Israel’s Aggressive Actions Are Indefensible

May 12th, 2021 by Andrew Korybko

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The ‘Israeli’-provoked violence is deplorable enough as it is since it was started by the Jewish State’s aggressive colonial ambitions against the occupied Palestinian people in complete contradiction of international law but was made even worse by the fact that it’s occurring right before the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr that commemorates the end of Ramadan.

What the three Abrahamic religions regard as the Holy Land is once again beset by violence provoked by “Israel‘s” indefensible actions. The self-proclaimed Jewish State sought to evict Palestinians from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in East Jerusalem, which has been illegally occupied by “Israel” since 1967, in order to create new colonial settlements there. “Israel” also prohibited the Palestinians from gathering near the Damascus Gate where they often socialize during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Furthermore, “Israel” restricted the number of worshippers at the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of the holiest sites in Islam.

These decisions prompted the Palestinians to protest, which some of them also did from within the Al-Aqsa Mosque by throwing bottles and stones at the “Israeli” security services, which in turn resulted in the latter attacking that place of worship with rubber bullets and stun grenades. The hybrid political-military movement Hamas subsequently issued an ultimatum to “Israel” to withdraw its security forces from Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood as well as release all of the Palestinians who were recently detained. This warning wasn’t heeded, hence why Hamas fired rockets from Gaza into “Israel”, triggering retaliatory airstrikes.

The “Israeli”-provoked violence is deplorable enough as it is since it was started by the Jewish State’s aggressive colonial ambitions against the occupied Palestinian people in complete contradiction of international law but was made even worse by the fact that it’s occurring right before the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr that commemorates the end of Ramadan. Muslims across the world are therefore extra incensed by what’s happening to their fellow believers in the Holy Land right now, which is why so many of their leaders such as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan have spoken out really loudly condemning the “Israeli” attacks.

“Israel” presents all of its actions as being within its sovereign rights and claims that the international community is biased against it, sometimes even outright accusing them of anti-Semitism, but such accusations are unsubstantiated. Its post-1967 occupation of former Palestinian-inhabited Jordanian territory is illegal under international law, as is its ever-expanding network of colonial settlements there. “Israel” provoked the Palestinians into resisting the way that they did because their victims felt that they had no other way to attract global attention to their legitimate cause. Alas, “Israel” continues to violate international law with impunity.

Some observers have remarked that it’s extremely suspicious that the violence broke out when it did during the end of Ramadan. A few speculate that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intentionally fanned the flames of violence in order to manufacture the violent scenario that’s since transpired so as to appear as the only political figure capable of defending “Israel” from what his government describes as so-called “terrorist attacks” by the Palestinians. This is taking place against the backdrop of his recent failure to form a government despite winning the fourth round of elections in two years. Another party is now tasked with trying to form a coalition.

This theory seems plausible enough since anyone could have predicted that the Palestinians would react the way that they did in the face of such provocations, not to mention the fact that they’re taking place during Ramadan and right before Eid al-Fitr. It certainly seems to be the case that the Palestinians were being manipulated into defending their interests through violent means in order to serve as the pretext for a politically convenient “Israeli” campaign against Hamas that could potentially bolster Netanyahu’s image. The resultant insight adds further credence to the argument that “Israel’s” aggressive actions are indefensible.

Colonialism should have ended during the last century yet it regrettably continues to this day in the Holy Land. Even worse, “Israel’s” crimes are deliberately being intensified during the most important Muslim holiday in order to provoke believers into desperately reacting the only way that some of them know how, which is with violence. Their response served to “justify” Netanyahu’s likely preplanned campaign against Hamas during this politically convenient moment after his coalition-building attempts just failed. The entire world must condemn “Israel”, impose meaningful costs for its violations of international law, and stand in solidarity with Palestine.

*

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

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

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

Featured image is from OneWorld

Antony Blinken Continues to Lecture the World on Values His Administration Aggressively Violates

By Glenn Greenwald, May 11, 2021

Continuing his world tour doling out righteous lectures to the world, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Thursday proclaimed — in a sermon you have to hear to believe — that few things are more sacred in a democracy than “independent journalism.”

The CoVaxx-19 Scorecard: Bleeding, Blood-Clots and the Whole Nine Yards

By Mike Whitney, May 11, 2021

Why would anyone allow himself to be injected with a substance for which the long-term adverse effects are completely unknown? It’s extremely dangerous. And, yet, millions of people around the world have already been inoculated with a hybrid concoction that was not approved by the FDA, did not meet the same rigorous standards for safety as previous vaccines, and which is vastly more lethal than any vaccine in modern times.

Why Are Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin Being Officially Suppressed?

By Dr. Gary Null and Richard Gale, May 11, 2021

Had the FDA and Anthony Fauci’s National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Disease (NIAID) started approving existing clinically-proven and inexpensive drugs for treating malaria, parasites and other pathogens at the start of the pandemic, millions of people would have been saved from experiencing serious infections or dying from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Why federal health officials never followed this strategy is a question the mainstream media refuses to ask.

Weed Killing Pesticide Paraquat Allegedly Causes Parkinson. Litigation in U.S. Courts

By Carey Gillam, May 11, 2021

Six more lawsuits alleging Syngenta’s weed killing pesticide paraquat causes Parkinson’s Disease were filed last week in Pennsylvania, California and Illinois, adding to more than a dozen similar lawsuits already filed in U.S. courts.

Unregulated Digital Cryptocurrencies Versus Regulated National Currencies: Is There a Danger?

By Prof Rodrigue Tremblay, May 11, 2021

A few years ago, after the 2007-2008 financial crisis, some clever people, whose identity is hidden behind the appellation of ‘Satoshi Nakamoto’, devised a decentralized electronic system of payments, which is independent of the existing traditional banking system. It is based on a new form of digital ‘currencies’ or ‘electronic currencies’, the ‘cryptocurrencies‘. Some observers have called the cryptocurrency innovation a sort of a new 21st Century digital gold rush.

Estonia Becomes Centre Stage of Anti-Russia Military Exercises

By Paul Antonopoulos, May 11, 2021

800 paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division of the U.S. Army departed from Fort Bragg in North Carolina last Friday morning for a Swift Response exercise. They were dropped into Estonia in a “joint forcible entry” operation in the early hours of Saturday. The airborne exercise is designed to test the fast response capabilities of the U.S. to defend Estonia in case of a hypothetical war with Russia.

COVID Authoritarians Abuse Children

By Rep. Ron Paul, May 11, 2021

Centers for Diseases Control (CDC) Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky has “recommended” that children wear masks while playing. Her offered reason is to ensure Covid is not spread by “heavy breathing” of children near each other while around a soccer ball.

Video: The 2021 Worldwide Corona Crisis. “The Worst Crisis in Modern History”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky and Ariel Noyola Rodriguez, May 11, 2021

Entire national economies are in jeopardy. In some countries martial law has been declared. Small and medium sized capital are slated to be eliminated. Big capital prevails. A massive concentration of corporate wealth is ongoing. It’s a diabolical “New World Order” in the making. Red Zones, the facemask, social distancing, the closing down of schools, colleges and universities, no more family gatherings, no birthday celebrations, music, the arts: no more cultural events, sport events are suspended, no more funerals, no more weddings, “love and life” is banned outright.

An Army of Big Biotech Companies Is Using Psych Tactics to ‘Create Vaccine Demand’

By Celeste McGovern, May 11, 2021

The U.S. is awash in a surplus of coronavirus vaccines as there has been a sudden drop in demand for them; most Americans who want the shots have had them. Now an army of Big Biotech’s agencies set up to address “vaccine hesitancy” are turning up their mass marketing to “create demand” using surveillance, rapid data analysis, media control, and host of behavior control strategies they’ve outlined in their playbooks.

The Vaccine Passport: An Instrument of Social Control. The Rise of “Utilitarian Extremism”, and How to Recognize It

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, May 11, 2021

Utilitarianism, which is now being increasingly promoted, is a discredited pseudo-ethic that has repeatedly been used to justify horrific human rights abuses. It is based on a mathematical equation that some individuals can be sacrificed for the greater good of the majority.

Bravery and Risk in the Age of Truth

By Julian Rose, May 11, 2021

Rising-up almost perceptibly now, in an increasing number of individuals, is a powerful urge to give expression to truth at its profoundest level. This is the life-force itself, demanding action and urging all who feel it to step forward into the front lines of a great battle. The battle to overcome the purveyors of gross injustice and stand firm for the global manifestation of truth. 

The Criminalization of Dissent. “Covid Deniers”and “Anti-Vaxxers” under Surveillance

By CJ Hopkins, May 11, 2021

One of the hallmarks of totalitarian systems is the criminalization of dissent. Not just the stigmatization of dissent or the demonization of dissent, but the formal criminalization of dissent, and any other type of opposition to the official ideology of the totalitarian system. Global capitalism has been inching its way toward this step for quite some time, and now, apparently, it is ready to take it.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Antony Blinken Continues to Lecture the World on Values His Administration Aggressively Violates

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

As the evacuation of NATO’s coalition troops, deployed in Afghanistan for the past 20 years, begins, a highly serious and still unresolved issue for the United States is where these armed forces and their weapons and military equipment will be withdrawn to.

Some media outlets have already heard from a senior White House official that some of the troops to be withdrawn are planned to be moved to the Indo-Pacific region. However, it is quite clear that in this case only part of the coalition troops being withdrawn is concerned. But 10,000 US and NATO troops in Afghanistan with all the weapons and military equipment they have amassed during the years of occupation need to be deployed somewhere within the remaining six months before the deadline announced by US President Joe Biden (September 11).

And the scope of this task is getting more and more formidable as the American military take stock of all the military equipment stockpiled by coalition troops. Although it is possible to sell some of it locally or transfer it to the Afghan security forces, the remaining extensive portion will be inherently very difficult and expensive to export to Europe or other US bases, even with the US making dollars from its printing press.

Certainly the United States and its allies would prefer to have military bases in Afghanistan’s neighboring countries rather than moving troops to more remote areas, such as the Middle East. Washington immediately rejects Iran, and Pakistan is a highly unlikely option.

In 2008, as relations between the US and Pakistan became increasingly strained, Washington and its allies created the “Northern Distribution Network” (NDN), through which non-lethal cargoes were delivered from Europe via Russia and Central Asia to coalition forces in Afghanistan. After the West’s critical reaction to the Crimean events, in 2015 Russia cancelled agreements to transit cargo for coalition forces through its territory, but the NDN continues to operate, delivering cargo through Georgia and Azerbaijan, across the Caspian Sea to Kazakhstan and on to Uzbekistan and Afghanistan. Today this NDN not only delivers supplies to Afghanistan, but also remains the main route for exporting foreign military equipment from Afghanistan.

But it is one thing to move weapons and equipment, and completely another to have military bases in the immediate vicinity of Afghanistan. In the course of its information campaign on alleged future military support for the operations of Afghan government forces against such terrorist groups as Jamaat Ansarullah, Islamic Jihad Union, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and Islamic State of Iraq and Levant-Khorasan (ISIL), which can threaten the stability of Central Asia, Washington looks to strengthen the interest of Central Asian states in the presence of said bases.

Amidst such conditions, the option of redeploying coalition forces from Afghanistan to a Central Asian country is now becoming especially popular in Washington. And some recent media reports suggest that the US military will make a maximum effort to redeploy some of its troops to Central Asia. There is already intensive groundwork underway to prepare for this. So, on April 22, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken already had telephone conversations with the foreign ministers of Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, and on April 23 his virtual meeting with all the heads of foreign ministries of Central Asian countries in the C5+1 format was held.

Today, not only does Russia have military bases in Central Asia — in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan — but even China has a small military base in the remote mountainous regions of far eastern Tajikistan — at the intersection of the Tajik, Chinese and Afghan borders. Both countries work with Tajik forces to conduct counter-narcotics raids in Afghanistan.

Uzbekistan has no Russian or Chinese military bases and is not a member of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are. And if Uzbekistan faces a security threat, it can only count on bilateral military agreements, which is why Washington believes the deployment of US troops could provide it with some additional guarantees in deterring militants based in Afghanistan.

In its calculations about the possibility of redeployment of troops to Central Asia, the Pentagon relies on the fact that NATO has been cooperating with the republics of this region for almost twenty years, and Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan have been members of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council since 1997. However, Washington also understands certain difficulties in this matter, since each of the countries has its own characteristics of interaction. In particular, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are members of the CSTO, while Uzbekistan has a negative experience with the “revolutionary” upheaval that took place in Andijan in the 2000s. For parties to the Collective Security Treaty, Article 2 provides for a collective fight against “threats to the security, stability, territorial integrity and sovereignty of one or more states”. However, in the official documents of the United States and NATO, Russia is listed as a strategic adversary.

Nevertheless, Washington expects to use the fact that the US and Russian bases were previously deployed simultaneously in Kyrgyzstan, and both Russian and NATO bases were located in Tajikistan. The last time Western troops used bases in Central Asia was from 2001 to 2014, but things didn’t end too smoothly for the US and Western countries then.

However, US and NATO officials make no secret of their desire to try again to place their military bases in Central Asia. Although Tajikistan has the longest border with Afghanistan and the country is very convenient for the Americans because of the short time it takes to get to the sites of air strikes, the appearance of an American military base here, although not impossible, is still unlikely due to the presence of a Russian military unit.

The appearance of a full-fledged US base in Uzbekistan, which under President Karimov already had a Pentagon base, is more likely. That is why the US has recently placed special emphasis on developing military cooperation with the country. In particular, the other day there was an American delegation led by Duke Pirak, deputy head of strategic planning and policy at the Central Command of the US Armed Forces. During this visit, a series of meetings were held, including with the head of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Uzbekistan, Shukhrat Kholmukhamedov, with whom they discussed cooperation in the military sphere. Despite the fact that Uzbekistan is now actively developing military cooperation with Russia, which is a major factor in ensuring regional security and the strength of the Uzbekistani armed forces, the United States has recently been increasingly seeking to “move Russia aside” and take its place, intending to hold the first dialogue on strategic partnership this year.

Despite the importance of continuing international efforts to counter terrorist activity in Afghanistan and intensifying measures to strengthen regional security measures, especially after the withdrawal of US and NATO military units from Afghanistan, the question of even temporary deployment of this military contingent in Central Asia will certainly be decided taking into account the position of Russia as well as China. As for the position of Moscow and Beijing, they will appropriately take into account the latest actions of Washington, which famously does not reduce its anti-Russian and anti-Chinese rhetoric, as well as military preparations with regard to Russia and China.

*

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

Valery Kulikov is a political expert, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Featured image is from NEO

L’Europa terreno di manovra di strategie Usa-Nato

May 11th, 2021 by Manlio Dinucci

La mobilità terrestre delle persone nell’Unione europea è stata paralizzata nel 2020 dai lockdown, principalmente in seguito al blocco del turismo. Lo stesso è avvenuto nella mobilità aerea: secondo uno studio del Parlamento Europeo (marzo 2021), essa ha subìto una perdita netta di 56 miliardi di euro e di 191.000 posti di lavoro diretti, più oltre un milione nell’indotto. La ripresa, nel 2021, si annuncia molto problematica. Solo un settore, in controtendenza, ha fortemente accresciuto la propria mobilità: quello militare.

In questo momento, in Europa, circa 28.000 militari stanno passando con carrarmati e aerei da un paese all’altro: sono impegnati nella Defender-Europe 21 (Difensore dell’Europa 2021), la grande esercitazione non della Nato ma dell’Esercito Usa in Europa, cui partecipano 25 alleati e partner europei. L’Italia vi partecipa non solo con le proprie forze armate, ma quale paese ospite. Sta per iniziare, contemporaneamente, l’esercitazione Nato Steadfast Defender (Difensore Risoluto), che mobilita oltre 9.000 militari statunitensi ed europei, compresi quelli italiani.

Essa costituisce il primo test su larga scala dei due nuovi comandi Nato: il Comando della Forza Congiunta, con quartier generale a Norfolk negli Usa, e il Comando dell’Appoggio Congiunto con quartier generale a Ulm in Germania. «Missione» del Comando di Norvolk è «proteggere le rotte atlantiche tra Nord America ed Europa», che secondo la Nato sarebbero minacciate dai sottomarini russi; quella del Comando di Ulm è «assicurare la mobilità delle truppe attraverso le frontiere europee per permettere un rapido rafforzamento dell’Alleanza sul fronte orientale», che secondo la Nato sarebbe minacciato dalle forze russe.

Per questa seconda «missione» svolge un ruolo importante l’Unione Europea, alla quale lo US Army Europe ha richiesto l’istituzione di «un’Area Schengen militare». Il Piano d’azione sulla mobilità militare, presentato dalla Commissione europea nel 2018, prevede di modificare «le infrastrutture (ponti, ferrovie e strade) non adatte al peso o alle dimensioni dei mezzi militari». Ad esempio, se un ponte non può reggere il peso di una colonna di carrarmati da 70 tonnellate, deve essere rafforzato o ricostruito.

Dopo aver destinato a tale scopo un primo stanziamento di circa 2 miliardi di euro, in denaro pubblico sottratto alle spese sociali, i ministri Ue della Difesa (per l’Italia Lorenzo Guerini) hanno deciso l’8 maggio di far partecipare gli Stati uniti, il Canada e la Norvegia al piano Ue della mobilità militare. Il segretario generale della Nato Stoltenberg, presente alla riunione, ha sottolineato che «questi alleati non appartenenti all’Unione europea svolgono un ruolo essenziale nella difesa dell’Europa». In tal modo la Nato (a cui appartengono 21 dei 27 paesi della Ue), dopo aver incaricato la Ue di realizzare e pagare la ristrutturazione delle infrastrutture europee a fini militari, prende di fatto in mano la gestione dell’«Area Schengen militare».

In una Europa trasformata in piazza d’armi, l’adeguamento delle infrastrutture alla mobilità delle forze Usa/Nato viene testata in prove di guerra, che prevedono «lo spiegamento di forze terrestri e navali dal Nord America alla regione del Mar Nero», e servono, secondo le parole di Stoltenberg, a «dimostrare che la Nato ha la capacità e volontà di proteggere tutti gli alleati da qualsiasi minaccia».

Quale sia la «minaccia» lo dichiarano anche i ministri degli esteri del G7 (Stati uniti, Canada, Gran Bretagna, Germania, Francia, Italia e Giappone), riunitisi il 5 maggio a Londra. I sette ministri (per l’Italia Luigi Di Maio), capovolgendo i fatti, accusano la Russia di «comportamento irresponsabile e destabilizzante, annessione illegale della Crimea, ammassamento di forze militari ai confini con l’Ucraina, uso di armi chimiche per avvelenare gli oppositori, maligne attività per minare i sistemi democratici di altri paesi, minaccia all’ordine internazionale basato sulle regole». Il fatto che il G7 formuli tali accuse con le stesse parole usate dal Pentagono e ripetute dalla Nato, conferma l’esistenza di una stessa matrice nella strategia della tensione che spinge l’Europa in una situazione sempre più pericolosa.

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on L’Europa terreno di manovra di strategie Usa-Nato

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The UK Column recently reported a £320 million media buy-in contract awarded to OMD Group, the brief for which was redacted from the publicly available information on the UK government’s Contract Finder website. This represents just 20% of the £1.6 billion in media buy-in contracts the government has awarded to Omnicom since 2018.

Headquartered in Manhattan New York, Omnicom is a global media, marketing and corporate communications holding company. It is currently considered the second largest advertising agency in the world, eclipsed only by WPP.

Omnicom is an advertising giant which specialises in public relations, lobbying, communications strategy, and the planning and purchasing of targeted advertising space. It builds comprehensive media campaigns for its extensive client list. Omnicom heads a North American-based network of prominent advertising and public relations agencies with a world wide collective reach.

Omnicom has been awarded a number of sizeable contracts by the UK government. These have included a December 2018 advertising campaign contract for the Cabinet Office, worth up to £184 million, a £119 million October 2020 media buy-in contract with a £230 million extension clause, and a £112 million media contract for the Ministry of Defence.

According to the Crown Commercial Service (CCS), media buying enables the government to:

buy media channels (for example, advertising space, partnerships, events and sponsorship) regionally, nationally and internationally across off and online channels.

Omnicom is the single supplier for these public relations campaigns and their UK OMD Group operations are run by Manning Gottlieb OMD (MG-OMD).

Manning Gottlieb OMD was dissolved in 2011 and struck off the companies register. It isn’t entirely clear, therefore, what the current legal status of MG-OMD is. Their website appears to be their only visible presence and it does not clarify their status. However the CCS has stated that MG-OMD is a division of OMD Group Ltd.

The CCS claim there are a number of advantages to be gained by having one US multinational corporation overseeing the UK government’s entire communication strategy, including robust pricing, neutrality and transparency. Putting aside Omnicom’s obvious monopoly, as mentioned above, when the UK Column looked at the client brief for the recent £320 million media buy-in, it was entirely redacted. We might question the CCS notion of transparency.

Who is the dominant partner in this arrangement?

Media buying is the process of acquiring space on media platforms (online and offline) to get a PR message out. In this case the UK government is the client and MG-OMD (Omnicom) is the sole supplier, often referred to as the Agent.

The supplier (Agent) is largely responsible for conducting market research and devising campaigns that will delver best value to the client. They are given a brief and then advise the client how they can achieve the client’s PR objectives.

As we have stated, it is not possible to examine the brief for the most recent contract. But the brief is available for the £112 million MoD contract. It raises some concerns.

Omnicom will agree the key performance indicators by which the efficacy of their campaigns are measured; they will evaluate and measure campaign performance and will be proactive and innovative; the Agent has the expertise to advise how to deliver all aspects of the service and it is MG-OMD (Omnicom) who deploy resources, implement the plan and collect and store the data generated by their PR campaigns on the client’s (MoD’s) behalf.

It seems that Omnicom, in the guise of MG-OMD, not only agrees what constitutes campaign efficacy, they plan, resource and operate the UK government’s communications strategy. It is not unreasonable to suggest that Omnicom is leading this process.

In 2018 the UK government awarded a four year £800 million contract to Omnicom’s OMD Group for media buy-ins. The CCS stated that the purpose of the contract was to:

Provide the best possible outcomes for communication campaigns … The successful media buying agency … will work in partnership … to deliver … fully integrated campaigns for government.

This contract is set to expire in May 2022.

Omnicom were running government PR campaigns when the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared a global Covid-19 pandemic in March 2020.

In an effort to maintain transparency, the signatories to the contract have been redacted as have the pricing criteria, Omnicom protected confidential commercial information and much of the Framework Agreement. However, the contract brief stated:

The Government Communication Plan is updated annually and CCS shall ensure that the Agency is notified when the plan is updated … The Agency will (if required) co-operate and work with agencies on any of the other Crown Commercial Service agreements. This includes other Framework Agencies … provision of specific single services and products including media planning and Campaign Solutions … The Agency shall manage and deliver fully integrated campaigns, either by delivering services in-house or through Sub-Contracts.

Omnicom was in place, ready and able to adapt to the UK government’s communication plans as they emerged.

Providing a “single version of the truth”

Omnicom was awarded the contract on 21st May 2018. On the 9th June (less than three weeks later), then UK Prime Minister Theresa May announced that the G7 had agreed to her Rapid Response Mechanism. Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, the US and the EU agreed that they would assert a common narrative.

Omnicom responded almost immediately.

In early 2019 they launched their Learn Fast & Act Fast communications strategy. This was perfect for the Rapid Response Mechanism needs of their clients.

As the Covid-19 pandemic unfolded, Omnicom was able to help the UK government to “navigate the road to a new normal.” They said they had deepened their “rapid response capabilities” which enabled their client, the UK government, to make “more informed decisions while providing a single version of the truth.”

With operations in all of the G7 countries, and in both Russia and China, where they are discovering new opportunities for growth, Omnicom is well placed to deliver fully integrated campaigns.Whenever a rapid response is required to assert the common G7 narrative, Omnicom will provide the approved single version of the truth.

In September 2019, three months after the Rapid Response Mechanism announcement, the BBC convened the Trusted News Summit. To aid transparency, then BBC Director General Tony Hall said that the meeting was held behind closed doors. The BBC effectively formed a global media cartel with the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Facebook, the Financial Times, First Draft, Google, The Hindu, The Wall Street Journal, AFP, CBC/Radio-Canada, Microsoft, Reuters and Twitter.

Less than two weeks after the WHO declared the global pandemic, the UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group in Emergencies (SAGE) issued some key advice. They outlined how our behaviour could be changed to ensure it was in line with the single version of the truth.

SPI-B (SAGE’s behaviour change experts) stated:

Guidance now needs to be reformulated to be behaviourally specific … A substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened. The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging … Messaging needs to emphasise and explain the duty to protect others … Consideration should be given to use of social disapproval.

SPI-B recommended that the UK government should:

  1. Use the media (MSM) to increase sense of personal threat.
  2. Use the media (MSM) to increase sense of responsibility to others.
  3. Use social disapproval for failure to comply.

A free, plural and independent media could not be “used” to terrorise the population in this fashion. Only a controlled propaganda machine could possibly be instructed to do so. The Trusted Newscartel was available. Omnicom, in the form of MG-OMD, was tasked with using it to do the hard hitting.

In doing so Omnicom has been supporting the mainstream media to stay afloat by pumping millions into their failed business models. The taxpayer funded government buy-ins directly finance the UK’s so called independent mainstream media. Like the banks, it seems they are too big to fail, and so once again the tax payer is being forced to bail them out.

OmniGOV = Fusion Doctrine

MG-OMD has given their propaganda operation the Orwellian sounding name of OmniGOV. They say they are very proud of it and recognise their responsibility as the “the single cross-HM Government agency partner.”

OmniGov were behind the snappy slogans used to change our behaviour throughout the pandemic. Phrases like “flatten the curve”, “stay home, protect the NHS, save lives” and “rule of six” all rely on a psychological mechanism called the rule of three. The £119 million Omnicom contract to modify our behaviour was in discussion long before the WHO made their pandemic declaration.

The hard hitting media campaigns designed to strike fear into the public imagination were OmniGOV public relations strategies. The now notorious “look into my eyes” campaign being another OmniGOV campaign.

“Look into my eyes” was pure propaganda. The UK government was the client and they wanted to increase the sense of personal threat and use social disapproval to compel compliance. OmniGOV created a campaign which presented a low mortality disease as some sort of plague. Covid-19 risks primarily affect older people and mortality distribution is indistinguishable from normal mortality.

OmniGOV ignored scientific and statistical evidence and presented a population scale threat that did not exist. They claimed, without evidence, that lockdowns, mask wearing and social distancing could stop the spread of a viral respiratory illness. They misled the public and suggested that following the rules would save lives.

The insinuation was clearly that those who did not obey were guilty of killing people and that their behaviour was wrong. While appearing to advocate social conscience and shared community responsibility the product was baseless fear and social division — as requested by OmniGov’s client.

OmniGOV are also proud of the other projects that have been engaged with during the pandemic. For example, they have been working with the NHS and Snapchat to encouraging young people to think differently about donating their organs, introducing them to the concept of body-tracking Augmented Reality.

A Green New Deal

If we ignore the obvious risk of having a single US corporation in apparent control of the UK government’s communication strategy, and if we set aside concerns about the vast sums we have paid them to propagandise us, some may still feel, given the claimed seriousness of Covid-19, that there is nothing to be concerned about and OmniGOV has acted in good faith.

But for that to be the case, they also have to overlook that the OmniGov led response to Covid-19 is transitioning us into a new global financial and economic model which, at the most senior level, Omnicom has being trying to engineer for years.

Omnicom is not a disinterested third party merely seeking to meet their contractual obligations. They have a significant conflict of interest. The post-Covid-19 recovery they are helping to define is in their interest, not ours.

The Chairman and CEO of Omnicom is John D. Wren. His personal Omnicom bio reads:

Mr. Wren was part of the team that created Omnicom Group in 1986. Mr. Wren is a member of the International Business Council of the World Economic Forum and is active in a number of philanthropic endeavors.

In 2012, Wren was a contributor and co-author of the World Economic Forum’s publication More with Less: Scaling Sustainable Consumption and Resource Efficiency. The report stated:

The need for rapid action to shift towards a resource-efficient economy is high … change is now urgently required at scale and greater pace than current initiatives, policies or strategies are likely to achieve … Business can catalyse scale through transforming interactions with citizens.. and playing an active role in shaping the policies and investments that define the rules of the game … The right rules of the game can catalyse citizen behaviour … and create new markets … The private sector needs to be involved in most phases of policy-making … such collaboration should be forged as a productive adjunct to more traditional inter-governmental arrangements.

Omnicom is undoubtedly delighted that the public private partnership they have forged with the UK, and many other governments, has allowed them to help define the rules of the game. Certainly they have been busy catalysing citizen behaviour and seem to be fully involved in most phases of policy making.

In 2020 the WEF’s International Business Council (IBC), with Wren as a member, released their Measuring Stakeholder Capitalism report.

Speaking about the need to shape the recovery, they noted that the global pandemic was a fantastic opportunity. They wrote:

We must mobilize all constituencies of our global society to work together and seize this historic opportunity … The principles of stakeholder capitalism, championed by the World Economic Forum … have never been so important. In 2017, the IBC spearheaded a commitment from more than 140 CEOs to align their corporate values and strategies with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) … The IBC has been leading the way in this initiative to deliver on the promise of stakeholder capitalism.

With the UK contingent of the Trusted News cartel being supported by OmniGOV, tax-avoidant members like Google can look forward to some tax payer subsidised profits. They will be free, alongside Omnicom, to spread the single version of the truth in line with the G7’s wishes.

This is stakeholder capitalism in operation. It has nothing to do with us; we merely pay for it. Nor will we be allowed to object or even question the asserted common narrative.

Dissent will not be tolerated

The UK Digital Secretary, Oliver Dowden, recently convened a meeting of G7 technology ministers who signed a ministerial declaration on “Internet safety principles.” The declaration was based upon the UK’s Online Harms white paper and, as such, there is no specific definition of “harm.” It simply means whatever the G7, the Trusted News cartel and other stakeholders like Omnicom want it to mean.

The G7 commit to “work together towards a trusted, values-driven digital ecosystem.” They declare:

Our collective recovery from COVID-19 must be rooted in a desire to build back better. Leaders … signed a declaration containing a series of shared principles on how to tackle the global challenge of online safety, including that online firms should have systems and processes in place to reduce illegal and harmful activity.

As the UK government is contractually obliged to update Omnicom on their communications strategy, and seeing as OmniGOV are their sole media campaign managers, the 2020/2021 strategy must have been agreed with Omnicom.

Given Omnicom’s long-standing commitment to creating sustainable market opportunities, they presumably welcome the fact that it is entirely based upon the rule of three with the “Build Back Better” slogan at its heart.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Cabinet Office Julie Lopez MP announced that control of government information campaigns will be centralised further. We can only speculate which stakeholder partner will win the 2022 contract bid.

In the meantime, practically everything we are told about Covid-19 and the allegedly inescapable global economic and monetary transformation forced upon us, will be fed to us by the Trusted Newscartel, guided and financed by OmniGOV. Omnicom and their stakeholder partners have a bright future.

*

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

Iain Davis is an author, blogger, researcher and short film maker who rants at in-this-together.com.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Continuing his world tour doling out righteous lectures to the world, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Thursday proclaimed — in a sermon you have to hear to believe — that few things are more sacred in a democracy than “independent journalism.” Speaking to Radio Free Europe, Blinken paid homage to “World Press Freedom Day”; claimed that “the United States stands strongly with independent journalism”; explained that “the foundation of any democratic system” entails “holding leaders accountable” and “informing citizens”; and warned that “countries that deny freedom of the press are countries that don’t have a lot of confidence in themselves or in their systems.”

The rhetorical cherry on top of that cake came when he posed this question: “What is to be afraid of in informing the people and holding leaders accountable?” The Secretary of State then issued this vow: “Everywhere journalism and freedom of the press is challenged, we will stand with journalists and with that freedom.” Since I know that I would be extremely skeptical if someone told me that those words had just come out Blinken’s mouth, I present you here with the unedited one-minute-fifty-two-second video clip of him saying exactly this:

That the Biden administration is such a stalwart believer in the sanctity of independent journalism and is devoted to defending it wherever it is threatened would come as a great surprise to many, many people. Among them would be Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks and the person responsible for breaking more major stories about the actions of top U.S. officials than virtually all U.S. journalists employed in the corporate press combined.

Currently, Assange is sitting in a cell in the British high-security Belmarsh prison because the Biden administration is not only trying to extradite him to stand trial on espionage charges for having published documents embarrassing to the U.S. Government and the Democratic Party but also has appealed a British judge’s January ruling rejecting that extradition request. The Biden administration is doing all of this, noted The New York Times, despite the fact that “human rights and civil liberties groups had asked the [administration] to abandon the effort to prosecute Mr. Assange, arguing that the case . . . could establish a precedent posing a grave threat to press freedoms” — press freedoms, exactly the value which Blinken just righteously spent the week celebrating and vowing to uphold.

It was the Trump DOJ which brought those charges against Assange after then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo claimed in a 2017 speech that WikiLeaks has long “pretended that America’s First Amendment freedoms shield them from justice,” and then warned: “they may have believed that, but they are wrong.” Pomepo added — invoking the mentality of all states that persecute and imprison those who report effectively on them — that “to give [WikiLeaks] the space to crush us with misappropriated secrets is a perversion of what our great Constitution stands for. It ends now.”

But like so many other Trump policies concerning press freedoms — from defending the Trump DOJ’s use of warrants to obtain journalists’ telephone records, to demanding Edward Snowden be kept in exile, to keeping Reality Winner and Daniel Hale imprisoned — top Biden officials have long been fully on board with Assange’s persecution. Indeed, they have been at the forefront of the effort to destroy basic press freedoms not just for WikiLeaks but journalists generally.

It was Joe Biden who called Assange a “high-tech terrorist” in 2010. It was the Obama administration that convened a years-long grand jury to try to prosecute Assange. It was Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) who urged Assange’s prosecution under the Espionage Act years before Trump was in office. And it was Blinken’s colleague on the Obama national security team, Hillary Clinton, who praised the DOJ for its prosecution of Assange. All of this was intended as punishment for Assange’s revelations of rampant wrongdoing by the U.S. Government and its allies and adversary governments around the world.

The New York Times, Feb. 21, 2021

How can you run around the world feigning anger over other countries’ persecution of independent journalists when you are a key part of the administration that is doing more than anyone to destroy one of the most consequential independent journalists of the last several decades? Indeed, as numerous journalists warned at the time, there were few, if any, administrations in U.S. history more hostile to basic press freedoms than the Obama administration in which Blinken previously served, including prosecuting double the number of journalistic sources under espionage laws than all previous administrations combined.

In 2013, while Blinken was serving as a high-level official in the State Department, the Committee to Protect Journalists did something very rare — issued a report warning of an epidemic of press freedom attacks by the U.S. Government — and said: “In the Obama administration’s Washington, government officials are increasingly afraid to talk to the press.” The New Yorker‘s Jane Mayer said of the Obama administration’s press freedom attacks: “It’s a huge impediment to reporting, and so chilling isn’t quite strong enough, it’s more like freezing the whole process into a standstill.” James Goodale, the New York Times’ General Counsel during the paper’s battle in the 1970s to publish the Pentagon Papers, warned that “President Obama will surely pass President Richard Nixon as the worst president ever on issues of national security and press freedom.”

Even the specific “press freedom attack” Blinken referenced in that video interview — namely, Russia’s recent demand that media outlets linked to foreign governments such as Radio Free Europe register as “foreign agents” with the Russian government and pay fines for their failure to do so — is one which Blinken and his comrades have wielded against others for years. Indeed, Russia was responding to the U.S. Government’s previous demand that RT and other Russian news agencies register as “foreign agents” in the U.S., as well as the Biden administration’s escalated attacks just last month on news agencies it claims serves as propaganda agents for the Kremlin.

It is hardly new for the U.S. to dole out lectures which the rest of the world recognizes as complete farces. In 2015, then-President Obama was prancing around India giving lectures on the importance of human rights, only to cut short his trip to fly to Saudi Arabia, where he met numerous top officials of the U.S. Government to pay homage to Saudi King Abdullah, their long-time close and highly repressive ally whose totalitarian regime Obama did so much to fortify.

But galavanting around the world masquerading as the champion of press freedoms and the rights of independent journalists, all while working to extend the confinement and detention of one of the people responsible for much of the most important journalistic revelations of this generation beyond the decade he has already endured, is a whole new level of deceit. “Hypocrisy” is insufficient to capture the craven insincerity behind Blinken’s posturing.

It is always easy — and cheap — to condemn the human rights abuses of your enemies. It is much harder — and more meaningful — to uphold those principles for your own dissidents. Blinken, like so many who preceded him in that Foggy Bottom office, theatrically excels at the former while failing miserably at the latter.

*

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

Featured image: Tony Blinken At His Confirmation Hearing, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Jan. 19, 2021. Screenshot via Mondoweiss

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

“We have enough evidence now to see a clear correlation with increased Covid deaths and the vaccine campaigns. This is not a coincidence. It is an unfortunate unintended effect of the vaccines. We must not turn a blind eye and pretend this is not occurring. We must halt all Covid vaccine administration immediately, before we create a true pandemic that we cannot reign in…” Dr. Janci Lindsay, Ph.D.

Why would anyone allow himself to be injected with a substance for which the long-term adverse effects are completely unknown?

It’s extremely dangerous. And, yet, millions of people around the world have already been inoculated with a hybrid concoction that was not approved by the FDA, did not meet the same rigorous standards for safety as previous vaccines, and which is vastly more lethal than any vaccine in modern times.

Why? Why are so many people submitting to this experiment?

It’s a mystery, isn’t it?

The current crop of Covid-19 vaccines have not been adequately tested, have not concluded Phase 3 Trials, and are not safe. And we’re not talking about the “short-term” effects here either. As tragic as the recent fatalities and injuries may be, they pale in comparison to the mountain of carnage we could see in the near future when vaccine victims discover that their compromised immune systems are no longer capable of fighting off new infections or wild strains of the virus. This same phenomenon emerged years ago in animal trials in which ferrets were injected with an experimental serum that helped them develop a “durable antibody response” to infection. Unfortunately– when the ferrets were exposed to the wild virus sometime later– they all died. Every one of them died.

Is this our future? Is this what we can expect a few years from now when routine respiratory infections and seasonal flu sweep through the country leaving millions of people severely ill or dead?

True, the vaccines do appear to provide some temporary immunity, but at what cost? Have you scanned the adverse events reports or mulled over the possibility that these injections may wreak long-term havoc on your vascular system, your heart or your cognitive abilities? Critics of the vaccines typically emphasize the bulging list of vaccine-related injuries and fatalities, but this is a mistake. It’s not the deaths and injuries that have already transpired, but the ocean of morbidity we may face in the future when the longer-incubating diseases begin to emerge overwhelming the maxed-out public health system and leaving many to fend for themselves.

Is such a scenario even possible?

Yes, it is possible, maybe, even probable.

Do you have any idea of what these vaccines do once they’re in your body? Do you realize that the substance enters your bloodstream and spreads everywhere including to your brain? Do you realize the dangers this poses to your overall health and survival? Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, M.D. has produced a number of videos that explain the basic biology of inoculation as it relates to these new gene-based injections. Anyone who is thinking about getting vaccinated, should consider what he has to say:

“The vaccine gets into your bloodstream… You are putting a viral gene into your bloodstream and it is going to circulate… Now, your bloodstream is a closed system of pipes. Once those packages are in the bloodstream, those millions of packages of the gene, will never get out, because they are trapped. And the main cells they will enter, will be the cells lining the blood vessels…. These cells line your blood vessels all over your body and all your organs.

Those cells take up the gene and start to produce the spike protein (which will extend its spike into the bloodstream–illustration) At the same time, the protein creates waste.… So there is now the spike protein and there is waste. …The spike protein has the ability to attract platelets which create blood clotting. The moment the platelets comes into contact with the spike protein, the platelets get activated and start clotting the blood….

Regrettably, there is another type of cell that comes around to see the trash. These cells are the killer lymphocytes, and these killer lymphocytes, are programed to see the trash of viruses and then kill the cells that are creating the virus and which line the walls of your blood vessels. This can happen anywhere (in the body.)

… We are going to find out which of your cells lining your blood vessels are going to take up these packages and produce them (spike proteins and trash) so they are going to be attacked by your own immune system and destroyed…

(So) What is the first symptom that people are presenting after vaccination?

Headache, right? Headache, nausea, dizziness, muscle pain, loss of motor control etc…

I asked myself what is the common denominator between all these symptoms?

Well, we predicted that there were going to be very severe thrombotic events …especially the splitting headache which is the typical sign that the blood is clotting in the veins of your brain. …Every clot formation in the brain is potentially lethal. And, if you get clots in the legs, they become pulmonary embolism which can also kill you.

… And when these clotting factors (platelets) get used up, people can bleed. Why don’t people think about this?” (“Interview with Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, M.D on Covid Vaccine”, New American: Start at minute 18)

Let’s summarize: The vaccine is inserted into a muscle in the arm, but the fluid quickly enters the bloodstream where it is trapped. Once in the bloodstream, it is taken up (absorbed) by the thin layer of cells that line the blood vessels. (Endothelial) The cells that have been penetrated by the substance start to produce spike protein and waste. The spike protein activates the platelets which triggers blood clots that can block the flow of blood to vital organs. At the same time, the overuse of platelets–which help to coagulate the blood– can lead to excessive internal bleeding. These seemingly conflicting conditions–clotting and bleeding– have attracted the attention of more and more researchers, like Dr Mike Williams, who had this to say in a recent article titled: “Clotting and Covid Vaccine “Science“. Here’s an excerpt:

“Effectively we have two opposing problems here: thrombosis forming a clot that can block a vessel supplying blood to an organ; and thrombocytopenia reducing the number of platelets that are needed to form a clot, causing bleeding, aka hemorrhage. Either of these problems can be very difficult to manage and extremely dangerous, even lethal for the patient — but to have both at the same time!

The combined thrombosis and thrombocytopenia linked to Covid vaccination is being considered as something new and very rare, and if clotting happens in a vital organ … well, we’re seeing the results: young people that should not be dying, are.” (“Clotting and Covid Vaccine “Science”” UK Column)

Indeed, “young people should not be dying”, but they are dying because they were injected with a substance that likely killed them. Does anyone refute this?

And the hemorrhage-clotting issues are just two of the problems with these injections. There’s also the “waste” to which Bhakdi refers. The waste attracts the killer lymphocytes which are white blood cells that are also one of the body’s main types of immune cells. These lymphocytes attack the cells in the lining of the blood vessels causing damage to the vascular system and to vital organs. By definition, this is a sign of an autoimmune disease in which an over-stimulated, hyper-aggressive immune system attacks your own body. Here’s more from Dr. Williams’s article:

“If we were to rely on mainstream news and government reports, we might be led to believe that clotting problems with Covid vaccines were entirely unexpected and rare. Yet the first warnings about the Astrazeneca clotting disorder came … Well over a decade before, to be precise….. In 2007 a research paper laid it out very clearly:

Thrombocytopenia has been consistently reported following the administration of adenoviral gene transfer vectors….It was known in 2007 that the same vector used for many of the Covid vaccines consistently caused thrombocytopenia. ..In September 2020, another paper was published SARS-CoV-2 binds platelet ACE2 to enhance thrombosis in COVID-19, that outlined a problem with SARS-CoV-2:…(Note: In other words, the drug companies have known about the clotting problems and the bleeding problems since 2007)

SARS-CoV-2 and its Spike protein directly stimulated platelets to facilitate the release of coagulation factors, the secretion of inflammatory factors, and the formation of leukocyte–platelet aggregates.

This paper identified a spike protein as causal factor in clotting. And, of course, a spike protein is what is being produced by most of the Covid vaccines. Alarm bells should have been ringing with regulators, but nothing was done.... They demonstrated brilliantly that in small blood vessels the spike protein, all by itself, can induce clotting by docking in various tissues….

The key point to this paper in relation to Covid vaccines is that the spike protein, devoid of viral RNA travels to the brain and causes clotting. Once again, in case you needed reminding: Covid vaccines produce such a spike protein.

Another paper by Nuovo et al, entitled Endothelial cell damage is the central part of COVID-19…

Simply put, there is overwhelming evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (that is also synthetically produced by the Covid vaccines) is a central part of the mechanisms of morbidity and mortality of SARS-CoV-2, and therefore is also a risk of the vaccine. In regard to clotting, that risk is greater if you receive a vaccine.

The data clearly demonstrate that the last thing you would ever want to do is make a vaccine that produces a spike protein. As the literature clearly showed, it would cause significant damage, including brain clots and death. And that literature, for the most part, was available before the release of Covid vaccines to the public.” (“Clotting and Covid Vaccine “Science”, Dr Mike Williams, UKColumn)

Get the picture?

In other words, researchers have known for a long time that these types of proteins produce clotting, bleeding and autoimmune issues, which are precisely the problems we are currently seeing. And that’s why we think that our main area of concern should not be short-term adverse effects and injuries, but the long-term safety profile. In short, what is the probability that the millions of people who got these injections will be seriously harmed by these conditions sometime in the future? We need to know that.

Now check out this excerpt from an open letter from Doctors for Covid Ethics to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) dated April 1, 2021:

“Our concerns arise from multiple lines of evidence, including that the SARS-CoV-2 “spike protein” is not a passive docking protein, but its production is likely to initiate blood coagulation via multiple mechanisms…..CSVT, cerebral venous thrombosis, is always a life-threatening condition that demands immediate medical attention. The number of cases you conceded had occurred can represent just the tip of a huge iceberg. As you must know, the most common symptoms of CSVT are piercing headache, blurred vision, nausea and vomiting. In severe cases, stroke-like symptoms occur including impairment of speech, vision and hearing, body numbness, weakness , decreased alertness and loss of motoric control. Surely, you are not oblivious to the fact that countless individuals suffered from precisely such symptoms directly following “vaccinations” with all the experimental gene-based agents.”

Clot formation in deep leg veins can lead to lethal pulmonary embolisms. Surely you must know that peripheral venous thromboses have repeatedly been reported following “vaccinations” with all the experimental gene-based agents…

Given that there is a mechanistically plausible explanation for these thromboembolic adverse drug reactions, namely that the gene-based products induce human cells to manufacture potentially pro-thrombotic spike protein, the reasoned & responsible assumption must now be that this may be a class effect. In other words, the dangers must be ruled out for all emergency-authorized gene-based vaccines, not merely the AZ product.” (“Open Letter to the EMA from Doctors for Covid Ethics”, Doctors for Covid Ethics”)

Bottom line: The blood clotting, the pulmonary embolisms, the consumption of platelets, the hemorrhagic diathesis and the bleeding are all linked to the production of spike proteins, the same type of proteins the vaccines train your cells to produce. Naturally, the responsible action at this point would be to terminate the mass vaccination campaign immediately until these issues can be resolved and patient safety can be guaranteed. But don’t hold your breath, because it’s not going to happen.

Molecular biologist and toxicologist Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D., arrived at the same conclusion in a public comment she directed to the CDC. Here’s an excerpt from her statement:

“In the mid-1990s, I aided the development of a temporary human contraceptive vaccine which ended up causing unintended autoimmune ovarian destruction and sterility in animal test models. Despite efforts against this and sequence analyses that did not predict this. I strongly feel that all the gene therapy vaccines must be halted immediately due to safety concerns on several fronts….

First, there is a credible reason to believe that the Covid vaccines will cross-react with the syncytin and reproductive proteins in sperm, ova, and placenta, leading to impaired fertility and impaired reproductive and gestational outcomes. ...

We have seen 100 pregnancy losses reported in VAERS as of April 9th. And there have [also] been reports of impaired spermatogenesis and placental findings from both the natural infection, vaccinated, and syncytin knockout animal models that have similar placental pathology, implicating a syncytin-mediated role in these outcomes…. Additionally, we have heard of multiple reports of menses irregularities in those vaccinated. These must be investigated.

We simply cannot put these [vaccines] in our children who are at .002% risk for Covid mortality, if infected, or any more of the child-bearing age population without thoroughly investigating this matter.

[If we do], we could potentially sterilize an entire generation.Speculation that this will not occur and a few anecdotal reports of pregnancies within the trial are not sufficient proof that this is not impacting on a population-wide scale….

Secondly, all of the gene therapies [Covid vaccines] are causing coagulopathy….(Clotting) This is not isolated to one manufacturer. And this is not isolated to one age group. As we are seeing coagulopathy deaths in healthy young adults with no secondary comorbidities…

There are forward and backward mechanistic principles for why this is happening. The natural infection is known to cause coagulopathy due to the spike protein. All gene therapy vaccines direct the body to make the spike protein….

Spike protein incubated with human blood in vitro also caused blood clot development which was resistant to fibrinolysis. The spike protein is causing thrombocytic events, which cannot be resolved through natural means. And all vaccines must be halted in the hope that they can be reformulated to guard against this adverse effect.

We have enough evidence now to see a clear correlation with increased Covid deaths and the vaccine campaigns. This is not a coincidence. It is an unfortunate unintended effect of the vaccines. We simply must not turn a blind eye and pretend this is not occurring. We must halt all Covid vaccine administration immediately, before we create a true pandemic that we cannot reign in…”(“Halt Covid Vaccine, Prominent Scientist Tells CDC“, jennifermargulis.ne)

That’s good advice, but is anyone listening?

*

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

This article was originally published on The Unz Review.

Mike Whitney is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

Seeing Through the COVID Spin

May 11th, 2021 by Barbara Loe Fisher

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The COVID-19 spin is reaching dizzying new heights every day, with fundamental facts about the experimental vaccine’s risks and failures getting lost in the hard sell

At dinner time, if you turn on any major television network in the U.S., you will see that the evening news has turned into one long COVID vaccine commercial infused with a heavy dose of fear mongering

On April 1, 2021, the U.S. government announced a $3 billion COVID vaccine ad campaign paid for with taxpayer dollars

COVID-19 vaccines were not designed to, and have not yet been proven to prevent infection and transmission of the new coronavirus in the majority of recipients

There is not one credible scientific study published in the medical literature demonstrating that high fevers, chills, headache, joint and muscle aching, disabling fatigue and other symptoms following vaccination are “good” for the body and indicate the body is successfully producing artificial immunity

There are no long-term studies evaluating the range of effects at the cellular and molecular level on the biological and genetic integrity of humans who receive the COVID vaccine

*

Seeing through the COVID-19 spin is a challenge even for those who have been writing and talking for years about the need to limit Big Pharma’s influence on health policy and law. Perhaps the greatest change I have seen in vaccine regulation, policymaking and law over the past four decades has been the development of public-private business partnerships between Big Pharma and the government.1,2,3,4,5

That seismic change has affected how new vaccines are developed, licensed and regulated and is influencing what we see happening today.6,7 Since the coronavirus pandemic was declared by government officials in early 2020, lawmakers have been persuaded to build the entire global pandemic response around a single experimental biological product.8,9,10

That single product is generating billions of dollars in profits for liability-free drug companies and their partners.11,12 The COVID-19 spin is reaching dizzying new heights every day,13,14 with fundamental facts about the experimental product’s risks and failures getting lost in the hard sell.

Watch the video here.

At dinner time, if you turn on any major television network in the U.S., you will see that the evening news has turned into one long COVID vaccine commercial infused with a heavy dose of fear mongering.

Before the pandemic declaration, we had learned to ignore prescription drug advertising in-between getting news of the day. Now newscasters and TV docs are Pharma’s new COVID “vaccine” sales reps and the only way to get away from the 24/7 sales pitch is to turn off the TV.

