I am now deeply concerned not only about a serious crisis in medicine but in science and democracy,” Fukushima said.

He highlighted the fact that countries that most aggressively pushed the COVID shot, such as Israel, saw the highest rates of death and infection, as shown by studies comparing Middle Eastern countries, including Jordan, Syria and Egypt. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arranged a special deal with Pfizer to use Israelis as lab rats in a national injection program with the Pfizer Covid “vaccine.”

“Israel led in early and widespread vaccination but also had the highest death and infection rates. The less aggressively vaccinated areas saw less harm,” said Fukushima, noting that “Israel was quick to halt the vaccine.” 

There were problems, moreover, with the very technology used to administer the mRNA – the lipid nanoparticles – that the doctor said result in “off-target effects” on various organs, including the ovaries, brain, liver, and bone marrow.

Worse, the spike proteins produced by the mRNA have been detected in the human body more than a year after the administration of the COVID shot, noted the oncologist, indicating “a severe problem.”

The doctor took aim at the World Health Organization (WHO) for “hastily” pushing the COVID shots without proper investigation, and moreover for trying to enforce a one-size-fits-all approach in countries with widely varying “medical circumstances, habits, and systems,” calling it “somewhat absurd.”

He argued that it is “crucial” that the WHO take responsibility for the harms of the COVID shots, which he called “an abuse, a misuse of science and an evil practice of science, to be frank.”

Fukushima pointed out that the WHO is “aware” of harms from the so-called vaccines because they are compensating for these damages in certain countries, and yet they are not properly addressing the COVID shot-induced death and injury through an investigation and report.

“Imagine finding your spouse dead in the morning. It’s no joke. A vaccine that causes such outcomes, even a single death, is unacceptable,” said Fukushima, adding that in Japan alone, the government has documented 2,134 deaths reported due to the COVID shot, which is likely a low estimate.

“There are tens of thousands of people who must see a doctor because of vaccine-related issues,” he continued, asserting that a big chunk of them – 30 percent – are “suffering from ME (myalgic encephalomyelitis) or chronic fatigue syndrome.” 

This is just the beginning, according to Fukushima, because the rates of all sorts of diseases have been spiking since the COVID shot rollout, including “autoimmune disease, neurodegenerative diseases, cancer, and infections.”

“It’s as if we’ve opened Pandora’s box… We must take these damages seriously and address them earnestly. Any efforts to dismiss these damages as if they didn’t happen are frankly the work of evil. This is a quintessential example of the evil practice of science,” Fukushima said.

He called on scientific and medical institutions, led by the WHO, to directly confront these outcomes through research efforts in order to “shine the light of science” on the shots.

“We should never again use such vaccines,” he said. “This is a shame for humanity. It’s a disgrace that we did this.”

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Featured image: Dr. Masanori Fukushima (Source: X/Screenshot via LSN)

---

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

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

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

---

My thanks to the Publisher and to the translator Tatsuo Iwana.

.

Anti-colonialist and anti-imperialist, party organizer and guerrilla warfare strategist, diplomat and publicist, revolutionary theorist and internationalist, Amílcar Cabral was among the most original Marxists of the 20th century.

Amílcar Lopes da Costa Cabral was born on September 12, 1924 in the town of Bafata in Portuguese Guinea, wedged between what was then French Guinea and the French colony of Senegal, in West Africa. His parents hailed from Cape Verde (Cabo Verde), an archipelago of impoverished islands in the North Atlantic, some 450 km west of the African mainland.

Under Portuguese rule, the Cape Verdeans were regarded as “civilized” because they spoke Portuguese, were of Christian faith, and adopted western dress. They were classified as assimilado: the people in-between the white settler-colonial regime and the black African population, including in the colonial administrative service in Guinea-Bissau.

As a child, Cabral moved with his family to Cape Verde; his schooling was in conditions of economic hardship. Belying its name, far from green the islands are semi-arid. Uninhabited until the 15th century, the Portuguese claimed the territory, strategically located on the transatlantic maritime route for the slave trade in Brazil and the Caribbean, and later for whale-hunting.

They settled inhabitable areas with whites, and brought captive West Africans to work the land. By the mid-20th century, 69% of the population was deemed mestiço (i.e. mixed heritage). The despoliation of its natural resources, through deforestation and over-grazing, was accompanied over five centuries by periodic drought followed by devastating famine, triggering waves of emigration as far afield as New England.

In Cabral’s own youth, the droughts of 1941-43 and 1947-48 led to anywhere between 30,000 and 45,000 deaths; he experienced the former personally.

It is not surprising that in 1945 when Cabral secured a scholarship to the University of Lisbon in the imperial capital, he chose to study agronomy with a particular interest in soil science.

Portugal had been under fascist rule since 1926. There was little democratic space and the Left conducted its activities clandestinely. It was in Lisbon that Cabral would meet and form political ties with African students from other Portuguese colonies. Some of them, like Agostinho Neto and Mário de Andrade (from Angola), and Eduardo Mondlane and Marcelino dos Santos (from Mozambique), would become leaders of the freedom movement in their countries.

Becoming Anti-Colonialists, and More

Their circle studied socialist writing from Brazil, as well as on the African-American experience of racism and deprivation in the United States. They also read and discussed the assertions of Négritude in Francophone Africa via Aimé Césaire (of Martinique) and Léopold Senghor (of Senegal), from which they would later critically distance. They were in contact with the illegal Portuguese Communist Party that operated in secret through broad organizations such as the youth wing of the Movement of Democratic Unity (MUD-Juvenil).

Upon graduation, Cabral joined the Lisbon Agronomic Station, where he conducted research in southern Portugal, a region of stark poverty and not coincidentally highly unequal ownership of land.(1)

In 1952 he chose to return to Guinea to lead the Agronomic Center in Bissau. The following year, taking advantage of his official role, Cabral conducted the first Agricultural Survey of Guinea.

He used this opportunity to travel widely across the mainland territory, to familiarize himself with its topography, economy, the diversity of its peoples and their practices and customs. This immersion in the reality of this land and its inhabitants would later contribute to his important political text, “Brief analysis of social structure in Guinea.”

His activities attracted the attention of the colonial administration, which banned him from living in Guinea. Unable to work or operate there, he joined a private company based in Angola, where he undertook studies on soil conditions and agricultural production.

Over the course of 1955 and 1956, while in Angola, Cabral participated in the formation of the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA). This underlined his Pan-Africanist vision of solidarity and unity as well as his intransigence against colonialism and imperialism wherever it manifested itself: in Congo, in Cuba, in Palestine, in South Africa, in Southern Arabia, in Vietnam.

On a secret visit to Bissau in 1956, Cabral and five others including his half-brother Luís founded what became the African Party of the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC) on September 19. While these pioneer members were of Cape Verdean origin, they were committed to the liberation of Guinea-Bissau too. Other nationalist organizations were from Guinea- Bissau, usually based on personalities and ethnicities, and opposed to union with Cape Verde.

Driven to the Countryside

Initially the underground party attempted to organize among the miniscule working class, and the urban poor in mainland Guinea. When dock workers at Pidjiguiti Quay in Bissau took part in peaceful protest on August 3, 1959, the colonial regime brutally suppressed them, massacring 50 and injuring over 100 in just 20 minutes.

Shocked by this cruel loss of life, and realizing their weaknesses, the PAIGC switched to mobilizing in the countryside. The leadership at this point were intellectuals from the Cape Verde islands.

They were strangers to the Guinean hinterland, away from its towns that they knew better. This is where Cabral’s study of peasant society, including its cleavages along ethnicity and religion, and contradictions including land ownership, gender relations, and socio-political organization, proved invaluable.

If, as Cabral and his comrades concluded, the urban working class was too miniscule and unready for revolutionary change, did this mean that the peasantry would substitute for it? No. The peasantry was the main “physical force” of the liberation movement, but was not “a revolutionary force.”(2) Instead, in the absence of a national capitalist class, the petty bourgeoisie — located between the colonial state and the colonized masses — is most likely to wield the functions of state power after decolonization.

This intermediary class, from which many leaders of revolutionary movements across time and space have emerged, has two roads before it, Cabral suggested. They could surrender to their natural tendency to become bourgeois via class location in the state bureaucracy and as compradors serv­icing foreign capital in commercial relations. Or be reborn as a “revolutionary worker completely identified with the deepest aspirations of the people.” These conflicting choices are the dilemma of the petty bourgeoisie in the national liberation struggle. In a famous phrase, Cabral summed it up as “to betray the revolution or to commit suicide as a class.”(3)

After some years of preparation with funds, light weapons, and combat training from the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, and China, the PAIGC launched its armed struggle on January 23, 1963.(4) Later, Cabral succeeded in negotiating assistance in the form of sugar, tobacco, and uniforms from Cuba, followed by military advisors and medics; and food, clothing and medicine from Sweden and other Scandinavian countries. The enemy was of course far better armed and resourced, supported by its NATO allies particularly the United States and West Germany, and spewing napalm.

However, before and during the military campaign, Cabral was clear that the political fight was his priority: to breach the “wall of silence” built around Portugal’s subjugation of African peoples.(5) He tirelessly traveled to combat the ideology of “lusotropicalism”: Portuguese colonialism as adaptive to the people of the tropics and neither racist or exploitative.

Cabral was a man of action but also a critical and creative thinker. As his friend Basil Davidson reminded us, “Thought and action, he never separated that sequence, just as he never changed its order.”(6)

Return to Our Own History

It was not colonialism that carried the colonized into history as was claimed for it. Rather, colonialism was an interruption in the history of the people. “In taking up arms to liberate ourselves,” Cabral reminded his audience, “we want to return to our history, on our own feet, by our own means and through our own sacrifices.”(7) As to when history begins, it could not be contingent on the emergence of class and therefore class struggle, as this would condemn societies without class relations, to be people “living without history, or outside history when they were subjected to the yoke of imperialism.”(8)

Instead, he argued it is the “level of development of productive forces … [that] is the true and permanent motive force of history.”(9) The objective of national liberation becomes the liberation of productive forces grabbed by imperialist domination. This enables the self-determination of the once colonized to progress to a higher form of economic, social and cultural existence. That transformation in the level of productive forces and their system of ownership, in short, the mode of production, is what is called “revolution.”

Additionally, Cabral had to grapple with the messiness of armed struggle where those bearing arms can become oppressive of those in whose name they claim to be fighting for. At the first Party congress in Cassacá in February 1964, the guerilla units that had operated autonomously were merged into a people’s army, under the control of the political leadership.

He reminded the party leaders and the cadre alike that “we are armed militants and not militarists” (emphasis in the original). He cautioned them to “Hide nothing from the masses of our people. Tell no lies. Expose lies whenever they are told. Mask no difficulties, mistakes, failures. Claim no easy victories. …”(10)

The Cassacá Congress also marked an important outward turn in the direction of prefigurative politics. The PAIGC began creating institutions for people in liberated areas, conveying a promise of what independence and freedom ought to mean: schools, health centers, elected tribunals, people’s stores where goods could be bartered. Farming food crops for subsistence, artisanal production for skilled work, and the nurturing of small industries were encouraged.

Base committees were formed in liberated areas through popular election from a party-list. Five members were elected, two places being reserved for women, and each assigned an area of responsibility.(11) This structure was crafted in far-from-ideal conditions of war not peace; and in the absence of political competition. However, it was also a first experience and education in participatory democracy.

In one of continuous injunctions to the cadre for their political orientation, he urged them to “[r]emember always that the people do not fight for ideas, for things that exist in the heads of individuals. The people fight and accept the necessary sacrifices in order to gain material benefits, to live better and in peace, to experience progress, and to guarantee the future of their children.”

Slogans and demands, no matter how good and important, are “empty words and without significance for the people if they are not translated into a real improvement in their living conditions.”(12)

As a theoretician and strategist of national liberation, Cabral was insistent that “those who lead the struggle must never confuse what they have in their head … with the specific reality of the land.” Whatever ideas we have from what we read or what others tell us of their own experience he underscored that “our feet are planted on the ground in our land.”(13)

Foreign military advisors often sought to transplant their battlefield approaches to the war against the Portuguese in Guiné but Cabral resisted them, expressing “reservations about the systematization of phenomena.”(14) He saw it as an error to mimic the experiences of others, since these were based on their unique geographical, historical, economic and social conditions.

At the first Tricontinental Congress in Havana in 1966, he cautioned that no matter how similar the case and identical the enemy, “national liberation and social revolution are not exportable commodities. They are … a local, national, product — more or less influenced by (favorable and unfavorable) external factors, but essentially determined and conditioned by the historical reality of each people.”(15)

Culture as Resistance

Culture is the other front of resistance and struggle for Cabral. It is both shield and sword. “Culture is simultaneously the fruit of a people’s history and a determinant of history.”(16) It is in his view the dynamic expression of social relationships, principally those between humans and nature, and between humans as individuals, groups of individuals, strata and classes.

However, culture to him was never essentialist nor static. It contained both positive and negative features. It ought to be forged by, and not only feed into, the movement for national liberation. He was careful to differentiate what he meant by culture from that to which the indigenous colonial elite was attached or what was imagined and invented by colonial diasporas.

Cabral was killed on January 20, 1973, aged 48, in Conakry, capital of the Republic of Guinea, which shares a land border with Guinea-Bissau. That is where the PAIGC leadership operated in exile. His assassin was someone he knew, a fellow militant.(17)

However, as Cabral himself had predicted, aware of the imperialist-inspired plots against his life stretching back over a decade, his death did not derail the independence of Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde, which was finally declared on September 24, 1973.(18) By then two-thirds of Guinea-Bissau was controlled by the PAIGC.

Moreover, the politico-military campaign he directed in Guinea-Bissau, along with those of liberation movements in Angola and Mozambique, directly contributed to the overthrow in Portugal of “the most long lived fascist State in history … and the end of the oldest colonial empire in the world.”(19)

Fourteen years of anti-colonial wars in Portuguese Africa triggered the “Carnation Revolution” beginning with the overthrow of the dictatorship by the Armed Forces Movement (MFA) in Lisbon on April 25, 1974. The new regime soon began the transfer of power in the African colonies to the liberation movements.

What is meant by the “liberation of the people”? Informed by the experience of neocolonialism that followed “independence” and the venality and tyranny of the postcolonial elite that assumed power, Cabral insisted that it is more than the expulsion of colonialists, the hoisting of a national flag, and the playing of a national anthem:

“It is the liberation of the productive forces of our country, the liquidation of all kinds of imperialist or colonial domination in our country, and the taking of every measure to avoid any new exploitation of our people. We don’t confuse exploitation with the color of one’s skin. We want equality, social justice and freedom.”(20)

Why do we return to Cabral in a different time to his? Recently, Ochieng Okoth invokes him among others, to advocate “a new mode of anti-imperialist politics” by way of four combined maneuvers.(21) These may be adapted as follows.

First, to retrieve the promise of a post-imperialist world embedded in national liberation or anti-colonial Marxism, from a critical reading of its experience. The struggle for freedom cannot stop with the ejection of colonialists and imperialists; but must grow into an attack on the social and economic mechanisms initiated by imperialism.

Next, to engage with the critique of political economy. Without properly unmasking the relations and processes of domination, we cannot make sense of subordination within the international system and within states.

Third, by basing ourselves on historical materialism to understand the motion and dynamics of social change; and the deployment of hierarchy and difference in class societies. To change the world, we need the theory and method to interpret it.

Finally, to revive internationalism through anti-imperialist solidarity across movements be they in the Global North or Global South. To see our struggles as interconnected, while respectful of their specificities.

In all this and more, the life and work of Amílcar Cabral is exemplary.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Notes

1. The wretched world of 20th century Alentejo day laborers to whom Cabral dedicated his dissertation, is magnificently fictionalized by José Saramago (himself the son of landless peasants) in Raised from the Ground (1980). Trans. Margaret Jull Costa (London: Harvill Secker, 2012).
2. Amílcar Cabral, “Brief analysis of the social structure in Guinea” in Revolution in Guinea: Selected Texts by Amílcar Cabral. Trans. and Ed. Richard Handyside (New York and London: Monthly Review Press, 1969), p. 61.
3. Amílcar Cabral, “Presuppositions and objectives of national liberation in relation to social structure” in Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings. Trans. Michael Wolfers (London: Heinemann, 1980), p. 136.
4. For a fascinating reconstruction of the dynamics of these relationships, see Natalia Telepneva, Cold War Liberation: The Soviet Union and the Collapse of the Portuguese Empire in Africa, 1961-1975(Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2021).
5. Amílcar Cabral, “Foreword” to Basil Davidson, The Liberation of Guiné: Aspects of an African Revolution (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969), p. 9.
6. Basil Davidson, “Tributes to a Fallen Comrade,” Ufahamu: A Journal of African Studies (Los Angeles), Vol. 3, Issue 3 (1973): 11-30, p. 13.
7. “The nationalist movements of the Portuguese colonies” in Revolution in Guinea: Selected Texts by Amílcar Cabral, op. cit., p. 78.
8. “Presuppositions and objectives of national liberation in relation to social structure” in Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings, op. cit.,p. 124.
9. Ibid., p. 125.
10. “Tell no lies. Claim no easy victories …” in Revolution in Guinea: Selected Texts by Amílcar Cabral, op. cit., p. 87.
11. Lars Rudebeck, Guinea-Bissau. A Study of Political Mobilization(Uppsala: Scandinavian Institute of African Studies, 1974), pp. 124-132.
12. “Tell no lies. Claim no easy victories …” in Revolution in Guinea: Selected Texts by Amílcar Cabral, op. cit., p. 86.
13. “To start out from the reality of our land – to be realists” in Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings, op. cit., pp. 45 and 44 respectively.
14. “Practical problems and tactics” in Revolution in Guinea: Selected Texts by Amílcar Cabral, op. cit., p. 141.
15. “Presuppositions and objectives of national liberation in relation to social structure” in Unity and Struggle: Speeches and Writings, op. cit.,p. 122.
16. Amílcar Cabral, “National Liberation and Culture” in Return to the Source: Selected Speeches of Amílcar Cabral. Ed. Africa Information Service (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1973), p. 41.
17. The received version that the killing was orchestrated by the Portuguese secret police (the PIDE), having infiltrated the PAIGC and turned some Guinean cadre against Cabral, has been challenged by Antonio Tomás, Amílcar Cabral: The Life of a Reluctant Nationalist(London: Hurst & Company, 2021), pp. 187-199. While affirming the longstanding intent and past attempts of Portuguese fascism to physically eliminate Cabral, Tomás places greater weight in this sadly successful instance, on the schism between PAIGC cadre from Guinea-Bissau and their Cape Verdean leadership.
18. The union between Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde broke on November 14, 1980, cracked by the unresolved tensions within the PAIGC.
19. Robin Blackburn, “The Test in Portugal,” New Left Review (London), I/87-88 (September-December 1974): 5-46, p. 5.
20. Amílcar Cabral, Our People Are Our Mountains (London: Committee for Freedom in Mozambique, Angola & Guiné, 1972), p. 8.
21. Kevin Ochieng Okoth, Red Africa: Reclaiming Revolutionary Black Politics (London: Verso, 2023), p. 16.

Featured image: Amilcar Cabral, presumably during the Cassacá Congress, freed from the southern region of Guinea. Wikimedia

31-year-old UK rugby player died on Aug. 27, 2024. In 2022, he collapsed in the gym and was diagnosed with a brain tumor.

.

.

.

What Is the Dcvax-l Cancer Vaccine?

These cases can be assumed to be COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancer until proven otherwise.

Glioblastoma is the 2nd most common Turbo Cancer.

Mainstream Oncology doesn’t recognize Turbo Cancer but is happy to profit from it, even though they are unable to treat it.

But what is the 200,000GBP Cancer Vaccine that didn’t work?

2023 Gatto et al – DCVax-L Vaccination in Patients with Glioblastoma: Real Promise or Negative Trial? The Debate Is Open 

“DCVax-L is a highly personalized vaccination that uses tumor lysate as a source of antigens and uses the patient’s autologous dendritic cells harvested by leukapheresis and then expanded in vitro.”

“The publication of the phase III study on the use of the dendritic cell vaccine DCVax-L in glioblastoma has aroused much interest in neuro-oncology”

“However, this study deserves some reflections regarding methodological issues related to the primary endpoint change, the long accrual period, and the suboptimal validity of the external control population used as the comparison arm.”

“When considering PFS (progression free survival) data, the study is negative, and the trial did not reach its prospectively defined primary endpoint. Therefore, from a purely formal point of view, the study should be declared negative.”

“Furthermore, the artificial generation of the external control group resulted in impressive differences in the control population from the vaccine arm. This is a further major methodological limitation: the validity of external controls was compromised by the demographic characteristics of the comparison studies. The studies selected as an external control group had different patient characteristics, and this represents an important confounding factor.”

“The DCVax-L trial included only patients who received gross or near total resection of the tumor mass, patients with disease confined to one hemisphere, and patients who had been off glucocorticoids for at least three weeks. All these criteria inevitably represent factors capable of favorably impacting survival; however, these inclusion criteria were not present in the studies used for comparison.”

My Take…

This is a long winded way of saying the DCVax-L Cancer Vaccine Trial was rigged.

BEWARE of “new, promising cancer treatments”.

Medical Oncology is completely compromised and littered with fraud.

Not only did all Oncologists take COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines, they have denied vaccine injuries and continue to deny the phenomenon of COVID-19 Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancer.

It is a failed medical specialty with no future. It has to be rebuilt from ground zero.

But they will sell you a 200,000GBP Cancer Vaccine that doesn’t work.

In the case of 31 year old Rugby player Calvin Nap, he did receive the DCVax-L Cancer Vaccine but it didn’t work.

It is sad to watch Oncology be completely destroyed by incompetence, corruption and greed.

*

Calvin’s Story 

Hi, my name is Calvin Nap and I was diagnosed with a brain tumour and had conventional brain surgery on the 31st May. 

On the 25th August, I was so excited to “ring” the bell at Velindre Cancer Hospital, which signaled my last treatment/session of radiation. It has been a grueling 6 weeks of radiation and chemotherapy treatments which has taken a toll on me physically and mentally. Despite my depleted physical condition, and my life being turned upside down, I will not be deterred from my goals of exploring all treatment options and especially bringing awareness to this cruel disease. Once I finish my chemotherapy treatment (6 months), I will have exhausted all treatment options the NHS has to offer. 

The neurosurgeon removed as much of the tumour as possible without impairing me, I have had the maximum dose of radiation and am taking the most suitable chemotherapy drug available on the NHS. Even after all these treatments, a residual amount of cancer stem cells remain in my brain. Due to the type of brain cancer I have, there is a strong potential for the tumour to grow again and be possibly more resistive to conventional treatments. There are additional treatment options, but they are not available on the NHS.

My family, friends and I have done extensive research on treatment options, collaborated with my fantastic Oncologist and there is hope.

The DCVax-L, an immunotherapy treatment is an encouraging option. It is a personalised vaccine made from cells from my tumour (which was frozen at the time of my surgery) and my blood cells. Once the vaccine is administered, my body will take over and destroy the cancer cells. The cost of manufacturing the vaccine is £200,000, plus additional medical costs.

It is extremely important to me to bring awareness to the issue that immunotherapy is not readily available for cancer patients, who may have exhausted all treatment options the NHS has to offer. The fact that the DCVax-L and other immunotherapy treatments are not deemed cost effective by the NHS is a tragedy for all cancer and other patients. I strongly believe that costs should NOT be a deciding factor for treatments, but a quality of life for the patient and their families should BE. 

Any donation you can give, no matter how small, will help to get me closer to the DCVax-L treatment I desperately need. My goal is to document my journey to a full recovery and to help and support others like me. Thank you so much for taking the time to read my story and for any kind of donation given.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

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

Featured image is a screenshot from The Mirror

---

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

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

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

Another American has been killed in cold blood by the Israeli government. On September 6, Aysenur Eygi of Seattle, Washington was killed by an American bullet fired by an Israeli sniper who stood on a roof above a crowd of peaceful protesters.  The young college graduate and peace activist was targeted and assassinated by the colonial-settler government of Benjamin Netanyahu. She died brutally, from a rifle shot to her head, underneath an olive tree, the international symbol of peace.

Olive trees and blood conjure up images of the Jewish settlers of the Occupied West Bank as they have continued to uproot Palestinian olive trees, which are more than just a source of food and income, but represent the soul of the Palestinian people which seeks peace and justice.

Eygi had just arrived in the Occupied West Bank to protest settlement expansion in the Palestinian village of Beita, near Nablus.  Jewish settlements in the Occupied West Bank are illegal under international law and are viewed as such by the US.

When Netanyahu took office in 2022, he said he had two goals: to expand the illegal settlements in the West Bank and to sign a normalization agreement with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

The agreement with the Saudis is off the table because of the current Gaza war, but settlement expansion is booming.

Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israeli Security Minister, and Bezalel Smotrich, Israeli Finance Minister, are both from illegal settlements and hold sway over Netanyahu.  Ben-Gvir and Smotrich are Jewish extremists and they are the force that keeps the Netanyahu government coalition together. If Netanyahu were to sign a ceasefire in Gaza or stop illegal settlements in the West Bank, they would break the Netanyahu government, which would send Netanyahu to jail for his past conviction of corruption and fraud.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said in a statement, that its troops “responded with fire toward a main instigator of violent activity who hurled rocks at the forces and posed a threat to them.”

However, eyewitnesses and the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), which Eygi was participating with, reject this claim of rocks or provocation.

Haaretz journalist, Jonathan Pollak, was an eyewitness to the killing and held Eygi as she lay dying. Pollack is an activist with the group, Defend Palestine. He gave an interview to the BBC, saying he had seen “soldiers on the rooftop aiming”.

He described holding Eygi to attempt to stop the bleeding, and then “I looked up, there was a clear line of sight between the soldiers and where we were.”

The killing of Eygi reminds us of another American killed by Israel, also from Washington, and volunteering with the same group, ISM.  Rachel Corrie left Washington in her senior year of college to be a peace activist in Rafah, Gaza. On March 16, 2003, she was run over and killed deliberately by an Israeli bulldozer driver demolishing the homes of Palestinians. The Israeli military investigation found her death an accident.  Her parents filed a civil lawsuit seeking accountability, but in 2015 the Israeli Supreme Court rejected their case.

The United Nations is demanding a “full investigation” into the killing of Eygi, but the US stands passively by, impotent in the face of Israel, regardless of how many US citizens are murdered.

Eygi had been born in 1998 in Antalya, Turkey but had lived in Seattle since the age of one.  For an American, having grown up in freedom and enjoying human rights, it was a shock when she saw the Israeli checkpoints set up that Palestinians have to move through daily.  Palestinians are subjected to constant humiliation and degradation at the hands of the IDF, and Eygi had a hard time accepting that injustice which was so far removed from the American core values of freedom and independence.

Every American is taught the country’s foundation began in 1776 in which Americans shed their blood to drive out the colonizers and achieve the freedom and independence of America.  

But, Americans are also taught that Israel is a democracy and that the US government must always send billions of dollars of the taxpayers’ money to Israel for weapons to kill Palestinians who ask for freedom, and an end to the colonial occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. 

While the UN and hundreds of its member countries were labeling Israel an apartheid state, and the International Court of Justice decreed that the occupation of Palestine was against international law, the Biden-Harris administration was packing up millions of dollars worth of weaponry and ammunition to keep the genocide going in Gaza.

Ghassan Daghlas, the Governor of Nablus, told the media that Al Najah University confirmed their autopsy findings “that Eygi was killed by an Israeli occupation sniper’s bullet to her head.”

Turkey has stood in solidarity with the Palestinians, and a Turkish ship, the Mavi Marmara, was attacked at sea on May 31, 2010, when Israeli commandos boarded the ship before it could deliver humanitarian supplies to the blockaded Gaza. 8 Turkish citizens and 1 American citizen were killed, and 30 wounded.

The Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, said that Israel had “heinously murdered our young child,” while referring to Eygi.

According to the Turkish Foreign Ministry, Eygi was murdered by the Benjamin Netanyahu government.

Turkey has stepped in officially to receive the body of Eygi and take her coffin back home to Washington to her family for burial.  Will her coffin be flown to the USA by a Turkish government plane?  Will her flag-draped coffin be met at the airport by the Turkish Ambassador to the US and his staff?  Will the Foreign Minister of Turkey accompany the coffin?

Americans will be asking: where is the US government? No demands, no outcry, and not even the decency to collect the body of Eygi and bring her home.

There will be no accountability demanded of Israel. Tawfic Abdel Jabbar, Mohammad Khdour, Rachel Corrie, Shireen Abu Akleh, and Aysenur Eygi are all Americans killed by Israel with impunity.  No justice will ever be served, and this is a message to every American: your life has no value, only Israelis have a value in the eyes of the US government.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Aysenur Eygi (Photo is by Aysenur Eygi Family via CNN Newsource)

A leading oncologist is raising the alarm about the staggering surge in cancer cases among young people.

North Carolina‘s Duke University oncologist Dr. Nicholas DeVito is warning that “every new patient” who now comes to his clinic is under 45 years old.

Dr. DeVito says he and his colleagues have experienced a complete demographic switch in recent years.

Based on what he’s seeing every day, talking to patients on the ground and analyzing the data, DeVito is now issuing a red alert to warn the public about the phenomenon.

However, the doctor is raising concerns that U.S. government officials are refusing to address or even acknowledge the dramatic surge in cancer cases.

The physician wrote for STAT News:

“The desire to protect Americans from substances that cause cancer and other diseases should transcend party affiliation and political motivation to overcome industrial lobbying efforts.”

In recent years, multiple studies and oncology experts have warned that cancer cases have been skyrocketing in younger people.

The U.S. has the sixth highest rate of early-onset cancers – disease in people under 50 – with 87 cases per 100,000 people younger than 50 years old.

And studies project diagnoses of early-onset cancers will rise by 31 percent and deaths will rise by 21 percent by 2030.

Cancers increasing the fastest include throat and prostate cancers.

Early-onset cancers with the highest mortality include breast, tracheal (windpipe), lung, stomach and colon.

DeVito wrote: “I hope to have a long career in oncology and eventually practice in an era where the U.S. has turned the tide against early-onset gastrointestinal cancers and few, if any, of my patients are under age 50.”

As Slay News reported earlier, a growing number of experts are demanding answers as aggressive turbo cancers continue to surge to unprecedented levels in young people.

Two shocking new reports from the American Cancer Society have revealed that various forms of the deadly disease surging among younger citizens.

In response to the reports, the corporate media is promoting several narratives to explain away the rapidly developing and spreading cancers.

However, several doctors have spoken out to warn that Covid mRNA shots are causing the recent emergence of aggressive cancers.

The disease has been found to form and spread so rapidly among vaccinated people that doctors have dubbed the phenomenon “turbo cancer.”

Doctors have revealed that some “turbo cancers” spread so quickly that seemingly healthy patients can die within a week of being diagnosed.

Oncologists are also warning that these aggressive cancers don’t respond to conventional treatments.

A study published in the August edition of The Lancet Public Health revealed that the incidence rates for 17 of 34 cancer types were increasing in progressively younger people in the U.S.

More recent data from the ACS’s “Cancer Statistics 2024” report shows the trend of cancer rates and related mortality continuing to rise.

The data shows cancer cases spiked dramatically in 2021, shortly after the Covid shots were released for public use.

The cases have continued to surge at alarming rates since then.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

---

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

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

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

 

 

Introductory Text by Paul Larudee. “Please Don’t Say Genocide”

Tsk, tsk. Hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, more than half children, have died in Gaza, but only 41,000 are counted by name as having been killed. That is because the rest have died of passive causes: starvation, disease, thirst, as well as killed without having been counted. Never mind that the infants, pregnant mothers, school children, and all who died passively did so as a matter of deliberate Israeli policy to make them die (sometimes also called killing or murder).

But don’t call it genocide. That would be antisemitic. That’s why it’s never mentioned by Democratic or Republican candidates for election. It’s not an issue. It won’t get you elected. Only the indomitable and courageous Jill Stein uses it. It’s why you will never hear the word in the mainstream media.

Genocide, genocide, genocide, genocide. There, I said it. And yes, it’s Israel committing genocide, and the Israeli public supporting genocide. And the US government participating as a full partner in genocide. But you can’t say genocide. It’s antisemitic. Saying genocide can get you banned by the social media censorship police. And beaten by municipal police at campus demonstrations against…what? Genocide, of course. 

Actually, Jonathan Cook says it better than I do.

***

How the War on Gaza Exposed Israeli and Western Fascism

By Jonathan Cook, Middle East Eye, September 13, 2024

Nearly a year into the world’s first live-streamed genocide – which began in Gaza, and is rapidly expanding into the occupied West Bank – the establishment western media still avoid using the term “genocide” to describe Israel’s rampage of destruction.

The worse the genocide gets, the longer Israel’s starvation-blockade of the enclave continues, the harder it gets to obscure the horrors – and the less coverage Gaza receives.

The worst offender has been the BBC, given that it is Britain’s only publicly funded broadcaster. Ultimately, it is supposed to be accountable to the British public, who are required by law to pay its licence fee.

This is why it has been beyond ludicrous to witness the billionaire-owned media froth at the mouth in recent days about “BBC bias” – not against Palestinians, but against Israel. Yes, you heard that right.

We are talking about the same “anti-Israel” BBC that just ran yet another headline – this time after an Israeli sniper shot an American citizen in the head – that managed somehow, once again, to fail to mention who killed her. Any casual reader risked inferring from the headline “American activist shot dead in occupied West Bank” that the culprit was a Palestinian gunman.

After all, Palestinians, not Israel, are represented by Hamas, a group “designated as a terrorist organisation” by the British government, as the BBC helpfully keeps reminding us.

And it is the supposedly “anti-Israel” BBC that last week sought to stymie efforts by 15 aid agencies known as the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) to run a major fundraiser through the nation’s broadcasters.

No one is under any illusions about why the BBC is so unwilling to get involved. The DEC has chosen Gaza as the beneficiary of its latest aid drive.

The committee faced the very same problem with the BBC back in 2009, when the corporation refused to take part in a Gaza fundraiser on the extraordinary pretext that doing so would compromise its rules on “impartiality”.

Presumably, in the BBC’s eyes, saving the lives of Palestinian children reveals a prejudice that saving Ukrainian children’s lives does not.

In its 2009 attack, Israel killed “only” 1,300 or so Palestinians in Gaza, not the many tens of thousands – or possibly hundreds of thousands, no one truly knows – it has this time around.

Famously, the late, independent-minded Labour politician Tony Benn broke ranks and defied the BBC’s DEC ban by reading out details of how to donate money live on air, over the protests of the show’s presenter. As he pointed out then, and it is even truer today: “People will die because of the BBC’s decision.”

According to sources within both the committee and the BBC, the corporation’s executives are terrified – as they were previously – of the “backlash” from Israel and its powerful lobbyists in the UK if it promotes the Gaza appeal.

A spokesperson for the BBC told Middle East Eye that the fundraiser did not meet all the established criteria for a national appeal, despite the DEC’s expert opinion that it does, but noted the possibility of broadcasting an appeal was “under review”.

Pulling Punches

The reason Israel is able to carry out a genocide, and western leaders are able to actively support it, is precisely because the establishment media constantly pulls its punches – very much in Israel’s favour.

Readers and viewers are given no sense that Israel is carrying out systematic war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, let alone a genocide.

Journalists prefer to frame events as a “humanitarian crisis” because this strips away Israel’s responsibility for creating the crisis. It looks at the effects, the suffering, rather than the cause: Israel.

Worse, these same journalists constantly throw sand in our eyes with nonsensical counter-claims to suggest that Israel is actually the victim, not the perpetrator.

Take, for example, the new “study” into supposed BBC anti-Israel bias, led by a British lawyer based in Israel. A faux-horrified Daily Mail warned over the weekend that the “BBC is FOURTEEN times more likely to accuse Israel of genocide than Hamas … amid growing calls for inquiry”.

But read the text, and what’s truly stunning is that over the selected four-month period, the BBC associated Israel with the term “genocide” only 283 times – in its massive output across many television and radio channels, its website, podcasts and various social media platforms, which serve myriad populations at home and abroad.

What the Mail and other right-wing attack-dog media don’t mention is the fact that none of those references would have been the BBC’s own editorialising. Even Palestinian guests who try to use the word on its shows are quickly shut down.

Many of the references would have been BBC News reporting on a case filed by South Africa at the International Court of Justice, which is investigating Israel for what the world’s top court termed in January to be a “plausible” risk of genocide in Gaza.

Regrettably for the BBC, it has been impossible to report that story without mentioning the word “genocide”, because it lies at the heart of the legal case.

What should, in fact, astound us far more is that an active genocide, in which the West is fully complicit, was mentioned by the BBC’s globe-spanning media empire a total of only 283 times in the four months following 7 October.

Campaign of Intimidation

The World Court’s preliminary ruling on Israel’s genocide is vital context that should be front and centre of every media story on Gaza. Instead, it is usually unmentioned, or hidden at the end of reports, where few will read about it.

The BBC infamously gave barely any coverage to the genocide case presented in January to the World Court by South Africa, which the panel of judges found to be “plausible”. On the other hand, it broadcast the entirety of Israel’s defence to the same court.

Now, after this latest campaign of intimidation by the billionaire-owned media, the BBC will likely be even less willing to mention the genocide – which is precisely the aim.

What should have stunned the Mail and the rest of the establishment media far more is that the BBC broadcast 19 references to a Hamas “genocide” in the same four-month period.

The idea that Hamas is capable of a “genocide” against Israel, or Jews, is as divorced from reality as the fiction that it “beheaded babies” on 7 October or the claims, still lacking any evidence, that it committed “mass rape” on that day.

Hamas, an armed group numbering thousand of fighters, currently pinned down in Gaza by one of the strongest armies in the world, is quite incapable of committing a “genocide” of Israelis.

This is, of course, why the World Court is not investigating Hamas for genocide, and why only Israel’s most fanatic apologists run with fake news either that Hamas is committing a genocide, or that it is conceivable it may try to do so.

No one really takes seriously claims of a Hamas genocide. The tell was the world’s stunned reaction when the group managed to escape from the concentration camp that is Gaza for a single day on 7 October and wreak so much death and havoc.

The idea that Hamas could do anything worse than that – or even repeat the attack – is simply delusional. The best Hamas can do is wage a guerrilla war of attrition against the Israeli military from its underground tunnels, which is precisely what it is doing.

Here’s another statistic worth highlighting from the recent “study”: in the same four-month period, the BBC used the term “crimes against humanity” 22 times to describe the atrocities committed by Hamas on one day last October, compared with only 15 times to describe Israel’s even worse atrocities committed continuously over the past year.

Allowable Thought

The ultimate effect of the latest media furore is to increase pressure on the BBC to make even larger concessions to the self-serving, right-wing political agenda of the billionaire-owned media and the corporate interests of the war machine it represents.

The state broadcaster’s job is to set limits on allowable thought for the British public – not on the right, where that role falls to papers such as the Mail and the Telegraph, but on the other side of the political spectrum, on what is misleadingly referred to as “the left”.

The BBC’s task is to define what is acceptable speech and action – meaning acceptable to the British establishment – by those seeking to challenge its domestic and foreign policy.

Twice in living memory, progressive left-wing opposition leaders have emerged: Michael Foot in the early 1980s, and Jeremy Corbyn in the late 2010s. On both occasions, the media have united as one to vilify them.

That should surprise no one. Making the BBC a whipping boy – denouncing it as “left-wing” – is a form of permanent gaslighting designed both to make Britain’s extreme right-wing media seem centrist, and to normalise the drive to push the BBC ever further rightwards.

Over decades, the billionaire-owned media have crafted in the public’s mind the idea that the BBC defines the extreme end of supposedly “left-wing” thought. The more the corporation can be pushed to the right, the more the left faces an unwelcome choice: either follow the BBC rightwards, or become universally reviled as the loony left, the woke left, the Trot left, the militant left.

Bolstering this self-fulfilling argument, any protests by BBC staff can be deduced by the journalist-servants of Rupert Murdoch and other press tycoons as further proof of the corporation’s left-wing or Marxist bias.

The media system is rigged, and the BBC is the perfect vehicle for keeping it this way.

Pressing the Button

What the BBC and the rest of the mainstream media are downplaying are not just the facts of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, but also the obvious genocidal intent of Israeli leaders, the country’s wider society, and its apologists in the UK and elsewhere.

It should not be up for debate that Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza, when everyone from its prime minister down has told us that this is very much their intent.

The examples of such genocidal statements by Israeli leaders filled pages of South Africa’s case to the World Court. Just one example: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denounced the Palestinians as “Amalek” – a reference to a biblical story well known to every Israeli schoolchild, in which the Israelites are ordered by God to wipe an entire people, including their children and livestock, off the face of the earth.

Anyone engaged on social media will have faced a battery of similarly genocidal statements from mostly anonymous supporters of Israel.

Those genocide cheerleaders recently gained a face – two, in fact. Video clips of two Israelis, podcasting in English under the name “Two Nice Jewish Boys”, have gone viral, showing the pair calling for the extermination of every last Palestinian man, woman and child.

One of the podcasters said that “zero people in Israel” care whether a polio outbreak caused by Israel’s destruction of Gaza’s water, sewage and heath facilities ends up killing babies, noting that Israel’s agreement to a vaccination campaign is driven purely by public relations needs.

In another clip, the podcasters agree that Palestinian hostages in Israeli prisons deserve to be “executed by shoving too large of an object up their butts”.

Another clip from the Israeli English podcast named ‘Two Nice Jewish Boys’ speaking about the Rape in Sde Teiman.

