All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Three days ago — June 10 — was the 60th anniversary of President Kennedy’s Peace Speech at American University. Reading or listening to the speech today, it is not difficult to see why the U.S. national-security establishment deemed Kennedy to be a grave threat to national security, just as it did with certain foreign leaders, such as Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh of Iran, Congo leader Patrice Lumumba, Guatemalan President JacoboArbenz and, later, President Salvador Allende of Chile.
For some 150 years, the federal government had been a limited-government republic. After World War II, however, the federal government was converted to a national-security state.
The difference was day and night.
With a limited-government republic, there was openness and transparency in governmental operations. Moreover, there was only a relatively small, basic military force. No Pentagon, no vast military-industrial complex, no CIA, no NSA, and no empire of foreign military bases. Governmental powers were limited and tightly constrained. No power to assassinate, kidnap, torture, or indefinitely detain people. No power to initiate coups or regime-change operations in foreign countries. No power of mass secret surveillance.
With a national-security state, dark-side secrecy became everything. “National security” became the two most important words in the American political lexicon. A large, permanent military establishment, along with the CIA and the NSA, came into existence. This vast national-security establishment vested itself with omnipotent, totalitarian-like powers, including assassination, torture, coups, secret surveillance, kidnapping, and indefinite detention. It established a vast empire of military bases, both foreign and domestic, and initiated a program of regime change in foreign nations. Foreign wars in faraway lands, such as Korea and Vietnam, became the norm.
The Cold War was actually one great big racket, one that became a cash cow for the vast military-intelligence complex and its ever-growing army of “defense” contractors who loved feeding at the public trough. This enormous racket was justified under the rubric of keeping America safe from a supposed vast communist conspiracy that supposedly was based in Moscow, Russia. Yes, that Russia!
There was no possibility whatsoever of a peaceful resolution of the forever war between the United States and Russia, U.S. oficials said. There could never be peaceful coexistence, they maintained. The war against the Russian Reds, U.S. national-security officials held, was a war to the death. That was why the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended to Kennedy that the United States initiate a surprise nuclear attack against the Russians, a recommendation that Kennedy indignantly rejected.
Having achieved a “breakthrough” after the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy had decided that he was going to lead America in an entirely different direction from that of the national-security establishment. In his Peace Speech, Kennedy threw down the gauntlet against what had now become his enemy — the national-security establishment. Kennedy essentially declared an end to the Cold War racket and announced that henceforth Russia and the United States would live in peaceful coexistence. He declared an end to to the extreme anti-Russia hostility that the national-security establishment had inculcated in the American people, and he even praised the Soviet Union.
The very next night — June 11 — Kennedy delivered a nation-wide speech expressing support for the civil-rights movement, which the national-security establishment was convinced was controlled by the Russian Reds. That’s why the FBI wiretapped Martin Luther King and used blackmail with the aim of inducing him to commit suicide.
Kennedy then followed up his words with actions. Over the fierce opposition of the Pentagon and the CIA, he negotiated the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty with the Soviets. He also ordered a pull-out of troops from Vietnam. He proposed a joint trip to the moon with the Russians, which would have meant sharing U.S. rocket technology with the Reds. On the day he was killed, he had an emissary having lunch with Fidel Castro with an intent to normalize relations with Cuba, which was anathema to the national-security establishment.
What would have happened if Kennedy had lived? The national-security establishment would have immediately become irrelevant and immaterial. They would have been left twiddling their thumbs, with nothing to do. Remember, after all, that the supposed threat from the Russian Reds was why the federal government was converted to a national-security state in the first place. Peaceful coexistence with the communist world would have meant no more justification for a national-security state. The Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA would have been dismantled and America’s founding system of a limited-government republic would have been restored.
Keep in mind something else. Kennedy would never have permitted the Pentagon and the CIA to go into the Middle East and begin killing people, as they did after the Cold War finally came to an end in 1989. That would have meant that there never would have been terrorist retaliation for U.S. interventionism and, therefore, there never would have been a “war on terrorism.”