Billions of Dollars Paid to TV Networks for DTC Pharma Ads

We should not be surprised. The U.S. and New Zealand are the only two countries in the world that allow direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical product advertising.15,16,17 In this country, Big Pharma pays U.S. television networks $5 billion per year to push use of drugs and vaccines.18

Taking a page out of Big Tobacco’s old book and upping the ante, Big Pharma has become a business partner of government.19 The COVID business deal is perhaps the single biggest one in the history of public health programs.20,21,22

Already wealthy drug companies were given at least $9 billion from the government to develop experimental COVID vaccines in record breaking time,23 shaving five to 10 years off the normal vaccine development, testing and licensing process.24,25 But that wasn’t enough. Congress also handed companies a liability shield from lawsuits whenever the product government paid them to produce fails to work as advertised or a person is hurt by using it.26

If you or a loved one dies or is permanently injured by an experimental or soon-to-be FDA licensed COVID vaccine, you cannot sue the drug company who made it, even if there is evidence the company could have made it less reactive or more effective.

Pharma Pays Big Tech Billions for Ads, Censorship Campaigns

If you are searching for relief from the hype by turning off the TV and turning on your computer, you will be disappointed. The COVID vaccine ad campaign is in high gear online, especially on social media platforms. The Thought Police hired by Big Tech to censor information that does not conform with preapproved pandemic narratives are making sure you do not have an opportunity to carefully weigh the vaccine’s benefits and risks.27,28,29

Rational thinking on the World Wide Web is no longer tolerated and neither is freedom of speech. The internet has become a drug company stockholder’s dream and a consumer’s worst nightmare.

Big Pharma and its business partners have paid a lot of money to Big Tech to eliminate freedom of thought and speech online. Right now the weapon of choice is a social media censorship campaign to de-platform dissenters, including reputable charitable organizations like the National Vaccine Information Center publishing well referenced information.30,31,32

The internet Thought Police are especially upset when anyone talks about reports of serious vaccine complications and deaths, but reports about COVID-19 disease complications and deaths are allowed without restrictions.33 As COVID social distancing regulations have kept more people at home and on their electronic devices, the health care and pharma industries have poured more money into direct-to-consumer digital ads.34

In 2020, drug and vaccine manufacturers funneled about $10 billion into digital advertising that we view on our computers, tablets and cell phones.35,36 How much of Big Tech’s decision to ghost dissenters from search engine results and de-platform social media accounts is influenced by an infusion of direct-to-consumer advertising dollars from Big Pharma?37

American Taxpayer Pays for COVID-19 Vaccine Ads

This year, the American taxpayer is also paying for TV and digital advertising to promote the use of the COVID-19 vaccine.38 On April 1, 2021, the government announced a $3 billion COVID vaccine ad campaign39 to make sure that every American gets vaccinated, a national ad campaign that is using community and religious leaders, as well as celebrities,40,41 to reach into every community to boost vaccine uptake in stores,42 sports arenas,43 schools44 and churches.45

Right now, Pfizer and Moderna, the two U.S. corporations manufacturing experimental messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines are leading beneficiaries of the free advertising paid for by tax dollars. The first to secure an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the FDA, Moderna counts the federal National Institutes of Health as a business partner,46 while Pfizer partnered with the German company BioNTech.47

Together, Moderna and Pfizer have captured market share and, by the end of 2020, Pfizer had achieved a 180% increase in revenue48,49 and Moderna had scored an eye watering 3,900% increase.50,51

So, what has the COVID vaccine advertising blitz done so far, other than to convince half of all adults to get at least one dose of the vaccine by mid-April 2021?52 The most notable achievement of the COVID vaccine campaign has been to keep everyone in a constant state of fear and confusion about what is true and what is false.53

There are so many misunderstandings and false impressions out there about the biological product manufactured by Moderna and Pfizer, a product that most people call a vaccine and others call a therapeutic drug but I call a cell disrupter biological.

No Long-Term Safety Studies of Experimental mRNA Vaccines

Whatever you want to call it, the experimental mRNA technology that Moderna and Pfizer employed to create the product has not yet been licensed by the FDA to prevent infections in humans.54

It is a genetic engineering technology that radically departs from the production methods used for two centuries to make live attenuated and inactivated viral and bacterial vaccines.55 It is an experimental technology that injects synthetic RNA directly into cells and, in effect, attempts to turn the human body into a vaccine manufacturing machine.56,57

There are no long-term studies58 evaluating the range of effects at the cellular and molecular level on the biological and genetic integrity of humans who receive the product. Nobody knows if it will, over time, negatively affect normal immune function and cause autoimmune and other chronic inflammatory conditions in the body,59,60,61 or provoke enhanced disease in vaccinated persons encountering mutated versions of the coronavirus in the future.62

Myth: mRNA Vaccines Prevent Infection and Transmission

What are the two biggest myths that have been generated by the advertising campaign being conducted with Pharma and taxpayer dollars?

The first big myth is that if you get two doses of the mRNA COVID vaccine, you will get artificial immunity and cannot be asymptomatically or symptomatically infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and you will not be able to infect others who come in physical contact with you: You dutifully got vaccinated and now you are immune.63

That is a normal assumption because that is what vaccines are supposed to do, but it is a false assumption. The Emergency Use Authorization the FDA gave to Pfizer and Moderna was not granted based on scientific evidence that the product prevented infection and transmission of SARS-CoV-2.64,65

In fact, the FDA directed manufacturers in the summer of 2020 to make a product that had at least a 50% efficacy rate in either preventing or reducing severity of COVID-19 disease.66

The companies chose to apply for an EUA based on nine months of clinical trial data that the product prevents people from developing severe symptoms of COVID-19 disease67 and reduces the likelihood they will have serious complications leading to hospitalization and death — not that it prevents infection and transmission. There is a difference.

TAKE HOME FACT: COVID-19 vaccines were not designed to, and have not yet been proven to prevent infection and transmission of the new coronavirus in the majority of recipients. Apparently, that is why public health officials are telling vaccinated people they have to continue wearing masks and social distancing just like unvaccinated people.68,69

Myth: It is ‘Good’ to Feel Bad After mRNA COVID-19 Shots

The second big myth being perpetuated by COVID spin is that when you have strong reactions to a COVID-19 shot, it is “good” because it means the vaccine is “working.”70,71

The companies and public health officials admit that the mRNA vaccines are reactive and that the majority of people, especially younger people, who get vaccinated will experience reactions strong enough to require a day or two of recovery and even time off work.72,73

But there is not one credible scientific study published in the medical literature demonstrating that high fevers, chills, headache, joint and muscle aching, disabling fatigue and other symptoms are “good” for the body and indicate the body is successfully producing artificial immunity.

In fact, strong reactions to pharmaceutical products like drugs and vaccines are usually something to be concerned about and a reason to exercise caution, especially with repeat doses.74,75,76

More concerning are the 68,000 adverse event reports following COVID-19 vaccinations, including over 2,600 deaths,77 that have been reported as of April 8, 2021, to the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) created under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.78,79,80,81

More than 70% of the reaction reports occurred in people between 17 and 65 years old. And that may be just the tip of the iceberg because one government funded study found that less than 1% of vaccine reactions are ever reported to the vaccine reaction reporting system82 created under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

Although Pfizer, Moderna and the government admit that messenger RNA COVID vaccines can cause a lot of reaction symptoms like fever, body pain and disabling fatigue,83,84,85 they adamantly deny that the shots cause sudden death86,87,88 or blood clots89,90,91,92 and bleeding disorders like immune thrombocytopenic purpura,93 cardiac and respiratory arrest94,95 and other very serious health problems.96

Where is the biological mechanism science that proves it is only a coincidence when people suddenly die within minutes,97 days or weeks of being given a COVID shot98 and that none of the tens of thousands of bad health outcomes being reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System is causally related?99

Where is science backing up the claim that feeling so bad you can’t get out of bed or go to work after getting vaccinated is “good” because being in pain is evidence that the product is effective?

TAKE HOME FACT: COVID-19 shots cause reactions in the majority of people.100,101 There is no scientific evidence that having strong reactions to a drug or biological means that the product is effective.102

Government health officials have said that COVID-19 vaccines will be approved for use in children of any age by early 2022.103 With the majority of adults suffering very strong COVID vaccine reactions, especially younger adults,104,105 why are there plans to give the messenger RNA cell disrupter biological to infants and young children when the CDC says the majority of children with COVID-19 disease either have mild symptoms or no symptoms at all?106

The enormous sums of money that Big Pharma and government are spending on television and digital ad campaigns to make sure that every child and adult in America gets a COVID-19 vaccine is creating false impressions and assumptions. When public policy precedes the science and aggressive advertising campaigns blur the lines between facts and myths, truth gets lost in the spin and nobody is safe.

Go to NVIC.org and learn more about SARS-CoV-2 and the biological product being referred to as the COVID-19 vaccine on our new coronavirus information pages.

Go to NVICAdvocacy.org, where you can learn how to help defend informed consent rights in your state so you can make voluntary decisions about vaccination for yourself and your minor children. It’s your health. Your family. Your choice. And our mission continues. No forced vaccination. Not in America.

*

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

Notes

1 Fisher BL. Here Comes the 21st Century Cures Act: Say Goodbye to Vaccine Safety Science. NVIC Newsletter July 21, 2015.

2 Ramsey L, Friedman LF. The government agency in charge of approving drugs gets a surprising amount of money from the companies that make them. Business Insider Aug. 17, 2016.

3 Fisher BL. End Pharma Liability Shield Endangering Public Health and Human Rights. NVIC Newsletter Nov. 8, 2016.

4 The Vaccine Reaction. Drug Companies Pay FDA and NIH to Fast Track and Market Vaccines. Sept 28, 2018.

5 Fisher BL. WHO, Government, Gates & Government: Who’s Calling the Shots? NVIC Newsletter Jan. 27, 2019.

6 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Public–private partnership responses to COVID-19 and future pandemics: Proceedings of a workshop—in brief. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press 2020.

7 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). COVID-19: Federal Efforts to Accelerate Vaccine and Therapeutic Development But More Transparency Needed on Emergency Use Authorization. Nov. 17, 2020.

8 National Institutes of Health. NIH clinical trial of investigational vaccine for COVID- 19 begins. NIH Press Release Mar. 16, 2020.

9 Lurie N, Saville M et al. Developing Covid-19 Vaccines at Pandemic Speed. NEJM Mar. 31, 2020

10 Fisher BL. COVID-19 Meltdown and Pharma’s Big Money Win. NVIC Newsletter Apr. 1, 2020.

11 Kollewe J. From Pfizer to Moderna: Who’s making billions from Covid-19 vaccines? The Guardian Mar. 6, 2021.

12 Egan M. Pfizer and Moderna could score $32 billion in Covid-19 vaccine sales – in 2021 alone. CNN Dec. 11, 2020.

13 Megan Garnett Coyle. Ad Tech Leaders Unite to Measure the Ad Council & COVID Collaborative’s COVID-19 Vaccine Education Initiative – the Largest PSA Campaign in US History. Businesswire Mar. 30. 2021.

History

14 Medical Xpress. US launches major COVI vaccination ad campaign. Apr. 1, 2021.

15 Lee B. How is Consumer Drug Advertising Regulated in the United States? June 17, 2019.

16 Harvard Health Publishing. Do not get sold on drug advertising. February 2017.

17 Rapaport L. U.S. health care industry spends $30 billion a year on marketing. Reuters Jan. 8, 2019.

18 Kanski A. Nielsen: Pfizer tops list of biggest pharma advertisers in 2018. Medical Marketing & Media Apr. 2, 2019.

19 Johnson B. Up in Smoke: Documents from the Annals of Tobacco Marketing. Ad Age Mar. 29, 2010.

20 Meyer R. Profiteering off a Covid vaccine. World of DTC Marketing Mar. 25, 2021.

21 Kollewe J. From Pfizer to Moderna: Who’s making billions from Covid-19 vaccines? The Guardian Mar. 6, 2021.

22 Dunleavy BP. Pfizer CEO says need for third dose of COVID-19 vaccine ‘likely.’ UPI Apr. 16, 2021.

23 Weintraub EW. Federal spending on COVID-19 vaccine candidates tops $9 billion, spread among 7 companies. USA Today Aug. 10, 2020.

24 The College of Physicians of Philadelphia. Vaccine Development, Testing and Regulation. The History of Vaccines Jan. 17, 2018.

25 Broom D. 5 charts that tell the story of vaccines today. World Economic Forum June 2, 2020.

26 Fisher BL, Parpia R. 2005 PREP Act and 1986 Act Shield Vaccine Manufacturer’s from Liability. The Vaccine Reaction Aug. 10, 2020.

27 Fisher BL. The New Internet Police Protecting You from Freedom of Thought and Speech. NVIC Newsletter Dec. 3, 2018.

28 Caceres M. When Even the New York Times Doesn’t Pass Facebook Muster. The Vaccine Reaction Dec. 28, 2020.

29 Mercola J. New Thought Police NewsGuard Is Owned by Big Pharma. Jan. 24, 2020.

30 Fisher BL. Vaccination and Censorship: The Truth Will Set Us Free. NVIC Newsletter Jan. 26, 2021.

31 O’Neill J. White House working with social media giants to silence anti-vaxxers. New York Post Feb. 19, 2021.

32 Attkisson S. CENSORED: The National Vaccine Information Center. Mar. 8, 2021.

33 Presson J. Questions linger about COVID-19 vaccine. The Mountaineer Feb. 12, 2021.

34 Droesch B. US Healthcare and Pharma Is Among the Fastest-Growing Digital Ad Spenders. EMarketer Oct. 9, 2020.

35 Droesch B. US Healthcare and Pharma Is Among the Fastest-Growing Digital Ad Spenders. EMarketer Oct. 9, 2020.

36 Silk B. Why Digital Is the Future for Pharma Advertising. Ethoseo Oct. 15, 2019.

37 Robbins R. Get ready for more drug ads: Facebook is making a bid for pharma dollars. STAT News Nov. 1, 2016.

38 Holmes K, Kaufman E. HHS begins national vaccine ad campaign with You Tube ads. CNN Dec. 4, 2020.

39 DHHS. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Launches Nationwide Network of Trusted Voices to Encourage Vaccination in Next Phase of Public Education Campaign. HHS Press Office Apr. 1, 2021.

40 Facher L. The White House is set to unveil a wide-reaching billion-dollar campaign aimed at convincing every American to get vaccinated. STAT News Mar. 15, 2021.

41 Associated Press. Celebrities Make a Stand for COVID-19 Vaccines on TV Special. Voice of America Apr. 16, 2021.

42 Walmart. Administering COVID-19 Vaccines. Apr. 21, 2021.

43 Hoffman DC. Mass COVID-19 Vaccination Site Set to Open at PPG Paints Arena. KDKA2 Mar. 15, 2021.

44 Archie A. This Indiana school district is helping high schoolers get a COBID-19 vaccine before prom. Louisville Courier Journal Apr. 13, 2021.

45 AdventHealth News. AdventHealth Partners with Churches to Provide COVID-19 Vaccines. Apr. 20, 2021.

46 Collins FS. Statement from NIH and BARDA on the FDA Emergency Use Authorization of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. NIAID Dec. 18, 2020.

47 Pfizer Inc. Pfizer and BioNTech Announce Further Details on Collaboration to Accelerate Global GOVIC-19 Vaccine Development. Businesswire Apr. 9, 2020.

48 Macrotrends. Pfizer Revenue 2006-2020. January 2021.

49 NASDAQ. Pfizer sees about $15 billion in 2021 sales from COVID-19 vaccine. Feb. 2, 2021.

50 NASDAQ. Moderna Earnings Date, Estimates & History. MarketBeat Apr. 16, 2021.

51 CBS News. Moderna forecasts $18.4 billion in COVID-19 vaccine sales. Feb. 28, 2021.

52 Yen H, Mattise J. Half of US adults have received at least one COVID-19 shot. Associated Press Apr. 18, 2021.

53 Syal A. Is It Safe to Visit Grandparents After Getting COVID Vaccine? NBC Feb. 14, 2021.

54 Pfizer Inc. The Facts About Pfizer and BioNTech’s COVID-19 Vaccine. Jan 6, 2021.

55 Banks MA. What Are mRNA Vaccines, and Could They Work Against COVID-19? Smithsonian Magazine Nov. 16, 2020.

56 Trafton A. Explained: Why RNA vaccines for Covid-19 raced to the front of the pack. MIT News Office Dec. 11, 2020.

57 Langreth R, Krege N. Moderna Wants to Transform the Body Into a Vaccine- Making Machine. Bloomberg News Aug. 11, 2020.

58 Harris R. Long-Term Studies of COVID-19 Vaccines Hurt by Placebo Recipients Getting Immunized. NPR Feb. 19, 2021.

59 Pardi N, Hogan MJ et al. mRNA vaccines – a new era in vaccinology. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 2018; 17: 261-279.

60 Jaffe-Hoffman M. Could mRNA COVID-19 vaccines be dangerous in the long- term? Jerusalem Post Nov. 17, 2020.

61 Odell J. Messenger RNA (nRNA) SARS Coronavirus ‘Vaccines’ and their Potential Autoimmunity Part 2. Bioregulatory Medicine Institute Feb. 24, 2021.

62 Arvin AM, Fink K et al. A perspective on potent antibody-dependent enhancement of SARA-Cov-2. Nature 2020; 584: 352-363.

63 Healthline. How Long Does Immunity Last After COVID-19?: How vaccine- induced immunity after receiving immunization works. Feb. 24, 2021.

64 FDA. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. Dec. 11, 2020.

65 FDA. Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. Dec. 18, 2020.

66 Heidt A. FDA to Require 50 Percent Efficacy for COVID-19 Vaccines. The Scientist July 1, 2020.

67 Crist C. Early Vaccines Will Prevent Symptoms, Not Virus. WebMD Oct. 28, 2020.

68 Syal A. Is It Safe to Visit Grandparents After Getting COVID Vaccine? NBC Feb. 14, 2021.

69 Rouan R. Fact Check: CDC recommends masks in most cases even after COVID-19 vaccines. USA Today Apr. 22, 2021.

70 Crow S. The CDC Says These 3 Side Effects Mean Your Vaccine Is Working. Yahoo Feb. 15, 2021.

71 Finberg R. No, vaccine side effects don’t tell you how well your immune system will protect you from COVID-19. Yahoo News Apr. 19, 2021.

72 Hendler C. Severe Reactions to COVID-19 Vaccine Close Schools in Michigan, Ohio and New York. The Vaccine Reaction Mar. 8, 2021.

73 Farber M. Is the COVID-19 vaccine effective if you don’t have a reaction to it? Fox News Feb. 9, 2021.

74 Bircher AJ. Symptoms and danger signs in acute drug hypersensitivity. Toxicology 2005; 209(2): 201-207.

75 Davidovici BB, Wolf R. The challenge of drug-rechallenge: Facts and controversies. Clin Dermatol 2010; 281(3): 249-253.

76 GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals. Highlights of Prescribing Information for INFANRIX – diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis vaccine adsorbed suspension: Contraindications, Warnings and Precautions. Nov. 20, 2019.

77 MedAlerts. Search the VAERS Database.

78 FDA. VAERS Overview. Mar. 29, 2019.

79 CDC. Vaccine Safety: Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

80 LaVigne P. The Story Behind MedAlerts. NVIC Newsletter Aug. 20, 2013.

81 The College of Physicians of Philadelphia. Vaccine Injury Compensation Programs: National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA)/National Childhood Vaccine Injury Program (NCVIP). The History of Vaccines Jan. 17, 2018.

82 Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. Electronic System for Public Health Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. AHRQ 2011.

83 The Vaccine Reaction. Moderna’s COVID-19 Vaccine Provokes COVID-Like Symptoms in Phase 3 Trial. Oct. 19, 2020.

84 Fisher BL. Over 3,000 “Health Impact Events” After COVID-19 mRNA Vaccinations. The Vaccine Reaction Dec. 22, 2020.

85 Gale J. COVID-19 vaccine side effects hit some recipients hard; that’s not all bad. Here’s what to do about them. Seattle Times Mar. 11, 2021.

86 Sforza T. Health care worker dies after second dose of COVID vaccine, investigation underway. Orange County Register Feb. 4, 2021.

87 Percy N. Kaiser says Pfizer vaccine likely not cause of Calfornia woman’s death. Mercury News Feb. 15, 2021

88 Brown E. Fact Check: Have 966 People Died After Receiving the COVID vaccine? Newsweek Mar. 8, 2021.

89 Goldstein S. Blood clots prevalent with Pfizer and Moderna Vaccine as with Astra Zeneca’s study. Dow Jones/Market Watch Apr. 16, 2021.

90 Ma A. Schuster-Bruce C. Johnson & Johnson asked other drugmakers to help it study blood-clot risks, and Moderna and Pfizer decline, report says. Business Insider Apr. 16, 2021.

91 Scribner H. Recent vaccine news should improve further confidence, doctor says. Deseret News Apr. 15, 2021.

92 Beusekom MV. Study: COVID much more likely than vaccines to cause blood clot. CIDRAP Apr. 15, 2021.

93 Fisher BL. Miami Obstetrician Develops Bleeding Disorder, Dies After Getting COVID- 19 Vaccine. The Vaccine Reaction Jan. 11, 2021.

94 Israel National News. Mexican doctor hospitalized after receiving COVID-19 vaccine. Jan. 2, 2021.

95 Microsoft News. 72-year old man sent to ICU following COVID-19 vaccination; MOH confirms cardiac arrest wasn’t caused by vaccine. Feb. 19, 2021.

96 Fisher BL. Healthy Mom, 39, in Utah Dies of Organ Failure Days After Moderna COVID Vaccination. The Vaccine Reaction Mar. 15. 2021.

97 The Vaccine Reaction. Woman Dies Immediately After Getting COVID-9 Vaccine in Virginia. Feb. 21, 2021.

98 Haglage A. No evidence COVID-19 vaccines cause death epidemiologists say: ‘Coincidences are going to happen.’ Yahoo Feb. 4, 2021.

99 Rouan R. Fact check: CDC data on adverse effects of vaccine cannot determine cause. USA Today Apr. 8, 2021.

100 CDC. Local Reactions, Systemic Reactions, Adverse Events and Serious Adverse Events: Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine. Dec. 13, 2020.

101 FDA. Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine. Dec. 18, 2020.

102 Finberg R. No, vaccine side effects don’t tell you how well your immune system will protect you from COVID-19. Yahoo News Apr. 19, 2021.

103 Thomas N. Fauci expects almost all children to be eligible for Covid-19 vaccines by first quarter 2022 at the latest. CNN Apr 18, 2021.

104 Koweek M. Younger adults are having harsher Covid vaccine side effects. WHIO TV Mar. 5, 2021.

105 Bendix A. Why you can expect more severe vaccine side effects if you’re younger or a woman. Business Insider Apr. 6, 2021.

106 CDC. COVID-19 in Children and Teens: What You Need to Know. Mar. 17, 2021.

All images in this article are screenshots from the video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Had the FDA and Anthony Fauci’s National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Disease (NIAID) started approving existing clinically-proven and inexpensive drugs for treating malaria, parasites and other pathogens at the start of the pandemic, millions of people would have been saved from experiencing serious infections or dying from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Why federal health officials never followed this strategy is a question the mainstream media refuses to ask.

Another question that the medical establishment, let alone our compliant media, is why have they failed to ask whether there are reliable studies in the peer-reviewed literature and testimonies from thousands of day-to-day clinical physicians worldwide who treat Covid-19 patients with these drugs, in particular hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Ivermectin. In most nations, there has been enormous success in treating Covid patients at the early and moderate stages of infection. However, in the US, Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, the FDA and our institutional medical leaders have categorically denied their use.  In fact they are quick to erect obstacles to prevent them from being prescribed.

When these questions are posited as a general argument for advocating expedient measures to protect public health during this pandemic, would it not have been wise to have prioritized HCQ, Ivermectin, and other remedies with a record of curtailing Covid, such as the antibiotic azithromycin, zinc, selenium, Vitamins C and D, and melatonin as a first line of defense?  There was absolutely no need to have waited for experimental vaccines or experimental drugs such as Remdesivir before the pandemic became uncontrollable.  But this is what Fauci and Trump permitted to happen.

If this strategy of medical intervention had been followed, would it have been successful?  The answer is likely an unequivocal “yes”.  Both HCQ and, even better, Ivermectin have been prophylactically prescribed by physicians working on pandemic’s front lines with enormous success.  Yet those American physicians struggling to get this urgent message out to federal health officials are being marginalized and ridiculed en masse. Only in the US, the UK, France, South Africa and several other developed nations has there been a stubborn hubris to deny their effectiveness, and where there have been concerted efforts to undermine these cheaper alternative remedies. The World Health Organization recommends Ivermectin for Covid-19 so why not the US and these other nations? Under oath, multiple physicians and professors at American medical schools have testified before Congress to present the scientific evidence supporting HCQ and Ivermectin.  These are otherwise medical professionals at the very heart of treating Covid-19 patients.

Today, American journalism is in shambles. In fact, it is a disgrace.  The American public is losing its trust in the media. Whether it is CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, NPR or PBS, they each have unlimited resources to properly investigate the federal and institutional machinery behind the government health policies being thrust upon us.  Yet no mainstream journalist has found the moral compass to bring this truth to the public.

In the meantime, we are allowing millions to die, and countless others to be seriously affected from a severe infection because of professional medical neglect and a healthcare system favoring the pharmaceutical industry’s frantic rush to develop expensive novel drugs and experimental vaccines. The incentive by the drug makers is to take every advantage available within the FDA’s emergency use loopholes to get their products approved as quickly as possible.  The primary advantage is that these novel drugs and vaccines can then leap over regulatory hurdles, which otherwise would require them to conduct lengthy and thorough clinical trials to prove their efficacy and safety. The consequence is that none of the new pharmaceutical Covid-19 interventions have been adequately reviewed.

On the other hand, HCQ and Ivermectin have an established legacy of prior research and have been on the market for decades. Worldwide, it is not unreasonable to claim that billions of people have been treated with these drugs.

Below is a breakdown of the studies conducted so far for HCQ, Ivermectin and Vitamin D specifically for combatting the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Hydroxychloroquine

  • 291 studies, 218 peer-reviewed have been conducted specifically for Covid-19
  • 241 have been clinical trials that involved 3,875 scientists and over 366,000 patients
  • 33 were randomize controlled trials
  • 65% improvement in 26 early treatment trials
  • 72% improvement in 11 early stage infection treatment mortality results
  • 22% improvement in 164 late stage infection treatment trials (patients in serious condition)

Full list of HCQ studies and details here.

Ivermectin

  • 92 studies, 52 peer-reviewed have been conducted specifically for Covid-19
  • 54 have been clinical trials that involved 442 scientists and over 17,600 patients
  • 27 were randomized controlled trials
  • 85% improvement in 14 prophylaxis trials
  • 80% improvement in 20 early stage infection treatment trials
  • 47% improvement in 20 late stage infection treatment trials
  • 74% improvement in 20 mortality results

Full list of Ivermectin studies and details here.

Vitamin D

  • 74 studies conducted by over 650 scientists
  • 52 sufficiency studies with 12,000 patients
  • 23 treatment trials with 23,000 patients
  • 53% improvement in 23 treatment trials
  • 53% improvement in 52 sufficiency studies
  • 63% improvement in 14 treatment mortality results

Full list of Vitamin D studies and details here.

Please share this information. The inept policies and measures being taken by our federal health officials and by both the former Trump and present Biden administrations are unparalleled in American healthcare history. And never before has the media been so willing to self-censor and been so grossly irresponsible to hide the published science and the truth.

*

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

Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries.

Dr. Gary Null is the host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director, including The War on Health, Poverty Inc and Plant Codes.

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.

***

Six more lawsuits alleging Syngenta’s weed killing pesticide paraquat causes Parkinson’s Disease were filed last week in Pennsylvania, California and Illinois, adding to more than a dozen similar lawsuits already filed in U.S. courts.

The lawsuits all allege that exposure to paraquat,  which is banned in more than 30 countries though not in the United States, causes the incurable and progressive Parkinson’s disorder that affects nerve cells in the brain, leading in advanced cases to severe physical debilitation and often dementia and death.

Many Parkinson’s experts say the disease can be caused by a range of factors, including exposure to pesticides such as paraquat, as well as other chemicals.

The first trial set to take place in the United States is to begin on May 10 in St. Clair County Circuit Court in Illinois. Missouri lawyer Steve Tillery  is representing the plaintiffs in Hoffman V. Syngenta and said he plans to introduce evidence that includes internal company records showing Syngenta has known for decades that its product causes Parkinson’s Disease.

The defendants in the Hoffman case, as well as the other cases filed, name the Swiss-based Syngenta and Chevron USA as defendants.

Both Chevron and Syngenta deny there is a connection between the disease and the weed killer.

Chevron distributed and sold paraquat products in the United States starting with an agreement with a Syngenta predecessor called Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), which introduced a paraquat-based herbicide called Gramoxone in 1962. Under a license agreement, Chevron had the right to manufacture, use, and sell paraquat formulations in the U.S.

Syngenta says that its paraquat products have been approved as “safe and effective” for more than 50 years and it will “vigorously” defend the lawsuits. Syngenta is owned by China National Chemical Corporation, known as ChemChina.

The complaints were filed on April 30 by a team of law firms: DiCello Levitt Gutzler, Saltz Mongeluzzi & Bendesky, P.C. and  Searcy Denney.

Mark DiCello, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys bringing the cases, said Chevron and Syngenta have “long known they were peddling this poison,” and that the science surrounding paraquat “is conclusively on the side of the plaintiffs.”

Jeffrey Goodman, another of the plaintiffs’ attorneys helping bring the litigation said the filings so far are but the “tip of the iceberg” of what he expects to expand into a major mass tort case.

“The manufacturers of paraquat knew for decades that their product was linked to Parkinson’s disease yet chose to hide this information from regulators and the public,” Goodman said.

The newly filed cases are:

The new cases join at least 14 lawsuits filed by eight different law firms in six different federal courts across the country.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Weed Killing Pesticide Paraquat Allegedly Causes Parkinson. Litigation in U.S. Courts
  • Tags: , ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

800 paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division of the U.S. Army departed from Fort Bragg in North Carolina last Friday morning for a Swift Response exercise. They were dropped into Estonia in a “joint forcible entry” operation in the early hours of Saturday. The airborne exercise is designed to test the fast response capabilities of the U.S. to defend Estonia in case of a hypothetical war with Russia. It is also part of larger NATO exercises that includes the participation of 30,000 troops doing drills with battlegroups led by the UK in Estonia, Canada in Latvia, Germany in Lithuania and the U.S. in Poland.

In effect, NATO has mobilized tens of thousands of troops right onto Russia’s border. Moscow has repeatedly expressed concern about a NATO building up in Europe and Russian Presidential spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated that Russia does not threaten anyone but will not ignore actions that could endanger its interests.

On the Estonian television program Välisilm, Colonel Paul Clayton of the Royal British Armed Forces, unashamedly expressed, in the context of NATO’s military exercises, the types of pressure that NATO is attempting to impose against Russia. He admitted that the Alliance is helping Ukraine train its troops and praised the Estonian government for its readiness to devote more than 2% of its GDP to defense. He also recommended more frequent co-operation with Latvia and Lithuania. In his opinion, this is all the more crucial because NATO’s “Northern Division” is being built in Riga, which consists of military units from the Baltic States under the command of Denmark.

The NATO contingent deployed in the Baltic States is under the pretext of “countering Russian aggression.” Moscow emphasizes, under the pretext of concern for the security of the Baltic States, that NATO has in fact provocatively brought its military bases closer to Russia’s borders. The Kremlin has also repeatedly stated that it has no plans to attack, but NATO continues to grow its potential and Russia has been forced to provide an asymmetric response to its military plans.

It is for this reason at the end of April, by presidential decree, the U.S., UK, Ukraine, Lithuania, Poland, Latvia, Czechia, Estonia, Australia and Georgia were put on a list of countries that are “unfriendly” to Russia. Although Germany and France frequently criticize Russia, Moscow recognizes that they are to some extent independent in their decision making and are not as beholden to Washington’s interests like the listed countries are.

Effectively, what Moscow does by establishing such a list is identity countries that enact policies completely aligned with Washington. Unsurprisingly, all the European Union countries to make the list are former Warsaw Pact members, and this points to two observations.

Firstly, Russia is announcing that it does not view the European Union as a single monolith and recognises that it is a fractured organisation with many divisions. One such division is between the majority of the EU who are mostly disinterested in pursuing aggressive anti-Russia policies, and Poland, Czechia and the Baltic States, who as former Warsaw Pact members have the expressed desire to be active participants in Washington’s containment efforts against Russia.

Secondly, Russia is once again demonstrating its flexibility by identifying the likes of Paris and Berlin as having issues with Moscow, but not at the behest of Washington and instead for their own interests. In this way, Moscow believes that it can negotiate with Western Europe, something it has failed to do with Washington and its vassal states in Eastern Europe.

By creating a list of unfriendly states (which nearly perfectly corresponds to the states involved in large scale NATO military drills on Russia’s borders), Moscow has broken Washington’s ultimatum of “us” or “them.” By not including France and Germany on the list, Russia is recognizing that the two leading countries of the European Union have agency that can shape and influence the destiny of Europe independently from Washington.

Although the U.S., UK and its vassals are attempting to intimidate Russia through its enormous military exercises, the show of strength does not reflect the reality that will unfold in a hypothetical war as there are huge divisions within the European Union and NATO. The overwhelming majority of member states are unwilling to go to war with Russia despite enthusiasm from Poland and the Baltics, rendering the joint NATO exercises as not an accurate reflection of a real war scenario.

*

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

Featured image is from InfoBrics

COVID Authoritarians Abuse Children

May 11th, 2021 by Rep. Ron Paul

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.

***

Centers for Diseases Control (CDC) Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky has “recommended” that children wear masks while playing. Her offered reason is to ensure Covid is not spread by “heavy breathing” of children near each other while around a soccer ball.

Dr. Walensky’s recommendation is one more example of Covid authoritarians’ refusal to “listen to the science.” The science says no to lockdowns and masks. The masks are not blocking the very small viruses in “heavy breathing.” Dr. Walensky also ignores the science showing that wearing a mask while exercising or playing sports has negative health effects.

Dr. Walensky’s most outrageous disregard of science is ignoring the fact that children are statistically unlikely to be at risk of either spreading Covid or becoming very sick from it.

Dr. Walensky’s recommendation is one of many examples of how children are harmed by the overreaction to coronavirus. Many children have had their physical and mental health damaged because they cannot go to school, play with their friends, or even have a birthday party because of the lockdowns.

Disappointingly, but not surprisingly, the two major teachers’ unions — the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) — have stood in the way of reopening schools. Teachers’ union leaders have claimed it is too dangerous for teachers to resume in-person instruction, even though adults are at little or no risk of getting Covid from children. Sadly, teachers’ unions are disregarding the interest of children. Recently released emails show the CDC disregarded the science in favor of the AFT’s restrictive guidance when developing recommendations concerning reopening schools.

The negative effects of lockdowns and school closings for children have led many parents to consider alternatives to government schools. Some private schools have not just remained open, they have followed the science and not forced their students to wear masks. Many parents are also considering homeschooling. Homeschooling parents obviously can ensure their children are not forced to obey mask, social distancing, and other unscientific mandates.

Parents interested in providing their children with a quality education that emphasizes the ideas of liberty should consider my homeschooling curriculum. The Ron Paul Curriculum provides students with a well-rounded education that includes rigorous programs in history, mathematics, and the physical and natural sciences. The curriculum also provides instruction in personal finance. Students can develop superior communication skills via intensive writing and public speaking courses. Another feature of my curriculum is that it provides students the opportunity to create and run their own internet-based businesses.

The government and history sections of the curriculum emphasize Austrian economics, libertarian political theory, and the history of liberty. However, unlike government schools, my curriculum never puts ideological indoctrination ahead of education.

Interactive forums allow students to learn from each other outside of a formal setting. The curriculum’s emphasis on self-directed learning and student interaction makes it ideal for parents who need to work from home but still want to homeschool their children.

I encourage parents looking at alternatives to government schools to go to RonPaulCurriculum.com for more information about my homeschooling program.

*

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

EU regulators Friday called on Pfizer and Moderna to provide additional data related to the companies’ COVID vaccines and a potential link to heart inflammation, after the agency completed a safety review of all four COVID vaccines authorized for emergency use in the EU.

The European Medicines Agency’s safety committee, (PRAC), also asked AstraZeneca for data related to reports of Guillain–Barré syndrome in people who received the AstraZeneca vaccine, and they recommended Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson (J&J) update their labels with side effect warnings.

In a report issued May 7, PRAC disclosed its members were aware of cases of myocarditis and pericarditis following Pfizer vaccination. Regulators said they didn’t see an indication the vaccine caused these cases, but as a prevention, PRAC requested Pfizer provide further data, including an analysis of events according to age and gender in its next pandemic summary safety report and will consider if any other regulatory action is needed.

Because Moderna and Pfizer use the same mRNA technology for their vaccines, the committee asked Moderna to monitor for similar cases of heart inflammation.

Myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, can lead to cardiac arrhythmia and death. Pericarditis is inflammation of the membrane around the heart.

A search in the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) revealed 213 cases of pericarditis and myocarditis reported in the U.S following COVID vaccination. Of the 213 cases reported, 105 cases were attributed to Pfizer, 93 cases to Moderna and 15 cases to Johnson & Johnson’s (J&J) COVID vaccine.

On April 27, Reuters reported the U.S. Department of Defense was investigating 14 cases of heart inflammation among people who were vaccinated through the military’s health services.

Of the 14 cases, one patient developed myocarditis after their first dose of vaccine. The remaining 13 patients developed myocarditis after their second vaccine doses. Eleven received the Moderna vaccine and three received Pfizer.

Israel’s Health Ministry is also examining cases of heart inflammation in people who received Pfizer’s COVID vaccine. As The Defender reported April 26, a preliminary report by the committee tasked with monitoring vaccine side effects in Israel identified 62 cases of myocarditis, including two deaths, after recent vaccination with Pfizer. Fifty-five of the cases occurred in men — most between ages 18 and 30.

In the case of AstraZeneca, PRAC said it is examining reports of Guillain–Barré syndrome and asked for more detailed data and an analysis of all reported Guillain–Barré syndrome cases.

Guillain–Barré syndrome is a rare immune disorder in which the body’s immune system attacks the nerves resulting in paralysis. It had been previously identified by regulators as a potential adverse side effect that required monitoring following AstraZeneca’s shot.

EMA recommends updates to labels, lists of side effects

The EMA’s May 7 report also included the recommendation that Pfizer add a new side effect to its product information for people with dermal fillers — soft, gel-like substances injected under the skin.

After reviewing all available evidence, including cases reported to the European database for suspected side effects and data from scientific literature, PRAC said there is at least a “reasonable possibility of a causal association between the vaccine and the reported cases of facial swelling in people with a history of injections with dermal fillers.”

The safety committee also said it would update its warning for J&J’s COVID vaccine after EU regulators in April identified a link between the shot and blood clots.

Though PRAC said the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks, the label will now include advice that patients diagnosed with thrombocytopenia within three weeks of vaccination be actively investigated for signs of thrombosis and that patients who present with thromboembolism within three weeks be evaluated for thrombocytopenia.

Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome will also be added as an “important identified risk” in the risk management plan for J&J’s vaccine. The committee asked the company to provide a plan to further study the possible underlying mechanisms for these events.

Additionally, PRAC looked at clotting risks with Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Though several cases of low blood platelets and blood clots were identified, the committee concluded that for the moment there does not seem to be any evidence of a safety signal for the mRNA shots.

Utilizing a search criteria that included reports of blood clots associated with blood clotting disorders, VAERS yielded a total of 2,808 reports in the U.S for all three vaccines from Dec. 14, 2020, through April 30. Of the 2,808 cases reported, there were 1,043 reports of blood clotting disorders attributed to Pfizer.

As The Defender reported Monday, a Utah teen remains hospitalized with three blood clots in and near his brain that developed after he received the first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine.

On May 7, Pfizer became the first COVID vaccine producer to request full approval by the U.S Food and Drug Administration for ages 16 and up. Pfizer requested priority review, which asks the FDA to take action within six months, compared to 10 months designated under standard review.

The FDA is expected to amend Pfizer’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) this week to authorize use of the vaccine in adolescents aged 12 to 15. The company announced plans to further expand EUA for its vaccine for children ages 2 to 11 in September.

If approved, Pfizer will be the first experimental vaccine to receive full approval by the FDA.

*

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

Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on EU Regulators Call on Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca for More Data on Heart Inflammation, Guillain–Barré Syndrome
  • Tags:

Halt COVID Vaccine, Prominent Scientist Tells CDC

By Dr. Jennifer Margulis, May 10, 2021

In a public comment to the CDC, molecular biologist and toxicologist Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D., called to immediately halt Covid vaccine production and distribution. Citing fertility, blood-clotting concerns (coagulopathy), and immune escape, Dr. Lindsay explained to the committee the scientific evidence showing that the coronavirus vaccines are not safe.

Vaccine Passports Illegal, Infections and Deaths after Vaccines, Government and Media Lies, the “Booster” Myth

By Rodney Atkinson, May 10, 2021

According to all UK COVID vaccine adverse reaction reports 1,086 UK citizens have died following the two COVID vaccinations (Pfizer and Astra Zeneca) up to the reporting date of 29/4/21. COVID infections following the vaccination have risen to 973 for both vaccinations with 62 deaths – a death rate of 6.3% which is nearly twice the rate of deaths in general from COVID. Once again there have been big rises in Lymphadenopathy.

CDC Changes Rules for Counting Breakthrough Cases, as More Fully Vaccinated People Test Positive

By Megan Redshaw, May 10, 2021

According to a statement on the CDC’s website, the agency said to help “maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance” it will stop reporting weekly COVID breakthrough infections unless they result in hospitalization or death.

Pfizer, AstraZeneca COVID Vaccines Probed in Europe after Reports of Heart Inflammation, Rare Nerve Disorder

By Noah Higgins-Dunn, May 10, 2021

Europe’s drug regulator says it’s evaluating an assortment of potential side effects following inoculation with leading COVID-19 vaccines, including heart inflammation, facial swelling and a rare nerve-degenerating disorder. Yet in most circumstances, it’s not clear whether the vaccines are to blame.

Treatment of Covid-19: Dr. Peter McCullough’s Important Statement to the Texas Senate

By Dr. Peter McCullough, May 10, 2021

Scientific information is being taken down by Facebook. There is a total blackout on information to patients regarding treatment.  Patients are led to believe that Covid cannot be treated. Medical doctors are prevented from treating.

The Fateful Choice: Nuclear Arms Race or Nuclear Weapons-Free World

By Lawrence Wittner, May 10, 2021

The recent announcement by the British government that it plans a 40 Percent Increase in the number of nuclear weapons it possesses highlights the escalation of the exceptionally dangerous and costly nuclear arms race.

History: The Kent State May 4, 1970 Shootings. New Documents Surface, Raise Serious Questions

By Taylor Hudak and Alan Frank, May 10, 2021

The Kent State community commemorated the 51st anniversary of the May 4, 1970, shootings outside Taylor Hall on Tuesday. It was a solemn gathering as many former students returned to visit the site of a tragedy where the Ohio National Guard opened fire on anti-Vietnam War protestors. The shootings resulted in the deaths of four students and nine others were wounded.

Covid-19: Fifteen Important Concepts

By Dr. Meryl Nass, May 10, 2021

It appears that the adenovirus vectored DNA vaccines are about to be scuttled, due to high rates of bleeding (3% in Norway) and clotting (rate uncertain). Platelet activation was a known complication of adenovirus vaccines since at least 2007.

Video: Kenyan Physicians Question Gene Therapy Vaccine, Say Powers of the World Are Suppressing Effective Early COVID Treatment

By Uwe Alschner, Dr. Stephen Karanga, Dr. Wahome Ngare, and Kristina Borjesson, May 10, 2021

In an interview with Klartext podcast host, Uwe Alschner, frontline doctors Stephen Karanga and Dr. Wahome Ngare of the Catholic Doctors Association say early COVID treatment is highly effective and question whether vaccines—which they say are misnamed and should be called gene therapy—are necessary or safe.

80 Years Ago: Fall of France, the Wehrmacht’s Advance Through the Ardennes Forest

By Shane Quinn, May 10, 2021

Eight decades ago in the late summer of 1940 the Wehrmacht’s generals, at Adolf Hitler’s behest, were beginning preparations for a massive invasion of the USSR. Morale within the German Army was very good indeed, for obvious reasons. Within six weeks Germany’s traditional nemesis France had been conquered at remarkable ease, along with the Low Countries of Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, demonstrating that this second major European war was proving rather different to the bitter toil of its 1914-1918 predecessor.

Covid Lockdown in India: Anthony Fauci ‘Has No Clue and No Authority to Lecture on What Is Good for India’

By Colin Todhunter, May 10, 2021

In light of the current COVID-related situation in India, Dr Anthony Fauci, the top US adviser on COVID, has called for India to implement a hard lockdown and for the mass roll-out of vaccines. However, Fauci has no clue and no authority to lecture on what is good for India.

Victory Day: Ukrainian Officials Imply Conflict with Russia Equivalent to Nazi Invasion

By Rick Rozoff, May 10, 2021

On the occasion of the 76th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany and the end of World War Two in Europe (Victory in Europe Day to much of the world), what since the 2014 coup in Ukraine has been celebrated as the Day of Remembrance and Reconciliation, President Volodymyr Zelensky visited a common gravesite where the remains of Ukrainian soldiers killed in that war are buried. He chose a war memorial in Lugansk – where his army is engaged in a seven-year war with the Lugansk People’s Republic.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Halt COVID Vaccine, Prominent Scientist Tells CDC

In Defense of Identity and Freedom

May 11th, 2021 by Slobodan Erić

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Serbian magazine Geopolitika, specialized in geopolitics. political, scientific, cultural, historical and spiritual issues, celebrates the 20th anniversary of its existence. On that occasion, on Global Research, we are publishing an interview with the founder and editor-in-chief of the magazine Geopolitika, Mr. Slobodan Erić, interviewed by Biljana Đorović, PhD in Media Philosophy from Belgrade.

Dr. Biljana Đorović: Serbian magazine Geopolitika celebrated its 20th anniversary this year. What we have before us is a quality newspaper which has been publishing texts and interviews with some of the most eminent intellectuals from around the world for the past two decades. Mr. Slobodan Erić, what is a basic concept of the magazine Geopolitika?

Slobodan Eric: Geopolitika is an independent analytical magazine which is not only concerned with local issues that are related to Serbia and the Balkan region, but also to the broader global problems and issues which are of essential importance to the world that we live in. Our guiding idea is that we cherish free thought. During the past two decades we have published interviews with some of the most eminent intellectuals from around the world who, in a certain sense, represent the conscience of the world. We will just mention some of the many free-thinking individuals who have spoken for our newspaper: Edward Herman, Robert MacChesney, William Engdahl, Michel Chossudovsky, Aleksandar Dugin, Thierry Meyssan, Michael Parenti, Alexander Solbucci, Jürgen Elsässer, Serge Trifkovic, General Jean-Pierre Gallois, Diana Johnstone… As for the direction of our editorial policy, we can say that Geopolitka takes an anti-globalist stance, while strongly supporting the idea of freedom, for which we have our foundation in the Serbian libertarian tradition.

DBD: How was the idea for establishing Geopolitika born?

SE: The idea to establish a newspaper which would publish the truth and attempt to gather on its pages the most eminent people in the world, not just in terms of their professionalism but also in terms of their ethics, was born during the NATO aggression on Serbia in 1999. That was the apogee of unipolarity in international relations, when Russia was still enchained by the neoliberal economic model and China, despite its strong economic growth, had still not had enough political self-confidence. Serbia was left to fend for itself in these circumstances and it suffered the brunt of NATO alliance’s terrible strike, since it had to be appropriately punished as an exemplar to other countries due to its resistance to the New World Order. Only free-thinking individuals from around the globe remained by Serbia’s side and their support was of immense importance to us. It was a difficult but honorable time for Serbia and I am proud to have a small part of that great resistance.

DBD: The world has, it seems, been occupied by another topic and another issue – namely, the COVID-19 virus. What is your view on the impact of this virus, not only in terms of its impact on healthcare, but on other aspects of life as well?

SE: Of course, those who have fallen sick and those who are helping them convalesce should have the attention and support of not just the healthcare system, but also of the whole of society. Great social traumas are often the result of mass diseases, but there is also a lot of empathy and solidarity amongst people. Even in this obviously estranged and egoistic world of ours there have been examples of laying down yourself for others ever since the outbreak of COVID-19, which should be lauded. However, despite the official narrative that is given to us by the world health establishment, there is a lot of contradictory information and unresolved questions regarding COVID-19 which demand answers that are based on science. It seems that fear has undermined the self-confidence of many people, primarily within Western civilization which has, especially since the second half of the 20th century, had a triumphant stance vis-à-vis the rest of the world. Epidemics are a suitable testing ground for certain social experiments. The World Health Organization has asserted itself as an authority which pretends to be in charge of managing this health crisis. The WHO has, through its incoherent announcements, demonstrated skepticism towards the use of medications in the fight against COVID-19, starting with hydrochloroquine, insisting primarily on isolation measures, i.e. on lockdowns. Locking down a majority of the population has meant that a lot of working positions have been closed down, especially in the sectors of aviation and tourism, but it has affected other sectors as well. Social peace has been paid for by massive state debt. And states which are in debt are not only economically, but also politically dependent.

DBD: What can be done to extricate ourselves from this situation that our world is currently contending with?

SE: The logical answer would be if there was an open and sincere dialogue to resolve this healthcare crisis. However, the impression is that the WHO, which is just a visible part of the global structure of power, will be setting the course with regards to this pandemic. A majority of people still view international relations within the context of opposing or Great Powers, i.e. the United States, Russia, China, the EU countries… For a long time, however, power has been shifting from formal to informal centers, which do not have a clear legal identity nor was their legitimacy confirmed through elections, i.e. they are not subject to parliamentary or legislative oversight. The Soviet dissident Alexander Zinoviev called this phenomenon “super-society”. The contemporary Russian thinker Andrey Fursov called it “supranational groups of global consensus and management”. Even behind the façade of democratic institutions there existed informal centers of power; the problem here is that this global power structure has not only its own political and economic interests, but also its own vision of the world which a majority of the inhabitants of this planet do not share. There is much that is problematic in their vision and their care for other people’s health, which is symbolically best represented by Bill Gates idea to blot out the sun – the star which is the source of life for our planet. According to his statements and of those who share his vision, the world is entering a phase of uncertainty which will be characterized by such challenges as epidemics and climate change. This concept will have its support base in the United States, which is for the first time in its history encountering an internal political crisis. To be more precise, it will receive its support from the new American administration – from president Joe Biden and his associates, who have shown great enthusiasm for these ideas, by signing multiple decrees at the beginning of his mandate which are supposed to contribute to the fight against climate change.

Alastair Crooke wrote that the “myth of democracy” has been spent and that the “climate myth” will follow it. This has to do with the reorganization of the global economy known as the “Great Reset” or “UN Agenda 2030”, as William Engdahl pointed out.

DBD: Will this “green economy”, which will be based on clean renewable sources of energy bring ecological and economic stability to the world or will it cause a new economic and social stratification that will further deepen the gap between the rich and the poor?

SE: In 2010, Dr. Ottmar Edenhofer, chief of Work Group No. 3 of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change of the United Nations said: “We should openly proclaim that we are de facto redistributing global wealth through climate change policy. We should liberate ourselves from this illusion that international climate policy is also an ecological policy…” William Engdahl quoted this in one of his books.