“Let's say some prisoner guards, soldiers, took a big, sharp, you know, like…

Scythe.

Porcupine dildo with barbed wire around it and shoved it up this guy's… https://t.co/go3DpN54oI pic.twitter.com/9PvCmALrPs

— Suppressed News. (@SuppressedNws) September 3, 2024

They also make clear that they would not hesitate to press a genocide button to wipe out the Palestinian people:

“If you gave me a button to just erase Gaza – every single living being in Gaza would no longer be living tomorrow – I would press it in a second … And I think most Israelis would. They wouldn’t talk about it like I am, they wouldn’t say ‘I pressed it’, but they would press it.”

Relentless Depravity

It is easy to get alarmed over such inhuman comments, but the furore generated by this pair is likely to deflect from a more important point: that they are utterly representative of where Israeli society is right now. They are not on some depraved fringe. They are not outliers. They are firmly in the mainstream.

The evidence is not just in the fact that Israel’s citizen army is systematically beating and sodomising Palestinian prisoners, sniping Palestinian children in Gaza with shots to the head, cheering the detonation of universities and mosques, desecrating Palestinian bodies, and enforcing a starvation-blockade on Gaza.

It is in the welcoming of all this relentless depravity by wider Israeli society.

After a video emerged of a group of soldiers sodomising a Palestinian prisoner at Israel’s Sde Teiman torture camp, Israelis rallied to their side. The extent of the prisoner’s internal injuries required him to be hospitalised.

In the aftermath, Israeli pundits – educated “liberals” – sat in TV studios discussing whether soldiers should be allowed to make their own decisions about whether to rape Palestinians in detention, or whether such abuses should be organised by the state as part of an official torture programme.

One of the soldiers accused in the gang rape case chose to cast off his anonymity after being championed by journalists who interviewed him. He’s now treated as a minor celebrity on Israeli TV shows.

Polls show that the vast majority of Jewish Israelis either approve of the razing of Gaza, or want even more of it. Some 70 percent want to ban from social media platforms any expressions of sympathy for civilians in Gaza.

None of this is really new. It all just got a lot more ostentatious after Hamas’s attack on 7 October. 

After all, some of the most shocking violence that day occurred when Hamas fighters stumbled onto a dance festival close to Gaza. 

The brutal imprisonment of 2.3 million Palestinians, and the 17-year blockade denying them the essentials of life and any meaningful freedoms, had become so normal to Israelis that hip, freedom-loving Israeli youngsters could happily hold a rave so close to that mass of human suffering.

Or as one of the Two Nice Jewish Boys observed of his feelings about life in Israel: “It’s nice to know that you’re dancing in a concert while hundreds of thousands of Gazans are homeless, sitting in a tent.” His partner interrupted: “Makes it even better … People enjoy knowing they [Palestinians in Gaza] are suffering.”

‘Heroic Soldiers’

This monstrous indifference to, or even pleasure in, the torture of others isn’t restricted to Israelis. There’s a whole army of prominent supporters of Israel in the West who confidently act as apologists for Israel’s genocidal actions. 

What unites them all is the Jewish supremacist ideology of Zionism. 

In Britain, Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis has not spoken out against the mass slaughter of Palestinian children in Gaza, nor has he kept quiet about it. Instead, he has given Israel’s war crimes his blessing.

Back in mid-January, as South Africa began making public its case against Israel for genocide that the World Court found “plausible”, Mirvis spoke at a public meeting, where he referred to Israel’s operations in Gaza as “the most outstanding possible thing”.

He described the troops clearly documented committing war crimes as “our heroic soldiers” – inexplicably conflating the actions of a foreign, Israeli army with the British army.

Even if we imagine he was truly ignorant of the war crimes in Gaza eight months ago, there can be no excuses now. 

Yet, last week, Mirvis spoke out again, this time to berate the British government for imposing a very partial limit on arms sales to Israel after it received legal advice that such weapons were likely being used by Israel to commit war crimes.

In other words, Mirvis openly called for his own government to ignore international law and arm a state committing war crimes, according to UK government lawyers, and a “plausible genocide”, according to the World Court.

There are apologists like Mirvis in influential posts across the West. 

Appearing on TV late last month, his counterpart in France, Haim Korsia, urged Israel to “finish the job” in Gaza, and backed Netanyahu, who the International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor is pursuing for war crimes. 

Korsia refused to condemn Israel’s killing of at least 41,000 Palestinians in Gaza, arguing that those deaths were “not of the same order” as the 1,150 deaths of Israelis on 7 October. 

It was hard not to conclude that he meant Palestinian lives were not as important as Israeli lives.

Inner Fascist

Nearly 30 years ago, Israeli sociologist Dan Rabinowitz published a book, Overlooking Nazareth, that argued Israel was a far more profoundly racist society than was widely understood. 

His work has taken on a new relevance – and not just for Israelis – since 7 October. 

Back in the 1990s, as now, outsiders assumed that Israel was divided between the religious and secular, the traditional and modern; between vulgar recent immigrants and more enlightened “veterans”. 

Israelis often see their society split geographically too: between peripheral communities where popular racism flourishes, and a metropolitan centre around Tel Aviv where a sensitive, cultured liberalism predominates. 

Rabinowitz tore this thesis to shreds. He took as his case study the small Jewish city of Nazareth Illit in northern Israel, renowned for its extreme right-wing politics, including support for the fascist movement of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane. 

Rabinowitz ascribed the city’s politics chiefly to the fact that it had been built by the state on top of Nazareth, the largest community of Palestinians in Israel, specifically to contain, control and oppress its historic neighbour. 

His argument was that the Jews of Nazareth Illit were not more racist than the Jews of Tel Aviv. They were simply far more exposed to an “Arab” presence. In fact, given the fact that few Jews chose to live there, they were heavily outnumbered by their “Arab” neighbours. The state had placed them in a direct, confrontational competition with Nazareth for land and resources. 

The Jews of Tel Aviv, by contrast, almost never came across an “Arab” unless it was in a servant’s role: as a waiter or a worker on a building site.

The difference, noted Rabinowitz, was that the Jews of Nazareth Illit were confronted with their own racism on a daily basis. They had rationalised and become easy with it. Jews in Tel Aviv, meanwhile, could pretend they were open-minded because their bigotry was never meaningfully tested.

Well, 7 October changed all that. The “liberals” of Tel Aviv were suddenly confronted by an unwelcome, avenging Palestinian presence inside their state. The “Arab” was no longer the oppressed, tame, servile one they were used to. 

Unexpectedly, the Jews of Tel Aviv felt a space they believed to be theirs exclusively being invaded, just as the Jews of Nazareth Illit had felt for decades. And they responded in exactly the same way. They rationalised their inner fascist. Overnight, they became comfortable with genocide.

The Genocide Party

That sense of invasion extends beyond Israel, of course. 

On 7 October, Hamas’s surprise assault wasn’t just an attack on Israel. The breakout by a small group of armed fighters from one of the largest and most heavily fortified prisons ever built was also a shocking assault on western elites’ complacency – their belief that the world order they had built by force to enrich themselves was permanent and inviolable. 

7 October severely shook their confidence that the non-western world could be contained forever; that it must continue to do the West’s bidding, and that it would remain enslaved indefinitely.

Just as it has with Israelis, the Hamas attack quickly exposed the little fascist within the West’s political, media and religious elite, who had spent a lifetime pretending to be the guardians of a western civilising mission – one that was enlightened, humanitarian and liberal. 

The act worked, because the world was ordered in such a way that they could easily pretend to themselves and others that they stood against the barbarism of the Other. 

The West’s colonialism was largely out of sight, devolved to globe-spanning, exploitative, environmentally destructive western corporations and a network of some 800 US overseas military bases, which were there to kick ass if this new arms-length economic imperialism encountered difficulties.

Whether intentionally or not, Hamas tore off the mask of that deception on 7 October. The pretence of an ideological rift between western leaders on the right and a supposed “left” evaporated overnight. They all belonged to the same war party; they all became devotees of the genocide party.

All have clamoured for Israel’s supposed “right to defend itself” – in truth, its right to continue decades of oppression of the Palestinian people – by imposing a blockade on food, water and power to Gaza’s 2.3 million inhabitants. 

All actively approve arming Israel’s slaughter and maiming of tens of thousands of Palestinians. All have done nothing to impose a ceasefire apart from paying lip service to the notion.

All seem readier to tear up international law and its supporting institutions than to enforce it against Israel. All denounce as antisemitism the mass protests against genocide, rather than denouncing the genocide itself.

7 October was a defining moment. It exposed a monstrous barbarity with which it is hard to come to terms. And we won’t, until we face a difficult truth: that the source of such depravity is far closer to home than we ever imagined.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Featured image: Palestinian families walk through destroyed neighbourhoods in Gaza City on 24 November 2023 as the temporary truce between Hamas and the Israeli army takes effect (MEE/Mohammed al-Hajjar)

First published on September 5, 2024

No major western leader is ever again going to be able to speak about human rights or ethical values, without attracting howls of derision. They are turning on their own people in order to prevent protest at a genocide they actively support.

Keir Starmer stepped up the pressure on opponents of Zionist genocide on Thursday with the arrest of journalist Sarah Wilkinson and the charging of activist Richard Barnard, both under the draconian Section 12 of the Terrorism Act which carries a sentence of up to 14 years in prison.

The UK MSM has of course ignored these, but is universally carrying outrage at the conviction of two Hong Kong activists for sedition, which carries a maximum sentence of … 2 years.

But they tell us it is China and not the UK which is the authoritarian dictatorship.

(To be plain, I do view the Hong Kong convictions as also an unwarranted interference with free speech. I merely point out the incredible hypocrisy of the British Establishment and far worse laws here).

Richard Barnard has been charged and will face trial, apparently related to public speeches supporting the Palestinian right to armed resistance.

Sarah Wilkinson was released on bail after about 14 hours. Like the recent arrest and bailing of Richard Medhurst, the arrest and bailing is a device to chill her reporting and activism.

The harassment of dissident journalists at ports, using the extensive powers of the Terrorism Act for questioning and confiscation of communications equipment, has become routine. I myself suffered detention, interrogation and confiscation of equipment for “terrorism” last October.

But the Sarah Wilkinson case is an escalation, in that this is a raid on a journalist whose home was invaded by 16 policemen at 7.30am, while she was arrested and taken to the police station as her home was comprehensively turned over, presumably looking for gunmen under the bed.

More details of the raid have come out which are scarcely believable. Armed counter-terrorism police wearing balaclavas were used against a peaceful, female journalist. She was manhandled and physically hurt. The ashes in her mother’s funerary urn were desecrated in a “search”. And Sarah’s bail conditions include that she may not use a computer or mobile telephone.

It is a fascist government that sends 16 police to bust a peaceful journalist at home at 7.30am.

Like the stopping of Richard Medhurst’s plane on the tarmac by police vehicles and his being dragged from the plane (which had just landed and was en route to the gate anyway) this is an authoritarian theatre of intimidation, a Nazi stamping of the violence of the state.

Richard Barnard is a co-founder of the brilliant Palestine Action, which has done so much to disrupt the Israeli arms industry in the UK as it continues to send vital equipment to carry out the mass destruction of civilians in Gaza.

BREAKING: After a targeted campaign by the zionist lobby, Palestine Action's co-founder Richard Barnard is facing three charges for two speeches.

He is accused of supporting a proscribed organisation under the Terrorism Act and encouraging 'criminal activity'. pic.twitter.com/cWq0qwk15v

— Palestine Action (@Pal_action) August 29, 2024

Richard has been charged under Section 12 of the Terrorism Act over two speeches he made supporting the Palestinian resistance.

I have of course said this before, but it bears repeating:

Palestine has the legitimate right of self-defence against the illegal occupation.

The occupying power Israel has no right of self-defence. That is the plain position in international law.

Yet in the UK, it is legal to offer full-throated support to Israel’s genocide and to wish that all Palestinians are exterminated.

IDF participants in genocide happily move between Israel and the UK with no legal consequences.

Yet it is illegal to support certain Palestinian organisations when engaged in legal acts of armed resistance.

The state’s actions against activists have been ramped up – as I predicted – since Starmer came to power.

Five young activists in Glasgow were ten days ago given sentences ranging from 12 months to 24 months in prison for direct action against Thales weapons plant in Govan, which makes parts for Israel’s Watchkeeper drones, widely used against civilians in Gaza.

The sentences from Sheriff Judge McCormick were savage – far higher than would normally be given on the specified charges, which were of breach of the peace, vandalism, disorderly conduct and acting in an abusive manner.

These normally would attract at most a suspended sentence on a first offence. McCormick also ignored the Scottish government guidelines not to give custodial sentences of 24 months or less but to seek alternatives.

More tellingly, McCormick completely ignored the elephant in the room: the genocide in Gaza, which Thales are supplying.

(The fact the action occurred before the genocide should be properly viewed as a commendable act of prescience.)

The Zionist Starmerite Establishment were quick to crow over the jailing – notably Luke Akehurst and John Woodcock (who is laughably called Lord Walney nowadays and is the Government Adviser on political violence) who said “Activists considering breaking the law to get their way need to see there will be consequences”.

This follows similarly harsh sentencing of climate change activists, including those who merely took part in Zoom calls discussing direct action.

The authoritarian reaction of the threatened Zionist ruling class is a worldwide phenomenon. Redoubtable Australian journalist Mary Kostakidis has been ludicrously charged under hate speech laws for retweeting mainstream pro-Palestinian tweets.

American activist Professor Danny Shaw was turned over by the FBI on return to the USA following a trip which included speaking on a panel alongside me at the Palestine International Film Festival.

Also in the United States my friend Scott Ritter has been raided by the FBI and all his electronics and other materials confiscated.

I have spoken to Danny Shaw and to Richard Medhurst. In all of these arrests and detentions, including my own, the emphasis has been on confiscating electronics and on questioning focusing very strongly on contacts, meetings and sources of finance.

The Five Eyes intelligence services are plainly building up Venn diagrams of the democratic opposition to Zionism and the neoliberal project. It is notable that many of those recently arrested over Palestine – including Mary Kostakidis, Richard Medhurst, Scott Ritter and myself – were active in the campaign to free Julian Assange.

I have always maintained that Keir Starmer’s record shows that he will be an even bigger danger to civil liberties than the Tories. It is worth noting that all of the Tory recent draconian legislation – The Public Order Act, The National Security Act and even the Rwanda Act – was not opposed or was supported by Starmer as the pretend “Leader of the Opposition”.

Starmer and Cooper are continuing the Tory policy of challenging a High Court ruling won by Liberty, that Suella Braverman acted illegally in tabling secondary legislation lowering the threshold to ban a demonstration on grounds of inconvenience to the public.

The forthcoming Online Safety Act will be truly chilling, including making it illegal to publish what the government deems misinformation.

Starmer has always been MI5-controlled. The fact that, while a Tory government was in power, the Crown Prosecution Service destroyed all the key documentation revealing Starmer’s involvement in the Assange, Savile and Janner cases (the last being far more important than generally appreciated), shows the extent to which Starmer is a protected Deep State asset.

If we are to survive this descent onto fascism as a society, we need to be prepared to dissent now, and each of us needs to be prepared to go to jail if necessary.

A last word to Craig Mokhiber, the senior UN international lawyer who resigned in protest at UN pusillanimity in face of genocide:

A dark evil has descended over the West. As the genocide in Palestine continues, the US, UK, Germany & other Western governments, instead of cracking down on those committing, aiding and inciting the genocide, are cracking down on those opposing the genocide. Human rights…

— Craig Mokhiber (@CraigMokhiber) August 31, 2024

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Featured image: U.K. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer upon his official appointment by the king in May. (Simon Dawson/ No 10 Downing Street, Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions. He hosts the podcast ‘Active Measures’ with Alex Rubinstein. He has contributed to the GrayZone and Mint Press News and he also has a substack at kitklarenberg.com. His work exposing state crimes against democracy has made him an honoree for the 2022 Indy Media Awards.

In the September 13^th edition of Global Research News Hour, Klarenberg describes to host Michael Welch the incredible violation of his rights directed to him by Anti-terrorism officers at Luton airport in London, England in May of 2023.

Global Research: A year ago, they took you off the plane and really fielded you aggressively. I wonder if you could talk about or introduce our listeners to that subject of being a target of this collective, and what happened to you.

Kit Klarenberg: Well, yeah, that was May 2023. So I mean, just, I mean, there’s a bit of background. I mean, I’ve lived in Serbia for a number of years.

I got trapped here during the pandemic, and it was a good place to get trapped because they didn’t lock down and they didn’t have all these insane mandates. But anyway, the point is, yes, I’ve called Serbia home for a number of years. I flew back to the UK to visit a relative who was, from my perspective, at least, like at that time, on their deathbed, and I thought that I would never see them again.

I had reservations about going because the previous summer, due to my reporting on Paul Mason’s leaked emails, I had a British detective email me inviting me to an interview in London to discuss charges under the, quote unquote, computer misuse act, i.e. reporting on leaked information in the public interest. And so I was, to say the least, ever so slightly worried. Now, when I landed in Luton, one of the world’s worst airports by some considerable margin, there was a team of armed counter-terror officers waiting for me on the tarmac.

They escorted me into the airport, and I was given the option of submitting to a six-hour long interview in which I would not have the right to silence. I would have to answer every question put to me, and I would have to hand over the PINs and passcodes to my digital devices, or face arrest and a prison sentence of up to six months for non-compliance.

GR: How many were there?

KK: There were six of them waiting for me, and there were more in the terminal waiting for me.

They’d done their homework in terms of digging into my background and my reporting. I proceeded to be interrogated very intensively for six solid hours as someone who has ADHD, being stuck in a windowless, airless, extremely hot room without access to any form of contact with the outside world, without food, without water.

GR: Without access to a lawyer.

KK: Yeah, that was about as much fun as you can imagine. Now, I was asked a wide variety of questions about my political beliefs, why I write, think, and say the things that I do, but also, yes, specific questions about my reporting, and also just completely insane queries about my relationship, or indeed Grayzone’s relationship, with the FSB, which is to say Russia’s federal security service. Of course, these were ludicrous, and I almost laughingly dismissed them, I mean, as the rubbish that they were, and then I’m asked, well, why are you responding so strongly? Look, it never, it just went on, it went on forever, and I think that what’s really interesting, and this is a point I’ve made on Twitter and it does bear endlessly repeating, that my, me getting stopped like this, it created an enormous amount of bad publicity for the British state.

There were mainstream figures, including people, to their credit, with whom I’d had crossed words with in the past, who were speaking up about this and condemning it and saying it was wrong. I, there, I was invited onto mainstream news networks in the US to, and other countries, to talk about what happened to me. There was, there were celebrities tweeting about, about what, about my detention.

This, I thought that this might be some deterrent to the British state doing this to other independent journalists. Since me, they’ve gone after Craig Murray, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, who blew the whistle on CIA and MI6 complicity and torture in that country. They’ve gone after Richie Medhurst, who is an independent journalist, mainly reporting on Gaza.

He was, like myself, had a team of officers waiting for him when he flew into Heathrow. He was, he was, he was outright arrested and thrown in a cell for 24 hours as a result of this, and he remains on bail and must present himself back in the UK in three months time. They’ve gone after Sarah Wilkinson, another independent journalist covering Palestine.

This is like some, some meek, mild, I mean, well, maybe not meek and mild in terms of her reporting, but like, she is just a very sweet middle-aged woman who had a team of a dozen balaclavid counter-terror officials kick in her door, arrest her, and she was initially released from this with bail conditions that stated that she couldn’t use a laptop, a phone, or the internet. I mean, quite how she was expected to do any work or function as a human being with these restrictions isn’t clear. Thankfully, by the grace of God, they have been undone, and she’s back covering the genocide in Gaza.

You know, the British authorities, it seems at this point, are drunk with power and completely unconcerned about the negative publicity arising from their heavy-handed treatment. To say the least, I am unenthused about returning to the UK ever again. You know, if needs must, I might consider it, but for the time being, I’m very happy in Serbia, where I might add as well, for all of the the brickbats which are hurled at this country, and it’s people who I consider to be, you know, fundamentally decent, to put it mildly, there was national outcry here when I got stopped.

There was a very prominent TV show run, which is, I think it’s the most watched news show in the country, and when the host, who’s regarded as a bit of a national treasure, his name is Marij, found out about this, he was like, this is an absolute disgrace, and the world must know about it, and he like pretty much demanded that I come on to talk about what had happened to me, and so it’s like, and I had political parties and press organizations here talk up in my favour. Now, I think that’s a very, it is a huge disparity with the British response, where the National Union of Journalists initially issued a statement in solidarity with me, but then deleted it due to backlash. There were a number of mainstream figures who did justify what happened to me, and claimed that it was, yes, legitimate and right that it was done.

And so, yeah, it’s the Britain I grew up in, what prided itself on being, you know, a land of freedom, and in the birthplace of liberal democracy. We are very far from that right now.

GR: Is there in some sense, is it deliberate to get the media on board so that anybody who’s thinking about putting out, you know, inconvenient messaging or whatever, this is what you’re up against, okay? And also, the fact that maybe they’re trying to change the way media is reporting on this stuff. Well, what do you think about that?

KK: Yeah, sure.

I mean, I do think that the British media in general is extraordinarily bad, and co-opted. But yeah, I do think that there is a sense of intimidation. There is a belief that this will create a chilling effect.

I would like to think that this is wrongheaded and erroneous, because I think a large number of people, including people who would otherwise be very quiet, passive, complacent liberals, have had enough of all of this. You know, I mean, Europe is collapsing economically. Its political system is producing parties and candidates who are completely indistinguishable from one another.

People want something different, and they also can see very plainly the repression and abuse and brutality that’s being meted out to anyone who dares deviate from the state line. I mean, you know, you look at Germany, where there are videos of armoured riot police beating young girls because they are walking around with Palestine flags. People are being prosecuted in that country and others for Palestine solidarity, for exercising their basic free speech, freedom of assembly rights, you know, the very hard-fought and hard-won freedoms.

And so I think that actually, rather than deterring people, it is radicalizing people further, because they can actually see the systems in which they’ve been living and not what they’ve been told they are. They are considerably more repressive than they’ve been led to believe. And yeah, people are looking for alternatives.

A feel-good story out of the last UK election in July was the fact that several completely independent candidates, who didn’t have any real presence in the mainstream and had no money, got elected to parliament on explicit Palestine solidarity platforms. So, you know, it’s usually right when repressive power structures are on the brink of collapse that they become their most repressive. It is a shame.

We have to live through that period of it. But the long-term view is a lot brighter than it might seem now, I like to think anyway.

Former US Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland confirmed that the US, UK, and other Western allies advised Ukraine to reject the 2022 Istanbul peace talks deal with Russia.

The agreement would have limited Ukraine’s military capabilities while leaving Russia unrestrained.

The deal collapsed after UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s visit to Kyiv, encouraging President Zelensky to continue fighting.

Russian President Putin recently reiterated that the failure of the talks was due to Western elites’ desire to inflict a strategic defeat.  

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Sixty percent of young people who were hospitalized with myocarditis after receiving an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine still showed signs of myocardial injury roughly six months after getting the shot, according to a new peer-reviewed study funded by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Critics said the study authors — who published their report in The Lancet on Sept. 6 — downplayed the seriousness of the study’s findings. They also noted that some authors had ties to the government and Big Pharma that may have influenced the research.

The study authors, led by Dr. Supriya S. Jain, a pediatric cardiologist and researcher at Maria Fareri Children’s Hospital in Valhalla, New York, analyzed health outcome data and biomarkers from 333 patients ages 5-30, from 38 U.S. hospitals, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-induced myocarditis.

The researchers used late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) in cardiac MRIs to determine which areas of the patients’ heart tissue were injured.

Gadolinium is a metal used to help doctors see abnormal tissues in MRI scans with more detail, according to Drugwatch. The presence of LGE is often associated with worse outcomes, such as a higher risk of heart failure or arrhythmias, according to Trial Site News in its coverage of the study.

The authors followed up with 307 of the 333 patients by analyzing their health data collected from April 2021 to November 2022. The time between vaccination and follow-up varied, with a median of 178 days.

The results revealed that LGE persisted in the cardiac MRIs of 60% of the patients at the follow-up. Jain and her co-authors called these results “reassuring,” noting that there had not been any reported cardiac-related deaths or heart transplants at the time of writing their report. They recommended “continued clinical surveillance and long-term studies.”

Daniel O’Conner of Trial Site News criticized the FDA as the study’s funder. “The FDA is not keeping up with its tradition of ‘patient safety first,’” he told The Defender, adding:

“The procedures that were used and the outcomes that were identified are associated with a higher probability of more severe conditions.

“The FDA [study authors] rightly called for ongoing surveillance — but they don’t have the urgency they should, given the vulnerabilities of the population.”

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Chief Scientific Officer Brian Hooker agreed, telling The Defender he was “disgusted” by the study authors’ downplaying of cardiac harm caused by the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines.

“It’s telling that 60% of the myocarditis patients were still showing significant inflammation and damage,” he said. “You get vaccinated, get myocarditis and then have a ticking time bomb in your chest for the rest of your life.”

Trial Site News — which aims to “drive more interest and awareness in clinical research” — made a similar point. “We here at TrialSite have concerns about the incidence, commonality of LGE and its association with propensity for more severe conditions if not now into the future.”

Trial Site News also said it was concerned about the many vaccine-induced myocarditis cases that aren’t presenting in the hospital and which thus weren’t included in the study. “What happens as they age?”

Heather Ray, a science and research analyst with CHD, pointed out that prior studies show that myocarditis can be life-threatening and can cause subclinical changes and scarring of the heart.

“I don’t feel that any incidence of vaccine-induced myocarditis is reassuring,” Ray told The Defender. “Additionally, we have all witnessed several anecdotal or personal reports of individuals who died from vaccine-induced cardiac issues over the past four years.”

Dr. Peter McCullough told The Defender that as a cardiologist, he was “greatly concerned” that COVID-19 vaccine heart damage in the majority of young people studied hadn’t resolved at the time of follow-up.

“The investigators should extend their efforts and measure spike protein or its antibodies in the blood and study strategies to eliminate mRNA and spike protein from the body,” McCullough said. “This is the best hope of reducing the damage done by COVID-19 vaccination.”

Is Vaccine-induced Myocarditis Less Serious Than Myocarditis Caused by COVID Virus?

In their study, Jain and her co-authors also compared the results from the vaccine-inducted myocarditis patients with health data from 100 children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C), a “rare but serious condition associated with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in which different body parts become inflamed, including the heart,” according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The authors explained:

“To gain a better perspective of the severity of cardiac involvement and myocardial injury in myocarditis associated with the COVID-19 vaccine in the pediatric population, we compared it with MIS-C, a serious complication of COVID-19 with common cardiac dysfunction.”

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., a senior research scientist with CHD, told The Defender the authors’ choice was “scientifically perplexing.”

“Why compare C-VAM [COVID-19 vaccine-associated myocarditis] to MIS-C?” he asked. “Wouldn’t comparing vaccine-induced myocarditis to virus-induced myocarditis be an even better perspective?”

The health data reported in the study show what a bad comparison the two make, he said:

“Table 1’s C-VAM vs. MIS-C p-value shows the children and adults who make up the two cohorts are radically different in age, weight, sex and race.

“And because they are different diseases, 5 of 8 presenting symptoms are different, 7 of 11 biomarkers are different, 9 of 10 hospital course metrics are different, both echocardiography metrics are different, 3 of the 5 left ventricular dysfunction metrics are different, and 5 of the 14 cardiac magnetic resonance metrics are different.”

Jablonowski speculated that the authors chose MIS-C as a comparator so they could compare vaccine-inducted myocarditis to “something worse.”

The authors concluded that cardiac dysfunction was “less common” in patients with vaccine-induced myocarditis than in patients with MIS-C.

They also said that the “initial clinical course” of myocarditis among those with vaccine-induced myocarditis was “more likely to be mild.”

Researchers Use Dismissive Words for Vaccine-induced Myocarditis

Jablonowski said the study authors used language to do “a lot of narrative-building” around vaccine-induced myocarditis and its symptoms, “namely that it’s ‘mild,’ ‘rare,’ ‘transient’ and ‘worth the risk.’”

They used the word “mild” no less than 24 times, almost always when describing vaccine-induced myocarditis, while the word “serious” appeared only once — and as a descriptor of MIS-C.

“Shiral Halal and her family would not consider it mild,” Jablonowski said. “She was a healthy 22-year-old Israeli woman, and the first publicly disclosed fatality, who died two weeks after her second Pfizer-BioNTech dose.”

McCullough said, “I disagree with the authors that this is a ‘mild condition,’ as Takada et al. recently reported a 9.6% mortality rate in young persons with vaccine myopericarditis. Even small areas of damage invisible to cardiac MRI could put vaccine recipients at risk for a future cardiac arrest.”

Myopericarditis is an umbrella term for myocarditis, inflammation of the heart, and pericarditis, inflammation of the tissue surrounding the heart.

Hooker said, “The use of the terms ‘mild’ and ‘rare’ have no place in this type of discourse. However, these researchers ‘pepper’ that type of wrong-headed and dismissive verbiage throughout the paper while genuflecting to the vaccine gods about how the clot shot is a ‘cornerstone in the mitigation of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.’”

Critics Call Out Conflicts of Interest

More than 60 researchers are listed as co-authors with Jain.

Ray noted that some of the co-authors came from the same universities or research labs involved with Pfizer-BioNTech’s clinical trials for its COVID-19 vaccine in children.

“For instance,” she said, “the report states that co-author Alexandra B. Yonts’ institution received funds for conducting Phase 3 clinical trials for the Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.”

The study numbers listed — C4591007 and C4591048 — were the clinical trials for emergency use authorization for subsequent doses (four doses total) of the COVID-19 shot for children 6 months to 4 years old, Ray said.

Jablonowski pointed out that the study’s second author, Steven A. Anderson, Ph.D., directs the FDA’s Office of Biostatistics and Pharmacovigilance yet declared “no competing interests.”

“It is nonsensical,” he said, “to declare no competing interests while studying adverse reactions to a product that your employing agency approves for everyone 6 months and older, including during pregnancy.”

The Defender reached out to Jain for comment but did not receive a response by our deadline.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa.

Featured image is from CHD

---

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

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

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

Alcohol consumption, even at low levels, can negatively impact brain structure, reducing overall brain volume and affecting gray and white matter integrity

Ethanol in alcoholic drinks is converted to acetaldehyde, a toxic substance that damages cells indiscriminately, leading to various health issues including increased cancer risk

Alcohol disrupts gut health by killing beneficial bacteria, potentially causing leaky gut syndrome and triggering inflammatory responses that affect your liver and brain

Regular alcohol consumption can alter hormonal balance, increasing estrogen levels and potentially raising cancer risk, especially for breast cancer

While N-acetylcysteine (NAC) supplementation may help mitigate some harmful effects of alcohol, abstaining completely is the safest option for optimal health

*

In the Everyday Wellness podcast above, Brooke Scheller, a doctor of Clinical Nutrition, founder of Functional Sobriety (a nutrition-based program for alcohol reduction) and author of “How to Eat to Change How You Drink,” discusses the impact of alcohol on your brain and body. I recently interviewed Brooke and will have her interview up in the next few weeks.

While I don’t recommend drinking alcohol, historically humans have been consuming it for thousands of years, including for recreational and medicinal purposes. The first instance of alcohol distillation can be traced back to China in the 1st century,¹ while alcohol has served various purposes throughout history:

Are Small Amounts of Alcohol Bad for Your Brain?

It’s often suggested that while heavy alcohol consumption is harmful, small or moderate amounts may provide some benefits. However, evidence suggests that alcohol consumption, even at low levels, may carry more risks than benefits for overall health.

According to a study from the UK Biobank that examined brain scans of 36,678 middle-aged and older adults,² even just one to two alcoholic drinks per day is associated with negative changes in brain structure, including reductions in overall brain volume, gray matter and white matter integrity.

The brain consists of two main types of tissue: gray matter and white matter. Gray matter comprises neuron cell bodies, which contain the cells’ genetic material. White matter, on the other hand, is made up of axons – long fibers extending from neurons. These axons are coated with a fatty substance called myelin, giving white matter its characteristic appearance.

This myelin sheath enables rapid communication between nerve cells, facilitating efficient information transfer throughout the brain.

The study demonstrates that the negative effects on brain structure are not limited to heavy drinkers but are observable even at low levels of alcohol intake. As consumption increases, so does the severity of these structural changes. This research provides compelling evidence that there may be no “safe” level of alcohol consumption when it comes to brain health.

A review published in Frontiers in Neuroscience also addressed the complex interplay between alcohol consumption and cognitive decline, noting that chronic alcohol abuse leads to “changes in neuronal structure caused by complex neuroadaptations in the brain.”³

Alcohol Is Converted Into the Poison Acetaldehyde

Ethanol, the type of alcohol in drinks, is both water-soluble and fat-soluble. This allows it to easily pass into all cells and tissues of your body. When ingested, ethanol is converted to acetaldehyde, which is a well-known poison that indiscriminately damages and kills cells. Your body then converts acetaldehyde to acetate, which can be used as fuel. However, this process is metabolically costly and provides no real nutritive value.

When you consume alcohol, it enters your stomach, then your liver starts converting the ethanol to acetaldehyde and then to acetate. Some of these byproducts reach your brain by crossing the blood-brain barrier (BBB).

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a protective mechanism that prevents most substances from entering the brain. However, alcohol is an exception due to its unique property of being both water- and fat-soluble. This characteristic allows alcohol to easily penetrate the BBB and enter the brain tissue.

Once inside, alcohol interacts with and affects the brain’s internal environment, which is primarily composed of two major cell types: neurons (nerve cells) and glial cells (found between neurons). The presence of alcohol in the brain disrupts normal neural circuit function, leading to the various effects associated with intoxication.

Among alcohol’s effects is suppression of activity in the prefrontal cortex, a brain area involved in impulse control and decision-making. As alcohol suppresses prefrontal cortex activity, people become more impulsive and less inhibited.

What’s less known, however, is that alcohol-induced changes in neural circuits can persist long term, even if you don’t drink heavily. Drinking patterns like having one or two drinks per night or drinking only on weekends, for instance, can lead to changes in the brain’s circuitry for habitual and impulsive behavior. These changes can continue even when not drinking, potentially making people more impulsive in their daily lives.

Fortunately, these changes are not permanent in most cases. A period of abstinence, typically ranging from two to six months, can allow these neural circuits to return to their normal state. The exception is in cases of chronic, heavy alcohol consumption over many years, where the changes may be more persistent.

It’s also important to distinguish between being “blackout drunk” and passing out. During a blackout, an individual may still be active and conscious, but their hippocampus — a brain region crucial for memory formation — is temporarily impaired. This results in an inability to form new memories, leading to no recollection of events the following day, despite the person having been awake and functional during that time.

Alcohol Damages Your Gut Health

Alcohol negatively affects your gut microbiome and gut-liver-brain axis, a bidirectional communication network that links these three crucial systems in your body. Alcohol’s antimicrobial properties, which make it effective for sterilization, also indiscriminately kill beneficial gut bacteria.

For instance, alcohol consumption may decrease Akkermansia muciniphila, a beneficial bacterial species naturally found in the human gut.⁴ This, in turn, is associated with “dysregulation of microbial metabolite production, impaired intestinal permeability, induction of chronic inflammation, and production of cytokines.”⁵

The metabolism of alcohol in your liver also triggers a proinflammatory response, releasing cytokines such as IL-6 and tumor necrosis factor alpha. This inflammatory reaction, combined with the disruption of gut bacteria, can lead to a condition known as “leaky gut.” In this state, harmful bacteria from partially digested food can escape your gut and enter your bloodstream.

The simultaneous occurrence of good bacteria die-off and bad bacteria infiltration creates a “two-hit” model, where the combined effects are more severe than each issue individually. These gut and liver disturbances have far-reaching consequences, Huberman explains, particularly on your brain.

Through neuroimmune signaling, inflammatory molecules can cross your blood-brain barrier, disrupting neural circuits that regulate alcohol consumption. Paradoxically, this disruption often results in increased alcohol intake, creating a vicious cycle of gut microbiome disruption, liver inflammation and altered brain function.

This self-perpetuating process explains why regular drinkers, even those who don’t consume large quantities, may find themselves caught in a pattern of increasing alcohol consumption and worsening systemic inflammation.⁶

Meanwhile, pathogenic oxygen-tolerant bacteria secrete a very virulent form of endotoxin, also known as lipopolysaccharides (LPS), which can cause inflammation if they translocate across the compromised gut barrier into the systemic circulation.

Even one episode of binge drinking results in increased endotoxin levels, “likely due to translocation of gut bacterial products and disturbs innate immune responses that can contribute to the deleterious effects of binge drinking,” researchers wrote in PLOS One.⁷

A study published in Scientific Reports also found that excessive drinkers had an increase in levels of LPS,⁸ while, among alcohol-dependent adults, avoiding alcohol for 19 days led to significant reductions in gut permeability.⁹

Even Light Drinkers May be at Risk of Premature Death

A systematic review and meta-analysis of 107 cohort studies involving more than 4.8 million people revealed that drinking less than two drinks a day is not associated with reductions in risk of all-cause mortality.¹⁰ Further, drinking more than this may significantly shorten life expectancy.

The study’s lead author, Tim Stockwell, a scientist with the Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research, told the Daily Mail that drinking about two drinks per week over your lifetime may cut your life short by three to six days. Drinking seven drinks a week may shave 2.5 months off life expectancy, while consuming about 35 drinks per week may reduce lifespan by about two years.¹¹

One reason for this detrimental effect could be alcohol’s link to cortisol. Regular alcohol consumption, even at moderate levels, can lead to changes in the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis.

This alteration in the HPA axis can result in higher baseline cortisol levels when not drinking. In other words, individuals who drink regularly may experience elevated levels of cortisol, often referred to as the “stress hormone,” even during periods when they are not consuming alcohol. This persistent increase in baseline cortisol can have various negative impacts on overall health and well-being.

This means that regular drinkers may actually feel more stressed and anxious when they’re not consuming alcohol. Further, while cortisol plays a vital role in your health, it can lead to severe health issues like muscle breakdown, inflammation and impaired immune function when chronically elevated, which is why keeping your levels in check is so important.

Alcohol Increases Estrogen Levels and Cancer Risk

Drinking alcohol affects your hormones, particularly the balance between testosterone and estrogen. Alcohol tends to increase the conversion of testosterone to estrogen,¹² which can have various negative effects in both men and women. Estrogens are one of the primary factors contributing to increasing your cancer risk.

Alcohol also increases cancer risk via acetaldehyde toxicity, which can cause DNA damage, inflammation, leaky gut and weakened immune function. Drinking alcohol also disrupts sleep, which means you’re not getting a restorative night’s sleep when you drink. Further, acetaldehyde toxicity can alter DNA methylation and gene expression, which raises your cancer risk as well.

How to Mitigate Some of Alcohol’s Harmful Effects

I don’t recommend drinking alcohol, and the best way to avoid its harmful effects is to simply not drink it. If you do plan to have an alcoholic beverage, however, N-acetylcysteine (NAC) supplementation can be used as a preventive measure when taken beforehand. NAC is a derivative of the amino acid cysteine, which not only boosts glutathione levels but also helps mitigate acetaldehyde toxicity, a primary cause of hangover symptoms.

Taking at least 200 milligrams of NAC about 30 minutes before drinking may help reduce alcohol’s toxic effects. The efficacy of NAC is thought to be enhanced when combined with vitamin B1 (thiamine). Additionally, vitamin B6 may help alleviate hangover symptoms.

Since alcohol consumption depletes B vitamins, which are necessary for alcohol elimination from your body, taking a B vitamin supplement before and after drinking can be beneficial. However, it’s crucial to note that this approach does not protect against alcohol poisoning or other serious risks associated with excessive drinking.

Therefore, it’s essential to consume alcohol responsibly and in moderation, regardless of any preventive measures taken. For optimal health, however, consider avoiding alcohol completely and instead exploring alternative methods for stress reduction and social interaction that don’t involve drinking.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Notes

¹ YouTube, Andrew Huberman, What Alcohol Does to Your Body, Brain & Health August 22, 2022, 10:52

² Nature Communications, Volume 13, Article number: 1175 (2022)

³ Front. Neurosci., 05 July 2019

^4, 5 Molecular Nutrition & Food Research

⁶ YouTube, Andrew Huberman, What Alcohol Does to Your Body, Brain & Health August 22, 2022, 55:12

⁷ PLOS One May 14, 2014

⁸ Scientific Reports, Volume 7, Article number: 4462 (2017)

⁹ PNAS October 6, 2014

¹⁰ JAMA Network Open March 31, 2023

¹¹ The Hill July 9, 2024

¹² Alcohol November 2000, Volume 22, Issue 3, Pages 123-127

Former US State Department official Victoria Nuland has acknowledged that the US discouraged Ukraine from signing a peace deal with Russia during the early days of the Russian invasion.

Nuland, who recently resigned from her post as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, made the comments in an interview that was published on YouTube on September 3.

.

.

Mikhail Zygar, an exiled Russian journalist, asked Nuland about former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennet’s claim that the US and its allies blocked his efforts at mediation and reports of former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urging Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky not to sign a deal.

Zygar also mentioned that David Arakhamia, a Ukrainian official who led negotiations with Russia at a meeting in Istanbul in March 2022, acknowledged last year that a deal was on the table at the time and that Russia’s main demand was for Ukrainian neutrality.