DBD: Does that mean that this prognosis of how the world will develop has no alternative and should we and can we actually discuss this topic? 

SE: I think that alternatives always exist. This epidemic represents a challenge but also an opportunity to seek answers to essential problems with which the modern world is facing. I hope and want to believe that a public discourse about everything with everyone can be held, including with the creators of the aforementioned concept of “green economy”. Our planet is in fact a wondrous place to live in, in which there is enough space for all peoples and their ideas. 

DBD: What should be done to stabilize international relations, especially amongst the Great Powers?

SE: I must confess that I found the idea that Charles A. Kupchan and Richard N. Haass had put forth to be especially intriguing, in which they pointed out the necessity of regulating international relations in the world based on the model of the Concert of European Nations from the 19th century. I think that the revitalization of such a concept in the current milieu of the multipolar world is sensible. I would like to remind our readers that the Concert of European Powers, which came into existence after the victory of the Holy Alliance (consisting of Russia, Prussia, Austria and Great Britain) against Napoléon’s France (which also became a member of the Concert) brought to Europe not only political stability through the balance of power, but also one hundred years of peace and unseen economic, social and cultural progress, not taking into consideration some minor local conflicts. Kupchan and Haass suggest that new actors be included in a Concert of Powers, which would serve as a consultative body, that would consist of the United States, China, the European Union, Russia, Japan, and India, according to the current constellation of international relations. They see this model as the “best means for the promotion of stability in the 21st century.” Every solution that reflects this new reality – the new multipolar world and which offers dialogue instead of conflict, is a good solution. This dialogue should be qualitatively broadened to encompass not only countries with their political and economic relations, but also the cultural milieus in which they exist or towards which they gravitate. The title of the famous and excellent book by Samuel Huntington “The Clash of Civilizations” should be reformulated into “The Cooperation of Civilizations”; this new title should be represented as the political goal in international relations.

DBD: This is a suggestion to regulate the relations amongst states on an external plan; however, on the internal level, political parties are still the main channel through which civil society exerts its influence on the state in all countries. Many deem that modern-day parties have forsaken their original political programs and that the difference between the right and the left is increasingly disappearing.

SE: To a great extent, that is correct, due to how technological development has changed the class and social structure of modern society. However, we still need parties of the classical right and left. The right is there to defend identity and traditional values, which have been under severe assault through the process of globalization, while on the other hand, the left should be there to defend traditional social and workers’ rights. The contemporary “beaubourg” left (a term which originates from France) is increasingly concerning itself with the rights of migrants and sexual minorities, i.e. the imperative demands of the LGBT community, while neglecting the maintenance of workers’ positions, the increase of salaries and everything related to workers’ unions’ rights. As some political commentators have noticed, what we need now is a new alliance – of a right of values and a workers’ left.

DBD: However, these suggestions in the field of international relations will not resolve a series of other urgent questions which face the modern world?

SE: That is correct. These suggestions must go in the direction of securing peace and political stability within a framework that will permit for a dialogue to be established, not just among states, but also within the framework of what we call global society. The world has entered into a phase of, not just fear and uncertainty, but also of a lack of ideas. What we need are fresh, new and creative ideas. Maybe a platform for open public discourse could be established where people could discuss how they see the world in the 21st century, where they could express their opinions and plans on how to resolve global problems, ranging from the aforementioned climate changes, through world poverty, global healthcare, the protection of freedom and human rights, to the new technological revolution and a vision of outer space. Everyone should be invited to this forum, so we could extract quality out of quantity (7 billion inhabitants on Earth). You never know, there just might crop up some good ideas about progress, not from some scientific institute in the United States or Europe, but from some lonely and misunderstood researcher in Russia or a programmer in India… In any case, our civilization has a wealth of experience. When we are talking about democracy, we should return to its place of origin in Ancient Greece, where they postulated some of the essential questions about man and the purpose of his existence. I told some of my German friends that it is good that Germany is producing the best cars, but that it is not good that they are not advancing at all in the field of philosophy. We have new models of Mercedes and BMW but, to my knowledge, we do not have any new Hegels or Kants. Russian industry is not on the same level as that of Germany’s, but modern Russia still maintains a traditional conception of culture. I am absolutely convinced that, even though we live in societies that are becoming increasingly secular (especially in Europe and North America), the solutions to many of our problems cannot be found without God, i.e. it will be much easier to do so with His help. The central idea of Christianity – Christ said “I am the Way, the Truth and Life” – is salvation, i.e. eternal life in the afterlife. But in order to attain that goal, we must work in this world, to take care of others apart from taking care of ourselves. “Ours is only what we can give to others,” said one monk from Mount Athos. If we give ourselves emotionally and materially to others, then we enrich ourselves in the Lord. And if we love God as our Creator then we cannot but love His creature, Man, and nature as God’s creation – plants and animals, which the ecological movement claims to be protecting. Of course, this is much more difficult in practice, since spiritual life, ethics and relations amongst people have become more complex and the temptations have become greater. But as a start we should have healthy thoughts, which will lead to healthy deeds. As one Serbian Orthodox monk, Father Tadej, said: “Your life is as your thoughts are.” God is not in strength but in truth and justice.

DBD: Whenever Serbia is mentioned in the world, it is usually within the context of the Kosovo and Metohija issue. Why is the West persistently asking Serbia to renounce Kosovo, after having bombed it in 1999 under the pretext that it was committing ethnic cleansing there?

SE: This is a good and difficult question, one which cannot be answered just within the domain of geopolitical and economic interests, but within the spiritual realm. Kosovo is the spiritual and historic heart of the Serbian people, which is a region within modern Serbia that has a broad autonomy granted to the Albanians, who have their own provincial government, parliament, as well as their own University, Academy of Sciences and national broadcasting corporation in the Albanian language. However, there does exist an indirect prehistory of conflict between the West and Serbia in modern history.

We should not forget that socialist Yugoslavia (where the Serbs were a majority) was not a member of any of the Cold War coalitions, was one of the founding members of the Non-Aligned Movement, and that it had caused the ire of global capitalists because it had espoused an idea and practice which they considered to be heretical – namely, workers’ self-management in the factories.

We can really wonder as to why the United States and the whole globalist structure is so obsessed with a small piece of land belonging to Serbia in Southeastern Europe, where the famous Battle of Kosovo happened in 1389. What differentiates this battle between the Serbian and Ottoman Turkish armies is that, for the Serbs, the spiritual-moral result of the battle is much more important than the military consequences. On the eve of the battle, Prince Lazar held a feast where he had gathered all of his voivodes, the military and political elite, which was so reminiscent of Christ’s Last Supper; they and the rest of the army received Holy Communion before the battle, where Prince Lazar exhorted them to sacrifice themselves for freedom and to choose the “Heavenly Kingdom”, proclaiming a thought which would become a motto for future generations of Serbs: “The earthly kingdom lasts only for a brief time, but the Heavenly Kingdom always and forever.”

The sacrifice, ethics and mystique of the heroes of Kosovo have had a strong influence on Serbs, by creating a spiritual and heroic vertical axis which helped them to always choose justice and higher spiritual ideals over earthly interests and which gave them the strength to resist much stronger enemies, such as Austria-Hungary and Germany in 1914, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy in 1941, and the NATO alliance in 1999. That is how what the West calls the “Kosovo myth” came into being among the Serbs, but what we call the “Kosovo testament”. Those globalist structures which are both politically and spiritually intent on shaping the world in their image are aware and know that the spiritual DNA of the Serbs lies within the “Kosovo myth”; they think that by taking Kosovo away from Serbia they will be able to destroy this pivotal point of Serbian being and resistance, because this “myth” is one of the rare, living Christian myths in today’s Europe.

DBD: In more recent times, you have been encountering serious threats to your own safety and we would like to inform the international public. What is happening exactly?

SE: It is a great challenge to manage a truly independent newspaper which publishes the opinions of free intellectuals from around the world, especially when it is done in Serbia. Not that long ago, my vehicle was sabotaged by having the bolts on its tires unscrewed which, due to circumstances – I would say through God’s intercession – had been uncovered beforehand and there were no consequences. During the past two months I have been subjected to intense physical stalking by foreign citizens – it is irrelevant whether they are from the Middle East, Central Asia, or the Caucasus region. I have a good reason to suspect that this physical stalking is just a preparation for my physical liquidation which will lead to the shutting down of the informational project Geopolitika. I think that they are just agents while the clients are from abroad. In any case, there are powerful structures behind this. Of course, if the clients are from abroad, they are dependent upon local structures, especially from the criminal milieu. Political assassinations and the murder of journalists are not always committed with firearms, but through kidnappings and burglary, so that the violent death of the victim is then presented as from natural causes or that it happened “under unclear circumstances”. I have already informed the police and attorney-general’s office about these events; I have also informed by letter the President of the Republic Mr. Aleksandar Vučić and the Minister of Internal Affairs Aleksandar Vulin about my suspicions that I am being physically stalked. Even despite this, I am still being followed, whether it is in the center of Belgrade, in front of the offices of Geopolitika on Nikola Pašić Square, by suspicious individuals. I have also informed the Committee for the Protection of Journalists (New York), Reportets Without Borders (Paris) International Press Institute

(Vienna)… I hope for and want to believe that Serbia security will undertake all measures to stop the worst possible outcome, because I have informed them on time about this threat to my security and I have given to them photographic evidence. However, smaller countries such as Serbia are easily subjected to pressure by Great Western Powers and their security services, whom I am purposefully not mentioning here. Since this is an operation which surpasses the boundaries of Serbia and has a deeper, international background, I would like to use the opportunity to call upon all independent and free organizations which are involved in the protection of human rights and freedoms to share any information that they might have with regards to these events by sending an email to us ([email protected]) or, better yet, to publicly publish it, if they are willing to and have the means. If anyone has any doubts or reservations with regards to my statements, I will suggest to them and investigative organs in Serbia that during the past two months the security footage from the area around Nikola Pašić Square and the National Assembly of Serbia has been reviewed and location data has been accessed through mobile base stations. Everything will be crystal clear from this. In the name of the editor’s office of Geopolitika, I would like to thank in advance for any sort of help or solidarity that will be offered.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on In Defense of Identity and Freedom
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The U.S. is awash in a surplus of coronavirus vaccines as there has been a sudden drop in demand for them; most Americans who want the shots have had them. Now an army of Big Biotech’s agencies set up to address “vaccine hesitancy” are turning up their mass marketing to “create demand” using surveillance, rapid data analysis, media control, and host of behavior control strategies they’ve outlined in their playbooks.

Demand plummets

About 40% of the total adult population has been fully vaccinated, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Uptake plummeted 25% after a peak in mid-April, and 56.4% of adults have had at least one dose of a coronavirus vaccine.

But five million people – about eight per cent of those who took a first dose of the shot – failed to show up for their second dose appointments, according to the CDC.

As a result, excess vaccine stock has been piling up across the country. Chairs sat empty at a Philadelphia mass vaccination site where 4,000 unused doses of vaccines were due to expire. A million doses, representing one out of every four sent to Louisiana by the federal government, were sitting on shelves. One Wyoming county asked the state to stop shipping vaccines because it had a surplus of 20,000 shots; North Carolina closed its vaccination clinics for lack of demand.

“For the first time ever, we’ve had appointments at many vaccination sites that have not been filled,” said Los Angeles County Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer during a news briefing last Thursday.

“There [are] a lot of people around here who … I don’t think they want to take the vaccine,” chuckled Ralph Merrill, an engineer who sits on an Alabama county board.

Vaccine vs. virus fear

Numerous mainstream media fretted about “vaccine hesitancy,” blaming it on COVID-19 denialism, “conspiracy theories,” and QAnon followers, Trump supporters, and minority mistrust of the government with its brutal history of racist eugenics. No one mentioned that some people just don’t think the vaccine works. The mainstream media simply ignored Yale Professor of Epidemiology Harvey Risch, for example, who revealed that the majority of people now coming down with COVID-19 have been vaccinated against the virus.

Nor did they mention the leading reason for vaccine refusal cited by 45% of those in a March poll conducted by the Delphi Group for Facebook researchers, which is fear of side-effects, however. With reported adverse events at 118,746 total in the U.S. alone, including 3,410 deaths and 1,595 permanent disabilities, it is a legitimate deterrent. So is the abrupt halt of AstraZeneca’s vaccine for its high rate of blood clots, and the pause of Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine.

Many people simply fear the novel vaccine more than the novel virus which, according to the CDC, has an overall 99.4% survival rate for those aged 50-65 who get the infection. The odds go up as people get older but decrease if people are younger. For those under 18, the coronavirus fatality rate estimated by the CDC is 0.00002, which translates into a 99.98% COVID survival rate. In fact, for those under 18, the lifetime odds of being struck by lightning are higher than the odds of dying of the virus.

Image

Nevertheless, President Joe Biden said Tuesday that now that the bulk of the vaccinated are seniors  – 85% of whom have gotten at least their first vaccine dose – he wants 70% of all Americans to get their first dose by July 4. He specifically pitched the jab to youths and announced his administration would be sending the vaccines to pediatricians to dole out over the coming weeks.

“Getting vaccinated not only protects you but reduces risk of giving the virus to somebody else,” Biden said, employing a classic line of “social marketing” script from a global industry of behavior change experts compelling people to take the shot.

Vaccination Demand Observatory

“[P]ublic health experts know that the last inch – getting the vaccine from vial to arm – can be the hardest,” according to the Vaccination Demand Observatory

Launched last week, the Observatory runs a “beta dashboard” of data and resources “intended for select global public health professionals.”

The Observatory was established by a group called the Public Good Projects (PGP) which “designs and implements large-scale behavior change programs for the public good,” UNICEF – which has received $86.6 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation since 2020 – and the Gates-subsidized Yale Institute for Global Health. .

PGP was founded by Joe Smyser, a public health academic who trained at the CDC and has partnered with Google and Facebook. Its board members include executives from Merck pharmaceuticals, Pepsi, Levi-Strauss, the Advertising Council, Sesame Street, Campbell’s, and TikTok.

PGP’s website says that through “media monitoring and bots, grassroots social media organizing, or thought leadership, we deploy our considerable resources and connections to communication for change.”

Bots – or internet robots, also known as crawlers – can scan content on webpages all over the internet and create automated conversations and comments.

“PGP is monitoring coronavirus-related media conversations 24/7 to provide organizations with real-time public health expertise and messaging guidance.”

The group has promoted vaccines before. It developed the #StopFlu campaign, recruiting 120 “‘micro’ social media influencers” in the “African American and Latinx communities across eight states” and giving them prompts to sell their audiences the ideas that flu is a serious problem and that healthy people need flu shots.

PGP’s Observatory says it aims to “mitigate…mistrust on all vaccines.” Awash in Brave New World speak, the program’s “three pillars” are “social listening analytics,” a training program, and a “Vaccine Acceptance Interventions Lab” (VAIL) to “draw upon behavioral and social research and insights from social listening” and to develop “inoculation messages to vaccinate people against vaccine misinformation.” These would be “rapid field tested for tone, format and behavior change impact before being implemented.”

In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) created a new public health field called “infodemiology” – the “science of managing infodemics.” PGP and UNICEF are leading the “Field Infodemiologist Training Program (FITP)” based in UNICEF country offices, government offices, and offices of other “multilateral partners” to train “field infodemic managers” to conduct “public health surveillance for misinformation” and provide “community support in “misinformation outbreaks.

Big Biotech’s global network

Among the huge network of organizations and programs involved in the vast mass marketing of vaccine demand – besides the WHO, CDC, UNICEF, PGP, and Yale – key orchestrators include:

  • Stronger – a new national campaign formed by an “ever-growing number of public and private sector partners” including PGP, Google and BIO. “Whether it’s vaccine misinformation or climate change denial, we’re seeing a dangerous strain of anti-science rhetoric growing online,” its website says. “Our aim is to cut through the noise and normalize the truth.”
  • BIO – Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), the world’s largest biotech advocacy association representing member companies including vaccine manufacturers Pfizer Inc., Moderna Therapeutics Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Biotech, and GlaxoSmithKline as well as big agriculture companies like Monsanto along with academic institutions and “related organizations.”
  • Project RCAID – created by PGP for “Rapid Collection Analysis Interpretation and Dissemination” – provides “real-time media monitoring with daily analyses from public health experts.”
  • Zignal Labs – a “media intelligence platform” to “craft messages” and “take control of threatening narratives before they emerge.”
  • Family Health International or FHI 360 – an organization that uses “social psychology, anthropology, behavioral economics, social marketing, and other behavioral sciences” to effect behavior change. It has received tens of millions from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to “create demand for long-acting contraceptives” in poor countries. Its donors also include the CDC, the World Bank, and vaccine-maker Johnson & Johnson. It’s now in the business of creating COVID-19 vaccine demand, too.

Playbook rules

In the world of “infodemic management,” one will inevitably come across the name of Jeff French, Professor at Brighton University and author of Strategic Social Marketing: For Behaviour and Social Change, whose text is referenced in most of the guides to mass marketing vaccines. French published a paper in July 2020 with the pandemic just a few months underway and a vaccine reportedly still unavailable for years to come about “Pre-Emptive COVID-19 Vaccination Uptake Promotion Strategy.” His tips have evidently inspired much of the standard pandemic vaccine sell:

  • “Effective campaigning against vaccine misinformation should focus on the dangers of the disease” and “draw on the powerful motivator of fear of loss along with the possibility of gain of positive health”
  • “Appeal to emotions since data alone will not be enough.”
  • Do not put adverse events at the center of  “demand creation efforts” but “be sure to contextualize them” and help audiences understand that “most will be rare and of limited duration.”
  • “Any media management and engagement strategy that is developed will need to include proactive, rolling media briefings, story generation, editorial feeds…and will also need to include 24/7 media monitoring and rebuttal/correction systems.”
  • Authorities should have “agreements in place” about “how and when misleading information and advocates of such information should be removed and flagged as being problematic on social media.”
  • Repeat “positive messaging that emphasizes the protective (individual, family, and community) benefits of the vaccine and the loss associated with not being vaccinated (death, poor health, loss of freedom and social solidarity, inability to travel” etc.)
  • “Partner” with the pharmaceutical industry, other for-profits, and NGOs to promote vaccines.
  • “Seek interventions” with key leaders in the anti-vaccination community and “seek to turn such informants into advocates for vaccination.”
  • “Continue to promote other protective behaviors such as handwashing and physical distancing.”
  • “Integrate financial and non-financial incentives… along with penalties for non-compliance by imposing restrictions on travel, education, or employment.”
  • “Governments will need to deliver and communicate what mix of incentives and penalty interventions will be used to promote demand.”

Behavior modification and operant conditioning techniques are a frequent theme of French’s writings; a 2014 paper he wrote for the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control on vaccine uptake said “behavioural interventions should seek to reward desired behaviours and when appropriate penalise inappropriate behaviour.”

A range of playbooks for public health agencies and “stakeholders” on strategies to make people take the shot follow on French’s instructions. The World Health Organization issued a “technical advisory” on the heels of French’s guidelines called Behavioral Considerations for Acceptance and Uptake of COVID-19 Vaccines in October, still two months before a shot was even available. Some of its advice is sounding very familiar now:

  • Leverage anticipated regret in communications.” For example, by “asking people how they would feel if they do not get vaccinated and end up contracting COVID-19 or transmitting it to loved ones.”
  • Emphasize the social benefits.” Tell people that “vaccination not only benefits the individual” but builds “herd” or “population immunity”
  • Putting emphasis on the economic benefits, such as being able to stay in the workforce and provide for one’s family, might also encourage vaccination”
  • “Manage expectations.” Since vaccine uptake may be “undermined by COVID-19 vaccines being not fully effective, meaning that people will have to continue to engage in preventive behaviour (e.g. maskwearing and physical distancing) even if and after they have been vaccinated.”
  • Emphasize danger of disease. “If people perceive that they are at low risk of contracting COVID-19, or that the consequences of becoming infected will not be severe, they will be less willing to get vaccinated.”
  • Downplay dangers of vaccination and adverse events. “Some people may try to compare the risk of getting infected with that of taking a new vaccine, and determine that between the two, the risk of COVID-19 is lower.” Adverse events are “often inevitable when large numbers of people get vaccinated in a short period of time.” Neutralize the blow by “communicating proactively about uncertainty” and risk of vaccine-associated disability and death.

‘Field Guide’

UNICEF and PGP’s Vaccine Misinformation Management Field Guide advises vaccine promoters to “consider putting vaccination in a ‘gain frame’. Show happy, healthy, productive people in graphics, and if you must show the act of vaccination try to avoid needles and tears.”

One of its tactics is to badger people to accept vaccination as a “social norm.” Explain that “the majority of people adopt certain behavior and that is what others expect you to do to achieve a common good.”

FHI360 published its own “quickstart guide” on “Demand Creation and Advocacy for COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance and Uptake” advises governments to “establish a demand creation and advocacy task force” – something Biden did in March, setting aside $1.5 for a media vaccine advertising blitz.

FHI 360 also advises breaking people into “audience segments” of “easy sells” who have “high trust in healthcare providers and do not question vaccines” to  “vaccine hesitant” who have “high concerns about safety and “low trust in institutions promoting vaccine.” Then, create “targeted messages,” making “talking point reference sheets for cultural and religious leaders.”

‘Carrot and stick’

It’s easy to find examples of French’s operant psychology marketing methods being played out in the real world pandemic theatre.

The mainstream media have evidently taken the point about “incentives and penalty interventions” on board and “herd immunity” is the new Holy Grail which all who are not reckless criminals should seek. “We’re struggling to get to herd immunity,” CNN’s Michael Smerconish said with the precise tone of fear and alarm that would elicit behavior modification. A full 26% of Americans said they would not take the vaccine, he said, but 44% of Republicans were resisting.

“Those folks jeopardize our ability to get to herd immunity faster,” Smerconish claimed in disgust. “If we don’t get vaccinated and periodically boosted we could prolong the pandemic and find ourselves continuing to fight this battle for years.” He quoted law professor Shanin Specter, who said, “Without a bigger carrot or a bigger stick many Americans will not get vaccinated and we will suffer more death and dislocation.”

The concept of “herd immunity” and how to get there is not settled science. The Great Barrington Declaration, signed by more than 43,000 medical practitioners and 14,000 public health scientists and doctors, proposes that allowing natural immunity to spread while shielding those most vulnerable to COVID infection would be less harmful than blanket lockdowns.

“As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all—including the vulnerable—falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity—i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable—and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity,” the declaration says.

Following infodemic guidelines, YouTube’s medical misinformation policyexpressly forbids any discussion of natural immunity in herd immunity on its platform.

Real world exercise

Emphasizing fear is a strategy employed frequently by experienced public health personnel, too. “In those communities where the uptake is less it will take a lot longer for the epidemic to end,” Eric Toner, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told Politico in an article about falling vaccine demand, for example. “There will be more sickness and more death in those communities.”

Former CDC director Tom Frieden employed an offshoot of the “social norm” tactic along with “emphasizing disease danger” in a recent tweet which painted unvaccinated people as “infected” spreaders of supposedly deadly variants.

Image

Research like a recent study from the Cleveland Clinic and Case Western Reserve University which found that new coronavirus variants are actually weaker than the original viral strain from Wuhan are to be ignored or treated as “misinformation.”

Marketing schemes to recruit faith leaders have had success too, as vaccination drives have even moved inside mosques to convince skeptical Muslims to roll up their sleeves. And Pope Francis has enthusiastically embraced the infodemic behavior change mission and is hosting a global public health vaccine promotion conference this week.

*

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

Featured image is from Shutterstock

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.

***

Proof of vaccination requirements for travel are rare, and limited to travel to certain destinations where the risk of contracting a disease and bringing it back to a population with nonexistent immunity against it is high

The U.S. government’s job is to protect the Constitutional rights of all Americans. Allowing or encouraging businesses to create a two-tier society where unvaccinated people are barred from participating in civic society is unconstitutional. 

Proof of vaccination against COVID-19 will not ensure safety. It won’t even promote it, as the so-called vaccines are designed to merely reduce symptoms of the infection

Utilitarianism, which is now being increasingly promoted, is a discredited pseudo-ethic that has repeatedly been used to justify horrific human rights abuses. It is based on a mathematical equation that some individuals can be sacrificed for the greater good of the majority.

Utilitarianism appears to be at work already. The European Union’s vaccine injury reporting system had logged 330,218 adverse event reports, including 7,766 deaths, as of April 17, 2021, and the U.S. reporting system had logged 118,902 adverse event reports as of April 23, including 3,544 deaths and 12,618 serious injuries, yet all of these injuries and deaths are simply ignored and people are told to get the shot, no matter what

*

In an April 29, 2021, opinion piece published by Newsday,1 Arthur Caplan and Dorit Reiss, Ph.D., argue for the implementation of vaccine passports as a strategy to regain our freedom to travel and the “safe” reopening of schools and businesses.

Caplan is the director of medical ethics at NYU Grossman School of Medicine and Reiss is a law professor at UC Hastings College of the Law and a member2 of the Parent Advisory Board of Voices of Vaccines.

Caplan is also co-chair of the Vaccines Working Group on Ethics and Policy, a group formed specifically to address “key policy challenges associated with the testing and distribution of vaccines intended to prevent COVID-19 transmission in the United States,” and Reiss is a member of the board.3

Part of their argument is that vaccinations have “always” been “necessary for travel,” which is patently false. Proof of vaccination requirements are rare, and strictly limited to travel to certain destinations where the risk of contracting a disease and bringing it back to a population with nonexistent immunity against it is high. You’ve never had to show proof of vaccination when flying to Paris, France, for example.

Arguing for Unconstitutional Practices

Caplan and Reiss also argue that prohibiting businesses from requiring vaccine passports, which some state governors are now doing, is “unusual and irrational,” as private businesses have the right to make their business more attractive by increasing the safety for its staff and patrons.

The problem with that argument is that it is the government’s job to protect the Constitutional rights of all Americans. Allowing or encouraging businesses to create a two-tier society where unvaccinated people are barred from participating in civic society is unconstitutional on its face.

What’s more, proof of vaccination against COVID-19 will not ensure safety. It won’t even remotely promote it, as the so-called vaccines are designed to merely reduce symptoms of the infection. They don’t make you immune. You can still contract the virus and spread it to others. The only one who might benefit from the jab is the one getting it.

Of course, Caplan and Reiss make no mention of this crucial point, but since the vaccinated person is the only one getting any protection, no one needs to know your vaccination status, as it doesn’t affect them either way. A COVID-19 vaccinated individual poses the same risk to the community as an unvaccinated one.

So, the only reason for a vaccine passport is a control-related one, and Reiss and Caplan are keeping busy, trying to convince you otherwise. In a February 2021 Barron’s article,4 they argued for letting employers mandate vaccines for their employees, using the same lame arguments.

What’s happening here is that the U.S. federal government recognizes that it cannot legally mandate vaccine passports. It would be unconstitutional, as it would create a two-tier society built on medical discrimination. So, government is depending on private businesses to push through this measure. Reiss and Caplan’s efforts are part of this strategic subversion of Constitutional rights.

Caplan and Reiss also paired up for an opinion piece published April 27, 2021, by The Hour,5 in which they sank to typical propagandist lows, bashing parents of vaccine damaged children who fought against the removal of religious exemption to vaccination in Connecticut.6

The Threat of Utilitarianism

Caplan’s and Reiss’ one-sided obsession with utilitarianism, where risks to the individual are ignored and the idea of self-determination and personal choice is ridiculed, is clearly spelled out in an article published in the January/June 2020 issue of the Journal of Law and the Biosciences:7

“There is a large literature about school mandates, and a somewhat more limited literature on adult mandates, but there is less principled discussion of when is it appropriate to mandate a specific vaccine. Field and Caplan suggested an ethical framework to consider when school mandates ought to apply …

Their framework explains that autonomy, beneficence, utilitarianism, justice, and non-maleficence are the values affected by immunization mandates. Applying the framework here provides important insights on the suitability of a COVID-19 vaccine mandate …

[U]tilitarianism — acting for the benefit of the greatest number for society as a whole — supports a COVID-19 mandate, as it supports other vaccine mandates … The current pandemic is causing harms in lives and suffering, and also economic harms as preventing loss of more life requires measures like sheltering at home, closing businesses, and the closing of public spaces. Preventing these staggering costs is a huge social benefit.

Once a vaccine is available, the justification for measures like shelter at home will decrease, but preventing harms will depend on vaccine use. A mandate will increase use, boost herd immunity and reduce costs. The only caveat is that the balance of costs and benefits depends on the safety of the vaccine.”

Utilitarianism is a discredited pseudo-ethic that has repeatedly been used to justify horrific human rights abuses. By now, we can accurately predict what the outcome will be if we allow it to be used to justify vaccine passports and mandatory COVID vaccinations.

In short, utilitarianism is based on a mathematical equation that some individuals can be sacrificed for the greater good of the majority. In other words, if some people are harmed by vaccines, it’s an acceptable loss because society as a whole may or will reap gains.

Caplan and Reiss express this as “acting for the benefit of the greatest number.” The flip-side is that a smaller number — it could be 49 out of 100 — may be harmed and that’s acceptable, because the people harmed is still a smaller number than the majority.

More Than 11,000 COVID Vaccine Deaths Logged

The latest data on COVID-19 vaccine side effects suggest governments are already operating under this horrific utilitarian ideology.

How else do you explain the fact that the European Union’s vaccine injury reporting system had logged 330,218 adverse event reports, including 7,766 deaths, as of April 17, 2021,8 and the U.S. reporting system had logged 118,902 adverse event reports as of April 23, including 3,544 deaths and 12,618 serious injuries,9 yet all of these injuries and deaths are simply ignored and the call for everyone to get their jab continues unabated — all while bashing vaccine hesitancy as a mental illness, intellectual deficit or act of domestic terrorism?!

In a utilitarian system, you cease to be an individual with rights to autonomous decision-making and become a tool of the government, and that’s exactly what we’re seeing here. Government has apparently decided that some people — quite a few people, apparently — are expendable, which is the exact converse of what they’re telling us publicly.

They say we all must get vaccinated to save lives, especially the elderly. Yet lives are being taken, and these are not people who already have one foot in the grave. While COVID-19 kills the elderly and the seriously ill, these gene therapy injections are stealing the lives of younger, healthy individuals who are in the prime of their lives. How can you even compare those two scenarios and come to the conclusion that mass vaccination is the greater good?

While utilitarianism was a popular ideology in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it went out of fashion in the mid-20th century, after the Third Reich employed the utilitarian rationale as an excuse to demonize and eliminate minorities judged to be a threat to the health, security and well-being of the State.10 Its abhorrent and unethical nature was clearly recognized and clarified during the Nuremberg trials.

Although we may disagree about the quality and quantity of the scientific evidence used by doctors and governments to declare COVID-19 “vaccines” safe, at our peril do we fail to agree that, while government may have the power, it does not have the moral authority to dictate that individuals born with certain genes and biological susceptibilities give up their lives without their consent for what the ruling majority deems is the greater good.

Having everyone conform to a normal weight and not having insulin resistance issues would be for the greater good of society. Does that mean government should have the power to send everyone above a certain BMI to a forced internment camp where they are exercised and underfed until they no longer pose an increased health care cost risk?

We really ought to think long and hard before we jump on the utilitarian wagon and start pumping our fists in the air in endorsement of the “greater good” narrative.

Most people in the U.S. are engaging in lifestyle practices that put them at a seriously increased risk of being a financial burden on society and the health care system, so don’t fall for the baseless idea that unvaccinated people, specifically, will end up costing more because they’ll end up with more serious cases of COVID-19. There’s no data at all to back that up.

Conspiracies Blamed for Growing Sensibility

As more and more people are starting to realize the perilous road we’re on and where it’s taking us, the mainstream propagandists are turning up the heat, blaming vaccine hesitancy on one “conspiracy theory” after another. They simply refuse to admit that people can, and most want, to make their own decisions.

Rising anti-vaccination sentiment is being blamed on everything from Russian bots and trolls spreading misinformation online and making a tiny minority appear larger than what it actually is,11to rebranding “harmful anti-vaccine views” as a civil liberties issue or a part of some other conspiracy theory involving the drug industry or Bill Gates.12

The fact is, the vaccine mandate pushers have nothing but foul language and mockery at their disposal. They have no facts with which to prove that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, or that mass vaccination will save lives. They cannot disprove the financial incentives and ties that exist between Gates, the World Health Organization, vaccine makers and government.

Gates is one of the largest funders of the WHO, which has been responsible for the global response to the pandemic, while simultaneously being heavily invested in COVID-19 vaccines and funding censorship of vaccine information.13

The WHO is also promoting global censorship of vaccine information, in part through its “Stop the Spread” campaign14 aimed at stopping the spread of COVID-19 “misinformation,” and a coalition of groups is calling on the Biden Administration to put together a disinformation task force.15

Showing just how ludicrous this suggestion is, the task force would “explore ways to crack down on deliberate disinformation campaigns in ways that don’t unduly limit free expression.” In other words, they’re to figure out how to censor people without making it a clear breach of the First Amendment.

Well, we already know one way in which they’re doing that, and that is by calling on private companies like Twitter and Facebook to censor for them. It’s still a violation of the First Amendment, though; it’s just harder to see.

Vaccine mandate pushers also cannot disprove that the pandemic is being used to roll out the Great Reset and global “build back better” plans that will decimate the U.S. Constitution and rob the working class of its wealth and autonomy. In short, they have no counter-arguments. All they can do is paint people who question their flimsy utilitarian narrative as crackpots of one sort or another.

If the vaccines were truly fantastic, word of their miraculous nature would spread like wildfire, just as reports of horrendous vaccine side effects now are, and people would flock to get them even in the absence of advertising and celebrity promotion.

The fact that name-calling and smear tactics are employed en masse to paint dissenters as crackpots and terrorists rather than presenting actual data and evidence that supports their pro-vaccine stance is proof positive that there’s something strange afoot.

Utilitarian Extremism Is on the Rise

I’ve previously written about the sudden influence wielded by a group called Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) — a progressive cancel-culture leader with extensive ties to government and global think tanks that recently labeled people questioning the COVID-19 vaccine as a national security threat.

The CCDH has published two reports16,17 naming me as one of the top 12 individuals responsible for 65% of vaccine “disinformation” on social media, and in true utilitarian fashion, CCDH founder Imran Ahmed is calling on all platforms to silence me for the public good.

Ahmed has also published an article18 in the journal Nature Medicine, calling for the “dismantling” of the entire “anti-vaccine industry.” In it, he repeats the lie that he “attended and recorded a private, three-day meeting of the world’s most prominent anti-vaxxers,” when, in fact, what he’s referring to was a public online conference open to an international audience.

All attendants have access to the recordings as part of their attendance fee, so unless he illegally hacked his way into the conference, he didn’t have to record a thing. We gave it to him. When you lie about something that stupid, it really puts your credibility about larger issues in question.

The CCDH is partnered with Anti-Vax Watch, which held a demonstration outside the halls of Congress in this bizarre getup. While the CCDH claims to be fighting the good fight against dangerous crackpots and extremists, they work with people who look like they epitomize those terms.19

This is hardly the look of people standing on higher moral and ethical ground. This is pure theatre, which makes sense, seeing how they don’t have facts and data with which to make their point.

AntiVaxWatch

Gates-Funded Doctor Demands Terrorist Experts Attack Me

Dr. Peter Hotez, president of the Sabin Vaccine Institute,20 recently cited the CCDH in a Nature article in which he goes so far as to call for cyberwarfare experts to be enlisted in the war against vaccine safety advocates and people who are “vaccine hesitant.”

“Accurate, targeted counter-messaging from the global health community is important but insufficient, as is public pressure on social-media companies,” Hotez writes.21

“The United Nations and the highest levels of government must take direct, even confrontational, approaches with Russia, and move to dismantle anti-vaccine groups in the United States.

Efforts must expand into the realm of cyber security, law enforcement, public education and international relations. A high-level inter-agency task force reporting to the UN secretary-general could assess the full impact of anti-vaccine aggression, and propose tough, balanced measures.

The task force should include experts who have tackled complex global threats such as terrorism, cyber attacks and nuclear armament, because anti-science is now approaching similar levels of peril. It is becoming increasingly clear that advancing immunization requires a counteroffensive.”

This appears to be part of the campaign to pressure the White House administration into creating an information warfare task force, as mentioned earlier. Not surprisingly, the Sabin Vaccine Institute has received tens of millions of dollars from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.22,23,24,25Most recently, funds from the Gates foundation were used to create a report called “Meeting the Challenge of Vaccine Hesitancy.”26,27

A Well-Informed Humanity United Is the Answer

Even while censorship and utilitarian-driven extremism heats up, we must never stop seeking out and sharing information that impacts our health and freedom. Informed consent demands transparency of the bad along with the good. Right now, all people are given free access to is the supposed benefit, while all potential harms are whitewashed and scrubbed from the internet.

Nothing good can come of this. As noted in Kennedy’s October 24, 2020, online speech,28 International Message of Hope for Humanity” — which kicked off a day of protest against the coup d’état by the technocratic elite — we must shed our imaginary fears, reject media fearmongering, insist on freedom of speech and engage in the democratic process.

“The only way we can win it is with democracy,” he said. “We need to fight to get our democracy back, to reclaim our democracy from these villains who are stealing it from us. Notice the people who are getting richest from this quarantine are the same people who are censoring criticism of the quarantine.”

The same is true for vaccines and vaccine passports. Kennedy also stressed another crucial point, namely the need to unify. We must put aside our quibbles over nonessential things like race, religion and political affiliations, and stay laser-focused on the real enemy.

“What the Big Tech villains … want us to do is fight with each other. They want Blacks fighting against Whites. They want republicans fighting against democrats. They want everybody polarized. They want everybody fragmented because they know that if we all get together, we’re going to start asking questions and those are questions they can’t answer …

Stop identifying yourself. The enemy is Big Tech, Big Data, Big Oil, Big Pharma, the medical cartel, the government totalitarian elements that are trying to oppress us, that are trying to rob us of our liberties, of our democracy, of our freedom of thought, of our freedom of expression, of our freedom of assembly and all of the freedoms that give dignity to humanity …

The free-flow of information, the cauldron of debate, is the only thing that allows governments to develop rational policies in which self-governance will actually work and triumph.

You are on the front lines of the most important battle in history — the battle to save democracy, freedom, human liberty and human dignity from this totalitarian cartel that is trying to rob us, simultaneously, in every nation in the world, of the rights that every human being is born with …

And I pledge to you: I will go down dying with my boots on, fighting side-by-side with all of you to make sure that we return these rights and preserve them for our children.”

I too will continue fighting for human rights, free speech and medical freedom. Without these, what are we? What is life reduced to? What’s the point of preventing a few COVID-19 cases and deaths if the entire global population — including the billions who are at no risk from this virus — must gamble their health in the process?

*

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

Notes

1 Newsday April 29, 2021

2 Voices for Vaccines Parent Group

3 Vaccine Working Group Members

4 Barrons February 12, 2021

5 The Hour April 27, 2021

6 Skeptical Raptor April 28, 2021

7 Journal of Law and the Biosciences 2020 Jan-Jun; 7(1): lsaa025

8 The Defender April 29, 2021

9 The Defender April 30, 2021

10 Weindling P. Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism 1870-1945. Cambridge University Press 1989

11 Washington Post August 28, 2018 (Archive)

12 Independent October 22, 2020

13 The Defender May 19, 2020

14 WHO Stop the Spread

15 Axios April 29, 2021

16 CCDH, The Disinformation Dozen

17 CCHD Disinformation Dozen: The Sequel

18 Nature March 15, 2021

19 Twitter Mercola March 25, 2021

20 WHO Peter Hotez

21 Nature April 27, 2021

22 PND July 1, 2011

23 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

24 Sabin Vaccine Institute February 11, 2019

25 The Courant May 13, 2007 (Archived)

26 Sabin Vaccine Institute June 2, 2020

27 Sabin Vaccine Institute May 28, 2020

28 Children’s Health Defense October 26, 2020

Featured image is from Mercola

Bravery and Risk in the Age of Truth

May 11th, 2021 by Julian Rose

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.

***

Rising-up almost perceptibly now, in an increasing number of individuals, is a powerful urge to give expression to truth at its profoundest level. This is the life-force itself, demanding action and urging all who feel it to step forward into the front lines of a great battle. The battle to overcome the purveyors of gross injustice and stand firm for the global manifestation of truth. 

Truth can seem illusive at such times as these, as that which is an expression of Supreme Consciousness does not show its radiant face to those who take no risks and show no bravery. However, each of us are sparks emanating from one great fire, and due to this, are blessed with powers capable of bringing about a total transformation – once we choose to take the risk of living for an ideal that radiates with light.

At a time when ‘the Lie’ has never been more dominant within the corridors of earthly power, it is up to us to unsheathe our swords of truth and cut a swathe of light through the dark backcloth of unprecedented deception. This truth-power brooks no equal – and simmers just under the surface with an increasing intent to explode volcanically outwards. It is, right now, weaving a strong and subtle web right under the noses of the insentient perpetrators of the great lie.

Truth can be discerned in many ways. On the subtle plain it is audible in the sounds of rustling leaves excited by the warming breezes of Spring. It is visible in the light that shines in the eyes of the free. It can be smelled in the salt of the sea, the richness of the soil and the perfume of the rose. It is tangible in the warm hands of an uncompromising and loving being.

This is the Age of Truth and nothing, but nothing, can prevent it manifesting itself. All that is needed from us is a little effort. A sincere attempt to locate the presence of this enigmatic flower, within ourselves. For that is where it resides, offering its irresistible perfume to all willing to give-in to the pull of its majestic presence.

Give-in to this pull – and immediately there arises a strong inner call to break the chains of illusion and death hanging over us, trying to pass themselves-off as ‘the reality of daily life’, when actually they are just ubiquitous manifestations of the Veil of Maya pushed into prominence by servants of a  grand falsification programme.

There is a deeper undercurrent of purpose about the awakening taking place at this time. A sense of surety that its momentum will ultimately sweep-aside and greatly outlive the grotesque life distortions presently playing-out their demonic control obsessions on the global stage.

‘The great lie’ is being busted open and all its distorted manifestations are becoming clear to see; but still, in spite of this, not everyone does. This is a choice that each individual makes: to see or not to see.

There is nobody who cannot exert their free will and make this choice. On making the decision ‘to see’, one has opened one’s account with the Divine. But unfortunately for some – who are accustomed to immediate rewards on the touch of a button – it is not an instant access account to the full wealth of conscious enlightenment. It is instead, more truly expressed in the words of Lao Tzu “The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”

This single step opens the initiate into the sanctuary of his/her unique truth. From here on one can discern the difference between what is supportive of a further flowering and what is blocking that flowering and keeping one in prison.

On recognising this, one’s entire life becomes directed to the demolition of the prison and the fertilising of the soil for a great flowering. The beauty of being committed to the flowering is that all those in love with the same cosmic melody are drawn together, thus forming an increasingly powerful force for the wider emancipation of all living beings.

This incorporates helping to free fellow human beings from the delusions of Maya and urging them to take action in hastening the uncompromising defeat and eradication of the anti-life forces. Those that are attempting to re-engineer and control every last channel of life on Earth. 

Being committed to defeating the forces of darkness means embracing the reality of danger and risk at every turn of the road. This is a battle royal, fought on two plains simultaneously: the one which houses our own inner “demons” and the one in which “the external forces” manifest their ambitions for totalitarian control over us.

This is the nature of the unavoidable confrontation facing each one of us as the heat is turned-up and the great mass of creation is forged down to its essence.

This is not a place for those who fear confrontation; yet inevitably, those coming face to face with the enemy within and without will find that the victory of truth over the lie can only be assured by raising the intensity of light that resides within, from a dimly flickering candle flame to a powerful ray of the rising sun.

To rise above the ubiquitous fear based pain body engulfing much of humanity today, requires a very special form of courage. On occasions it requires having what Carlos Castaneda’s shaman, Don Juan, describes as “guts of steel”.

How are yours?

‘The truth shall set you free’.

Yes, but freedom does not come unless invited, and the criteria for the invitation is burned onto a sheet of parchment in bold script “To be free is to carry the torch of truth.

To carry the torch of truth is to be responsible for supporting the health and welfare of Life on Earth.”

Our onward journey therefore translates into a collective effort to raise the bar of fearless action. To defeat the oppressors of the divine wellspring of existence and to redeem the sanctity of life.

Let us confront this unprecedented challenge with courage and bravely beating hearts, for this is our supreme test – and only in unity is our victory assured.

*

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

Julian Rose is an early pioneer of UK organic farming, writer, international activist, entrepreneur and holistic teacher. His latest book ‘Overcoming the Robotic Mind – Why Humanity Must Come Through’ is particularly recommended reading for this time: see www.julianrose.info

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Bravery and Risk in the Age of Truth

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.

***

Some of my students (present and former) and colleagues in Japan have formed an International Corona Research Cohort. Our goal is to produce scholarship that critically examines certain aspects of the Covid-19 narrative. Over the past year, we have observed virtually identical patterns of public messaging to those appearing in the wake of 9/11 and the subsequent “regime-change wars” (Gabbard, 2020). We are pursuing the following hypotheses:

  1. Are mainstream (corporate) media primarily PR tools owned and/or used by transnational elites as described by Peter Phillips in his latest book Giants: The Global Power Elite(Seven Stories Press, 2018).
  2. How, through discourse, do agenda-setting media shape human perception and inculcate necessary forms of fear and hysteria in populations to produce unquestioning and reflexively obedient people? What discourse techniques prevail across cultures and national boundaries?

We have recently devised an instrument (in English and Japanese) to measure awareness, perception, and attitude toward the Covid-19 narrative and will use this in surveys to quantify the effectiveness of Government-Corporate PR producing the leading narratives and coercing people – absent informed consent – to join in the global experiment in mRNA therapies (aka vaccines). Since this is an international project, we seek to use the instrument in other languages.

Our project is inspired by the tremendous work of Reiner Fuellmich and the thousands of other attorneys who have joined him as well as hundreds of thousands of physicians and research scientists backing the lawsuit against the CDC, the WHO, and the Davos Group for crimes against humanity in Nuremberg, Germany.

If you wish to join our international effort in the study of these communications, please let me know so we can coordinate and support you appropriately.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on International Corona Research Cohort. The Lawsuit against the CDC, the WHO and the Davos Group
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

One of the hallmarks of totalitarian systems is the criminalization of dissent. Not just the stigmatization of dissent or the demonization of dissent, but the formal criminalization of dissent, and any other type of opposition to the official ideology of the totalitarian system. Global capitalism has been inching its way toward this step for quite some time, and now, apparently, it is ready to take it.

Germany has been leading the way. For over a year, anyone questioning or protesting the “Covid emergency measures” or the official Covid-19 narrative has been demonized by the government and the media, and, sadly, but not completely unexpectedly, the majority of the German public. And now such dissent is officially “extremism.”

Yes, that’s right, in “New Normal” Germany, if you dissent from the official state ideology, you are now officially a dangerous “extremist.” The German Intelligence agency (the “BfV”) has even invented a new category of “extremists” in order to allow themselves to legally monitor anyone suspected of being “anti-democratic and/or delegitimizing the state in a way that endangers security,” like … you know, non-violently protesting, or speaking out against, or criticizing, or satirizing, the so-called “New Normal.”

Naturally, I’m a little worried, as I have engaged in most of these “extremist” activities. My thoughtcrimes are just sitting there on the Internet waiting to be scrutinized by the BfV. They’re probably Google-translating this column right now, compiling a list of all the people reading it, and their Facebook friends and Twitter followers, and professional associates, and family members, and anyone any of the aforementioned people have potentially met with, or casually mentioned, who might have engaged in similar thoughtcrimes.

You probably think I’m joking, don’t you? I’m not joking. Not even slightly. The Federal Office for Protection of the Constitution (“Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz”) is actively monitoring anyone questioning or challenging the official “New Normal” ideology … the “Covid Deniers,” the “conspiracy theorists,” the “anti-vaxxers,” the dreaded “Querdenkers” (i.e., people who “think outside the box”), and anyone else they feel like monitoring who has refused to join the Covidian Cult. We’re now official enemies of the state, no different than any other “terrorists” … or, OK, technically, a little different.

As The New York Times reported last week (German Intelligence Puts Coronavirus Deniers Under Surveillance), “the danger from coronavirus deniers and conspiracy theorists does not fit the mold posed by the usual politically driven groups, including those on the far left and right, or by Islamic extremists.” Still, according to the German Interior Ministry, we diabolical “Covid deniers,” “conspiracy theorists,” and “anti-vaxxers” have “targeted the state itself, its leaders, businesses, the press, and globalism,” and have “attacked police officers” and “defied civil authorities.”

Moreover, back in August of 2020, in a dress rehearsal for the “Storming of the Capitol,” “Covid-denying” insurrectionists “scaled the steps of Parliament” (i.e., the Reichstag). Naturally, The Times neglects to mention that this so-called “Storming of the Reichstag” was performed by a small sub-group of protesters to whom the German authorities had granted a permit to assemble (apart from the main demonstration, which was massive and completely peaceful) on the steps of the Reichstag, which the German police had, for some reason, left totally unguarded. In light of the background of the person the German authorities issued this “Steps-of-the-Reichstag” protest permit to — a known former-NPD functionary, in other words, a neo-Nazi — well, the whole thing seemed a bit questionable to me … but what do I know? I’m just a “conspiracy theorist.”

According to Al Jazeera, the German Interior Ministry explained that these querdenking “extremists encourage supporters to ignore official orders and challenge the state monopoly on the use of force.” Seriously, can you imagine anything more dangerous? Mindlessly following orders and complying with the state’s monopoly on the use of force are the very cornerstones of modern democracy … or some sort of political system, anyway.

But, see, there I go, again “being anti-democratic” and “delegitimizing the state,” not to mention “relativizing the Holocaust” (also a criminal offense in Germany) by comparing one totalitarian system to another, as I have done repeatedly on social media, and in a column I published in November of 2020, when the parliament passed the “Infection Protection Act,” which bears no comparison whatsoever to the “Enabling Act of 1933.”

This isn’t just a German story, of course. As I reported in a column in February, The “New Normal” War on Domestic Terror is a global war, and it’s just getting started. According to a Department of Homeland SecurityNational Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin(and the “liberal” corporate-media propaganda machine), “democracy” remains under imminent threat from these “ideologically-motivated violent extremists with objections to the exercise of governmental authority” and other such “grievances fueled by false narratives” including “anger over Covid-19 restrictions.”

These Covid-denying “violent extremists” have apparently joined forces with the “white-supremacist, Russia-backed, Trump-loving “Putin-Nazis” that terrorized “democracy” for the past four years, and almost overthrew the US government by sauntering around inside the US Capitol Building without permission, scuffling with police, attacking furniture, and generally acting rude and unruly. No, they didn’t actually kill anyone, as the corporate media all reported they did, but trespassing in a government building and putting your feet up on politicians’ desks is pretty much exactly the same as “terrorism.”

Or whatever. It’s not like the truth actually matters, not when you are whipping up mass hysteria over imaginary “Russian assets,” “white-supremacist militias,” “Covid-denying extremists,” “anti-vax terrorists,” and “apocalyptic plagues.” When you’re rolling out a new official ideology — a pathologized-totalitarian ideology — and criminalizing all dissent, the point is not to appear to be factual. The point is just to terrorize the sh*t out of people.

As Hermann Goering famously explained regarding how to lead a country to war (and the principle holds true for any big transition, like the one we are experiencing currently):

“[T]he people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.”

Go back and read those quotes from the German Interior Ministry and the DHS again slowly. The message they are sending is unmistakeably clear. It might not seem all that new, but it is. Yes, they have been telling us “we are being attacked” and denouncing critics, protesters, and dissidents for twenty years (i.e., since the War on Terror was launched in 2001, and for the last four years in their War on Populism), but this is a whole new level of it … a fusion of official narratives and their respective official enemies into a singular, aggregate official narrative in which dissent will no longer be permitted.

Instead, it will be criminalized, or it will be pathologized.

Seriously, go back and read those quotes again. Global capitalist governments and their corporate media mouthpieces are telling us, in no uncertain terms, that “objection to their authority” will no longer be tolerated, nor will dissent from their official narratives. Such dissent will be deemed “dangerous” and above all “false.” It will not be engaged with or rationally debated. It will be erased from public view. There will be an inviolable, official “reality.” Any deviation from official “reality” or defiance of the “civil authorities” will be labelled “extremism,” and dealt with accordingly.

This is the essence of totalitarianism, the establishment of an inviolable official ideology and the criminalization of dissent. And that is what is happening, right now. A new official ideology is being established. Not a state ideology. A global ideology. The “New Normal” is that official ideology. Technically, it is an official post-ideology, an official “reality,” an axiomatic “fact,” which only “criminals” and “psychopaths” would deny.

I’ll be digging deeper into “New Normal” ideology and “pathologized totalitarianism” in my future columns, and … sorry, they probably won’t be very funny. For now I’ll leave you with two more quotes. The emphasis is mine, as ever.

Here’s California State Senator Richard Pan, author of an op-ed in the Washington Post: “Anti-vax extremism is akin to domestic terrorism,” quoted in the Los Angeles Times:

“These extremists have not yet been held accountable, so they continue to escalate violence against the body public … We must now summon the political will to demand that domestic terrorists face consequences for their words and actions. Our democracy and our lives depend on it … They’ve been building alliances with white supremacists, conspiracy theorists and [others] on the far right …”

And here’s Peter Hotez in Nature magazine:

“The United Nations and the highest levels of governments must take direct, even confrontational, approaches with Russia, and move to dismantle anti-vaccine groups in the United States. Efforts must expand into the realm of cyber security, law enforcement, public education and international relations. A high-level inter-agency task force reporting to the UN secretary-general could assess the full impact of anti-vaccine aggression, and propose tough, balanced measures. The task force should include experts who have tackled complex global threats such as terrorism, cyber attacks and nuclear armament, because anti-science is now approaching similar levels of peril. It is becoming increasingly clear that advancing immunization requires a counter-offensive.”

We’ll be hearing a lot more rhetoric like this as this new, more totalitarian structure of global capitalism gradually develops … probably a good idea to listen carefully, and assume the New Normals mean exactly what they say.

*

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

Featured image: 1918 flu pandemic (Source: Consent Factory Inc)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Criminalization of Dissent. “Covid Deniers”and “Anti-Vaxxers” under Surveillance
  • Tags: , ,

Halt COVID Vaccine, Prominent Scientist Tells CDC

May 10th, 2021 by Dr. Jennifer Margulis

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

In a public comment to the CDC, molecular biologist and toxicologist Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D., called to immediately halt Covid vaccine production and distribution. Citing fertility, blood-clotting concerns (coagulopathy), and immune escape, Dr. Lindsay explained to the committee the scientific evidence showing that the coronavirus vaccines are not safe.

On April 23, 2021, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices held a meeting in Atlanta, Georgia. The focus of this ACIP meeting was blood clotting disorders following Covid vaccines. Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay spoke to the CDC during the time set aside for public comment.

The censorship on social media in particular and the internet in general is relentless. Here is a slightly edited, annotated censorship-proof transcript of Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay’s 3-minute comment.

You can listen to her testimony on YouTube below (for now, anyway. YouTube will likely censor it).

Molecular Biologist and Toxicologist Calls to Halt Covid Vaccine

Hi, my name is Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay. I hold a doctorate in biochemistry and molecular biology from the University of Texas, and have over 30 years of scientific experience, primarily in toxicology and mechanistic biology.

In the mid-1990s, I aided the development of a temporary human contraceptive vaccine which ended up causing unintended autoimmune ovarian destruction and sterility in animal test models. Despite efforts against this and sequence analyses that did not predict this.

I strongly feel that all the gene therapy vaccines must be halted immediately due to safety concerns on several fronts.

Janci Chunn Lindsay: Covid vaccines could induce cross-reactive antibodies to syncytin, and impair fertility as well as pregnancy outcomes

First, there is a credible reason to believe that the Covid vaccines will cross-react with the syncytin and reproductive proteins in sperm, ova, and placenta, leading to impaired fertility and impaired reproductive and gestational outcomes. 

Respected virologist Dr. Bill Gallaher, Ph.D., made excellent arguments as to why you would expect cross reaction. Due to beta sheet conformation similarities between spike proteins and syncytin-1 and syncytin-2.

I have yet to see a single immunological study which disproves this. Despite the fact that it would literally take the manufacturers a single day to do these syncytin studies to ascertain this [once they had serum from vaccinated individuals]. It’s been over a year since the assertions were first made that this [the body attacking its own syncytin proteins due to similarity in spike protein structure] could occur.

Pregnancy losses reported to VAERS lead to demand to halt Covid vaccine

We have seen 100 pregnancy losses reported in VAERS as of April 9th. And there have [also] been reports of impaired spermatogenesis and placental findings from both the natural infection, vaccinated, and syncytin knockout animal models that have similar placental pathology, implicating a syncytin-mediated role in these outcomes.

Additionally, we have heard of multiple reports of menses irregularities in those vaccinated. These must be investigated.

We simply cannot put these [vaccines] in our children who are at .002% risk for Covid mortality, if infected, or any more of the child-bearing age population without thoroughly investigating this matter.

[If we do], we could potentially sterilize an entire generation. Speculation that this will not occur and a few anecdotal reports of pregnancies within the trial are not sufficient proof that this is not impacting on a population-wide scale.

Covid vaccine causes blood disorders

Secondly, all of the gene therapies [Covid vaccines] are causing coagulopathy. [Coagulopathy when the body’s blood clotting system is impaired.] This is not isolated to one manufacturer. And this is not isolated to one age group. 

As we are seeing coagulopathy deaths in healthy young adults with no secondary comorbidities.

There have been 795 reports related to blood clotting disorders as of April 9th in the VAERS reporting system, 338 of these being due to thrombocytopenia.

There are forward and backward mechanistic principles for why this is happening. The natural infection is known to cause coagulopathy due to the spike protein. All gene therapy vaccines direct the body to make the spike protein. Zhang et al in [a scientific paper published in the Journal of Hematology & Oncology] in September 2020 showed that if you infuse spike protein into mice that have humanized ACE-2 receptors on blood platelets that you also get disseminated thrombosis.

Spike protein incubated with human blood in vitro also caused blood clot development which was resistant to fibrinolysis. [Fibrinolysis is the body’s process of breaking down blood clots]. The spike protein is causing thrombocytic events, which cannot be resolved through natural means. And all vaccines must be halted in the hope that they can be reformulated to guard against this adverse effect. 

Third, there is strong evidence for immune escape—

At this point in her oral testimony, Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay was interrupted by a man’s voice: “Thank you for your comment, your time has expired.”

I reached out to Dr. Janci Chunn Lindsay to find out what else she had wanted to share with ACIP, in addition to her concerns over fertility and blood-clotting disorders. She sent me back her third point, which she submitted as written testimony.

Third, there is strong evidence for immune escape, and that inoculation under pandemic pressure with these leaky vaccines is driving the creation of more lethal mutants that are both newly infecting a younger age demographic, and causing more Covid-related deaths across the population than would have occurred without intervention. That is, there is evidence that the vaccines are making the pandemic worse.

It is clear that we are seeing a temporal immune depression immediately following the inoculations [see World Meter Global Covid deaths counts following inoculation dates] and there are immunosuppressive regions on spike proteins, as well as Syn-2, that could be likely causing this, through a T-cell mediated mechanism. If we do not stop this vaccine campaign until these issues can be investigated, we may see a phenomenon such as we see in chickens with Marek’s disease.

We have enough evidence now to see a clear correlation with increased Covid deaths and the vaccine campaigns. This is not a coincidence. It is an unfortunate unintended effect of the vaccines. We simply must not turn a blind eye and pretend this is not occurring. We must halt all Covid vaccine administration immediately, before we create a true pandemic that we cannot reign in.

MIT scientist also concerned about blood-clotting, fertility issues

Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., an expert in protein synthesis, believes that Dr. Lindsay’s hypothesis is correct. “I absolutely share these concerns,” Dr. Seneff, who is a senior research scientist at MIT, wrote to me in a sobering email.

“The potential for blood clotting disorders and the potential for sterilization are only part of the story. There are other potential long-term effects of these vaccines as well, such as autoimmune disease and immune escape, whereby the vaccines administered to immune-compromised people accelerate the mutation rate of the virus so as to render both naturally acquired and vaccine-induced antibodies no longer effective.”

Like Dr. Lindsay, Dr. Seneff believes we need to immediately halt Covid vaccine campaigns. “This massive clinical trial on the general population could have devastating and irreversible effects on a huge number of people,” Seneff explains.

Despite these fertility and blood disorder concerns, the CDC panel voted last Friday to resume the use of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine. They did, however, suggest an FDA warning label be added. Their argument against halting Covid vaccination? The CDC believes the benefits outweigh the risks.

*

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

Jennifer Margulis, Ph.D., is an investigative journalist, book author, and Fulbright awardee. She is the author of Your Baby, Your Way: Taking Charge of Your Pregnancy, Childbirth, and Parenting Decisions for a Happier, Healthier Family, co-author (with Paul Thomas, M.D.) of The Vaccine-Friendly Plan, and The Addiction Spectrum: A Compassionate, Holistic Approach to Recovery. Follow her on Facebook, Twitter, and Pinterest.

Featured image is courtesy of Ian Hutchinson via jennifermargulis.net

The Ethnic Cleansing of Jerusalem

May 10th, 2021 by Donald Monaco

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Israeli occupation of Palestine has taken an ugly turn, as numerous Palestinian families are slated to be evicted from their homes in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah by fanatical Jewish settlers.

The outright theft of Palestinian homes and property by predatory Zionist vultures has provoked widespread protests and violence in the revered city.  Heavily armed Israeli police forces have intervened to protect the settlers.  Hundreds of Palestinians have been injured on the grounds of the nearby Al-Aqsa Mosque.  The necessity of defending Jerusalem and one of the holiest sites in Islam is a deeply held conviction for many of the world’s 1.9 billion Muslims.

By slowly encircling Al-Aqsa and allowing property expropriations in East Jerusalem, Israel is playing with fire.  It should be recalled that the notorious Arab murderer Ariel Sharon invaded Haram al Sharif surrounded by hundreds of armed police, igniting the second Palestinian Intifada on September 28, 2000.  The revolt became known as Al-Aqsa Intifada.

The legality of the evictions will be decided by Israel’s Supreme Court.  Palestinians have only a slim chance of prevailing in this venue.  Israel is legally structured as an apartheid state. Palestinian Arabs living within the pre-1967 borders of Israel may attain citizenship.  However, the crucial designation in the state of Israel is nationality.  Declaring itself to be a Jewish state, Israel gives legal and property rights to those who have Jewish nationality that are denied to those with Arab nationality.  Palestinians living in the post-1967 “Occupied Territories” of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip have no rights as an occupied people in the eyes of Israel’s leaders.  They are denationalized and have no citizenship or property rights.

Palestinians living under Israeli occupation do have rights under international law as articulated in the Hague Regulations of 1907 and Article 2 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949.  These conventions prohibit the Zionist occupying power from forcefully displacing them and seizing their land.

But Israel is contemptuous of international law.  Successive Israeli regimes have continued to build Jewish settlements in territories occupied after 1967 in direct defiance of international conventions, arguing the confiscation of land is a “military necessity” needed for state security.

The families living in Sheikh Jarrah are refugees from the 1948 Nakba, or catastrophe, that saw 700,000 Palestinians driven from their land at the point of a gun.  The state of Israel officially denies the existence of “refugees” from the Arab/Israeli wars of 1948 and 1967, not to mention those who fled their homes as the result of massacres at villages such as Deir Yassin.

Deir Yassin was a peaceful village attacked by Zionist para-military terror groups on April 9, 1948.  The Irgun and Lehi groups murdered 107 unarmed men, women, and children, provoking a mass exodus of Palestinians living in nearby communities.

The ethnic cleansing of Palestine was deliberately planned and executed by David Ben Gurion and the Zionist leadership of the nascent state of Israel during its “War of Independence” in 1948.  This was evidenced by “Plan Dalet,” the Zionist strategy of de-Arabization of Palestinian towns, villages, and cities.

By denying refugee status, Israel disavows Palestinian demands for ‘right of return’ to their homes and/or ‘compensation’ for property and land that was stolen from them.

Information about Sheikh Jarrah is censored by the Western media.  Google, Facebook, and Instagram have deleted content of Palestinian activists who decried the evictions taking place in East Jerusalem.

Predictably, Western governments, led by the United States and countries in the European Union, are calling for restraint.  Such sentiments are echoed by UN representatives.  They are hollow.  No Western government will challenge Israel with more than tepid rhetorical admonitions.

The settler movement in Jerusalem and the West Bank of the Jordan River is a calculated attempt to render the “two-state” solution to the Palestinian problem obsolete by extending Jewish sovereignty to all but a group of isolated cantons governed by the corrupt Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas.

During his tenure as a cabinet member in the regime of Menachem Begin during the 1970s and Prime Minister from 2001 to 2006, Ariel Sharon pursued a deliberate policy of creating facts on the ground to foreclose possibility of a two-state solution by expanding settlements in the Occupied Territories.

The interpenetration of Jewish and Arab inhabitants of Israel and the Occupied Territories points to a “One-State Solution” to the conflict for many peace advocates.  Apartheid must yield to democracy.  Israel will never accept such a solution.

The Zionist project is a colonial undertaking.  At its core is the creation of an expansionist, exclusivist Jewish state. Expansionism can only be achieved by Judaization of Occupied Palestine.  This entails an unrelenting project of violence, subjugation, and ethnic cleansing.

The Zionist project is over 100 years old and predates the Balfour Declaration of 1917.  The British were the first benefactors of the Zionist movement.  The Americans are its second.  Without British and U.S. imperialism, Israel would not exist.  The defeat of Zionism rests upon the defeat of imperialism.  The struggle to free Palestine is intimately linked to the struggle against U.S. empire.

The clashes in Sheikh Jarrah have erupted after years of oppression and dispossession.  Should a third Palestinian Intifada burst forth, its success or failure will be determined by the level of support it receives from regional allies and the international solidarity movement.  Tear gas and rubber bullets being used to repress protesters in the streets of East Jerusalem bear the following trade mark: “Made in the USA.”  Ultimately, a central component of the struggle to free Palestine will be made in the USA.  Should that struggle fail, disaster awaits the peoples of the Middle East and beyond.

*

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

Donald Monaco is a political analyst who lives in Brooklyn, New York.  He received his Master’s Degree in Education from the State University of New York at Buffalo in 1979 and was radicalized by the Vietnam War.  He writes from an anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist perspective.  His recent book is titled, The Politics ofTerrorism, and is available at amazon.com.

Featured image is from Palestine Solidarity Campaign

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.

***

According to all UK COVID vaccine adverse reaction reports 1,086 UK citizens have died following the two COVID vaccinations (Pfizer and Astra Zeneca) up to the reporting date of 29/4/21. COVID infections following the vaccination have risen to 973 for both vaccinations with 62 deaths – a death rate of 6.3% which is nearly twice the rate of deaths in general from COVID. Once again there have been big rises in Lymphadenopathy.

COVID-19 vaccine Pfizer analysis print

from 9/12/20 to 29/4/21

  • Lymphadenopathy – 4319
  • Myocardial infarction – 94 (deaths 17)
  • Eye problems – 2438
  • Death/sudden death – 136
  • COVID – 599 (deaths 33) 5.5%
  • Spontaneous abortion – 60
  • respiratory disorders – 6520 (deaths 34)
  • total deaths to 29/4 – 364

COVID-19 vaccine AstraZeneca analysis print

from 9/12/20 to 29/4/21

  • Lymphadenopathy – 3515
  • Eye problems – 8841
  • Diarrhoea – 6715
  • Death/sudden death – 247
  • COVID – 374 (deaths 29) 7.74%
  • respiratory disorders – 18,759
  • total deaths to 29/4 – 722 

Deaths by Vaccine

So far in the UK approximately 33m people have received at least one vaccination from either the AstraZeneca or the Pfizer “vaccine” (the latter is is fact a genetic treatment). There have been 1,086 deaths (see above). Therefore the chance of dying from the vaccine is 1 in 30,386. This compares very badly with the chance of those under 50 dying from COVID itself as this ONS data shows:

For a healthy child under ten, the chance of dying of Covid-19 is 1 in 4 million (or 1 in 1.3million for a child with co-morbidities). Which is why so many attack the plans to vaccinate children, see this.

For healthy ten-to-19-year-olds the chance of dying from Covid-19 is 1 in 2.5 million;

  • For 20-30 year-olds 1 in 576,000; 
  • 30-39-year-olds 1 in 164,000;
  • 40-49-year-olds 1 in 46,242

Government and Media Lies:

Despite the clear evidence from the above statistics the UK’s National Statistician in reply to an (April) question from Philip Davis MP asking “how many and what proportion of people have died within 28 days of receiving a COVID-19 vaccination, and whether those people will all be considered to have died as a result of that vaccination” replied with the at best disingenuous answer:

“Up to the end of February 2021, there were 0 deaths registered with the aligning ICD codes for this”

Clearly avoiding any mention of the 1086 deaths set out in Government statistics above.

The deliberate cover up of even official statistics about vaccines has been most blatantly demonstrated in the USA where Democrat Party Attorneys General from 12 States wrote to the CEOs of Twitter and Facebook asking them to censor any negative claims about vaccines. See this.

They claim that the (official and compulsory) VAERS reports of vaccine deaths, infections and injuries are “falsehoods” and “misleading” and they claim the right to know the truth! The fascist arrogance of these pseudo elites is quite breathtaking. They “know” the “truth” and the people are just imagining the problems! They just “imagine” the 2,400 vaccine deaths officially reported in the USA. (Dr Mike Yeadon reports that the US VAERS reporting system “is telling us that almost 99% of the deaths reported to VAERS after vaccination occurred after covid19 vaccination. The balancing 1% were for ALL THE OTHER VACCINES COMBINED.”

Or the 1086 reported vaccine deaths in the UK. The people are after all ignorant and stupid!

They also seek to hide the inconvenient truths that the “approved” vaccines are in fact not licensed at all and are only “approved for emergency use” until they have fulfilled their complete trial process – which will not be before 2023!

There has never been a coronavirus vaccine developed before and there has never been an mRNA vaccine administered before this year. By now most will be wary of the heading “Fact Check” since the writers will certainly have an agenda which makes their own “facts” in need of checking. This Reuters “fact check” is a complete lie. See this.

First they deny the vaccines are experimental (when the USA FDA has designated them “for emergency use only” and confirmed licensing process will not conclude until 2023) but then say that animal experiments are being done alongside human vaccinations! In other words what would normally be done before humans are exposed is being done in parallel! And the experiments on animals they refer to report purely resistance to the virus – not deaths of animals and other adverse effects!

This kind of half truth and manipulation is typical of most “Fact Check” reports.

Not long ago Boris Johnson declared:

“There is absolutely no question of people being asked to produce certification, or covid status report, when they go to the shops or to the pub garden, or to the hairdressers or whatever on Monday” [12th April 2021].

At the turn of the year, speaking to Sky News, Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove reassured everyone that vaccine passports will not be necessary to go to the pub.

‘A vaccine passport in order to go to the pub?’ asks Kay Burley.

‘No,’ says Gove.

And yet now the Government through a House of Commons Committee (above) is considering vaccine passports.

For months the Government and the BBC have been recording thousands of new COVID “Cases” which are not cases (in the sense used in the first wave) but infections and many of those are either without symptoms or false positives.

Equally false are the death statistics which show that a small fraction of reported COVID deaths were from COVID itself: (Both the US CDC and Italian researchers have shown that only 6% to 12% of “COVID deaths” have been unambiguously from COVID.

The “More Vaccinations for Variants” Fraud

No sooner have some 17m people in the UK received two vaccine shots than the Government and big Pharma are talking of an autumn “booster jab” to cater for “COVID variants”. But this seems to be an attempt to keep the panic going and provide more profitable work for vaccine companies.

As Dr Mike Yeadon the former Pfizer researcher and Vice President and founder of a successful Biotech company (which was sold to Novartis for $325m!) issued the following statement on the fraudulent claim that more vaccinations were needed to combat COVID “variants”

 I need to inform you that the variants narrative is ENTIRELY FRAUDULENT. While they exist they are all so similar to the original virus that it’s impossible that any of them ‘escape immunity’ or require ‘top-up’ vaccines’.

Specifically, no variant is more than 0.3% different from the original, so 99.7% identical. Both theory & practice shows no possibility that a variant so similar to the original virus will not be fully recognised as essentially the same.

If anyone is immune through vaccination or natural infection, their immune system WILL fully recognise ANY & ALL variants.

Those who were infected by SARS in 2003 & donated blood last year all retained cellular immunity to SARS AND had CROSS-IMMUNITY to SARS-COV-2. These viruses are 20% different (80% identical) and (even) this difference is FAR TOO SMALL to ‘escape immunity’.

Vaccine Passports and Other Restrictions Illegal

The Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee have called for evidence about vaccine passports. It is now too late to submit evidence online but you could write to the Secretary of that Committee at the House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA and of course your own MP – I strongly advise you to do so. These are the arguments against passports and any other method of coercion:

  • there is no informed consent before vaccination (deaths and adverse effects, contents of vaccines, their experimental nature etc are not communicated to the patient) – therefore the vaccines are illegal
  • many should not have it for medical reasons – allergies, pregnancy, planned pregnancy, frailty
  • these experimental vaccines offered are not licensed (only “approved for emergency use”) so they are against the Nuremburg code on experimental treatments and passports are a clear form of coercion
  • Over 1,000 deaths in the UK and over 5,000 deaths in UK EU USA after vaccination (not communicated to patients before vaccinations)
  • The 47 country Council of Europe says it is illegal to coerce or influence people to have vaccination which is what a passport would do. See this.

Point 7.3 of the resolution obliges all Member States to ensure that citizens are informed that Covid vaccinations are NOT (word written in capital letters) mandatory and that no one is politically, socially or otherwise pressured to be vaccinated.

*

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

This article was originally published on Freenations.

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Vaccine Passports Illegal, Infections and Deaths after Vaccines, Government and Media Lies, the “Booster” Myth
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Dan Ellsberg, the legendary whistleblower who has been arrested more than 75 times for protesting the U.S. warfare state, has not mellowed with age.

At an online conference hosted by the University of Massachusetts-Amherst honoring Ellsberg’s legacy on April 30th and May 1st, the 90-year-old legend blew the whistle yet again.

Truth, Dissent & the Legacy of Daniel Ellsberg: 50th Anniversary Conference Commemorating the Release of the Pentagon Papers, April 30 – May 1, 2021. [Source: umass.edu; Keynote address; Whistleblowers: Plenary Panel with Daniel Ellsberg and Edward Snowden, moderated by Amy Goodman]

He disclosed a secret government study, authored by Pentagon staffer Morton Halperin, which reveals that Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was ready to nuke Taiwan during the 1958 crisis over Quemoy and Matsu Islands during the height of the Cold War.

Ellsberg told Democracy Now host Amy Goodman that, in a meeting with the Joint Chiefs, Dulles conceived of a plan to use seven-kiloton weapons with the expectation that the Soviet Union, Communist China’s ally at the time, would hit Taiwan with nuclear weapons in response.

Dulles, Ellsberg said, was “willing to destroy Taiwan to save it since the entire U.S. world position depended on it,” adding that “the history of 1958 deserves to be read” but that “one-third of Halperin’s study”—which Ellsberg has in his safe—”remains classified.”

Ellsberg stated further that “what I have just said subjects me to the same charges as Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning whose material was only secret—this was top secret.”

“If they want to bring that up, I will be happy to discuss it in front of the Supreme Court and if I lose, and the First Amendment loses, then my old retirement plan of being in prison will come into effect.”

In 1971, Ellsberg had faced a 115-year jail term for leaking the Pentagon Papers, a classified war study which exposed years of government deception on Vietnam.

At the time, he worked for the Defense Department and RAND Corporation, the Air Force’s think tank, after serving in the U.S. Marines in the 1950s and from 1965-1967 as a State Department official in South Vietnam during which time he became disillusioned with the Vietnam War.

Ellsberg decided to leak the Pentagon Papers after hearing draft resister Randy Kehler speak movingly at a War Resister’s League conference and reading books on Gandhian non-violent civil disobedience.

A couple of men sitting on a bench Description automatically generated with low confidence

Dan Ellsberg and Randy Kehler seated on a bench together in 1971. [Source: ellsbergpapers.org]

In his interview with Goodman, Ellsberg said that the 1958 documents are relevant now because “the same discussions about Taiwan are going on today in the Pentagon” and there is “still talk about destroying it.”

Admiral Charles J. Richard, who currently heads the U.S. Strategic Command, called on the nation’s military and civilian leaders to seek new ways to face threats by Russia and China, including the “real possibility” of “nuclear conflict.”

According to Ellsberg, Richard sounds like he is “criminally insane.”

With a high risk of nuclear war, “people in government have to show the moral courage of Snowden, Manning and Daniel Hale [drone whistleblower].”

“Humankind,” Ellsberg said, “may not otherwise survive.”

From the Pentagon Papers to Watergate

In an article published in The Conversation on April 23rd, UMASS-Amherst historian Christian G. Appy, who helped convene the Ellsberg conference, detailed how President Richard Nixon’s (1969-1974) obsession with Ellsberg because of his leaking of the Pentagon Papers led directly to Watergate.

The Pentagon Papers covered the years 1945-1968, i.e., before Nixon became President; however, Nixon feared that Ellsberg would leak other information that could undercut some of his key policies and result in his impeachment.

The Nixon administration consequently indicted Ellsberg under the Espionage Act and Nixon established a special White House unit under Egil Krogh, Jr., known as the Plumbers, which broke into Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office seeking incriminating information about him.

The burglary was a dress rehearsal for the break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel, which led to Nixon’s likely impeachment and resignation.

Ellsberg meanwhile had his case dismissed because of the White House’s illegal actions.

A sketch of Daniel Ellsberg testifying in front of cameras and politicians.

Ellsberg’s trial. [Source: theconversation.com]

Ellsberg: “I Was a Danger to Nixon’s Vietnam Policy”

During his plenary address at the UMASS-Amherst conference, Ellsberg told moderator Charles Sennott, founder of the Ground Truth Project, a grassroots news organization, that Nixon burglarized his psychiatrist’s office because he thought the psychiatrist had documents exposing his secret plans to end the Vietnam War and wanted information he could use against Ellsberg for blackmail.

According to Ellsberg, Nixon’s plan centered on removing U.S. ground troops to undercut the anti-war movement, sustaining funding for the South Vietnamese Army (ARVN), expanding the air war and threatening North Vietnam with a nuclear attack—which Nixon thought would “force Ho Chi Minh [North Vietnam’s leader] to sue for peace as soon as they heard.”

Nixon had gotten the idea for threatening nuclear weapons while serving as Vice President under Dwight Eisenhower who had made successful nuclear threats in the Taiwan straits and in Korea.

According to Ellsberg, Nixon was committed to preserving U.S. proxy Nguyen Van Thieu’s leadership over South Vietnam for at least another eight years—even at a huge cost in lives.

Thieu was a major sticking point in the peace negotiations on which Nixon would not compromise.

The reason was that Thieu had played a major role in helping Nixon win the 1968 presidential election by helping him to sabotage peace talks with North Vietnam.

These talks had brought Vice President Hubert Humphrey (D) closer to Nixon in the polls prior to the election, but Humphrey’s rise stopped abruptly when the negotiations stalled.

Thieu later bragged: “I elected Nixon.”

Nixon had to keep Thieu in power so he would not release communications revealing Nixon’s sabotage of the peace talks—an act of treason, i.e., an impeachable offense.

According to Ellsberg, “Nixon actually did what Donald Trump was accused of doing—colluding with a foreign power to win an election.”

And this is why Nixon went after him—because he did not want his treason exposed.

*

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

Jeremy Kuzmarov is Managing Editor of CovertAction Magazine. He is the author of four books on U.S. foreign policy, including Obama’s Unending Wars (Clarity Press, 2019) and The Russians Are Coming, Again, with John Marciano (Monthly Review Press, 2018). He can be reached at: [email protected].

Featured image: Daniel Ellsberg, co-defendant in the Pentagon Papers case, talks to the media outside the Federal Building in Los Angeles on April 28, 1973. [Source: nbcnews.com]

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

As more reports surface of breakthrough COVID cases, in and outside the U.S., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today said it will change how breakthrough cases are reported, effective May 14.

According to a statement on the CDC’s website, the agency said to help “maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance” it will stop reporting weekly COVID breakthrough infections unless they result in hospitalization or death.

The news followed another change, announced late last month, in how PCR tests should be administered to the fully vaccinated.

Both changes will result in lower overall numbers of reports of breakthrough cases in the U.S.

A breakthrough case is recorded if a person tests positive for SARS-Cov-2 two weeks after receiving the single-dose Johnson & Johnson (J&J) shot or completing the two-dose Moderna or Pfizer vaccination.

Why the changes matter

In April, the CDC issued new guidance to laboratories recommending reducing the RT-PCR CT value to 28 cycles — but only for those fully vaccinated individuals being tested for COVID.

In an RT-PCR test — the gold standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2 — RNA is extracted from the swab collected from the patient. It is then converted into DNA, which is then amplified.

CT, or cycle threshold, is a value that emerges during RT-PCR tests. A CT value refers to the number of cycles needed to amplify viral RNA to reach a detectable level.

According to the Indian Council of Medical Research, a patient is considered positive for COVID if the CT value is below 35. In other words, if the virus is detectable after 35 cycles or earlier, then the patient is considered positive.

Dr. Anthony Fauci recommends a CT value of 35. Globally, the accepted cut-off for CT value for COVID ranges between 35 and 40, depending on instructions from manufacturers of testing equipment.

“If the benchmark were to be lowered to 24 it would mean that CT values in the range 25-34 would not be considered positive,” according to the Indian Council of Medical Research, as reported by The Indian Express. “A benchmark of 35, therefore, means that more patients would be considered positive than we would get if the benchmark were 24.”

In other words, lowering CT threshold parameter may lead to missing infectious persons.

CDC won’t report new breakthrough numbers this week

Because the change in how the CDC will report breakthrough cases is still being implemented and won’t take effect until May 14, the CDC did not report new numbers this week.

According to the latest available numbers, as of April 26, the CDC reported 9,245 people had tested positive for COVID at least two weeks after getting their final COVID vaccination. About 9%, or 835, people required hospitalization and 132 died.

Of the hospitalized patients, 241 were said to be asymptomatic or having an illness not related to COVID, and 20 deaths were reported as asymptomatic or not related to the disease.

The latest numbers are from 46 U.S. states and territories. It’s not clear which four states didn’t submit breakthrough case figures to the CDC.

“These surveillance data are a snapshot and help identify patterns and look for signals among vaccine breakthrough cases,” the CDC said in an April 27 statement. “As CDC and state health departments shift to focus only on investigating vaccine breakthrough cases that result in hospitalization or death, those data will be regularly updated and posted every Friday.”

According to the CDC, actual vaccine breakthrough numbers are likely higher as the surveillance system is passive and relies on voluntary reporting from state health departments and may not be complete. In addition, some breakthrough cases will not be identified due to lack of testing. This is particularly true in instances of asymptomatic or mild illness, CDC added.

The CDC said vaccines are still effective, noting the breakthrough cases represent a small percentage of those who have been vaccinated.

‘Most-vaccinated’ country returns to lockdowns, as breakthrough cases surge

The island of Seychelles, which has fully vaccinated more of its population against COVID than any other country in the world, has re-implemented lockdown measures similar to those imposed in 2020 as infections surge.

According to Bloomberg, 62.2% of the island’s adult population has received two doses of COVID vaccines. That compares with 55.9% for Israel, the second most vaccinated nation. Sinopharm and AstraZeneca’s Covishield are the two vaccines being administered in the Seychelles.

“Despite all the exceptional efforts we are making, the Covid-19 situation in our country is critical right now, with many daily cases reported last week,” Peggy Vidot, the nation’s health minister, said at a press conference Tuesday.

On a per capita basis, the Seychelles outbreak is worse than India’s raging surge. Peaking at an average of just more than 100 new cases a day is a big deal in a country with a population of fewer than 100,000 people, The Washington Post reported.

Of those cases, 84% are Seychellois and 16% are foreigners, Daniel Lucey, clinical professor of medicine at Dartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, said in a blog post. Just under two-thirds of those are either unvaccinated or have only had one dose, and the remainder have had two doses, Lucey added.

A comparison between Sinopharm, Covishield and unvaccinated infected persons could be done using genetic sequencing and data on the severity of their infections, Lucey said. “Given the widespread international use of these two vaccines there are global implications to what is happening now in the Seychelles.”

Officials at a press conference gave little detail on what could be behind the infection surge other than to say people were taking fewer precautions against the virus than before and the surge may be due to celebrations after Easter.

California experiencing thousands of breakthrough COVID infections

Between Jan. 1 and April 28, California public health officials recorded 3,084 breakthrough cases of COVID, The Sacramento Bee reported.

“As more time passes and more people are fully vaccinated, it is likely that additional post-vaccination cases will occur,” the California Department of Public Health said in a statement.

Post-vaccination cases are recorded if a person tests positive for SARS-Cov-2 two weeks after receiving J&J or completing the two-dose Moderna or Pfizer vaccination.

The state health department did not have information on hospitalizations and deaths attributed to breakthrough cases.

The Defender previously reported on breakthrough cases in Washington, Florida, South Carolina, Texas, New York, California and Minnesota.

*

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

Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.

Featured image is from Natural News

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Europe’s drug regulator says it’s evaluating an assortment of potential side effects following inoculation with leading COVID-19 vaccines, including heart inflammation, facial swelling and a rare nerve-degenerating disorder. Yet in most circumstances, it’s not clear whether the vaccines are to blame.  

In AstraZeneca’s case, the European Medicines Agency’s safety committee, known as PRAC for short, said it’s examining reports of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) among people who received the drugmaker’s COVID-19 vaccine, according to a report released on Friday. The agency is tracking the data for all coronavirus shots as part of its routine safety procedures.

GBS syndrome is a rare disorder that causes nerve inflammation and can result in pain, numbness, muscle weakness and difficulty walking. GBS was previously identified by regulators as a potential adverse side effect that required monitoring following AstraZeneca’s jab, the EMA said. The regulator asked AstraZeneca to provide more detailed data and an analysis of all reported GBS cases for its next safety report, which are required on a monthly basis.

Concerns of rare but serious blood clots among AstraZeneca vaccine recipients have beset Europe’s vaccine rollout for months. In early April, the EMA said the unusual blood clots with low blood platelets should be listed as very rare side effect for the company’s vaccine, marketed as Vaxzevria.

Additionally, the committee said Friday that it would update its warning for Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine, which has also faced blood clotting issues. The warning will advise patients who have been diagnosed with thrombocytopenia, or low blood platelets, within three weeks of vaccination to be “actively investigated” for blood clot formations.

Despite close monitoring, the EMA committee said it hasn’t found similar blood clot cases among the mRNA shots from Pfizer and Moderna. However, those companies may have some of their own potential safety concerns that require additional observation, the committee said.

PRAC recommended adding a new side effect to Pfizer’s product information for people with dermal fillers, which are soft, gel-like substances injected under the skin. The committee now believes there’s “at least a reasonable possibility” the vaccine causes facial swelling in people with the fillers.

Additionally, the committee said it’s aware of cases of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, as well as pericarditis, inflammation of the membrane around the heart, following vaccination with Pfizer’s shot, known as Comirnaty.

At the moment, regulators don’t see an indication that the vaccine caused these cases. As a precaution, the committee asked Pfizer to present additional data, including an analysis of the events according to age and gender, and will “consider if any other regulatory action is needed.” Since Moderna also uses mRNA technology for its vaccine, the committee asked the mRNA biotech to monitor for similar cases.

This isn’t the first time officials have probed the potential risk of heart inflammation following COVID-19 vaccination. Late last month, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky said the agency hasn’t found a link between the shots and the myocarditis cases.

Those comments followed the news that the U.S. Department of Defense would investigate 14 cases of heart inflammation among people who were vaccinated through the military’s health services. Israel also said it would examine a small number of cases, Reuters reported.

“We have not seen a signal and we’ve actually looked intentionally for the signal in the over 200 million doses we’ve given,” Walensky said during a press briefing in April.

*

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

Featured image is from FiercePharma

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The local corporate media in Draper, Utah, is reporting that a 17-year-old student from Corner Canyon High School ended up in the ICU with blood clots in his brain just after receiving an experimental COVID injection.

The day after his COVID-19 vaccine shot, 17-year-old Everest Romney felt his neck swelling. In the coming days, he suffered from severe headaches.

His mother, who tells ABC4 the pediatrician initially dismissed the symptoms as a pulled neck muscle, says she was convinced it was something else.

“He could not move his neck without the assistance of his hands,” says mother Cherie Romney.

That was just a few days after the shot. Plus, now her son suffered from fevers and incessant headaches.

Romney says she knew she needed to keep advocating to doctors that something wasn’t right.

Finally, after more than a week of the symptoms, the Corner Canyon High School basketball player and his family had answers: two blood clots inside his brain, and one on the outside.

“The hardest thing was I let him get that shot. And he was healthy and well before,” says Romney.

“But you question it, you can’t help but question it when it all goes wrong,” she added. (Full article here.)

However, as with ALL stories of COVID “vaccine” injuries or deaths that make it into the corporate media, they continue to state that there is no link between the injuries and the injections.

In fact, the reporter in the video of this story tells us that they are not even going to name which “vaccine” he received, showing just how much control Big Pharma has on the media.

The media not only is protected under the First Amendment to state the facts and name the company who made this shot, but the job of the media is supposed to be to inform the public, which they are clearly not doing when they report a “vaccine” injury but refuse to name which one caused it.

Since the Johnson and Johnson shot has already been linked to “rare” blood clots, my guess is that this was one of the mRNA injections from either Pfizer or Moderna, and they just don’t want the bad publicity which would slow down their efforts to inject even more people.

Here is the video from ABC (if it disappears let us know).

Continuing to call these reactions “rare” is criminal, as more people have died following COVID injections now than recorded deaths following vaccines for the past 20 years.

How many more lives will be destroyed, like this 17-year-old healthy high school student who had his whole career and life still before him, just because Big Pharma wants to use the public as lab rats to fulfill their eugenic view of medicine and develop novel, new vaccines designed to reduce the world’s population and enslave everyone to the medical system?

*

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

Featured image is from Health Impact News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Healthy Utah High School Athlete Develops Blood Clots in His Brain Following COVID Injection
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The CDC released more data in their Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) today, and it included two new deaths of infants age 2 and age 1.

While none of the COVID injections have emergency use authorization for children under the age of 17 yet, there are ongoing trials with children being injected with the experimental shots as young as 6 months old.

One of the infants who died was apparently in a Pfizer trial, while the other one was apparently in a Moderna trial.

VAERS ID 1255745 involved a 2-year-old baby girl in Virginia who died 5 days after she was injected. The VAERS entry appears to be made by a family member who laments that the child’s death “was going to happen anyway,” apparently repeating what health officials were telling them, and that they would probably claim her death “had nothing to do with the shot.”

VAERS ID: 1255745 – Pfizer

Symptoms: Death, Product administered to patient of inappropriate age

SMQs:, Medication errors (narrow)

Write-up: she was going to die/dies after vaccine; 2-year-old patient; This is a spontaneous report from a non-contactable consumer via a Pfizer-sponsored program.

A 2-year-old female patient received bnt162b2 (PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE), second dose at the age of 2-years-old via an unspecified route of administration on 25Feb2021 (Batch/Lot number was not reported) as single dose for covid-19 immunisation.

The patient”s medical history and concomitant medications were not reported. It was reported that the 2-year-old dies after vaccine on 03Mar2021. Reported on VAERS.

Look for the researchers to exclude her from the study, probably claiming her death had nothing to do with the shot, she was going to die that day, five days after vaccination anyway.

That”s how they roll. The patient died on 03Mar2021. The outcome of the event was fatal. No follow-up attempts are possible. Information on lot/batch cannot be obtained. No further information is expected.; Reported Cause(s) of Death: she was going to die

VAERS ID 1261766 involved a year-old baby boy in Florida who suffered convulsions and seizures after the Moderna shot and died 2 days later.

VAERS ID: 1261766 – Moderna

Symptoms: Body temperature increased, Death, Seizure

SMQs:, Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (broad), Systemic lupus erythematosus (broad), Convulsions (narrow), Noninfectious encephalitis (broad), Noninfectious encephalopathy/delirium (broad), Noninfectious meningitis (broad), Generalised convulsive seizures following immunisation (narrow), Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms syndrome (broad), Hypoglycaemia (broad)

Write-up: increased body temperature, seizure, death

TV Doctor Puts 5-Year-Old and 7-Year-Old Children on TV After Participating in Duke Pfizer Trial for Children Age 5 to 11

Dr. Cameron Wolfe with his wife and two children. Image source.

I can’t even imagine what it takes to convince parents of young children to allow their children to be guinea pigs for a vaccine trial.

In what looks more like a publicity stunt to convince parents and children to sign up for the experimental COVID shots, Dr. Cameron Wolfe, an infectious disease specialist at Duke University who makes regular appearances on WRAL-TV talking about COVID, brought his two children on TV to show how they got the experimental shots and are now “feeling great and full of energy.”

A clinical trial at the Duke University Health System is currently studying its use on ages 5 to 11.

WRAL News spoke with two young boys who are excited to be part of that trial.

Their father is someone who has become familiar in the Triangle during the pandemic. Dr. Cameron Wolfe, infectious disease specialist at Duke, makes regular appearances on WRAL-TV talking about COVID.

He and his wife, who is also a doctor, hope sharing their story about their kids getting the vaccine will encourage other parents about the vaccine’s safety.

Wolfe tweeted photos of his boys getting their second doses of the Pfizer vaccine on Monday.

Drs. Sarah and Cameron Wolfe said they had no reservations about their 5-year-old Lachlan and 7-year-old Callum joining the Duke trial for kids ages 5 to 11.

“I think it was an easy choice to get the vaccine, and early,” said Sarah. “We were going to have peace of mind for caregivers, teachers, and the kids they interact with in school that we were adding safety.”

And the kids were eager to get the shots.

“I thought it would protect me. And also stop me from spreading it – protecting me, and protecting everyone else,” said Callum. “And the scientists would get to know if it works on kids also.”

After getting the vaccine, both kids seem to be feeling great – and full of energy.

When asked what he would tell other kids about the vaccine, 7-year-old Callum said, “Well, that you should do it. Because then you’ll be safe and you’ll be protecting everyone else around you.”

His father agrees with him, pointing out that if enough school children get vaccinated, the community can get closer to herd immunity level.

Unlike some of the adult trials where you might get placebo, everyone gets the real shot in this trial. Health officials are looking at dose level and how much to give.

As far as a timeline — Pfizer expects to have approval from the FDA for kids as young as 2 by this fall. (Full story.)

The corporate media, the government health agencies, and the pharmaceutical companies for many months now have been conditioning the public to always expect serious side-effects to these shots, and that when they become seriously ill after an injection, that this is “proof” that the shots work.

And this kind of propaganda works, if one just spends a few minutes on social media reading about people’s reactions.

So if this is the “logic” that convinces people to just accept side effects as “proof” the shots “are working,” what does it mean when there are no side effects (other than maybe injection site temporary pain) and are reported “to be feeling great – and full of energy”?

Was this just a publicity stunt to get more parents and children to sign up for the trials?

For the baby girl in Virginia and the baby boy in Florida who participated in these COVID “vaccine” trials and were added to VAERS, they are not “feeling great and full of energy.”

They’re dead.

They are now just a number, a statistic, to be added to the other 4000+ unprecedented deaths that have been recorded by the CDC following non-FDA approved COVID shots during the last 4 months.

And earlier this week it was announced that Pfizer has requested the “emergency use” authorization on their COVID shot to be fully approved by the FDA, which would open the door to making them mandatory.

*

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

Featured image: Image Source

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Dr. Peter McCullough is an outstanding scholar and medical doctor. 

Scientific information is being taken down by Facebook.

There is a total blackout on information to patients regarding treatment. 

Patients are led to believe that Covid cannot be treated. 

Medical doctors are prevented from treating.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Treatment of Covid-19: Dr. Peter McCullough’s Important Statement to the Texas Senate

George W. Bush’s Finest Piece of War

May 10th, 2021 by Nabil Salih

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.

***

George W. Bush is back. He is back, this time not to bomb countries and cause the death of thousands. This time the man is back as an artist who advocates for the rights of immigrants, and the US media is on heat.

Bush, the former US president, recently penned an Op-Ed for The Washington Post, and received a round of applause on ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ when the eponymous host complimented him on his painting of American politician Madeleine Albright. He appears on TV to speak about his new book of oil paintings of America’s immigrants, ‘Out of Many, One’, he is not wearing handcuffs, and all rehabilitated. It is all normal.

What is also normal is how the starvation and deprivation of medication that caused the early death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children because of the severe UN sanctions on the country in the 1990s, have fallen into oblivion. To Albright, speaking in a 1996 TV interview, the political price was “worth it”, though she would later express regret for her wording.

Bush’s grinning face seems to be traveling at a smooth pace from one TV show to the next. Kimmel admired his guest’s reflexes when he dodged Muntadhar al-Zaidi’s shoe throw, and the two had a laugh about it. Of course, it slipped Kimmel’s mind to ask his guest about his time ordering cluster bombs be dropped on my family’s house in Baghdad to “liberate it”. It also slipped the host’s mind to ask why in the first place a man would want to throw a shoe at the former president.

For their part, the cheering crowd gave the impression that the next rich guy to oversee the annihilation of inferior beings overseas could as well re-emerge from the gutter and be celebrated as a cool, funny grandpa.

Bush’s blood-stained past tells us the man is dangerous. If Richard Nixon – in the words of the late Hunter S. Thompson – “could shake your hand and stab you in the back at the same time”, you might lose a finger or two if you extend your hand to shake Bush’s.

And with the way things are going, there’s a big chance he will get away with it – again.

George W. Bush is responsible for the destruction of an incalculable number of innocent Iraqi lives. Have the decency to remember his victims

It is well known that columnists in the US were at war with Iraq even before depleted uranium was generously distributed among its citizens in 2003, but the slick anchors and boring television hosts of today seem to be suffering from amnesia.

In an interview after a tour of Bush’s Texas ranch, CBS’s Norah O’Donnell told the former president that she thought the paintings in his new book were “beautiful”. And when she asked him about the 6 January storming of the Capitol, Bush said that it made him sick: “This sends a signal to the world, you know, like, we’re no different, and this book says we are different, much different”.

In the words of the great Iraqi poet Saadi Youssef:

But I am not an American

Is it enough that I am not American for the Phantom pilot to send me back to stone age?”[1]

The entire charade reeks with hypocrisy. Even when preaching on immigration reforms, Bush failed to hide his ‘us versus them’ complex.

But the American exceptionalism is not what bothers me the most.

That death in Iraq is eliminated from the conversation makes it clear that to ‘them Americans’, ‘us Iraqis’ are non-existent. We are not worthy of receiving justice or of anybody at least bothering to ask Bush about that long-forgotten ‘blunder’, as Iraqi scholar Sinan Antoon reminds us.

Meanwhile, war is ongoing in Iraq. Its signs are unmistakable; walls and road signs riddled with bullet holes, concrete barriers blocking main streets, dead youth staring from faded billboards and military choppers occupying the skies above.

In Baghdad, militiamen nurtured under the lawlessness birthed by the US invasion still fire rockets on the airport and the ‘Green Zone’. They still roam the streets, armed to the teeth, terrorizing the city’s traumatized residents who are left unprotected by empty promises from the Iraqi state.

While Iraq no longer receives aerial bombing from the West, death has become a permanent resident of Baghdad. The lethal failure of its subsequent ‘post-liberation’ rulers continues what George W. Bush started 18 years ago: non-stop civilian killings in Iraq.

The negligence behind the recent al-Amiriyah-like incineration of dozens of patients inside Ibn al-Khatib’s hospital is an example of the consequences of war faced by the people of Iraq since 2003.

George W. Bush is responsible for the destruction of an incalculable number of innocent Iraqi lives. Have the decency to remember his victims.

*

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

Notes

[1] From Saadi Youssef’s poem, America America. Translated by the author of the piece.

Featured image is a U.S. Air Force photo by Carlos Cintron. Public Domain

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The recent announcement by the British government that it plans a 40 Percent Increase in the number of nuclear weapons it possesses highlights the escalation of the exceptionally dangerous and costly nuclear arms race.

After decades of progress in reducing nuclear arsenals through arms control and disarmament agreements, All The Nuclear Powers are once again busily upgrading their nuclear weapons capabilities. For several years, the U.S. Government has been engaged in a massive nuclear “modernization” program, designed to refurbish its production facilities, enhance existing weapons, and build new ones. The Russian government, too, is investing heavily in beefing up its nuclear forces, and in July 2020, President Vladimir Putin announced that the Russian navy would soon be armed with hypersonic nuclear weapons and underwater nuclear drones. Meanwhile, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea are expanding the size of their nuclear arsenals, while Israel is building a new, secret nuclear weapons facility and France is modernizing its ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and missile-carrying submarines.

This nuclear buildup coincides with the Scrapping Of Key Nuclear Arms Control And Disarmament Agreements, including the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the Iran nuclear agreement, and the Open Skies Treaty.

Like arms races of the past, the reviving nuclear arms race places the world in immense danger, for when nations engage in military conflict, they are inclined to use the most powerful weapons they have available. How long will it be before a nuclear-armed, aggressive government—or merely one threatened with military defeat or humiliation—resorts to nuclear war?

In addition to creating an enormous danger, a nuclear arms race also comes with a huge financial price—in this case, in the trillions of dollars. Military analysts have estimated that the U.S. government’s nuclear “modernization” program alone will cost about $1.5 Trillion.

Of course, the nuclear arms control and disarmament process is not dead—at least not yet. One of U.S. President Joseph Biden’s first actions after taking office was to offer to Extend The U.S.-Russia New Start Treaty, which significantly limits the number of U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear weapons. And the Russian government quickly accepted. In addition, efforts are underway to Restore The Iran Nuclear Agreement. Most dramatically, the UN Treaty On The Prohibition Of Nuclear Weapons, which was adopted by 122 nations in 2017, secured sufficient ratifications to become International Law in January 2021. The provisions of this landmark agreement, if adhered to, would create a nuclear weapons-free world.

Even so, when it comes to freeing the world from the danger of nuclear destruction, the situation is not promising. None Of The Nuclear Powers has signed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. And without their participation, a nuclear-free world will remain an aspiration rather than a reality. In fact, The Most Powerful Nuclear Nations remain in a state of high tension with one another, which only enhances the possibility of nuclear war. Assessing the situation at the beginning of 2020 and 2021, a panel appointed by the editors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists placed the hands of their famous “Doomsday Clock” at 100 Seconds To Midnight, the most dangerous setting in its history.