Wow! Nuland basically admits that Ukraine-Russia peace deal, which was close to being finalized in spring 2022, “fell apart” because US, UK & other Western governments “advised” Zelensky government that it was not “good deal” even though even members of Ukrainian delegation… pic.twitter.com/HPsrpOzQNf

— Ivan Katchanovski (@I_Katchanovski) September 8, 2024

Nuland claimed the US took a hands-off approach to the negotiations when they first started and said it wasn’t until “relatively late in the game” that the Ukrainians started seeking the advice of the US and its allies.

“The Ukrainians began asking for advice on where this thing was going, and it became clear to us, clear to us and the Brits, clear to others, that Putin’s main condition was buried in an annex to this document that they were working on. And it included limits on the precise kinds of weapons systems that Ukraine could have after the deal,” Nuland said.

She said the deal would make Ukraine “neutered” as a military force and said there were no similar constraints on the Russian military.

“People inside Ukraine and people outside Ukraine started asking questions about whether this was a good deal, and it was at that point that it fell apart,” Nuland said.

Boris Johnson traveled to Ukraine on April 9, 2022, and, according to Ukrainska Pravda, told Zelensky that even if Ukraine was ready to sign a deal with Russia, the “collective West” was not. Arakhamia confirmed this account in November 2023, saying that when the negotiators returned from Istanbul, Johnson visited Ukraine and “said that we would not sign anything with them at all, and let’s just fight.”

On April 20, 2022, around the time the talks broke down, then-Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said Turkey thought a deal could be reached following the Istanbul talks, but then it got the impression that some NATO members wanted to prolong the war to weaken Russia.

“After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long … But, following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, it was the impression that… there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue, let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine,” Cavusoglu said.

On April 25, 2022, after visiting Kyiv, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin declared that one of the US’s goals in the war was to see a “weakened” Russia.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

BlackRock is one of the most well-known investment and asset management companies in the world, based in New York City. Founded in 1988, it has quickly expanded worldwide, with a strong presence in the U.S., Asia, Brazil, and the Middle East.

Along with State Street and Vanguard, it is believed to control most global corporations through various investments.

In the first quarter of 2024, the company’s assets under management (AUM) hit a record $10.5 trillion, up $1.4 trillion year-over-year.

So, what does BlackRock’s ownership structure look like? In this article, we examine BlackRock’s major stakeholders and the number of BLK shares they own.

Let’s explore who owns the most BlackRock stock in 2024.

BlackRock Shares Analysis: Unique Investment Approach and Shareholder Dynamics

As of April 30, 2024, the company had 148,599,981 shares outstanding, considerably less than its competitors, such as Bank of America, Invesco, or UBS.

At the time of writing, its stock was trading at $718.13 per share. The company had a market capitalization of about $116.07 billion.

The company’s revenues clocked in at about $17.859 billion for the full year 2023, and $4.728 billion for the Q1 2024, according to BlackRock’s latest financial reports.

On May 15,  Blackrock declared a quarterly cash dividend of $5.10 per share of common stock, payable on June 24, 2024, to shareholders of record at the close of business on June 7, 2024.

.

As of June 28, 2024, BlackRock (BLK) stock appreciated by 5,022.16%, according to data from TradingView.

.

Note that past performance is not indicative of future results.

But who are the stakeholders of BlackRock?

The shareholders are divided into Investor A, Investor B, Investor C, Institutional, and Class R shares. The type of ownership, sales charge, management fees, and other operating expenses can vary depending on the type of share purchased.

BlackRock shareholders are also classified into individual and institutional shareholders.

BlackRock has 2,824 institutional owners and shareholders that have filed 13D/G or 13F forms with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). These institutions hold a total of 136,830,864 shares, according to the data compiled by Fintel.io as of June 28, 2024.

Who Owns BlackRock?

Top 5 Largest Institutional BlackRock Shareholders

Institutional investors are the largest owners of Blackrock shares. Amongst BlackRock’s major shareholders are investment and asset management companies like Vanguard Group and State Street Global Advisors, which have some of the largest stakes.

BlackRock has a higher percentage of institutional shareholders than other similar investment companies. Currently, institutional investors hold 51.78% of the company’s stock.

Out of these, the top 5 largest BlackRock owners are outlined below, with holdings as of 31 March 2024.

 

 

5.  Temasek Holdings – 5,115,491 – 3.44%

Temasek Holdings, owned by the Government of Singapore, possesses a 3.44% stake in BlackRock. This equates to approximately 5,115,491 shares, valued at around $4.26 billion.

In 2023, Temasek Holdings led a $140 million funding round for Ola Electric.

According to the latest news, Temasek Holdings has recently backed a new $250 million tech fund, Alpha Intelligence Capital (AIC), which invests in artificial intelligence companies, including OpenAI.

4. Bank of America – 5,196,941 – 3.49%

Bank of America is one of the biggest BlackRock shareholders, with a 3.49% stake in Blackrock, which amounts to 5,196,941 shares valued at approximately $4.33 billion.

In contrast to other Wall Street banks, Bank of America has been avoiding job cuts until recently.

However, as the layoff trend continues, Bank of America has started a round of job cuts, following its rivals Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley, which collectively cut over 10,000 roles last year.

3. State Street Global Advisors – 5,928,745 – 3.98%

State Street Global Advisors holds a 3.98% stake in BlackRock, equivalent to about 5,928,745 shares valued at approximately $4.94 billion. This stake makes State Street the third-largest BlackRock owner among institutional shareholders.

The company offers exchange-traded funds (ETFs) such as the SPDR S&P 500 Ucits ETF and the SPDR S&P 500 ESG Leaders Ucits ETF.  Recently, State Street Global Advisors reduced the fees for these two funds, positioning them among the most cost-effective options for tracking the S&P 500 Index.

This decision is seen as a strategic and forward-thinking move, particularly in a market where investors are increasingly well-informed about the variety of funds and fee structures available.

2. BlackRock – 9,604,250 – 6.46%

BlackRock owns a 6.46% stake in BlackRock, totaling approximately 9,604,250 BLK shares with an estimated value of $8 billion. This amount makes BlackRock the second-largest institutional shareholder of its own company.

But what does BlackRock own besides BLK stock?

Blackrock’s investment in its BLK shares represents only a tiny fraction (0.2%) of the company’s holdings. As of Q1 2024, the top five Blackrock holdings included Microsoft (5.3%), Apple (4.2%), Nvidia (3.8%),  Amazon (2.7%), and Meta Platforms (1.8%).

1. Vanguard Group – 13,182,262 – 8.87%

The Vanguard Group holds an 8.87% stake in BlackRock, equivalent to around 13,182,262 shares valued at approximately $10.9 billion.

These shares are distributed across various mutual funds and ETFs managed by Vanguard, including the Vanguard 500 Index Fund, the Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF, and the Vanguard Value ETF.

Top 5 Largest Individual BlackRock Shareholders

Amongst the individual shareholders of BlackRock, the founders and long-time employees of the company hold the most shares. This was because BlackRock famously implemented a strategy of offering equity options to new employees it hired.

Although this caused friction amongst the early management, it is a practice that still holds true and attracts some of the best talent in the world.

Below, we highlight the key individuals who not only hold substantial shares in the company but have also played pivotal roles in its growth and operations.

 

 

5. Murry S. Gerber – 42,648 – 0.02%

Murry S. Gerber has been serving as BlackRock’s Lead Independent Director since 2017.

BlackRock has recently announced that Murry S. Gerber decided to not stand for re-election at the conclusion of his term in May 2024 and retire after 23 years of service to the firm and its shareholders.

Before BlackRock, Gerber held prominent positions at EQT Corporation, including Chairman, Executive Chairman, President, and CEO. His extensive leadership experience also includes a tenure as CEO of Coral Energy.

Additionally, Gerber contributes to the cultural sector as a member of the board of trustees of the Pittsburgh Cultural Trust.

According to his latest SEC filing, Murry S. Gerber owned 42,648 shares of BlackRock as of January 16, 2024.

4. Richard Kushel – 67,107 – 0.04%

Richard Kushel holds the position of Senior Managing Director at BlackRock, where he also oversees the Portfolio Management Group.

His expansive role at BlackRock includes past leadership as the Head of Multi-Asset Strategies and Global Fixed Income. Additionally, Kushel has significantly contributed to the company’s growth in his former capacities as Chief Product Officer and head of the Strategic Product Management Group, BlackRock Investment Stewardship, and the BlackRock Investment Institute.

As of May 02, 2024, Richard Kushel owned 67,107 shares in the company.

3. Robert S. Kapito – 217,127 – 0.14%

Robert Kapito is the President and director of BlackRock. He is distinguished as one of the eight founders of the company. In his extensive leadership roles, he chairs the Global Operating Committee and is a member of the Global Executive Committee. Additionally, Kapito holds a director position at iShares.

His key responsibilities include overseeing Risk and Quality Analysis, Investment Strategies, Technology and Operations, as well as Client Business.

Robert Kapito owned 217,127 shares as of January 31, 2023. This stake makes him the third-largest individual BlackRock owner.

2. Larry Fink –  414,146 – 0.27%

Larry Fink, one of the original eight Blackrock owners and founders, currently holds the positions of CEO and Chairman and is the second-largest individual shareholder of the company.

As of February 28, 2024, he held 414,146 shares of the asset management firm.

In his 2024 annual letter to shareholders, Larry Fink shared a very personal story of his parents’ successful investments and how they “could have lived beyond 100 and comfortably afforded it.”

Their experience reminded Fink why he founded BlackRock in the first place. He said:

“Obviously, we were ambitious entrepreneurs, and we wanted to build a big, successful company. But we also wanted to help people retire like my parents did. That’s why we started an asset manager — a company that helps people invest in the capital markets — because we believed participating in those markets was going to be crucial for people who wanted to retire comfortably and financially secure.”

In an interview with CNBC’s Jim Cramer, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink said he’s hopeful about the younger generation despite a looming retirement crisis.

1. Susan L. Wagner – 427,887 – 0.28%

Susan Wagner, celebrated as one of the original founders of BlackRock, has served in various significant roles within the company, including Head of Corporate Strategy, Chief Operating Officer, and Vice Chairwoman.

Wagner played a crucial role in expanding BlackRock’s reach into international markets such as Brazil, Asia, and the Middle East. Even after retiring, she continues to serve on BlackRock’s board.

In addition to her contributions at BlackRock, Wagner is a member of the board of trustees at Hackley School and holds positions on the boards of both Swiss Re and Apple.

As of February 22, 2024, she held 427,887 shares in BlackRock, which makes Wagner the largest individual BlackRock owner at the time of writing.

The Bottom Line

BlackRock is a highly regarded and prestigious asset management company that has made a name for itself in a relatively short time. Founded by eight people, it now has about 2,824 institutional shareholders and about $10.5 trillion in AUM.

Among those who own BlackRock shares are very large institutional shareholders, such as Vanguard Group and State Street Global Advisors, as well as the original founders and other employees.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Featured image is from Techopedia

Rolling out of my crib before dawn today (I was in it long before the charlatans Harris and Trump began their theatrical “debate”), it being another September 11th, I wondered where Dick Cheney was.

And I was still wondering where Elmer Gantry was, having received the previous day a form message from RFK, Jr.’s faith-based engagement team leader, Rev. Wendy Silvers, that she was conducting a “pop-up” prayer service for the great Ciceronians’ debate, with Bobby Kennedy in the press room, rooting for his boy Donald. Cheney and Harris vs. Kennedy and Trump. A tag-team match perfect for the World Wrestling Federation (WWF).

I had just dreamed, or so I thought, that Cheney was out night-riding his white stallion across the Wyoming hills, long gun tight aside his saddle, cowboy hat slung back with a full moon shining on his melonic noggin, sea-shells in his ears as he grooved from side-to-side to the music of that other Kamala Harris endorser, Taylor Swift. It’s always wonderful, wonderful, oh so wonderful to get political advice from a fully-clothed warmonger and a scantily-clad diva.

In my dream I heard another voice as night rider Dick ripped off his earphones and pulled back on the reins.  “Dick, Dick,” an eerie voice rang out:

‘If you want to save your soul from hell a-riding on our range,
Then cowboy change your ways today or with us you will ride
-try’ng to catch the devil’s herd
Across these endless skies’
Yippee-yi-ay, yippee-yi-o,
The ghost herd in the sky.

That was it, I threw my old clothes on and headed up the hill to the lake to clear my mind of such a nasty flic.  Dick hadn’t changed his ways since 2001, except to embrace Democratic war making instead of Republican.  Actually, that’s wrong, for as Mr. Neocon, a signer of the bloodthirsty neo-conservative document the Project for the New American Century, he always welcomed and got bipartisan support to attack Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

The neo-cons who run the Democrats and Republicans alike, and whose document “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” most interestingly stated long before COVID-19 that “advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.”

You don’t say.

There was no need for these neocons to mention the Palestinians, of course, for their slaughter was guaranteed, not only because so many neocons held dual Israeli-U.S. citizenship, but because of all the Israel Lobby money flowing into the pockets of Congress.  As for the Russians, attacking them was as American as cherry pie, for they were always coming to get us, just as those sneaky Chinese had their eyes on seizing California.

It was still semi-dark as I walked, with just the fingertips of a rosy-fingered dawn raising its hand over East Mountain.  At the lake’s edge, two men in woolen caps and parkas sat meditating facing the mist-rising lake.  I wondered why.  Were they seeking personal peace of mind or illumination about the ruthless ways of their government?  As I walked, I talked to myself and my own ghosts, watching as I went the disappearing vapor and the sky slowly turning blue.

I remembered that September 11, 2001 was also a very blue day until the black clouds flew in and that sparkling morning turned to smoke and dust as the three World Trade Center buildings were brought down by controlled demolition, not airplanes.

But where was Dick Cheney that morning?  Not out on the range, no siree.  He was riding herd on another roundup.  He had taken control of the U.S. government under a Continuity of Government (COG) declaration, as Peter Dale Scott has documented:

Within hours of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001, Dick Cheney in effect took command of the national security operations of the federal government.

Quickly and instinctively, he began to act in response to two longstanding beliefs: that the great dangers facing the United States justified almost any response, whether or not legal; and that the presidency needed vastly to enhance its authority, which had been unjustifiably and dangerously weakened in the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate years.

James Mann has argued that COG implementation was the “hidden backdrop” to Cheney’s actions on 9/11, when he “urged President Bush to stay out of Washington,” and later removed himself to more than one “’undisclosed location’”.

Scott and authors James Mann and James Bamford further show how Cheney and his buddy Donald Rumsfeld of “unknown unknowns” fame were for a long time part of the permanent hidden national security apparatus that runs the country as presidents like Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden enter and exit the White House and are falsely held up as leading the nation.  “Cheney and Rumsfeld had previously been preparing for almost two decades, as central figures in the secret agency planning for so-called Continuity of Government (COG),” writes Scott.  “It was revealed in the 1980s that these plans aimed at granting a president emergency powers, uncurbed by congressional restraints, to intervene abroad, and also to detain large numbers of those who might protest such actions.”

Unlike this morning when I saw Cheney riding the range, on the morning of September 11, 2001, Cheney was in the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) beneath the White House. 

What exactly he was doing there I will leave to the reader’s research initiative. The great researcher David Ray Griffin’s many books about the attacks of that day would be a good place to start.  Let’s just say he wasn’t listening to pop music, not presidential recommender Taylor Swift anyway, for she was just eleven years old that day.  She was probably dreaming of writing her political music, Phil Ochs style.

Have you ever noticed how in all the presidential debates since 2001, the truth about what happened on September 11, 2001 is never discussed? 

It is just assumed that the government’s version of events is true.  It is a third rail of American politics; mention it and your goose is cooked.

Just this morning at the 23rd anniversary memorial service of September 11th in NYC, Donald Trump and Kamala Harris shook hands. (Anthony Fauci would be outraged, having said that “I don’t think people should ever shake hands again.”)

Was that handshake some sort of tacit agreement never to broach the subject of September 11th during the campaign?  To suggest that both the attacks of that day and the subsequent anthrax attacks were linked inside jobs sounds so conspiratorial. That’s a voter turnoff.  

Even I find accusing the U.S. government of a false flag attack conspiratorial, since that’s exactly what it is, as I wrote years ago about the linguistic mind-control used to convince Americans that they are ruled by a secret cabal of ghost writers in the sky.  My words:

In summary form, I will list the language I believe “made up the minds” of those who have refused to examine the government’s claims about the September 11 attacks and the subsequent anthrax attacks.

1. Pearl Harbor. As pointed out by David Ray Griffin and others, this term was used in September 2000 in The Project for the New American Century’s report, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (p.51).  Its neo-con authors argued that the U.S. wouldn’t be able to attack Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. “absent some catastrophic event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”  Coincidentally or not, the film Pearl Harbor, made with Pentagon assistance and a massive budget, was released on May 25, 2001 and was a box office hit. It was in the theatres throughout the summer.  The thought of the attack on Pearl Harbor (not a surprise to the U.S. government, but presented as such) was in the air despite the fact that the 60^th anniversary of that attack was not until December 7, 2001, a more likely release date. Once the September 11 attacks occurred, the Pearl Harbor comparison was “plucked out” of the social atmosphere and used innumerable times, beginning immediately. Even George W. Bush was widely reported to have had the time  that night to allegedly use it in his diary. The examples of this comparison are manifold, but I am summarizing, so I will skip giving them.  Any casual researcher can confirm this.
2. Homeland. This strange un-American term, another WW II word associated with another enemy – Nazi Germany – was also used many times by the neo-con authors of “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.”  I doubt any average American referred to this country by that term before.  Of course it became the moniker for The Department of Homeland Security, marrying home with security to form a comforting name that simultaneously and unconsciously suggests a defense against Hitler-like evil coming from the outside.  Not coincidentally, Hitler introduced it into the Nazi propaganda vernacular at the 1934 Nuremberg rally. Both usages conjured up images of a home besieged by alien forces intent on its destruction; thus preemptive action was in order.
3. Ground Zero. This is a third WWII (“the good war”) term first used at 11:55 A.M. on September 11 by Mark Walsh (aka “the Harley Guy” because he was wearing a Harley-Davidson tee shirt) in an interview on the street by a Fox News reporter, Rick Leventhal. Identified as a Fox free-lancer, Walsh also explained the Twin Towers collapse in a precise, well-rehearsed manner that would be the same illogical and anti-scientific explanation later given by the government: “mostly due to structural failure because the fire was too intense.” Ground zero – a nuclear bomb term first used by U.S. scientists to refer to the spot where they exploded the first nuclear bomb in New Mexico in 1945 – became another meme adopted by the media that suggested a nuclear attack had occurred or might in the future if the U.S. didn’t act. The nuclear scare was raised again and again by George W. Bush and U.S. officials in the days and months following the attacks, although nuclear weapons were beside the point. But the conjoining of “nuclear” with “ground zero” served to raise the fear factor dramatically.  Ironically, the project to develop the nuclear bomb was called the Manhattan Project and was headquartered at 270 Broadway, NYC, a few short blocks north of the World Trade Center.
4. The Unthinkable. This is another nuclear term whose usage as linguistic mind control and propaganda is analyzed by Graeme MacQueen in the penultimate chapter of the very important The 2001 Anthrax Deception.  He notes the patterned use of this term before and after September 11, while saying “the pattern may not signify a grand plan …. It deserves investigation and contemplation.”  He then presents a convincing case that the use of this term couldn’t be accidental.  He notes how George W. Bush, in a major foreign policy speech on May 1, 2001, “gave informal public notice that the United States intended to withdraw unilaterally from the ABM Treaty”; Bush said the U.S. must be willing to “rethink the unthinkable.”  This was necessary because of terrorism and rogue states with “weapons of mass destruction.”  PNAC also argued that the U.S. should withdraw from the treaty. A signatory to the treaty could only withdraw after giving six months notice and because of “extraordinary events” that “jeopardized its supreme interests.” Once the September 11 attacks occurred, Bush rethought the unthinkable and officially gave formal notice on December 13 to withdraw the U.S. from the ABM Treaty.  MacQueen specifies the many times different media used the term “unthinkable” in October 2001 in reference to the anthrax attacks.  He explicates its usage in one of the anthrax letters – “The Unthinkabel” [sic].  He explains how the media that used the term so often were at the time unaware of its usage in the anthrax letter since that letter’s content had not yet been revealed, and how the letter writer had mailed the letter before the media started using the word.  He makes a rock solid case showing the U.S. government’s complicity in the anthrax attacks and therefore in the Sept 11 attacks.  While calling the use of the term “unthinkable” in all its iterations “problematic,” he writes, “The truth is that the employment of ‘the unthinkable’ in this letter, when weight is given both to the meaning of this term in U.S. strategic circles and to the other relevant uses of the term in 2001, points us in the direction of the U.S. military and intelligence communities.”  I am reminded of Orwell’s point in 1984: “a heretical thought – that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc – should be literally unthinkable, at least as far as thought is dependent on words.”  Thus the government and media’s use of “unthinkable” becomes a classic case of “doublethink.”  The unthinkable is unthinkable.
5. 9/11. This is the key usage that has reverberated down the years around which the others revolve. It is an anomalous numerical designation applied to an historical event, and obviously also the emergency telephone number.  Try to think of another numerical appellation for an important event in American history. The future editor of The New York Times and Iraq war promoter, Bill Keller, introduced this connection the following morning in a NY Times op-ed piece, “America’s Emergency Line: 911.”  The linkage of the attacks to a permanent national emergency was thus subliminally introduced, as Keller mentioned Israel nine times and seven times compared the U.S. situation to that of Israel as a target for terrorists. His first sentence reads: “An Israeli response to America’s aptly dated wake-up call might well be, ‘Now you know.’”  By referring to September 11 as 9/11, an endless national emergency became wedded to an endless war on terror aimed at preventing Hitler-like terrorists from obliterating us with nuclear weapons that could create another ground zero or holocaust. It is a term that pushes all the right buttons evoking unending social fear and anxiety.  It is language as sorcery; it is propaganda at its best. Even well-respected critics of the U.S. government’s explanation use the term that has become a fixture of public consciousness through endless repetition.   As George W. Bush would later put it as he connected Saddam Hussein to “9/11” and pushed for the Iraq war, “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”  All the ingredients for a linguistic mind-control smoothie had been blended.

It’s getting dark now, the sun is setting and shimmering across the lake.  Shadows are falling, but to quote Dylan, “it’s not dark yet but it’s getting there.”  I hope to dream again tonight as I rock in my crib, not about Cheney and his ilk, not about Trump or Harris and the Spectacle, but maybe just about the lovely lapping lake I listened to today, thinking of Yeats’ poem, “The Lake of Innisfree,” set in the land of my ancestors, hearing its cadence that flows like a prayer. 

It is always the poets who remind us that words can be used to traumatize or transport one into a beautiful dreamer.

I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made;
Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee,
And live alone in the bee-loud glade.

And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow,
Dropping from the veils of the morning to where the cricket sings;
There midnight’s all a glimmer, and noon a purple glow,
And evening full of the linnet’s wings.

I will arise and go now, for always night and day
I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore;
While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey,
I hear it in the deep heart’s core.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.

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

The Elite program to kill off a substantial proportion of the human population and technologically enslave those left alive now advances rapidly. See ‘Humans Fiddle While Humanity Burns: Will it be Near-Term Death or Transhuman Slavery?’

But as the Elite’s global technocracy advances, with each project within it putting another technological bar in the prison cell of those it doesn’t kill, it almost invariably draws little more than powerless complaints and virtually no resistance even among those who claim to be ‘aware’.

After all, what does it matter if you do one or two things – shop at your favourite supermarket perhaps where your biometric and other personal data will be collected – because it is more convenient and cheaper, for example?

But the problem is that the prison – or, more accurately, slave camp – is being incrementally built around each one of us personally and if you are not willing to pay the price of resistance (whether this involves making a clear commitment, putting in more personal effort, more money, some inconvenience, something else or even prison time) and to work cooperatively with others to solve at least some of the personal challenges you face, then you will end up in the technocratic ‘smart city’ prison the Elite plans to have built for you by 2030. If you want a sense of the horrors that this will entail, this sanitized ‘promotional’ article unashamedly offers it: ‘Testing Tech in Paradise: Queensland’s Sunshine Coast’.

And that means that every time you merely complain (including to a politician) or opt for convenience, a cheaper price or to ‘save time’ by not doing something to prevent your data being harvested to be used against you, then you are cooperating with the Elite’s intention to kill you or imprison you permanently.

Of course, officially, there is nothing to see here, as Elite agents in governments, corporations and elsewhere go about imposing the Elite program on us while concealing it behind a barrage of propaganda.

See ‘Online conspiracy theories about Edmonton’s “15-minute city” plan: “Absolute nonsense”’.

But if you read the primary literature on this subject, issued by key program-setting organizations such as the World Economic Forum, most of the ‘absolute nonsense’ that is being uttered comes from the plethora of organizations tasked with imposing the Elite program.

See ‘The Brave New World of 1984 2030: “You’ll Own Nothing. And You’ll Be Happy.”’

Car Privacy and Freedom

Within this comprehensive program that details extensive changes to 200 areas of human life designed to culminate in those still alive ‘owning nothing and being happy’ by 2030, just one challenge we face in defending a life worth living is making our cars private and secure. This is a significant challenge if your car was built this century and it will take considerable effort to remove all of the invasive surveillance and control tech built into it which has increased enormously in recent years.

Needless to say, you do not have to remove this tech. But, if you do not, there will come a point in time when the car will respond to directives issued from outside the vehicle even while you are driving. And you will be powerless to stop it.

So, assuming that you are already resisting key components of the Elite’s technocratic program – there is little point bothering to secure your car if you aren’t doing a swag of other things as well – here is a summary of some key ways in which your car will need to be modified so that it cannot spy on you and control your movements.

At its simplest, the invasive tech in any car made this century is likely to collect identifiers such as your name, residential address and email address as well as biometrics such as your geolocation, driver’s license and financial information, which it then also sells or gives to governments on request. Some of this can be disabled by using your phone or computer to access particular websites where you can ‘deny permission’ for various ‘permissions’ assumed when you bought the vehicle. As an absolute minimum, you are certainly encouraged to do this, as illustrated by the woman in the 80-second video immediately below.

You can read more about this invasive technology and learn how many of these features can be deactivated in articles such as these:

‘“Privacy Nightmare on Wheels”: Every Car Brand Reviewed By Mozilla – Including Ford, Volkswagen and Toyota – Flunks Privacy Test’ and

‘How to Figure Out What Your Car Knows About You (and Opt Out of Sharing When You Can)’ which references a site that will give you a reasonable privacy report on your particular car:

Vehicle Privacy Report.

Nevertheless, it is important to understand that there is surveillance tech in your car that cannot be ‘turned off’ by removing ‘permission’ and that the invasive tech is outside your car as well as inside it.

These ‘inside vehicle’ technologies – including an array of cameras, microphones and sensors – must be physically removed from your car and that requires someone aware of the threats and technically competent to identify and remove all offending components from your particular make and model of car. In some cases, it might be possible to disable the tech but, if this is done, it is also necessary to ensure that it cannot then be remotely reactivated.

It is like your computer, mobile phone, television, refrigerator and many other devices: If you are using an ‘ordinary one’ made this century and purchased from a standard retail outlet then it is so full of tech designed to end your freedom and invade your privacy that there is little about your life (genetic info, sex life, political beliefs, trade union membership…) the relevant Elite agents do not know and the data is stored in one or more of the vast data banks (the ‘cloud’ as they like to call it) around the world.

For two more examples of how our cars are being weaponized to spy on us and those around us (gathering enormous data which is often sold or otherwise shared) while tracking every movement we make and, in time, also limiting our range of movement, check out these articles:

‘Biometrics key to controlling autonomous, software-defined vehicles’ and ‘Ford might install tech that reports other drivers to law enforcement’.

And, according to Christine Anderson, a Member of the European Parliament: ‘A committee of the ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) dominated by police and intelligence services is currently working unnoticed on the future mass surveillance of vehicles in real time. Position data from the [car’s] navigation system will then provide a permanent movement profile. Speed, fuel level, open windows and doors will be transmitted, as well as the number of people currently sitting in the vehicle and the IDs of all smartphones connected to the infotainment system. By linking the vehicle identification number (VIN) with the smartphone IMEI, remote access to certain functions of the on-board electronics will also be possible from the outside.’

See ‘Total surveillance with the state in the passenger seat!’

The ‘outside car’ technologies include Automatic Licence Plate Readers positioned along roads and elsewhere while connected to registration authorities to, among other functions, confirm your car is registered before you can buy fuel.

See ‘No-rego-no-fuel policy applied at some petrol stations’.

While roadside cameras used to detect mobile phone use while driving are already widespread.

See ‘What do mobile phone cameras look like? Here’s how to spot them’.

But this technology does more than just detect mobile phone use as the article makes clear.

And there are plenty more ‘outside car’ technologies performing a range of functions that will ultimately limit your movement. For example, technology might be used to lock you out of your car or disable your car if you attempt to go beyond the limit of your geofenced confinement in your ‘15-minute city’.

Even car parks are not secure. Car parks are being electronically monitored so tightly that the minute your allowed time is up, the ‘parking inspector’ will be notified to head to your car to issue a parking fine. Of course, how long the ‘parking inspector’ remains human, as distinct from transhuman, robot or drone, is undoubtedly only a short time away. In any case, given that they will have the number plate of your vehicle already, the fine might simply be automatically deducted directly from your bank account given your personal details, including vehicle registration number, will be linked to your digital identity (and thus bank account) and adversely impact your social credit score as well. Mind you, in some contexts such as where your car has self-driving features, the ‘parking inspector’ can just order your car to drive itself to any location for impounded vehicles.

So if you use a 21st century car (and other tech products) and want freedom, privacy and to resist the rapidly advancing technocracy’s control over you, you will need to do the work yourself to identify and remove all invasive tech from your car, computer, phone, television, fridge… or pay someone you trust and who is competent to do it for you.

Whatever it costs financially, it is worth it (unless you put little value on your freedom and privacy which are rapidly vanishing and will be gone by 2030 without a monumental expansion of the number of people resisting strategically).

Another option to ensure your car is private and free of high tech restrictions is illustrated in the 30-second Tucker Carlson video immediately below.

Of course, you might hope that using some form of public transport – a bus, train, tram or even taxi or rented car – might solve your problem but the invasive tech is already virtually everywhere with surveillance (and, increasingly, facial recognition) cameras becoming ubiquitous while these and a variety of other technologies, such as geofencing, will ultimately restrict your movement, however you travel. Even where you can walk will be limited.

Defending Our Freedom, Privacy and a Life Worth Living

Of course we must do much more than make our vehicles secure. And we need vastly more people aware and taking action to resist as well. Otherwise those of us resisting will still be swept up by the transhuman and technocratic police – no matter how organized we are in our self-reliant communities – and relocated to a ‘smart city’ prison.

See ‘Policing the Elite’s Technocracy: How Do We Resist This Effectively?’

The ‘We Are Human We Are Free’ campaign identifies the foundational components of the Elite’s technocratic program that must be resisted if we are to defeat the advancing technocracy. At an absolute minimum, the One-page Flyer in 23 languages identifies the critical basics for action.

Conclusion

The Elite program to kill off a substantial proportion of the human population and technologically enslave those left alive now advances rapidly.

Most of the technologies for achieving these two ends have either been deployed already or are being rapidly deployed now.

You can do nothing or, perhaps, complain about what is happening.

But unless you take the precise personal action necessary to defend yourself and your family, you cannot escape the outcome that the Elite is imposing on you.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of ‘Why Violence?’ His email address is [email protected] and his website is here. He is a regular contributor to ‘Global Research’.

Featured image: Technocracy – a 1933 cartoon by Winsor McCay

As the US government works overtime to stigmatize any journalism possessing connectivity with Russia, the world slides dangerously down a path defined by a Russophobic US-driven agenda that leads toward the inevitability of conflict, and the probability of nuclear war.

When the FBI executed a search warrant on my residence on August 7, they were singularly focused on my professional relationship (I am a self-employed journalist) with the Russian government, and in particular, RT, the widely recognized brand name of Russia Today, a media company founded by the autonomous non-profit organization TV-Novosti in April 2005.

According to the FBI, the US government was concerned that my activities fell under the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA).

The FBI has also searched the Virginia home of Dmitry Simes, a veteran Russian-American journalist who currently resides in Moscow where he helps moderate a popular political program, The Big Game, on Channel 1.

While the FBI has not publicly commented on the raid on Simes’ home, it is most likely due to similar concerns over FARA compliance.

I have been an external contributor (i.e., contactor) to RT since April 2020. Since the initial contract was signed, I have written numerous articles and produced hundreds of videos for which I have been compensated financially in accordance with the terms set forth in the agreements between myself and RT. As stipulated in the signed agreements, I am solely responsible for the content of the work provided.

At no time have I entered into any agreement, written or oral, or have reached any understanding, formal or informal, that I am responsive to the direction or control of either RT/TV-Novosti or the Russian government.

Indeed, the agreement between myself and RT stipulates that I am responsible for determining the topics that will be covered in the content I produce, although as is the case in any editorial/producer relationship with “talent,” I have been asked to provide content that is responsive to breaking news.

I am a freelance journalist. This is the life of a freelance journalist.

Nothing more, nothing less.

This relationship is like that which I have as an outside contributor to other journalistic outlets, including TruthDig, The American Conservative, Consortium News, The Washington Spectator, and Energy Intelligence, all of which have published my work on a regular basis during the same period in which I produced content for RT.

In all cases, I am solely responsible for the content I produce. There is, of course, a collaborative relationship with the editors of all these publishing outlets, some more intense/heavy than others. This is the normal reality faced by every journalist in the world.

I can say without fear of contradiction that the editorial ‘touch’ of RT is the lightest of any publisher I have dealt with – there is the standard follow-up questioning on sourcing of information, and some massaging of language for clarity. On a few occasions (I can count them on one hand), RT has turned down articles I have submitted for publication. In every instance, the topics dealt with US domestic issues, and the editors were concerned about being seen as buying into unfounded conspiracies.

How utterly irresponsible of them!

The specific compensation received for work published is confidential in accordance with the terms of the agreement I signed with RT (the FBI seized physical and electronic copies of this agreement, and I have in the past provided copies of the agreement to the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) or their proxies operating within the US banking system). But I can say this – it is within the industry norm, slightly more than some publishers, and slightly less than others. And in no case can it be considered exorbitant – The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal, all of whom have published my opinion pieces in the past, all pay significantly more than does RT.

This reality must be disappointing to the FBI and the Department of Justice, which, through their questioning, seemed caught up in a working theory that I was a controlled asset of RT and, by extension, the Russian government. Their conspiracy theories extended into the person of my wife, Marina, who was questioned by a pair of FBI agents at her place of work at the same time the FBI conducted its search of our residence. The agents showed Marina a copy of an email she had sent to me back in late 2020/early 2021, where she listed the articles that I had published for RT for each month.

I was paid on a monthly billing cycle, with the amount calculated based upon the number of articles published in a given month. On occasion, there would be discrepancies, where my count of articles published did not align with the money paid in compensation. To assist me in working out these discrepancies, Marina would generate a list of articles published by publication date, so that I could more coherently communicate with RT.

“Do you direct the work of your husband?” the FBI asked my wife. “Do you organize his work?”

The answer was self-evident, as my wife informed the FBI.

I am my own boss.

The FBI was also interested in the payment vehicle used by RT to compensate me. The method agreed to contractually was a wire transfer to be made monthly based upon the work published. For this, I provided my banking information, including SWIFT code.

Following the commencement of the Special Military Operation by Russia in Ukraine in February 2022, this method became difficult because of the sanctioning of Russian banks by the US, denying these banks access to the SWIFT system that controls money transfers globally and, most importantly in my case, into the US.

RT developed workarounds which used unsanctioned third parties to execute the wire transfers. Over time, RT made use of two such intermediaries. I have always been totally transparent about this payment method. Indeed, when my bank began blocking payment on instructions from their internal OFAC enforcement units, I reached out to the bank to resolve the issue. Part of the resolution measures agreed to was that I provided the OFAC enforcement unit with copies of my contractual relationships showing that the money received was related to contracted work. This method worked but was very time-consuming and inconvenient – wire transfers were often returned to the sender in whole or in part because of the delay in processing the submitted paperwork, which took place every time a payment was received.

I contacted OFAC directly to complain, citing harassment and First Amendment issues, and was informed that they had nothing to do with it. The problem, it seemed, was overzealous employees at the bank itself (the OFAC enforcement unit was an in-house entity, with no formal relationship with the US government or OFAC.)

The solution was simple – I switched banks. In making the application to my new bank, I was transparent about international wire transfers that they would expect, what country these transfers would originate from, roughly in what amounts the transfers would be, and for what purpose (writing.)

The bank in question was USAA, with which I had a relationship dating back to 1984 when I was commissioned as an officer in the US Marines. Last year, USAA ended its relationship with me without warning, closing my bank account and terminating homeowner and auto insurance policies that I had with them dating back four decades.

I opened a new account with my current bank. Once again, I was fully transparent in the application process as to the source and reason for incoming wire transfers.

The FBI, in questioning me, provided the names of the two intermediaries used by RTto make the wire transfers of my compensation. I provided accurate answers to all their questions concerning these entities and my relationship with them.

I have no doubt that the US government will continue to make it difficult, and perhaps impossible, for RT to compensate external contributors based in the United States, including myself, for their work.

This is harassment under color of law.

But under no circumstances does it make the work, or any compensation paid to me for this work, a violation of the law.

And under no circumstances does being paid for my outside contributions to RTviolate the Foreign Agent Registration Act.

I have been lambasted for publishing my work in RT.

Several US-based publishers, including TruthDig and the The American Conservative, have terminated their relationship with me because I also contributed to RT – this after my writing won an award for TruthDig and one of my articles was the most-viewed for the year for The American Conservative. I had just started what was supposed to be a stint as a regular contributor for Responsible Statecraft (RS) when some of their funders balked at having someone who also wrote for RT writing for them (I had just published my first article, only to have it removed from the RS website without warning. RS was willing to pay me for the article in question, but I let them know under no circumstances would I accept money from their organization.)

One of the reasons I enjoy contributing to RT is the global diversity of their audience. But I also appreciate the relative purity of their message – in a world where the US and its compliant minions in the controlled Western press work overtime to manipulate audiences into accepting at face value and without question the American-driven narrative, RT and other non-Western news outlets provide alternatives which are fact-driven.

In March 2011, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton complained about the US “losing the information war” to nations like Russia amongst English-speaking audiences around the world.

The truth, when seen from the perspective of an American secretary of state, hurts.

I have had extensive intimate experience with the US mainstream media dating back to my time as a weapons inspector in Iraq. I bore personal witness to US government officials leaving important Security Council meetings early so they could brief reporters from The New York Times, who would then publish a front-page story about the meeting which bore no resemblance whatsoever to the reality of the meeting and reflected every talking point of the United States.

How did I know this?

Because the Security Council meeting dealt with issues surrounding the inspections I was responsible for leading in Iraq, and with briefings that I helped write and provide to the members present. I was there when the US official walked out, and I knew who he was going to meet.

I was also present when the CIA worked with CNN to make a documentary about the work of the UN weapons inspectors in Iraq. I was one of several inspectors whose stories served as the centerpiece of the documentary. Moreover, I was the point of contact between the CIA and CNN when it came to the release of U-2 imagery and other intelligence-related information to CNN to be used in the documentary.

I worked for NBC News in the months after I resigned from my position with the United Nations. I was an on-air analyst who often appeared with Tom Brokaw and Brian Williams. I would work with NBC News to turn raw news feeds into finished products ready for on-air broadcast. I saw firsthand how NBC manipulated the news to fit pre-conceived notions instead of reporting it as is. I was eventually released from my contract when National Security Adviser Sandy Berger objected to questions being asked of him by NBC White House correspondent Claire Shipman, indicating that he knew I was behind those questions.

NBC had the choice: Defend journalistic integrity, or cave in to White House pressure.

They caved.

After 9/11, I was contracted by Fox News as an on-air analyst for six months, only to have the network balk at my assessments which ran counter to the narrative being promulgated by the Bush White House. Fox News decided it was better to pay me and keep me off the airwaves (I was exclusive to Fox at the time) than release me and let me speak out.

The contract was not renewed when it expired.

I was briefly courted by CNN in the fall of 2002, on the eve of the invasion of Iraq. After being questioned in an in-house forum that brought together the major reporters, hosts, and producers of CNN, I was ‘cleared’ by the senior CNN executives, who proceeded to give me a “behind-the-scenes” tour of their newsroom.

I was shocked when I was taken to the CNN “war room,” where the producers were already working with the Pentagon to embed reporters with military units. My questions about this level of collusion led CNN to lose interest in me shortly thereafter.

The bottom line is this – I have seen the American mainstream media up-close and personal.

There is zero integrity when it comes to reporting fact-based truth.

.

RT hosts a panel discussion on US efforts to vilify Russia at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, June 7, 2024.

.

In every instance I experienced, the news organizations of these various media companies were literally subordinated to the US government, taking their talking points directly from either the White House, the State Department, or the Pentagon.

In short, these news organizations did not produce news, but rather American propaganda which was designed to deceive the broader American audience about critical issues of war and peace.

The news organizations I observed firsthand were more representative of a state-controlled media than a free press.

And, if called upon to compare and contrast, based upon my own personal experiences, the level of journalistic integrity between these US media outlets and RT, RT wins hands-down.

When it comes to reporting on politically sensitive content, such as the Special Military Operation, I likewise side with RT.

The Biden administration has openly admitted that it purposely declassifies intelligence information it knows to be wrong or misleading so that it can be released to the mainstream media for the purpose of controlling the narrative.