As a result, a fateful choice lies before the nuclear powers. They can plunge ahead with their nuclear arms race and face the terrible consequences. Or they can take the path of sanity in the nuclear age and join other nations in building a nuclear weapons-free world.

*

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

Dr. Lawrence Wittner, syndicated by PeaceVoice, is Professor of History emeritus at SUNY/Albany and the author of Confronting The Bomb (Stanford University Press).

 

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.

Revised, May 10, 2021

***

The Kent State community commemorated the 51st anniversary of the May 4, 1970, shootings outside Taylor Hall on Tuesday. It was a solemn gathering as many former students returned to visit the site of a tragedy where the Ohio National Guard opened fire on anti-Vietnam War protestors. The shootings resulted in the deaths of four students and nine others were wounded.

Fast-forward 51 years later and so much has changed on the Kent campus. However, the sadness brought on by the events of May 4th remains. And behind the tears, pain and uncertainty is a longing for answers. 

A Timeline of Events

On April 30, 1970, President Richard Nixon announced the invasion of Cambodia, a country which remained neutral during the Vietnam War. The announcement was met with a surge in anti-war protests across the country including on college campuses like Kent State University.

Following President Nixon’s announcement, an anti-war rally was held on the Commons on Friday May 1. Protestors delivered anti-war speeches and one demonstrator even buried a copy of the Constitution to symbolize the Nixon Administration’s disregard for the historical document.

On Saturday May 2, the Ohio National Guard was ordered to duty at the university by Governor Rhodes following a request from Kent Mayor Satrom who feared that socalled radicals would destroy the city. Later that evening the ROTC building went up in flames and radical protestors were blamed for causing the fire. However, it is unknown to this day who the real perpetrators were.

By Sunday May 3, nearly 1,000 National Guard troops were present on the campus. Photographs of the university at the time resemble that of a war zone rather than an educational institution. In the morning, Governor Rhodes visited Kent State and held a press conference where he expressed disdain for the anti-war protestors. Due to the nature of the governor’s speech, it was then assumed that all protests and demonstrations were banned.

A Fateful Day

An anti-war protest was scheduled for noon on Monday May 4th near the victory bell. The protest was thought to be banned but students still gathered and exercised their right to assembly. The guardsmen ordered for the protestors to disperse but they refused and tensions began to escalate. This led to the guardsmen firing into the crowd of protestors killing four students and injuring nine others.

The four students who were killed:

  • Allison Krause, 19
  • Jeffrey Miller, 20
  • Sandra Scheuer, 20
  • William Schroeder, 19

The nine students who were injured:

  • Alan Canfora
  • John Cleary
  • Thomas Grace
  • Dean Kahler
  • Joseph Lewis Jr.
  • Donald Scott MacKenzie
  • James Russell
  • Robert Stamps
  • Douglas Wrentmore

A Hero Emerges

The shooting lasted for 13 seconds and was followed with a brief period of silence before many in the crowd began to scream and cry. A tragedy had just occurred and perhaps more violence was yet to come. However, one brave and courageous man stepped up to be the voice of reason.

Glenn Frank, a geology professor on campus, was a faculty peace marshal that weekend. Earlier that day he had jumped into an ambulance and requested the driver to take him to the scene. After helping to get the deceased and wounded students into the ambulances, a group of 1,000 students sat down in front of the guard.

“The General said, you have five minutes to move those students. Another group of guardsmen began to march towards the student gathering. Glenn ran up to Major Jones, who was in charge of the guardsmen and said, ‘my God, what are you doing?’ Jones responded, ‘I have my orders.’ ‘Over my dead body,’ said Glenn. Jones then threw down his baton, but the Guard stopped. After the General gave him five minutes to disperse, he then made his impassioned plea.” — Alan Frank

Professor Frank’s actions on May 4, 1970, are said to have saved hundreds of lives. In an emotional plea to the students and protestors, Glenn Frank said:

“I don’t care whether you’ve never listened to anyone before in your lives. I am begging you right now if you don’t disperse right now they’re going to move in and it can only be a slaughter. Would you please listen to me. Jesus Christ. I don’t want to be a part of this,”

KSU faculty member Glenn Frank talking to a crowd of people, blood in parking lot is visible in background

After hearing Glenn Frank’s plea, many students left the premise and no one else was killed by the National Guard that day. However, for Glenn Frank himself, he remained deeply troubled by the events that took place. While continuing to work as a geology professor at Kent State, Glenn spent the rest of his life searching for the truth by investigating what led up to the senseless killing of four college students.

A Search for Answers

It has been 51 years since the May 4, 1970, shootings and many questions remain unanswered. The public deserves clarity. A passage of time should not comfort those in positions of power who continue to suppress the truth.

Glenn Frank’s son, Alan Frank, who was present during the May 4, 1970 shootings, shares his experience. Alan, who has been an active member of the Kent State May 4th community, revisits the work of his father who has sought answers to our many unanswered questions surrounding the events on and leading up to that day.

*

Interview with Alan Frank 

The following is a transcript of an interview between independent journalist Taylor Hudak and Alan Frank, the son of Geology Professor Glenn Frank. The interview took place on May 4, 2021, at Kent State University.

A note from the author: Due to the passage of time and with many of the subjects deceased, I cannot independently verify all of the claims made during this interview. If you have additional information on the events leading up to and on May 4th 1970, please contact [email protected].

***

Taylor Hudak: First of all, Alan Frank, I want to thank you for doing this interview with me. And I know it’s been 51 years since the shooting on May 4, 1970. What does it feel like to be back here on this day?

Alan Frank: Oh, it’s something very personal to me because I just feel the need to come and pay my respects. I try to do it every May 4th when I’m in town for sure. And I’m probably going to run into some people that are very close to me that I’m looking forward to seeing.

TH: If you could just take me back to May 4th, 1970, on the Kent State campus. What was your experience?

AF: Let me go back a few days before that when Nixon announced the invasion of Cambodia. On Friday May 1st, there were a couple of rallies on campus, one where a guy buried a copy of the Constitution. That evening I was downtown. It was a beautiful, beautiful evening. People were getting kind of rowdy. And I saw a lot of people that I didn’t usually recognize. There were a lot of people that just normally didn’t come downtown like that. And there are some high school kids that were going around.

Eventually a police cruiser came through and some rocks and bottles were thrown at the police car. And eventually they put a bunch of trash out into the middle of the street on Water Street and set it on fire. And then apparently police had come in and told everybody that the bars were shut down. So part of the crowd moved up towards Main Street, broke windows and some other things.

Two friends and I eventually kicked out the bonfire that was in the street. And a lot of times you’ll see the caption there’s two or three guys by the fire and they say these are radicals that started the fire. Now, we were there kicking the fire out and hoping that the bikers didn’t beat us up.

So that evening, my father had been out of town with my my mother. And I told them that people were out, but I didn’t know if it was a riot. Everybody says it was a riot, but I didn’t experience a whole lot of that. The next day, on Saturday May 2nd, my father was contacted by Dr. Matson, who was in charge since Dr. White was off campus in Iowa at the time. He was asked to gather faculty marshals and they had a meeting at seven o’clock that evening.

At that time, for many weeks, a lot of people felt that the ROTC building was going to burn. So he was right by the ROTC building and a group of students were there throwing rocks and breaking windows. Eventually, they went to Tri Towers to get some more students to back them up. They came back and continued hurling more rocks and came down over the hill and tried to start the fire. And I just listened to a police report and it said the ROTC building is burning. And then about 48 minutes into it, it said the building looks like it’s going to go back up (in flames) again. So it took at least those 48 minutes on the tape that I had heard. There were lots of stories going around about what was going on that night (Saturday May 2nd). People saw other people with walkie talkies. A lot of them had billy clubs.

TH: These so-called radicals had walkie talkies?

AF: Right, right. Yeah. So anyhow, after a good hour to an hour and a half, they attempted to burn the ROTC building. Police were standing right by the heating plant, which was not far away from there but didn’t do anything. My dad was out there, got hit with rocks around his legs several times. My dad, Glenn Frank, was a faculty marshal. However, they were not to get into anything with any of the students and just tried to maintain order as much as possible. That was the day that he had gone out and purchased a bunch of cloth, robin’s egg blue cloth. And one of the reasons was that, and I’m sure you know this, everybody had red and blue and white bandanas. Nobody had a robin’s egg blue bandana. So he passed those out and so the faculty had those and the student marshals had white armbands. So eventually the protestors ran over to an athletic shed down near the tennis courts and set the tennis shed on fire. And apparently a tree started to burn, and they started a bucket brigade. Well, in that time, somebody had come in and finally torched the (ROTC) building. Nobody knows who.

TH: And it’s still unclear to this day?

AF: Yes, to this day. There’s 167 pages of the FBI report that are still redacted. I’ve got some pictures here, and I’ll show you. They name about 20 some people who are suspected to have participated in the burning of the ROTC building on May 2. However, almost half of them are redacted. And why on earth would they conceal the identities of the radicals who they suspected started the fire?

However, their names are redacted and when you look at their pictures, there’s black magic marker that’s just been drawn across their face so you can’t tell who it is. In some parts of the burn report, there are 25 pages at a time that are just totally deleted. You know, what’s with that?

FBI report

 

TH: Can you think of any reason why they would do that?

AF: I’m wondering, you know, if it was a false flag operation or something like that. I’m not saying the CIA did this, but the CIA had a program called Chaos. And the FBI also had a program called COINTELPRO. So both of them had counterintelligence programs. Every military intelligence group had people that would try to infiltrate the radical groups.

So you almost wonder whether more people were infiltrating these groups than were actually the radical students a part of these groups. But there’s no doubt that some of the students tried to participate. I talked to Tom Grace and I said, Tom, I never knew that the the FBI released the burn report saying the students did it. He said, well, no, we’re pretty sure that the students did it. And I kind of called B.S. on that because there were these other people on campus that nobody recognized. Tom Grace said some had disguises on. So it’s hard to say, you know. Until the FBI releases the burn report unredacted, we’re never going to know. And I wonder, is it for national security? Is it for the fact that they’re hiding undercover agents? I don’t know. But so many different intelligence agencies were around campus at that time.


Note: Federal Bureau of Investigation (Department of Justice) Form No. 4-694a (Rev. 12-4-86), “Explanation of Exemptions, Subsections of Title 5, United States Code, Section 552”. (FOIA)


TH: Right. And there’s been a long history of infiltration in different activist groups, and it’s something that still goes on today but it’s expanded with the internet.

AF: I talked to Alan Canfora for, I don’t know, probably since this started. He was one of the people that said he and others tried to start a fire for an hour and a half, and they couldn’t do it. And then soon as he and the others left and the police surrounded the building, it went up (in flames). And I also talked to a friend of mine who is a biology professor. His name was Denny Cooke. And I said, Denny, the Justice Department has two different quotes by you. And they say, check with Denny Cooke to see which one is correct.

In one statement, Denny said that he had seen a small fire going. In the other statement, he said that it was almost out. And when I asked Denny about it at the 25th anniversary, I was right over here in the Student Center. And he said to me, Alan, you are the first person to ask me this question in 25 years. He said, I put the fire out. We talked a little bit, and he said again, I put the fire out. And a third time to make sure I got it, he said, I put the fire out. And he said, I don’t know what happened to the mob when they left. But that’s what Denny had said to me.

TH: And again, what was Denny’s position or role at the university?

AF: He was a faculty marshal and a biology professor right over here. So there are so many questions. And it just bothers me that we see things that happen in the United States, such as the January 6th attack on the Capitol building. And people aren’t trusting the police. They’re not trusting the FBI. They’re not trusting anybody and part of that, I understand because it is hard to believe the truth when you’re either not lying or you’re trying to create a situation where then you can go in and either blame it on somebody else or be the hero that solves that problem. We can’t afford to do that. I mean, it’s obvious to me that this is a great country as far as our Constitution is concerned. There are some people that are really being inappropriate with what’s happening in this country.

TH: And who would that be?

AF: Well, focusing on May 4th, what bothers me the most right now is the FBI report.

I’m just concerned. I would love to see the unredacted FBI report.

TH: And specifically on what happened on the evening of May 2? The burning of the ROTC building?

AF: Yeah, yeah. Especially, on that evening. I had another friend, who was around that evening, who sat near the victory bell watching people come out of the crowd, run up, do something and run back. And he said they did it with military precision. And I said, man, could you write that down for me? And he said no. And I’m just wondering, is that because this is a very relatively conservative guy? But for some reason, he doesn’t want to be associated with what he saw.

TH: And he saw the fire go up?

AF: He saw the fire go up.

TH: And who is this person? Do they want to remain anonymous? AF: Yes.

TH: Ok, I understand.

AF: Yeah, and he said it was like military precision when they would come up and then go back and he saw, you know, five to 10 people doing this. And many of the reports say that there were probably only five to ten people that did it. But I think they were able to talk students into being a part of it and thereby, you know, taking their role. Yeah.

TH: Yeah, that’s entrapment. I know we are speculating here, but do you think that that’s a possibility?

AF: I think so. The FBI report is very difficult to read. The copies are bad. But when you read the report, you will notice it doesn’t have the right hand margin in some of the documents and you’ve got to figure out what the words are. But this is my fifth time going through it. The first time I probably spent two hundred hours trying to figure out some of the things in the documents. In my opinion, there should be no reason to include records of the murdered students in the report. However, they talk within the first couple sections about the four students who were killed. It mentions that Bill Schroeder was a ROTC student and that he was thinking about or he was having some dissonance regarding the Vietnam War and thought about going to Canada. Now, back then, that was pretty sacrilegious, you know.

TH: Right. That was a crime at the time.

AF: Yeah.

TH: So they put this in the report to perhaps make it look as if it was acceptable to shoot the students?

AF: Exactly. That’s my feeling now. TH: And that’s in the FBI report?

AF: It’s in the FBI report. And there were two FBI reports. Well, they’re very similar. One is like one out of eight and it’s about twelve hundred pages. The other is one out of twenty two. So they’re divided up like that. But why would it even mention details about the students if you didn’t want to kind of blame them? Like Sandy Scheuer. I mean, I don’t think she was in any radical group. She was on her way to class when she was murdered. And it said, in the report, she would hang out with some of the radicals like the long hairs and the beards and stuff like that. Why would they even put that crap in there, you know?

TH: So it included information that was unnecessary?

AF: Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. They have a story about Allison Krause going into one dorm. It says that this R.A. saw her come in and she had a bottle and she had to use the bathroom. And the R.A. said, I’m pretty sure that she went in there to pee in the bottle to spray it on people. I mean, they are making this crap up, you know?

TH: They’re smearing the victims.

AF: Exactly. Exactly. Yeah. When they are mentioned like that, when in my opinion, there’s no need to have that information in the report, I just see it as an effort to skew the narrative in a certain direction. In another 50 years, nobody’s going to know this information. They’re going to see, oh, well, you know, they all deserved to be shot. It’s garbage. It’s really garbage. So there are times when I thought either the FBI report was written in a genius manner or it was just a total screw up just because of some of the information that’s in there. So just reading through it critically and considering what they have put in there, it makes me wonder. And I don’t think it’s going to be solved until everything is unredacted.

TH: Ok. Let’s shift our focus to what took place on and around May 4th. If you can please continue to share your experience.

AF: Ok, Sunday May 3, I was not on campus. My dad was with the faculty marshals though. And at that time, I was a jock on the swim team, and a lot of jocks and frat guys were against these radicals. So I was having lunch with a friend of mine in the Student Center. After lunch, I jokingly said to him, let’s go beat up some hippies. And I ran into him a couple years ago and he said, yeah, back then we never beat up anybody, you know, we just didn’t do it. And that’s what I was joking about it.

TH: So you were more conservative?

AF: Oh, yeah, I was. I was conservative.

TH: So you were not someone who was out there protesting?

AF: I went up there on May 4th, quote, to make sure that nobody hurt the Guard. I don’t know what I would have done. I don’t know if I could have done anything, but it was such a joke. And so we walked up and stood behind the couple hundred people that were down below by the victory bell. The Guard enforced Governor’s Rhodes decision that no rallies were to be allowed. After tensions escalated, the Guard shot off tear gas. I went into Johnson Hall because I had stayed there as a swimming recruit. And so I had a connection with Johnson Hall and came out after they had gone up over the hill. And then they walked down to the practice football field.

And it was such a circus, you know, nobody was close enough to them (the National Guard). All these guardsmen say, oh, yeah, we were getting pelted by rocks. And somebody said the sky was black with rocks. It’s bullshit. And it’s the lies that are put in that FBI report that really bothered me and the BCI report, the Bureau of Criminal Investigation report. There are just so many pieces of information that are in these reports that make one think that all of these guys got what they deserved. I read in James Michener’s book, “Kent State: What Happened and why,” that a very good former baseball player went down to the site of the shooting, placed himself where one of the students was and tried to hurl a rock toward where the Guard was. And he said, you’d have to be Joe DiMaggio to be able to to hit anybody. Even the General picked up a rock and threw it back at kids. General Canterbury talked later about how he and his friend, Sylvester Del Corso, did this. General Canterbury and Del Corso said, yeah, we had a fun time this weekend throwing rocks back at these demonstrators. It’s totally, totally inappropriate and totally unprofessional. But this guy, General Canterbury, kind of bragged that he messed with the students.

And the number of people that had been bayonetted is higher than I had realized. One black guy was in a car bringing his girlfriend back to campus, and the guardsmen went through an open window and bayoneted him. And another woman got hit in the buttocks because she was trying to get into the window of the library.

 

Letter from Civil Rights Divison Attorney John C. Hoyle concerning a guardsmen stabbing a girl with a bayonet. September 24, 1973.

So what the guard was doing was just totally inappropriate, which I didn’t realize at the time because it took years for this to come out. But back to Monday May 4, we get up on campus and we’re watching the circus back and forth. Now some people called it a tennis match because it was just so ridiculous. The guardsmen got down and they knelt and aimed their weapons especially towards Alan Canfora who had the black flag.

Alan Canfora waving the back flag before the National Guard on May 4, 1970. Taken by John Filo.

After about 10 minutes on the field, they started to walk back up. There’s a lot of people who were just observers on the Hill. Ten to 20 people, maybe, were throwing things. I don’t remember anybody getting hit at that time. However, as the guard is coming back up, the guardsmen report that they (the protestors) were within six inches of their bayonets and that they had to shoot in order to protect themselves. And the pictures didn’t come out initially so they had the ability to make up what was really going on.

TH: They initially said that protestors were six feet from their bayonets?

AF: Inches. Six inches from their bayonets.

TH: Well, that is definitely not corroborated by the photographic evidence.

AF: Right, exactly. So who in their right mind would even get near somebody with a bayonet? Come on. This buddy of mine from the swim team and I are walking up the hill probably 50 to 75 feet in front of the guard. We were some of the closest people there and there was no sense of danger. There were no rocks being thrown at that time that I saw, even though, people say, oh, I got hit in the stomach with a rock, I got hit in the testicles with a rock, etc.

But I felt absolutely no danger. I said to my buddy Al, shouldn’t we be walking faster? And he said, what are they going to do, shoot? And I thought, how could I be so stupid to even think that? I was embarrassed for about 15 seconds. And as we walked up, The Guard turned in unison and started firing. And we were like, whoa! And so we ran to Johnson Hall because that’s where I luckily had a connection.

Otherwise, I might have gone down near Taylor Hall where a few other people were. The photographs don’t show that at all. So we run from the top of the hill near the pagoda down into the bathroom. Meanwhile, the firing is still going on and it was like the longest 13 seconds of my life. And we’re in there (the bathroom) and we’re laughing and saying they’re shooting blanks, they’re trying to scare us, etc. The National Guard then went down the hill, and we came out the bathroom window. And I hear this guy screaming, “They killed them! They killed them!” And in my in my mind I’m thinking, what? No way. And so we came out and there’s a picture of me just kind of looking over the scene. And I walked down to where Jeffrey Miller was and Mary Ann Vecchio, the fourteen year old runaway, was by him.

John Filo/Getty Images

So I was right there when John Filo was taking these shots. And I was in shock because I could not make a connection that there was any reason for the Guard to fire at that time. Several of the guardsmen have said that it was not a shooting situation and they didn’t feel like they were in danger. While other guardsmen said that the protestors were so close to them that they were afraid their weapons would be taken off of them by the demonstrators. Well, between Johnson Hall and Taylor Hall there was an opening pathway. They could have gone down there if they wanted to. They said a surge came up with the rocks and there was yelling. But I don’t remember any of that. I remember the shooting, and it was so totally inappropriate.

TH: Initially, when you heard the gunshots, what was going through your head at the time?

AF: We thought they were shooting blanks in an attempt to scare people. But we ran into Johnson Hall and came back out, it was like, wait a second, what is happening? This is so inappropriate and so was what came after that. One guard captain said that he had walked over to Jeffrey Miller’s body and found a pistol on him, which is totally bullshit. The Guard eventually claimed that he said he turned it into the FBI about a month and a half to two months afterwards. The FBI looked at the pistol and noticed the initials on the pistol were SNY. And the man who turned in the pistol, his name was Snyder. And it was a drop pistol. It was a pistol that was, I think, an 1850 pin fire revolver, which they don’t make ammunition for anymore. Snyder had said he was in C company between Taylor and Prentice Hall. He said that he watched Jeff Miller running back and forth with a pistol saying, “kill, kill, kill.” I mean, come on. And then people really went nuts and they found out that he (Snyder) was lying to the grand jury and everybody else. Yet nothing was ever done. Nothing was ever done.

TH: And who is this Snyder? What is his full name?

AF: Captain Ron (nickname) “Cyanide” Snyder. That’s what his nickname was to his–

TH: And what was his role?

AF: He was one of the people who was apparently making decisions on what the Guard should be doing at that time. So you know, we’re friends on Facebook. We’ve talked, and I’ve asked him certain questions. But it just bothers me that he was caught lying at least a couple of times and nothing was ever done about it.

TH: So he lied that there was a gun found on Jeffrey Miller?

AF: Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. And the FBI said, you know, the initials SNY make us doubt that–

TH: So the initials on the gun were SNY?

AF: SNY. Snyder is his name. s-n-y-d-e-r.

TH: So we can’t be sure of this right now, but it seems as if that gun was his and he placed it there?

AF: Well, it probably wasn’t even there. I believe he had it at home. You know, he had said that he turned it into the FBI a month and a half or two months later when he said they were going to charge the Guardsman with something. And so he said, well, I’ve got the perfect solution, we’ve got this gun here. And it’s just to show that these so-called radical students had weapons and therefore, the Guard was justified. But this was not true.

 

Memorandum from Attorney John C. Hoyle concerning Capt. Snyder’s allegation that he took the gun off of the body of victim Jeffrey Miller. September 25, 1973.

TH: Oh that’s beyond corrupt.

AF: Oh yeah. Yeah. There are so many stories about just inappropriate things that the Guard did, and it just bothers me. It just bothers me terribly. And the FBI report continues to allow people to believe a certain narrative. On Saturday night, May 2, when the fire truck came to put out the fire, the people that were supposedly the radicals ran up and took the fire hoses slashed them with machetes and icepicks. My dad was given a part of the FBI report that wasn’t really the FBI report, but it was all the physical evidence, at the very end it says that these items were in Seabury Ford’s office. And this brings me to another point. Seabury Ford was the prosecuting attorney who had been with 107th Cavalry and came out with a story in October saying they should have shot them all. And he said he keeps a loaded .45 in his desk, but that’s a different story. And that’s when my father said, wait a second, you know, we’re under a gag order but this guy can say whatever he wants?


(Note from the author: The investigation and gag order is addressed later in the interview)


So my dad defied the judge to arrest him. He said, I defy Judge Jones to arrest me because my dad knew if he was arrested that they would also have to arrest Seabury Ford. And like I said, that’s another story. But anyways, somebody was given a three foot piece of fire hose, a .32 caliber pistol and a machete. And you wouldn’t give these items back to radical students. So who has them? And that was redacted at the very end of the report.

First and page of the report obtained by Glenn Frank that includes the evidence. The document shows weapons including a blue steel .32 caliber revolver, one section of a fire hose and one machete style knife was returned to individuals whose identities are redacted.

TH: So they gave these materials back to so-called radical students?

AF: Well, they gave it to somebody. I can’t say that it was radicals. Well, I’m sure it wasn’t radical students, because if there was any way to indicate that they deserved what they got by being in possession of these items, they would have made it public. But I think somebody in charge got these things as mementos. One thing Ron Snyder said to me was, I’m probably the only person that has a weapon that was up on campus that day. And I didn’t respond to that statement. But, yeah, he had brought several illegal weapons. He brought a .22 Beretta that he gave to Major Jones. In Michener’s book, Snyder was talking about Jeff Miller running back and forth and he said, I had just about decided to shoot him with my revolver. And my dad goes, wait a second, would a captain in the guard refer to their sidearm .45 as a revolver unless he had another illegal weapon? And so then Snyder and some of his guys walked over to Jeff Miller’s body.

Somebody tried to “toe” him over the Guard (use boot to toe him over) and people went nuts. I mean there was blood just flowing down the asphalt. According to Michener, Snyder had gone over to there to make sure he was dead. Now, my dad said if you weren’t part of the shooting, wouldn’t you go over there to make sure he was alive?

TH: That is a great question. It doesn’t add up. But I wanted to ask you about your dad, Glenn Frank. And his role in all of this? Because he had a significant role on May 4, 1970, and is credited with saving many, many lives.

AF: Absolutely. Absolutely. On that day, my dad came out of the Student Center and got in an ambulance. When he jumped into the ambulance, he just said, that’s it, take me up there. And it shows them going up near Taylor Hall in this ambulance. And at the time, I was wandering around in a daze, I’m sure. And once he got there, I walked up to him and he pointed his finger at me and he goes, “you get the hell out of here.”

TH: Your dad said this to you?

AF: My dad. Yeah.

TH: How did you feel at the moment?

AF: I knew I wasn’t going to get out of there because what I had just seen was murder. You know, there’s just absolutely no way.

TH: Were you there when your dad told the students to leave and that this wouldn’t end well?

AF: Yes. Yeah.

TH: Tell me about that moment.

AF: There were probably 1,000 students who were there including jocks and fraternity guys and other people who had showed up just because of what had happened. And so I sat down and many, many other people sat down. And my dad and I never talked about this, but I’ve always wondered what would I do if I thought my son might be in a situation where within five minutes he could be in a shooting situation. And just one bullet into a crowd would probably go through at least six, seven, eight people. So it would have been a slaughter. And my dad even mentioned that in his speech. But I was not going to move. I remember him coming back and forth between The Guard and the students and some of the other faculty.

And I thought, this guy is going to try to get me to move and I’m not moving. I made my decision. I just saw murders take place. And this was the only thing I felt that I could do to protest. But when he said what he said and then he ended with “Jesus Christ, I don’t want to be a part of this,” it was shocking. It was such an incredible moment. Jerry Lewis, a sociology professor, said it was like a prayer, an anguished plea. And people heard my dad’s words and we all just started to stand up and walk away.

And I saw Dad and he had his head down and he was kneeling on the ground. He was crying. And I thought somebody had hit him in the head with a rock. That’s all I could think of. And a friend and I walked him over to the tennis courts just to get away from The Guard. But yes, he saved hundreds of lives that day. No question. And I was one of them, you know, because I was not going to listen to him. I was not going to move.

TH: Your dad had dedicated so much of his life to investigating exactly what had happened on that day. Can you talk about why your dad was so passionate about getting to the truth?

AF: One of the things that my dad said was that he was so high on America. And he would do whatever it took to find it out what really happened. He was in the Marines, he was a scout leader and he was a Boy Scout. He was pretty conservative, which is where I’m sure I got my views from at the time. And the more that he looked into it (what happened on and around May 4, 1970, the more he said, “my country doesn’t do this, my country doesn’t do this.” I’m sure he felt that the country was constitutionally wonderful, and he just he could not believe that this happened.

TH: Do you think it changed his faith in the system and in the intelligence community?

AF: Yeah, yeah. He was able to contact people in the CIA. He got access to the quote secret police files. He had friends all over and they were pretty much conservative, law abiding people. He was in the Fraternal Order of the police. He had the ability to talk to anybody about anything and was able to add a different perspective. And he said, I’ve always felt that I need to know my perspective and I need to know the other perspective as well so I can to be able to to discuss a situation. But I don’t know if he ever had good access to the FBI report. But I came across a couple files within the last month or so that were just sitting up in my attic. And he had so many files on so many people. I mean, if he talked to somebody about Kent State, he would make a file. With regard to the gag order from October, when the prosecuting attorney said they should have shot all students, somebody started a petition drive to support my dad. And there were like 5-6,000 signatures in this one file. So there was so much support for him. But he was finally arrested, I think on the last day of probably spring quarter. And he announced it to his class that if somebody comes in everything’s fine.

TH: And what exactly was he arrested for?

AF: He was arrested for breaking the gag rule.


Note:

In the fall of 1970, A Ravenna Grand Jury assembled to investigate the Kent State shootings. The court implemented a gag order, which prevented anyone involved in the investigation from speaking on the case. Seabury Ford, a special prosecutor overseeing the case, violated the gag order by speaking to the press, where he is quoted in an article saying, “National Guardsmen should have shot all the trouble-makers.” After seeing such a comment by one of the prosecutors, Glenn Frank spoke out in response, and both Frank and Ford were charged with contempt of court. However, following Frank’s arrest, he received a significant amount of support from his students. You can view news coverage of the incident and the letters of support here.


TH: Ok, let’s talk about the aftermath here and the investigation. Your dad was he skeptical of the official narrative, right?

AF: Eventually, he was. I think initially he felt ok this is what it appears to be. He talked to certain professors that had maybe more of a radical viewpoint, and they gave him enough information that he started to question the official findings. And eventually he testified in front of the Scranton Commission. And the Scranton Commission essentially said that they felt that the guardsman had fabricated their side of the story. He felt that they got together and said that no this isn’t what happened. And the more information he was able to obtain, the more he questioned some of the things that people, not the government necessarily, but people were claiming. So it was just such a painful event. He and I never ever really talked about it.

TH: You never really talked about it?

AF: No. Oh, no, no. I mean, I remember one time one of the police officers had mentioned to him that he was on a hit list–


Caption: First and page of the report obtained by Glenn Frank that includes the evidence. The document shows weapons including a blue steel .32 caliber revolver, one section of a fire hose and one machete style knife was returned to individuals whose identities are redacted.


TH: So they gave these materials back to so-called radical students?

AF: Well, they gave it to somebody. I can’t say that it was radicals. Well, I’m sure it wasn’t radical students, because if there was any way to indicate that they deserved what they got by being in possession of these items, they would have made it public. But I think somebody in charge got these things as mementos. One thing Ron Snyder said to me was, I’m probably the only person that has a weapon that was up on campus that day. And I didn’t respond to that statement. But, yeah, he had brought several illegal weapons. He brought a .22 Beretta that he gave to Major Jones. In Michener’s book, Snyder was talking about Jeff Miller running back and forth and he said, I had just about decided to shoot him with my revolver. And my dad goes, wait a second, would a captain in the guard refer to their sidearm .45 as a revolver unless he had another illegal weapon? And so then Snyder and some of his guys walked over to Jeff Miller’s body.

Somebody tried to “toe” him over the Guard (use boot to toe him over) and people went nuts. I mean there was blood just flowing down the asphalt. According to Michener, Snyder had gone over to there to make sure he was dead. Now, my dad said if you weren’t part of the shooting, wouldn’t you go over there to make sure he was alive?

TH: That is a great question. It doesn’t add up. But I wanted to ask you about your dad, Glenn Frank. And his role in all of this? Because he had a significant role on May 4, 1970, and is credited with saving many, many lives.

AF: Absolutely. Absolutely. On that day, my dad came out of the Student Center and got in an ambulance. When he jumped into the ambulance, he just said, that’s it, take me up there. And it shows them going up near Taylor Hall in this ambulance. And at the time, I was wandering around in a daze, I’m sure. And once he got there, I walked up to him and he pointed his finger at me and he goes, “you get the hell out of here.”

TH: Your dad said this to you?

AF: My dad. Yeah.

TH: How did you feel at the moment?

AF: I knew I wasn’t going to get out of there because what I had just seen was murder. You know, there’s just absolutely no way.

TH: Were you there when your dad told the students to leave and that this wouldn’t end well?

AF: Yes. Yeah.

TH: Tell me about that moment.

AF: There were probably 1,000 students who were there including jocks and fraternity guys and other people who had showed up just because of what had happened. And so I sat down and many, many other people sat down. And my dad and I never talked about this, but I’ve always wondered what would I do if I thought my son might be in a situation where within five minutes he could be in a shooting situation. And just one bullet into a crowd would probably go through at least six, seven, eight people. So it would have been a slaughter. And my dad even mentioned that in his speech. But I was not going to move. I remember him coming back and forth between The Guard and the students and some of the other faculty. And I thought, this guy is going to try to get me to move and I’m not moving. I made my decision. I just saw murders take place. And this was the only thing I felt that I could do to protest. But when he said what he said and then he ended with “Jesus Christ, I don’t want to be a part of this,” it was shocking. It was such an incredible moment. Jerry Lewis, a sociology professor, said it was like a prayer, an anguished plea. And people heard my dad’s words and we all just started to stand up and walk away. And I saw Dad and he had his head down and he was kneeling on the ground. He was crying. And I thought somebody had hit him in the head with a rock. That’s all I could think of. And a friend and I walked him over to the tennis courts just to get away from The Guard. But yes, he saved hundreds of lives that day. No question. And I was one of them, you know, because I was not going to listen to him. I was not going to move.

TH: Your dad had dedicated so much of his life to investigating exactly what had happened on that day. Can you talk about why your dad was so passionate about getting to the truth?

AF: One of the things that my dad said was that he was so high on America. And he would do whatever it took to find it out what really happened. He was in the Marines, he was a scout leader and he was a Boy Scout. He was pretty conservative, which is where I’m sure I got my views from at the time. And the more that he looked into it (what happened on and around May 4, 1970, the more he said, “my country doesn’t do this, my country doesn’t do this.” I’m sure he felt that the country was constitutionally wonderful, and he just he could not believe that this happened.

TH: Do you think it changed his faith in the system and in the intelligence community?

AF: Yeah, yeah. He was able to contact people in the CIA. He got access to the quote secret police files. He had friends all over and they were pretty much conservative, law abiding people. He was in the Fraternal Order of the police. He had the ability to talk to anybody about anything and was able to add a different perspective. And he said, I’ve always felt that I need to know my perspective and I need to know the other perspective as well so I can to be able to to discuss a situation. But I don’t know if he ever had good access to the FBI report. But I came across a couple files within the last month or so that were just sitting up in my attic. And he had so many files on so many people. I mean, if he talked to somebody about Kent State, he would make a file. With regard to the gag order from October, when the prosecuting attorney said they should have shot all students, somebody started a petition drive to support my dad. And there were like 5-6,000 signatures in this one file. So there was so much support for him. But he was finally arrested, I think on the last day of probably spring quarter. And he announced it to his class that if somebody comes in everything’s fine.

TH: And what exactly was he arrested for?

AF: He was arrested for breaking the gag rule.


Note:

In the fall of 1970, A Ravenna Grand Jury assembled to investigate the Kent State shootings. The court implemented a gag order, which prevented anyone involved in the investigation from speaking on the case. Seabury Ford, a special prosecutor overseeing the case, violated the gag order by speaking to the press, where he is quoted in an article saying, “National Guardsmen should have shot all the trouble-makers.” After seeing such a comment by one of the prosecutors, Glenn Frank spoke out in response, and both Frank and Ford were charged with contempt of court. However, following Frank’s arrest, he received a significant amount of support from his students. You can view news coverage of the incident and the letters of support here.


TH: Ok, let’s talk about the aftermath here and the investigation. Your dad was he skeptical of the official narrative, right?

AF: Eventually, he was. I think initially he felt ok this is what it appears to be. He talked to certain professors that had maybe more of a radical viewpoint, and they gave him enough information that he started to question the official findings. And eventually he testified in front of the Scranton Commission. And the Scranton Commission essentially said that they felt that the guardsman had fabricated their side of the story. He felt that they got together and said that no this isn’t what happened. And the more information he was able to obtain, the more he questioned some of the things that people, not the government necessarily, but people were claiming. So it was just such a painful event. He and I never ever really talked about it.

TH: You never really talked about it?

AF: No. Oh, no, no. I mean, I remember one time one of the police officers had mentioned to him that he was on a hit list–

TH: Wait. What kind of hit list?

(See attached photo evidence for more details)

AF: A hit list, an assassination list. He was told by a person that he was on two assassination lists. President White was on two or three and he said he was only on one. And it was almost like this person was sharing this information with my dad and my dad’s thinking, why the hell would I be on any of them? You know? So anyhow, finally, my dad said to the guy, are you CIA? And the guy just kind of stopped. And he said, well, no, but we’ve had a long relationship.

TH: Well what does that mean?

AF: Exactly. Exactly!

TH: This man told your dad that he was was on an assassination list?

AF: Yes and so did one of the police chiefs as well as one of the people with the Mod Squad.

TH: And who is this person? Do you know?

AF: His name is Barclay McMillen. (McMillen was a professor at Kent State at the time) And he wrote some things about what was happening. I don’t know what his official position really was. But the CIA had another program way back when where they were recruiting or getting people from the CIA to be involved in university positions.

TH: So there was a CIA program to infiltrate the universities?

AF: Yeah, yeah. So it was not just the radical student organizations which they tried to infiltrate create problems when there were no problems. I shared this with Alan Canfora before he died and that this guy was a DEA agent.

 

 

Memorandum from Acting Administrator of the DEA John R. Bartels, Jr. to J. Stanely Pottinger the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division requesting information on DEA agents who were present on the Kent State campus on May 4, 1970. Ron Mohr is written on the document. October 9, 1973.

 

And you don’t know if these people are CIA or exactly what because the CIA has had the ability to put people in certain positions where you didn’t know that they were really CIA. I mean, I’ve heard that once a spook, always a spook. And so with this particular guy, in 1972, he went to the Vietnam vets–

TH: What is his name? Who is he? 

AF: His name is Ron Reinhold Mohr. And Reinhold Mohr told people at the VVAW, Vietnam Vets Against the War, that they should kill some pigs. And they said, really? He said he had an automatic AK-47 and a grenade launcher. And they said, oh, gosh, you know, why don’t you bring them over so we can take a look at them? In the meantime, they contacted the Kent Police, the city police, and they said we got this nut case that’s saying that we should kill pigs. And one of the people that he had talked about was a guy named Willie. Willie was a big, heavyset black guy who is the most wonderful person. I mean, if anybody ever hurt him, whether it was radicals or whatever, they would have been wiped out. The students would be angry because Willie was just a wonderful person.

So he (Mohr) suggested that Willie should have been killed. And so anyhow, they contacted the Kent City Police and they (VVAW) arranged for this guy to come over and show them the weapons. There was the AK-47, you know, an automatic weapon. And many times you’ve got a gas port and there was a little tiny hole drilled into the gas port. So on this weapon you had to continue to pull the trigger. You couldn’t just pull the trigger and then shoot automatically. And so what happened was the police came in, they busted the guy and took him down to the police station. And they get a call from the Kent State University police saying you just busted our number one undercover agent. 

TH: Is there any proof of documentation of this? 

(See attached documents) 

AF: I’ve got reports from a guy by the name of Mike White who writes about it. Another guy by the name of Alan Morris who was with the VVAW at that time. So a lot of people have talked about this. Then they eventually let him go since it was an automatic weapon and a grenade launcher despite that it was illegal.

I think they were made illegal in the 68′ if I’m not correct. But anyhow the ATF had to be called in, the Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms because this is illegal. And so they came in and they examined the weapons and they said, well, the AK-47 had a little hole drilled into the gas chamber and the VVAW said it would take one little tiny spot weld and it would be fully automatic because it’s the guts inside that make it an automatic, either semiautomatic or automatic.

So they said that it wasn’t really automatic and they said there were no gas containers for the grenade launcher or no grenades with the grenade launcher. You know, this is bullshit. Anyhow, Reinhold Mohr eventually got sacked at the university, sued later, got his position back, plus all of his back pay. He sued the university to get his job back in his back pay and eventually was successful in doing that. 

 

 

Article from The Daily Kent Stater, April 26, 1972

TH: Really?

AF: Yeah. So, you know, the people that are pulling the strings will do it for what they feel is appropriate. But Reinhold Mohr, I saw his name on something that said he was a DEA agent. There were three DEA agents on campus at that time. And there was also a document that my dad got from the police. It was a list called the Mod Squad. And there are 32 people, students, whatever, or police that were on the Mod Squad. They were undercover. And Reinhold Mohr was one of the people, an agent provocateur, getting this stuff out there. 

 

William Bess, with the Kent State University police, correspondence to KSU President Robert Winkler with a list of the Mod Squad members. The list includes Reinhold Mohr. November 15, 1973.

I’m reminded of my dad trying to talk to Bob White about this. Bob White was the president of the university and he and Bob had a great relationship. A little side story– many years before, Bob White had announced to the faculty that tuition was not going to go up a certain quarter. So my dad got into the class and announced to the students that tuition is not going to go up next quarter. Well, then all of a sudden, Bob White said tuition is going to go up. And my dad was furious and he called up Bob. And Bob said, Glenn, now I want you to just wait for a moment. Wait five minutes, and if you still feel the same way, call me back. So my dad watched the clock to the second to call him back and told him what he thought. And as a result, tuition didn’t go up that year. I mean, there weren’t that many professors on campus at that time and a lot of people knew everybody else. But he wanted Bob to tell him what happened on May 4th. He would ask Bob and say, just tell me.

And Bob said, I cannot. And this was many years later. This is probably close to 20 years later. Bob gave my dad a letter saying I cannot comment on something that’s still actionable. So somebody is telling him, you say this and you’re going to get in trouble. And eventually Bob sent him a little letter saying, Glenn, you’re a good guy, a good man, and I’m sorry that you’re so– I can’t remember the exact word that he (Bob) used. But essentially, it said, I want to tell you that from my better than average point of view, there were crazies on all sides. And he said that’s more than two or three. I can’t remember exactly what was in the letter.

But I think he died with information that we need to know about. And from Bob, we will never, never hear it. So I think it’s going to take either people that were actively involved in this stuff to come forward. I think that the people that were redacted in the FBI report should come forward, but most of them are probably dead. And many people had never seen so many of these quote radicals before on campus. 

TH: It’s quite telling the FBI would redact the names and black out the faces of some so-called radicals but not others. I mean that cannot be common practice? 

AF: Yeah. It’s crazy. Isn’t that crazy? 

TH: It is. I mean, I can’t verify this but it seems a likely explanation is that these people were cops or informants working for the police. But I want to shift the focus back to your dad and the work he was involved with after the shootings. What was it like to see him research and dedicate so much of his time to determining what happened on May 4th, 1970? And also, did his perspective on the United States change after all of this? 

AF: I saw what it was doing to him. I saw that he was just so focused on getting whatever information that he could. And I would ask my dad why he was doing this. But I didn’t have the knowledge that he had. Had I had this knowledge, I would have been going, wow, are you kidding me? You know, this is incredible. So hopefully he had access to certain parts of the FBI report. I really don’t know. He died in 93′ so 23 years afterwards. But he didn’t care where the truth took him, he just wanted the truth to come out. He talked to governors and he talked to anyone who could give him information. 

TH: Did the official reports or initial media coverage of the May 4th shootings coincide with what you experienced on that day? 

AF: No, no. Well, to say that the Guard felt that they had to fire to extricate themselves doesn’t match with my experience. No way. I was one of the closest people to them. I would guess 50 to 75 feet away because we were walking just in front of them. But Joe Lewis, a protestor, was giving them the finger. Larry Shafer is the only guardsmen who admitted to shooting someone, and he shot Joe Lewis. And he said that this guy (Lewis) was approaching him. He (Shafer) said he couldn’t see what was in his left hand and in his right hand he was giving him the bird. Reports are that he was anywhere between 60 and 71 feet away when Shafer fired. Apparently, he shot him twice, once in the leg and once in the groin. And the story that I had heard was that he (Shafer) bragged about it. And a couple of people fired their shotguns. James Russell was hit by a shotgun around 350 feet away. Another friend of mine said that he was up on the railing at Taylor Hall, and there are a lot of people at Taylor Hall, but they fired down into the parking lot. The closest person was Jeffrey Miller who was 270 feet away. Sandy and Bill were, I think, 390 feet away when they were killed. And Allison was 330 feet away. So there’s absolutely no way that these people were a danger to anybody. 

TH: Exactly. 

AF: It’s almost like people who are being bullied, and they finally have a chance to get back at the bully. I just feel that many of the guardsmen felt, fuck you, you know, we’re going to show you. 

TH: I can see that. So taking a step back a little bit and looking at the broader picture, what does it tell you about the United States’ military industrial complex? I mean, these were students who were protesting the Vietnam War, and they have a right to do that. And meanwhile, the intelligence community is, and still to this day, putting a lot of funding, time, money and energy into these different programs to infiltrate these activist groups. What does it tell you about the importance of the United States’ war efforts? 

AF: There’s a person that I contacted within the last year or two, his name is Christopher Pyle. He was either a major or a captain in charge of army intelligence. And they had over a thousand agents that would infiltrate these different groups. 

TH: At what time was this? 

AF: He finally came out with this in April of 1970, and said we got to stop this. So just just before the shootings. It’s Christopher Pyle. He’s a professor at Mount Holyoke. I contacted him about the possibility that it could have been Army intelligence that burned the ROTC building. He didn’t think so because essentially that would be a good skill to have. Even though around the United States, several ROTC buildings were burned and one was in Tuscaloosa, AL, and that guy was an FBI agent. Some people say there were no provocateurs. Sorry. Every military agency has provocateurs infiltrate groups except possibly the Coast Guard. I don’t know. I’ve never seen anything with the Coast Guard. But Army, Air-Force, Marines and Navy all had these programs. And the purpose was to infiltrate these groups. And how many of those people are the ones who might try to turn up the heat just a little bit like Reinhold Mohr? How many people before that? There are so many stories about Central Intelligence having agents who were following Mark Rudd from, I think, Mark is at Colombia? 

TH: And he was with Weather Underground at the time. 

AF: Yes. You know, my buddy who said he had seen these five or 10 people on Saturday night burn down the ROTC building, he purposely stayed away on Monday because he didn’t trust what could happen. And he was right. 

TH: Now, I want to shift focus back on your dad and the work that he’s done.What was his perspective on, say, the United States after this had happened as well as the military and the intelligence agencies? 

AF: You know, deep down, I believe he just felt that we still have the greatest country in the world, but the things that certain people were doing was just totally inappropriate. 

TH: It’s been 51 years since the shootings, how has this impacted the Kent State community and what has the community done to commemorate the lives lost? 

AF: I’m fairly certain that the community wanted to let it go. I mean, even weeks later, people were saying, oh, come on, this is old news. I never knew that the quote radicals on campus were were bad enough that they would go up to the store owners and threaten them with burning their shops if they didn’t put either peace signs or “get out of Vietnam” signs on their windows. So my dad was like, ok, yeah, I understand where they were coming from. But essentially they’re believing the big lie, you know, and it’s a big lie. And it’s just so unfortunate. And for me, in this day and age, I think it’s going to be so important to recognize the mistakes that we’ve made and decide that we can’t continue to do this or else we’re going to get more people breaking into The Capitol, etc. We can’t afford to continue the way we’re going. 

TH: Can you be a little more specific? 

AF: We can’t continue to have people create problems and then have those same people solve the problems that they created. So it bothers me. And I still believe this is one of the greatest countries, but we have screwed so many things up. It’s the individuals. It’s the individuals that think that they’re above the law and who are doing things that are just totally inappropriate. 

TH: You have been very involved in the Kent State May 4th community and keeping the memory going. How has that process been over the past 50 years? 

AF: Well, relating back to the town and gown relationships, it used to be terrible. It was terrible. And I see people that are trying to pull everyone together. I’ve also seen the people that still believe that they should have shot more students or all students on that day. But they may not know some of the things that actually happened to get us to that point. As I said, why would you even have something in an FBI report about people who were murdered that demonizes them? You’re going after the victim again. And I just want to be able to trust what people say initially. Maybe it’s my naiveté, but initially I want to believe what people are doing until I find out, wait a minute, yeah, that’s not true. But that’s not even close. 

TH: What has it been like organizing events with others who were also present on that day? Is there a group of people from your generation who are keeping this going? 

AF: Yeah, myself and three or four other people were trying to give support to the May 4th Task Force. And I used to tell Alan (Canfora) all the time, thank you for doing what you do because I wasn’t physically capable of doing it. I continue to have chronic pain. And there are times that I can’t do it, but there are times I can’t not do it. It’s too important. And I even talked to Seymour Hersh. He said to me, why are you looking into this? There were so many other things that were going on. Hersh also told me that Kent State offered him a lot of money to come and speak at the 50th anniversary. And I said, well, just come to my house and stay, you’ll have a much better time just hanging out than you will with the university people. He sees so many things and he has information about so many activities that he just felt it was just ill-trained guards. 

TH: Sy Hersh? Really? 

AF: Yeah. 

TH: When was this? When did you last speak with him?

AF: Oh, within I say, I was trying to think if it was before Covid. It was within the past few years or so. 

TH: We, of course, today still have many protests in the United States. But what are your thoughts on how protests and organizing today has changed compared to back in 1970. 

AF: I think one of the most important things is that everybody walks around with a camera, essentially. And they can film the actual things that are occurring, such as the George Floyd killing. Had we believed what was in the initial report that George Floyd had a medical emergency is nothing compared to the filming of the actual event. And yet we had a lot of people that were photographers taking pictures that day (May 4th 1970). A lot of the things that haven’t come out, as far as I’m aware, you know, there just thousands of pictures from that day.

I’m not sure about anybody else, but for me, I’m always aware that I never want to say something that I wouldn’t want the entire world to know about me. And with Derek Chauvin, I don’t know that he could have possibly thought the inappropriateness of his restraint with George Floyd would not be public. How was it that he didn’t think somebody’s going to come back and show this unless he just felt that, you know, police had immunity? 

TH: So lastly, is there anything else you want to add? Anything else you would like to say about your dad and his legacy? 

AF: Yeah. My dad would be the last person to ever think that he was a hero that day. But he was. He absolutely was. And some people have seen the 1981 docudrama of him, and the person who portrayed him is nothing at all like him. This guy was a homer milquetoast. And my dad would do whatever he needed to do. Like when we all sat down in front of the Guard and he basically said “if you’re going to shoot somebody, shoot me.” He ran up as Major Jones was coming down the hill with a whole line of guardsmen. And unfortunately, a friend that helped with this video that’s on the website absconded with this film. And in 25 years, I finally found out that he’s around this area. But essentially it shows my dad running up to Major Jones. And Major Jones said, I have my orders and my dad said over my dead body. And that’s when Jones threw his baton down and they stopped. And my dad meant it what he said. He absolutely meant it– if you’re going to kill somebody, kill me. 

TH: Very heroic.

AF: Yeah.

TH: Alan Frank, thank you for your time and for sharing your story with me today. 

**

The events of May 4, 1970, have left a generation with considerable pain, frustration and a yearning for answers. Professor Glenn Frank’s heroic actions saved hundreds of lives that day, positively changing the course of history. He further served the Kent State community with his 20 years of research into the events surrounding that devastating spring day. May the revisiting of his unparalleled work and research bring us closer to the truth. And in the words of the 1994 tribute to the award-winning professor, “Let his quest for the truth continue!”  

“I can’t understand this reluctance to tell the truth unless there is something to hide. If, on the other hand, the truth has been presented, why does the evidence seem to conflict with public perceptions?” — Glenn Frank

*

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


Annex

Glenn Frank’s handwritten notes during his phone call with Police Officer Bob Winkler on September 22, 1989, from 9:30 to 12:00:

Glenn Frank’s handwritten notes during his phone call with KSU professor Barclay McMillen on Friday November 24, 1989 at 2pm (1 hour phone call):

Glenn Frank’s handwritten notes during a second phone call he received from professor Barclay McMillen on Saturday December 24, 1989, at 10am.

According to Glenn Frank’s written notes from his communications with Police Officer Bob Winkler and with Professor Barclay McMillen, both men corroborate the claim that a hit list in relation to the events of May 4, 1970, was created.

The hit list, according to Glenn’s notes, is said to include (himself) Glenn W. Frank and Kent State University President Robert White. While this cannot be proven at this point in time, if such claims were to be true, it suggests the creators of the hit list wanted to keep the truth of May 4th a secret from the public.

*

Memorandum from October 5, 1973. J. Stanley Pottinger Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division letter to Robert A. Murphy Chief of Criminal Section.

The letter states that Joseph Rhodes, the Governor of Ohio at the time, who ordered the National Guard to Kent State University on May 3, 1970, has been quoted in the past saying “that two guardsmen had gone to Kent State with the intent to shoot at students and that the FBI knew who they were.”

Intelligence Unit Report. The document includes additional information including “At 12:09 on Monday, May 3, 1971, one unidentified female receptionist at Beall-McDowell Hall, contacted this office. Just prior to the call she overheard NBC newsmen state that if trouble did not occur at Kent State University, they would have to create some.” The document was signed by Detective Charles H. Siemer.

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

Taylor Hudak, MA, is an independent journalist covering human rights abuses in the West, the corruption of the intelligence community and whistleblowing. Taylor’s work can be found on acTVism Munich, YouTube and The Last American Vagabond.  

Covid-19: Fifteen Important Concepts

May 10th, 2021 by Dr. Meryl Nass

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.

***

These are the facts concerning Covid-19 and the vaccine

1.  Covid-19 is a nasty disease when allowed to progress for more than a week, untreated, and develop into an autoimmune illness.

2.  It is highly contagious.

3.  In some parts of the country (not Maine) 80% herd immunity has already been reached, based on antibody levels.  Eventually we will reach this too, and then everyone will breathe a sigh of relief.

4.  It appears that the adenovirus vectored DNA vaccines are about to be scuttled, due to high rates of bleeding (3% in Norway) and clotting (rate uncertain). Platelet activation was a known complication of adenovirus vaccines since at least 2007.

5.  The mRNA vaccines were authorized by the FDA using poorly designed studies whose goal was to get them to market as quickly as possible.  They cause higher rates of short-term reactions than any other licensed US vaccines.  No one knows what kinds of long-term reactions they may cause, nor how often.

6.  They were tested to see if they prevented mild disease.  We still don’t know to what extent they prevent severe disease, nor to what extent they prevent asymptomatic spread.

7.  It is almost impossible to receive any type of compensation if you are injured by an Emergency Use Authorized product, including all Covid vaccines and some new Covid drugs, as everyone involved with them has been given a waiver of liability, so you cannot sue anyone. The Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program was created as an alternative, but so far, this program has turned away over 90% of applicants.  There is a one-year statute of limitations.

 Now for the good news. Treatment

8. Most people with severe cases of Covid had low levels of Vitamin D, and multiple comorbidities.  Unless you work outside all day, everyone should be supplementing with this vitamin and should consider checking a blood level.

9.  Multiple old, licensed, generic medications work wonders against Covid. The best one is ivermectin, which has been shown to reduce both deaths and hospitalizations by 80% when used early. Had it been used routinely in the US, up to 400,000 of the 500,000 deaths might have been prevented. There are now 50 studies supporting its use.  All are positive.  And it’s very safe.

10.  Many other old drugs are also beneficial, and others are being tested and look very promising. It is remarkable what a wide range of repurposed drugs have activity against Covid, from antihistamines (H1 and H2 blockers), melatonin, Zinc, the chloroquine drugs, an antidepressant, an anti-estrogen, a gout drug and several more.

11.  The two most devastating complications of Covid are thrombosis and autoimmune cytokine storm.  A whole aspirin daily reduces thrombosis when Covid hits, and an inhaled or oral steroid reduces autoimmunity.  These are simple, safe measures.

12.  I have posted information about treatment on my blog, and have posted several other protocols from different groups of American doctors who treat Covid aggressively and early.  There are plenty of doctors who are able and willing to effectively treat Covid patients.

13.  Early treatment is key.  None of my patients have needed oxygen or hospitalization; none have died.  With early treatment you will almost always develop a robust immune response to all currently known Covid variants, which is something the vaccines are not able to provide.

14.  The most complete source of information on every common treatment for Covid is c19study.com, which updates constantly as studies are published.

15.  My colleagues said that dealing with Covid is a team sport.  Maybe.  But armed with knowledge, everyone can hit a home run when Covid comes calling.

16.  Dr. Peter McCullough, a distinguished cardiology professor at Baylor, has a 20 minute video on Covid that nobody should miss.  Watch below.

*

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

Featured image is from OffGuardian

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Covid-19: Fifteen Important Concepts
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

In an interview with Klartext podcast host, Uwe Alschner, frontline doctors Stephen Karanga and Dr. Wahome Ngare of the Catholic Doctors Association say early COVID treatment is highly effective and question whether vaccines—which they say are misnamed and should be called gene therapy—are necessary or safe.

They also say that the World Health Organization has a history of coming to Africa with questionable vaccines and explain why the WHO’s advisory telling patients testing positive for COVID to go home and take analgesics until they have problems breathing instead of immediately treating them with effective, re-purposed drugs, including hydroxychloroquine with zinc and Ivermectin, is wrong.

Watch the interview below.

*

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

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

***

In light of the current COVID-related situation in India, Dr Anthony Fauci, the top US adviser on COVID, has called for India to implement a hard lockdown and for the mass roll-out of vaccines.

However, Fauci has no clue and no authority to lecture on what is good for India.

That is the view of journalist Ratna Chakraborty. Writing on the Empire Diaries website, she argues that the US is a rich nation, prints the world’s reserve currency, has robust financial coverage for the jobless and its population is spread out.

On the other hand, India is finance-strained, has a brittle economy that lives on the brink of disaster, does not have any financial coverage for the jobless, is densely populated and its people mostly live in congested clusters.

Given the government’s incompetence and the callousness demonstrated towards poorer sections of Indian society the first time around, Chakraborty says any new lockdown would again result in disaster. She adds that nothing has been learnt, with no attempt to upgrade the healthcare set-up nationwide.

It is worth recalling what renowned academic and activist Noam Chomsky said about India’s first lockdown.

During an interview with Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! back in May 2020, Chomsky said:

“… you can almost describe it as genocidal. Modi gave, I think, a four-hour warning before a total lockdown. That’s (affected) over a billion people. Some of them have nowhere to go.”

He added:

“People in the informal economy, which is a huge number of people, are just cast out. Go walk back to your village, which may be a thousand miles away. Die on the roadside. This is a huge catastrophe in the making…”

During the first lockdown in India, rural affairs commentator P Sainath painted a dreary picture of the impacts, not least the desperate plight of migrant workers, a shortage of cash to buy food and a potential shortage of food as farmers were unable to complete their harvests.

Sainath also reported the views of Dr. Sundararaman, a former executive director of the National Health Systems Resources Centre, who argued that there was a desperate need to:

“identify and act on the reverse migrations problem and the loss of livelihoods. Failing that, deaths from diseases that have long tormented mostly poor Indians could outstrip those brought about by the corona virus.”

Regardless of the destructive impact of the first lockdown in India and the questionable efficacy of lockdowns in terms of what they are supposed to achieve, another one would further push hundreds of millions towards poverty and hunger. It would merely fuel and accelerate the impoverishment caused by the first lockdown.

A new report prepared by the Centre for Sustainable Employment at Azim Premji University (APU) has highlighted how employment and income had not recovered to pre-pandemic levels even by late 2020.

The report, ‘State of Working India 2021 – One year of Covid-19’ highlights how almost half of formal salaried workers moved into the informal sector and that 230 million people fell below the national minimum wage poverty line.

Even before COVID, India was experiencing its longest economic slowdown since 1991 with weak employment generation, uneven development and a largely informal economy. A recent article by the Research Unit for Political Economy highlights the structural weaknesses of the economy and the often desperate plight of ordinary people.

The study also found that there was a loss in monthly earnings for all types of workers: 13% for casual workers, 18% for the self-employed, 17% for those with temporary salaries, 5% for the permanent salaried and 17% overall.

The poorest 25% of households borrowed 3.8 times their median income, as against 1.4 times for the top 25%. The study noted the implications for debt traps.

Six months later, it was also noted that food intake was still at lockdown levels for 20% of vulnerable households.

How bad is COVID?

Given this impact, before listening to prominent individuals with apparent conflicts of interest related to vaccine roll-outs (see the editorial in the British Medical Journal ‘Covid-19, Politicisation, Corruption, and Suppression of Science’), the current COVID-related situation in India must be contextualised. The sensationalism needs to be put to one side.

According to Yohan Tengra, a Mumbai-based political analyst and healthcare specialist, the true number of infection rates can only be known by testing symptomatic people who have tested positive with either a virus culture test or PCR test that uses 24 cycles or less.

The PCR test has been used as the gold standard for COVID cases around the world. But it has been sharply criticised for being inaccurate, inappropriate, for using cycles in excess of 40 (thereby inflating the numbers) and for producing ‘false positives’.

It seems that even the Swedish Ministry of Health now thinks that it is not fit for purpose:

“The PCR technology used in tests to detect viruses cannot distinguish between viruses capable of infecting cells and viruses that have been neutralised by the immune system and therefore these tests cannot be used to determine whether someone is contagious or not. RNA from viruses can often be detected for weeks (sometimes months) after the illness but does not mean that you are still contagious.”

We also need to be reminded what the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated about the PCR in December 2020. It is especially important to focus on PCR testing because these tests are the entire basis for restrictions and lockdowns (and vaccination); even when deaths were within normal annual ranges, ‘case’ levels were high and restrictions and ‘tiered lockdowns’ were still being imposed in places like the UK.

The following extract can be found on page 39 of the report from the CDC 2010-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel:

“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms. This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”

Perfectly healthy people are being tested and small often insignificant fragments of flu, common cold or some other virus can be detected. People are then labelled as a COVID ‘case’.

But that is not all. In their recent article ‘The Nuremberg Doctors Trial and Modern Medicine’s Panic Promotion of the FDA’s Experimental and Unapproved COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines’, Dr Gary G Kohls and Professor Michel Chossudovsky state that – with regard to the so-called ‘emergency use authorization’ (EUA) of COVID-19 vaccines – it is now established and confirmed by the WHO (January 20, 2021) that the entire data base pertaining to tabulation of confirmed positive cases (RT-PCR test) (since early February 2020 in 193 member states of the UN) is invalid.

The two authors note that this flawed methodology cannot be used to confirm the existence of an emergency situation. EUA criterion is therefore not only invalid but illegal.

Furthermore, there is currently decent scientific evidence to indicate asymptomatic transmission may not be significant.

According to Tengra, the case numbers being reported in India are mainly asymptomatic cases. The directors of the All India Institute of Medical Science and the India Council of Medical Research both say that there are many more asymptomatic cases this time than in the so-called ‘first wave’.

As these ‘cases’ comprise most of India’s case numbers, we should therefore be questioning the data as well as the PCR tests being used to detect the virus.

Tengra says the case fatality rate for COVID-19 in India was over 3% last year but has now dropped to below 1.5%. The infection fatality rate is even lower, with serosurvey results showing them to be between 0.05% to 0.1%.

As has occurred in many other countries, Tengra notes the way that death certificate guidelines are structured in India makes it easy for someone to be labelled as a COVID death just based on a positive PCR test or general symptoms. It is therefore often difficult to say who has died from the virus and who has been misdiagnosed.

We should also bear in mind that respiratory diseases like TB and respiratory tract infections such as bronchitis leading to pneumonia are major killers in India. These conditions are severely aggravated by air pollution and often require oxygen which can be in short supply during air pollution crises in places like Delhi at this time of the year.

Therefore, the current harrowing scenes we see in the media might not necessarily be due to the lethality of the virus but by the numbers who are ending up in hospital.

Vaccines

If the pandemic narrative has been constructed on the house of (statistical) cards outlined thus far, then we should be questioning the need for a mass vaccination campaign, which could actually lead to aggravating the current situation.

This is not lost on Dr Geert Vanden Bossche, a virologist who has held positions at several vaccine companies, carrying out vaccine research and development. He has also been involved with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and has worked with the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI). Not an ‘anti-vaxxer’ in any sense of the term.

He offers insight into why it is quite possible that mass vaccine rollouts will actually lead to very disturbing levels of deaths directly related to COVID-19. Far from reducing the numbers and facilitating immunity, he anticipates ‘vaccine mitigated immune escape’.

Vanden Bossche warns that mass infection prevention and mass vaccination with Covid-19 vaccines in the midst of the pandemic can only breed highly infectious variants. He offers a truly worrying scenario. Of course, not everyone might agree with his analysis but it is certainly a cause for concern.

There is also the entire issue regarding the necessity, efficacy and safety of the vaccines now being rolled out. The group ‘Doctors for COVID Ethics’ has recently raised serious doubts in all of these areas (its concerns have been published on the UK-based OffGuardian website).

In finishing, there are two questions we should ask.

Can we have confidence in science and evidence-based health and social policy where COVID-19 is concerned? And can we just assume – as governments and the media imply we should – that Anthony Fauci and the pharmaceutical corporations have ordinary people’s interests at heart?

In response to the first question, not much. In response to the second, certain interests have been riding and fuelling a wave of sensationalism and duplicity throughout.

*

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

Colin Todhunter is a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research.

Featured image is from Zero Hedge

Declaration of Canadian Physicians for Science and Truth

May 10th, 2021 by Dr. Stephen Malthouse

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Declaration of Canadian Physicians for Science and Truth, which rebuts the recent unethical statement of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (Apr 30, 201), is now up on the internet. (posted on Global Research). We believe that this Declaration has global significance. 

In the Canadian province of Ontario, the regulatory medical College has publicly stated that doctors must now follow public health policy, even when it is harming patients, or face punishment. This issue is not only about the province of Ontario or even the physicians of Canada. It is an international concern regarding unethical overreach by authorities that affects the way doctors practice or fear to practice in all countries around the world. It does not allow us to put the welfare of our patients first.

The statement from the Ontario college essentially says “Do as you are told or you will be sanctioned as a doctor.”

In the current global environment of misinformation and coercion by powerful government and public health authorities, we cannot allow this statement to go unchallenged. If it can happen in Canada, it can happen in every country and already has in many.

We ask you, as our global medical brethren, to read our Declaration and sign it. When choosing who comes first — the patient or regulatory policy –, we are must stand shoulder-to-shoulder and united in our decision. It is the patient.

*

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

Featured image is from  Inga – stock.adobe.com

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

On the occasion of the 76th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany and the end of World War Two in Europe (Victory in Europe Day to much of the world), what since the 2014 coup in Ukraine has been celebrated as the Day of Remembrance and Reconciliation, President Volodymyr Zelensky visited a common gravesite where the remains of Ukrainian soldiers killed in that war are buried. He chose a war memorial in Lugansk – where his army is engaged in a seven-year war with the Lugansk People’s Republic.

His words spoke of peace; his appearance denoted something different. Accompanied by representatives of the European Union and the G7 (both groups have recently been subjected to fierce anti-Russian diatribes from NATO Secretary Jens Stoltenberg and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, respectively), his address included this hardly opaque parallel:

“Today, like last year, I am in Luhansk region, in Milove district….Today, the Bell of Memory has appeared in this place. Each bell toll means that we will never forget what our ancestors did so that the next generations of Ukrainians could live freely on their land, in their state in peace and harmony.”

To drive the point home, he added the war against the Third Reich “was definitely not for…war to take our people’s lives 76 years later.” That is, eighty years later Nazi Germany 1941 = Russia 2021.

Regarding Russia, which he implied threatens Ukraine today as Germany did earlier, Zelensky also said that no nation has the right to “privatize victory in WWII.” What Russia celebrates as Victory Day for itself and all other former Soviet republics, Ukraine marks as the Day of Remembrance and Reconciliation exclusively for itself.

The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry also marked the day by commemorating the deaths of an estimated eight million Ukrainians.

Interfax-Ukraine‘s report of the Foreign Ministry statement (it’s not yet posted in English online) has the title “Ukraine today defends Europe, which emerged on ruins of World War II – Foreign Ministry.”

Part of the statement is paraphrased as “Despite the hope that war will never again come to the Ukrainian land, in 2014 Russia launched a military aggression against Ukraine and occupied part of the Ukrainian territory.”

Quoting directly, it shares this from the Foreign Ministry: “Today Ukraine defends not only itself, but the entire democratic Europe. The Europe that appeared on the ruins of World War II and is united by the main idea ‘Never Again.’” Lest the point be missed.

For those who have learned (or think they’ve learned) the history of the world’s deadliest war from viewing Steven Spielberg films or playing live-action video games, the last two words will clinch the deal.

Russia is the new Third Reich. Its president is the new Adolph Hitler. What Hillary Clinton said seven years ago in relation to Ukraine. The seeds of this revisionism were sown years ago. In one version, the one echoed today by the Ukrainian government, Ukraine was invaded by both Germany and Soviet Russia in the early 1940s, much as with Poland in 1939.

The dissemination of that claim aims to terrify citizens in the West with the dire prospect of Never Again becoming Once Again.

*

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

Canadians Sinking Under a Trillion Dollar Debt Tab

May 10th, 2021 by Franco Terrazzano

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.

***

If you think the federal government’s so-called historic spending on a national child-care scheme is big, wait until you hear how much the government is spending to cover its debt interest costs.

In its 2021 budget, the Justin Trudeau government is promising to spend $30 billion over five years on a national child-care program. That’s a tonne of money considering we couldn’t afford it pre-pandemic.

But it’s still five times less than what the feds will have to pay in debt interest charges over that period, which will total $153 billion by 2026. That’s nearly $4,000 per Canadian. And instead of that money going towards health care or lower taxes, it’s going into the pockets of bond fund managers.

Assuming the feds can hold the line on budgeted spending – a generous assumption given the government’s track record – the deficit by the end of 2025 will still be $30 billion. The interest charges that year will be $39 billion. That means the borrowing to make up the budget gap couldn’t even cover the interest payments.

On top of this interest, taxpayers will have to eventually pay back the $1,000,000,000,000 – one trillion – debt tab.

It’s no wonder economists’ spidey senses are tingling from this debt-fueled spending spree.

The University of Calgary’s Jack Mintz noted that Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland “is rolling the dice that never-ending deficits will be manageable.” Mintz added that “just a one-point increase in interest rates would then increase the annual deficit by close to $5 billion.”

In the few months since the fall economic statement was released, the private sector has revised its 10-year government bond rate forecast up about half a percentage point. What happens if low interest rates inch up?

Mintz isn’t the only expert raising concerns.

“Are we really going to make this assumption that interest rates are going to stay static for the next 10 or 20 years?” said David Rosenberg, chief economist and strategist at Rosenberg Research, on BNN Bloomberg. “I just find so many people have short memories against what happened in the 1970s into the 1980s, and then all the tough choices and the hardship to get our fiscal situation back into some mode of stability.”

Former finance minister Paul Martin knows a thing or two about tough choices. After all, he cut government spending by about 10 per cent during his mission to erase the federal deficit in the 1990s. He also knows a thing or two about the dangers of debt binges.

“The debt and deficit are not inventions of ideology,” said Martin during his budget speech in 1995. “They are facts of arithmetic. The quicksand of compound interest is real.”

The provinces also learned their lesson the hard way.

“When [Ralph] Klein became premier, government debt daily snatched money away from patients and students due to escalating interest costs,” said government finance expert Mark Milke in his book Ralph vs. Rachel. “Between 1985 and 1993 in Alberta, the cost of interest on Alberta’s growing debt was $7.2 billion, equivalent to two full years of what the province spent on health care just a few years previous.”

Saskatchewan had to come to terms with its deficit addiction by enduring “a lot of pain,” according to former finance minister Janice MacKinnon who closed 52 hospitals across the prairie province.

“We left a fiscal situation in Saskatchewan until it was a crisis and so we had to make dramatic cuts to fundamental programs and raise taxes to get out of the situation,” said MacKinnon.

The moral of the story is that the best time to put out a fire is before it spreads. But by betting the house that interest rates will stay low forever and nearly doubling Canada’s debt in a few short years, Budget 2021 is adding fuel to the fire.

*

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

Franco Terrazzano is the Federal Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

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.

***

Comrades, let it not be said the ministry of COVID compliance does not listen to the citizens.  After considering the bad optics of armbands, due to negative historic references, the government is allowing the private sector to create a modern method of compliance with vaccination protocols.

To enjoy your new freedom the COVID Ministry is working on QR Code wristbands to speed up the vaccination checkpoint scanning process.

The wristbands will be connected to a secure governmental database so you don’t have to worry about your travel habits being tracked, and the governmental contractors have promised they will not use the data to monitor citizens.  The government cares about you.

Your unique wristband may even come in a variety of colors so you can coordinate your outfits.

(CNN/Meredith) — New technology in the form of a wearable wristband could carry your COVID-19 vaccination card’s information and tell others around you that you’ve been fully vaccinated.

ImmunaBand is a blue silicone bracelet that has two purposes — first, it has a built-in QR code that carries your COVID-19 vaccination card’s information that can be used as a back-up for people who lose or misplace their CDC vaccination card. ImmunaBand’s second function is to show an outward display that a person has been fully vaccinated, thus making them safe to be near.

So how does it work? Wearers have to upload their vaccination cards for review before they can receive the band. The documentation is stored on a server compliant with medical privacy laws and the process is end-to-end encrypted, the company said in a news release.  The company makes two bands — one with just the QR code, and another with the QR code plus the wearer’s name and type of vaccine they received. The bands are both priced at $19.99. That code can be scanned with a smartphone to prove vaccination, the company said.  (read more)

Apparently a COVID vaccination card, a COVID vaccination passport, or a new COVID wristband are going to be needed as identification to enjoy the new freedom permitted by the state.  However, don’t even think about asking for election ID’s for voting…. because, well, that violates all kind of progressive needs.  Just sayin’.

*

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

Featured image is from The Last Refuge

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

76 years ago Germany surrendered to allied forces finally ending the ravages of the Second World War.

Today, as the world celebrates the anniversary of this victory, why not think very seriously about finally winning that war once and for all?

If you’re confused by this statement, then you might want to sit down and take a deep breath before reading on. Within the next 12 minutes, you will likely discover a disturbing fact which may frighten you a little bit: The allies never actually won World War II…

Now please don’t get me wrong. I am eternally thankful for the immortal souls who gave their lives to put down the fascist machine during those bleak years… but the fact is that a certain something wasn’t resolved on the 9th of May, 1945 which has a lot to do with the slow re-emergence of a new form of fascism during the second half of the 20th century and the renewed danger of a global bankers’ dictatorship which the world faces again today.

It is my contention that it is only when we find the courage to really look at this problem with sober eyes, that we will be able to truly honor our courageous forebears who devoted their lives to winning a peace for their children, grandchildren and humanity more broadly.

The Ugly Truth of WWII

I’ll stop beating around the Bush now and just say it: Adolph Hitler or Benito Mussolini were never “their own men”.

The machines they led were never fully under their sovereign control and the financing they used as fuel in their effort to dominate the world did not come from the Banks of Italy or Germany. The technologies they used in petrochemicals, rubber, and computing didn’t come from Germany or Italy, and the governing scientific ideology of eugenics that drove so many of the horrors of Germany’s racial purification practices never originated in the minds of German thinkers or from German institutions.

Were it not for a powerful network of financiers and industrialists of the 1920s-1940s with names such as Rockefeller, Warburg, Montague Norman, Osborn, Morgan, Harriman or Dulles, then it can safely be said that fascism would never have been possible as a “solution” to the economic woes of the post-WWI order. To prove this point, let us take the strange case of Prescott Bush as a useful entry point.

The patriarch of the same Bush dynasty that gave the world two disastrous American presidents (and nearly a third had Donald Trump not annihilated Jeb at the last minute in 2016) made a name for himself funding Nazism alongside his business partners Averell Harrimen and Averell’s younger brother E. Roland Harriman (the latter who was to recruit Prescott to Skull and Bones while both studying at Yale). Not only did Prescott, acting as director of Brown Brothers Harriman, provide valuable loans to keep the bankrupt Nazi party afloat during Hitler’s loss of support in 1932 when the German population voted into office the anti-Fascist General Kurt von Schleicher as Chancellor, but was even found guilty for “Trading with the enemy” as director of Union Banking Corporation in 1942!

That’s right! As demonstrated in the 1992 Unauthorized Biography of George Bush, eleven months after America entered WWII, the Federal Government naturally conducted an investigation of all Nazi banking operations in the USA and wondered why Prescott continued to direct a bank which was so deeply enmeshed with Fritz Thyssen’s Bank voor Handel en Scheepvart of the Netherlands.

Thyssen for those who are un-aware is the German industrial magnate famous for writing the book “I Paid Hitler”. The bank itself was tied to a German combine called Steel Works of the German Steel Trust which controlled 50.8% of Nazi Germany’s pig iron, 41.4% of its universal plate, 38.5% of its galvanized steel, 45.5% of its pipes and 35% of its explosives. Under Vesting Order 248, the U.S. federal government seized all of Prescott’s properties on October 22, 1942.

The U.S.-German Steel combine was only one small part of a broader operation as Rockefeller’s Standard Oil had created a new international cartel alongside IG Farben (the fourth largest company in the world) in 1929 under the Young Plan.

Owen Young was a JP Morgan asset who headed General Electric and instituted a German debt repayment plan in 1928 that gave rise to the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and consolidated an international cartel of industrialists and financiers on behalf of the City of London and Wall Street. The largest of these cartels saw Henry Ford’s German operations merging with IG Farben, Dupont industries, Britain’s Shell and Rockefeller’s Standard Oil. The 1928 cartel agreement also made it possible for Standard Oil to pass off all patents and technologies for the creation of synthetic gasoline from coal to IG Farben thus allowing Germany to rise from producing merely 300 000 tons of natural petroleum in 1934 to an incredible 6.5 million tons (85% of its total) during WWII! Had this patent/technology transfer not taken place, it is a fact that the modern mechanized warfare that characterized WWII could never have occurred.

Two years before the Young Plan began, JP Morgan had already given a $100 million loan to Mussolini’s newly established fascist regime in Italy- with Democratic Party kingmaker Thomas Lamont playing the role of Prescott Bush in Wall Street’s Italian operation. It wasn’t only JP Morgan who loved Mussolini’s brand of corporate fascism, but Time Magazine’s Henry Luce unapologetically gushed over Il Duce putting Mussolini on the cover of Time eight times between 1923 and 1943 while relentlessly promoting fascism as the “economic miracle solution for America” (which he also did in his other two magazines Fortune and Life). Many desperate Americans, still traumatized from the long and painful depression begun in 1929, had increasingly embraced the poisonous idea that an American fascism would put food on the table and finally find help them find work.

A few words should be said of Brown Brothers Harriman.

Bush’s Nazi bank itself was the spawn of an earlier 1931 merger which took place between Montagu Norman’s family bank (Brown Brothers) and Harriman, Bush and Co. Montague Norman was the Governor of the Bank of England from 1920 to 1944, leader of the Anglo-German Fellowship Trust and controller of Germany’s Hjalmar Schacht (Reichsbank president from 1923-1930 and Minister of Economy from 1934-1937). Norman was also the primary controller of the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) from its creation in 1930 throughout the entirety of WWII.

The Central Bank of Central Banks

Although the BIS was established under the Young Plan and nominally steered by Schacht as a mechanism for debt repayments from WWI, the Swiss-based “Central Bank of Central Banks” was the key mechanism for international financiers to fund the Nazi machine. The fact that the BIS was under the total control of Montagu Norman was revealed by Dutch Central Banker Johan Beyen who said “Norman’s prestige was overwhelming. As the apostle of central bank cooperation, he made the central banker into a kind of arch-priest of monetary religion. The BIS was, in fact, his creation.”

The founding members of the Board included the private central banks of Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Belgium as well as a coterie of 3 private American banks (JP Morgan, First National of Chicago, and First National of New York). The three American banks merged after the war and are today known as Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase.

In its founding constitution, the BIS, its directors and staff were given immunity from all sovereign national laws and not even authorities in Switzerland were permitted to enter its premises.

This story was conveyed powerfully in the 2013 book Tower of Basel: The Shadowy History of the Secret Bank that Runs the World.

A Word on Eugenics

Nazi support in the build up to, and during WWII didn’t end with finance and industrial might, but extended to the governing scientific ideology of the third Reich: Eugenics (aka: the science of Social Darwinism as developed by Thomas Huxley’s X Club associate Herbert Spencer and Darwin’s cousin sir Francis Galton decades earlier).

In 1932, New York hosted the Third Eugenics Conference co-sponsored by William Draper Jr (JP Morgan banker, head of General Motors and leading figure of Dillon Read and co) and the Harriman family. This conference brought together leading eugenicists from around the world who came to study America’s successful application of eugenics laws which had begun in 1907 under the enthusiastic patronage of Theodore Roosevelt. Hiding behind the respectable veneer of “science” these high priests of science discussed the new age of “directed evolution of man” which would soon be made possible under a global scientific dictatorship.

Speaking at the conference, leading British Fascist Fairfield Osborn said that eugenics:

“aids and encourages the survival and multiplication of the fittest; indirectly, it would check and discourage the multiplication of the unfitted. As to the latter, in the United States alone, it is widely recognized that there are millions of people who are acting as dragnets or sheet anchors on the progress of the ship of state…While some highly competent people are unemployed, the mass of unemployment is among the less competent, who are first selected for suspension, while the few highly competent people are retained because they are still indispensable. In nature, these less-fitted individuals would gradually disappear, but in civilization, we are keeping them in the community in the hopes that in brighter days, they may all find employment. This is only another instance of humane civilization going directly against the order of nature and encouraging the survival of the un-fittest”.

The dark days of the great depression were good years for bigotry and ignorance as eugenics laws were applied to two Canadian provinces, and widely spread across Europe and America with 30 U.S. states applying eugenics laws to sterilize the unfit. Eugenics’ successful growth was due in large measure to the fierce financial support of the Rockefeller Foundation and the science magazine Nature which had been created in 1865 by T.H. Huxley’s X Club. The Rockefeller Foundation went onto fund German eugenics and most specifically the rising star of human improvement Joseph Mengele.

The Nazi Frankenstein Monster is Aborted

Describing his January 29, 1935 meeting with Hitler, Round Table controller Lord Lothian quoted the Fuhrer’s vision for Aryan co-direction of the New World Order saying:

“Germany, England, France, Italy, America and Scandinavia … should arrive at some agreement whereby they would prevent their nationals from assisting in the industrializing of countries such as China, and India. It is suicidal to promote the establishment in the agricultural countries of Asia of manufacturing industries”

While it is obvious that much more can be said on the topic, the Fascist machine didn’t fully behave the way the Dr. Frankensteins in London wished, as Hitler began to realize that his powerful military machine gave Germany the power to lead the New World Order rather than play second fiddle as mere enforcers on behalf of their Anglo masters in Britain. While many London and Wall Street oligarchs were willing to adapt to this new reality, a decision was made to abort the plan, and try to fight another day.

To do this a scandal was concocted to justify the abdication of pro-Nazi King Edward VIII in 1936 and an appeasing Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was replaced with Winston Churchill in 1940. While Sir Winston was a life long racist, eugenicist and even Mussolini-admirer, he was first and foremost a devout British Imperialist and as such would fight tooth and nail to save the prestige of the Empire if it were threatened. Which he did.

The Fascists vs Franklin Roosevelt

Within America itself, the pro-fascist Wall Street establishment had been loosing a war that began the day anti-fascist President Franklin Roosevelt was elected in 1932. Not only had their attempted February 1933 assassination failed, their 1934 coup d’etat plans were also thwarted by a patriotic General named Smedley Darlington Butler. To make matters worse, their efforts to keep America out of the war in the hopes of co-leading the New World Order alongside Germany, France and Italy was also falling apart. A As I outlined in my recent article How to Crush a Bankers’ Dictatorship, between 1933-1939, FDR had imposed sweeping reforms on the banking sector, thwarted a major attempt to create a global Bankers’ dictatorship under the Bank of International Settlements, and mobilized a broad recovery under the New Deal.

By 1941, Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor polarized the American psyche so deeply that resisting America’s entry into WWII as Wall Street’s American Liberty League had been doing up until then, became political suicide. Wall Street’s corporatist organizations were called out by FDR during a powerful 1938 speech as the president reminded the Congress of the true nature of fascism:

“The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism – ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power… Among us today a concentration of private power without equal in history is growing. This concentration is seriously impairing the economic effectiveness of private enterprise as a way of providing employment for labor and capital and as a way of assuring a more equitable distribution of income and earnings among the people of the nation as a whole.”

While America’s entry into WWII proved a decisive factor in the destruction of the fascist machine, the dream shared by Franklin Roosevelt, Henry Wallace and many of FDR’s closest allies across America, Canada, Europe, China and Russia for a world governed by large-scale development, and win-win cooperation did not come to pass.

Even though FDR’s ally Harry Dexter White led in the fight to shut down the Bank of International Settlements during the July 1944 Bretton Woods conference, the passage of White’s resolutions to dissolve BIS and audit its books were never put into action. While White, who was to become the first head of the IMF, defended FDR’s program to create a new anti-imperial system of finance, Fabian Society leader, and devout eugenicist John Maynard Keynes defended the Bank and pushed instead to redefine the post-war system around a one world currency called the Bancor, controlled by the Bank of England and BIS.

The Fascist Resurgence in the Post-War World

By the end of 1945, the Truman Doctrine and Anglo-American “special relationship” replaced FDR’s anti-colonial vision, while an anti-communist witch hunt turned America into a fascist police state under FBI surveillance. Everyone friendly to Russia was targeted for destruction and the first to feel that targeting were FDR’s close allies Henry Wallace and Harry Dexter White whose 1948 death while campaigning for Wallace’s presidential bid put an end to anti-colonialists running the IMF.

In the decades after WWII, those same financiers who brought the world fascism went straight back to work infiltrating FDR’s Bretton Woods Institutions such as the IMF and World Bank, turning them from tools of development, into tools of enslavement. This process was fully exposed in the 2004 book Confessions of an Economic Hit man by John Perkins.

The European banking houses representing the old nobility of the empire continued through this reconquering of the west without punishment. By 1971, the man whom Perkins exposed as the chief economic hit man George Schultz, orchestrated the removal of the U.S. dollar from the Gold-reserve, fixed exchange rate system director of the Office of Management of Budget and in the same year, the Rothschild Inter-Alpha Group of banks was created to usher in a new age of globalization. This 1971 floating of the dollar ushered in a new paradigm of consumerism, post-industrialism, and de-regulation which transformed the once productive western nations into speculative “post-truth” basket cases convinced that casino principles, bubbles and windmills were substitutes for agro-industrial economic practices.

So here we are in 2020 celebrating victory over fascism.

The children and grandchildren of those heroes of 1945 now find themselves attached to the biggest financial collapse in history with $1.5 quadrillion of fictitious capital ripe to explode under a new global hyperinflation akin to that which destroyed Weimar in 1923, but this time global. The Bank of International Settlements that should have been dissolved in 1945 today controls the Financial Stability Board and thus regulates the world derivatives trade which has become the weapon of mass destruction that has been triggered to unleash more chaos upon the world than Hitler could have ever dreamed.

The saving grace today is that the anti-fascist spirit of Franklin Roosevelt is alive in the form of modern anti-imperialists Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping and a growing array of nations united under the umbrella of the New Deal of the 21st Century which has come to be called the “Belt and Road Initiative”.

*

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

Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , a BRI Expert on Tactical talk, and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and in 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation . Consider helping this process by making a donation to the RTF or becoming a Patreon supporter to the Canadian Patriot Review.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

We are a broad and diverse group of Canadian physicians from across Canada who are sending out this urgent declaration to the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons of our various Provinces and Territories and to the Public at large, whom we serve.

On April 30, 2021, Ontario’s physician licensing body, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO), issued a statement forbidding physicians from questioning or debating any or all of the official measures imposed in response to COVID-19. 1

The CPSO then went on to threaten physicians with punishment – investigations and disciplinary action.

We regard this recent statement of the CPSO to be unethical, anti-science and deeply disturbing.

As physicians, our primary duty of care is not to the CPSO or any other authority, but to our patients.

When we became physicians, we pledged to put our patients first and that our ethical and professional duty is always first toward our patients. The CPSO statement orders us to violate our duty and pledge to our patients in the following ways:

1. Denial of the Scientific Method itself:  The CPSO is ordering physicians to put aside the scientific method and to not debate the processes and conclusions of science.

We physicians know and continue to believe that throughout history, opposing views, vigorous debate and openness to new ideas have been the bedrock of scientific progress.  Any major advance in science has been arrived at by practitioners vigorously questioning “official” narratives and following a different path in the pursuit of truth.

2. Violation of our Pledge to use Evidence-Based Medicine for our patients:  By ordering us not to debate and not to question, the CPSO is also asking us to violate our pledge to our patients that we will always seek the best, evidence-based scientific methods for them and advocate vigorously on their behalf.

The CPSO statement orders physicians for example, not to discuss or communicate with the public about “lockdown” measures. Lockdown measures are the subject of lively debate by world-renown and widely respected experts and there are widely divergent views on this subject. The explicitly anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration – https://gbdeclaration.org – was written by experts from Harvard, Stanford and Oxford Universities and more than 40,000 physicians from all over the world have signed this declaration. Several international experts including Martin Kuldorf (Harvard), David Katz (Yale), Jay Bhattacharya (Stanford) and Sunetra Gupta (Oxford) continue to strongly oppose lockdowns.

The CPSO is ordering physicians to express only pro-lockdown views, or else face investigation and discipline. This tyrannical, anti-science CPSO directive is regarded by thousands of Canadian physicians and scientists as unsupported by science and as violating the first duty of care to our patients.

3. Violation of Duty of Informed Consent:  The CPSO is also ordering physicians to violate the sacred duty of informed consent – which is the process by which the patient/public is fully informed of the risks, benefits and any alternatives to the treatment or intervention, before consent is given.

The Nuremberg Code, drafted in the aftermath of the atrocities perpetrated within the Nazi concentration camps – where horrific medical experiments were performed on inmates without consent – expressly forbids the imposition of any kind of intervention without informed consent.

In the case of the lockdown intervention for example, physicians have a fiduciary duty to point out to the public that lockdowns impose their own costs on society, including in greatly increased depression and suicide rates, delayed investigation and treatment of cancer (including delayed surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy), ballooning surgical waiting lists (with attendant greatly increased patient suffering) and increased rates of child and domestic abuse.

We physicians believe that with the CPSO statement of 30 April 2021, a watershed moment in the assault on free speech and scientific inquiry has been reached.

By ordering physicians to be silent and follow only one narrative, or else face discipline and censure, the CPSO is asking us to violate our conscience, our professional ethics, the Nuremberg code and the scientific pursuit of truth.

We will never comply and will always put our patients first.

The CPSO must immediately withdraw and rescind its statement of 30 April 2021.

We also give notice to other Canadian and international licensing authorities for physicians and allied professions that the stifling of scientific inquiry and any order to violate our conscience and professional pledge to our patients, itself may constitute a crime against humanity.

*

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

Notes

1 College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario Statement on Public Health Misinformation(4/30/21). https://twitter.com/cpso_ca/status/1388211577770348544

The College is aware and concerned about the increase of misinformation circulating on social media and other platforms regarding physicians who are publicly contradicting public health orders and recommendations. Physicians hold a unique position of trust with the public and have a professional responsibility to not communicate anti-vaccine, anti-masking, anti-distancing and anti-lockdown statements and/or promoting unsupported, unproven treatments for COVID-19. Physicians must not make comments or provide advice that encourages the public to act contrary to public health orders and recommendations. Physicians who put the public at risk may face an investigation by the CPSO and disciplinary action, when warranted. When offering opinions, physicians must be guided by the law, regulatory standards, and the code of ethics and professional conduct. The information shared must not be misleading or deceptive and must be supported by available evidence and science.

Featured image: The private Herron nursing home in a Montreal suburb lost 31 patients to COVID-19 after their caregivers fled the premises (Source: Eric THOMAS/AFP)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO) Forbids Physicians from Questioning Official Covid-19 Measures

Clotting and COVID Vaccine “Science”

May 10th, 2021 by Dr. Mike Williams

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.

***

Even a cursory look at social media demonstrates that there are three main areas of concern around Covid vaccines at the moment: clotting disorders; abnormal menses; and the possibility that those that are vaccinated are shedding that vaccine material.

There are of course other significant concerns not least neurological damage following receipt of the vaccine but, as you will see, that may be as a consequence of one of the other three.

Only one of these concerns is recognised by governments and health agencies at the moment – clotting disorders; the other two are not.

I’m going to try and sketch out what we know about the first; the other two will be for later articles. I’ll attempt to use the scientific and medical literature to help me to do that.

Clotting Disorders

The problem of clots after Covid vaccination was taken more seriously when a preprint paper appeared in Research Square investigating reports “of some vaccine recipients developing unusual thrombotic events and thrombocytopenia”.

The researchers “investigated whether such patients could have a prothrombotic disorder caused by platelet-activating antibodies directed against platelet factor 4 (PF4), as is known to be caused by heparin and sometimes other environmental triggers”.

In short: some of the patients were positive for antibodies to PF4 and the authors concluded that “The AZD1222 [AstraZeneca] vaccine is associated with development of a prothrombotic disorder that clinically resembles heparin-induced thrombocytopenia but which shows a different serological profile”.

They proposed calling this new problem vaccine-induced prothrombotic immune thrombocytopenia (VIPIT). Something tells me that name is going to be changed ASAP.

The authors’ conflict(s) of interest included receiving fees from AstraZeneca’s competitor, Pfizer. This is something we may have to forgive them for, as any help in unravelling this problem is much needed.

Effectively we have two opposing problems here: thrombosis forming a clot that can block a vessel supplying blood to an organ; and thrombocytopenia reducing the number of platelets that are needed to form a clot, causing bleeding, aka haemorrhage. Either of these problems can be very difficult to manage and extremely dangerous, even lethal for the patient — but to have both at the same time!

The combined thrombosis and thrombocytopenia linked to Covid vaccination is being considered as something new and very rare, and if clotting happens in a vital organ … well, we’re seeing the results: young people that should not be dying, are.

At the time of writing this article, Reuters reported:

In a weekly update on side effects from COVID-19 vaccines, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said there were a total of 209 clots with low platelet counts following vaccination with AstraZeneca’s shot, compared to a total of 168 reported last week.

Considering that adverse events are generally accepted to be massively underreported, that is very concerning.

Clotting following vaccination — A surprise?

If we were to rely on mainstream news and government reports, we might be led to believe that clotting problems with Covid vaccines were entirely unexpected and rare.

Yet the first warnings about the Astrazeneca clotting disorder came before the preprint (above) was published: and long before they even started making the current Covid ‘vaccines’. Well over a decade before, to be precise.

Adenoviral viral vector delivery systems that are being employed by Astrazeneca, Sputnik and Johnson & Johnson, for example, were known to be problematic in the past. In 2007 a research paper laid it out very clearly:

Thrombocytopenia has been consistently reported following the administration of adenoviral gene transfer vectors. The mechanism underlying this phenomenon is currently unknown. In this study, we have assessed the influence of von Willebrand Factor (VWF) and P-selectin on the clearance of platelets following adenovirus administration. In mice, thrombocytopenia occurs between 5 and 24 hours after adenovirus delivery. The virus activates platelets and induces platelet-leukocyte aggregate formation. There is an associated increase in platelet and leukocyte-derived microparticles. Adenovirus-induced endothelial cell activation was shown by VCAM-1 expression on virus-treated, cultured endothelial cells and by the release of ultra-large molecular weight multimers of VWF within 1 to 2 hours of virus administration with an accompanying elevation of endothelial microparticles.

Consistently reported? In 2007?

It was known in 2007 that the same vector used for many of the Covid vaccines consistently caused thrombocytopenia. But apparently, that did not deter the UK regulatory authorities from allowing an emergency authorisation for that technology to be released not just on the UK population but also many other countries around the world.

In September 2020, another paper was published SARS-CoV-2 binds platelet ACE2 to enhance thrombosis in COVID-19, that outlined a problem with SARS-CoV-2:

Our findings uncovered a novel function of SARS-CoV-2 on platelet activation via binding of Spike to ACE2. SARS-CoV-2-induced platelet activation may participate in thrombus formation and inflammatory responses in COVID-19 patients.

Specifically, they noted:

SARS-CoV-2 and its Spike protein directly stimulated platelets to facilitate the release of coagulation factors, the secretion of inflammatory factors, and the formation of leukocyte–platelet aggregates.

But what has that got to do with the vaccine?

This paper identified a spike protein as causal factor in clotting. And, of course, a spike protein is what is being produced by most of the Covid vaccines. Alarm bells should have been ringing with regulators, but nothing was done.

It should also be noted that platelet-leukocyte aggregation was mentioned in both the 2007 and 2020 papers. How did the authorities and drug manufacturers miss that?

Pseudovirons

Of more concern was the fantastic work of Margo et al, available as early as October 2020, in a paper entitled Severe COVID-19: A multifaceted viral vasculopathy syndrome.

They demonstrated brilliantly that in small blood vessels the spike protein, all by itself, can induce clotting by docking in various tissues.

[V]iral spike protein without viral RNA localized to ACE2+ endothelial cells in microvessels that were most abundant in the subcutaneous fat and brain.

We see immediately a reason why overweight people have a higher risk of a poorer outcome from SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also get a prophetic warning of what was to come post vaccination — brain clots and death.

Dr Magro and her colleagues exquisitely demonstrated that the spike protein, even absent viral RNA, could cause thrombosis:

It is concluded that serious COVID-19 infection has two distinct mechanisms: 1) a microangiopathy of pulmonary capillaries associated with a high infectious viral load where endothelial cell death releases pseudovirions into the circulation, and 2) the pseudovirions dock on ACE2+ endothelial cells most prevalent in the skin/subcutaneous fat and brain that activates the complement pathway/coagulation cascade resulting in a systemic procoagulant state as well as endothelial expression of cytokines that produce the cytokine storm.

Lung Septal Capillaries

The above diagram depicts the virus attaching to the inner lining of small blood vessels, causing an immune reaction and destruction of the infected cells. That results in debris being released —pseudovirions — that travel to other areas, where the process repeats itself with some modifications.

In the brain (below), those viral-free pseudovirions (including spike protein) induce a clotting response initiated by a part of the immune system called Complement. Specifically, the Mannose Binding Lectin Complement pathway.

Skin, Adipose, Brain

The key point to this paper in relation to Covid vaccines is that the spike protein, devoid of viral RNA travels to the brain and causes clotting. Once again, in case you needed reminding: Covid vaccines produce such a spike protein.

Another paper by Nuovo et al, entitled Endothelial cell damage is the central part of COVID-19 and a mouse model induced by injection of the S1 subunit of the spike protein, which also featured Dr Magro, was available online from 24 December 2020.

It concluded that:

ACE2+ endothelial damage is a central part of SARS-CoV2 pathology and may be induced by the spike protein alone … including neurological damage in test animals.

There seems to be a common theme developing here.

Resistant clots

The journey doesn’t end there. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 induces fibrin(ogen) resistant to fibrinolysis: Implications for microclot formation in COVID-19:

Here we suggest that, in part, the presence of spike protein in circulation may contribute to the hypercoagulation in COVID-19 positive patients and may cause substantial impairment of fibrinolysis. Such lytic impairment may result in the persistent large microclots we have noted here and previously in plasma samples of COVID-19 patients. This observation may have important clinical relevance in the treatment of hypercoagulability in COVID-19 patients.

Loosely translated: the spike protein may contribute to clotting and those clots may be resistant to be being broken up by the body.

Another one: The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alters barrier function in 2D static and 3D microfluidic in-vitro models of the human blood-brain barrier:

[in vitro] [e]vidence provided suggests that the SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins trigger a pro-inflammatory response on brain endothelial cells that may contribute to an altered state of BBB function. Together, these results are the first to show the direct impact that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein could have on brain endothelial cells; thereby offering a plausible explanation for the neurological consequences seen in COVID-19 patients.

Not only can the spike protein cause clots all by itself, that may well be resistant to being broken up, it also looks like it also may alter the blood-brain barrier, causing neurological damage.

As if mocking the intelligence of those that still believe in science this, just published — SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alone may cause lung damage:

“These findings show that the genetically modified mouse together with just a segment of the spike protein can be used to study SARS-CoV-2 lung injury,” said Solopov. “We can use this tool to develop a better understanding of how the spike protein causes lung symptoms—even without the intact virus—in order to develop new targets and therapeutics for COVID-19.

Using a newly developed mouse model of acute lung injury, researchers found that exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alone was enough to induce COVID-19-like symptoms including severe inflammation of the lungs.

The spike protein alone can be studied whilst it alone is causing lung injury … does that raise any alarm bells within the scientific community?

A recent paper stated clearly that the risk of clotting from a Covid vaccine is far less than if you contract SARS-CoV-2. The message is that taking risk/reward into account, everyone should be vaccinated.

Well, those pushing that narrative failed to take into account that to make that risk/reward calculation, the risk in the Oxford paper has to be multiplied by the risk of actually being (officially) diagnosed with Covid. Once that is done, the risk is much higher for those vaccinated.

The image below demonstrates how successful the current crop of vaccines are at producing spike proteins. The white arrows point to spike proteins on the cell surface following the Astrazeneca vaccine. Those vaccine induced spike proteins were claimed to provoke an immune response to protect life — but, based on the literature I have referenced, we should now look at them very differently.

Spike proteins on the surface of cells as a result of Astrazeneca vaccine

In Conclusion

Simply put, there is overwhelming evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (that is also synthetically produced by the Covid vaccines) is a central part of the mechanisms of morbidity and mortality of SARS-CoV-2, and therefore is also a risk of the vaccine. In regard to clotting, that risk is greater if you receive a vaccine.

The data clearly demonstrate that the last thing you would ever want to do is make a vaccine that produces a spike protein. As the literature clearly showed, it would cause significant damage, including brain clots and death. And that literature, for the most part, was available before the release of Covid vaccines to the public.

*

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

Dr. Mike Williams is a medical consultant, operating in private practice.

Featured image is from UKColumn

Selected Articles: US Encirclement of China

May 10th, 2021 by Global Research News

US Encirclement of China: A Progress Report

By Brian Berletic, May 09, 2021

Tensions between Washington and Beijing are not merely the recent results of former US President Donald Trump’s time in office – but rather just the latest chapter in US efforts to contain China that stretch back decades.

No Vaccine Passports in Texas! Medical Doctors Testify Before State Senate to Oppose Mandatory COVID Shots

By Brian Shilhavy, May 09, 2021

This past week the Texas Senate Committee on State Affairs took testimony from Texas physicians regarding SB 1669: Stop Forced Vaccination and Vaccine Passports in Texas. SB 1669 was sponsored by Senator Bob Hall.