Not for telling the truth.

I have, over the years, had the opportunity to meet and work with several RTjournalists and reporters who cover the Special Military Operation.

Every single one has demonstrated impeccable integrity when it comes to reporting the news.

I have also had the opportunity to interface with and interview many of the sources these RT journalists draw upon for their reporting and can say that the assessments I make as an independent analyst often reflect those of the RT journalists.

Not because, as is the case in the United States, we are working from the same government-dictated script – the Russian government has never tried to dictate any narrative to me, nor has RT.

But because both RT and I have an assiduous appreciation for fact-based truth.

Sadly, I can’t say that for any of the mainstream American media organizations I’ve worked with in the past.

My reporting for RT is my own, reflecting my observations and analysis. My most recent reporting from Russia backs this up – a four-part series which RT knew nothing about until I pitched it to them after I completed my most recent trip to Russia.

In writing How the Chechen miracle kick-started the Russian ‘Path of Redemption’, Helping Crimea recover from decades of Ukrainian misrule is a tough but necessary challenge, We are witnessing the bittersweet birth of a new Russia, and Why did it take Russia so long to realize Donbass was worth fighting for?, I provided unique reporting that was unavailable anywhere else in the world – Western media outlets would never allow such reporting to be published on their pages or websites, and Russian news outlets had never seen such reporting from an independent Western perspective.

This is exactly what journalism is supposed to be – hard-hitting, probing analysis based upon first-hand observations derived from access to high-level sourcing.

I picked RT as the publisher of these articles because I wanted this reporting to be available not only to a global English-speaking audience, but also to a Russian audience.

This reporting was not the byproduct of close collusion between myself and the Russian government – in fact, when I tried to get official permission to travel to the new territories and Donbass from the Russian Ministry of Defense, I was turned down. It was only because of my persistence, and that of my host, Aleksandr Zyrianov, that I was able to travel to Chechnya, Crimea, the New Territories, and Donbass, and meet with the high-level officials and military officers who feature in my reporting.

Trying to convince a Western audience – be it government officials, journalists, or the consumers of news – that RT is a responsible news organization more committed to telling the truth than their ostensibly “free” Western media counterparts, is a literal mission impossible.

The level of Russophobia that has infected every level of society in the West is mind-boggling. I have been called a shill of Russian President Vladimir Putin more times than I can count, by both the online trolls of the North Atlantic Fella Organization (NAFO), whose mission is simply to harass any online voice that doesn’t conform to the US/NATO narrative, and ostensibly “neutral” journalists who write for outlets that publish my work. My crime? Reporting accurately on the positions taken by the Russian government – “speaking ‘Putin,” in the vernacular of my critics.

.

The author at the Victory Day Parade rehearsal in Moscow, May 7, 2023

.

The consequences of this Russophobia-infected journalism are dire – not only has the ignorance enshrined within the journalism of the West resulted in the destruction of Ukraine, but, if not reversed, is leading the Collective West down the path of inevitable conflict with Russia which would probably end in a general nuclear war.

Trying to head off such a tragic outcome has been the fuel that feeds my work as a journalist these past few years.

And it will continue to fuel my work going forward.

I am grateful to RT for allowing my words to be published and disseminated in both written and video form.

I believe that, in doing so, RT is contributing to the cause of saving the world from the horror of nuclear war.

Even if the Russophobia-infected minds in the Collective West fail to recognize this.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Featured image: The author talks to readers during the presentation of his book, Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika, dedicated to nuclear security, at the Pobeda Culture and Leisure Centre in Novosibirsk, Russia.

No debate entre os dois candidatos à presidência dos EUA, Kamala Harris disse:

“A agenda de Putin não é apenas sobre a Ucrânia. Os aliados europeus são gratos por entendermos a importância da maior aliança militar que o mundo já conheceu, que é a OTAN. O que fizemos foi preservar a capacidade de Zelensky e dos ucranianos de lutar por sua independência. Caso contrário, Putin estaria sentado em Kiev com os olhos voltados para o resto da Europa”.

Assim, Harris vira a realidade de cabeça para baixo, escondendo o fato de que foi a OTAN, sob o comando dos EUA, que atacou a Rússia, expandindo com bases militares e armas nucleares cada vez mais perto de seu território, organizando em 2014, com forças neonazistas, o golpe na Ucrânia e o subsequente ataque aos russos da Ucrânia. Uma guerra total, portanto, contra a Rússia. Contra esse pano de fundo, escreve o New York Times, “o presidente Biden parece estar prestes a abrir caminho para que a Ucrânia lance armas ocidentais de longo alcance nas profundezas do território russo, desde que não use armas fornecidas pelos EUA”. Em outras palavras, Biden autorizará os aliados europeus a fornecer à Ucrânia armas de longo alcance para atacar profundamente o território russo. A Grã-Bretanha já está preparada para fazer isso. “O exército ucraniano não é capaz de lançar ataques de longo alcance com armas ocidentais. – O presidente Putin enfatizou:

“Isso só é possível com o uso de dados de inteligência dos satélites da OTAN. Não é uma questão de permitir que o regime ucraniano ataque a Rússia com essas armas, mas de decidir se os países da OTAN estão diretamente envolvidos no conflito ou não. Se a decisão for tomada, isso significará que os países da OTAN, os EUA e os países europeus, estão em guerra com a Rússia. E se esse for o caso, então, tendo em mente a mudança na própria essência desse conflito, tomaremos as decisões apropriadas com base nas ameaças que serão criadas contra nós”.

Como os mísseis de longo alcance podem ser armados com ogivas nucleares e não nucleares, a Rússia estaria exposta a um risco maior de ataque nuclear.

No debate com Harris, Donald Trump disse que “a situação está piorando e pode levar à Terceira Guerra Mundial. Putin tem armas nucleares. Ninguém pensa nisso. E, eventualmente, ele as usará. É algo sobre o qual não gostamos de falar. Ninguém gosta de falar sobre isso”. Ele então enfatizou: “Acho que é do interesse dos Estados Unidos acabar com essa guerra e negociar um acordo”. Trump simplifica, entretanto, como, se ele se tornasse presidente dos Estados Unidos, poderia implementar tal acordo: “Se eu fosse presidente, a guerra nunca teria começado. Conheço Putin muito bem e Putin me respeita, enquanto ele não respeita Biden.”

A visão simplista de que a guerra poderia terminar com um acordo pessoal entre os dois presidentes ignora o fato de que ela está sendo deflagrada pelas potências fortes dos EUA e do Ocidente, que estão perdendo o domínio que mantiveram até agora no mundo e estão tentando preservá-lo por meio da guerra. E o cenário de guerra europeu está ligado ao do Oriente Médio, onde uma guerra está se desencadeando e Trump, como Harris, culpa não Israel, apoiado pelos EUA, mas o Irã, um aliado da Rússia e da China, o mais temido pelos EUA e pelo próprio Trump por causa de suas grandes capacidades econômicas.

Manlio Dinucci

Breve resumo da análise da imprensa internacional de Grandangolo na sexta-feira, 13 de setembro de 2024, no canal de TV italiano Byoblu:

https://www.byoblu.com/2024/09/13/dietro-il-dibattito-harris-trump-grandangolo-pangea/

Tradução: Mondialisation.ca

 

VIDEO (em italiano) :

The World Health Organization (WHO) today approved the first mpox vaccine for use in adults — and also said it can be used for babies, children, teens and pregnant women if they are in “outbreak settings where the benefits of vaccination outweigh the potential risks.”

WHO’s approval of Bavarian Nordic’s vaccine will help governments and international agencies such as the Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and UNICEF, buy it, MedicalXpress reported.

The MVA-BN vaccine — short for “Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Bavarian Nordic” — is a smallpox/mpox vaccine. It is sold in the U.S. under the name Jynneos.

WHO Assistant Director-General Yukiko Nakatani said, “The decision can also help national regulatory authorities to fast-track approvals, ultimately increasing access to quality-assured mpox vaccine products.”

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Chief Scientific Officer Brian Hooker called the WHO’s approval of the shot for infants and children in Africa “a train wreck in the making.”

Hooker told The Defender:

“The safety profile is abysmal in adults (up to 2.1% serious cardiac events in clinical trials) and the vaccine has not been adequately tested for efficacy or safety in pediatric populations.

“In other words, the WHO has no idea whether it will work nor do they know how much damage it will do. The WHO has again abandoned good public health principles and waved their magic vaccine wand on the mpox outbreak.”

Dr. David Bell, a public health physician and biotech consultant, also criticized the WHO for overly focusing on mpox vaccines and neglecting to address broader public health issues in Africa.

“So far this year, about 40,000 children have died from malaria in the DRC [Democratic Republic of Congo] alone, and similar numbers of people from malnutrition, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDs,” Bell said.

Although these numbers “obviously dwarf” the number of mpox deaths, the WHO is allocating fewer resources to addressing them.

Bell — who formerly served as a medical officer and scientist at the WHO — explained what he sees occurring:

“We have become much better at detecting much rarer diseases such as mpox, and addressing these is certainly more lucrative for the growing industry feeding off the WHO’s misinformation regarding rapidly rising pandemic risk.

“However, it is clear that the people of DRC and Africa in general would benefit far more if WHO returned to impactful public health. There has been a move over recent years to a concentration on addressing the symptoms of diseases of poverty (which mpox is) with Western-developed commodities, rather than dealing with underlying causes.

“This signals a return to colonialist-era approaches rather than evidence-based public health. It presumably reflects the way WHO is now funded, with increasing control from the private sector and a few large Western nations with large Pharma industries.”

No Clinical Trials on Kids

In its press release, the WHO said the MVA-BN vaccine can be administered to adults over 18 as a two-dose injection four weeks apart but can also be given as a single dose “in supply-constrained outbreak situations.”

“While MVA-BN is currently not licensed for persons under 18 years of age,” it said, “this vaccine may be used ‘off-label’ in infants, children and adolescents, and in pregnant and immunocompromised people.”

The WHO called for more data on the vaccine’s safety and efficacy in these situations.

The WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization — which reviewed all available evidence and recommended the use of MVA-BN vaccine — noted in its Weekly Epidemiological Record reportthat “MVA-BN has not been specifically studied in clinical trials in children.”

However, they said:

“The same non-replicating MVA viral vector is used as a platform for other vaccines that include MVA-filo (Mvabea™) against Ebola virus disease (EVD).

“The EVD vaccine is approved by the EU for adults and children aged 1 year and older. Data from 5 published studies on MVA-BN as a viral vector platform for the prevention of EVD, with a total population of 52 229 children, support the favourable safety profile of the product.”

The authors of a new study — published Sept. 11 in The BMJ — presented results on MVA-BN’s effectiveness in adult males but said nothing about children or pregnant women.

In 2023, researchers funded by the UK Health Security Agency looked at the health outcomes of 87 children who received a single dose of MVA-BN.

They reported that the vaccine was “well tolerated” but that larger studies needed to be done to fully assess the shot’s safety and efficacy in kids.

The Defender asked Bavarian Nordic for information about its mpox vaccine in pediatric populations but did not receive a response by the deadline.

The WHO’s process for granting a drug “prequalification” approval for “emergency use listing” requires drugmakers to “commit to continue generating missing information to fulfill prequalification requirements.”

“Once this information becomes available,” the WHO said, “a PQ [prequalification] application should be submitted to complete the full process to achieve  recommendation for international procurement in both emergency and non-emergency settings.”

It is unclear how much pediatric safety and efficacy data Bavarian Nordic has collected so far and what it showed.

Mpox Vaccine Approved for U.S. Kids and Teens Since 2022

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2022 granted emergency use authorization for the vaccine for “in individuals less than 18 years of age determined to be at high risk for monkeypox infection.”

Jynneos has been licensed for use in U.S. adults since 2019.

The Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC)’s mpox vaccination website states that while teens and children at risk for mpox can receive Jynneos, it is not recommended for babies under 6 months.

The CDC also says Jynneos can be given to pregnant or breastfeeding women.

Although it remains unknown if Jynneos may pose risks to a developing fetus if taken during pregnancy, animal studies haven’t shown any harm to developing fetuses when the vaccine was given to pregnant animals, the agency said.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. 

Featured image is from CHD

Nel dibattito tra i due candidati alla presidenza degli Stati Uniti, Kamala Harris ha dichiarato: “L’agenda di Putin non riguarda solo l’Ucraina. Gli Alleati europei sono grati che noi comprendiamo l’importanza della più grande alleanza militare che il mondo abbia mai conosciuto, che è la NATO. Ciò che abbiamo fatto è preservare la capacità di Zelensky e degli Ucraini di combattere per la loro indipendenza. Altrimenti, Putin sarebbe seduto a Kiev con gli occhi puntati sul resto dell’Europa.” La Harris capovolge in tal modo la realtà, nascondendo il fatto che è stata la NATO sotto comando USA ad aggredire la Russia, espandendosi con basi militari e armi nucleari sempre più a ridosso del suo territorio, organizzando nel 2014 con forze neonaziste il colpo di stato in Ucraina e il conseguente attacco ai Russi di Ucraina. Guerra a oltranza, dunque, contro la Russia. In tale quadro – scrive il New York Times – “il presidente Biden sembra sul punto di spianare la strada all’Ucraina per il lancio di armi occidentali a lungo raggio in profondità nel territorio russo, a patto che non utilizzi armi fornite dagli Stati Uniti.” In altre parole, Biden autorizzerà gli Alleati europei a fornire all’Ucraina armi a lungo raggio per colpire in profondità il territorio russo. La Gran Bretagna è già pronta a farlo. “L’esercito ucraino non è in grado di sferrare attacchi a lungo raggio con armi occidentali. – sottolinea il presidente Putin – Ciò è possibile solo utilizzando i dati di intelligence dei satelliti NATO. Non si tratta di permettere al regime ucraino di attaccare la Russia con queste armi, ma di decidere se i paesi della NATO siano direttamente coinvolti nel conflitto o meno. Se la decisione verrà presa, significherà che i paesi della NATO, gli Stati Uniti e i paesi europei, saranno in guerra con la Russia. E se è così, allora, tenendo presente il cambiamento nell’essenza stessa di questo conflitto, prenderemo le decisioni appropriate in base alle minacce che verranno create nei nostri confronti”. Poiché i missili a lungo raggio possono essere armati sia di testate non-nucleari che nucleari, la Russia sarebbe esposta a un più alto rischio di attacco nucleare.

Al dibattito con la Harris, Donald Trump ha detto che “la situazione sta peggiorando, potrebbe portare alla terza guerra mondiale. Putin ha armi nucleari. Nessuno ci pensa. E alla fine le userà. Una cosa di cui non ci piace parlare. A nessuno piace parlarne.” Ha quindi sottolineato: “Penso che sia nell’interesse degli Stati Uniti terminare questa guerra e negoziare un accordo.” Trump semplifica però il modo in cui, se divenisse Presidente degli Stati Uniti, potrebbe realizzare tale accordo.: “Se fossi stato presidente, la guerra non sarebbe mai iniziata. Conosco Putin molto bene e Putin mi rispetta, mentre non rispetta Biden.” La visione semplicistica che la guerra potrebbe terminare con un accordo personale tra i due Presidenti, ignora il fatto che essa è stata fatta esplodere dai poteri forti degli Stati Uniti e dell’Occidente che stanno perdendo il predominio finora mantenuto nel mondo e che cercano di conservare con la guerra. E lo scenario bellico europeo è collegato a quello mediorientale, dove divampa una guerra di cui Trump, come la Harris, attribuisce la responsabilità non a Israele sostenuto dagli USA ma all’Iran, alleato di Russia e Cina, la più temuta dagli USA e dallo stesso Trump per le sue grandi capacità economiche.

Manlio Dinucci

VIDEO :

Image Professor Peter Dale Scott

This article was originally published in November 2011

“I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency [the National Security Agency] and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”   — Senator Frank Church (1975)

I would like to discuss four major and badly understood events – the John F. Kennedy assassination, Watergate, Iran-Contra, and 9/11. I will analyze these deep events as part of a deeper political process linking them, a process that has helped build up repressive power in America at the expense of democracy.

In recent years I have been talking about a dark force behind these events — a force which, for want of a better term, I have clumsily called a “deep state,” operating both within and outside the public state. Today for the first time I want to identify part of that dark force, a part which has operated for five decades or more at the edge of the public state. This part of the dark force has a name not invented by me: the Doomsday Project, the Pentagon’s name for the emergency planning “to keep the White House and Pentagon running during and after a nuclear war or some other major crisis.”1

My point is a simple and important one: to show that the Doomsday Project of the 1980s, and the earlier emergency planning that developed into it, have played a role in the background of all the deep events I shall discuss.

More significantly, it has been a factor behind all three of the disturbing events that now threaten American democracy. The first of these three is what has been called the conversion of our economy into a plutonomy – with the increasing separation of America into two classes, into the haves and the have-nots, the one percent and the 99 percent. The second is America’s increasing militarization, and above all its inclination, which has become more and more routine and predictable, to wage or provoke wars in remote regions of the globe. It is clear that the operations of this American war machine have served the one percent.2

The third – my subject today — is the important and increasingly deleterious impact on American history of structural deep events: mysterious events, like the JFK assassination, the Watergate break-in, or 9/11, which violate the American social structure, have a major impact on American society, repeatedly involve law-breaking or violence, and in many cases proceed from an unknown dark force.

There are any number of analyses of America’s current breakdown in terms of income and wealth disparity, also in terms of America’s increasing militarization and belligerency. What I shall do today is I think new: to argue that both the income disparity – or what has been called our plutonomy — and the belligerency have been fostered significantly by deep events.

We must understand that the income disparity of America’s current economy was not the result of market forces working independently of political intervention. In large part it was generated by a systematic and deliberate ongoing political process dating from the anxieties of the very wealthy in the 1960s and 1970s that control of the country was slipping away from them.

This was the time when future Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell, in a 1971 memorandum, warned that survival of the free enterprise system depended on “careful long-range planning and implementation” of a well-financed response to threats from the left.3 This warning was answered by a sustained right-wing offensive, coordinated by think tanks and funded lavishly by a small group of family foundations.4 We should recall that all this was in response to serious riots in Newark, Detroit, and elsewhere, and that increasing calls for a revolution were coming from the left (in Europe as well as America). I will focus today on the right’s response to that challenge, and on the role of deep events in enhancing their response.

What was important about the Powell memorandum was less the document itself than the fact that it was commissioned by the United States Chamber of Commerce, one of the most influential and least discussed lobbying groups in America. And the memorandum was only one of many signs of that developing class war in the 1970s, a larger process working both inside and outside government (including what Irving Kristol called an “intellectual counterrevolution”), which led directly to the so-called “Reagan Revolution.”5

It is clear that this larger process has been carried on for almost five decades, pumping billions of right-wing dollars into the American political process. What I wish to show today is that deep events have also been integral to this right-wing effort, from the John F. Kennedy assassination in 1963 to 9/11. 9/11 resulted in the implementation of “Continuity of Government” (COG) plans (which in the Oliver North Iran Contra Hearings of 1987 were called plans for “the suspension of the U.S. constitution”). These COG plans, building on earlier COG planning, had been carefully developed since 1982 in the so-called Doomsday Project, by a secret group appointed by Reagan. The group was composed of both public and private figures, including Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney.

I shall try to show today that in this respect 9/11 was only the culmination of a sequence of deep events reaching back to the Kennedy assassination if not earlier, and that the germs of the Doomsday Project can be detected behind all of them.

More specifically, I shall try to demonstrate about these deep events that

1) prior bureaucratic misbehavior by the CIA and similar agencies helped to make both the Kennedy assassination and 9/11 happen;

2) the consequences of each deep event included an increase in top-down repressive power for these same agencies, at the expense of persuasive democratic power;6

3) there are symptomatic overlaps in personnel between the perpetrators of each of these deep events and the next;

4) one sees in each event the involvement of elements of the international drug traffic – suggesting that our current plutonomy is also to some degree a narconomy;

5) in the background of each event (and playing an increasingly important role) one sees the Doomsday Project — the alternative emergency planning structure with its own communications network, operating as a shadow network outside of regular government channels.

Bureaucratic Misbehavior as a Factor Contributing to both the JFK Assassination and 9/11

Both the JFK assassination and 9/11 were facilitated by the way the CIA and FBI manipulated their files about alleged perpetrators of each event (Lee Harvey Oswald in the case of what I shall call JFK, and the alleged hijackers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi in the case of 9/11). Part of this facilitation was the decision on October 9, 1963 of an FBI agent, Marvin Gheesling, to remove Oswald from the FBI watch list for surveillance. This was shortly after Oswald’s arrest in New Orleans in August and his reported travel to Mexico in September. Obviously these developments should normally have made Oswald a candidate for increased surveillance.7

This misbehavior is paradigmatic of the behavior of other agencies, especially the CIA, in both JFK and 9/11. Indeed Gheesling’s behavior fits very neatly with the CIA’s culpable withholding from the FBI, in the same month of October, information that Oswald had allegedly met in Mexico City with a suspected KGB agent, Valeriy Kostikov.8 This also helped ensure that Oswald would not be placed under surveillance. Indeed, former FBI Director Clarence Kelley in his memoir later complained that the CIA’s withholding of information was the major reason why Oswald was not put under surveillance on November 22, 1963.9

A more ominous provocation in 1963 was that of Army Intelligence, one unit of which in Dallas did not simply withhold information about Lee Harvey Oswald, but manufactured false intelligence that seemed designed to provoke retaliation against Cuba. I call such provocations phase-one stories, efforts to portray Oswald as a Communist conspirator (as opposed to the later phase-two stories, also false, portraying him as a disgruntled loner). A conspicuous example of such phase-one stories is a cable from the Fourth Army Command in Texas, reporting a tip from a Dallas policeman who was also in an Army Intelligence Reserve unit:

Assistant Chief Don Stringfellow, Intelligence Section, Dallas Police Department, notified 112th INTC [Intelligence] Group, this Headquarters, that information obtained from Oswald revealed he had defected to Cuba in 1959 and is a card-carrying member of Communist Party.”10

This cable was sent on November 22 directly to the U.S. Strike Command at Fort MacDill in Florida, the base poised for a possible retaliatory attack against Cuba.11

The cable was not an isolated aberration. It was supported by other false phase-one stories from Dallas about Oswald’s alleged rifle, and specifically by concatenated false translations of Marina Oswald’s testimony, to suggest that Oswald’s rifle in Dallas was one he had owned in Russia.12

These last false reports, apparently unrelated, can also be traced to officer Don Stringfellow’s 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit.13 The interpreter who first supplied the false translation of Marina’s words, Ilya Mamantov, was selected by a Dallas oilman, Jack Crichton, and Deputy Dallas Police Chief George Lumpkin.14 Crichton and Lumpkin were also the Chief and the Deputy Chief of the 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit.15 Crichton was also an extreme right-winger in the community of Dallas oilmen: he was a trustee of the H.L. Hunt Foundation, and a member of the American Friends of the Katanga Freedom Fighters, a group organized to oppose Kennedy’s policies in the Congo.

We have to keep in mind that some of the Joint Chiefs were furious that the 1962 Missile Crisis had not led to an invasion of Cuba, and that, under new JCS Chairman Maxwell Taylor, the Joint Chiefs, in May 1963, still believed “that US military intervention in Cuba is necessary.”16 This was six months after Kennedy, to resolve the Missile Crisis in October 1962, had given explicit (albeit highly qualified) assurances to Khrushchev, that the United States would not invade Cuba.17 This did not stop the J-5 of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (the JCS Directorate of Plans and Policy) from producing a menu of “fabricated provocations to justify military intervention.”18 (One proposed example of “fabricated provocations” envisioned “using MIG type aircraft flown by US pilots to … attack surface shipping or to attack US military.”)19

The deceptions about Oswald coming from Dallas were immediately post-assassination; thus they do not by themselves establish that the assassination itself was a provocation-deception plot. They do however reveal enough about the anti-Castro mindset of the 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit in Dallas to confirm that it was remarkably similar to that of the J-5 the preceding May – the mindset that produced a menu of “fabricated provocations” to attack Cuba. (According to Crichton there were “about a hundred men in [the 488th Reserve unit] and about forty or fifty of them were from the Dallas Police Department.”)20

It can hardly be accidental that we see this bureaucratic misbehavior from the FBI, CIA, and military, the three agencies with which Kennedy had had serious disagreements in his truncated presidency.21 Later in this paper I shall link Dallas oilman Jack Crichton to the 1963 emergency planning that became the Doomsday Project.

Analogous Bureaucratic Misbehavior in the Case of 9/11

Before 9/11 the CIA, in 2000-2001, again flagrantly withheld crucial evidence from the FBI: evidence that, if shared, would have led the FBI to surveil two of the alleged hijackers, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaz al-Hazmi. This sustained withholding of evidence provoked an FBI agent to predict accurately in August, 2001, that “someday someone will die.”22 After 9/11 another FBI agent said of the CIA: “They [CIA] didn’t want the bureau meddling in their business—that’s why they didn’t tell the FBI….  And that’s why September 11 happened. That is why it happened. . . . They have blood on their hands. They have three thousand deaths on their hands”23 The CIA’s withholding of relevant evidence before 9/11 (which it was required by its own rules to supply) was matched in this case by the NSA.24

Without these withholdings, in other words, neither the Kennedy assassination nor 9/11 could have developed in the manner in which they did. As I wrote in American War Machine, it would appear that

Oswald (and later al-Mihdhar) had at some prior point been selected as designated subjects for an operation. This would not initially have been for the commission of a crime against the American polity: on the contrary, steps were probably taken to prepare Oswald in connection with an operation against Cuba and al-Mihdhar [I suspect] for an operation against al-Qaeda. But as [exploitable] legends began to accumulate about both figures, it became possible for some witting people to subvert the sanctioned operation into a plan for murder that would later be covered up. At this point Oswald (and by analogy al-Mihdhar) was no longer just a designated subject but also now a designated culprit.25

Kevin Fenton, in his exhaustive book Disconnecting the Dots, has since reached the same conclusion with respect to 9/11: “that, by the summer of 2001, the purpose of withholding the information had become to allow the attacks to go forward.”26 He has also identified the person chiefly responsible for the misbehavior: CIA officer Richard Blee, Chief of the CIA’s Bin Laden Unit. Blee, while Clinton was still president, had been one of a faction inside CIA pressing for a more belligerent CIA involvement in Afghanistan, in conjunction with the Afghan Northern Alliance.27 This then happened immediately after 9/11, and Blee himself was promoted, to become the new Chief of Station in Kabul.28

How CIA and NSA Withholding of Evidence in the Second Tonkin Gulf Incident, Contributed to War with North Vietnam

I will spare you the details of this withholding, which can be found in my American War Machine, pp. 200-02. But Tonkin Gulf is similar to the Kennedy assassination and 9/11, in that manipulation of evidence helped lead America – in this case very swiftly – into war.

Historians such as Fredrik Logevall have agreed with the assessment of former undersecretary of state George Ball that the US destroyer mission in the Tonkin Gulf, which resulted in the Tonkin Gulf incidents, “was primarily for provocation.”29 The planning for this provocative mission came from the J-5 of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the same unit that in 1963 had reported concerning Cuba that, “the engineering of a series of provocations to justify military intervention is feasible.”30

The NSA and CIA suppression of the truth on August 4 was in the context of an existing high-level (but controversial) determination to attack North Vietnam. In this respect the Tonkin Gulf incident is remarkably similar to the suppression of the truth by CIA and NSA leading up to 9/11, when there was again a high-level (but controversial) determination to go to war.

Increases in Repressive Power After Deep Events

All of the deep events discussed above have contributed to the cumulative increase of Washington’s repressive powers. It is clear for example that the Warren Commission used the JFK assassination to increase CIA surveillance of Americans. As I wrote in Deep Politics, this was the result of

the Warren Commission’s controversial recommendations that the Secret Service’s domestic surveillance responsibilities be increased (WR 25-26). Somewhat illogically, the Warren Report concluded both that Oswald acted alone (WR 22), . . . and also that the Secret Service, FBI, CIA, should coordinate more closely the surveillance of organized groups (WR 463). In particular, it recommended that the Secret Service acquire a computerized data bank compatible with that already developed by the CIA.31

This pattern would repeat itself four years later with the assassination of Robert Kennedy. In the twenty-four hours between Bobby’s shooting and his death, Congress hurriedly passed a statute— drafted well in advance (like the Tonkin Gulf Resolution of 1964 and the Patriot Act of 2001) — that still further augmented the secret powers given to the Secret Service in the name of protecting presidential candidates.32

This was not a trivial or benign change: from this swiftly considered act, passed under Johnson, flowed some of the worst excesses of the Nixon presidency.33

The change also contributed to the chaos and violence at the Chicago Democratic Convention of 1968. Army intelligence surveillance agents, seconded to the Secret Service, were present both inside and outside the convention hall. Some of them equipped the so-called “Legion of Justice thugs whom the Chicago Red Squad turned loose on local anti-war groups.”34

In this way the extra secret powers conferred after the RFK assassination contributed to the disastrous turmoil in Chicago that effectively destroyed the old Democratic Party representing the labor unions: The three Democratic presidents elected since then have all been significantly more conservative.

Turning to Watergate and Iran-Contra, both of these events were on one level setbacks to the repressive powers exercised by Richard Nixon and the Reagan White House, not expansions of them. On the surface level this is true: both events resulted in legislative reforms that would appear to contradict my thesis of expanding repression.

We need to distinguish here, however, between the two years of the Watergate crisis, and the initial Watergate break-in. The Watergate crisis saw a president forced into resignation by a number of forces, involving both liberals and conservatives. But the key figures in the initial Watergate break-in itself – Hunt, McCord, G. Gordon Liddy, and their Cuban allies — were all far to the right of Nixon and Kissinger. And the end result of their machinations was not finalized until the so-called Halloween Massacre in 1975, when Kissinger was ousted as National Security Adviser and Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller was notified he would be dropped from the 1976 Republican ticket. This major shake-up was engineered by two other right-wingers: Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney in the Gerald Ford White House.35

That day in 1975 saw the permanent defeat of the so-called Rockefeller or liberal faction within the Republican Party. It was replaced by the conservative Goldwater-Casey faction that would soon capture the nomination and the presidency for Ronald Reagan.36 This little-noticed palace coup, along with other related intrigues in the mid-1970s, helped achieve the conversion of America from a welfare capitalist economy, with gradual reductions in income and wealth disparity, into a financialized plutonomy where these trends were reversed.37

Again in Iran-Contra we see a deeper accumulation of repressive power under the surface of liberal reforms. At the time not only the press but even academics like myself celebrated the termination of aid to the Nicaraguan Contras, and the victory there of the Contadora peace process. Not generally noticed at the time was the fact that, while Oliver North was removed from his role in the Doomsday Project, that project’s plans for surveillance, detention, and the militarization of the United States continued to grow after his departure.38

Also not noticed was the fact that the US Congress, while curtailing aid to one small drug-financed CIA proxy army, was simultaneously increasing US support to a much larger coalition of drug-financed proxy armies in Afghanistan.39 While Iran-Contra exposed the $32 million which Saudi Arabia, at the urging of CIA Director William Casey, had supplied to the Contras, not a word was whispered about the $500 million or more that the Saudis, again at the urging of Casey, had supplied in the same period to the Afghan mujahedin.40 In this sense the drama of Iran-Contra in Congress can be thought of as a misdirection play, directing public attention away from America’s much more intensive engagement in Afghanistan – a covert policy that has since evolved into America’s longest war.

We should expand our consciousness of Iran-Contra to think of it as Iran-Afghan-Contra. And if we do, we must acknowledge that in this complex and misunderstood deep event the CIA in Afghanistan exercised again the paramilitary capacity that Stansfield Turner had tried to terminate when he was CIA Director under Jimmy Carter. This was a victory in short for the faction of men like Richard Blee, the protector of al-Mihdhar as well as the advocate in 2000 for enhanced CIA paramilitary activity in Afghanistan.41

Personnel Overlaps Between the Successive Deep Events

I will never forget the New York Times front-page story on June 18, 1972, the day after the Watergate break-in. There were photographs of the Watergate burglars, including one of Frank Sturgis alias Fiorini, whom I had already written about two years earlier in my unpublished book manuscript, “The Dallas Conspiracy” about the JFK assassination.

Sturgis was no nonentity: a former contract employee of the CIA, he was also well connected to the mob-linked former casino owners in Havana.42 My early writings on the Kennedy case focused on the connections between Frank Sturgis and an anti-Castro Cuban training camp near New Orleans in which Oswald had shown an interest; also in Sturgis’ involvement in false “phase-one” stories portraying Oswald as part of a Communist Cuban conspiracy.43

In spreading these “phase-one” stories in 1963, Sturgis was joined by a number of Cubans who were part of the CIA-supported army in Central America of Manuel Artime. Artime’s base in Costa Rica was closed down in 1965, allegedly because of its involvement in drug trafficking.44 In the 1980s some of these Cuban exiles later became involved in drug-financed support activities for the Contras.45

The political mentor of Artime’s MRR movement was future Watergate plotter Howard Hunt; and Artime in 1972 would pay for the bail of the Cuban Watergate burglars. The drug money-launderer Ramón Milián Rodríguez has claimed to have delivered $200,000 in cash from Artime to pay off some of the Cuban Watergate burglars; later, in support of the Contras, he managed two Costa Rican seafood companies, Frigorificos and Ocean Hunter, that laundered drug money.46

It is alleged that Hunt and McCord had both been involved with Artime’s invasion plans in 1963.47 It was I believe no accident that the organization of Hunt’s protégé Artime became enmired in drug trafficking. Hunt, I have argued elsewhere, had been handling a U.S. drug connection since his 1950 post in Mexico City as OPC (Office of Policy Coordination) chief.48

But McCord not only had a past in the anti-Castro activities of 1963, he was also part of the nation’s emergency planning network that would later figure so prominently in the background of Iran-Contra and 9/11. McCord was a member of a small Air Force Reserve unit in Washington attached to the Office of Emergency Preparedness (OEP); assigned “to draw up lists of radicals and to develop contingency plans for censorship of the news media and U.S. mail in time of war.”49 His unit was part of the Wartime Information Security Program (WISP), which had responsibility for activating “contingency plans for imposing censorship on the press, the mails and all telecommunications (including government communications) [and] preventive detention of civilian ‘security risks,’ who would be placed in military ‘camps.’”50 In other words, these were the plans that became known in the 1980s as the Doomsday Project, the Continuity of Government planning on which Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld worked together for twenty years before 9/11.

A Common Denominator for Structural Deep Events: Project Doomsday and COG

McCord’s participation in an emergency planning system dealing with telecommunications suggests a common denominator in the backgrounds of almost all the deep events we are considering. Oliver North, the Reagan-Bush OEP point man on Iran-Contra planning, was also involved in such planning; and he had access to the nation’s top secret Doomsday communications network. North’s network, known as Flashboard,  “excluded other bureaucrats with opposing viewpoints…[and] had its own special worldwide antiterrorist computer network, … by which members could communicate exclusively with each other and their collaborators abroad.”51

Flashboard was used by North and his superiors for extremely sensitive operations which had to be concealed from other dubious or hostile parts of the Washington bureaucracy. These operations included the illegal shipments of arms to Iran, but also other activities, some still not known, perhaps even against Olof Palme’s Sweden.52 Flashboard, America’s emergency network in the 1980s, was the name in 1984-86 of the full-fledged Continuity of Government (COG) emergency network which was secretly planned for twenty years, at a cost of billions, by a team including Cheney and Rumsfeld. On 9/11 the same network was activated anew by the two men who had planned it for so many years.53

But this Doomsday planning can be traced back to 1963, when Jack Crichton, head of the 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit of Dallas, was part of it in his capacity as chief of intelligence for Dallas Civil Defense, which worked out of an underground Emergency Operating Center. As Russ Baker reports, “Because it was intended for ‘continuity of government’ operations during an attack, [the Center] was fully equipped with communications equipment.”54 A speech given at the dedication of the Center in 1961 supplies further details:

This Emergency Operating Center [in Dallas] is part of the National Plan to link Federal, State and local government agencies in a communications network from which rescue operations can be directed in time of local or National emergency. It is a vital part of the National, State, and local Operational Survival Plan.55

Crichton, in other words, was also part of what became known in the 1980s as the Doomsday Project, like James McCord, Oliver North, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney after him. But in 1988 its aim was significantly enlarged: no longer to prepare for an atomic attack, but now to plan for the effective suspension of the American constitution in the face of any emergency.56 This change in 1988 allowed COG to be implemented in 2001. By this time the Doomsday Project had developed into what the Washington Post called “a shadow government that evolved based on long-standing ‘continuity of operations plans.’”57

It is clear that the Office of Emergency Preparedness (OEP, known from 1961-1968 as the Office of Emergency Planning) supplies a common denominator for key personnel in virtually all of the structural events discussed here. This is a long way from establishing that the OEP itself (in addition to the individuals discussed here) was involved in generating any of these events. But I believe that the alternative communications network housed first in the OEP (later part of Project 908) played a significant role in at least three of them: the JFK assassination, Iran-Contra, and 9/11.

This is easiest to show in the case of 9/11, where it is conceded that the Continuity of Government (COG) plans of the Doomsday Project were implemented by Cheney on 9/11, apparently before the last of the four hijacked planes had crashed.58 The 9/11 Commission could not locate records of the key decisions taken by Cheney on that day, suggesting that they may have taken place on the “secure phone “ in the tunnel leading to the presidential bunker – with such a high classification that the 9/11 Commission was never supplied the phone records.59 Presumably this was a COG phone.

It is not clear whether the “secure phone” in the White House tunnel belonged to the Secret Service or (as one might expect) was part of the secure network of the White House Communications Agency (WHCA). If the latter, we’d have a striking link between 9/11 and the JFK assassination. The WHCA boasts on its Web site that the agency was “a key player in documenting the assassination of President Kennedy.”60  However it is not clear for whom this documentation was conducted, for the WHCA logs and transcripts were in fact withheld from the Warren Commission.61

The Secret Service had installed a WHCA portable radio in the lead car of the presidential motorcade.62 This in turn was in contact by police radio with the pilot car ahead of it, carrying DPD Deputy Chief Lumpkin of the 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit.63 Records of the WHCA communications from the motorcade never reached the Warren Commission, the House Committee on Assassinations, or the Assassination Records Review Board.64 Thus we cannot tell if they would explain some of the anomalies on the two channels of the Dallas Police Department. They might for example have thrown light upon the unsourced call on the Dallas Police

tapes for a suspect who had exactly the false height and weight recorded for Oswald in his FBI and CIA files.65

Today in 2011 we are still living under the State of Emergency proclaimed after 9/11 by President Bush. At least some COG provisions are still in effect, and were even augmented by Bush through Presidential Directive 51 of May 2007. Commenting on PD-51, the Washington Post reported at that time,

After the 2001 attacks, Bush assigned about 100 senior civilian managers [including Cheney] to rotate secretly to [COG] locations outside of Washington for weeks or months at a time to ensure the nation’s survival, a shadow government that evolved based on long-standing “continuity of operations plans.”66

Presumably this “shadow government” finalized such long-standing COG projects as warrantless surveillance, in part through the Patriot Act, whose controversial provisions were already being implemented by Cheney and others well before the Bill reached Congress on October 12.67 Other COG projects implemented included the militarization of domestic surveillance under NORTHCOM, and the Department of Homeland Security’s Project Endgame—a ten-year plan to expand detention camps at a cost of $400 million in fiscal year 2007 alone.68

I have, therefore, a recommendation for the Occupy movement, rightfully incensed as it is with the plutonomic excesses of Wall Street over the last three decades. It is to call for an end to the state of emergency, which has been in force since 2001, under which since 2008 a U.S. Army Brigade Combat Team has been stationed permanently in the United States, in part to be ready “to help with civil unrest and crowd control.”69

Democracy-lovers must work to prevent the political crisis now developing in America from being resolved by military intervention.

Let me say in conclusion that for a half century American politics have been constrained and deformed by the unresolved matter of the Kennedy assassination. According to a memo of November 25 1963, from Assistant Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach, it was important then to persuade the public that “Oswald was the assassin,” and that “he did not have confederates.”70 Obviously this priority became even more important after these questionable propositions were endorsed by the Warren Report, the U.S. establishment, and the mainstream press. It has remained an embarrassing priority ever since for all succeeding administrations, including the present one. There is for example an official in Obama’s State Department (Todd Leventhal), whose official job, until recently, included defense of the lone nut theory against so-called “conspiracy theorists”71

If Oswald was not a lone assassin, then it should not surprise us that there is continuity between those who falsified reports about Oswald in 1963, and those who distorted American politics in subsequent deep events beginning with Watergate. Since the deep event of 1963 the legitimacy of America’s political system has become vested in a lie — a lie which subsequent deep events have helped to protect.72

Peter Dale Scott, a former Canadian diplomat and English Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author of Drugs Oil and War, The Road to 9/11, and The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War.

His most recent book is American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection and the Road to Afghanistan.

His website, which contains a wealth of his writings, is here http://www.peterdalescott.net/q.html  

Peter Dale Scott is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization

Notes

1 Tim Weiner, “The Pentagon’s Secret Stash,” Mother Jones Magazine Mar-Apr 1992, 26.

2 J.A. Myerson “War Is a Force That Pays the 1 Percent: Occupying American Foreign Policy,” Truthout, November 14, 2001, link. Cf. Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007), 6, etc.