Let Mumia Out! Exploring Racial Justice as the Sun Sets over George Floyd

By Michael Welch, Suzanne Ross, and Johanna Fernandez, May 08, 2021

Even in the midst of an apparent pandemic keeping all Americans and many around the world in the grip of heightened fear, that did not stop people from rising up in centres globally to massively dispute and condemn the death of a black man – George Floyd – under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer. Anywhere from 15 to 26 million people are estimated to have shown up at protests in the USA in the month of June alone condemning the actions against Floyd and evidence of racism conducted by police generally.

Beware of Covid PCR Testing and the Relentless “Vaccinate Vaccinate Vaccinate” Campaign

By Peter Koenig, May 08, 2021

The validity of the PCR test has been questioned for months, if not from the very beginning of the declared covid-19 plandemic, including lately also by WHO. However, this test is still and ever more so being forced upon us. This despite the fact that ever more scientific evidence comes to the fore that the test is absolutely unsuited to determine whether a person is “infected” with the covid-19 virus.

Walking with Fr. Daniel Berrigan, S.J., a Criminal for Peace 

By Edward Curtin, May 08, 2021

Today is a day to celebrate the prophetic voice and witness of Fr. Daniel Berrigan, the non-violent anti-war activist and poet, whose life and witness has touched so many lives.  He was born on May 9, 1921 and would have been 100 years old today.  He died five years ago, but his spirit continues to animate and inspire so many others. 

The Spoils of War: Afghanistan’s Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 08, 2021

The US opioid crisis broadly defined bears a relationship to the export of heroin out of Afghanistan.  There were 189,000 heroin users in the US in 2001, before the US-NATO invasion of Afghanistan. By 2016 that number went up to 4,500,000 (2.5 million heroin addicts and 2 million casual users). In 2020, deaths from opioids and drug addiction increased threefold. It’s Big Money for Big Pharma.

The COVID-19 Crisis Has Already Left Too Many Children Hungry in America

By Lauren Bauer, May 09, 2021

I document new evidence from two nationally representative surveys that were initiated to provide up-to-date estimates of the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the incidence of food insecurity. Food insecurity occurs when a household has difficulty providing enough food due to a lack of resources.

Children Are Far More Likely to Die from Diarrhea than COVID-19

By Simon Black, May 07, 2021

In the winter of 1837, Charles Dickens published the first two chapters of what would become one of his most popular works– the story of an orphan called Oliver Twist. If you’ve never read it, the book is one of Dickens’ most damning condemnations of the poverty, crime, and child labor that dominated 19th century Britain.

NATO’s Southeastern Spearhead: Turkey’s Military Aggression in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Caucasus Signals Proxy Conflict with Iran

By Rick Rozoff, May 07, 2021

The past week has witnessed reports of increased Turkish military activity in Iraq and Syria as well as its intruding itself deeper into the war in Yemen. In all three cases Ankara has pitted itself against forces that are or can be seen to be pro-Iranian: Shiite parties in northern Iraq, the government of Syria and the Houthi-led government in Yemen.

The True Meaning of the Afghan “Withdrawal”

By Prof Alfred McCoy, May 07, 2021

The Taliban’s fighters have already captured much of the countryside, reducing control of the American-backed Afghan government in Kabul, the capital, to less than a third of all rural districts. Since February, those guerrillas have threatened the country’s major provincial capitals — Kandahar, Kunduz, Helmand, and Baghlan — drawing the noose ever tighter around those key government bastions.

Global Casinos: Financial Markets Are a Fraudsters Paradise

By Rod Driver, May 07, 2021

Many of the biggest banks, and many other financial companies, devote most of their resources to activities that provide no benefit to the real world, but which can have negative consequences for everyone else. This post summarises some of the most problematic activities, such as speculation, private equity, hedge funds, vulture funds, and high frequency trading.

COVID Vaccines: The Tip of the Iceberg

By Swiss Policy Research, May 07, 2021

SPR carefully distinguishes between short-term and long-term safety, short-term and long-term effectiveness, age- and sex-specific aspects, and medical and political questions. Some people might prefer a simpler, more black-and-white assessment, but this would not reflect complex reality.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: US Encirclement of China

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Office of the Inspector General at the U.S. Agency for International Development concluded that the U.S. aid to Venezuela in 2019 was not fully allocated to the country, and it was part of a mechanism to unseat democratically elected President Nicolás Maduro. The findings, known on Thursday, belong to a report published by this office on April 16.

Titled “Enhanced Processes and Implementer Requirements Are Needed To Address Challenges and Fraud Risks in USAID’s Venezuela Response,” the report highlights that “the shipment of U.S. supplies responded in part to the Trump administration’s campaign to put pressure on Maduro rather than simply provide aid to Venezuelans in need.”

Moreover, the Inspector General Office remarked that only eight out of 386 tons of U.S. humanitarian aid reached Venezuela, with some of those goods ending up in Colombia and Somalia. This, as the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), allocated $2 million for this particular operation.

Likewise, a Venezuelan non-profit organization unnamed in the report received funding based on its alignments with U.S. interests despite concerns about the non-profit financial requirements.

In this sense, the report, which has examined humanitarian information for over two years, highlights that “the directive to pre-position humanitarian commodities was not driven by technical expertise or fully aligned with the humanitarian principles of neutrality, independence and being based on needs assessments.”

On the other hand, the experts remarked the contradictions of humanitarian help being politicized. One example was the aid convoy that the U.S. tried to send via Colombia, preceded by a “Venezuela Live Aid” concert sponsored by billionaire Richard Branson, which promoted Opposition lawmaker and self-appointed interim president Juan Guaido. This concert featured international artists such as Carlos Vives, Juanes, Alejandro Sanz and became a platform explicitly focused on anti-Venezuelan government messages throughout.

Furthermore, the report notices that “the verbal direction did not establish clear accountability nor did it provide justification for decision-making.” For instance, “supplies were unnecessarily shipped in huge Air Force C-17 cargo planes instead of more economical commercial options that were available.”

In addition, “ready-to-eat food to combat child malnutrition was also sent even though USAID’s experts had determined that the nutritional condition of children in Venezuela did not warrant its use at the time.”

Ultimately and upon close analysis, the report highlights that the U.S government’s goal was not to aid but rather to force the Venezuelan government to surrender to its interests.

*

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

Featured image: Venezuelans marched on Angostura bridge at the border with Colombia to reject the alleged humanitarian aid on February 20, 2019. | Photo: Twitter/ @teleSURtv

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The title is courtesy of the Transylvania Now new site. The Pentagon’s Special Operations Command Europe kicked off the Trojan Footprint 21 exercise on May 3; what is identified as its premier special operations forces drills.

The war games will be held until May 14 in five Black Sea and Balkans nations: Bulgaria, Georgia, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Romania. Special forces from the U.S. – all branches of the armed forces including Green Berets – the five host nations, Britain, Germany, Spain and Ukraine are involved. With the exception of Turkey, all Black Sea littoral states but Russia are participating.

The exercise is designed for “enhancing interoperability between NATO allies” to prepare for “counter[ing] myriad threats.” Though there aren’t a thousand, only one, threat. Russia.

Just as it is all-service so it is “all-domain” with air, land and sea forces engaged in combating an unnamed adversary in the Black Sea. One which has a fleet based in Sevastopol in Crimea.

Trojan Footprint 21 is occurring simultaneously with the massive DEFENDER-Europe 21 war games in the same area and ahead of the Steadfast Defender exercise, also to be held in the Black Sea region.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on NATO Allies Take over Black Sea for Military Exercise
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is embarking on a new beginning that could change the Middle East. To enhance security and stability, a Saudi delegation headed by the head of the intelligence service, Lieutenant General Khaled Al-Humaidan, visited Damascus on Monday and met Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad and the Vice President for Security Affairs, Major General Ali Mamlouk. The talks were aimed at restoring diplomatic relations after a ten-year pause, reported the private London-based Arabic daily, Rai Al-Youm

Saudi Arabia will reopen its embassy in Damascus following continuing talks planned in Damascus after the end of Ramadan, and the Eid al-Fitr holiday. The Syrian ambassador to Lebanon issued a positive statement on the topic.

Lebanon remains at the core of Saudi interests in the eastern Mediterranean region, and the assistance of Damascus in stabilizing Lebanon is crucial. A US State Department assessment in 2020 found evidence that Damascus was regaining its pre-eminent place in Lebanese politics. Following the collapse of Lebanese banks, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has worked towards making Riyadh a player in Lebanon again, and the Saudis need President Assad on their side to help shape the region.

Saudi Arabia is recalibrating its foreign policy and repairing relations with its neighbors as it works to stop the influence of global powers in the region. The visit to Damascus comes after the UAE and Bahrain have publically shown support for the Assad administration in recent years.

Giorgio Cafiero, CEO, and founder of Gulf State Analytics, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Washington, said

“The Saudis have to be pragmatic in how they deal with Syria. It’s very clear that Damascus isn’t on the verge of falling and I think the Saudis are coming to terms with the inevitable in moving toward some sort of rapprochement with Syria,” he said. “It’s important to realize that as Assad has proven triumphant on the ground and as the Saudis have deepened their relationship with Russia,” said Cafiero. “We need to keep in mind that Syria is very much in need of reconstruction and redevelopment and the Syrian government is going to want help from the wealthy Gulf countries, so this is certainly a card that the Saudis can play at some point – to support reconstruction with deep pockets,” said Cafiero.

Syria would also be able to lobby Washington indirectly through Abu Dhabi and Riyadh to lift sanctions, and thereby access the funds being offered by the Gulf states to rebuild Syria. The UAE has publicly called for the removal of US Caesar Act sanctions, and is delivering regular medical aid and helping to facilitate Syria’s regional rehabilitation. The Emirati foreign minister had declared that “the return of Syria to its environment is inevitable and is in the interest of Syria and the region as a whole, and the biggest challenge facing coordination and joint work with Syria is the Caesar Act.”

Algeria is insisting that Syria be readmitted to the Arab League, and the UAE has restored ties with Syria as it seeks to contain Turkish expansion. The UAE, a Saudi ally, reopened its embassy in Damascus in December 2019 in an attempt to re-engage with Syria. Oman and the UAE, have recently rekindled ties with the Syrian government.  Iraq, another Syrian ally, has also pushed for Damascus to rejoin the Arab League.

Iraq is turning to Syria as a transit route for Egyptian gas imports. Iraqi oil minister Ihsan Abdul Jabbar Ismail said on April 29 that discussions have opened with his Syrian counterpart Bassam Toumeh.

“We have a common vision about the possibility of steering and moving Egyptian gas through Syria land,” a spokesman for the Iraqi oil ministry said.

The Arab Gas Pipeline runs from Egypt to Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, with the Syrian section having been completed in 2008. Gas exports from Egypt to Iraq would flow through an extension to the pipeline.

The Akkas gas field is in western Al-Anbar province in Iraq, but the field development was put on hold while the area was occupied by ISIS.  However, both the Syrian and Iraqi governments control the areas on both sides of the border, and Iraq has planned to supply surplus gas to Syria.  US-based energy firm Schlumberger is to lead a consortium to develop Akkas, a project that also involves Saudi companies.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov visited Saudi Arabia in March, sending signals to Washington that the Saudis are seeming to inch closer to the Russian position on Syria. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said in a joint press conference with Lavrov,

“We are keen to coordinate with all parties, including Russia, to find a solution to the Syrian crisis.”

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz met with the Russian president’s special envoy for Syrian settlement affairs Alexander Lavrentiev, the day before meeting with Lavrov, and discussed the latest developments in Syria.

Sami Hamdi, the editor-in-chief at The International Interest, says that the Saudi displeasure with the Biden administration has something to do with the shift as well. “Bin Salman may also have eyes on deepening ties with Russia as Riyadh becomes increasingly disillusioned with Washington. Engaging with Syria is likely to increase Saudi-Russia ties and cooperation,” Hamdi said.

Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Russia have coordinated well on the issue of oil within the OPEC framework and the pursuit of market equilibrium.

Iraq has played host recently to Saudi Arabia and Iran in last month’s direct talks that officials hope will defuse the tension between the two regional powers. Talks behind closed doors between the two were held in Baghdad as senior representatives from both worked to find common ground. The Lebanese newspaper Al Akhbar reported that the discussions which started in Baghdad will continue.

Iran will also urge Saudi Arabia to recognize President Assad as the legitimate leader of Syria, paving the way for Syria’s re-entry into the Arab League. This may be timed to coincide with the outcome of the Syrian presidential election on May 26.

The Saudi, Jordan, Syria highway for the movement of goods and people is now open.  Jordan held the key and has opened the border crossing with Saudi Arabia at Al-Omari post, while also opening the Jaber crossing into Syria, which is called Nassib on the Syrian side.

The Saudi-UAE reset with Syria sends a clear message to the Biden administration: you want to restart relations with Iran, and we want to restart relations with Syria.

Saudi Arabia will push for a solution to the Syrian crisis and that will place the interests of the region above all else, even if they conflict with Washington.

The US-allied Gulf Arab states, especially Saudi Arabia and Qatar, were the main regional backers of armed groups opposed to the Syrian government, providing finance and weapons as part of a program of support for the armed opposition coordinated by Washington.

The Syrian battleground has provided fertile ground to feed extremism among the region’s youth, as radical groups can use social media. By pushing for a solution in Syria and the return of Damascus to the Arab fold, would end the use of Syria as a battlefield for conflicting regional and international agendas.

The US State Department responded to the Emirati foreign minister’s statements on Tuesday regarding the effects of the US “Caesar Act” on the lives of Syrians, by claiming the sanctions have nothing to do with the humanitarian crisis in Syria, even though medical supplies and equipment are forbidden by US-EU sanctions.

*

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

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

Steven Sahiounie is an award-winning journalist. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Mideast Discourse

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Syria Comes In from the Cold: Saudi-Syria Relationship Warms Up
  • Tags:

Exposing Myanmar’s US-Backed Opposition

May 10th, 2021 by Brian Berletic

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Exposing Myanmar’s US-Backed Opposition

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

***

The Chairperson of the Commission, H.E. Moussa Faki Mahamat, has announced the appointment of H.E John Dramani Mahama, former President of the Republic of Ghana, as his High Representative to Somalia.

As the High Representative for Somalia’s political track, President Mahama will work with the Somali stakeholders, to reach a mutually acceptable compromise towards an all-encompassing resolution for the holding of Somali elections in the shortest possible time.

In fulfilling his mandate, the High Representative will be supported by the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), to ensure that the mediation efforts and the peace support operation work together seamlessly.

The Chairperson of the Commission calls on the Somali stakeholders to negotiate in good faith, and to put the interests of Somalia and the well-being of the Somali people above all else in the search for an inclusive settlement to the electoral crisis.

This should usher in a democratically elected government with the legitimacy and mandate to resolve the remaining outstanding political and constitutional issues that are posing a threat to the stability of the country and the region as a whole.

The Chairperson of the Commission also encourages all the Somali stakeholders and the international community to extend every support to the High Representative, who will arrive the country in the coming days.

Ambassador Abukar Arman, a former Somalia special envoy to the United States and a foreign policy analyst says there have previously been interventions from neighbors have not brought Somalia the promised peace.

It is clear that no Somali can pursue a political career in his own country without first getting Ethiopia’s blessings. Already, Ethiopia has installed a number of its staunch cohorts in the current government and (along with Kenya) has been handpicking virtually all of the new regional governors, mayors and so forth.

In October 2010, the African Union appointed Jerry John Rawlings as the AU High Representative for Somalia to “mobilize the continent and the rest of the international community to fully assume its responsibilities and contribute more actively to the quest for peace, security and reconciliation in Somalia.”

That however, Ambassador Arman says the former Ghana president and AU Special Representative for Somalia is now assuming his new post with significant diplomatic capital, mainly resulting from the credible work of his fellow countryman, former president, and Special Envoy to Somalia, Jerry John Rawlings.

“On the other hand, he would be carrying the hefty political burden that comes with the so-called African Solutions for African Problems and its cash-gulping record. The concept is taken hostage by African sloganeers and foreign elements eager to advance zero-sum interests,” he wrote me in an emailed message.

Make no mistake, Somalia is held in a nasty headlock by a neighbourhood tag-team unmistakably motivated by zero-sum objective. It is their so-called African solution (not so much of the extremist group al-Shabaab) that is setting the Horn on fire.

According to AFP news report, Mogadishu had been on edge since February, when President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed’s term ended before elections were held, and protesters took to the streets against his rule. But a resolution in April to extend his mandate by two years split the country’s fragile security forces along all-important clan lines.

Soldiers loyal to influential opposition leaders began pouring into the capital. The fighting drove tens of thousands of civilians from their homes and divided the city, with government forces losing some key neighborhoods to opposition units.

Under pressure to ease the tension, Mohamed abandoned his mandate extension and instructed his prime minister to arrange fresh elections and bring together rivals for talks. Indirect elections were supposed to have been held by February under a deal reached between the government and Somalia’s five regional states the previous September.

But that agreement collapsed as the president and the leaders of two states, Puntland and Jubaland, squabbled over the terms. Months of UN-backed talks failed to broker consensus between the feuding sides.

In early May, Mohamed re-launched talks with his opponents over the holding of fresh elections, and agreed to return to the terms of the September accord.

Prime Minister Mohamed Hussein Roble has invited the regional leaders to a round of negotiations on May 20 in the hope of resolving the protracted feud and charting a path to a vote. In the meanwhile, the international community has threatened sanctions if elections are not held soon.

Somalia remains the epicenter of global geopolitical and geo-economic competition. Some of the major ones are in a cut-throat competition that further complicates the Somalia conundrum. With its longest coastline, bordering Ethiopia to the west, Kenya to the southwest and the Gulf of Eden, Somalia has attracted many foreign countries to the region in East Africa.

*

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

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who previously worked with Inter Press Service (IPS), is now a frequent and passionate contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Somalia: Epicenter of Global Geopolitical and Geo-economic Competition

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

First published on November 17, 2021

***

The global energy shortages which have driven prices for coal, oil and natural gas to explosive highs in the last months are a predictable consequence of the mad pursuit of “Zero Carbon” economic policies that have seen foolish governments subsidize a growing share of electricity from unreliable solar and wind generation.

One consequence has been a five-fold rise in the price of natural gas or methane across the globe. That extends from China to the EU, USA and beyond. A follow-on consequence of that natural gas shortage and price explosion is a growing crisis in world agriculture fertilizer production. This may all be no accident. It fits the WEF Great Reset Agenda of UN 2030.

Ammonia-based fertilizers made from nitrogen (most of our air, so never in shortage) and natural gas or methane (CH4) make up almost 70% of all fertilizers used to support major agriculture crops such as wheat, corn, rice and even coffee. As natural gas prices have soared by anywhere from 300% to 500% over the past months, this has had a devastating impact on world fertilizer production where some 80% of the cost of making ammonia fertilizers is due to natural gas.

When Hurricane Ida stormed across Louisiana on August 25, the largest ammonia factory complex in the world, owned by CF Industries, was closed for safety reasons and only reopened ten days later. Curiously at that point two more factories from the same CF Industries, those in the UK, announced they would close two more fertilizer plants on September 22, claiming high natural gas prices as the cause, despite the fact their Louisiana plant had just been out for ten days. The two plants supply some two-thirds of UK domestic fertilizer demand. The Government was forced to agree emergency subsidies to CF Industries to reopen one of the two plants temporarily to ease the pressuresThe combined effect of the three major closures by the same group added to the crisis in world fertilizer supply. It may be just coincidence that the two largest stock owners of CF Industries are Vanguard and BlackRock.

This crisis is snowballing. As of early October reported closures of ammonia fertilizer production had been announced by the giant German chemicals company, BASF, in Belgium and Germany, indefinitely. It also affects production of ammonia-based diesel fuel additive, AdBlue.

Further closings are ongoing in Achema in Lithuania, OCI in Netherlands. Yara International is reducing 40% of its EU ammonia fertilizer production. Fertiberia in Spain is closing a plant along with OPZ in Ukraine, a major fertilizer producer. In Austria Borealis AG has closed production and Germany’s largest ammonia producer, SKW Piesteritz, has cut production by 20%.

Worsening the overall global fertilizer crisis, the Biden Administration in August slapped sanctions on the Belarus government, explicitly naming Belaruskali OAO, the world’s fourth largest fertilizer producer, for “sustaining the Belarusian regime at the expense of the Belarusian people.” Belaruskali controls about one-fifth of the world potash-based fertilizer market.

Heart of global food security

Nitrogen-based fertilizers are far the most widely used in global farming, about three-fourths of all commercial fertilizers. Since the development of the Haber-Bosch process in Germany just before the First World War, artificial production of nitrogen fertilizers has supported the enormous expansion in agriculture productivity. Nitrogen fertilizers are made from ammonia (NH3) produced by the Haber-Bosch process. It is energy-intensive using natural gas (CH4) which is methane, to supply hydrogen. This NH3 or ammonia is used as a feedstock for other nitrogen fertilizers, such as anhydrous ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3) and urea (CO(NH2)2). Crop yields since World War Two have become strongly dependent on nitrogen-based fertilizers. It is estimated for the US that average corn yields would decline by 40 percent without nitrogen fertilizer.

Today estimates are that perhaps half the global population is dependent on nitrogen fertilizers. According to studies published in the scientific journal, Nature, 48 percent of the world population in 2008 was dependent on nitrogen fertilizers for their daily access to food. “This means that nitrogen fertilizers in 2015 provided food security for 3,5 billion people who would otherwise have starved to death.”

China shock

Adding a huge shock to the growing global fertilizer shortage is the decision by Beijing in recent weeks to severely cut or freeze fertilizer exports for a variety of reasons including shortages of coal and natural gas for electric power and a panicked try to control domestic inflation. Record summer floods in Henan Province hit the heart of the China grain region, and the government has started a campaign to have citizens undergo a “Clean Plate Campaign 2.0″ to stop food waste, which some believe is a way to disguise the serious harvest failures.

China, India and USA are far and away the world’s largest users of nitrogen fertilizers in tons per acre. China is also one of the largest fertilizer exporters and there the government in September announced a ban on nitrogen and phosphate fertilizer export until June 2022. With soaring global natural gas prices, as well as coal which China imports, the country has seen significant electric power blackouts owing to electric companies closing rather than sell power at a loss. One consequence of the complex crisis is the fertilizer export ban. China is the largest exporter of urea nitrogen fertilizer, accounting for nearly a third of the global supply, and is also a major manufacturer of phosphate.

In Bavaria in southern Germany, farmers are reportedly unable to buy fertilizer until at least next summer. The spreading global fertilizer crisis will mean sharp reductions in feed corn, wheat, rice, coffee and other crops in 2022. This hits amid the steepest food price inflation in decades, further aggravated by covid measures and disruptions in global shipping trade.

COP26 Methane Attack

Behind the growing global fertilizer shortage crisis is the five-fold explosion in the price of methane or natural gas as it is usually called. This has its origins in deliberate “anti-carbon” green policies of the Biden Administration and of the European Union with its “Fit for 55” program to cut CO2 emissions by 55% by 2030, including methane or natural gas. The Biden administration has forced disinvestment in USA shale gas, and the forced expansion of highly-subsidized Green Energy such as wind and solar have created an unreliable electric grid. When the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine alternative electric power is missing. Storage is a huge problem. That was not so critical when solar or wind made up a tiny percent of the grid. But today in countries such as energy-dependent Germany, alternatives can make up 42% of gross electric consumption. As nuclear and coal plants are taxed into extinction for the Zero Carbon madness, prices for oil and natural gas are exploding. New investment in hydrocarbon exploitation is collapsing as a result, and supplies limited just when everyone needs it.

The growing crisis in world fertilizer production fits well into the UN Agenda 2030 for “sustainable” (sic) agriculture by which the globalists such as World Economic Forum of Klaus Schwab and BlackRock of Wall Street, the world’s largest private investment fund with a reported $9 trillion in assets it manages, mean dramatic reduction in meat production, replacing it with fake lab-grown meats or even insects as a protein source.

There is a growing demonization of agriculture and especially meat production, claiming it is a major source of global warming.

Methane is now a major target of the Green Agenda from the USA and EU. Notably, at the recent UN COP 26 global warming gathering, some 100 nations signed on to a joint EU-US proposal to cut methane gas emissions by 30% by 2030. We can expect to see growing government and NGO attacks on our food system using soaring fertilizer prices, campaigns against meat and demands for “sustainable” agriculture to further raise our now-soaring cost of food. Key to this attack is the Green New Deal war on oil, gas and coal, the low-cost energy system that has been the heart of today’s global economy and escape from poverty since World War II.

*

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

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics.

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

 

US Encirclement of China: A Progress Report

May 9th, 2021 by Brian Berletic

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.

***

Tensions between Washington and Beijing are not merely the recent results of former US President Donald Trump’s time in office – but rather just the latest chapter in US efforts to contain China that stretch back decades.

Indeed, US foreign policy has for decades admittedly aimed at encircling and containing China’s rise and maintaining primacy over the Indo-Pacific region.

The “Pentagon Papers” leaked in 1969 would admit in regards to the ongoing US war against Vietnam that:

…the February decision to bomb North Vietnam and the July approval of Phase I deployments make sense only if they are in support of a long-run United States policy to contain China.

The papers also admitted that China, “looms as a major power threatening to undercut [American] importance and effectiveness in the world and, more remotely but more menacingly, to organize all of Asia against [America].

The papers also made it clear that there were (and still are), “three fronts to a long-run effort to contain China: (a) the Japan-Korea front; (b) the India-Pakistan front; and (c) the Southeast Asia front.”

Since then, it is clear that from the continued US military presence in both Japan and South Korea, the now two decades-long US occupation of Afghanistan on both Pakistan’s and China’s borders, and the emergence of the so-called “Milk Tea Alliance” aimed at overthrowing Southeast Asian governments friendly with China and replacing them with US-backed client regimes – this policy to contain China endures up to today.

Assessing US activity along these three fronts reveals the progress and setbacks Washington faces – and various dangers to global peace and stability Washington’s continued belligerence pose.

The Japan-Korea Front 

Military.com in their article, “Here’s What It Costs to Keep US Troops in Japan and South Korea,” reports:

In all, more than 80,000 US troops are deployed to Japan and South Korea. In Japan alone, the US maintains more than 55,000 deployed troops — the largest forward-deployed US force anywhere in the world.

The article notes that according to the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), the US spent “$34 billion to maintain military presences in Japan and South Korea between 2016 and 2019.”

The article cites the GAO providing an explanation as to why this massive US military presence is maintained in East Asia:

“…US forces help strengthen alliances, promote a free and open Indo-Pacific region, provide quick response to emergencies and are essential for US national security.”

“Alliances” that are “strengthened” by the physical presence of what are essentially occupying US forces suggests the “alliance” is hardly voluntary and claims of promoting a “free and open Indo-Pacific region” is highly subjective – begging the question of to whom the Indo-Pacific is “free and open” to.

And as US power wanes both regionally in the Indo-Pacific as well as globally, Washington has placed increasing pressure on both Japan and South Korea to not only help shoulder this financial burden, but to also become more proactive within Washington’s containment strategy toward China.

Japan is one of three other nations (the US itself, Australia, and India) drafted into the US-led Quadrilateral Security Dialogue – also know as the “Quad.”

Rather than the US solely depending on its own military forces based within Japanese territory or supported by its Japan-based forces, Japan’s military along with India’s and Australia’s are also being recruited to take part in military exercises and operations in and around the South China Sea.

India’s inclusion in the Quad also fits well into the US 3-front strategy that made up Washington’s containment policy toward China as early as the 1960s.

The India-Pakistan Front 

In addition to recruiting India into the Quad alliance, the US helps encourage escalation through political support and media campaigning of India’s various territorial disputes with China.

The US also targets Pakistan’s close and ongoing relationship with China – including the support of armed insurgents in Pakistan’s Baluchistan province.

Recently, a bombing at a hotel in Quetta, Baluchistan appears to have targeted China’s ambassador to Pakistan, Ambassador Nong Rong.

The BBC in its article, “Pakistan hotel bomb: Deadly blast hits luxury venue in Quetta,” would claim:

Initial reports had suggested the target was China’s ambassador.
 
Ambassador Nong Rong is understood to be in Quetta but was not present at the hotel at the time of the attack on Wednesday.

The article also noted:

Balochistan province, near the Afghan border, is home to several armed groups, including separatists.
 
Separatists in the region want independence from the rest of Pakistan and accuse the government and China of exploiting Balochistan, one of Pakistan’s poorest provinces, for its gas and mineral wealth.

Absent from the BBC’s reporting is the extensive and open support the US government has provided these separatists over the years and how – clearly – this is more than just a local uprising against perceived injustice, but yet another example of armed conflict-by-proxy waged by Washington against China.

As far back as 2011 publications like The National Interest in articles like, “Free Baluchistan” would openly advocate expanding US support for separatism in Pakistan’s Baluchistan province.

The article was written by the late Selig  Harrison – who was a senior fellow at the US-based corporate-financier funded Center for International Policy – and would claim:

Pakistan has given China a base at Gwadar in the heart of Baluch territory. So an independent Baluchistan would serve US strategic interests in addition to the immediate goal of countering Islamist forces.

Of course, “Islamist forces” is a euphemism for US-Persian Gulf state sponsored militants used to both fight Western proxy wars as well as serve as a pretext for Western intervention. Citing “Islamist forces” in Baluchistan, Pakistan clearly serves as an example of the latter.

In addition to op-eds published by influential policy think tanks, US legislators like US Representative Dana Rohrabacher had proposed resolutions such as (emphasis added),

“US House of Representatives Concurrent Resolution 104 (112th): Expressing the sense of Congress that the people of Baluchistan, currently divided between Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan, have the right to self-determination and to their own sovereign country.”

There is also funding provided to adjacent, political groups supporting separatism in Baluchistan, Pakistan as listed by the US government’s own National Endowment for Democracy (NED) website under “Pakistan.” Organizations like the “Association for Integrated Development Balochistan” are funded by the US government and used to mobilize people politically, constituting clear interference by the US in Pakistan’s internal political affairs.

The Gwadar Port project is a key juncture within China’s growing global network of infrastructure projects as part of its One Belt, One Road initiative. The US clearly opposes China’s rise and has articulated robust strategies to counter it; everything up to and including open war as seen in the Pentagon Papers regarding the Vietnam War.

The recent bombing in Baluchistan, Pakistan demonstrates that this strategy continues in regards to utilizing local militants to target Chinese-Pakistani cooperation and is one part of the much wider, region-wide strategy of encircling and containing China.

The Southeast Asia Front

Of course the US war against Vietnam was part of a wider effort to reassert Western primacy over Southeast Asia and deny the region from fueling China’s inevitable rise.

The US having lost the war and almost completely retreating from the Southeast Asia region saw Southeast Asia itself repair relations amongst themselves and with China.

Today, the nations of Southeast Asia count China as their largest trade partner, investor, a key partner in infrastructure development, a key supplier for the region’s armed forces, as well as providing the majority of tourism arrivals throughout the region. For countries like Thailand, more tourists arrive from China than from all Western nations combined.

Because existing governments in Southeast Asia have nothing to benefit from by participating in American belligerence toward China, the US has found it necessary to cultivate and attempt to install into power various client regimes. This has been an ongoing process since the Vietnam War.

The US has targeted each nation individually for years. In 2009 and 2010, US-backed opposition leader-in-exile Thaksin Shinawatra deployed his “red shirt” protesters in back-to-back riots – the latter of which included some 300 armed militants and culminated in city-wide arson across Bangkok and the death of over 90 police, soldiers, protesters, and bystanders.

In 2018, US-backed opposition groups took power in Malaysia after the US poured millions of dollars for over a decade in building up the opposition.

Daniel Twining of the US National Endowment for Democracy subsidiary – the International Republican Institute – admitted during a talk (starting at 56 minutes) by the Center for Strategic and International Studies that same year that:

…for 15 years working with NED resources, we worked to strengthen Malaysian opposition parties and guess what happened two months ago after 61 years? They won.

He would elaborate on how the NED’s network played a direct role in placing US-backed opposition figures into power within the Malaysian government, stating:

I visited and I was sitting there with many of the leaders the new leaders of this government, many of whom were just our partners we had been working with for 15 years and one of the most senior of them who’s now one of the people running the government said to me, ‘gosh IRI you never gave up on us even when we were ready to give up on ourselves.’

Far from “promoting freedom” in Malaysia – Twining would make clear the ultimate objective of interfering in Malaysia’s internal political affairs was to serve US interests not only in regards to Malaysia, but in regards to the entire region and specifically toward encircling and containing China.

Twining would boast:

…guess what one of the first steps the new government took? It froze Chinese infrastructure investments.

And that:

[Malaysia] is not a hugely pro-American country. It’s probably never going to be an actual US ally, but this is going to redound to our benefit, and and that’s an example of the long game.

It is a pattern that has repeated itself in Myanmar over the decades with NED money building a parallel political system within the nation and eventually leading to Aung San Suu Kyi and her US-backed National League for Democracy (NLD) party taking power in 2016.

For Myanmar, so deep and extensive is US backing for opposition groups there that elections virtually guarantee US-backed candidates win every single time. The US National Endowment for Democracy’s own website alone lists over 80 programs and organizations receiving US government money for everything from election polling and building up political parties, to funding media networks and “environmental” groups used to block Chinese-initiated infrastructure projects.

The move by Myanmar’s military in February this year, ousting Aung Sang Suu Kyi and the NLD was meant to correct this.

However, in addition to backing political groups protesting in the streets, the US has – for many decades – backed and armed ethnic rebels across the country. These rebels have now linked up with the US-backed NLD and are repeating US-backed regime change tactics used against the Arab World in 2011 in nations like Libya, Yemen, and Syria – including explicit calls for “international intervention.”

A US-Engineered “Asia Spring”  

Just as the US did during the 2011 “Arab Spring” – the US State Department, in a bid to create synergies across various regime change campaigns in Asia, has introduced the “Milk Tea Alliance” to transform individual US-backed regime change efforts in Asia into a region-wide crisis.

The BBC itself admits in articles like, “Milk Tea Alliance: Twitter creates emoji for pro-democracy activists,” that:

The alliance has brought together anti-Beijing protesters in Hong Kong and Taiwan with pro-democracy campaigners in Thailand and Myanmar.

Omitted from the BBC’s coverage of the “Milk Tea Alliance” (intentionally) is the actual common denominators that unite it – US funding through fronts like the National Endowment for Democracy and a unifying hatred of China based exclusively on talking points pushed by the US State Department itself.

Circling back to the Pentagon Papers and recalling the coordinated, regional campaign the US sought to encircle China with – we can then look at more recent US government policy papers like the “Indo-Pacific Framework” published in the White House archives from the Trump administration.

The policy paper’s first bullet point asks:

How to maintain US strategic primacy in the Indo-Pacific region and promote a liberal economic order while preventing China from establishing new, illiberal spheres of influence, and cultivating areas of cooperation to promote regional peace and prosperity?

The paper also discusses information campaigns designed to “educate” the world about “China’s coercive behaviour and influence operations around the globe.” These campaigns have materialized in a propaganda war fabricating accusations of “Chinese genocide” in Xinjiang, China, claims that Chinese telecom company Huawei is a global security threat, and that China – not the US – is the single largest threat to global peace and stability today.

In reality US policy aimed at encircling China is predicated upon Washington’s desire to continue its own decades-long impunity upon the global stage and the continuation of all the wars, humanitarian crises, and abuses that have stemmed from it.

Understanding the full scope of Washington’s “competition” with China helps unlock the confusion surrounding unfolding individual crises like the trade war, the ongoing violence and turmoil in Myanmar, bombings in southwest Pakistan, students mobs in Thailand, riots in Hong Kong, and attempts by the US to transform the South China Sea into an international conflict.

Understanding that these events are all connected – then assessing the success or failure of US efforts gives us a clearer picture of the overall success Washington in encircling China.  It also gives governments and regional blocs a clearer picture of how to manage policy in protecting against US subversion that threatens national, regional, and global peace and stability.

*

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

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook” where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from NEO

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US Encirclement of China: A Progress Report
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

This past week the Texas Senate Committee on State Affairs took testimony from Texas physicians regarding SB 1669: Stop Forced Vaccination and Vaccine Passports in Texas.

SB 1669 was sponsored by Senator Bob Hall.

You can learn more about this bill at the National Vaccine Information Center’s Advocacy Portal (registration required.)

Here is some of the text provided to the public regarding Senate Bill 1669:

Contact your Texas State Legislators and Demand No Forced Vaccination, No Vaccine Passports, No Exceptions – Support SB 1669

Mandated vaccination in Texas with COVID-19 vaccines will be the reality unless the legislature takes decisive action now.  In fact, it has already started happening.

Houston Methodist Hospital has told its 26,000 employees to get vaccinated by June 7th or get fired. Atria Senior Living, which has 16 facilities in Texas, is requiring all employees to receive 2 COVID-19 vaccines by May 1, 2021 as a condition of employment or face termination.

The city of Farmer’s Branch, Texas is requiring COVID-19 vaccination to access the city run facility called The Branch Connection. Forget taking a cruise with Royal Caribbean from Texas unless you’ve been COVID-19 vaccinated. St. Edwards University in Austin became one of the first colleges to mandate COVID-19 vaccines.

This is just the beginning.

Governor Abbott’s Executive Order Prohibiting COVID-19 Vaccine Passports Falls Short at Protection

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has been quoted saying that in Texas, COVID-19 vaccines “are always voluntary and never forced.”

The truth is Executive Order GA 35 falls short at preserving the right of law-abiding Texas citizens to be able to function normally in society without having to show proof of a COVID-19 vaccination.

EO GA 35 only prohibits the government, or public or private entities funded by the government, from requiring documentation of an individual’s COVID-19 vaccination status. This does nothing to prohibit businesses not receiving government funding from banning customers who don’t have a COVID-19 vaccine. Also, this executive order fails to give any protection to employees whose employers are requiring COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of employment.

In addition, the limited protections offered in EO GA 35 will be short lived because the order only applies to “Emergency Use Authorization” (EUA) COVID-19 vaccines.  Once a vaccine has received full FDA approval, the EUA designation no longer applies and therefore neither will any protection in this executive order including the ban on forced vaccination by the government. Full FDA approval will be soon. Moderna, the manufacture of one of the 3 available COVID-19 vaccines, is already seeking full FDA approval, and Pfizer, one of the other manufacturers, announced it would seek full approval in the first half of 2021.

Governor Abbott’s executive order also falls short when compared to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s executive order banning vaccines passports which additionally prohibits all business from requiring COVID-19 vaccination status or post infection recovery status to gain access to or service from the business, and it applies to all COVID-19 vaccines instead of expiring after full FDA approval is achieved. It also protects personal privacy rights by prohibiting the government from publishing or sharing a person’s COVID-19 vaccination status to third parties.

Texans Need a Law Passed to Protect them From Forced Vaccination and Vaccine Passports (If you want to immediately see what you can do to help pass SB 1669 into law in Texas scroll down to “Action Needed)”

We are grateful to announce that Texas history has been made with the filing of
SB 1669 in the Texas Legislature by Senator Bob Hall.

SB 1669 prohibits discrimination or segregation based on vaccination or immune status and prohibits forced vaccination in all areas of your life.

We need your help getting SB 1669 moving as the bill is currently stalled awaiting a hearing in the Senate State Affairs Committee. Legislators need to be educated about the shortcomings in Governor Abbott’s executive order and the vulnerabilities for mandated vaccination in Texas based on current law so they can pass this bill or amend parts of it onto other bills.

This is by far the most comprehensive bill prohibiting mandated vaccination in all areas that could affect your life including government orders, employment, healthcare, education, access to businesses, access to events and venues like sports and concerts, long-term care, nursing homes, insurance, and childcare.

Read more at the National Vaccine Information Center’s Advocacy Portal.

Senator Bob Hall, in his opening statements at the Senate hearing this week stated:

The chief responsibility and Constitutional role of our government is to protect the rights of the individual. Employees can take off their helmets, masks, and uniforms at the end of the work day, but they cannot remove a vaccine.

Dr. Richard Bartlett was the first physician to testify in favor of SB 1669 to Stop Forced Vaccination and Vaccine Passports in Texas.

Dr. Bartlett has over 28 years of medical practice experience and is a veteran primary care and emergency room doctor in West Texas.

Dr. Bartlett is best known since the COVID crisis started as a doctor who has cured many patients using an older, already FDA approved drug, called budesonide, which is an inhaled corticosteroid. (Learn more here.)

During his testimony, Dr. Bartlett explained that there are existing treatments already available to treat COVID patients, making it unnecessary to mandate experimental new “vaccines.”

He pointed to a recent Oxford University study just published that showed 90% success rate in using inhaled budesonide with COVID patients in preventing long-term care or hospitalization.

From the Oxford study:

The STOIC study found that inhaled budesonide given to patients with COVID-19 within seven days of the onset of symptoms also reduced recovery time. Budesonide is a corticosteroid used in the long-term management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Findings from the phase 2 randomised study, which was supported by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), were published on the medRxiv pre-print server.

The findings from 146 people – of whom half took 800 micrograms of the medication twice a day and half were on usual care – suggests that inhaled budesonide reduced the relative risk of requiring urgent care or hospitalisation by 90% in the 28-day study period. Participants allocated the budesonide inhaler also had a quicker resolution of fever, symptoms and fewer persistent symptoms after 28 days. (Source.)

Dr. Bartlett works in the Emergency Room, and he stated that there are very few patients coming in now with COVID, but “I am now seeing more people come in (to the ER) who are having complications from the COVID shot.”

And Dr. Bartlett points out that these are mostly younger people who were in excellent health before the shot, since Dr. Bartlett works in Lubbock, Texas, which is a college town.

Dr. Ben Edwards of Veritas Medical in Lubbock, Texas, was the next physician to give testimony in favor of SB 1669 to Stop Forced Vaccination and Vaccine Passports in Texas.

Dr. Edwards received his degree from Baylor University, and later graduated from UT-Houston Medical School. He moved to Waco to complete his training at the Waco Family Practice Residency Program where he was Chief Resident. He now operates three clinics in West Texas.

Dr. Edwards stated his concern that “the forced and coerced COVID-19 vaccinations would, in my opinion, be a violation of the Nuremberg Code,” as well as several other international codes on bioethics and human rights.

He cited the fact that the CDC is now reporting 4,178 deaths reported to VAERS, while for the previous 20 years combined there were 4,182 deaths recorded from all vaccines.

He also pointed out that a Harvard Study has previously estimated that only about 1% of all adverse reactions to vaccines are ever reported to VAERS. Two other subsequent studies showed the same thing.

In his own practice, Dr. Edwards stated that he has received “numerous reports within hours of receiving the COVID vaccines that people have suffered strokes, heart attacks, pulmonary embolisms (blood clots), and sudden death.”

Dr. Edwards went on to cite research which shows that those with natural immunity to COVID (they already had it) will see a 2 to 3 fold increase risk of adverse reactions from the COVID shots.

Over half of Texans now have this natural immunity. He stated:

On a personal note, I believe that God gave us an amazingly robust immune system, and I don’t think you can improve on God.

The next physician to testify in favor of SB 1669 to Stop Forced Vaccination and Vaccine Passports in Texas was Dr. Amy Offutt from St. Marble Falls, TX.

Dr. Offutt is trained in Integrative Medicine. She was recently appointed by Governor Greg Abbott to the Pediatric Acute-Onset Neuropsychiatric Syndrome Advisory Council. In addition, she serves on the Board of Directors for ILADS (International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society).

Dr. Offutt is another physician who has been successfully treating COVID patients with existing early treatment protocols.

She testified:

As of last Friday, my practice has treated 579 acutely ill patients as old as 98 years of age, with only ten hospitalizations and one dead.

The man who died presented on the 12th day of illness was a transplant patient and had already been to the ER multiple times before seeking care from us. This was such an unnecessary tragedy.

Dr. Offutt believes that “informed consent is the core to shared decision making in medicine.”

The next physician to testify in favor of SB 1669 to Stop Forced Vaccination and Vaccine Passports in Texas was Dr. Angelina Farella from Webster, TX.

Dr. Farella is a pediatrician with over 25 years experience. She started out her testimony to the Senate Committee by stating:

I am here today to protect our children in Texas. This is a very scary situation that we are in right now.

Dr. Farella stated that as a pediatrician she has given out tens of thousands of vaccines, and that she is not “anti-vaccine,” but:

I am against this COVID vaccine, if we can even call it that (a vaccine.)

What we are doing to our children with this vaccine is actually criminal.

All of these physicians are “frontline physicians” who actually treat patients, but their clinical experiences in treating COVID patients is being censored by the corporate media, and ignored by the government and Big Pharma, in favor mass vaccination instead.

Here is their testimony. This is from our Rumble Channel, and it is also on our Bitchute Channel.

*

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

Featured image is from Health Impact News

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, food insecurity has increased in the United States. This is particularly true for households with young children.

I document new evidence from two nationally representative surveys that were initiated to provide up-to-date estimates of the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, including the incidence of food insecurity. Food insecurity occurs when a household has difficulty providing enough food due to a lack of resources.

The COVID Impact Survey and The Hamilton Project/Future of the Middle Class Initiative Survey of Mothers with Young Children asked validated questions taken from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) food security questionnaire in late April 2020.[1] Households and children are considered food insecure if the respondent indicates the following statements were often or sometimes true:

  • The food we bought just didn’t last and we didn’t have enough money to get more.
  • The children in my household were not eating enough because we just couldn’t afford enough food.

To compare April 2020 estimates of food insecurity with statistics from earlier time points, I use the same questions listed above to replicate these results with the Current Population Survey Food Security Supplement (FSS), the source of USDA’s official food insecurity statistics.[2]

Figure 1 illustrates the high levels of food insecurity observed in the COVID Impact Survey and in the Survey of Mothers with Young Children. By the end of April, more than one in five households in the United States, and two in five households with mothers with children 12 and under, were food insecure. In almost one in five households of mothers with children age 12 and under, the children were experiencing food insecurity.

Rates of food insecurity observed in April 2020 are also meaningfully higher than at any point for which there is comparable data (2001 to 2018; Figure 2). Looking over time, particularly to the relatively small increase in child food insecurity during the Great Recession, it is clear that young children are experiencing food insecurity to an extent unprecedented in modern times.

Food Insecurity Has Deteriorated More among Households with Children

In the Survey of Mothers with Young Children, 17.4 percent of mothers with children ages 12 and under reported that since the pandemic started, “the children in my household were not eating enough because we just couldn’t afford enough food.” Of those mothers, 3.4 percent reported that it was often the case that their children were not eating enough due to a lack of resources since the coronavirus pandemic began.

By comparison, in the 2018 FSS, 3.1 percent of mothers with a child age 12 and under reported that their children were not eating enough because they could not afford enough food ever in the past twelve months. The incidence of hardship among children as measured by responses to this question has increased 460 percent.

But responses to this question alone do not fully capture child food insecurity. To estimate food insecurity, the USDA aggregates a battery of questions on access to food from the Current Population Survey. In total for 2018, 7.4 percent of mothers with children under the age of 12 had food insecure children in their household, more than double the share who said that the children in their household were not eating enough because they couldn’t afford enough food (3.1 percent). If the ratio between this single question and the overall measure of child food insecurity were to continue to hold today, 17.4 percent children not eating enough would translate into more than a third of children experiencing food insecurity.

The Survey of Mothers with Young Children found that 40.9 percent of mothers with children ages 12 and under reported household food insecurity since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This is higher than the rate reported by all respondents with children under twelve in the COVID Impact Survey (34.4 percent) but the same as women 18–59 living with a child 12 and under (39.2 percent.) In 2018, 15.1 percent of mothers with children ages 12 and under affirmatively answered this question in the FSS, slightly more than the 14.5 percent that were food insecure by the complete survey. The share of mothers with children 12 and under reporting that the food that they bought did not last has increased 170 percent.

Food insecurity in households with children under 18 has increased by about 130 percent from 2018 to today. Using the COVID Impact Survey, I find that 34.5 percent of households with a child 18 and under were food insecure as of late April 2020. On this single question (“the food we bought didn’t last…”) in the 2018 FSS, 14.7 percent of households with children 18 and under affirmatively answered this question; this value is slightly higher than the overall rate of food insecurity among households with children 18 and under for that year.

High levels of food insecurity are not just a problem of households with children. Prior to the crisis, in 2018, 11.1 percent of households were food insecure and 12.2 percent of households answered the single question in the battery affirmatively. The Urban Institute’s Health Reform Monitoring Survey, in the field from March 25 to April 10, used the six-question short form food insecurity module and found that 21.9 percent of households with nonelderly adults were food insecure. By late April 2020, 22.7 percent of households reported in the COVID Impact Survey not having sufficient resources to buy more food when the food that they purchased didn’t last. Overall rates of household food insecurity have effectively doubled.

Families Need More Resources to Handle these Material Hardships

Policymakers must act to protect the health and well-being of the American people, especially children.

Luckily, food insecurity is an unusual policy challenge in that it recommends a clear solution. To reduce the number of people, including children, who have insufficient food due to a lack of resources, policymakers can supply the resources.

To increase food security, economic security, and economic stimulus, Congress should increase the generosity of food security programs immediately and ensure that benefits levels stay elevated consistent with economic data. Governors should work with USDA to implement these programs. Specifically:

  • Increase maximum Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food Stamp program) benefits by at least 15 percent and double the minimum benefit;
  • Provide SNAP emergency allotments, authorized under Families First, to those households that are eligible to receive the maximum level of benefits (more than 5 million children reside in these households and they have received no additional SNAP benefits during this crisis);
  • Pandemic-EBT through this summer and through at least the end of the 2020-2021 school year to ensure there are sufficient resources to purchase food in the event of ongoing schooling disruptions (Pandemic-EBT is a new program which provides the value of school meals as a grocery voucher to eligible families when schools are closed, a little more than $100 per child per month);
  • Support families with children ages 5 and under through an additional SNAP multiplier or by broadening eligibility for Pandemic-EBT; and,
  • Suspend SNAP work requirements for students and sustain the ABAWD SNAP work requirement suspension.

At the very beginning of the COVID-19 crisis, Diane Schanzenbach and I called for “at least” a 15 percent benefit increase to SNAP. Evidence presented in this piece reiterates that a 15 percent increase to SNAP should be the floor.

New nationally representative surveys fielded since the pandemic began show that rates of food insecurity overall, among households with children, and among children themselves are higher than they have ever been on record. Food insecurity represents an urgent matter for policymakers in the capitol and in state houses across the country. Food security programs, centrally SNAP and Pandemic-EBT, must be strengthened and expanded immediately.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Notes

[1] The COVID Impact Survey is a nationally representative survey conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago on behalf of the Data Foundation; it uses the AmeriSpeak panel and was in the field from April 20 to April 26, 2020. The Hamilton Project and the Future of the Middle Class Initiative, both affiliates of the Brookings Institution, conducted a nationally representative survey of mothers with children ages 12 and under using SurveyMonkey from April 27 to April 28, 2020. Technical documentation for the COVID Impact Survey can be found here. The Survey of Mothers with Young Children was developed by Lauren Bauer and Richard Reeves; Katherine Guyot and Emily Moss contributed substantially to the development of the survey and we acknowledge the contributions of The Hamilton Project, Future of Middle Class Initiative, and Economic Studies staff at the Brookings Institution. Both surveys used an iterative raking procedure to adjust the surveyed data to match demographic weighting variables obtained from the 2020 Current Population Survey. The COVID Impact Survey was weighted to reflect the U.S. population 18 and over while the Survey of Mothers with Young Children was weighted to reflect the population of mothers with at least one of their own children age 12 and under in their household. Additional technical documentation regarding the Survey of Mothers with Young Children is available from the author.

[2] While this is a cleaner approach than comparisons to the complete food insecurity battery, the food insecurity time period about which the three surveys ask are each different. I have presented the most conservative estimates throughout this piece, comparing affirmative responses on single questions from the food insecurity battery for the last twelve months (FSS), the last 30 days (COVID Impact Study), and since the coronavirus pandemic began (Survey of Mothers with Young Children). Additional analyses are available from the author.

First published on April 16, 2021

“Life has become very difficult. We spend all our time looking for basic life necessities. We spend hours searching for either oil, electricity, solar energy, gas, any way to provide for our basic necessities, a life that is difficult in Sana’a, in rural areas it is even more difficult. All of these shortages are caused by the blockade.”

– Ahmed Jahaf, Yemeni artist [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The country of Yemen, once renowned for its architectural gems and theatre shaping the minds and memory of its population, is now scraping itself out from under the wreckage of homes, schools, mosques and hospitals downed by Saudi-led coalition airstrikes.[2]

The battle for control of Yemen has persisted for more than six years. According to December 2020 statistics from the UN Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs:

“The war had already caused an estimated 233,000 deaths, including 131,000 from indirect causes such as lack of food, health services and infrastructure”[3]

According to UNICEF, 80 per cent of the population are in need of humanitarian assistance. That includes 12 million children. [4]

According to  the latest Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) Acute Malnutrition report:

“Nearly 2.3 million children under the age of five in Yemen are projected to suffer from acute malnutrition in 2021, four United Nations agencies warned today. Of these, 400,000 are expected to suffer from severe acute malnutrition and could die if they do not receive urgent treatment.”[5]

This colossal catastrophe, the largest humanitarian crisis in the world, nevertheless has not generated much in the way of mainstream media concern. More than that, the U.S., UK, Canada are willingly complicit in the carnage![6]

Some moves have been made in recent days by the newly sworn in U.S. President Joe Biden promising to end arms sales to the Saudi Arabia assault on Yemen, freezing arms sales to Saudi Arabia and backing off of designating the rebel group in Yemen, the targets of Saudi wrath, as terrorists. But will this do anything to meaningfully end the conflict or the widespread suffering resulting from blocks to commercial trade which predominantly brings in assistance to the starving region? Can moves by ordinary people throughout the world resolve the turmoil in time to avoid a worsening horror? These are questions the Global Research News Hour hopes will be addressed in this special hour. [7][8][9]

Coming in our first half hour we are joined by the antiwar and social justice activist Azza Robji. She breaks down the extent of the crisis, the role of aggressor states, including Canada, and outlines the various ways people can come together to alter the course of the dangerous powers we live in.

In our second half hour we are joined by two journalists, Steven Sahiounie based in Latakia, Syria, and Yousra Abdulmalik based in Sana’a in Yemen to outline details about the current approach by Biden, the UN’s involvement, and efforts by the Western countries to make a real difference for the people of Yemen.

Azza Robji was born in Ariana, Tunisia. She is an executive member of Vancouver’s anti-war coalition Mobilization Against War & Occupation (MAWO). She authored the 2019 book U.S. and Saudi War on the People of Yemen.

Steven Sahiounie is an award-winning journalist. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Abdulmalik Yousra is a Yemeni journalist based in the capital Sana’a. Her articles appear on major Yemeni news outlets.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 312)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.

WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.

CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am. 

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time. 

Notes:

  1. Robji, Azza (2019), p.161 ‘U.S. and Saudi War on the People of Yemen’, Battle of Ideas Press
  2. Robji, azza op cit. pg 49, 50
  3. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/12/1078972#:~:text=UN%20Podcasts-,UN%20humanitarian%20office%20puts%20Yemen%20war%20dead,%2C%20mostly%20from%20’indirect%20causes’&text=Millions%20of%20children%20across%20Yemen,the%20country%20(file%20photo).
  4. https://www.unicefusa.org/mission/emergencies/child-refugees/crisis-in-yemen#:~:text=In%20Yemen%2C%20a%20child%20dies%20every%2010%20minutes%20from%20preventable%20causes&text=Eighty%20percent%20of%20the%20population,Cholera%20is%20endemic.
  5. https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/acute-malnutrition-threatens-half-children-under-five-yemen-2021-un
  6. Rabji, Azza op cit. Pg 58-60,
  7. Borger, Julian and Wintour, Patrick (Feb 4, 2021), ‘Biden announces end to US support for Saudi-led offensive in Yemen’, The Guardian; https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/04/us-end-support-saudi-led-operations-yemen-humanitarian-crisis
  8. https://www.state.gov/revocation-of-the-terrorist-designations-of-ansarallah/
  9.  , Daphne and, Michelle (Jan 19, 2021), ‘U.S. exempts U.N., aid groups from effort to cut off Yemen’s Houthis’, Reuters; https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-usa-idUSKBN29O1X4

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).

***

Updated on May 10, 2021

The validity of the PCR test has been questioned for months, if not from the very beginning of the declared covid-19 plandemic, including lately also by WHO. However, this test is still and ever more so being forced upon us. This despite the fact that ever more scientific evidence comes to the fore that the test is absolutely unsuited to determine whether a person is “infected” with the covid-19 virus. According to some scientists there are up to 90% false positives. Besides, a positive in 97% of the cases does not indicate that you will come down with symptoms. Especially young people, and people without any co-morbidities rarely show any symptoms.

On the other hand, there is a relentless drive by western countries, foremost Europe and the US to vaccinate-vaccinate-vaccinate – and this with a substance that is not even qualifying as a vaccine, namely a new type of what’s also called “gene-therapy”, a mRNA-type injection which will affect the human genome and most likely the human ADN. mRNA stands for messenger ribonucleuc acid.

The best-known pharma-manufacturers of these mRNA-type substances, falsely called vaccines, include Pfizer, Moderna and a few other inoculations from the Bill Gates created GAVI Alliance, or the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations, also called the Vaccine Alliance. They are located in Geneva, next door to WHO.

There are also adenovector-based covid so-called vaccines, such as AstraZeneca and J&J which have been banned by several countries, because of their high risk of blood clotting, or post-vaccination cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). These are particularly dangerous for young people. In fact, AstraZeneca recently and officially acknowledged that thrombocytopenia (low blood platelet count due to an autoimmune reaction) is a ‘frequent (1% to 10%)’ vaccine adverse event, even though it wasn’t detected during the vaccine trial.

Yet, AstraZeneca and J&J do not have the decency to withdraw them from the market. To the contrary, they continue to push them – letting governments ban them, if they feel the risk is too high. What’s even worse is that the European Medicine’s Agency (EMA) has approved them and is silent in the face of increasing injuries and death rates.

Both of these therapies are basically untested. No substantial animal trials. In the few animal trials carried out on ferrets and rats, all animals died. Claiming an emergency, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognizes the gravity of the current public health emergency and has granted a so-called Emergency Use Application (EUA) for what effectively is a gene-therapy, not a vaccine. Therefore, further animal trials were skipped and this experimental gene-treatment, the mRNA-type jabs went directly to humans – which are now acting as guinea pigs.

For the tremendous risks and dangers of this therapy, see the recent exclusive interview with Lifesitenews.com (7 April 2021), and testimony of former Pfizer VP and Chief Science Officer, Mike Yeadon, who says “Your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death.’ See full interview here. 

It appears that so-called vaccination and testing are in reverse proportions related, i.e. the fewer people volunteer to take the jab, the more governments force these false PCR test on the population. In many countries, Switzerland is a case in point, governments “allow” schools to test school children, including Kindergarten up to four times per month, and businesses may do the same, for the “safety of co-workers” – never mind that most people in many countries still work from their home offices. Not submitting to a test or a highly questionable vaccine, may result in dismissal – losing your job. That’s as gloomy and spooky as it has become, this covid-craze.

Now they have introduced “self-testing kits” sold or distributed by pharmacies. Despite intense propaganda, most of these government bought and subsidized tests remain in pharmacies warehouses, as ever fewer people are willing to submit to this lunacy. On top of it all, you have to report only the positive tests of the self-tests – a further up-wards distortion of the anyway false picture of the so-called “infection rate”. – And nobody seems to ask why. Or if they do, they do it not LOUD ENOUGH.

Of course, the higher the number of covid positives, the higher the willingness to vaccinate, so the propaganda assumes, and if not, the better the justification for more lockdowns, more fear – and again – maybe – more willingness to vaccinate. You see – all actions drive to more fear and eventually “more vaccination”. It is as if countries were given a vaccination quota they have to fulfill, and there seems to be no measure of coercion strong enough to get people to submit to this awful, untested jab.

Even the US top-doc, Dr. Anthony Fauci, expresses his doubts on the vaccines’ effectiveness. See here.

One may also ask, why does Europe and the US not allow the Russian Sputnik V or one of the internationally rolled-out Chinese vaccines? Maybe because these vaccines are real vaccines, based on a decades long experience, the traditional method of injecting a weak or dead virus which will react when it comes in contact with a live virus and creates antibodies to create immunity – without affecting your DNA?

It becomes increasingly obvious that there is a special agenda behind this fierce testing and vaccination craze. To top it all off, and to come closer with a reason for it all, a recent report suggests (yet to be confirmed) that according to Johns Hopkins University, You can be vaccinated with a PCR test, even without knowing (11 April 2021). There we go. See here for more details.

So, why is “vaccination” so important? – And especially vaccination with an mRNA-type injection   why? – One reason may be this: as reported by The Daily Mail and RT.

Pentagon scientists reveal a microchip that senses COVID-19 in your body.

The technology was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which operates under the Pentagon. The microchip is sure to spark worries among some about a government agency implanting a microchip in a citizen. And who knows what else the microchip does in your body. Anything coming from DARPA is not as benign as it is made to believe, and is certainly not an attraction or a convincer for people who are anyway not keen on getting covid-jabbed.

In addition, the collateral damage of these untested toxins that go as vaccines, the immediate side effects are already by an order of magnitude higher than those of conventional vaccinations. The Defender (Children’s Health Defense – CHD) lists statistical figures from CDC, that the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) received data that between Dec. 14, 2020 and April 1, 2021, a total of 56,869 adverse events were reported, including 2,342 deaths — an increase of 93 over the previous week — and 7,971 serious injuries, up 245 over the same time period. This is the latest from CDC.

According to CDC, these figures are vastly under-reported.

*

In January 2019, the WHO defined the growing number of vaccine critics as one of the ten greatest threats to global health, and since the unprecedented corona vaccination fiasco, the number of vaccine refusers has multiplied. Meanwhile, resistance is emerging even within the conventional medical community. But the masterminds at WHO continue to insist on an unrealistic vaccination rate of at least 70 percent.

Why this tremendous push for vaccination? We know that the covid-19 death rate is comparable to that of a common flu. See Dr. Fauci in peer-reviewed “Navigating the Uncharted”. Listening to Dr. Yeadon, we also know that vaccination is unnecessary, as there are many effective preventive and curing medicines available.

In addition to the immediate side effects, the medium to long-term collateral damage may be much more significant. Dr. Yeadon, Pfizer’s former VP says that two to three years down the road, we may see massive genocide-like deaths from mRNA-type injections. See this.

It is increasingly clear that behind this covid cum vaccination drive, there is a eugenics agenda of gigantic proportions. This has recently also been recognized by the leading German Human Rights lawyer, Dr. Reiner Füllmich, a member of the Corona Investigative Committee, which investigates globally on the prosecution of fraudulent reporting of covid- vaccination, testing and leading to fraudulent “case figures” – and to a massive drive to instill fear in the population. He and his team are launching several Class Action suits in the US and in Canada, and several lawsuits against individuals and institutions in Europe and the US. He calls these coming trials “Nuremberg 2”, after the Nuremberg trials following WWII.

In a recent interview (12 April 2021), Dr. Füllmich said he sees the light at the end of the tunnel. He also said about Corona measures,

“These are the worst crimes against humanity ever committed. The few people who can still think independently, about 10 to 20 percent of the population, they know that the question was never about a virus or human health, but about a massive thinning of the world population, and total control.” – See the full interview here.

Add to the horrendous deadly future for maybe hundreds of millions of people from the vaccines, that more mRNA-type substances will be implanted in people old and young, including children, without them knowing, by repeated testing – and in some countries even forced or coerced repeated testing.

If we go by the words of experienced Dr. Mike Yeadon, former VP Chief Science for Pizer, we might be in for mass-dying – an outright genocide – in a few years.

And this in addition to the collateral social, economic and health damage already perpetuated by false covid-data and government fear-instilling lying, leaving hundreds of millions in misery, despair and abject famine – leading to death.

Is massive depopulation an objective of this corona fraud?

Hence, be aware of even more exposure to the risk by accepting the incessant call for testing-testing and more testing. Be alert and aware and follow the light.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

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

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

Today is a day to celebrate the prophetic voice and witness of Fr. Daniel Berrigan, the non-violent anti-war activist and poet, whose life and witness has touched so many lives.  He was born on May 9, 1921 and would have been 100 years old today.  He died five years ago, but his spirit continues to animate and inspire so many others. 

The following essay by Edward Curtin is from his recent book, Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies. (click here to order from Clarity

Radical dissidents and prophets have never had an easy time of it.  When alive, that is.  Once safely dead, however, honors and respect are often heaped on their heads.  The dead can’t talk back, or so it is assumed.  Nor can they cause trouble.

Jesuit priest Fr. Daniel Berrigan was one such man.  When he died on April 30, 2016, the major media, organs of propaganda and war promotion, noted his death in generally respectful ways.  This included The New York Times.  But back in 1988 when Daniel was a spry 68 years old, the Times published a review of his autobiography, To Dwell in Peace, which was a nauseating hatchet job aimed at dismissing his anti-war activism through the cheap trick of psychological reductionism and reversal.   

How could Berrigan really be a Christian, a man of peace, the reviewer Kenneth Woodward (himself a product of eight years of Jesuit education) asked rhetorically, and be so angry?  Wasn’t he in truth a bitter, ungrateful, and angry – i.e. violent – “celebrity priest” masquerading as an apostle of peace?  And therefore, were not his peace activities, his writings, and his uncompromising critique of American society null and void, the rantings of a disturbed man?  Furthermore, by the unspoken intentional logic of such an ad hominem attack, were not those who follow in his footsteps, those who hear his words and – God forbid! – take them seriously, were not they too wolves in sheep’s clothing, angry children trying to exact revenge on their parents?  “Gratefulness, we learn, is not a Berrigan trait,” Woodward concluded in his bilious review of a “pervasively angry autobiography.”  “The Berrigans (note the plural usage), it seems, never learned to laugh at themselves.”

Such character assassination has long been one tool of the power elite. Silence or kill the prophets one way or another.

When Dan and I first met we walked together in the blue cold snowy silence of Ithaca nights.  It was December 1967.  He was a 46-year-old black-bereted whirling dervish orbiting a profound spiritual and poetic stillness; I, a 23-year-old Marine intent on declaring myself a conscientious objector before my reserve unit was activated and sent to Vietnam.

He had been arrested for the first time at a Pentagon demonstration in late October.  A few days later his brother, Philip, together with three others, had upped the ante dramatically by pouring blood on draft files in Baltimore. This action, which became known as the Baltimore Four and started a chain of draft board raids over the next years, and the raging Vietnam War that Johnson was dramatically escalating, were the backdrop for my three-day visit with Dan.  The invitation had been arranged by my inspirational college teacher, Bill Frain, Dan’s friend.

Walking and talking, talking and walking, we whirled around the Cornell campus where Dan was a chaplain, into and out of town, from apartment to apartment, a gathering here, a Mass there.  The intensity was electric.  At a party I met and learned from the brilliant Pakistani scholar and activist Eqbal Ahmad. At an apartment Mass led by Dan in his inimitable style I felt as if we were early Jewish-Christians gathering in secret.  There was a sense of foreboding, as if something would soon break asunder as the U.S. rained bombs and napalm down on the Vietnamese. 

I recall a sense of intense agitation on Dan’s part, as if events were conspiring to push him to answer an overwhelming question.  I knew from the first that he was no J. Alfred Prufrock who would sit on the fence.  He would never say, “I am no prophet – and here’s no great matter/I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker/And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker/And in short, I was afraid.”  A poet, yes, a lover of beauty, that I could tell; but I felt his fierceness from the start, and it was something I viscerally connected with. He was preparing for a great leap into the breach; was Odysseus readying to leave Ithaca, not for Troy to wage a violent war, but a peaceful Odysseus readying to leave Ithaca to travel to Vietnam to wage a non-violent war against war – a lifelong journey. I too felt that my life would never be the same and I was venturing out onto unchartered waters. His courage rubbed off on me.

In those few days with Dan I unlearned most of the lessons my Jesuit education had instilled in me.  Deo et Patria were rent asunder.  I had never accepted the Marine slogan that “my rifle is my life,” nor had I fully ingested the Jesuits’ conservative ideology – what Dan called “consensus, consensus” – that I should become a man successful through speaking out of both sides of my mouth and serving two masters.  But at that point I had no Jesuit mentor who embodied another path.  In Dan I found that man, or he found me. 

Contrary to some public images of him, he was a man of indirection as well as bluntness. He had the gift of discernment. Not once during my initial stay with him did he suggest a course of action for me.  We talked about the war, of course, of his brother Phil’s and others’ courage, but we also talked of poetry and art, of the beauty of starry winter nights and the dramatic waterfalls surrounding the Cornell campus.  Most of all he wanted to know about me, my family, my background; he listened intently as if he were contemplating his own past as well, weighing the future.  I had already decided to leave the Marines one way or the other, but we never discussed this. He arranged for me to speak to a Cornell lawyer who did anti-war work in case I needed legal help.  But I felt I was in the presence of a man who knew and respected that such momentous decisions were made in solitary witness to one’s conscience. I felt he supported me whatever I did.

When I set sail from Ithaca, I felt blessed and confirmed.  I would never go to war; I knew that.  But I also came away with a different lesson: that not participating in the killing wasn’t enough. I would have to find ways to resist the forces of violence that were consuming the world.  They would have to be my ways, not necessarily Dan’s.  I was unyielding in my conviction that I would not stay in the Marines no matter what the consequences; but after that I would have to choose and take responsibility for what Dan referred to as “the long haul” – a lifelong commitment to the values we shared.  But values are probably too abstract a way to describe what I mean.  Dan conveyed to me through his person that each of us must follow his soul’s promptings – there was no formula.  I was young enough to be his son, and yet he spoke to me as an equal.  Despite his adamantine strength of purpose and conviction, he let me see the scarecrow man within.  No words can describe the powerful stamp this set on my heart that has never left me.

Less than two months later the TET offensive exploded, and Dan was on that night flight to Hanoi with Howard Zinn to bring back three US airmen who had been shot down while bombing North Vietnam. Then the great anti-war leader, Martin Luther King, was executed by government forces in Memphis.  The message sent was clear.  Shortly Dan was invited by Philip to join the Catonsville action.  He gave it prayer and thought, and then jumped in, knowing that the children he had met in the North Vietnamese bomb shelters hiding from American bombs were pleading with him. He later wrote of holding a little boy:

In my arms, fathered

In a moment’s grace, the messiah

Of all my tears, I bore reborn

A Hiroshima child from hell.

He was a changed man.  No longer just a priest-poet, he would now become a revolutionary anti-war activist for life.  He wrote in “Mission to Hanoi, 1968.” 

“Instructions for return. Develop for the students the meaning of Ho’s ‘useless years.’  The necessity for escaping once and for all the slavery of ‘being useful.’  On the other hand, prison, contemplation, life of solitude.  Do the things that even ‘movement people’ tend to despise and misunderstand.  To be radical is habitually to do things which society at large despises.”

Shortly after Catonsville, I was privileged to be invited by Bill Frain to a meeting at his house in Queens, New York of the Catonsville Nine.  We met deep in his backyard, huddled in a circle away from the prying eyes and listening devices of the FBI.  There my education continued.  In January I had submitted my request to be discharged from the Marines as a conscientious objector.  Now I was gathering with nine incredibly courageous Americans who had taken personal responsibility for the nation’s war crimes in an act that sent shock waves around the world.  Although I don’t recall feeling it at the time, I now realize how blessed I was to have been allowed into that august company.  For them to have trusted a 23-year-old whom eight of them had never met takes my breath away.  I am sure Dan gave the okay.

Later that night I drove him back to where he was staying in Yonkers.  So true to form, as we crossed the Whitestone Bridge in the dark, this beautiful man spoke of the exquisiteness of the sparkling lights and the illuminated Manhattan skyline.  He was a hunger artist for beauty. And we talked again of poetry and family, of our relationships, how important they were, and how fractious relationships could get when one stood up for truth and victims everywhere.  He asked about my girlfriend: what did she think about these things?  I sensed that without being explicit he was warning me, while simultaneously telling himself that he was in for some sharp criticism from people close to him.  As we rolled along in that cocoon of intimate talk, I again realized how rare this man was, how multi-faceted and deep.

Afterwards, as I drove home, I kept thinking of the great novel by Ignazio Silone, Bread and Wine, a book Bill Frain had introduced me to; of Pietro Spina, the revolutionary in hiding disguised as a priest, and his former teacher, the priest Don Benedetto. Hunted and surveilled by Italy’s fascist government, they secretly meet and talk of the need to resist the forces of state and church collaborating in violence and suppression.  Dan and the others had dramatically confronted these twin ogres and were willing to face the consequences. My problem was that Dan was both the revolutionary and the priest, but I was neither.  Who was I? The meaning, if not the exact words, of Don Benedetto came back to me: “But it is enough for one little man to say ‘No!’ murmur ‘No!’ in his neighbor’s ear, or write ‘No!’ on the wall at night, and public order is endangered.” And Pietro: “Liberty is something you have to take for yourself.  It’s no use begging it from others.” 

A few days later another conspiratorial murder took place as Bobby Kennedy was murdered in Los Angeles.  First King, then Kennedy.  Again I heard Don Benedetto’s words: “Killing a man who says ‘No!’ is a risky business because even a corpse can go on whispering ‘No! No! No!’ with a persistence and obstinacy that only certain corpses are capable of.  And how can you silence a corpse?”

Then the police riots at the Democratic convention followed.  Fascist forces had been unleashed.  The Trial of the Catonsville Nine took place in October, and of course they were convicted – sentenced as Dan so famously put it, for “the burning of paper instead of children.” That fall I received a letter from Marine Headquarters in Washington D.C. informing me that I was being released from the Marine Corps so I “could take final vows in a religious order.”  It was a complete fabrication since I was engaged to be married, but it was a way to get rid of me without honoring my request as a CO.  Yet in its weird way it was true: I was religious and I was trying to follow an order, but as one of the dissenters led by Dan and his brave companions who formed a different corps – one dedicated to life, not death.

In 1970 when Dan had gone underground instead of reporting for prison, I travelled to the big antiwar event, “America is Hard to Find,” at Cornell. Word had gone out that Dan would appear, which he did in Barton Hall in front of a crowd of 15,000, including the FBI who were ready to pounce on him.  When Dan appeared on stage and gave a moving speech about the need to oppose the war, silence and a sense of held breath filled the hall.  When he finished to thunderous applause, the lights went out and when they came back on, he was gone.  It was like being at a magic show.  He had escaped inside a puppet of one of the twelve apostles – oh what great joy and laughter! A circus act!  Puckish Dan, imaginative through and through, irreverently funny, later said, “I was hoping it wasn’t a puppet of Judas.”

That was the man.

Once my wife and I were eating dinner with him at the 98th St apartment where he lived with other Jesuits.  The conversation turned to Dorothy Day, the founder of The Catholic Worker and long-time pacifist and servant of the poor. Day had been a mentor to Dan.  I told him how I had followed his example when I was teaching in Brooklyn and brought my students to The Catholic Worker to meet with Day.  Now that Day had died, we asked, what would be the Catholic Church’s attitude toward this great dissident?  I said that I thought the church would eventually declare her a saint now that she was safely dead.  Dan strongly demurred; that would never happen, he said, she was too radical and the institution would not recognize her.  Now that Day is being considered for canonization – i.e. declared a saint – I can’t help think of the ways the powers-that-be, both ecclesiastical and secular, have characterized him before and after his death.  Is irony the right word?

I return to a question he had the effrontery to ask, not as an academic exercise but as an existential question demanding a living answer: “What is a human being, anyway?”  It is the type of question asked by Emerson and Thoreau, Gandhi and King, dead sages all.

In the truest sense he answered that question with his life.  A human being is not cannon fodder, a human being is not a piece of paper, not an abstraction, a human being is not a human being when forced to wage war or live off the spoils of war, a human being is not a human being when in the grip of “Lord Nuke.”  None of these.  A human being is a child of God, and as such is called to resist the rule of death in the world, to resist violence with love and non-violence.  A human being is a lover.

This means a human being is necessarily at odds with the powers-that-be, the governments and corporations that in the name of peace prepare for and wage war.  It is a view of human being that is bound to be unpopular, except when it can be affirmed with pieties but contradicted by actions

Sainthood is a piety, the kiss of death bestowed as a guilt offering by authorities lacking authority. It is the Judas kiss – a cosmic joke made to make God laugh.

Dan wasn’t a saint.  He was something more – a man – a brave, brilliant, and prophetic inspirational dissident, full of contradictions like us all. He was a true human being of the highest sacramental order – flesh and blood, bread and wine, life and death. At the height of the AIDS crisis in the 1980s, when social panic consumed the nation and people, including the institutional churches, shunned gay men as lepers, only a man of supreme non-judgmental compassion would have befriended and cared for dying patients, as Dan did for many years.  This didn’t attract headlines as his anti-war activities did, but it symbolized the man.  He was a genuine Christian.

Today, he is in death what he was in life – a great spiritual leader.  Ever faithful, he leads us on, by deeds and words.  There are no bars to manhood (or womanhood), he once wrote.  Freedom is our birth-right.

This mess of mythological pottage, this self-contradictory dream, makes slaves of us,” he wrote, “keeps most of us inert and victimized, makes hostages of our children as well as ourselves.  And yet we are instructed by the highly placed smilers to keep smiling through, as if the dollars in our pockets or the brains in our heads were still workable, negotiable, a sound tender.  As though, in plain fact, our world was not raving mad in its chief parts.  And driving us mad, as the admission price to its Fun House.

On the afternoon of April 30, 2016, I was cleaning out files and had emptied two large drawers of papers.  I noticed there was one green sheet left in one drawer.  It was a saying Dan had sent to me about death.  “Though invisible to us our dead are not absent.”  I thought how true that was and wondered when Dan would die, knowing he was failing.

The next morning I was informed that Dan had died the previous day.  The presence of his absence struck me forcibly.  It consoles me in my sadness, as I know it does so many others.

On the morning of his funeral, there was a march around lower Manhattan in his honor.  Outside the Catholic Worker someone asked me to carry a large photo of Dan, circa 1968.  As we proceeded through the rainy streets, it dawned on me that we were walking together again, and although I was now carrying his image, he had carried me for so many years as that indelible stamp on my heart.  When I emerged from a coffee shop after urinating, some marchers laughed at the incongruous sight of Dan’s photo and me.  I pointed to Dan’s photo and said, “He really had to go.”  I think I heard Dan laugh and say, “That’s the way to shirk responsibility.”

I believe he walks beside us still, or in my case, he walks before me, beckoning me on, since I have such a long way to go to learn the lessons that he first taught me long ago on those snowy night walks through Ithaca.

No, you can’t silence certain corpses.

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.

***

Die „Neue Rheinische Zeitung NRhZ“ aus Köln veröffentlichte am 14. April ein Interview mit der Holocaustüberlebenden Vera Sharav (1). Frau Sharav sprach in der 44. Sitzung des Corona-Untersuchungsausschusses mit Rechtsanwalt Dr. Füllmich und seinem Team über „Die Wurzeln des Übels“. Dabei schilderte sie, wie sie als Kind der Verfolgung durch den deutschen Faschismus ausgeliefert war und deshalb in den USA die „Alliance Human Research Protection“ zum Schutz der Menschen vor medizinischer Willkür und vor Menschenversuchen gründete.

Zu Hitlers Masterplan Eugenik gehörte die „T-4-Aktion“, die systematische Ermordung von Menschen mit körperlichen, geistigen und seelischen Behinderungen. Die Leitung oblag der Zentraldienststelle T4 (eine Abkürzung für die Adresse Tiergartenstraße 4). Diesen Krankenmorden fielen bis zum Jahr 1945 über 200.000 Menschen zum Opfer. Ausgehend von Hitlers Masterplan kam Frau Sharav auf den heutigen Masterplan „Eugenik“ von Rockefeller, Gates und Schwab zu sprechen. Ihre Schlussfolgerung lautete:

„Das Virus ist nicht das Problem, …es ist die Eugenik. Hinzu kommt – wie vor 70 Jahren – der Gleichklang der Medien mit der Regierungspraxis (2).“

Deshalb richtete sie einen dringenden Appell an die Deutschen:

Stoppt den Masterplan Eugenik!

Zur Sprache kam dabei auch der sogenannte Nürnberger Kodex.

Nürnberger Kodex 

Am 19. August 1947 endete vor einem Militärgericht im Nürnberger Justizpalast der erste der sogenannten Nachfolgeprozesse des Nürnberger Kriegsverbrechertribunals. Sieben der 23 angeklagten Ärzte und Gesundheitsbeamten wurden zum Tode verurteilt und hingerichtet. Ihnen allen wurden verbrecherische medizinische Experimente und Zwangssterilisationen vorgeworfen. Als Konsequenz wurden klare rechtliche Kriterien geschaffen, die für den Bereich der medizinischen Menschenversuche festlegten, inwieweit es sich um „normale“ Experimente oder Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit handelt.

Der Nürnberger Kodex ist somit eine zentrale ethische Richtlinie zur Vorbereitung und Durchführung medizinischer, psychologischer und anderer Experimente am Menschen und gehört zu den medizinethischen Grundsätzen in der Medizinerausbildung. Die zehn Punkte des Nürnberger Kodex von 1947 besagen, dass bei medizinischen Versuchen an Menschen

„die freiwillige Zustimmung der Versuchsperson unbedingt erforderlich (ist). Das heißt, dass die betreffende Person im juristischen Sinne fähig sein muss, ihre Einwilligung zu geben; dass sie in der Lage sein muss, unbeeinflusst durch Gewalt, Betrug, List, Druck, Vortäuschung oder irgendeine andere Form der Überredung oder des Zwanges, von ihrem Urteilsvermögen Gebrauch zu machen; dass sie das betreffende Gebiet in seinen Einzelheiten hinreichend kennen und verstehen muss, um eine verständige und informierte Entscheidung treffen zu können (3).“ 

Corona-Impfung als Verletzung des Nürnberger Kodex? 

Nach Aussage der Professorin Heike Egner hat der Internationale Strafgerichtshof in Den Haag „eine aus Israel eingereichte Klage wegen Verletzung des Nürnberger Kodex durch die israelische Regierung und Pfizer angenommen – die Entscheidung darüber steht nun aus (4)“.

Eingereicht worden sei die Klage von einer Gruppe von Anwälten, Ärzten und besorgten Bürgern, die von ihrem demokratischen Recht Gebrauch machen möchten,

„keine experimentelle medizinische Behandlung (COVID-Impfstoff) zu erhalten und sich deswegen unter großem und schwerem illegalem Druck der israelischen Regierung fühlen (5).“

*

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

Dr. Rudolf Hänsel ist Diplom-Psychologe und Erziehungswissenschaftler.

Fussnoten

1. Siehe Video und Transkript der deutschen Fassung

2. Dito

3. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nürnberger_Kodex;      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_code

4. https://uniclub.aau.at/corona-impfung-als-verletzung-des-nuernberger-kodex/

5. Dito

  • Posted in Deutsch
  • Comments Off on Holocaustüberlebende Vera Sharav: Stoppt den Masterplan Eugenik!
  • Tags:

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

***

As soon as the al-Qaeda-affiliated “moderate opposition” of Greater Idlib considers that it could have a bit of freedom to act, the Syrian Arab Army reminds it that the situation isn’t so.

Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham and the other factions attempt to act, thinking that Damascus is preoccupied in its endeavor to contain ISIS in the central region with Russia’s help. It seems that they are mistaken.

On May 3rd, at least 4 militants of the Ahrar al-Sham Movement near the area of al-Burnas in the northern countryside of Lattakia were killed in a Syrian Arab Army (SAA) operation that included guided missile strikes by Damascus forces.

Then, on the very next day, the army struck a pickup and motorcycle of the al-Qaeda-affiliated Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP) near the village of al-Qarqur with an ATGM.

Both Arhar al-Sham and the TIP are allies of al-Qaeda’s Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, which leads the al-Fateh al-Mubeen Operations Room in Greater Idlib.

The operations room is highly likely behind all ceasefire violations that take place in Greater Idlib, and the positions of the factions it coordinates are continuously pounded by the SAA and its Russian support.

Furthermore, it is probably a matter of time until Turkey’s efforts and those of the factions it backs are also impeded in northeastern Syria.

May 5th was the seventh day in a row in which an electricity power outage continued in Hasaka province due to Turkish forces’ control of the quantities of water supplying the Euphrates Dam.

To top it all off, the US continues smuggling resources away from the Syrian people.

On May 5th, 35 trucks loaded with wheat were escorted in a convoy towards northern Iraq and away from Hasaka province.

In northern Iraq, instability is also a constant. On May 5th, unidentified militants attacked the Bai Hasan oil fields in the northern Iraqi province of Kirkuk, where large oil reserves are located.

The militants blew up two wells in the oil fields with explosive devices while attacking a nearby security post to distract the guards. A police officer was killed and three more were wounded in the attack.

Incidents such as this aren’t uncommon. Earlier, two other wells were blown up in the same field and ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack, which didn’t result in any real material losses.

Damascus and Baghdad have recently held talks on bilateral relations and cooperation in different fields. Security is likely one of them, and it is simply a matter of time until coordinated actions begin, initially against ISIS, and then likely against the Turkish forces whose encroachment both Syria and Iraq oppose.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

PayPal: [email protected], http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: The Al Qaeda Affiliated “Moderate Opposition” in Northern Syria
  • Tags: ,

 “I went through the anteroom on my way to that courtroom where Judge Sabo and another person were engaged in conversation. Judge Sabo was discussing the case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. During the course of that conversation, I heard Judge Sabo say, ‘Yeah, and I’m going to help them fry the n––-.’ There were three people present when Judge Sabo made that remark, including myself.” – in a sworn affidivit by Philadephia court reporter Terri Maurer-Carter, August 2001

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Even in the midst of an apparent pandemic keeping all Americans and many around the world in the grip of heightened fear, that did not stop people from rising up in centres globally to massively dispute and condemn the death of a black man – George Floyd – under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer. Anywhere from 15 to 26 million people are estimated to have shown up at protests in the USA in the month of June alone condemning the actions against Floyd and evidence of racism conducted by police generally.

Newspapers and broadcasts around the world couldn’t get enough of this incident and the unrest it was setting off. The fate of George Floyd resulted in the first major demonstration and possibly even the first news story generally that actually shoved COVID reporting aside. [2]

Mumia Abu Jamal was not so lucky.

In recent days, it was learned that Mumia Abu-Jamal, the former Black Panther and radio journalist who was arrested and charged under suspicious conditions, was taken to a hospital. He had suffered from Cirrhosis of the liver, Hepatitis C, a severe, chronic and debilitating skin condition, and COVID-19. As well, his heart was requiring major surgery. Advocates argue these concerns were a reflection of a court-documented medical neglect. [3]

Mumia has just entered his 40th year as an incarcerated prisoner. His trial was considered by Amnesty International, “clearly failed to meet minimum international standards safeguarding the fairness of legal proceedings” – meaning there are plenty of reasonable doubts about his guilt. And now his life is in peril. While Mumia’s got a cast of dedicated supporters in Philadelphia and around the world bringing attention to his plight, the media by and large is not paying attention.

If the guilty verdict given to former police officer Derek Chauvin in relation to the murder and manslaughter of George Floyd was to be the beacon signaling the downfall of racial policing everywhere, as some had hoped, than why is there a pause in the case of what is arguably the most famous political prisoner in America who has the fingerprints of bigoted treatment all over his body?

This week on the Global Research News Hour we plan to examine Mumia’s current health, legal and political situation and probe the distorted treatment of this legendary voice.

In our first half hour, long time Mumia supporter Suzanne Ross returns again with updates on Mumia’s situation, including the disappointing news brief from a so-called “progressive” lawyer. In the second half hour, we listen to another supporter Professor Johanna Fernández expand on the racial injustice angle from shackles in the hospital to the neglect in medical care, to media avoidance. Finally, running near the end of the show, Mike Africa Jr, member of the MOVE family, spends a few minutes taking the conversation beyond Mumia to discuss the bombing of their home by the police in May of ‘85 and the various events connected with the anniversary of that event.

Dr. Suzanne Ross is a New York City based clinical psychologist, a long-time anti-imperialist activist and representative of International Concerned Family and Friends of Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Associate Professor Johanna Fernández teaches 20th Century US history and the history of social movements in the Department of History at Baruch College (CUNY). She is the editor of Writing on the Wall: Selected Prison Writings of Mumia Abu-Jamal and one of the coordinators of the Campaign to Bring Mumia Home. She is also the host of the daily program Its a New Day for WBAI radio in New York City.

Mike Africa Jr. Is a writer, activist and hip hop artist. He hosts the weekly podcast “Ona Move w/Mike Africa, Jr.” and is the star of the HBOmax documentary “40 Years A Prisoner, he is a stage performer, keynote speaker.” He is the son of one of the MOVE 9 who gave birth to him while in prison.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 315)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.

WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.

CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am. 

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time

Notes:

  1. www.freemumia.com/terri-maurer-carter/
  2. Amy Mitchell, Mark Jurkowitz, J. Baxter Oliphant, and elisa Shearer (June 12, 2020), ‘Majorities of Americans Say News Coverage of George Floyd Protests Has Been Good, Trump’s Public Message Wrong’, Pew Research Centre: Journalism and Media; www.journalism.org/2020/06/12/majorities-of-americans-say-news-coverage-of-george-floyd-protests-has-been-good-trumps-public-message-wrong/
  3. havanatimes.org/news/mumia-abu-jamal-undergoes-successful-heart-surgery/

A recent Associated Press (AP) “report” entitled “The superspreaders behind top COVID-19 conspiracy theories”,  directed against several authors, academics and independent media including Global Research describes Michel Chossudovsky as “a professor emeritus of economics … and a conspiracy theorist who has argued the U.S. military can control the weather”. (emphasis added)

The insinuation is that the Independent media including Global Research are “Superspreaders” intent upon misleading public opinion.

My response: “do you home work”.  Sloppy journalism and “Fake News” on this and other issues including Covid.

There is a vast literature on weather modification for military use. Do your “Fact-checking”. The US Military can control the weather. And that is not a conspiracy theory, that’s a conspiracy fact.

I refer the distinguished AP journalists David Klepper, et al to consult the US Air Force document entitled “Weather as a Force Multiplier: Owning the Weather in 2025

We are dealing with REAL weapons of mass destruction and WHY is it not being reported upon.

It’s scary? Weather Modification for Military Use (2025) coincides chronologically with Joe Biden’s “New Cold War” and the World Economic Forum’s “Global Reset”.

I also suggest that the Associated Press consult the following document:

The Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva: 18 May 1977

Guided by the interest of consolidating peace, … and of saving mankind from the danger of using new means of warfare, (…) Recognizing that military … use of such [environmental modification techniques] could have effects extremely harmful to human welfare, Desiring to prohibit effectively military … use of environmental modification techniques in order to eliminate the dangers to mankind. … and affirming their willingness to work towards the achievement of this objective, (…) Each State Party to this Convention undertakes not to engage in military … use of environmental modification techniques having widespread, long-lasting or severe effects as the means of destruction, damage or injury to any other State Party.

(Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques, United Nations, Geneva, May 18, 1977. Entered into force: 5 October 1978)

What we are dealing with is a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD) which has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media, with some exceptions. Its deployment by the US Air Force is in violation of the 1978 convention quoted above.

This CBC documentary below released in the 1990s says the truth.

Those were the days of honest journalism.

(I will not comment on what the CBC has become today).

To watch this engaging 15-minute CBC documentary online, click here.

 

When the Lie Becomes the Truth. When War Becomes Peace

I have undertaken research on both “weather warfare” as well on as the use of “low yield” tactical nuclear weapons which are now being upheld as an instrument of peace. They are categorized as mini-nukes “harmless to civilians” with an explosive capacity between one third and 12 times a Hiroshima bomb.

The mainstream media casually describes nuclear weapons as a means to achieving World peace. It’s called “nuclear peace”.

According to “scientific opinion” (quoted by the  mainstream media “Superspreaders”):

“controlled nuclear proliferation [by the US] may be beneficial for inducing stability”.

And Joe Biden is now committed to extending Obama’s $1.2 trillion dollar nuclear weapons program which is intended to protect the “Free World”. What nonsense!

***

See also

Michel Chossudovsky, Weather Warfare: Beware the US military’s experiments with climatic warfare, The Ecologist, December 2007

 

Come tutto è iniziato con Damasco, la fine verrà da Damasco

Durante il mandato dell’ex presidente americano George W. Bush e dopo l’ammissione pubblica del fallimento delle guerre da lui condotte attraverso la pubblicazione del famoso “rapporto Baker-Hamilton” emesso [6 dicembre 2006] da una commissione composta da membri dei partiti repubblicano e democratico del Congresso degli Stati Uniti, il presidente siriano Bashar al-Assad ha lanciato il suo appello per la formazione di un sistema regionale che riunisca gli stati che si affacciano su cinque mari [il Mar Mediterraneo, il Mar Rosso, il Mar Caspio, il Mar Nero e il Mar del Golfo Arabico] per riempire il vuoto lasciato dal fallimento americano.

Il presidente siriano aveva quindi avviato una prima mossa includendo Russia, Iran, Turchia, Egitto e Arabia Saudita, motivando i suoi alleati russi e iraniani ad accettare il suo invito e cercando di convincere Turchia, Arabia Saudita ed Egitto della portata dei rischi derivanti dal vuoto strategico annunciato; un vuoto che sarebbe stato riempito dal caos e dal terrorismo, a meno che non si trovasse un’alternativa che garantisse la stabilità nella regione.

Ma il Partito Democratico ha finito per rifiutare l’opzione raccomandata dal rapporto Baker-Hamilton di aprire alla Siria, che è il cuore stesso di questo sistema regionale a cinque mari, perché non includeva l’entità occupante israeliana. Questo nonostante il suo ruolo sia stato considerato decisivo di fronte alle guerre dei neoconservatori, dato che la Siria avrebbe contribuito a spianare la strada al ritorno dei democratici alla Casa Bianca, secondo le parole della presidente della Camera dei rappresentanti degli Stati Uniti, Nancy Pelosi, dopo la sua visita a Damasco e il suo incontro con il presidente Bashar al-Assad nel 2007.

Inoltre, con l’arrivo di Barak Obama al potere e lo sbocciare della cosiddetta primavera araba, divenne presto chiaro che l’opzione del caos e del terrorismo era diventata un’opzione ufficiale per Washington, dimostrando la validità delle previsioni del presidente al-Assad.

Infatti, da allora in poi, l’Egitto fu la prima vittima presa di mira dal caos e dal terrorismo avendo approfittato della rabbia del popolo egiziano che aspirava al cambiamento, fino a cadere sotto l’influenza della Fratellanza dei cosiddetti Fratelli Musulmani, prima che l’esercito lo recuperasse due anni dopo. Per quanto riguarda la Turchia e l’Arabia Saudita, hanno partecipato attivamente al nuovo piano americano, di cui la Siria era l’obiettivo principale: la Turchia, motivata da dichiarate ambizioni ottomane, essendo il perno e l’incubatore della guerra alla Siria; l’Arabia Saudita essendo il finanziatore, istigatore e organizzatore di gruppi terroristici che costituiscono l'”esercito ausiliario” di questa guerra, al fine di compensare l’inettitudine degli eserciti occidentali e l’esercito israeliano nel combattimento [terrestre].

È così che, negli ultimi dieci anni, la guerra in Siria è diventata una versione geograficamente ridotta di una terza guerra mondiale, sia per l’enormità delle risorse destinate a vincerla, sia per la molteplicità dei paesi coinvolti.

Ed è così che dieci anni dopo l’aggressione alla Siria, Egitto, Arabia Saudita e Turchia, invitati ieri a unirsi al sistema di stabilità regionale proposto dal presidente Al-Assad, si trovano oggi di fronte a scadenze drammatiche. L’Egitto è minacciato esistenzialmente dalla diga Rinascimento in Etiopia. Turchia e Arabia Saudita stanno raccogliendo i risultati del fallimento delle guerre in cui sono stati coinvolti, in Siria per la prima, in Siria e Yemen per la seconda.

Nel frattempo, è stata la resistenza ormai leggendaria della Siria la ragione decisiva del fallimento degli aggressori nel raggiungere i loro obiettivi principali, i suoi fedeli alleati che sono rimasti al suo fianco essendo pienamente consapevoli che questa non era solo una guerra alla Siria, ma anche una guerra progettata per cambiare il mondo dalla porta della Siria e seminare caos e terrorismo in esso.

Infatti, il piano degli alleati che hanno lanciato la guerra alla Siria è andato ben oltre i suoi confini. Attaccandola, hanno preso di mira la Russia nella sua sicurezza, la Cina nel suo accesso al Mediterraneo, l’Iran nel suo ruolo, la sua resistenza e le sue relazioni con i vari movimenti di resistenza, cercando di spezzare la schiena della Resistenza libanese e bloccare le sue vie di approvvigionamento. E, nel processo, hanno lavorato per garantire la sicurezza di Israele e dell’occupante americano in Iraq, per mettere il Libano nelle mani del “gruppo di Jeffrey Feltman” e, implicitamente, per tagliare la strada alla resistenza risorgente in Yemen, Palestina e Iraq.

Ma con la partenza dell’amministrazione dell’ex presidente Donald Trump e il fallimento dei suoi piani per far rivivere e generalizzare il caos e il terrorismo, a causa delle vittorie della Siria sulle organizzazioni ISIS-Daesh, il Fronte al-Nusra e i cosiddetti Fratelli Musulmani, la Casa Bianca si è aperta nuovamente a un’amministrazione democratica nella persona del presidente Joe Biden.

Una nuova amministrazione che ha riaffermato il fallimento delle guerre condotte dagli Stati Uniti e ha espresso l’intenzione di entrare in un processo di risoluzione dei conflitti, a partire dal ritorno all’accordo nucleare iraniano. Ha anche preso la decisione di ritirare le sue truppe dall’Afghanistan, sapendo bene che mantenere la stabilità è incompatibile con un vuoto strategico. Così come sa che non c’è più posto per l’entità occupante israeliana in un sistema destinato a preservare la stabilità regionale e che le politiche di normalizzazione, guidate da Donald Trump, sono incapaci di creare un contesto sul quale potrebbe contare a questo scopo.

E ora che la guerra sembra volgere al termine, con il suo principale sponsor che ha perso le possibilità di continuarla e si trova bloccato per mancanza di una strategia di uscita, ecco che Washington bussa alla porta di Teheran e Mosca, seguita dall’Arabia Saudita di fronte alla necessità di ammettere che le regole di ingaggio sono cambiate e la risposta significa: “Per noi, per andare avanti, dovete andare verso Damasco, perché è lì il cuore della questione”.

L’Arabia Saudita sta quindi cercando di normalizzare le sue relazioni con l’Iran e la Siria. E la Turchia, la cui presenza in Libia solleva importanti questioni internazionali e regionali, si sta muovendo per normalizzare le relazioni con l’Egitto.

Quindi, la domanda diventa di nuovo: “Quale sistema regionale sarebbe in grado di preservare la stabilità? “. Apparentemente, la risposta è che non ci sono altre possibilità degne di discussione per scegliere tra l’opzione dei cinque mari di Al-Assad e quella che porta al caos e al terrorismo. E infine, come tutto è iniziato con Damasco, la fine verrà da Damasco.

E Damasco rimarrà la capitale della regione

A questo proposito, ricordiamo che per anni i media hanno parlato di rapporti secondo cui Teheran e Mosca avevano raggiunto accordi in privato per decidere il futuro della presidenza in Siria. Al che abbiamo risposto: “Se è quello che vogliono, non lo avranno, ma non lo vogliono e non lo vorranno!”.

Ora, Teheran e Mosca sostengono la decisione del presidente Bashar al-Assad di rispettare la scadenza delle elezioni presidenziali secondo la costituzione siriana in vigore, così come la sua candidatura per un nuovo mandato. E questo, prima di tutti i negoziati che dovrebbero portare a una nuova costituzione che gli permetterebbe di correre per un primo e poi un secondo mandato, in modo che il detto ‘Al-Assad resta e gli altri vanno! “.

E ora i media ci raccontano delle delegazioni che si sono precipitate a Damasco, la risposta sentita da quelli dei paesi coinvolti nella guerra contro la Siria è invariabile: “Senza riorganizzare le relazioni con la Siria, la regione rimarrà bloccata in mezzo all’abisso”.

In altre parole, per chi non l’avesse notato, gli eventi si stanno muovendo verso una nuova realtà regionale e internazionale che sarà coronata dall’incontro al vertice tra il presidente Putin e il presidente Biden. Una realtà che inizierà con l’accordo sul nucleare iraniano e il cui ritmo dovrebbe accelerare dopo le elezioni presidenziali siriane aprendo sulla Siria attraverso questioni di grande importanza. Tra queste questioni: l’occupazione dei territori siriani da parte degli Stati Uniti e della Turchia, le aggressioni dell’esercito di occupazione israeliano, la questione dei separatisti curdi, la formulazione di una soluzione politica, il ritorno degli sfollati e la ricostruzione.

Questi sono sviluppi che alcuni potrebbero non essere in grado di digerire, ma saranno sufficienti per confermare che Damasco rimarrà la capitale della regione, che la Resistenza è la potenza nascente nella regione, e che il vicino Libano è il paese fratello della Siria e il centro della Resistenza, oltre ai loro nemici. Infatti, l’ora della verità farà capire a questi ultimi che non sono altro che nani anche se hanno occupato i troni della finanza e della politica per molti anni.

Quindi, è ragionevole immaginare un governo libanese nel 2022 che non stabilisca le migliori relazioni con la Siria? È ragionevole immaginare un governo e delle elezioni nel 2022 che non partano dall’equazione tra Damasco, la capitale della regione, e la Resistenza? Chiunque immagini questo farebbe bene a seguire questo consiglio: “Non stare in fondo alla carovana, non troverai nessuno ad accoglierti! “.

Nasser Kandil

5/5/2021

 

*Politico libanese, ex deputato e direttore del quotidiano libanese “Al-Binaa”

 

Fonte: Sintesi di due articoli di Al-Binaa (Libano)

https://www.al-binaa.com/archives/296797

https://www.al-binaa.com/archives/296934

Traduzione dall’arabo al francese di Mouna Alno-Nakhal.

Le monde revient à la vision des « cinq mers » d’Al-Assad

Par Nasser Kandil, 07 mai 2021

Traduzione dal Francese all’italiano di Nora Hoppelantidiplomatico.it

 

 

Note:

1][Israele sta solo cercando di guadagnare tempo!]

[2][Trump e le missioni date al futuro re dei Saud salmani]

[3][Yemen / La battaglia di Al-Hodeida alla luce della “teoria dei cinque mari” di Bashar al-Assad]

https://www.afrique-asie.fr/le-monde-revient-a-la-vision-des-cinq-mers-dal-assad/

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Il mondo ritorna alla visione dei “cinque mari” di Assad