3 Scott, Road to 9/11, 22, 29, 98.

4 Scott, Road to 9/11, 22, 97.

5 Scott, Road to 9/11, 21, 51-52; Kristol as quoted in Lewis H. Lapham, “Tentacles of Rage: The Republican Propaganda Mill, a Brief History,” Harper’s Magazine, September 2004, 36.

6 E.g. Peter Dale Scott, American War Machine, 204-05.

7 Peter Dale Scott, The War Conspiracy, 354.

8 Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics II, 30-33; Scott, The War Conspiracy, 387; Scott, American War Machine, 152.

9 Clarence M. Kelley, Kelley: The Story of an FBI Director (Kansas City, MO:

Andrews, McMeel, and Parker, 1987), 268, quoted in Scott, The War Conspiracy (2008), 389.

10 Scott, Deep Politics, 275; Scott, Deep Politics II, 80, 129n; HSCA Critics Conference of 17 September 1977, 181, link. Stringfellow worked under Jack Revill in the Vice Squad of the DPD Special Services Bureau. As such he reported regularly to the FBI on such close Jack Ruby associates as James Herbert Dolan, a “known hoodlum and strong-arm man” on the FBI’s Top Criminal list for Dallas (Robert M. Barrett, FBI Report of February 2, 1963, NARA#124-90038-10026, 12 [Stringfellow]; cf. NARA#124-10212-10012, 4 [hoodlum], NARA#124-10195-10305, 9 [Top Criminal]). Cf. 14 WH 601-02 Ruby and Dolan]. Robert Barrett, who received Stringfellow’s reports to the FBI, had Ruby’s friend Dolan under close surveillance; he also took part in Oswald’s arrest at the Texas Theater, and claimed to have seen DPD Officer Westbrook with Oswald’s wallet at the site of the Tippit killing [Dale K. Myers, With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Murder of Officer J.D. Tippit (Milford, MI: Oak Cliff Press, 1998), 287-90]).

11 It was sent for information to Washington, which received it three days later (Scott, Deep Politics, 275; Scott, Deep Politics II, 80, 129n; Scott, War Conspiracy, 382).

12 Warren Commission Exhibit 1778, 23 WH 383. (Marina’s actual words, before mistranslation, were quite innocuous: “I cannot describe it [the gun] because a rifle to me like all rifles” (Warren Commission Exhibit 1778, 23 WH 383; discussion in Scott, Deep Politics, 168-72).

13 Stringfellow himself was the source of one other piece of false intelligence on November 22: that Oswald had confessed to the murders of both the president and Officer Tippit (Dallas FBI File DL 89-43-2381C; Paul L. Hoch, “The Final Investigation? The HSCA and Army Intelligence,” The Third Decade, 1, 5 [July 1985], 3),

14 9 WH 106; Scott, Deep Politics, 275-76; Russ Baker, Family of Secrets, 119-22.

15 Rodney P. Carlisle and Dominic J. Monetta, Brandy: Our Man in Acapulco (Denton, TX: University of North Texas Press, 1999), 128.

16 Joint Chiefs of Staff, “Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” Report of the J-5 to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1 May 1963, NARA #202-10002-10018, 12. Cf. pp. 15-16: “The United States should intervene militarily in Cuba and could (a) engineer provocative incidents ostensibly perpetrated by the Castro regime to serve as the cause of invasion…”

17 Robert Dallek, An Unfinished Life, 568; James A. Nathan, The Cuban missile crisis revisited, 283; Waldron and Hartmann, Legacy of Secrecy, 9.

[18 Joint Chiefs of Staff, “Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” Report of the J-5 to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1 May 1963, NARA #202-10002-10018, 12.

19 “Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” NARA #202-10002-10018, 20. I see nothing in this document indicating that the President should be notified that these “fabricated provocations” were false. On the contrary, the document called for “compartmentation of participants” to insure that the true facts were not leaked (“Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” NARA #202-10002-10018, 19).

20 Quoted in Baker, Family of Secrets, 122. One of these, DPD Detective John Adamcik, was a member of the party which retrieved a blanket said to have contained Oswald’s rifle; and which the Warren Commission used to link Oswald to the famous Mannlicher Carcano. Adamcik was later present at Mamantov’s interview of Marina about the rifle, and corroborated Mamantov’s account of it to the Warren Commission. There is reason to believe that Mamantov’s translation of Marina’s testimony was inaccurate (Scott, Deep Politics, 268-70, 276).

21 See James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008).

22 9/11 Commission Report, 259, 271; Lawrence Wright, The Looming Tower:

Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 (New York: Knopf, 2006), 352–54 (FBI agent).

23 James Bamford, A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America’s Intelligence Agencies (New York: Doubleday, 2004, 224. For a fuller account of the CIA’s withholding before 9/11, see Kevin Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots; Rory O’Connor and Ray Nowosielski, “Insiders Voice Doubts about CIA’s 9/11 Story,” Salon, October 14, 2011, link.

24 Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots, 7-12, 142-47, etc.

25 Scott, American War Machine, 203.

26 Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots, 371, cf. 95. Quite independently, Richard Clarke, the former White House Counterterrorism Chief on 9/11, has charged that “There was a high-level decision in the CIA ordering people not to share information” (Rory O’Connor and Ray Nowosielski, “Insiders Voice Doubts about CIA’s 9/11 Story,” Salon, October 14, 2011).

27 Coll, 467-69.

28 Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots, 107-08.

29 James Bamford, Body of Secrets, 201. Cf. Fredrik Logevall, Choosing War: The Lost Chance for Peace and the Escalation of War in Vietnam (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 200, citing John Prados, The Hidden History of the Vietnam War (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1995), 51.

30 “Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” Report of the J-5 to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, May 1, 1963, JCS 2304/189, NARA #202-10002-10018, link.

31 Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 280.

32 Public Law 90-331 (18 U.S.C. 3056); discussion in Peter Dale Scott, Paul L.

Hoch, and Russell Stetler, The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond (New York: Random

House, 1976), 443–46.

33 Army intelligence agents were seconded to the Secret Service, and at this time there was a great increase in their number. The Washington Star later explained that “the big build-up in [Army] information gathering…did not come until after the shooting of the Rev. Martin Luther King” (Washington Star, December 6, 1970; reprinted in Federal Data Banks Hearings, p. 1728).

34 George O’Toole, The Private Sector (New York: Norton, 1978), 145, quoted in

Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 278–79.

35 Scott, Road to 9/11, 52-53.

36 Scott, Road to 9/11, 53-54.

37 Scott, Road to 9/11, 50-64.

38 Peter Dale Scott, “Northwards without North,” Social Justice (Summer 1989). Revised as “North, Iran-Contra, and the Doomsday Project: The Original Congressional Cover Up of Continuity-of-Government Planning,” Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, February 21, 2011.

39 Scott, Road to 9/11, 132.

40 Jonathan Marshall, Peter Dale Scott, and Jane Hunter, The Iran-Contra Connection, 13 (Contras); Richard Coll, Ghost Wars, 93-102 (mujahedin).

41 Richard Coll, Ghost Wars, 457-59, 534-36,

42 According to testimony from CIA Deputy Director Vernon Walters, only “Hunt and McCord had ever been CIA full-time employees. The others [including Sturgis] were contract employees for a short duration or a longer duration” (Watergate Hearings, 3427). Cf. Marshall, Scott, and  Hunter, The Iran-Contra Connection, 45 (casino owners).

43 Peter Dale Scott, “From Dallas to Watergate,” Ramparts, December 1973; reprinted in Peter Dale Scott, Paul L. Hoch, and Russell Stetler, The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond, 356, 363.

44 Peter Dale Scott, Crime and Cover-Up, 20.

45 Peter Dale Scott and Jonathan Marshall, Cocaine Politics, 25-32, etc.

46 Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs, and the Press  (London: Verso, 1998), 308-09; Martha Honey, Hostile Acts: U.S. Policy in Costa Rica in the 1980s (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 1994), 368 (Frigorificos).

47 Tad Szulc, Compulsive Spy: The Strange Career of E. Howard Hunt (New York: Viking, 1974), 96-97.

48 Scott, American War Machine, 51-54. Hunt helped put together what became the drug-linked World Anti-Communist League. Artime’s Costa Rica base was on land whose owners were part of the local WACL chapter (Scott and Marshall, Cocaine Politics, 87, 220).

49 Woodward and Bernstein, All the President’s Men (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974), 23

50 Jim Hougan, Secret Agenda (New York: Random House, 1984), 16, citing Department of Defense Directive 5230.7, June 25, 1965, amended May 21, 1971.

51 Peter Dale Scott, “North, Iran-Contra, and the Doomsday Project: The Original Congressional Cover Up of Continuity-of-Government Planning,” Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, February 21, 2011. Cf. Peter Dale Scott, “Northwards Without North: Bush, Counterterrorism, and the Continuation of Secret Power.” Social Justice (San Francisco), XVI, 2 (Summer 1989), 1-30; Peter Dale Scott, “The Terrorism Task Force.” Covert Action Information Bulletin, 33 (Winter 1990), 12-15.

52 Peter Dale Scott and Jonathan Marshall, Cocaine Politics: Drugs, Armies, and the CIA in Central America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 140-41, 242 (Iran, etc.); Ola Tunander, The secret war against Sweden: US and British submarine deception in the 1980s, 309 (Sweden).

53 Scott, Road to 9/11, 183-87.

54 Russ Baker, Family of Secrets, 121.

55 “Statement by Col. John W. Mayo, Chairman of City-County Civil Defense and Disaster Commission at the Dedication of the Emergency Operating Center at Fair Park,” May 24, 1961, link.

Six linear inches of Civil Defense Administrative Files are preserved in the Dallas Municipal Archives; a Finding Guide is viewable online here.  I hope an interested researcher may wish to consult them.

56 Scott, Road to 9/11, 183-87.

57 Washington Post, May 10, 2007.

58 9/11 Report, 38, 326, 555n9; Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America, 224.

59 Scott, Road to 9/11, 226-30. A footnote in the 9/11 Report (555n9) says:

“The 9/11 crisis tested the U.S. government’s plans and capabilities to ensure the continuity of constitutional government and the continuity of government operations. We did not investigate this topic, except as needed to understand the activities and communications of key officials on 9/11. The Chair, Vice Chair, and senior staff were briefed on the general nature and implementation of these continuity plans.”

The other footnotes confirm that no information from COG files was used to document the 9/11 report. At a minimum these files might resolve the mystery of the missing phone call which simultaneously authorized COG, and (in consequence) determined that Bush should continue to stay out of Washington. I suspect that they might tell us a great deal more.

60 “White House Communications Agency,” Signal Corps Regimental History, link.

61 The Warren Commission staff knew of the WHCA presence in Dallas from the Secret Service (17 WH 598, 619, 630, etc.).

62 Statement of Secret Service official Winston Lawson, 17 WH 630 (WHCA radio).

63 Pamela McElwain-Brown, “The Presidential Lincoln Continental SS-100-X,” Dealey Plaza Echo, Volume 3, Issue 2, 23, link (police radio); Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 272-75 (Lumpkin).

64 In the 1990s the WHCA supplied statements to the ARRB concerning communications between Dallas and Washington on November 22 (NARA #172-10001-10002 to NARA #172-10000-10008).  The Assassination Records Review Board also attempted to obtain from the WHCA the unedited original tapes of conversations from Air Force One on the return trip from Dallas, November 22, 1963. (Edited and condensed versions of these tapes had been available since the 1970s from the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library in Austin, Texas.) The attempt was unsuccessful: “The Review Board’s repeated written and oral inquiries of the White House Communications Agency did not bear fruit. The WHCA could not produce any records that illuminated the provenance of the edited tapes.” See Assassinations Records Review Board: Final Report, chapter 6, Part 1, 116, link. In November 2011 AP reported that Gen. Chester Clifton’s personal copy of the Air Force One recordings was being put up for sale, with an asking price of $500,000 (AP, November 15, 2011, link).

65 See Scott, War Conspiracy (2008), 347-48, 385-87.

66 Washington Post, May 10, 2007.

67 Dick Cheney, In My Time: A Personal and Political Memoir (New York: Threshold Editions, 2011), 348: “One of the first efforts we undertook after 9/11 to strengthen the country’s defenses was securing passage of the Patriot Act, which the president signed into law on [sic] October 2001.” Cf. “The Patriot Act, which the president signed into law on October 2001,″ link; “Questions and Answers about Beginning of Domestic Spying Program; link.

68 Scott, Road to 9/11, 236-45; Peter Dale Scott, “Is the State of Emergency Superseding our Constitution? Continuity of Government Planning, War and American Society,” November 28, 2010, http:/1/japanfocus.org/-Peter_Dale-Scott/3448.

69 “Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1,” Army Times, September 30, 2008, link. As part of the Army’s emergency plan GARDEN PLOT in the 1960s, there were until 1971 two brigades (4,800 troops) on permanent standby to quell unrest.

70 “Memorandum for Mr. Moyers” of November 25, 1963, FBI 62-109060, Section 18, p. 29, link. Cf. Nicholas Katzenbach, Some of It Was Fun (New York: W.W. Norton, 2008), 131-36.

71 Leventhal’s official title is (or was) “Chief of the Counter-Misinformation Team, U.S. Department of State” (link). In 2010 the U.S. State Department “launched an official bid to shoot down conspiracy theories….The “Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation” page… insists that Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F Kennedy alone, and that the Pentagon was not hit by a cruise missile on 9/11” Daily Record [Scotland], August 2, 2010, (link). The site still exists here, (“Conspiracy theories exist in the realm of myth, where imaginations run wild, fears trump facts, and evidence is ignored.”) The site still attacks 9/11 theories, but a page on the Kennedy assassination has been suspended (link). Cf. Robin Ramsay, “Government vs Conspiracy Theorists: The official war on “sick think,” Fortean Times, April 2010, link; “The State Department vs ‘Sick Think’

The JFK assassination, 9/11, and the Tory MP spiked with LSD,” Fortean Times, July 2010, link; William Kelly, “Todd Leventhal: The Minister of Diz at Dealey Plaza,” CTKA, 2010, link.

72 For Nixon’s sensitivity concerning the Kennedy assassination, and the way this induced him into some of the intrigues known collectively as Watergate, see e.g. Scott, Hoch, and Stetler, The Assassinations, 374-78; Peter Dale Scott, Crime and Cover-up (Santa Barbara, CA: Open Archive Press, 1993), 33, 64-66.

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

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

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

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions. He hosts the podcast ‘Active Measures’ with Alex Rubinstein. He has contributed to the GrayZone and Mint Press News and he also has a substack at kitklarenberg.com. His work exposing state crimes against democracy has made him an honoree for the 2022 Indy Media Awards.

In the September 13^th edition of Global Research News Hour, host Michael Welch asked Klarenberg to explain some of the aspects of 9/11 that investigators today should not shirk. He also elaborated on the stock market activity in both the 9/11 attacks and the October 7 attacks on Israel that may have predicted terrorist behaviour.

Global Research: The Office of Military Investigations found that CIA and FBI veterans affirmed that the agencies using the Saudi General Intelligence Directorate were trying to contact and recruit these two hijackers, Nawaf Hazmi and Khalid Mihdhar, as assets. People who a year later used planes as an act of terrorism. Talk about that aspect of 9-11 because I think it is fascinating.

Kit Klarenberg: There were people within, I guess you could call it the 9-11 truth movement, although I don’t personally consider myself a member of any movement, apart from the movement for humanity perhaps.

In effect, for years, independent researchers and journalists had been raising very obvious questions about whether the CIA had a relationship with some of the hijackers via the Saudi Intelligence services. Not least because of the very strange confirmed behaviour by the CIA around the two hijackers you mentioned, which is Hazmi and Mihdhar. So they entered the US despite the fact that the CIA and NSA knew that they were coming.

They shouldn’t have been allowed to get in in the first place and they had multi-entry visas to the US. And when they landed, the numerous FBI officials, just a bit of background, there was something called Alec Station, which was the CIA’s anti-Bin Laden and anti-Al Qaeda unit. Now this had FBI agents posted to it.

When they found out that Hazmi and Mihdhar were members of Al Qaeda and who were flagged as potentially very dangerous terrorists, said we want to inform our superiors in FBI headquarters about this. And they were blocked. They were consistently blocked from doing so.

And there are all sorts of indications that Alec Station sought to obfuscate and mislead the FBI about the presence of these two known Al Qaeda operatives on US soil. Now, not long after arrival, as in within minutes of their arrival at Los Angeles International Airport, they bump into, apparently by happenstance, Omar al-Bayoumi, who was this kind of very shady Saudi government employee who doesn’t seem to have done much very obvious work for the Saudi government, but it appears was receiving an enormous amount of money from the House of Saud. Now, the FBI, years later, set up something called Operation Encore, which was an investigation into potential potential Saudi connections to the 9-11 attacks.

And they concluded there was a 50-50 chance that Bayoumi, and by extension Saudi Arabia, had detailed advanced knowledge of the 9-11 attacks. Now, this was sat on until, I believe it was 2021, when the Biden administration released a tranche of Operation Encore documents. But the point is, is this this spy talk released court filing, it has all sorts of information on how, yes, the CIA had a relationship, a liaison relationship with Hazmi and Mihdhar via the Saudi Intelligence services.

Now, this raises all sorts of questions, namely, why did it take so long for this to be confirmed? The filing offers some explanation for this, which is that the CIA and the FBI just lied, despite well knowing about this rather dark handshake, which raises the obvious prospect that the pair, if not other hijackers, were working for the CIA on the day of the attacks. Now, yeah, I would recommend your listeners read my article, and indeed the hyperlinked court filing in full, because it is full of completely dynamite disclosures. Yes, that kind of beg for a re-investigation of who knew what and about 9-11 in advance.

But also, yes, whether there was some degree of direction and control over the hijackers, whether they knew or didn’t know by the CIA. It’s all quite extraordinary. But if nothing else, we know for a fact now that, yes, there was a relationship with two of the hijackers.

The CIA sought to conceal this for reasons unclear. I think more widely, it’s kind of remarkable. I remember very well where I was and what I was doing on 9-11 when I was 12.

But the entire event has been rather forgotten. I mean, this was the start.

GR: Well, you mentioned that a lot, that there are memory holes in the stuff that they’ve known about, and they’ve just kind of forgotten it.

I mean, you mentioned in the article about Hani Hanjour, he had a demonstrably bad record of flying, and yet here he is executing the perfect downwards corkscrew flight into the Pentagon with precision that the vast majority of pilots don’t possess the skill to accomplish. And yet he was able to do it on September 11th, one of the many conflicting narratives that we have your term memory hole in the past 20 years.

KK: Yeah, and I think that Hani Hanjour is, I mean, I would suggest, and that’s what my investigation includes, was a very likely candidate for another 9-11 hijacker who was working for the CIA.

Now, I mean, the mainstream media has even reported on the oddity of Hanjour being the worst flight school pupil that his teachers had ever seen. And in written exams, he would take hours to answer a question that students typically completed in just 20 minutes. He was unable to control a single-engine Cessna during practical tests, and the sense among the teachers with whom he crossed paths was he shouldn’t be in the air under any circumstances.

Now, yes, as you mentioned, he performs this perfect descending corkscrew turn about 330 degrees from around 7,000 feet in the air while travelling over 500 miles per hour to come perfectly level with a pedestrian road leading up to the Pentagon, flying just over a metre above the ground, knocking over lampposts en route, and then crashing into a wing of the Pentagon, which is disused. The only people killed were largely maintenance workers who were reconstructing this section of the Pentagon. There were no senior staff harmed in this.

And, yes, this raises the very obvious question of what the hell actually happened, because the official story of the worst pilot trainee teachers had ever seen doing this seems not only implausible, but impossible. And, I mean, this is a door that a large number of people, including, I might add, people within independent media, don’t want opened because it raises all sorts of crazy questions about, you know, what were the planes being remotely flown? Was it actually not a plane at all, but something rather different, such as a missile? I mean, I think that, yes, there is an aversion to exploring this stuff because it is speculative, and I can understand that as someone who works overwhelmingly based on primary source documentary evidence in the form of leaked and declassified files. Yeah, but, I mean, those explanations do seem, you know, rather more compelling and plausible than Hanjour flying it himself.

Now, I mean, there are all sorts of other debates which, again, people don’t particularly want to go near about controlled demolition and etc. I do think at this stage, when we are 23 years removed from this, the risk of people getting into very serious trouble for probing these areas, not least because, yes, the world has kind of moved on and this catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor, in the phrase of the Project for a New American Century, has been rather forgotten, despite the world-changing consequences it ushered in. This is the kind of stuff that we need to be looking at.

GR: On the days immediately before 9/11, there were ‘put’ options placed on United and American airlines, the airplanes that were hijacked, suggesting a terrorist attack involving the airlines might happen. In an article you wrote in December of last year, you wrote about similarly strange behaviour of Israeli stock immediately before October 7, likewise suggesting a similar planned terrorist attack. Could you comment on how people other than Hamas might have profited from this knowledge, that the government would have known and therefore this was an attack that was allowed to happen on purpose?

KK: Yeah, sure.

I mean, I do think that, I mean, I’ve mentioned the kind of empirical case for 9-11 being a conspiracy. Yeah, one of the most compelling things is that pointing in that direction is the fact that there was widespread, extremely suspicious trading in the months and weeks and days leading up to 9-11, and which implied foreknowledge. Now, there are multiple academic papers which conclude that, yes, that the activity such as betting on, investing large amounts of money in stocks that did well out of 9-11, such as Raytheon, the defence contractor, and betting against stocks that did badly, such as United Airlines out of 9-11.

There was an enormous amount of activity in both directions, which suggested that people knew the attack was coming and they sought to profit from it. And they did to a large extent. I mean, to give you an example on just one, on September 10th, 2001, which is a day before this, the purchase of Raytheon shares soared sixfold.

And then a week later, their value had almost doubled. So, I mean, there are coincidences and there are also not coincidences. But I think that I kind of had this in mind when I read this very interesting academic study, which concluded that there was suspicious trading on Israeli stocks, again, both positive and negative trading, as it were, in the days preceding October 7th last year.

Now, the paper has a number of very revealing graphics, which show the enormous spikes going from almost zero, if not total zero, to hundreds of thousands of trades being made in the days on Israeli stocks that were damaged by October 7th. But what’s even more compelling, and again, you might be tempted to dismiss that as coincidence, is that the paper also finds similar patterns in the trading of Israeli stocks in April 2023. This is right when, and this has been reported in the mainstream media, Hamas was planning to execute what happened on October 7th originally.

Shorting activity on the Israeli ETF since October, 2022

But they got cold feet because they sensed that the Israelis were onto them. So they dropped their plans. Now, I mean, again, this can hardly be considered a coincidence.

But at both times when an attack was expected, and indeed an attack was executed, there is a similar level of deeply suspicious, unprecedentedly high stock market activity related to Israeli stocks. Now, I mean, this is a point that I made in my Mint Press article, which you mentioned, which is that, yeah, there are countless indications which have been confirmed in the mainstream that the Israeli military and Israeli Intelligence services knew that something was coming. And, you know, I got a lot of flak in certain circles for suggesting when this began that they knew what was coming.

And this has just been amply confirmed by subsequent disclosures.

GR: Well, there have been like Egyptian intelligence, and they’d also sent information to them about the possibility of attack. And Israeli Mossad, I mean, they have all sorts of transmitters all along the – I mean, I think they said something like a former IDF operative said that a cat couldn’t get across without notifying it.

And yet, according to an interview I did, I guess, late in spring or something, they found they were all – like they were completely caught off guard. So it all seems like, you know, in terms of the position of the troops and so on and so forth. So that all sort of further corroborates the possibility that they let it happen on purpose.

And this was with the goal of, you know, creating this incident where they would have their own war on terrorism, so-called, right?

KK: Yeah, no, absolutely. And it’s like, you know, I mean, I’ve been covering events in Gaza and the West Bank for many, many, many years. And it’s like, you know, Israel has formed doing this, where there are several examples, such as in the lead up to Operation Protective Edge in 2014 or Operation Cast Lead in 2008, where the Palestinian leadership was in peace talks with Israel.

And then at the very last minute, there are a series of Israeli provocations. Hamas responds with rather flaccid rocket attacks. And then this is used as a pretext for not only sabotaging peace negotiations, but carpet bombing Gaza.

Now, as well, I think that you’ve got to bear in mind that, like, not long before this, Azerbaijani authorities carried out an almost total ethnic cleansing in Artsakh, which is this was now formerly Armenian enclave within Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijanians moved in and said, well, and told the 200,000 strong population, if you don’t leave immediately, we’re going to massacre you all. So, of course, they left.

Now, that was assisted by the Israelis, and it received not a wink of criticism in the Western mainstream at all. So we must ask ourselves, was that a motivating factor for Netanyahu to think, right, well, I’m just going to carry out my own, like, you know, total ethnic cleansing? I mean, and that is what has happened. It’s I mean, another data point within this that just sticks in my mind a lot, which is there is a veteran British client journalist called Robert Peston.

He’s a British journalist. He, on October 8th, published a very notable post on X or Twitter, as it was previously called. And he said that British Intelligence sources had told him that the Hamas’ strike on Israel the previous day was going to evolve into a full blown regional war in West Asia as destabilizing to global security as Putin’s attack on Ukraine.

And it stated that this crisis would spread well, that his intelligence sources stated that this crisis will spread well beyond the Middle East. And we are in the early stages of a conflict with ramifications for much of the world. Now, this was posted about 24 hours after Hamas breached Gaza’s concentration camp walls.

How did his British intelligence sources know this unless they wanted this to happen, were planning for this to happen and intended for the grand regional war that they spoke of to happen? Because at that point, the Israeli government hadn’t even announced a response, really, beyond dispatching Israeli occupation force operatives en masse to massacre people. There was no sense that there was going to be, I mean, we’re almost a year into this, of the Israeli occupation forces going into Gaza routinely and jousting with Hamas. And it goes on and on.

And it looks like Hezbollah and Israel any day now could end up in a full blown hot war. Like, you know, it’s really, really, really suspicious. And I think that in a very basic way as well, Netanyahu has all sorts of domestic political problems, including the fact that he is being investigated for corruption.

The second that he’s out of office, he’s probably going to jail. Now, in that context where on a micro and macro level, you feel like your time is running out. And I do think that the genocide in Gaza has exposed all sorts of structural problems within Israel, namely that it’s a settler colonial population.

And so they’ve had a population collapse. A large number of people have fled home to the countries they’re actually born in. Their economy has been ravaged by this.

They’re having zero tourism, which was a big major economic sector for them. Their tech sector, because the apparent fallibility of their security systems was amply demonstrated on October 7th, are suffering big time. Yeah.

I mean, these were already kind of existing issues. And I think that in terms of drawing the U.S. deeper into this and other Western powers as a kind of grand last hurrah, was Netanyahu’s only option from a personal and just wider geopolitical perspective. So the reasons for allowing this to go ahead couldn’t be writ larger.

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

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

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

First published by Global Research on September 18, 2023

*** 

 

 

Abstract 

Seventeen equatorial and Southern-Hemisphere countries were studied (Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, Suriname, Thailand, Uruguay), which comprise 9.10 % of worldwide population, 10.3 % of worldwide COVID-19 injections (vaccination rate of 1.91 injections per person, all ages), virtually every COVID-19 vaccine type and manufacturer, and span 4 continents.

In the 17 countries, there is no evidence in all-cause mortality (ACM) by time data of any beneficial effect of COVID-19 vaccines. There is no association in time between COVID-19 vaccination and any proportionate reduction in ACM. The opposite occurs. 

All 17 countries have transitions to regimes of high ACM, which occur when the COVID-19 vaccines are deployed and administered. Nine of the 17 countries have no detectable excess ACM in the period of approximately one year after a pandemic was declared on 11 March 2020 by the World Health Organization (WHO), until the vaccines are rolled out (Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Philippines, Singapore, Suriname, Thailand, Uruguay). 

Unprecedented peaks in ACM occur in the summer (January-February) of 2022 in the Southern Hemisphere, and in equatorial-latitude countries, which are synchronous with or immediately preceded by rapid COVID-19-vaccine-booster-dose rollouts (3rd or 4th doses). This phenomenon is present in every case with sufficient mortality data (15 countries). Two of the countries studied have insufficient mortality data in January-February 2022 (Argentina and Suriname). 

Detailed mortality and vaccination data for Chile and Peru allow resolution by age and by dose number. It is unlikely that the observed peaks in all-cause mortality in January-February 2022 (and additionally in: July-August 2021, Chile; July-August 2022, Peru), in each of both countries and in each elderly age group, could be due to any cause other than the temporally associated rapid COVID-19-vaccine-booster-dose rollouts. Likewise, it is unlikely that the transitions to regimes of high ACM, coincident with the rollout and sustained administration of COVID-19 vaccines, in all 17 Southern-Hemisphere and equatorial-latitude countries, could be due to any cause other than the vaccines. 

Synchronicity between the many peaks in ACM (in 17 countries, on 4 continents, in all elderly age groups, at different times) and associated rapid booster rollouts allows this firm conclusion regarding causality, and accurate quantification of COVID-19-vaccine toxicity. 

The all-ages vaccine-dose fatality rate (vDFR), which is the ratio of inferred vaccine-induced deaths to vaccine doses delivered in a population, is quantified for the January-February 2022 ACM peak to fall in the range 0.02 % (New Zealand) to 0.20% (Uruguay). In Chile and Peru, the vDFR increases exponentially with age (doubling approximately every 4 years of age), and is largest for the latest booster doses, reaching approximately 5 % in the 90+ years age groups (1 death per 20 injections of dose 4). Comparable results occur for the Northern Hemisphere, as found in previous articles (India, Israel, USA). 

We quantify the overall all-ages vDFR for the 17 countries to be (0.126 ± 0.004) %, which would imply 17.0 ± 0.5 million COVID-19 vaccine deaths worldwide, from 13.50 billion injections up to 2 September 2023. This would correspond to a mass iatrogenic event that killed (0.213 ± 0.006) % of the world population (1 death per 470 living persons, in less than 3 years), and did not measurably prevent any deaths. 

The overall risk of death induced by injection with the COVID-19 vaccines in actual populations, inferred from excess all-cause mortality and its synchronicity with rollouts, is globally pervasive and much larger than reported in clinical trials, adverse effect monitoring, and cause-of-death statistics from death certificates, by 3 orders of magnitude (1,000-fold greater). 

The large age dependence and large values of vDFR quantified in this study of 17 countries on 4 continents, using all the main COVID-19 vaccine types and manufacturers, should induce governments to immediately end the baseless public health policy of prioritizing elderly residents for injection with COVID-19 vaccines, until valid risk-benefit analyses are made.

Introduction 

All-cause mortality by time is the most reliable data for detecting and epidemiologically characterizing events causing death, and for gauging the population-level impact of any surge or collapse in deaths from any cause.

Such data can be collected by jurisdiction or geographical region, by age group, by sex, and so on; and it is not susceptible to reporting bias or to any bias in attributing causes of death in the mortality itself

(Aaby et al., 2020; Bilinski and Emanuel, 2020; Bustos Sierra et al., 2020; Félix-Cardoso et al., 2020; Fouillet et al., 2020; Kontis et al., 2020; Mannucci et al., 2020; Mills et al., 2020; Olson et al., 2020; Piccininni et al., 2020; Rancourt, 2020; Rancourt et al., 2020; Sinnathamby et al., 2020; Tadbiri et al., 2020; Vestergaard et al., 2020; Villani et al., 2020; Achilleos et al., 2021; Al Wahaibi et al., 2021; Anand et al., 2021; Böttcher et al., 2021; Chan et al., 2021; Dahal et al., 2021; Das-Munshi et al., 2021; Deshmukh et al., 2021; Faust et al., 2021; Gallo et al., 2021; Islam, Jdanov, et al., 2021; Islam, Shkolnikov, et al., 2021; Jacobson and Jokela, 2021; Jdanov et al., 2021; Joffe, 2021; Karlinsky and Kobak, 2021; Kobak, 2021; Kontopantelis et al., 2021a, 2021b; Kung et al., 2021a, 2021b; Liu et al., 2021; Locatelli and Rousson, 2021; Miller et al., 2021; Moriarty et al., 2021; Nørgaard et al., 2021; Panagiotou et al., 2021; Pilkington et al., 2021; Polyakova et al., 2021; Rancourt et al., 2021a, 2021b; Rossen et al., 2021; Sanmarchi et al., 2021; Sempé et al., 2021; Soneji et al. 2021; Stein et al., 2021; Stokes et al., 2021; Vila-Corcoles et al., 2021; Wilcox et al., 2021; Woolf et al., 2021; Woolf, Masters and Aron, 2021; Yorifuji et al., 2021; Ackley et al., 2022; Acosta et al., 2022; Engler, 2022; Faust et al., 2022; Ghaznavi et al., 2022; Gobiņa et al., 2022; He et al., 2022; Henry et al., 2022; Jha et al., 2022; Johnson and Rancourt, 2022; Juul et al., 2022; Kontis et al., 2022; Kontopantelis et al., 2022; Lee et al., 2022; Leffler et al., 2022; Lewnard et al., 2022; McGrail, 2022; Neil et al., 2022; Neil and Fenton, 2022; Pálinkás and Sándor, 2022; Ramírez-Soto and Ortega-Cáceres, 2022; Rancourt, 2022; Rancourt et al., 2022a, 2022b; Razak et al., 2022; Redert, 2022a, 2022b; Rossen et al., 2022; Safavi-Naini et al., 2022; Schöley et al., 2022; Sy, 2022; Thoma and Declercq, 2022; Wang et al., 2022; Aarstad and Kvitastein, 2023; Bilinski et al., 2023; de Boer et al., 2023; de Gier et al., 2023; Demetriou et al., 2023; Donzelli et al., 2023; Haugen, 2023; Jones and Ponomarenko, 2023; Kuhbandner and Reitzner, 2023; Lytras et al., 2023; Masselot et al., 2023; Matveeva and Shabalina, 2023; Neil and Fenton, 2023; Paglino et al., 2023; Rancourt et al., 2023; Redert, 2023; Schellekens, 2023; Scherb and Hayashi, 2023; Šorli et al., 2023; Woolf et al., 2023). 

We have previously reported several cases in which anomalous peaks in all-cause mortality (ACM) are temporally associated with rapid COVID-19 vaccine-dose rollouts and cases in which the start of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign coincides with the start of a new regime of sustained elevated mortality; in India, Australia, Israel, USA, and Canada, including states and provinces (Rancourt, 2022; Rancourt et al., 2022a, 2022b, 2023). 

These studies allowed us to make the first quantitative determinations of the vaccine-dose fatality rate (vDFR), which is the ratio of inferred vaccine-induced deaths to vaccine doses administered in a population, based on excess-ACM evaluation on a given time period, compared to the number of vaccine doses administered in the same time period.

The all-ages all-doses value of vDFR was typically approximately 0.05 % (1 death per 2,000 injections), with an extreme value of 1 % for the special case of India (Rancourt, 2022). Our work, using extensive data for Australia and Israel, has also shown that vDFR is exponential with age (doubling every 5 years of age), reaching approximately 1 % for 80+ year olds (Rancourt et al., 2023). 

The clearest example is that of a relatively sharp ACM peak occurring in January-February 2022 in Australia, which is synchronous with the rapid rollout of Australia’s dose 3 of the COVID-19 vaccine; occurring in 5 of 8 of the Australian states and in all of the more-elderly age groups (Rancourt et al., 2022a, 2023).

In contrast, often one must contend with the confounding effect of the intrinsic seasonal variation of ACM; however, in this case for Australia, the said January-February 2022 peak occurs at a time in the intrinsic seasonal cycle when one should have a stable (Southern Hemisphere) summer low or summer trough in ACM. There are no previous examples of such a peak in the summer in the historic record of ACM for Australia (Rancourt et al., 2022a).

Few national jurisdictions have the kind of extensive age-stratified mortality and vaccination data available for Australia and Israel. Two other such jurisdictions are Chile and Peru. Here, we show that Chile and Peru, like Australia, has a relatively sharp ACM peak occurring in January-February 2022, which is synchronous with the rapid rollout of Chile’s dose 4 and Peru’s dose 3 of the COVID-19 vaccine, respectively, occurring for all of the more-elderly age groups. 

This shared feature between Chile, Peru and Australia led us to look for more examples of the January-February 2022 ACM-peak phenomenon in the Southern Hemisphere and in equatorial regions. Equatorial countries have no summer and winter seasons and no seasonal variations in their ACM patterns. We found the same phenomenon everywhere that data was available (Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Uruguay), although incomplete for Bolivia and not as distinctive for New Zealand. Here, we report on those findings. 

Data

The sources of mortality and vaccine-administration data are given in Appendix A: Sources of mortality and vaccination data. 

Appendix B: Examples of all-cause mortality and vaccination data contains examples of the data: all-ages national ACM by time (week or month), from 2015 to 2023, and all-ages all-doses vaccine administration by week, using Y-scales starting from zero, for the 17 countries considered in the present study: Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, Suriname, Thailand, and Uruguay.

Figure 1 shows the said 17 countries considered, in relation to the equator on a world map. 

Figure 1: World map showing the 17 countries considered in the present study, in relation to the equator and the tropics ― Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Malaysia, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Singapore, South Africa, Suriname, Thailand, and Uruguay. 

Method to Detect Time Transitions to

Regimes of High All-Cause Mortality 

We implement the following method developed by one of us (JH) for detecting changes in regime in ACM data by time (day, week, month, quarter). 

One is interested in detecting transitions in time (as one advances in time from a stable historic period) to regimes of “higher than usual” or “higher than recent” ACM, which may be associated with the declaration of a pandemic or with rollouts of vaccines. Although the trained eye can detect such transitions in the raw ACM by time data itself, it is useful to apply a statistical transformation, which is designed to largely eliminate the confounding difficulty of seasonal variations in ACM, which occur in non-equatorial countries. 

Since the dominant period of the seasonal variations in ACM is 1 year, and since we wish to detect changes moving forward in time, we adopt the following approach. We apply a 1-year backward moving average to the ACM by time data. Each point in time of the 1-year backward moving average is simply the average ACM for the year ending at the said point in time, and we plot this moving average by time. Changes in regime of ACM then appear as breaks (in slope or value) in the moving average by time. 

Note that the 1-year backward moving average method produces one significant but easily discerned artifact: Relatively large and sharp peaks in ACM give rise to artificial drops in the moving average at one year ahead of (later than) the said relatively large and sharp peaks in ACM. 

Methods to Quantify vDFR from All-Cause Mortality 

4.1 Historical-trend baseline for a period (or peak) of mortality (Method 1) 

Our first method (Method 1) for quantification of vDFR by age group (or all ages) and by vaccine dose number (or all doses) is as follows (Rancourt et al., 2022a, 2023), here improved to adjust for systematic seasonal effects: 

i. Plot the ACM by time (day, week, month) for the age group (or all ages) over a large time scale, including the years prior to the declared pandemic. 

ii. Identify the date (day, week, month) of the start of the vaccine rollout (first dose rollout) for the age group (or all ages). 

iii. Note, for consistency, that the ACM undergoes a step-wise increase to larger values near the date of the start of the vaccine rollout.

iv. Integrate (add) ACM from the start of the vaccine rollout to the end of available data or end of vaccinations (all doses), whichever comes first. This is the basic integration time window used in the calculation, start to end dates. 

v. Apply this window and this integration over successive and non-overlapping equal-duration periods, moving as far back as the data permits. 

vi. Start each new integration window at the same point in the seasonal cycle as the start of the basic integration window for the vaccine period, even if this introduces gaps between successive integration periods. 

vii. Plot the resulting integration values versus time, and note, for consistency, that the value has an upward jog, well discerned from the historic trend or values, for the vaccination period. 

viii. Extrapolate the historic trend of integrated values into the vaccination period. The difference between the measured and extrapolated (historic trend predicted) integrated values of ACM in the vaccination period is the excess mortality associated with the vaccination period. 

ix. The extrapolation, in practice, is achieved by fitting a straight line to chosen pre-vaccination-period integration points. 

x. If too few points are available for the extrapolation, giving too large an uncertainty in the fitted slope, then impose a slope of zero, which amounts to using an average of recent values. In some cases, even a single point (usually the point for the immediately preceding integration window) can be used. 

xi. The error in the extrapolated value is most often overwhelmingly the dominant source of error in the calculated excess mortality. Estimate the “accuracy error” in the extrapolated value as the mean deviation of the absolute value difference with the fitted line (mean of the absolute values of the residuals) for the chosen points of the fit. This error is a measure of the integration-period variations from all causes over a near region having an assumed linear trend. 

xii. The said “accuracy error” is generally larger than the “precision error” (or statistical error) in the extrapolated value, as it represents the year-to-year variability of the integrated ACM in the integration window in the years prior to the Covid or vaccination periods. 

xiii. If there are too few integration windows in the available normal years prior to the peak or region of interest to obtain a good estimate of the historic year-to-year variability, or if the statistical errors in the integrated values are relatively large, then make use of the statistical errors to best estimate the needed uncertainty. 

xiv. Apply the same integration window (start-to-end dates during vaccination) to count all vaccine doses administered in that time. 

xv. Depending on particular circumstances in the data, it may be necessary to use different integration bounds (different windows) for the ACM and for the vaccine administration. We saw no need for this, and we did not try to implement or test such an optimization. 

xvi. Define vDFR = (vaccination-period excess mortality) / (vaccine doses administered in the same vaccination period). Calculate the uncertainty in vDFR using the estimated error in vaccination-period excess mortality. 

The same method is adapted to any region of interest (such as a peak in ACM) of sub-annual duration, by translating the window of integration (of the region of interest) backwards by increments of one year. 

The above-described method is robust and ideally adapted to the nature of ACM data. Integrated ACM will generally have a small statistical error. 

A large time-wise integration window (e.g., for the entire vaccination period) mostly removes the difficulty arising from intrinsic seasonal variations; and this difficulty is further solved by starting each new integration window at the same point in the seasonal cycle as the start of the basic integration window for the vaccine period (point-vi, above).

The historic trend is analysed without introducing any model assumptions or uncertainties beyond assuming that the near trend can be modelled by a straight line, where justified by the data itself. Such an analysis, for example, takes into account year to year changes in age-group cohort size arising from the age structure of the population. The only assumption is that a locally linear near trend for the unperturbed (ACM-wise unperturbed) population is realistic. 

While the above method is designed for cases (jurisdictions) in which there is no evidence in the ACM data for mortality caused by factors other than the vaccine rollouts, such as Covid measures (treatment protocols, societal impositions, isolation and so forth; since no excess mortality occurs in the pre-vaccination period of the Covid period), it can be readily adapted to cases in which mortality in the vaccination period is confounded by additional (Covid period) causal factors that cannot be ruled out. 

One approach is simply to adapt the above method to calendar years, irrespective of whether excess mortality occurs prior to the COVID-19 vaccine rollouts. One obtains excess ACM by calendar year, relative to the expected value from the historic trend deduced by linear extrapolation from a chosen range of yearly ACM values for < 2020 (for years prior to 2020, when the 11 March 2020 announcement of a pandemic was made). One then compares the excess ACM for 2020 and for 2021. In many (most) countries, there was essentially no COVID-19 vaccination in 2020, and a rapid rollout essentially started in January 2021. 

Special Case of a Single Historic Integrated Point (Method 2) 

In cases in which it is not possible or practical to obtain more than one integration value for the needed extrapolation (steps v to ix, above), rather than assume a zero slope for the extrapolation (step x, above), the following second method (Method 2) can be applied.

If Y(−1) is the sole historic integrated point, then simply take the needed extrapolated value, Y(0), to be: 

Y(0) = Y(−1) + m ΔT W    (1)

where m is the slope of the best-straight-line fit through the original ACM by time unit (day, week, month…) versus numbered time unit, ΔT is the number of time units between Y(0) and Y(−1) (i.e., between the start of the Y(0) integration window and the start of the Y(−1) integration window), and W is the inclusive width of the integration window in number of time units. 

This assumes that the ACM by time varies on a straight line, notwithstanding seasonal variations, on the near segment used to obtain the best-straight-line fit. 

The resulting excess mortality for the integration window or period, xACM(0), is then: 

xACM(0) = ACM(0) − Y(0)      (2)

where ACM(0) is the integrated ACM in the period of interest. 

The statistical error (standard deviation) in xACM(0) is then given by: 

sig(xACM(0)) = sqrt [ ACM(0) + Y(−1) + (ΔT W sig(m))2 ]      (3)

where sig(m) is the nominally statistical error in m. 

If there is no seasonal variation in ACM, as occurs in equatorial-latitude jurisdictions, then sig(m) is the actual statistical error in m. With seasonal variations in ACM, sig(m) extracted from the least squares fitting to a straight line does not have a simple  meaning. In this case, sig(m) will incorporate uncertainty arising from seasonal variations, and increases with increasing amplitude of the seasonal variation. 

Application of the Methods to the Specific Countries 

The parameters for applying the methods (Methods 1 and 2) to the data are given in Appendix C: Technical and specific information for applications of the methods to the data. 

Click here to read the full report.

*

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

Featured image is from Mercola

Twenty-three years ago: 9/11 was  a criminal undertaking based on countless lies and fabrications. On September 11, 2024, we commemorate the tragic events of 9/11.

Global Research will be publishing several important articles pertaining to 9/11 and its immediate aftermath, leading to the illegal US-NATO bombing and occupation of Afghanistan.

Below is the carefully documented and incisive video by James Corbett, initially released in 2011 

***

Transcript

On the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with boxcutters directed by a man [Osama bin Laden] on dialysis in a hospital halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily-defended airspace in the world, overpowering the passengers and the military combat-trained pilots on 4 commercial aircraft before flying those planes wildly off course for over an hour without being molested by a single fighter interceptor.

These 19 hijackers, devout religious fundamentalists who liked to drink alcohol, snort cocaine, and live with pink-haired strippers, managed to knock down 3 buildings with 2 planes in New York, while in Washington a pilot who couldn’t handle a single engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 in an 8,000 foot descending 270 degree corskscrew turn to come exactly level with the ground, hitting the Pentagon in the budget analyst office where DoD staffers were working on the mystery of the 2.3 trillion dollars that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had announced “missing” from the Pentagon’s coffers in a press conference the day before, on September 10, 2001.

Luckily, the news anchors knew who did it within minutes, the pundits knew within hours, the Administration knew within the day, and the evidence literally fell into the FBI’s lap. But for some reason a bunch of crazy conspiracy theorists demanded an investigation into the greatest attack on American soil in history.

The investigation was delayed, underfunded, set up to fail, a conflict of interest and a cover up from start to finish. It was based on testimony extracted through torture, the records of which were destroyed.

It failed to mention the existence of WTC7, Able Danger, Ptech, Sibel Edmonds, OBL and the CIA, and the drills of hijacked aircraft being flown into buildings that were being simulated at the precise same time that those events were actually happening.

It was lied to by the Pentagon, the CIA, the Bush Administration and as for Bush and Cheney…well, no one knows what they told it because they testified in secret, off the record, not under oath and behind closed doors. It didn’t bother to look at who funded the attacks because that question is of “little practical significance“. Still, the 9/11 Commission did brilliantly, answering all of the questions the public had (except most of the victims’ family members’ questions) and pinned blame on all the people responsible (although no one so much as lost their job), determining the attacks were “a failure of imagination” because “I don’t think anyone could envision flying airplanes into buildings ” except the Pentagon and FEMA and NORAD and the NRO.

The DIA destroyed 2.5 TB of data on Able Danger, but that’s OK because it probably wasn’t important.

The SEC destroyed their records on the investigation into the insider trading before the attacks, but that’s OK because destroying the records of the largest investigation in SEC history is just part of routine record keeping.

NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC7’s collapse, but that’s OK because knowing how they made their model of that collapse would “jeopardize public safety“.

The FBI has argued that all material related to their investigation of 9/11 should be kept secret from the public, but that’s OK because the FBI probably has nothing to hide.

This man never existed, nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention, and if you say otherwise you are a paranoid conspiracy theorist and deserve to be shunned by all of humanity. Likewise him, him, him, and her. (and her and her and him).

Osama Bin Laden lived in a cave fortress in the hills of Afghanistan, but somehow got away.

Then he was hiding out in Tora Bora but somehow got away.

Then he lived in Abottabad [Pakistan] for years, taunting the most comprehensive intelligence dragnet employing the most sophisticated technology in the history of the world for 10 years, releasing video after video with complete impunity (and getting younger and younger as he did so), before finally being found in a daring SEAL team raid which wasn’t recorded on video, in which he didn’t resist or use his wife as a human shield, and in which these crack special forces operatives panicked and killed this unarmed man, supposedly the best source of intelligence about those dastardly terrorists on the planet.

Then they dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it. Then a couple dozen of that team’s members [SEAL] died in a helicopter crash in Afghanistan.

This is the story of 9/11, brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about JFK and incubator babies and mobile production facilities and the rescue of Jessica Lynch.

If you have any questions about this story…you are a batshit, paranoid, tinfoil, dog-abusing baby-hater and will be reviled by everyone. If you love your country and/or freedom, happiness, rainbows, rock and roll, puppy dogs, apple pie and your grandma, you will never ever express doubts about any part of this story to anyone. Ever.

This has been a public service announcement by: the Friends of the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA, SEC, MSM, White House, NIST, and the 9/11 Commission. Because Ignorance is Strength.

*

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

Featured image is from The Land Destroyer Report

A NATO invasion of nuclear Russia is currently underway, and the world is unaware that it is in World War III, as reported by Megatron (14 August 2024).

The Kursk region of Russia is currently full of NATO weapons, troops, logistics, and more, many of them destroyed. See map, below.

 

Ukrainian aims to destabilize Russia with Kursk incursion. (BingMaps/Institute For The Study Of War/USA TODAY)

Video footage comes out of dozens of NATO vehicles, air defense systems, tanks and more; even if destroyed and captured by Russian forces in the Kursk Region.

The Kiev forces of about 11,600 under guidance of NATO troops have not managed to conquer the city of Kurchatov and its nuclear power plant. Apparently, President Zelensky used all of Kiev’s remaining troops, plus extra Polish (NATO) forces. 

Russian General Apti Alaudinov noted that the purpose of invading the Kursk Region was to secure a strong position for upcoming negotiations with Russia. However, with Kiev’s and their western masters’ defeat, the Kiev Regime signed their own death warrant. 

Kiev’s losses are more than 2,000.

General Allaudin further predicts that the Kiev Special Operation will be terminated by the end of 2024, with a total victory of the Russian Army, and the surrender of the Kiev Regime and its masters in Washington and London. (Borzzikman Aug 15, 2024)

Whether surrender by the west will actually happen, remains to be seen. It is not a habit of the west, even in terminal conditions, losing face – thus, more aggressions, perhaps of a NATO direct attack on Russia, is a possibility.

At this point, President Putin still refuses to declare war, although Russia’s territory has been invaded and Russians are killed on their territory by NATO forces. And more direct NATO attacks may be planned. For now, Washington is getting away with “murder”; literally. 

Step by step, Washington and its NATO partners have been crossing one red line after the other.

• First, NATO weapons in Ukraine;
• then NATO troops un Ukaine;
• then F-16 fighter jets in Ukraine;
• then NATO soldiers commanding the sophisticated weaponry supplied by the west;
• then NATO troops on Russian territories; then NATO drones and aircraft attacking Russian targets on Russian territory – and finally NATO troops attempting taking over an entire Russian district, taking Russian prisoners, killing Russians.

Airports across Russia have been constantly bombed for several weeks by NATO drones. 

On August 9, 2024, Russian state media reported an explosion, followed by fire at the Russian air base in the Lipetsk region, around 280 kilometers from the border with northeastern Ukraine, as if Ukraine / NATO forces attacked the airfield, and destroyed a warehouse and several other facilities with guided aerial bombs; guided by NATO experts. 

Some speculate that Kiev / NATO may have used a small tactical nuclear weapon. There is however no proof for such an aggression, and Russia remains silent.

According to Russian military, their own (Russian) offensive involved around 1,000 troops and more than two dozen armored vehicles and tanks. See this. (This page was removed by Google, saying the Moscow Times page does not exist anymore – the link is shown, to demonstrate western censoring).

The Russian army is constantly advancing in the Donbass, defending the Russian speaking population from the cowardly Azov-Nazi attacks that killed in the last 10 years about 18,000 people, most of them women and children. 

Russia, on her own territory receives heavy and painful blows from NATO weapons. NATO is everywhere, with communication, logistics and NATO command.

Over 35 countries are investing hundreds of billions in tax payers’ money to supply Ukraine with weapons to carry out these deadly strikes against Russia – on Russian territory, with NATO soldiers, whom the west likes to call “foreign mercenaries”. 

Some 80 years after WWII, when Russia defeated Nazi-Germany, German tanks – given to Ukraine – are again rolling through the Kursk region, where the decisive battle took place; the battle by which Russia defeated Nazi-Germany saving the West from German fascism. 

But fascism today is ticking and is well alive, reminiscing the times of the 1940’s. Now neo-fascism is emanating from Ukraine, an erstwhile ally of Nazi-Germany – the Bandera’s Azov Battalions – that killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of Russians during WWII.

Mr. Putin was adamant eradicating Nazism in Ukraine, making Ukraine a neutral and NATO-free country, a key condition for Peace negotiations. 

Many people are still under the illusion that Russia is in a minor military conflict with Ukraine, not realizing that this proxy-war Washington-NATO against Russia is far more dangerous than the WWII situation in 1943.

NATO is attempting to gradually creating brigades in Eastern Europe, aiming at confronting Russia.

It is a game of observation, “how far can we go”, while carefully watching Russia’s reaction. The difficulties they may have, is manning the brigades with soldiers, as young Europeans are unwilling to die for western warmongers and profits of western war industries. 

According to Megatron, there is a high probability that NATO may eventually intend to invade Belarus.

Did Mr. Putin and his advisers miscalculate NATO’s boldness, hoping that they will not cross from Ukraine into Russian territories, to avoid further escalation?

What now, that all the Red Lines have been crossed – and that more than once?

In a recent statement, former Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, said Russia should no longer hold back: 

“From this moment, the [Kiev] Special Military operation should become openly exterritorial in nature,” Medvedev, who serves as deputy chair of the Russian Security Council, argued in a post on Thursday.

“We can and should go further into what still exists as Ukraine. To Odessa, Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk, Nikolaev. To Kiev and further. There should be no restrictions in terms of recognized borders.” See this.

*

If President Putin is holding out for even more western / NATO aggressions on Russian territory, it may be that he has a strong response in store, one that cannot be accused as a response to a “false flag”, because what Kiev-NATO are doing on Russian territories is clearly no “false flag”, but pure provocation. 

Russia has the military capacity to wipe out simultaneously western decision and military centers, as well as financial hubs, with ultra-precise, supersonic tactical nuclear weapons, keeping the loss of life to a minimum, but disabling western power structures.

*

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

One Month Before Global Research’s Anniversary

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

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

Featured image is from South Front

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

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

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

Give Truth a Chance. Secure Your Access to Unchained News, Donate to Global Research.

AI translation into Japanese

***

爆弾：日本の元内務大臣が予防接種を受けていない人に謝罪：「あなたは正しかった、ワクチンは私たちの愛する人の何百万人もの人を殺している」

ミシェル・チョスドフスキーによる入門ノート

Introductory Note by Michel Chossudovsky

In Japan, the mRNA vaccine was launched in February 2021 allegedly as a means to protect the Japanese people against a non-existent “killer virus”.

More than 206 million doses had already been administered. The Japanese population was not informed regarding the dangers of the mRNA vaccine.

In December 2021, Japan’s Ministry of Health authorized booster shots of  Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, pointing to the “low rate of side effects such as myocarditis”. 

According to Japan’s Ministry of Heath’s early advisory (which was similar to that applied in numerous countries):

“The Government recommends that people get vaccinated because the benefits of vaccination are greater than the risk of side reactions.” (emphasis added)

The foregoing is misleading as pointed out in the Former Minister of Internal Affairs Kazuhiro Haraguchi’s courageous statement:

“‘You Were Right, Vaccines Are Killing Millions of Our Loved Ones”

「あなたは正しかった、ワクチンは私たちの愛する人の何百万人もの人を殺している」

“They are trying to block our freedom, our resistance, our power. But we will never lose.”

Haraguchi issued a rallying call for action.

He urged the people to stand united in challenging the government and its questionable decisions.

“Let’s overthrow this government,”

he proclaimed, emphasizing the need for change and accountability.

He called on legislators to continue fighting for the people’s lives and freedoms, “Let’s make it happen,” he concluded.

---

Excess Mortality (Japan) (2020-2022)

In Japan, the vaccine was launched in early 2021.

A 2021 report by Japan’s Ministry of Education confirms that suicide among Japanese schoolchildren had hit a record high during the 2020 school year.  The report from the Ministry of Education suggests that

“the pandemic has caused changes in the school and family environment and had an impact on children’s behavior”. (For details see chapter 6 of  Michel Chossudovsky’s book)

---

A  note on my book entitled: 

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

first published in Japanese in April 2022.

In English it is available in E-book form. (See below).

I remain indebted to the Japanese publisher which brought out and promoted my book despite political pressures  and an atmosphere of censorship.  My thanks to both the Publisher and to the Translator.

The fraudulent narrative concerning the Covid “Vaccine” is collapsing in different parts of the World.

In California, 9th Circuit Court Rules that COVID-19 mRNA Injections Are Not “Vaccines”.  

In Germany, the Health authorities  have acknowledged the devastating nature and impacts of the Covid lockdowns, the mandatory wearing of the face mask, and the experimental mRNA “vaccines”.

Global Research has from the outset provided an extensive daily coverage of the devastating impacts of the “vaccine”. Our objective is to SAVE LIVES. 

In solidarity with the people of Japan.

In solidarity with people all over the World. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, June 11, June 24, 2024

 

---

Kazuhiro Haraguchi, the former Japanese Minister for Internal Affairs, has become the first major politician to apologize to the unvaccinated for the tsunami of deaths occuring among the vaccinated population.

His presentation  starts 7’o”

Earlier this week, huge numbers of Japanese citizens took to the streets to protest against the crimes against humanity perpetrated by globalist organizations such by World Health Organization (WHO) and World Economic Forum (WEF) during the pandemic.

During an opening speech at the protests, Haraguchi delivered a powerful and emotional apology for the huge numbers of deaths now occurring as a result of the deadly mRNA roll-out.

Haraguchi began by addressing the grief and loss felt by families who have lost loved ones who were coerced into taking the COVID jab. With a deep sense of sincerity, he extended his condolences and took responsibility for the failings of those in power. “I apologize to all of you. So many have died, and they shouldn’t have,” he said.

Thelibertybeacon.com reports: One of the key points in Haraguchi’s speech was his criticism of the ban on Ivermectin, a drug developed by Dr. Satoshi Omura, which he believed could have played a significant role in combating the pandemic. Haraguchi questioned the motives behind the ban, suggesting that economic interests were prioritized over public health. “Why? Because they are cheap. They don’t want it because it will interfere with the sales of the vaccines,” he argued. This statement drew loud applause from the crowd, many of whom felt that corporate profits had taken precedence over human lives.

Haraguchi then shared a deeply personal story about his own health struggles. After receiving vaccines, he developed a severe illness, specifically a rapidly progressing form of cancer. “This time last year, I had neither eyebrows nor hair. Two out of the three supposed vaccines I received were lethal batches,” he revealed. This candid account of his battle with cancer, which included significant physical changes like hair loss, struck a chord with the audience. He recounted an incident where his appearance became a point of distraction in the Diet, with an opponent focusing more on his wig than the issues at hand.

Adding to the conversation, Haraguchi disclosed that he was not the only member of Japan’s National Diet (legislature) to suffer adverse effects from vaccines. He mentioned that three of his colleagues had been severely affected, with some even hospitalized. “They are falling to pieces, some hospitalized. But they don’t speak up,” he explained. This revelation underscored a broader issue: the reluctance or inability of public figures to discuss their personal health challenges openly.

Haraguchi was particularly passionate about the attempts to silence those who question current policies and government actions. He recounted a recent incident where he was banned from speaking on Channel 3 after an interview with its president. 

“The other day, I spoke with the President of Channel 3, and I was banned. They are trying to silence our voices,” he stated. This attempt to censor dissenting voices highlighted a critical concern about freedom of speech and expression. Haraguchi urged the audience to remain steadfast in their resolve, saying,

“They are trying to block our freedom, our resistance, our power. But we will never lose.”

In the conclusion of his speech,

Haraguchi issued a rallying call for action. He urged the people to stand united in challenging the government and its questionable decisions. “Let’s overthrow this government,” he proclaimed, emphasizing the need for change and accountability. He called on legislators to continue fighting for the people’s lives and freedoms, “Let’s make it happen,” he concluded.

The protest that is happening right now (31st May 2024), which aims to draw tens of thousands of participants, marked a significant moment in the global discourse about pandemic management and health policies. Haraguchi’s speech, filled with personal anecdotes and strong criticisms, resonated deeply with the attendees.

Read this

---

爆弾：日本の元内務大臣が予防接種を受けていない人に謝罪：「あなたは正しかった、ワクチンは私たちの愛する人の何百万人もの人を殺している」

ミシェル・チョスドフスキーによる入門ノート

Introductory Note by Michel Chossudovsky

私の著書『 世界的なコロナ危機、人類に対するグローバルクーデター』  は、2022年4月に日本語で初めて出版されました。英語版は電子書籍の形で入手できます。

政治的圧力と検閲にもかかわらず私の本を出版してくれた日本の出版社には今でも感謝しています。

出版社と翻訳者に感謝します。

日本では、存在しない「殺人ウイルス」から日本人を守る手段として、mRNAワクチンが2021年2月に発売されたとされている。

すでに2億600万回以上が投与された。日本 国民はmRNAワクチンの危険性について知らされていなかった。

2021年12月、 日本の厚生労働省は 「心筋炎などの副作用の発生率が低い」ことを指摘し、モデルナ社とファイザー社のワクチンの追加接種を承認した。

日本の保健省の初期勧告によると（これは多くの国で適用されているものと同様でした。

「ワクチン接種のメリットは副反応のリスクよりも大きいため、 政府は人々にワクチン接種を推奨しています。」 （強調追加）

原口一博氏の勇気ある発言が指摘しているように、上記は誤解を招くものである。

「『あなたは正しかった。ワクチンは何百万人もの私たちの愛する人を殺している』」

新型コロナウイルスの「ワクチン」に関する欺瞞的な物語は、世界のさまざまな地域で崩壊しつつある。

カリフォルニア州の 第9巡回裁判所は、COVID-19 mRNA注射は「ワクチン」ではないとの判決を下した。

ドイツ では 、保健当局が、新型コロナウイルス対策のロックダウン、マスク着用義務、実験的なmRNA「ワクチン」の壊滅的な性質と影響を認めている。

日本の人々と連帯して。

世界中の人々と連帯します。

ミシェル・チョスドフスキー、グローバル・リサーチ、2024 年 6 月 11 日

 

日本の元総務大臣である原口一博氏は、ワクチン接種者の間で津波による死亡者が発生したことについて、ワクチン未接種者に謝罪した最初の主要政治家となった。

 

今週初め、大勢の日本国民が、パンデミックの最中に世界保健機関（WHO）や世界経済フォーラム（WEF）などのグローバリスト組織が犯した人道に対する罪に抗議するため街頭に出た。

原口氏は抗議活動の冒頭演説で、致命的なmRNAの流出の結果として現在発生している膨大な数の死者について力強く、感情的に謝罪した。

原口氏はまず、新型コロナウイルスのワクチン接種を強制され愛する人を失った遺族が感じている悲しみと喪失感について語った。 氏は心から哀悼の意を表し、権力者の失策の責任を認めた。  「皆さんにお詫びします。多くの人が亡くなりましたが、亡くなるべきではなかったのです」と氏は述べた。

Thelibertybeacon.com の報道によると、原口氏の演説の要点の一つは、 大村智博士が開発した イベルメクチンの禁止に対する批判だった。同氏は、この薬がパンデミック対策に大きな役割を果たせたと考えていた。原口氏は禁止の背後にある動機に疑問を呈し、公衆衛生よりも経済的利益が優先されたと示唆した。「なぜかって？ 安いからだ。ワクチンの売り上げに支障が出るから嫌がるんだ」と同氏は主張した。この発言は、企業の利益が人命よりも優先されたと感じていた聴衆から大きな拍手を浴びた。

原口氏はその後、自身の健康問題に関する非常に個人的な話をした。 ワクチン接種後、深刻な病気、具体的には急速に進行する癌を発症した。 「去年の今頃は、眉毛も髪の毛もありませんでした。私が受けた3つのワクチンのうち2つは致死的なワクチンでした」と彼は明かした。脱毛などの著しい身体的変化を含む癌との闘いについてのこの率直な話は、聴衆の共感を呼んだ。彼は、国会で彼の外見が気を散らす原因となり、対立候補が目の前の問題よりも彼のかつらに注目したという出来事を語った。

会話に加えて、原口氏は、 ワクチンによる副作用に苦しんだ日本の国会議員は自分だけではないことを明らかにした。同氏は、同僚3人が重篤な影響を受け、中には入院した人もいると述べた。 「彼らはバラバラになっていて、中には入院している人もいる。しかし、彼らは声を上げません」と彼は説明した。この暴露は、公人が個人の健康問題について公然と話し合うことに消極的である、あるいはそれができないという、より広範な問題を浮き彫りにした。

原口氏は、現在の政策や政府の行動に疑問を抱く人々を黙らせる試みに特に情熱を注いだ。同氏は、チャンネル3の社長とのインタビュー後にチャンネル3での発言を禁止された最近の出来事について語った 。  「先日、私はチャンネル 3 の社長と話をしましたが、私は禁止されました。彼らは私たちの声を黙らせようとしている」と彼は述べた。反対意見を検閲するこの試みは、言論と表現の自由に対する重大な懸念を浮き彫りにした。原口氏は聴衆に対し、「彼らは私たちの自由、私たちの抵抗、私たちの力を阻止しようとしている。しかし、私たちは決して負けません。」

原口氏は演説の最後に、行動を起こすよう呼びかけた。 政府とその疑わしい決定に異議を唱えるために国民が団結するよう促した。  「この政府を打倒しよう」と宣言し、変革と説明責任の必要性を強調した。議員らに国民の命と自由のために戦い続けるよう呼びかけ、「実現させよう」と締めくくった。

現在（2024年5月31日）行われている抗議活動は、数万人の参加を目指しており、パンデミック管理と健康政策に関する世界的な議論において重要な瞬間を刻んだ。個人的な逸話と強い批判に満ちた原口氏の演説は、参加者の心に深く響いた。

これを読む。

 

 

*

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

Having cut his teeth in the mainstream media, including stints at the BBC, Sean witnessed the corruption within the system and developed a burning desire to expose the secrets that protect the elite and allow them to continue waging war on humanity. Disturbed by the agenda of the elites and dissatisfied with the alternative media, Sean decided it was time to shake things up. Knight of Joseon (https://joseon.com)

Featured image is from TPV

---

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

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

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

---

My thanks to the Publisher and to the translator Tatsuo Iwana.

 

 

First published on October 5, 2023

If an experimental vaccine were to damage the heart and immune system in a significant number of individuals who received it, it is possible that it could lead to a decline in the overall population size.

This could occur for several reasons.

• First, damage to the heart could lead to an increase in cardiovascular diseases, which are a leading cause of mortality worldwide. This could result in a higher number of deaths among individuals who received the vaccine.
• Second, damage to the immune system could leave individuals more susceptible to other infections and diseases, which could also contribute to an increase in mortality.
• Last, but by no means least, the negative impacts of the vaccine on fertility and reproductive health could lead to a decline in the number of births, further contributing to a decline in the overall population size.

If such a vaccine were to be developed and distributed, it could potentially lead to depopulation due to increased mortality and decreased fertility.

Unfortunately, the world has found itself in a situation where powerful institutions and Governments have coerced millions of people into getting an experimental Covid-19 vaccine that causes all of the ill-fated effects mentioned above.

Official Government reports and confidential Pfizer documents prove it.

Therefore, you are witnessing mass depopulation unfold before your very eyes.

The push for mass Covid-19 vaccination was never about combating a virus. It was about reducing the global population.

This goal aligns with the interests of certain powerful corporations and individuals who stand to benefit from a smaller, more manageable population now that AI is advanced enough to replace hundreds of millions of workers.

Regardless of the specific cause, the implications of what is currently occurring in the real world are significant.

Millions Have ‘Died Suddenly’

Did you know that data on excess deaths in 15% of the world’s countries can be found on the website of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)?

This includes major countries like the USA, Canada, and the UK.

Additionally, we were able to extract even more up-to-date data on 28 European countries from EuroMOMO.

All of this information has been provided to the OECD and EuroMOMO by each country’s Government organizations, such as the Centers for Disease Control in the USA and the Office for National Statistics in the UK.

The following chart illustrates the disturbing trend of excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” countries (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US) as well as 27 other European countries –

Are you aware of the staggering number of excess deaths that have occurred in the US and Europe in recent years?

In 2021, the US saw almost 700,000 excess deaths, with another 360,000 excess deaths by November 11th, 2022.

Europe had a similarly alarming 382,000 excess deaths in 2021, with 309,000 excess deaths by November 2022.

And these figures don’t even include Ukraine!

Shockingly, even countries like New Zealand, Australia, and Canada have seen excess deaths that have not decreased since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine.

The following chart illustrates the disturbing trend of overall excess deaths in Australia in 2020, 2021, and up to week 30 of 2022 –

Did you know that the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine in Australia led to a shocking 747% increase in excess deaths, from 1,303 in 2020 to 11,042 in 2021?

And the situation has only gotten worse since then.

By the end of July 2022, there were a staggering 18,973 excess deaths in Australia – a 1,356% increase from 2020.

That’s more excess deaths in 7 months than in the previous two years combined.

And the situation in the US is similarly alarming –

Are you aware of the disturbing trend of excess deaths in the US following the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine?

By week 38 of 2022, 1,700 more people had died compared to the same time in 2020, and by week 38 of 2021, a shocking 109,000 more people had died compared to the same time in 2020.

These numbers indicate that rather than decreasing, deaths have actually increased following the vaccine rollout.

The following two charts illustrate the total excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” and Europe since the beginning of 2021 when the Covid-19 vaccine was introduced –

Did you know that over 1.8 million excess deaths have occurred in the “Five Eyes” and most of Europe since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine?

This shocking figure includes over 1 million excess deaths in the US and over 690,000 excess deaths in Europe according to the Centers for Disease Control and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, as well as significant numbers of excess deaths in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand.

The official narrative that the vaccine is safe and effective and would reduce the number of deaths is completely contradicted by these figures, which suggest that the Covid-19 vaccines may be the main cause of the excess deaths.

Children / Teens & Young Adults Have ‘Died Suddenly’

Did you know that excess deaths among children aged 0 to 14 in Europe skyrocketed by a staggering 755% between January and September 2022, according to official data?

This alarming increase, which has prompted the European Union to launch an investigation, occurred despite efforts by EuroMOMO to downplay the figures.

It’s worth noting that the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine was approved for use in children by the European Medicines Agency on 28th May 2021. Which was week 21 of 2021.

Then excess deaths “only “coincidentally” began to be recorded from week 22 once this emergency use authorisation was granted.

Overall, excess deaths rose 630% since the vaccine’s approval for use in children by September of 2022.

It’s a sad reality that despite the mounting evidence pointing to the clear danger of Covid-19 vaccinations for children, it is highly unlikely that authorities will acknowledge this risk.

Tragically, the significant increase in excess deaths among children in Europe since the European Medicines Agency emergency approved the vaccine for use in this population is likely to be dismissed as just another “coincidence” in the long list of such occurrences since the start of the pandemic.

It’s vital that we continue to examine and scrutinize the data to ensure that the health and well-being of our children are protected.

Did you also know that according to official figures quietly published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), nearly half a million children and young adults died by October 9th 2022 in the USA since the Food & Drug Administration first granted emergency use authorization for a Covid-19 vaccine?

This heartbreaking development has resulted in nearly 118,000 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 average.

The figures also reveal that there have been 7,680 more excess deaths among children and young adults in 2022 so far compared to the same time frame in 2020, at the height of the alleged Covid-19 pandemic.

However, the worst year for deaths among 0 to 44-year-olds was 2021, with 291,461 excess deaths in total, nearly 60,000 more than occurred in 2020.

According to the official CDC figures, this increase was mainly due to a mysterious sudden rise in deaths among children and young adults starting around week 31 of 2021.

It’s a heartbreaking reality that nearly half a million people aged 0 to 44 have died since week 51 of 2020, resulting in a staggering 117,719 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 five-year average.

According to official data, the average life expectancy in the USA was 77.28 years as of 2020.

If we are to believe the official narrative that Covid-19 is a deadly disease, then it’s perhaps understandable that 231,987 children and young adults up to the age of 44 died in 2020, resulting in 40,365 excess deaths as an unfortunate consequence of this alleged disease.

However, if we are to accept the official narrative that Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective, how do we explain the further increase in deaths among children and young adults in both 2021 and 2022?

It’s worth noting that millions of Americans were pressured into getting the vaccines, and millions of parents were similarly coerced into forcing their children to receive the injections.

The answer is clear: the official narrative is a blatant lie. The Covid-19 vaccines are neither safe nor effective.

The hard-to-find data provided by the CDC only hints at this disturbing trend of young American deaths, but further data published by the UK Government confirms it.

For example, a report published on July 6th, 2022 by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, a government agency, provides further evidence of the danger of these vaccines.

The report is titled ‘Deaths by Vaccination Status, England, 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2022‘, and it can be accessed on the ONS site here, and downloaded here.

Have you seen Table 2 of the report by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, which contains the monthly age-standardized mortality rates by vaccination status by age group for deaths per 100,000 person-years in England up to May 2022?

If not, you should take a look, because the figures it contains are truly disturbing.

We’ve taken the data provided by the ONS for January to May 2022 and created the following chart, which illustrates the devastating consequences of the mass Covid-19 vaccination campaign.

The chart shows the monthly age-standardized mortality rates by vaccination status among 18 to 39-year-olds for Non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022.

It’s clear from this data that the risks associated with these vaccines cannot be ignored.

It’s a disturbing trend: in every single month since the start of 2022, partly vaccinated and double vaccinated 18-39 year-olds have been more likely to die than unvaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds.

The situation has been particularly dire for triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds, whose mortality rate has worsened month by month since the mass Booster campaign that took place in the UK in December 2021.

In January, triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were slightly less likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group, with a mortality rate of 29.8 per 100,000 among the unvaccinated and 28.1 per 100,000 among the triple-vaccinated.

However, from February onwards, triple-vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds were 27% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals, with a mortality rate of 26.7 per 100k among the triple-vaccinated and 21 per 100k among the unvaccinated.

The situation worsened even further by May 2022, with triple vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds 52% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group, with a mortality rate of 21.4 per 100k among the triple vaccinated and 14.1 among the unvaccinated.

The partly vaccinated also fared poorly, with May seeing partly vaccinated 18 to 39-year-olds 202% more likely to die than unvaccinated individuals in this age group.

The report by the UK’s Office for National Statistics also includes mortality rates for children, although the UK government attempted to conceal this data.

The following chart shows the mortality rates by vaccination status per 100,000 person-years among children aged 10 to 14 in England for the period 1st January 2021 to 31st May 2022 –

According to the UK’s Office for National Statistics, the mortality rate for Covid-19 deaths among unvaccinated children aged 10 to 14 is 0.31 per 100,000 person-years.

However, for one-dose vaccinated children, the mortality rate is 3.24 per 100,000 person-years, and for triple-vaccinated children, the mortality rate is an alarming 41.29 per 100,000 person-years.

The situation is no better when it comes to non-Covid-19 deaths. The all-cause death mortality rate is 6.39 per 100,000 person-years among unvaccinated children and slightly higher at 6.48 among partly vaccinated children.

However, the rate worsens with each additional injection: the all-cause death mortality rate is 97.28 among double-vaccinated children and an alarming 289.02 per 100,000 person-years among triple-vaccinated children.

This means, according to the UK government’s own official data, double-vaccinated children are 1422% or 15.22 times more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children, while triple-vaccinated children are 4423% or 45.23 times more likely to die of any cause than unvaccinated children.

The data provided by the Office for National Statistics, which is age-standardized and rates per 100,000 population, is definitive proof that Covid-19 vaccines increase a person’s risk of death.

It’s no surprise, then, to learn that a secret CDC report confirms that nearly half a million American children and young adults have died following the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, resulting in nearly 118,000 excess deaths compared to the 2015-2019 five-year average.

You Only Have One Heart & It Will Not Regenerate

The potential consequences of a COVID-19 vaccine that harms the heart are dire. If such a vaccine were widely distributed and administered to a significant portion of the population, it could lead to millions of sudden deaths.

The heart is a vital organ that plays a critical role in maintaining the body’s proper functioning, so any adverse effects on it could have disastrous consequences.

Unfortunately, at least two Covid-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna do exactly this, and they have now been administered to millions of people multiple times, and it is likely that these vaccines are responsible for the millions of excess deaths recorded worldwide since their rollout.

The risk of myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle that can lead to sudden death if not treated, is a serious concern when it comes to the Covid-19 vaccine. This is especially true for young and healthy adults and children, who may not experience any symptoms of myocarditis until the condition has progressed to a severe stage.

Symptoms of myocarditis can include chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue, and abnormal heart rhythms, and if left untreated, it can result in heart failure, cardiac arrest, and sudden cardiac death.

This is likely why an investigation of official figures published by Public Health Scotland in April 2022 found that there has been a 67% increase compared to the historical average in the number of people aged 15 to 44 experiencing heart attacks, cardiac arrest, myocarditis, stroke, and other cardiovascular diseases since this age group was offered the Covid-19 vaccine.

Unfortunately, a study conducted by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has shown that the risk of myocarditis following mRNA COVID vaccination is around 133x greater than the background risk in the population.

This means Covid vaccination increases the risk of suffering myocarditis, an autoimmune disease causing inflammation of the heart, by 13,200%.

It is clear from the data presented that the Covid-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna have had a significant impact on the health of millions of people worldwide.

The potential adverse effects on the heart, including myocarditis and an increased risk of heart attacks, cardiac arrest, and other cardiovascular diseases, could lead to a significant number of sudden deaths if these vaccines are widely distributed and administered to a significant portion of the population.

Additionally, the high number of excess deaths that have occurred since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccines suggests that these vaccines may be contributing to a larger trend of depopulation.

Excess deaths refer to the number of deaths above what would normally be expected in a given population, and the fact that there have been millions of excess deaths in the “Five Eyes” countries and Europe since the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccine is a cause for concern.

The potential consequences of depopulation are far-reaching and could have significant impacts on society, including economic disruption and a decrease in the overall population size. It is imperative that further research is conducted to understand the true extent of the impact of the Covid-19 vaccines on population health and to ensure that any future vaccines are thoroughly tested and deemed safe before being distributed.

Obviously, it stands to reason that more people need to be dying than are being born for depopulation to take place. And unfortunately, confidential Pfizer documents confirm this is now our reality.

The Confidential Pfizer Documents

The data contained in this document is alarming and raises serious concerns about the safety of the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy and lactation. According to the data, there have been numerous cases of pregnant women experiencing adverse reactions to the vaccine, including miscarriages, stillbirths, and other serious complications.

Furthermore, the data suggests that the vaccine may also pose risks to breastfeeding infants. There have been numerous reports of infants experiencing adverse reactions to the vaccine when it is passed to them through their mother’s milk.

These findings are extremely concerning and highlight the need for further research into the safety of Covid-19 vaccines during pregnancy and lactation. If the risks associated with these vaccines are not properly addressed, it could have significant implications for fertility rates and overall population numbers.

It is imperative that authorities take these concerns seriously and conduct thorough investigations into the safety of Covid-19 vaccines during pregnancy and lactation. The health and well-being of both mothers and their children must be a top priority.

Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine has been linked to a high number of adverse reactions in pregnant women. According to the company’s own data, of the 270 known cases of exposure to the vaccine during pregnancy, 46% of the mothers (124) experienced an adverse reaction.

Of these, 75 were considered serious, including uterine contractions and fetal death.

This means that 58% of the mothers who reported adverse reactions suffered a serious event. These troubling findings raise concerns about the safety of the vaccine for pregnant women and highlight the need for further research.

It is alarming that Pfizer’s own data shows that 124 out of 270 pregnant women who were exposed to the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine experienced an adverse reaction. Of those, 75 were considered serious, including fetal death.

It is also concerning that Pfizer has no information on the outcomes of 238 out of 270 pregnancies. These figures raise serious questions about the safety of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for pregnant women and their fetuses.

The findings of another Pfizer study on Wistar Han rats show that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine accumulates in the ovaries over time.

The ovaries are a pair of female glands that produce eggs and the female hormones estrogen and progesterone.

The study, which can be found in the list of confidential Pfizer documents published by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under a court order, administered a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine to 21 female and 21 male rats.

The researchers measured the concentration of total radioactivity in the blood, plasma, and tissues of the rats at various points after the injection was administered. The accumulation of the vaccine in the ovaries raises concerns about its potential impact on fertility and reproductive health.

One of the most concerning findings from the study on the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine is the fact that it accumulates in the ovaries over time.

In the first 15 minutes following injection, the total lipid concentration in the ovaries measured 0.104ml, but this increased to 1.34ml after just one hour, 2.34ml after four hours, and 12.3ml after 48 hours.

While the scientists conducting the study did not continue their research beyond 48 hours, it’s unclear whether this concerning accumulation continued.

These findings raise serious questions about the potential long-term effects of the Pfizer vaccine on fertility and reproductive health.

But according to data published by Public Health Scotland, the number of people suffering from ovarian cancer has significantly increased in 2021 compared to the previous year and the 2017-2019 average.

This could potentially be linked to the accumulation of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine in the ovaries, as found in a study on rats.

Newborn baby deaths in Scotland have also reached a critical level for the second time in just seven months, according to official figures.

The rate of neonatal deaths in March 2022 was 4.6 per 1,000 live births, a 119% increase from the expected rate of deaths.

This means the neonatal mortality rate exceeded an upper warning threshold known as the “control limit” for the second time following the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines to women / pregnant women.

The last time it exceeded this limit was in September 2021, when neonatal deaths per 1,000 live births reached 5.1. These levels are on par with those typically seen in the late 1980s.

At the time, PHS said the fact that the upper control limit has been exceeded “indicates there is a higher likelihood that there are factors beyond random variation that have contributed to the number of deaths that occurred”.

This news is shocking and raises serious concerns about the safety of Covid-19 vaccines.

Increased Mortality

It’s alarming to see in figures found in a report published by the UK Government titled ‘Deaths by Vaccination Status, England, 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2022‘, and it can be accessed on the ONS site here, and downloaded here, that in every single month between January and May of 2022, individuals aged 18 to 39 who were either partly or fully vaccinated were more likely to die from non-Covid causes compared to their unvaccinated counterparts.

The situation is particularly dire for triple-vaccinated individuals, whose mortality rates have only worsened month after month since the widespread booster campaign in December 2021.

These shocking figures, provided by the UK’s Office for National Statistics, confirm that the Covid-19 vaccines significantly increase a person’s risk of death.

It’s clear that the vaccines are not only failing to protect individuals, but they are actively causing harm. It’s crucial that action is taken to halt their distribution and investigate the true dangers they pose.

But this situation isn’t isolated to 18 to 39-year-olds. It’s common among every single age group.

The following two charts show the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status for non-Covid-19 deaths in England between January and May 2022 for all age groups –

You can read a full investigation of the above figures broken down by age group here.

Depopulation by COVID-19 Vaccination

The potential consequences of the Covid-19 vaccination campaign are alarming and could lead to depopulation on a global scale.

The heart is a vital organ and any adverse effects on it could have devastating consequences. This is especially true for young and healthy adults and children, as myocarditis may not cause any symptoms until the condition has progressed to a severe stage.

Data from Pfizer reveals that 46% of pregnant women who received the vaccine suffered adverse reactions, with 58% experiencing serious adverse events ranging from uterine contraction to fetal death.

Moreover, studies have shown that the vaccine accumulates in the ovaries over time, raising concerns about its potential impact on fertility.

Official figures also reveal that mortality rates are highest among the vaccinated and lowest among the unvaccinated population in every age group.

With all of this evidence, it is clear that the Covid-19 vaccination campaign could have serious consequences for the future of humanity.

But Why?

There are various reasons that some people may want to depopulate the planet.

One reason could be overpopulation, as some people believe that the earth’s resources are being depleted at an unsustainable rate due to the increasing population.

Other people may argue that depopulation is necessary due to the negative impact that humans have had on the environment, and reducing the population could help mitigate some of these problems.

Some people may also advocate for depopulation due to concerns about the impact of climate change, as a smaller population would likely lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Finally, some people may simply believe that a smaller population would be more manageable and easier to control, and may advocate for depopulation for this reason.

Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates are two powerful figures who have expressed support for the idea of depopulation through various means, including vaccination.

Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum, has argued that reducing the global population would be beneficial for the environment and the economy, and has suggested that advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence could play a role in achieving this goal.

Similarly, Bill Gates has stated that vaccination campaigns can be used to reduce the population, and has funded numerous initiatives that promote vaccination as a means of controlling population growth.

So it should now begin to make sense as to why powerful figures like Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab have been advocating for widespread vaccination campaigns.

The push for mass Covid-19 vaccination isn’t about combating a virus, but about reducing the global population.

This goal aligns with the interests of certain corporations and individuals who stand to benefit from a smaller, more manageable population.

*

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

Featured image is from The Expose

---

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

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.  Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Global Research Wants to Hear From You!

***

“I was asked a wide variety of questions about my political beliefs, why I write, think and say the things that I do. But also specific questions about my reporting and also just completely insane queries about my relationship, or indeed GrayZone’s relationship, with the FSB – which is to say Russia’s federal security service. Of course, these were ludicrous and I almost laughingly dismissed them as the rubbish that they were. And then I am asked, “Why are you reacting so strongly?” “

– Kit Klarenberg, relating to his interrogation by UK authorities. (from this week’s interview.)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Listeners to the Global Research News Hour, and visitors to its partner website Global Research have probably become aware of charges by critics that both these media outlets have a tendency to spit out numerous “conspiracy theories.” Such behaviour casts blame for incidents on elements within U.S., Canada, the UK, and their fellow guardians of the “international rules-based order” (the “good guys”) and letting the real villains (Russia, China, Iran, etc) get away with wrongdoing.

Some examples explored herein include counter-narratives arguing potential government complicity in events such as the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the major political assassinations of the 1960s, and 9/11. [1]

In his 2013 book Conspiracy Theory in America, Florida State University political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith wrote:

I introduced the concept of State Crime Against Democracy (SCAD) to displace the term “conspiracy theory.” I say displace rather than replace because SCAD is not another name for conspiracy theory; it is a name for the type of wrongdoing about which the conspiracy theory label discourages us from speaking. Basically, the term “conspiracy theory” is applied pejoratively to allegations of official wrongdoing that have not been substantiated by public officials themselves. [2]

When it comes to the task of daring to allege wrongdoing in international affairs on the part of today’s paladins of virtue, and having ample room and sources to back up your argument, few today could match a new super-duper investigative snooper like Kit Klarenberg.

Klarenberg, who has written for a number of publications, puts out intriguing articles on both old and breaking stories at a rate of at least once a week. Former citizen of the United Kingdom currently living in Serbia, much of his work specializes on the actions of United Kingdom intelligence operations. Of particular note, in 2022, he dug up dirt on the left-wing journalist Paul Mason who was colluding with British Intelligence and targeting academics and other people who were putting out the “wrong” points about the Ukraine War. [3]

This was a story that got the attention of this radio host, and evidently also the attention of several UK security people concerned about people putting out the wrong story!

This week, on the Global Research News Hour, Kit Klarenberg appears on the show as a feature guest to chat about some of the feature story topics in his analytical arsenal, from 9/11 and the October 7 attacks on Israel, to the UK based race rioting of last month, to the moment when he was detained by authorities and had his rights as we know them completely thrown away.

Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions. His work has previously appeared in MintPress News, The Cradle, Declassified UK, and Grayzone.  His work has been published at Global Research. His substack is kitklarenberg.com

(Global Research News Hour Episode 440)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the man who as the UK’s Chief Prosecutor made the decisions to prosecute and imprison and keep in prison Julian Assange, is now on September 13th visiting the White House in order to persuade U.S. President Joe Biden to enable Ukraine to use NATO missiles to strike deep inside Russia, including The Kremlin, which is less than 317 miles from Ukraine’s border.

On September 12th, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had issued the following warning about this potential decision:

.

.

Here is the transcript:

Answer to a question from a media representative

After his speech at the plenary session of the United Cultures Forum, Vladimir Putin answered a question from a media representative.

September 12, 2024 18:55 Saint Petersburg

Question: Over the last few days, we have seen and heard how at a very high level in Great Britain and the United States, the topic has been discussed that the Kiev regime will be able to strike deep into Russian territory with long-range Western weapons. And, apparently, this decision is either about to be made, or, apparently, has already been made. This is, of course, an extraordinary thing. I wanted to ask you to comment on what is happening.

V. Putin: There is an attempt to substitute concepts. Because we are not talking about allowing or prohibiting the Kiev regime from striking Russian territory. It is already striking with the help of unmanned aerial vehicles and other means. But when we are talking about using high-precision long-range weapons of Western manufacture, it is a completely different story.

The thing is – I have already spoken about this, and any experts will confirm this both here and in the West – the Ukrainian army is not capable of delivering strikes with modern high-precision long-range systems of Western manufacture. It cannot do this. This is only possible using intelligence data from satellites, which Ukraine does not have, this data is only from satellites of either the European Union or the United States – in general, from NATO satellites. This is the first thing.

The second and very important, perhaps the key, is that flight assignments for these missile systems can, in fact, only be entered by NATO military personnel. Ukrainian military personnel cannot do this.

So it’s not a question of allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not. It’s a question of deciding whether NATO countries are directly involved in a military conflict or not.

If this decision is made, it will mean nothing less than the direct participation of NATO countries, the United States, and European countries in the war in Ukraine. This is their direct participation, and this, of course, significantly changes the very essence, the very nature of the conflict.

This will mean that NATO countries, the US, European countries are fighting with Russia. And if this is so, then, bearing in mind the change in the very essence of this conflict, we will make appropriate decisions based on the threats that will be created for us.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Eric’s Substack.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Al Mayadeen English

 

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance. Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ? Or Was it “A False Flag”.

In the words of Philip Giraldi: 

“As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles.

In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case.” 

A Tissue of Lies 

“A Tissue of Lies” has served to justify the killing in the Gaza Strip of more than 35,000 civilians, of which 70% are women and children coupled with total destruction and an endless  string of atrocities. 

The Cat is out of the bag. Netanyahu has tacitly acknowledged that it was “A False Flag” which was intent upon justifying a carefully planned genocidal attack against Palestine: 

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

Does this candid statement not suggest that Netanyahu and his military-intelligence apparatus are responsible for the killings of innocent Israeli civilians? 

On that same day of October 7, 2023 Netanyahu launched a carefully planned military operation against the Gaza Strip entitled “State of Readiness For War”.  

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance.

Had  “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” been a “surprise attack” as parroted by the media, Netanyahu’s “State of Readiness For War” could not have been carried out (at short notice) on that same day, namely October 7, 2023. 

South Africa’s  Legal Procedure against The State of Israel 

On January 11, 2024, The Republic of South Africa  presented to The Hague World Court, a carefully formulated Legal Procedure against the State of Israel predicated on  The Genocide Convention.

This legal procedure, however, has not contributed to repealing the ongoing genocide and saving the lives of tens of thousands of civilians.

I should mention that the False Flag issue –which constitutes a crime against humanity– was casually ignored by the ICJ.

Our suggestion is that  an investigation followed by a legal procedure pertaining to the “False Flag” should be undertaken.

The heads of State and heads of government who have endorsed Israel’s Genocidal Acts are from a legal standpoint complicit. 

The ICJ Judgement was contradictory. The Presiding Judge (former legal advisor to Hillary Clinton) was in conflict of interest: 

The ICJ Judgment of January 26, 2024 assigns the Netanyahu government representing the State of Israel –accused by the Republic of South Africa of genocide against the People of Palestine– with a mandate to “take all measures within its power” to “prevent and punish” those responsible for having committed “Genocidal Acts”. (under Article IV of the Genocide Convention)

Sounds contradictory? What the ICJ judgment intimates –from a twisted legal standpoint– is that Netanyahu’s Cabinet which was “appointed” to implement  the “prevent and punish” mandate cannot be accused of having committed “Genocidal Acts”.

See

“Fake Justice” at The Hague: The ICJ “Appoints” Netanyahu to “Prevent” and “Punish” Those Responsible for “Genocidal Acts”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 24, 2024

 

Our intent is to provide a broad and detailed understanding of the false flag issue pertaining to Palestine

The titles of the videos, articles and texts presented below:  

1. Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”? They Let it Happen? Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?, by Dr. Philip Giraldi. 
2. Video: ICJ Hearings in The Hague, 
3. Text of Israel’s Secret Intelligence Memorandum. Planning the Forcible Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland
   
4. Video: “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”, Interview. Michel Chossudovsky with Caroline Mailloux
5. “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”, by Michel Chossudovsky
6. Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor? But Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”, by Philip Giraldi 

 

In solidarity with the People of Palestine.

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, January 11, 2024, September 14, 2024

 

Part I

Is the Gaza-Israel Fighting “A False Flag”?

They Let it Happen?

Their Objective Is “to Wipe Gaza Off the Map”?

by Dr. Philip Giraldi 

October 8, 2023

Am I the only one who read about a speech given by Netanyahu or someone in his cabinet about a week ago in which he/they in passing referred to a “developing security situation” which rather suggests (to me) that they might have known about developments in Gaza and chose to let it happen so they can wipe Gaza off the map in retaliation and, possibly relying on the US pledge to have Israel’s “back,” then implicating Iran and attacking that country.

I cannot find a link to it, but have a fairly strong recollection of what I read as I thought at the time it would serve as a pretext for another massacre of Palestinians.

As a former intelligence officer, I find it impossible to believe that Israel did not have multiple informants inside Gaza as well as electronic listening devices all along the border wall which would have picked up movements of groups and vehicles.

In other words, the whole thing might be a tissue of lies as is often the case.

And as is also ALWAYS the case Joe Biden is preparing to send some billions of dollars to poor little Israel to pay for “defending” itself.

 

 Part II

VIDEO. ICJ Hearings in The Hague

January 2024

ICJ Hearings 

1. January 11, 2024. Click Here to View the ICJ Hearings,

2. January 12, 2024. Israel’s Legal Team’s response to South Africa, ICJ The Hague at 10 am. Video in Real Time 

3. Video: South Africa’s Closing Argument against Israel for Genocide. January 11 Hearing at the World Court

 

Part III

Israel’s Secret Intelligence Memorandum

Planning the Forcible Exclusion of Palestinians from Their Homeland

by Michel Chossudovsky

October 2023

 

An official “secret” memorandum authored by Israel’s  Ministry of Intelligence “is recommending the forcible and permanent transfer of the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinian residents to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula”, namely to a refugee camp in Egyptian territory. There are indications of Israel-Egypt negotiations  as well as consultations with the U.S. 

The 10-page document, dated Oct. 13, 2023, bears the logo of the Intelligence Ministry … assesses three options regarding the future of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip … It recommends a full population transfer as its preferred course of action. … The document, the authenticity of which was confirmed by the ministry, has been translated into English in full here on +972.

See below, click here or below to access complete document (10 pages)

For further details and analysis see:

“Wiping Gaza Off the Map”: Israel’s “Secret” Intelligence Memorandum “Option C” by Michel Chossudovsky

 

Part IV 

Video: “False Flag. Wiping Gaza Off the Map”

Interview: Michel Chossudovsky and Caroline Mailloux 

October 17, 2023

 

To comment or access Rumble 

 

 

 

 

Part V 

“False Flag”. Wiping Gaza Off the Map

by

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

October 12, 2023

 .

Introduction

.

Early Saturday October 7, 2023, Hamas launched “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” led by Hamas’ Military Chief Mohammed Deif. On that same day, Netanyahu confirmed a so-called “State of Readiness For War”.  

Military operations are invariably planned well in advance (See Netanyahu’s January 2023 statement below). Was “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm” a “surprise attack” ?

U.S. intelligence say they weren’t aware of an impending Hamas attack. 

“One would have to be almost hopelessly naïve to buy the corporate state media line that the Hamas invasion  was an Israeli “intelligence failure”. Mossad is one of, if not the, most powerful intelligence agencies on the planet.”

Did Netanyahu and his vast military and intelligence apparatus (Mossad et al) have foreknowledge of the Hamas attack which has resulted in countless deaths of Israelis and Palestinians.

Was a carefully formulated Israeli plan to wage an all out war against Palestinians envisaged prior to the launching by Hamas of  “Operation Al-Aqsa Storm”? This was not a failure of Israeli Intelligence, as conveyed by the media. Quite the opposite. 

Evidence and testimonies suggest that the Netanyahu government had foreknowledge of the actions of Hamas which have resulted in hundreds of Israeli and Palestinian deaths. And “They Let it Happen”:

“Hamas fired between 2-5 thousand rockets at Israel and hundreds of Israeli are dead, while dozens of Israelis were captured as prisoners of war. In the ensuing air response by Israel, hundreds of Palestinians were killed in Gaza.” (Stephen Sahiounie)  

This was Not a “Surprise Attack”

Was the Hamas Attack a “False Flag”? 

“I served in the IDF 25 years ago, in the intelligence forces. There’s no way Israel did not know of what’s coming.

A cat moving alongside the fence is triggering all forces. So this??

What happened to the “strongest army in the world”?

How come border crossings were wide open?? Something is VERY WRONG HERE, something is very strange, this chain of events is very unusual and not typical for the Israeli defense system.

To me this suprise attack seems like a planned operation. On all fronts. 

If I was a conspiracy theorist I would say that this feels like the work of the Deep State.  

It feels like the people of Israel and the people of Palestine have been sold, once again, to the higher powers that be. 

(Statement by Efrat Fenigson, former IDF intelligence,  October 7, 2023, emphasis added)

Ironically, the media (NBC) is now contending that the “Hamas attack bears hallmarks of Iranian involvement”

History: The Relationship between Mossad and Hamas

What is the relationship between Mossad and Hamas? Is Hamas an “intelligence asset”? There is a long history. 

Hamas (Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) (Islamic Resistance Movement), was founded in 1987 by Sheik Ahmed Yassin. It was supported at the outset by Israeli intelligence as a means to weaken the Palestinian Authority:

“Thanks to Mossad, (Israel’s “Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks”), Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat’s Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation.

Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, “Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)”. (L’Humanité, translated from French)

The links of Hamas to Mossad and US intelligence have been acknowledged by Rep. Ron Paul in a statement to the U.S Congress: “Hamas Was Started by Israel”?

“You know Hamas, if you look at the history, you’ll find out that Hamas was encouraged and really started by Israel because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat… (Rep. Ron Paul, 2011)

What this statement entails is that Hamas is and remains “an intelligence asset”, namely “an “asset” to intelligence agencies”

See also the WSJ (January 24, 2009) “How Israel helped to Spawn Hamas”. 

Instead of trying to curb Gaza’s Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah. (WSJ, emphasis added)

 

“The Hamas Partnership” is confirmed by Netanyahu

 

“The Cat is Out of the Bag”

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” he [Netanyahu] told a meeting of his Likud party’s Knesset members in March 2019. “This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” (Haaretz, October 9, 2023, emphasis added)

Does this statement not suggest that Netanyahu and his military-intelligence apparatus are responsible for the killings of innocent Israeli civilians? 

“Support” and “Money” for Hamas. 

“Transferring Money to Hamas” on behalf of Netanyahu is confirmed by a Times of Israel October 8, 2023 Report: 

“Hamas was treated as a partner to the detriment of the Palestinian Authority to prevent Abbas from moving towards creating a Palestinian State. Hamas was promoted from a terrorist group to an organization with which Israel conducted negotiations through Egypt, and which was allowed to receive suitcases containing millions of dollars from Qatar through the Gaza crossings.” (emphasis added)

.

The Dangers of Military Escalation?

 

Let us be under no illusions, this “false flag” operation is a complex military-intelligence undertaking, carefully planned over several years, in liaison and  coordination with US intelligence, the Pentagon and NATO. 

In turn, this action against Palestine is already conducive to a process of military escalation which potentially could engulf a large part of Middle East.

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

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

The premise of NATO-Israel military cooperation is that “Israel is under attack”. Does Israel’s agreement with the Atlantic Alliance “obligate” NATO “to come to the rescue of Israel” under the doctrine of “collective security” (Article 5 of the Washington treaty)?

In recent developments, U.S. military deployments in the Middle East are ongoing allegedly to avoid escalation.

According to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg:

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

Netanyahu’s “New Stage”

“The Long War” against Palestine

 

Netanyahu’s stated objective, which constitutes a new stage in the 75 year old war (since Nakba, 1948) against the people of Palestine is no longer predicated on “Apartheid” or “Separation”. This new stage –which is also directed against Israelis who want peace— consists in “total appropriation” as well as the outright exclusion of the Palestinian people from their homeland:

“These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me [Netanyahu]: The Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea and Samaria.” (Netanyahu January 2023. emphasis added)

We bring to the attention of our readers the incisive analysis of  Dr. Philip Giraldi pointing to the likelihood of a “False Flag’”. 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 8, 2023, Above text updated on October 12, 2023

.

 

Part VI

Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor?

But Who Actually Did What to Whom?

“This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”

by

Dr Philip Giraldi

October 16, 2023

.

“As a former on-the-ground intelligence officer, I am somewhat convinced that this was likely more like a false flag operation rather than a case of institutional failure on the part of the Israelis.”

It’s amazing how America’s thought-controlled media is able to come up with a suitable narrative almost immediately whenever there is an international incident that might be subject to multiple interpretations.

***

Since 1948 Israel has expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from their homes,

has occupied nearly all of the historic Palestine, has empowered its army to kill thousands of local people, and

has more recently established an apartheid regime that even denies that Palestinian Arabs are human in the same sense that Jews are.

Netanyahu-allied government minister Ayelet Shaked memorably has called for Israel not only to exterminate all Palestinian children, whom she has described as “little snakes,” but also to kill their mothers who gave birth to them.

But when the Arabs strike back against the hatred that confronts them with their limited resources it is Israel that is described as the victimand the Palestinians who are dehumanized and portrayed as the “terrorists.”

Media in the US and Europe were quick to label the Hamas offensive breaching the formidable Israeli border defenses as “Israel’s 9/11” or even “Israel’s Pearl Harbor” to establish the context that the Israelis have been on the receiving end of an “unprovoked” attack by a cruel and heartless enemy.

Israel has responded to the attack with a heavy bombardment of Gaza that has destroyed infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, while also cutting off food supplies, water and electricity.

It has demanded that residents of north Gaza, all 1.1 million of them, evacuate to make way for a possible ground offensive but there is nowhere to go as all the borders are closed, and the United Nations is calling it a demand with “devastating humanitarian consequences.” Journalist Peter Beinart has commented “This is a monstrous crime. It’s happening in plain view, with US support.”

And the United States government is indeed typically on the same page as Israel. President Joe Biden, citing fabricated stories about dead Jewish babies, speaks of how Israel has a “duty” to defend itself, while the Palestinians somehow have no right to protect themselves at all, much less to rise up against their persecutors in a struggle for freedom.

And Washington has also unhesitatingly chosen to directly involve itself in the conflict, completely on the side of the Jewish state, asserting repeatedly that “Israel has a right to defend itself” and telling the Israelis that “we have your back” while also dispatching two aircraft carrier groups to the scene of the fighting as well as the 101^st Airborne to Jordan and increasing the readiness of Marines stationed in Kuwait.

The White House could have taken more aggressive steps to encourage a ceasefire and talks but has chosen instead to issue essentially toothless calls to let the trapped civilians escape while also backing a devastating Israeli military response.

 

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Tel Aviv, Oct. 12, 2023. – Secretary Antony Blinken on X

Israel is also hosting the worthless and brain dead Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin who will be providing advice along the lines of his insightful comment that Hamas is “evil” and “worse than ISIS.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken is already in Jerusalem, announcing that the US is there to support Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s unity government “as long as America exists” after first saying “I come before you not only as the United States Secretary of State, but also as a Jew.”

Blinken’s explicit association of his personal religion with his official role as a representative of the US government makes clear that a key element in why he is there is because he is “a Jew.” Perhaps he should recuse himself from policy making involving Israel as being “a Jew” would not appear to be a United States national interest and is likely to produce irrational responses to developing situations.

If all of this sounds a lot like Ukraine it should, except that in Ukraine the US and NATO are fighting against Russia, which is being demonized for occupying what is claimed Ukrainian territory, whereas in Palestine they are supporting the occupier of actual Palestinian territory, Israel.

Funny thing that, and the word “hypocrisy” comes immediately to mind. As it turns out, however, I am somewhat on the same page as much of the media, agreeing that the Hamas incursion is something like 9/11, though I am sure that my take would not be found acceptable to the CNN Jake Tappers of this world.

My thinking is that Israel knew in advance about 9/11 in the United States due to its extensive spying network and chose not to share the information because it was to their advantage not to do so.

Indeed, a pleased Netanyahu even stated several years later that “9/11 was a good thing because it made the United States join us in our fight.”

That the attacks killed 3,000 Americans did not bother the Israeli government as Israel has a long history of killing Americans when it can benefit from so doing, starting with the attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 which killed 34 sailors.

So too in this case in Gaza, Netanyahu may have decided to encourage an unexpected development, making it like 9/11, that would enable him to escalate and “mow the grass” as the Israelis put it, in the remainder of Arab Palestine.

And bear in mind that the actual incident that triggered the uprising was a rampage involving at least 800 Israeli settlers in and around the al-Aqsa mosque, the third holiest site in Islam, beating pilgrims and destroying Palestinian shops, all without any interference from the nearby Israeli security forces. The rioting was clearly allowed and even encouraged by the government.

Drawing on my experience as a former on-the-ground intelligence officer, I am somewhat convinced that this was likely more like a false flag operation rather than a case of institutional failure on the part of the Israelis.

Israel had an extensive electronic and physical wall backed by soldiers and weaponry that completely surrounded Gaza on the landward side, so effective that it was claimed that not even a mouse could get in.

The Mediterranean side of Gaza was also tightly controlled by the Israeli Navy and boats to and from Gaza were completely blocked.

Egypt tightly controlled the southern part of Gaza bordering on the Sinai. So Gaza was under 24/7 complete surveillance and control at all times. Israeli military intelligence also certainly had a network of recruited informants inside Gaza who would report on any training or movements, easy enough to do when you can approach people who are starving and make them an offer they cannot refuse just for providing information on what they see and hear.

And then there was a warning from the Egyptian government to Israel ten days before the Hamas attack, with Egypt’s Intelligence Minister General Abbas Kamel personally calling Netanyahu and sharing intelligence suggesting that the Gazans were likely to do “something unusual, a terrible operation.” Other media accounts reveal how Hamas trained and practiced their maneuvers publicly. There were also assessments made by US intelligence, which were shared with Israel, suggesting that something was afoot. So, given all of the evidence, there likely was no intelligence failure to anticipate and counter the Hamas attack but rather a political decision made by the Israeli government that knew what might be coming and chose to let it proceed to provide a casus belli to destroy Gaza, vowing that “Every member of Hamas is a dead man,” and then go on from there. And “from there” might well include Lebanon, Syria and Iran, possibly with the assistance of the United States to do the heavy lifting. Iran in particular is already being blamed by the usual suspects as a party involved in the Hamas attack, so far without any evidence whatsoever, which is typical of how these stories evolve.

Image: Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir visits Al-Aqsa, 3 January (Social Media)

And Israel has moved far to the right politically to such an extent that it might appreciate a little ethnic cleansing to demonstrate its seriousness. Netanyahu and other senior government officials in his cabinet have recently been making passing references to a “developing security situation” in the country to justify the intensifying of the raids by the army against Palestinian towns and refugee camps. The new government in Israel has also placed police under the control of ultra-nationalist Jewish Power party head Itamar Ben-Gvir as National Security Minister. He has been exploiting his position to call in particular for a war to destroy Hamas in Gaza, which is precisely what is happening. Gaza might be of particular interest to Ben-Gvir and others as it uniquely shelters an armed and organized resistance in the form of Hamas, which, oddly, was founded with the support of Israel to split the Palestinian political resistance with Fatah controlling the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza.

There is another issue relating to the recent fighting that one would like to know the answer to, namely how did Hamas get its weapons in the first place?

Some were clearly manufactured from parts and scrap but others were sophisticated and, as Gaza is blockaded on all sides, smuggling them in becomes problematical. One argument is that they were supplied by Iran and others to be brought in by tunnels, but the tunnels on two sides would end up in Israel and on the third side in Egypt. The fourth side is the Mediterranean Sea. So how did they arrive? Is there a possible triple or even quadruple cross taking place with different parties lying to each other? And should there be concerns that after the American armada arrives off the coast of Gaza there just might be some kind of false flag incident engineered by Netanyahu that will involve Washington directly in the fighting?

And there is what amounts to a related issue that should be of concern to everyone in the US and generically speaking the “Western world” where human rights are at least nominally respected. The message from almost all Western governments is that Israel has a carte blanche to do whatever it likes even when it involves war crimes to include mass forced displacement or genocide. In this case, the coordinated government-media response which is intended to protect Israel from any criticism almost immediately began circulating fabricated tales of atrocities while also delivering a hit on freedom of speech and association. President Biden, who should be trying to defuse the crisis, is instead adding fuel to the flames, saying of Hamas that “Pure, unadulterated evil has been unleashed on the earth!”

In Florida the arch Zionist stooge Governor Ron Desantis met with Jewish leaders in a synagogue to announce draconian measures against Iran to include sanctions on companies that are in any way linked to that country. One might point out that those businesses have done nothing wrong and Desantis also called for “eradication of Hamas from the earth.” His intellectual depth was at the same time revealed when he said the US should not take in any Gazan refugees because they are “antisemites.”

And in South Carolina, America’s favorite he/she Senator Lindsey Graham is calling for a US attack on Iran as well as declaring the war against Hamas to be “a religious war” and urging the Israeli army to invade Gaza and do “Whatever the hell you have to do to” to “level the place.”

And the Europeans are equally spineless in their deference to Israel. The Israeli president declared the that there are no innocent civilians in Gaza, and not long after that top European Union representatives met with him to offer their unqualified support. Meanwhile in France, the spineless and feckless government of Emmanuel Macron has sought to outlaw any gathering that expresses support for Palestinian rights.

And in the UK, the Home Secretary Suella Braverman has proposed criminalizing any protest against Israeli actions or anything in support of Palestine to include banning any public display of the Palestinian national flag, which she regards as a “criminal offense toward the Jewish community in Britain.”

She has also said that “I would encourage police to consider whether chants such as: ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ should be understood as an expression of a violent desire to see Israel erased from the world, and whether its use in certain contexts may amount to a racially aggravated section 5 public order offence.” Berlin’s Public Prosecutor’s Office has also classified the use of the expression as a “criminal offense.” The manner in which most Western political elites are lining up unquestionably and even enthusiastically behind Israel and its craven leaders’ desire for bloody vengeance is truly shocking but comes as no surprise.

Beyond the issue of Gaza itself, some in Israel are arguing that Netanyahu has personally benefitted from the unrest through the creation of the national unity government which has ended for the time being the huge demonstrations protesting his judicial reform proposals. If all of this comes together politically as it might in the next several weeks, we could be seeing the initial steps in what will develop into the complete ethnic cleansing of what was once Palestine, in line with Netanyahu’s assertion that “the Jewish people have an exclusive and inalienable right to all parts of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop the settlement of all parts of the Land of Israel.” So all of the former Palestine is now a land to be defined by its Jewishness where Jews are in full control and are free to do whatever they want without any objection, referred to by the Israeli government as “an exclusive right to self-determination.” And it has all possibly been brought to fruition by the enablement provided by the current developments in Gaza.

The original source of Dr. Giraldi’s October 16, 2023 article. 

Gaza Strikes Back. It’s Another 9/11 or Pearl Harbor but Who Actually Did What to Whom? “This Was More Likely a False Flag Operation”

By Philip Giraldi, October 16, 2023

***

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 councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

 

The following article published twenty years ago, in August 2004 refutes the 9/11 Commission script as to what actually happened on the planes.

Much of this  detailed information was based on alleged cell phone conversations between passengers and family members. Yet the technology to use a cell phone on a plane above 8500 feet did not exist in September 2001.  

A revised version of the article was subsequently published as a chapter in my book entitled America’s “War on Terrorism”, Montreal 2005, which can be ordered directly from Global Research   

Note: Several of the links to quoted 2001-2004 articles are no longer available. The author has made updates quoting the original sources.

“We Have Some Planes”

The 9/11 Commission’s Report provides an almost visual description of the Arab hijackers. It depicts in minute detail events occurring inside the cabin of the four hijacked planes.

In the absence of surviving passengers, this “corroborating evidence”, was based on passengers’ cell and air phone conversations with their loved ones. According to the Report, the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) was only recovered in the case of one of the flights (UAL 93).

Focusing on the personal drama of the passengers, the Commission has built much of its narrative around the phone conversations. The Arabs are portrayed with their knives and box cutters, scheming in the name of Allah, to bring down the planes and turn them “into large guided missiles”

(Report, Chapter 1, http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf ).

The Technology of Wireless Transmission

The Report conveys the impression that cell phone ground-to-air communication from high altitude was of reasonably good quality, and that there was no major impediment or obstruction in wireless transmission.

Some of the conversations were with onboard air phones, which contrary to the cell phones provide for good quality transmission. The report does not draw a clear demarcation between the two types of calls.

More significantly, what this carefully drafted script fails to mention is that, given the prevailing technology in September 2001, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to place a wireless cell call from an aircraft traveling at high speed above 8000 feet:

“Wireless communications networks weren’t designed for ground-to-air communication. Cellular experts privately admit that they’re surprised the calls were able to be placed from the hijacked planes, and that they lasted as long as they did. They speculate that the only reason that the calls went through in the first place is that the aircraft were flying so close to the ground

(http://www.elliott.org/technology/2001/cellpermit.htm)

Expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry casts serious doubt on “the findings” of the 9/11 Commission. According to Alexa Graf, a spokesman of AT&T, commenting in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks:

“it was almost a fluke that the [9/11] calls reached their destinations… From high altitudes, the call quality is not very good, and most callers will experience drops. Although calls are not reliable, callers can pick up and hold calls for a little while below a certain altitude”

 (http://wirelessreview.com/ar/wireless_final_contact/)

New Wireless Technology

While serious doubts regarding the cell calls were expressed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, a new landmark in the wireless telecom industry has further contributed to upsetting the Commission’s credibility. Within days of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report in July, American Airlines and Qualcomm, proudly announced the development of a new wireless technology –which will at some future date allow airline passengers using their cell phones to contact family and friends from a commercial aircraft (no doubt at a  special rate aerial roaming charge)

(see https://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2004/07/15/american-airlines-and-qualcomm-complete-test-flight-evaluate-cabin-mobile)

 

“Qualcomm Incorporated (Nasdaq: QCOM), pioneer and world leader of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) digital wireless technology, and American Airlines, the world’s largest carrier, today [July 14, 2004] successfully demonstrated in-cabin voice communications using commercially available CDMA mobile phones on a commercial American Airlines aircraft. Through the use of an in-cabin third-generation (3G) “picocell” network, passengers on the test flight were able to place and receive calls as if they were on the ground.

The proof-of-concept demonstration flight originated out of the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. … Passengers included members of the media and government representatives.

A small in-cabin CDMA cellular base station on the plane, that uses standard cellular communications, was connected to the worldwide terrestrial phone network by an air-to-ground Globalstar satellite link.

The information gathered during this proof-of-concept demonstration flight will be used to further research into the quality, convenience and safety of communications with personal CDMA mobile phones carried by passengers on a commercial aircraft.

“We are pleased to have worked so closely with American Airlines to complete this proof-of-concept demonstration for the in-flight use of 3G CDMA technology,” said Dr. Irwin Jacobs, chairman and CEO of Qualcomm. “Together, we have anticipated the future needs of wireless subscribers in the airline industry and are aggressively driving the delivery of innovative solutions to meet those needs.” Qualcomm, July 14, 2024

Note The Date: : July 14, 2004  [Almost 3  Years after September 11, 2001] 

Needless to say, neither the service, nor the “third generation” hardware, nor the “Piccocell” CDMA base station inside the cabin (which so to speak mimics a cell phone communication tower inside the plane) were available on the morning of September 11, 2001.

The 911 Commission points to the clarity and detail of these telephone conversations. In substance, the Qualcomm July 2004 report quoted above creates yet another embarrassing hitch in the official story. 

The untimely American Airlines / Qualcomm announcement acted as a cold shower. Barely acknowledged in press reports, it confirmed that the Bush administration had embroidered the cell phone narrative (similar to what they did with WMDs) and that the 9/11 Commission’s account was either flawed or grossly exaggerated.

The Washington Post: (July 27, 2004) confirms without referring explicitly to 9/11 that: 

“Travelers could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month [July 2004], American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls.”

.

Altitude and Cellphone Transmission

According to industry experts, the crucial link in wireless cell phone transmission from an aircraft is altitude. Beyond a certain altitude which is usually reached within a few minutes after takeoff, cell phone calls are no longer possible.

In other words, given the wireless technology available on September 11 2001, these cell calls could not have been placed from high altitude.

The only way passengers could have got through to family and friends using their cell phones, is if the planes were flying below 8000 feet. Yet even at low altitude, below 8000 feet, cell phone communication is of poor quality.

The crucial question: at what altitude were the planes traveling, when the calls were placed?

While the information provided by the Commission is scanty, the Report’s timeline does not suggest that the planes were consistently traveling at low altitude. In fact the Report confirms that a fair number of the cell phone calls were placed while the plane was traveling at altitudes above 8000 feet, which is considered as the cutoff altitude for cell phone transmission.

Let us review the timeline of these calls in relation to the information provided by the Report on flight paths and altitude.

United Airlines Flight 175

United Airlines Flight 175 departed for Los Angeles at 8:00:

 “It pushed back from its gate at 7:58 and departed Logan Airport at 8:14.”

The Report confirms that by 8:33, “it had reached its assigned cruising altitude of 31,000 feet.” According to the Report, it maintained this cruising altitude until 8.51, when it “deviated from its assigned altitude”:

“The first operational evidence that something was abnormal on United 175 came at 8:47, when the aircraft changed beacon codes twice within a minute. At 8:51, the flight deviated from its assigned altitude, and a minute later New York air traffic controllers began repeatedly and unsuccessfully trying to contact it.”

And one minute later at 8.52, Lee Hanson receives a call from his son Peter.

[Flight UAL 175] “At 8:52, in Easton, Connecticut, a man named Lee Hanson received a phone call from his son Peter, a passenger on United 175. His son told him: “I think they’ve taken over the cockpit—An attendant has been stabbed— and someone else up front may have been killed. The plane is making strange moves. Call United Airlines—Tell them it’s Flight 175, Boston to LA.

Press reports confirm that Peter Hanson was using his cell (i.e it was not an air phone). Unless the plane had suddenly nose-dived, the plane was still at high altitude at 8.52. (Moreover, Hanson’s call could have been initiated at least a minute prior to his father Lee Hanson picking up the phone.)

Another call was received at 8.52 (one minute after it deviated from its assigned altitude of 31,000 feet). The Report does not say whether this is an air phone or a cell phone call:

Also at 8:52, a male flight attendant called a United office in San Francisco, reaching Marc Policastro. The flight attendant reported that the flight had been hijacked, both pilots had been killed, a flight attendant had been stabbed, and the hijackers were probably flying the plane. The call lasted about two minutes, after which Policastro and a colleague tried unsuccessfully to contact the flight.

It is not clear whether this was a call to Policastro’s cell phone or to the UAL switchboard.

At 8:58, UAL 175 “took a heading toward New York City.”:

“At 8:59, Flight 175 passenger Brian David Sweeney tried to call his wife, Julie. He left a message on their home answering machine that the plane had been hijacked. He then called his mother, Louise Sweeney, told her the flight had been hijacked, and added that the passengers were thinking about storming the cockpit to take control of the plane away from the hijackers.

At 9:00, Lee Hanson received a second call from his son Peter:

It’s getting bad, Dad—A stewardess was stabbed—They seem to have knives and Mace—They said they have a bomb—It’s getting very bad on the plane—Passengers are throwing up and getting sick—The plane is making jerky movements—I don’t think the pilot is flying the plane—I think we are going down—I think they intend to go to Chicago or someplace and fly into a building—Don’t worry, Dad— If it happens, it’ll be very fast—My God, my God.

The call ended abruptly. Lee Hanson had heard a woman scream just before it cut off. He turned on a television, and in her home so did Louise Sweeney. Both then saw the second aircraft hit the World Trade Center.50 At 9:03:11, United Airlines Flight 175 struck the South Tower of the World Trade Center. All on board, along with an unknown number of people in the tower, were killed instantly.”

American Airlines Flight 77

American Airlines Flight 77 was scheduled to depart from Washington Dulles for Los Angeles at 8:10… “At 8:46, the flight reached its assigned cruising altitude of 35,000 feet.”

At 8:51, American 77 transmitted its last routine radio communication. The hijacking began between 8:51 and 8:54. As on American 11 and United 175, the hijackers used knives (reported by one passenger) and moved all the passengers (and possibly crew) to the rear of the aircraft (reported by one flight attendant and one passenger). Unlike the earlier flights, the Flight 77 hijackers were reported by a passenger to have box cutters. Finally, a passenger reported that an announcement had been made by the “pilot” that the plane had been hijacked….

On flight AA 77, which allegedly crashed into the Pentagon, the transponder was turned off at 8:56am; the recorded altitude at the time the transponder was turned off is not mentioned. According to the Commission’s Report, cell calls started 16 minutes later, at 9:12am, twenty minutes before it (allegedly) crashed into the Pentagon at 9.32am:

” [at 9.12] Renee May called her mother, Nancy May, in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane.”

According to the Report, when the autopilot was disengaged at 9:29am, the aircraft was at 7,000 feet and some 38 miles west of the Pentagon. This happened two minutes before the crash.

Most of the calls on Flight 77 were placed between 9.12am and 9.26am,  prior to the disengagement of automatic piloting at 9.29am.  The plane could indeed have been traveling at either a higher or a lower altitude to that reached at 9.29. Yet, at the same time there is no indication in the Report that the plane had been traveling below the 7000 feet level, which it reached at 9.29am.

At some point between 9:16 and 9:26, Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States. [using an airphone]

(Report p 7, see http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf )

United  Airlines Flight 93

UAL flight 93 was the only one of the four planes that, according to the official story, did not crash into a building. Flight 93 passengers, apparently:”alerted through phone calls, attempted to subdue the hijackers. and the hijackers crashed the plane [in Pennsylvania] to prevent the passengers gaining control.” ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_flight_93 ). Another version of events, was that UAL 93 was shot down.

According to the Commission’s account:

“the first 46 minutes of Flight 93’s cross-country trip proceeded routinely. Radio communications from the plane were normal. Heading, speed, and altitude ran according to plan. At 9:24, Ballinger’s warning to United 93 was received in the cockpit. Within two minutes, at 9:26, the pilot, Jason Dahl, responded with a note of puzzlement: “Ed, confirm latest mssg plz—Jason.”70 The hijackers attacked at 9:28. While traveling 35,000 feet above eastern Ohio, United 93 suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into the descent, the FAA’s air traffic control center in Cleveland received the first of two radio transmissions from the aircraft….”

At least ten cell calls are reported to have taken place on flight 93.

The Report confirms that passengers started placing calls with cell and air phones shortly after 9.32am, four minutes after the Report’s confirmation of the plane’s attitude of 35,000 feet. In other words, the calls started some 9 minutes before the Cleveland Center lost UAL 93’s transponder signal (9.41) and approximately 30 minutes before the crash in Pennsylvania (10.03)

“At 9:41, Cleveland Center lost United 93’s transponder signal. The controller located it on primary radar, matched its position with visual sightings from other aircraft, and tracked the flight as it turned east, then south.164 “

This suggests that the altitude was known to air traffic control up until the time when the transponder signal was lost by the Cleveland Center. (Radar and visual sightings provided information on its flight path from 9.41 to 10.03.)

Moreover, there was no indication from the Report that the aircraft had swooped down to a lower level of altitude, apart from the 700 feet drop recorded at 9.28. from a cruising altitude of 35,000 feet:

[pages 12-14 of the Report] courier script as in Report.

“At 9:32, a hijacker, probably Jarrah, made or attempted to make the following announcement to the passengers of Flight 93:“Ladies and Gentlemen: Here the captain, please sit down keep remaining sitting.

We have a bomb on board. So, sit.” The flight data recorder (also recovered) indicates that Jarrah then instructed the plane’s autopilot to turn the aircraft around and head east. The cockpit voice recorder data indicate that a woman, most likely a flight attendant, was being held captive in the cockpit. She struggled with one of the hijackers who killed or otherwise silenced her.

Shortly thereafter, the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from GTE airphones and cellular phones. These calls between family, friends, and colleagues took place until the end of the flight and provided those on the ground with firsthand accounts. They enabled the passengers to gain critical information, including the news that two aircraft had slammed into the World Trade Center.77…At least two callers from the flight reported that the hijackers knew that passengers were making calls but did not seem to care.

The hijackers were wearing red bandanas, and they forced the passengers to the back of the aircraft.80 Callers reported that a passenger had been stabbed and that two people were lying on the floor of the cabin, injured or dead—possibly the captain and first officer. One caller reported that a flight attendant had been killed.81 One of the callers from United 93 also reported that he thought the hijackers might possess a gun. But none of the other callers reported the presence of a firearm. One recipient of a call from the aircraft recounted specifically asking her caller whether the hijackers had guns.

The passenger replied that he did not see one. No evidence of firearms or of their identifiable remains was found at the aircraft’s crash site, and the cockpit voice recorder gives no indication of a gun being fired or mentioned at any time.

We believe that if the hijackers had possessed a gun, they would have used it in the flight’s last minutes as the passengers fought back.82 Passengers on three flights reported the hijackers’ claim of having a bomb. The FBI told us they found no trace of explosives at the crash sites. One of the passengers who mentioned a bomb expressed his belief that it was not real. Lacking any evidence that the hijackers attempted to smuggle such illegal items past the security screening checkpoints, we believe the bombs were probably fake. During at least five of the passengers’ phone calls, information was shared about the attacks that had occurred earlier that morning at the World Trade Center. Five calls described the intent of passengers and surviving crew members to revolt against the hijackers. According to one call, they voted on whether to rush the terrorists in an attempt to retake the plane. They decided, and acted. At 9:57, the passenger assault began. Several passengers had terminated phone calls with loved ones in order to join the revolt. One of the callers ended her message as follows:

“Everyone’s running up to first class. I’ve got to go. Bye.” The cockpit voice recorder captured the sounds of the passenger assault muffled by the intervening cockpit door. Some family members who listened to the recording report that they can hear the voice of a loved one among the din.

We cannot identify whose voices can be heard. But the assault was sustained. In response, Jarrah immediately began to roll the airplane to the left and right, attempting to knock the passengers off balance. At 9:58:57, Jarrah told another hijacker in the cockpit to block the door. Jarrah continued to roll the airplane sharply left and right, but the assault continued. At 9:59, Jarrah changed tactics and pitched the nose of the airplane up and down to disrupt the assault. The recorder captured the sounds of loud thumps, crashes, shouts, and breaking glasses and plates.

At 10:00:03, Jarrah stabilized the airplane. Five seconds later, Jarrah asked, “Is that it? Shall we finish it off?” A hijacker responded, “No. Not yet. When they all come, we finish it off.” The sounds of fighting continued outside the cockpit. Again, Jarrah pitched the nose of the aircraft up and down.At 10:00:26, a passenger in the background said, “In the cockpit. If we don’t we’ll die!” Sixteen seconds later, a passenger yelled,“Roll it!” Jarrah stopped the violent maneuvers at about 10:01:00 and said, “Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest!” He then asked another hijacker in the cockpit,“ Is that it? I mean, shall we put it down?” to which the other replied, “Yes, put it in it, and pull it down.” The passengers continued their assault and at 10:02:23, a hijacker said, “Pull it down! Pull it down!” The hijackers remained at the controls but must have judged that the passengers were only seconds from overcoming them. The airplane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to the right.

The airplane rolled onto its back, and one of the hijackers began shouting “Allah is the greatest. Allah is the greatest. ”With the sounds of the passenger counterattack continuing, the aircraft plowed into an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 580 miles per hour, about 20 minutes’ flying time from Washington D.C. Jarrah’s objective was to crash his airliner into symbols of the American Republic, the Capitol or the White House. He was defeated by the alerted, unarmed passengers of United”

The Mysterious Call of Edward Felt from UAL 93

Earlier coverage of the fate of UAL 93 was based in part on a reported cell call from a passenger named Edward Felt, who managed to reach an emergency official in Pennsylvania. How he got the emergency supervisor’s number and managed to reach him remains unclear.

The call was apparently received at 9.58 am, eight minutes before the reported time of the crash at 10.06 am in Pennsylvania:

“Local emergency officials said they received a cell phone call at 9.58 am from a man who said he was a passenger aboard the flight. The man said he had locked himself in the bathroom and told emergency dispatchers that the plane had been hijacked. “We are being hijacked! We are being hijacked!” he was quoted as saying. A California man identified as Tom Burnett reportedly called his wife and told her that somebody on the plane had been stabbed. “We’re all going to die, but three of us are going to do something,” he told her. “I love you honey.”

The alleged call by Edward Felt from the toilet of the aircraft of UAL 93 was answered by Glenn Cramer, the emergency supervisor in Pennsylvania who took the call.

It is worth noting that Glenn Cramer was subsequently gagged by the FBI.” (See Robert Wallace`s incisive analysis published in Sept 2002 by the Daily Mirror, (http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/WAL403A.html ).

Ironically, this high profile cell call by Ed Felt, which would have provided crucial evidence to the 9/11 Commission was, for some reason, not mentioned in the Report.

American Airlines Flight 11

Flight 11 took off at 7:59.  Just before 8:14. The Report outlines an airphone conversation of flight attendant Betty Ong and much of the narrative hinges upon this airphone conversation

There are no clear-cut reports on the use of cell phones on Flight AA11.  According to the Report, American 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 8.46.

Concluding Remarks

A large part of the description, regarding the 19 hijackers relies on cell phone conversations with family and friends.

While a few of these calls (placed at low altitude) could have got through, the wireless technology was not available. On this issue, expert opinion within the wireless telecom industry is unequivocal.

In other words, at least part of the Commission’s script in Chapter 1 on the cell phone conversations, is fabricated. 

According to the American Airline / Qualcomm [2004] announcement, the technology for cell phone transmission at high altitude will only be available aboard commercial aircraft in 2006. This is an inescapable fact.

In the eyes of public opinion, the cell phone conversations on the Arab hijackers is needed to sustain the illusion that America is under attack.

The “war on terrorism” underlying the National Security doctrine relies on real time “evidence” concerning the Arab hijackers. The latter personify, so to speak, this illusive “outside enemy” (Al Qaeda), which is threatening the homeland.

Embodied into the Commission’s “script” of 911, the narrative of what happened on the plane with the Arab hijackers is therefore crucial. It is an integral part of the Administration’s disinformation and propaganda program. It constitutes a justification for the anti-terror legislation under the Patriot acts and the waging of America’s pre-emptive wars against Afghanistan and Iraq.

 Note: Emphasis added (bold) 

---

America’s “War on Terrorism”

Michel Chossudovsky’s book can be order directly from Global Research. Click link. to order

.

.

..

.

.

.

---

ANNEX

The 9/11 Report’s Footnotes on the Cell Phone Conversations

70. On FDR, see NTSB report,“Specialist’s Factual Report of Investigation—Digital Flight Data Recorder” for United Airlines Flight 93, Feb. 15, 2002; on CVR, see FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003; Commission review of Aircraft Communication and Reporting System (ACARS) messages sent to and from Flight 93 (which indicate time of message transmission and receipt); see UAL record, Ed Ballinger ACARS log, Sept. 11, 2001. At 9:22, after learning of the events at the World Trade Center, Melody Homer, the wife of co-pilot Leroy Homer, had an ACARS message sent to her husband in the cockpit asking if he was okay. See UAL record,ACARS message, Sept. 11, 2001.

71. On FDR, see NTSB report,“Specialist’s Factual Report of Investigation—Digital Flight Data Recorder” for United Airlines Flight 93, Feb. 15, 2002; on CVR, see FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003; FAA report,“Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events: September 11, 2001,” Sept. 17, 2001; NTSB report, Air Traffic Control Recording—United Airlines Flight 93, Dec. 21, 2001.

72.The 37 passengers represented a load factor of 20.33 percent of the plane’s seating capacity of 182, considerably below the 52.09 percent for Flight 93 on Tuesdays in the three-month period prior to September 11 (June 11–September 4, 2001). See UAL report, Flight 93 EWR-SFO load factors, undated. Five passengers holding reservations for Flight 93 did not show for the flight.All five were interviewed and cleared by the FBI. FBI report,“Flight #93 ‘No Show’ Passengers from 9/11/01,” Sept. 18, 2001.

73. INS record,Withdrawal of Application for Admission for Mohamed al Kahtani,Aug. 4, 2001.

74. See FAA regulations,Admission to flight deck, 14 C.F.R. § 121.547 (2001);UAL records, copies of boarding passes for United 93, Sept. 11,2001.One passenger reported that ten first-class passengers were aboard the flight. If that number is accurate, it would include the four hijackers. FBI report of investigation, interview of Lisa Jefferson, Sept. 11, 2001;UAL record, Flight 93 passenger manifest, Sept. 11, 2001.All but one of the six passengers seated in the first-class cabin communicated with the ground during the flight, and none mentioned anyone from their cabin having gone into the cockpit before the hijacking.Moreover, it is unlikely that the highly regarded and experienced pilot and co-pilot of Flight 93 would have allowed an observer into the cockpit before or after takeoff who had not obtained the proper permission. See UAL records, personnel files of Flight 93 pilots. For jumpseat information, see UAL record,Weight and Balance Information for Flight 93 and Flight 175, Sept. 11, 2001;AAL records, Dispatch Environmental Control/Weekly Flight Summary for Flight 11 and Flight 77, Sept. 11, 2001.

75. Like Atta on Flight 11, Jarrah apparently did not know how to operate the communication radios; thus his attempts to communicate with the passengers were broadcast on the ATC channel. See FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003.Also, by 9:32 FAA notified United’s headquarters that the flight was not responding to radio calls.According to United, the flight’s nonresponse and its turn to the east led the airline to believe by 9:36 that the plane was hijacked. See Rich Miles interview (Nov. 21, 2003); UAL report, “United dispatch SMFDO activities—terrorist crisis,” Sept. 11, 2001.

76. In accordance with FAA regulations, United 93’s cockpit voice recorder recorded the last 31 minutes of sounds from the cockpit via microphones in the pilots’ headsets, as well as in the overhead panel of the flight deck. This is the only recorder from the four hijacked airplanes to survive the impact and ensuing fire.The CVRs and FDRs from American 11 and United 175 were not found,and the CVR from American Flight 77 was badly burned and not recoverable. See FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,”Dec. 4, 2003; see also FAA regulations, 14 C.F.R. §§ 25.1457, 91.609, 91.1045, 121.359; Flight 93 CVR data. A transcript of the CVR recording was prepared by the NTSB and the FBI.

77. All calls placed on airphones were from the rear of the aircraft. There was one airphone installed in each row of seats on both sides of the aisle.The airphone system was capable of transmitting only eight calls at any one time. See FBI report of investigation, airphone records for flights UAL 93 and UAL 175 on Sept. 11, 2001, Sept. 18, 2001.

78.FAA audio file, Cleveland Center, position Lorain Radar; Flight 93 CVR data; FBI report, “CVR from UA Flight #93,” Dec. 4, 2003.

79. FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Todd Beamer, Sept. 11, 2001, through June 11, 2002; FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Sandy Bradshaw, Sept. 11, 2001, through Oct. 4, 2001.Text messages warning the cockpit of Flight 93 were sent to the aircraft by Ed Ballinger at 9:24. See UAL record, Ed Ballinger’s ACARS log, Sept. 11, 2001.

80.We have relied mainly on the record of FBI interviews with the people who received calls. The FBI interviews were conducted while memories were still fresh and were less likely to have been affected by reading the accounts of others or hearing stories in the media. In some cases we have conducted our own interviews to supplement or verify the record. See FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Todd Beamer, Mark Bingham,Sandy Bradshaw,Marion Britton,Thomas Burnett, Joseph DeLuca,Edward Felt, Jeremy Glick,Lauren
Grandcolas, Linda Gronlund, CeeCee Lyles, Honor Wainio.

81. FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Thomas Burnett, Sept. 11, 2001; FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Marion Britton, Sept. 14, 2001, through Nov. 8, 2001; Lisa Jefferson interview (May 11, 2004); FBI report of investigation, interview of Lisa Jefferson, Sept. 11, 2001; Richard Belme interview (Nov. 21, 2003).

82. See Jere Longman, Among the Heroes—United Flight 93 and the Passengers and Crew Who Fought Back (Harper-Collins, 2002), p. 107; Deena Burnett interview (Apr. 26, 2004); FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Jeremy Glick, Sept. 11, 2001, through Sept. 12, 2001; Lyzbeth Glick interview (Apr. 22, 2004). Experts told us that a gunshot would definitely be audible on the CVR. The FBI found no evidence of a firearm at the crash site of Flight 93. See FBI response to Commission briefing request no. 6, undated (topic 11).The FBI collected 14 knives or portions of knives at the Flight 93 crash site. FBI report, “Knives Found at the UA Flight 93 Crash Site,” undated.

83. FBI response to Commission briefing request no. 6, undated (topic 11); FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from Jeremy Glick, Sept. 11, 2001, through Sept. 12, 2001.

84. See FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from United 93.

85. FBI reports of investigation, interviews of recipients of calls from United 93. For quote, see FBI report of investigation, interview of Philip Bradshaw, Sept. 11, 2001; Philip Bradshaw interview (June 15, 2004); Flight 93 FDR and CVR data.At 9:55:11 Jarrah dialed in the VHF Omni-directional Range (VOR) frequency for the VOR navigational aid at Washington Reagan National Airport, further indicating that the attack was planned for the nation’s capital.

Kiev já não esconde o seu desespero para ser autorizado a atacar alvos na “Rússia profunda”. Depois de vários pedidos falhados de autorização por parte dos EUA, o regime pediu às autoridades britânicas que apoiassem a sua exigência, alegando que a medida é necessária para que a Ucrânia alcance os seus objectivos estratégicos na guerra. Londres não está em posição de autorizar ou não tais ataques sem consenso prévio com os americanos, mas a sede por uma escalada de tensões faz com que Kiev aja de forma irracional.

O primeiro-ministro ucraniano, Denis Shmyhal, pediu ao secretário dos Negócios Estrangeiros do Reino Unido, David Lammy, que apoiasse a exigência da Ucrânia de usar mísseis de longo alcance contra a Rússia. Lammy estava em visita oficial a Kiev juntamente com Antony Blinken. Alguns analistas ocidentais esperavam que a viagem de Blinken visasse precisamente anunciar uma autorização pública para estes ataques, mas nenhuma mudança na posição americana foi declarada até agora.

Durante uma reunião com o oficial britânico, Shmyhal disse:

“Nós [ucranianos] esperamos que o equipamento de longo alcance para ataques no território do nosso inimigo seja alcançado. Esperamos sua ajuda e apoio nesta questão.”

Lammy parecia desconfortável com o pedido, pois as palavras soavam como uma clara tentativa de criar um “lobby” e pressionar os EUA a aceitarem as exigências da Ucrânia. Lammy evitou dar uma resposta conclusiva sobre o assunto, mas um dia antes do encontro com Shmyhal já havia deixado claro que decisões estratégicas não seriam anunciadas na viagem.

“É extremamente importante que nós (Lammy e Blinken) viajemos juntos para ouvir dos nossos homólogos ucranianos e do Presidente Zelensky a sua avaliação da situação no terreno e das suas necessidades (…) Seria, no entanto, bastante errado comentar os detalhes das questões operacionais num fórum como este, porque a única pessoa que poderia beneficiar é Putin, e não faremos nada para lhe dar qualquer vantagem na sua invasão ilegal”, disse Lammy.

Na mesma linha, Blinken confirmou que o objetivo da viagem é apenas ouvir as exigências e necessidades ucranianas, sem tomar qualquer decisão no momento. Ele disse que tudo o que for discutido durante a viagem será relatado aos governos americano e britânico após o final da expedição, e qualquer possível decisão será tomada apenas posteriormente – o que implica que qualquer esforço ucraniano de “autorização” é inútil para agora.

“Um dos objetivos da viagem que faremos juntos é ouvir diretamente da liderança ucraniana, incluindo o presidente Zelensky, sobre como exatamente os ucranianos veem as suas necessidades neste momento, quais os objetivos e o que podemos fazer para apoiar essas necessidades (..) Tudo o que posso dizer é que ouviremos atentamente os nossos parceiros ucranianos, ambos apresentaremos relatórios ao primeiro-ministro e ao presidente Biden nos próximos dias, e prevejo plenamente que isto é algo que eles abordarão quando nos encontrarmos na sexta-feira”, disse Blinken.

Entretanto, Londres parece disposta a mudar o foco das exigências da Ucrânia. O Reino Unido anunciou novas sanções contra navios que supostamente trabalham para contornar o embargo ao petróleo russo. Lammy comentou a medida durante a sua visita a Kiev, descrevendo-a como uma espécie de vitória estratégica para o lado ucraniano ocidental. Ele disse que as sanções poderiam infligir sérios danos à economia russa, dificultando assim os seus esforços militares. Lammy parece simplesmente querer que Kiev veja tais medidas “moderadas” como “suficientes” e pare de pedir políticas militares crescentes.

“A Rússia foi forçada a gastar mais de oito mil milhões de dólares (6 mil milhões de libras) para acumular esta frota. Mas com os petroleiros sancionados ociosos e incapazes de carregar petróleo, estamos determinados a fazer do investimento de Putin um passo em falso dispendioso para o Kremlin”, acrescentou Lammy.

Alguns analistas acreditam que Blinken e Lammy “autorizaram” secretamente os ataques profundos durante a viagem. Não há provas que apoiem esta afirmação até agora, mas seria uma medida suicida das potências ocidentais. Se Kiev começar a lançar tais ataques a partir de agora, Moscou terá a certeza de que tal autorização foi dada. Neste cenário, a Rússia seria forçada a responder de forma incisiva, o que resultaria numa escalada generalizada de violência.

Washington e Londres querem, sem dúvida, a guerra, mas não querem ser alvo de uma ação retaliatória da Rússia, uma vez que nenhum dos lados beneficiaria de uma guerra aberta ou nuclear. Se Kiev utilizar estas armas contra o território russo profundo, os EUA e o Reino Unido alegarão muito provavelmente que não deram qualquer autorização, deixando o regime ucraniano assumir sozinho a responsabilidade.

Pedir ajuda a Londres é inútil, uma vez que os britânicos nunca tomariam uma decisão sem comunicação prévia com os EUA. Londres e Washington atuam juntas em todos os seus movimentos. O desespero de Kiev para gerar a escalada e a internacionalização está a impedir que as autoridades ucranianas percebam que não há sentido estratégico nas suas ações. “Pressionar” os seus patrões internacionais é um esforço inútil, uma vez que a Ucrânia, como agente por procuração, deve seguir ordens e não exigir nada.

Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

 

Artigo em inglês : Regime de Kiev pede apoio de Londres em ataques com mísseis de longo alcance, InfoBrics, 12 de Setembro de 2024.

Imagem : InfoBrics

*

Lucas Leiroz, membro da Associação de Jornalistas do BRICS, pesquisador do Centro de Estudos Geoestratégicos, especialista militar.

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

 

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

First posted on September 29, 2021

.

.

.

For more than ten years, meetings have been held by billionaires described as philanthropists to Reduce the Size of the World’s Population culminating with the 2020-2023 Covid crisis.

Recent developments suggest that “Depopulation” is an integral part of the so-called Covid mandates including the lockdown policies and the mRNA “vaccine”. 

Flash back to 2009. According to the Wall Street Journal: “Billionaires Try to Shrink World’s Population”.

In May 2009, the Billionaire philanthropists met behind closed doors at the home of the president of The Rockefeller University in Manhattan.

This Secret Gathering was sponsored by Bill Gates. They called themselves “The Good Club”. 

Among the participants were the late David Rockefeller, Warren Buffett, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg  Ted Turner, Oprah Winfrey and many more. 

In May 2009, the WSJ as well as the Sunday Times reported: (John Harlow, Los Angeles) that

“Some of America’s leading billionaires have met secretly to consider how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world’s population and speed up improvements in health and education.”

The emphasis was not on population growth (i.e Planned Parenthood) but on “Depopulation”, i.e,. the reduction in the absolute size of the World’s population.

To read complete WSJ article click here.

According to the Sunday Times report :

The philanthropists who attended a summit convened on the initiative of Bill Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, discussed joining forces to overcome political and religious obstacles to change.

…

Stacy Palmer, editor of the Chronicle of Philanthropy, said the summit was unprecedented. “We only learnt about it afterwards, by accident. Normally these people are happy to talk good causes, but this is different – maybe because they don’t want to be seen as a global cabal,” he said.

Another guest said there was “nothing as crude as a vote” but a consensus emerged that they would back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat.

“This is something so nightmarish that everyone in this group agreed it needs big-brain answers,” said the guest.  …

Why all the secrecy? “They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government,” he said.(Sunday Times)

Shrinking The World’s Population

The media reports on the May 5, 2009 secret gathering focussed on the commitment of “The Good Club” to “slowing down” the growth of the World’s population.

“Shrink the World Population” (the WSJ Title) goes far beyond Planned Parenthood which consists in “Reducing the Growth of World Population”. It consists in “Depopulation”, namely reducing the absolute size of the World’s  Population, which ultimately requires reducing the rate of birth (which would include reduced fertility) coupled with a significant increase in the death rate.

Secret Meeting: At the Height of the H1N1 Pandemic

On April 25, 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) headed by Margaret Chan declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). And a couple of weeks later, the “Good Club” met in NYC at the height of the H1N1 swine flu pandemic which turned out to be a scam.

It is also worth noting that at very outset of the H1N1 crisis in April 2009, Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, London was advising Bill Gates and the WHO:  “40 per cent of people in the UK could be infected [with H1N1] within the next six months if the country was hit by a pandemic.”

Sounds familiar? That was the same Neil Ferguson (generously supported by the Gates Foundation) who designed the coronavirus Lockdown Model (launched on March 11, 2020). As we recall, that March 2020 mathematical model was based on “predictions” of 600,000 deaths in the UK.  

And now (Summer- Autumn 2021) a third authoritative “mathematical model” by the same “scientist” (Ferguson) was formulated to justify a “Fourth Wave Lockdown”. 

Saving Lives to Achieve “Depopulation”

Was an absolute “reduction” in World population contemplated at that May 2009 secret meeting? 

A few months later,  Bill Gates in his TED presentation (February 2010) pertaining to vaccination, confirmed the following;

“And if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [the world population] by 10 or 15 percent”.

According to Gates’ statement, this would represent  an absolute reduction of the World’s population (2010) of the order of 680 million to 1.02 billion.

(See quotation on Video starting at 04.21. See also screenshot of Transcript of quotation)

TED Talk at 04:21:

“The Good Club” Then and Now

The same group of billionaires who met at the May 2009 secret venue at the Rockefeller University in Manhattan, have been actively involved from the outset of the Covid crisis in designing the lockdown policies applied Worldwide including the mRNA vaccine and the WEF’s “Great Reset”.

The mRNA vaccine is not a project of a UN intergovernmental body (WHO) on behalf the member states of the UN: It’s a private initiative. The billionaire elites who fund and enforce the Covid Vaccine Project Worldwide are Eugenists committed to Depopulation.

 

As the entire US-led political West continues to lag decades behind Russia in hypersonic weapons, it keeps using various coping mechanisms to “explain” the gap.

This ranges from rather pathetic claims that Moscow “stole American hypersonic technologies” (they must’ve all been stored on a single hard drive that was snatched by the SVR over 40 years ago and the US hasn’t recovered ever since) to the laughable “need for perfectionism in the minds of American engineers”.

And while Washington DC is “perfecting” technologies it doesn’t have (remember, because the evil Russians stole them), the Kremlin is putting its very real hypersonic weapons to good use. Continuing months of unprecedented kill streaks with its long-range strike systems, Russia just obliterated hundreds of NATO personnel in Ukraine, forcing the world’s most vile racketeering cartel to send dozens of aircraft to Poland and Romania.

These are used to collect the casualties and send them off to their home countries. Numerous reports indicate there are hundreds of dead and wounded. The NATO personnel were stationed in Poltava and Lvov. The Kiev regime tried hiding and downplaying these losses, insisting that “50 people were killed” and that a “neighboring hospital was also struck”. Citing local sources, the New York Times reported that the “missiles struck with an unforgiving quickness: The Ukrainian Defense Ministry reported that the gap between the sounding of warning sirens and the strike was so short that many people were killed on their way to shelter”. Interestingly, the label “people” is often used to conceal the fact that these were NATO personnel. It’s also unclear where the Kiev regime’s air defenses were, otherwise fabled for their “50,000% interception rates” of Russian missiles, drones and other long-range precision strike weapons.

However, even the mainstream propaganda machine had to admit that the Kremlin targeted military assets. However, they still tried hiding the fact these were NATO personnel, calling them “cadets of the Poltava Institute of Military Communications in what marks a first in terms of targeting such a large gathering of soon to be commissioned officers”. Kiev keeps pushing a sob story about “classes and teaching underway at the military academy” when two 9M723 hypersonic missiles used by the “Iskander-M” struck. Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko lamented that “the cadets” had only two minutes to leave the building, saying that it’s impossible to escape from “the sixth floor of some building and you need to run downstairs”. I’ve already covered the topic of just how little time a group of soldiers would have to leave a building after a hypersonic weapon such as the 3M22 “Zircon” is fired.

Some sources are claiming the missile strike wiped out at least 700 troops, nearly all of whom were specialists in ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) and EW (electronic warfare). Reports indicate that many of the neutralized NATO personnel were Swedes, sent to train Ukrainian personnel to use the Saab 340 AEW&C (Airborne Early Warning & Control) aircraft, two of which were promised by Stockholm and are supposed to be delivered in the near future.

Interestingly, Swedish Foreign Minister Tobias Billstrom resigned in the immediate aftermath of the strike and announced that he’s retiring from politics. The two events aren’t necessarily related, but the timing is quite peculiar. However, that wasn’t the end of NATO’s troubles in Ukraine, as Russian hypersonic weapons continued raining down on other military targets in the country, particularly those with high concentration of foreign troops.

Namely, another Russian long-range precision strike targeted Lvov in Western Ukraine. The city is the capital of the homonymous oblast (region). A lot of critical military facilities are located in the area, including the infamous Yavoriv training camp, notorious for accommodating various Neo-Nazi units and foreign mercenaries, as well as NATO personnel.

The Russian military reported that the 9-A-7660 “Kinzhal” missile systems armed with the 9-S-7760 air-launched hypersonic missiles were used in the strike. Poland said it scrambled fighter jets because the area is quite close to its border. According to Reuters, “Polish and allied aircraft were scrambled for the third time in eight days to closely monitor the inbound projectiles, and were ready to intercept them in the event the missiles approached Polish airspace”. However, there’s nothing they could really do against hypersonic missiles.

Back in May, Moscow also used its hypersonic weapons to wipe out NATO personnel in Yavoriv, less than 15 km from the Polish border. The strike came right after speculation that the so-called “no-fly zone” (NFZ) could be established over Western Ukraine. For quite some time, Warsaw has been demanding that NATO starts shooting down Russian missiles. However, such proposals have been rejected repeatedly, as the world’s most vile racketeering cartel doesn’t have the backbone to fight Moscow directly and is doing so only through proxies, be it terrorists and extremists (including Islamic radicals) or entities such as the Neo-Nazi junta. Despite desperate attempts to portray it otherwise, NATO simply doesn’t have the means to intercept Russian hypersonic weapons. In the meantime, Moscow continues to obliterate overhyped Western-made systems all across NATO-occupied Ukraine.

This includes the now regular hunt for platforms such as the HIMARS and M270/MARS, as well as dozens of long-range strikes on all sorts of high-priority targets. Since late July, when I made a list of reports about the latest strikes (at the time), there have been numerous other attacks, destroying hundreds of NATO-sourced assets.

This includes strikes reported by Daily Journal and Military Watch Magazine, both on July 26. The MWM covered another one on July 28, as well as several more in August (here, here, here and here), while the South Front has been the most diligent in reporting about this in the last month or so, providing video evidence for around a dozen strikes (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here). Numerous other sources also reported on similar strikes (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here), which includes almost exclusively those with video evidence.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”!

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Did Putin Just Issue the Most Serious Warning to Date?

By Drago Bosnic, September 13, 2024

Both the United States and United Kingdom have given the go-ahead for the use of their long-range missiles against targets deeper within Russia. For Washington DC, those are longer-range ATACMS missiles, while it’s the “Storm Shadow” air-launched cruise missile for London.

Towards an “Oppressive Digital New World Order”. UN “World for the Future” Conference, 22-23 September 2024. Borderless “Enslavement Package”, Digital Control Over 8 Billion People

By Peter Koenig, September 11, 2024

This digital enslavement package will be adopted under almost complete exclusion of the public, of people like you and me. Most parliaments and governments worldwide have apparently already agreed to it, so that the presentation and the so-called discussion during the UN Annual Conference is a sheer fig leaf, a mere farce.

9/11 Analysis: Where Was Osama bin Laden on September 11, 2001?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 12, 2024

Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts on September 10, 2001 were confirmed by a CBS News Report. Osama had been hospitalized on September 10th, 2001, one day before the 9/11 attacks. How on earth could he have coordinated the attacks from his hospital bed in a heavily guarded Pakistani military hospital located in Rawalpindi?

Putting an End to Biden’s Ceasefire Sabotage

By Mike Whitney, September 13, 2024

The main obstacle to a ceasefire in Gaza is not Israel or Hamas. It’s the United States. Here’s what you need to know: The Security Council approved the Biden-authored ceasefire deal on June 10, 2024.

The Insane Recklessness of Collective Biden. Towards a Third World War?

By Dr. Gilbert Doctorow, September 13, 2024

I cannot say how close we are to midnight on the nuclear war watch. But a Third World War fought at least initially with conventional weapons is now just days, at most weeks away.

The Great Ozempic Scam. Big Pharma and the Causes of Obesity. The Importance of Natural Foods. Promoting Healthy Eating

By A Midwestern Doctor, September 12, 2024

In early 2023, a private conference with pharmaceutical industry leaders and investors highlighted anti-obesity and Alzheimer’s drugs as the next big money-makers and had the FDA head as its keynote speaker.

51 Years Ago: Chile, September 11, 1973: The Ingredients of a Military Coup

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 11, 2024

The main objective of the US-supported military coup in Chile was ultimately to  impose the neoliberal economic agenda.  The latter, in the case of Chile, was not imposed by external creditors under the guidance of the IMF. “Regime change” was enforced  through a covert military intelligence operation, which laid the groundwork for the military coup.

For around a month, the political West has been threatening Iran with “swift and severe consequences” if it delivers any surface-to-surface missiles to Russia. There have been various reports about Iranian short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) supposedly on their way to Moscow, including the likes of “Fath-360”, “Fateh-110” and “Zolfaghar”.

Some sources, such as the Duran, report that Iranian parliamentarians have confirmed that the deal is already ongoing, although there’s no official confirmation on the exact types of missiles that are being delivered. However, EU/NATO seem to be particularly concerned by this prospect. Tehran has been quite successful in developing a plethora of ballistic missiles, ranging from SRBMs to IRBMs (intermediate-range ballistic missiles), providing the country with a coverage that goes beyond the Middle East.

Some mainstream propaganda machine outlets insist that the said missiles have already been delivered, although repeated threats from NATO could indicate that the deliveries are yet to start. EU officials say the deal is allegedly “imminent”, while some military sources report that it has already been confirmed. The political West decided to impose additional sanctions on Iran, while simultaneously delivering long-range strike capabilities to the Neo-Nazi junta.

What’s more, top-ranking US officials are sending somewhat mixed signals about giving the Kiev regime the right to hit targets deeper within Russia, with President Joe Biden saying that he’s “working on it”, while Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin warned Volodymyr Zelensky that these long-range strikes “won’t be game changers”. Either way, the political West’s endless hypocrisy is glaringly obvious once again.

On the other hand, the question arises, why is Russia even acquiring missiles from Iran? It’s a well-known fact that Moscow is wholly unsurpassed in top-notch missile systems, be it in range, speed, maneuverability, etc. However, since the INF Treaty limitations were imposed in 1987, the Kremlin eliminated the vast majority of its unprecedented arsenal of missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 km. After the United States unilaterally withdrew from the said treaty in 2019, both countries started working on the reintroduction of these weapons. However, this is a long-term process that will take years, while Russia needs more affordable equivalents to fill the gap now. In decades after the (First) Cold War, its only new SRBM system was the “Iskander”. Albeit unrivaled among land-based platforms, particularly with its 9M723 hypersonic missile, it’s somewhat costly.

This means that the “Iskander-M” system is generally reserved for high-priority targets, while it’s also likely that the Russian military is stocking up for a possible confrontation with NATO. However, there’s a growing need for more affordable massed tactical and operational level strikes. Numerous reports indicate that North Korean missiles are already being used in this capacity, specifically the KN-23 (officially the “Hwasong-11Ga”, but more popularly known as the “Kimskander”). However, although cheaper than the 9M723, this missile is still more expensive than Iranian SRBMs which fill a very important niche role at ranges below 300 km (or 500 in the case of “Zolfaghar”). Combined with Russian ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets and improved guidance systems, these could be far deadlier than in Iranian service.

Moscow and Tehran already have a very successful military cooperation, particularly when it comes to drones. The most prominent of these are certainly the “Shahed-131” and “Shahed-136”, better known as “Geranium-1” and “Geranium-2” in Russian service. These unmanned systems provide the Kremlin with a robust and cost-effective alternative to its advanced cruise missiles, allowing for massed saturation strikes across the entire territory under the Kiev regime’s control.

In addition, there’s an important economic aspect of Russian-Iranian cooperation, as these deals usually boil down to barter trade, thus eliminating the US dollar as a financial medium between the two countries. Moscow is also providing Tehran with top-notch aircraft such as the Su-35, a critically important segment in the much-needed modernization of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force (IRIAF).

These deals between the Kremlin and Tehran are particularly frustrating to the political West, as they’re completely incapable of stopping or at least disrupting them. This cooperation also exposes the Neo-Nazi junta’s absurd lies about their alleged “success in shooting down” Russian missiles. Namely, the illogic of their claims was already apparent, but it’s even more obvious when it comes to Iranian missiles, as these are less advanced, but there’s still panic in both Kiev and Brussels that they’re coming to Russia. Had the junta really been so successful in downing Moscow’s missiles, it wouldn’t even bat an eye over Tehran’s. However, it’s quite usual for the political West and its vassals and satellite states to be completely delusional and hypocritical. The US is crying foul because its adversaries are working together while it’s threatening all of them simultaneously.

It should also be noted that NATO is terrified of the prospect of Russia getting even more precision strike options. Namely, Moscow has been very successful in obliterating the personnel of the world’s most vile racketeering cartel all across NATO-occupied Ukraine, so the Russian military having more (and cheaper) missiles for this purpose is surely sounding many alarms.

In addition, there’s solid evidence that the Kremlin will deliver advanced SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems to Tehran, which is directly undermining US/NATO’s strike options against Iran. It can be expected that the multipolar world will increase coordination in order to push back against the political West’s aggression against the entire world. This will surely frustrate the US and its vassals and satellite states, but it’s a must if the globe is to become a fairer and safer place for everyone.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image: Two IRGC missiles, Dezful (missile) front and Zolfagar Basir missile rear, on a Zulfaqar missile launcher, at an IRGC Air Force exhibition in Tehran. (By M. Sadegh Nikgostar / Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

When the special military operation (SMO) was launched to end the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict, Russian President Vladimir Putin was very clear about the direct involvement of any third parties.

This has prevented the political West from taking direct action in support of the Kiev regime, but it still didn’t prevent it from doing everything else in its power to avert the complete defeat of the puppets in Kiev. In fact, they even sent former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson to sabotage the already signed peace deal that would’ve ended the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict a couple of weeks after the SMO started.

Several high-ranking Western officials admitted this in the last two and a half years, including monstrous war criminals such as Victoria Nuland. Even former top-ranking Neo-Nazi junta officials such as Oleksiy Arestovych lamented that the deal was beneficial to both sides, but the US-led political West had other plans.

However, while making sure as many Ukrainians as possible die a pointless death in a perfectly avoidable war with a military superpower, NATO also keeps trying to probe Russia’s reaction to various levels of indirect involvement of third parties. This includes everything from sabotage operations and ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) support for the Kiev regime to terrorism and guiding NATO-sourced weapons to kill Russian soldiers and even civilians in some cases. Expectedly, Moscow is furious, but it’s still trying to keep its cool, as a direct response could easily result in global thermonuclear annihilation. However, Russian patience is regularly mistaken for weakness in the political West, which is why they keep sending ever more advanced weapons to the Neo-Nazi junta. After initially giving mixed signals about this, it seems the political West has now decided to take things up a notch (or a thousand).

Image: An ATACMS missile being launched from an M270 MLRS (Licensed under the Public Domain)

Namely, both the United States and United Kingdom have given the go-ahead for the use of their long-range missiles against targets deeper within Russia. For Washington DC, those are longer-range ATACMS missiles, while it’s the “Storm Shadow” air-launched cruise missile for London. In previous months, UK PM Keir Starmer said that he supports such strikes, only for the British military to deny such reports. The US is doing something similar, with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin telling Zelensky that long-range strikes “won’t be a game changer” against Moscow.

Perhaps the political West is trying to use these sorts of intentionally misleading and contradictory statements as a Pilatian way to avoid responsibility for any escalation. However, President Putin just made it very clear that such a strategy is futile and that NATO will be held accountable. Namely, in a short interview with Russian state media, he actually said there will be a direct response.

“What we are seeing is an attempt to use a straw man argument. Because this is not a question of whether the Kiev regime is allowed or not allowed to strike targets on Russian territory. It is already carrying out strikes using unmanned aerial vehicles and other means. But using Western-made long-range precision weapons is a completely different story,” Putin said, adding: “The fact is that – I have mentioned this, and any expert, both in our country and in the West, will confirm this – the Ukrainian army is not capable of using cutting-edge high-precision long-range systems supplied by the West. They cannot do that. These weapons are impossible to employ without intelligence data from satellites which Ukraine does not have. This can only be done using the European Union’s satellites, or US satellites – in general, NATO satellites. This is the first point.”

“The second point – perhaps the most important, the key point even – is that only NATO military personnel can assign flight missions to these missile systems. Ukrainian servicemen cannot do this. Therefore, it is not a question of allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not. It is about deciding whether NATO countries become directly involved in the military conflict or not,” he continued and concluded: “If this decision is made, it will mean nothing short of direct involvement – it will mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are parties to the war in Ukraine. This will mean their direct involvement in the conflict, and it will clearly change the very essence, the very nature of the conflict dramatically. This will mean that NATO countries – the United States and European countries – are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.”

⚡️The use of Western high-precision long-range weapons against Russia will mean direct participation of NATO countries in military operations in Ukraine — Putin

The Ukrainian army cannot strike with modern Western-made high-precision long-range systems, said President Vladimir… pic.twitter.com/0kKBAzsbw7

— Sputnik (@SputnikInt) September 12, 2024

This is the message, the be-all and end-all warning that should be taken as seriously as possible. In the last two and a half years, Russia has drastically changed its long-range strike strategy, as well as its nuclear doctrine, including recently, putting emphasis on its unrivaled strategic arsenal. The Kremlin simply needs to be ready to use its world-class thermonuclear weapons to secure basic Russian national interests. On the other hand, this is yet another neocolonial war for the political West, which simply wants to continue its parasitical existence at the expense of the entire world’s peace, prosperity and sustainable development. In order to put a final stop to this, Russia is working together with other superpowers, such as China, and various regional actors, such as Iran and North Korea. At Moscow’s helm, Putin is critically important to the rest of the globe as one of the leaders of the free world, which is why the political West even tried to assassinate him.

In fact, only two days after the attempt on his life, Foreign Policy, one of the most prominent outlets of the mainstream propaganda machine even published a piece titled “Would the US Consider Assassinating Putin?”, further confirming what Pepe Escobar, a colossus in geopolitical analytics, told me during an online meeting concerning this and several other important topics. It is only thanks to Putin’s unrivaled patience, self-control and cool-headedness did we not see monstrosities such as the RS-28 “Sarmat” launched immediately at all major NATO capitals. However, it seems the political West is determined to make sure exactly this happens, as they keep poking the Bear and trying to force it to respond as violently as possible. As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for… And indeed, if the US, UK and other pathologically Russophobic countries and entities keep doing this, the consequences might be global and permanent.

*

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

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”! 

This article was originally published on InfoBrics.

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the Twitter/X video