In other words, if Kennedy had lived, we’d be living in a totally different society today, one characterized by a limited-government republic rather than a national-security state — one without the militarism, forever wars, conflicts, hostilities, crises, chaos, coups, assassinations, torture, and indefinite detention that have become regular and permanent features of American life.
For its part, the military-intelligence establishment considered Kennedy to be a weak leader — a coward — an appeaser — Neville Chamberlain — a traitor — a president who was leading America to doom at the hands of the communists. Kennedy was deemed to be a grave threat to national-security. As far as it was concerned, the national-security establishment had no choice but to do what was necessary to save America.
Kennedy knew the danger that he faced in the war between him and the national-security establishment for the future direction of America. He had listened to President Eisenhower’s Farewell Address, when Ike warned the American people of the dangers that the national-security state apparatus posed to the rights and liberties of the American people and to America’s democratic processes.
The war between President Kennedy and the national-security establishment came to an end on November 22, 1963. And Americans have been paying the price for that “victory” ever since.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable.”—H.L. Mencken
And so it continues.
This entire fiasco—indicting Donald Trump for allegedly violating both the Espionage Act and obstructing justice by improperly handling classified records—is merely the latest in a never-ending series of distractions, distortions, and political theater aimed at diverting the public’s attention from the sinister advances of the American Deep State.
Don’t allow yourselves to be distracted, diverted or mesmerized by the cheap theater tricks.
This indictment spectacle is Shakespearean in its scope: full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Nothing is the key word here.
Despite the wall-to-wall media coverage, this is all just smoke and mirrors.
Mark my words: the government is as corrupt and self-serving as ever, dominated by two political factions that pretend to be at odds with each other all the while moving in lockstep to maintain the status quo.
If you really want to talk about who’s guilty of treason, set your sights higher: indict the government for overstepping its authority, abusing its power, disregarding the rule of law, and betraying the American people.
When we refer to the “rule of law,” that’s constitutional shorthand for the idea that everyone is treated the same under the law, everyone is held equally accountable to abiding by the law, and no one is given a free pass based on their politics, their connections, their wealth, their status or any other bright line test used to confer special treatment on the elite.
When the government and its agents no longer respect the rule of law—the Constitution—or believe that it applies to them, then the very contract on which this relationship is based becomes invalid.
There are hundreds—make that thousands—of government bureaucrats who are getting away with murder (in many cases, literally) simply because the legislatures, courts and the citizenry can’t be bothered to make them play by the rules of the Constitution.
Unless something changes in the way we deal with these ongoing, egregious abuses of power, the predators of the police state will continue to wreak havoc on our freedoms, our communities, and our lives.
For too long now, the American people have played politics with their principles and turned a blind eye to all manner of wrongdoing when it was politically expedient, allowing the government to wreak havoc with their freedoms and act in violation of the rule of law.
“We the people” are paying the price for it now.
We are paying the price every day that we allow the government to continue to wage its war on the American People, a war that is being fought on many fronts: with bullets and tasers, with surveillance cameras and license readers, with intimidation and propaganda, with court rulings and legislation, with the collusion of every bureaucrat who dances to the tune of corporate handouts while on the government’s payroll, and most effectively of all, with the complicity of the American people, who continue to allow themselves to be easily manipulated by their politics, distracted by their pastimes, and acclimated to a world in which government corruption is the norm.
We’ve been losing our freedoms so incrementally for so long—sold to us in the name of national security and global peace, maintained by way of martial law disguised as law and order, and enforced by a standing army of militarized police and a political elite determined to maintain their powers at all costs—that it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when it all started going downhill, but we’re certainly on that downward trajectory now, and things are moving fast.
The republic has fallen.
The Deep State’s plot to take over America has succeeded.
The American system of representative government has been overthrown by a profit-driven, militaristic, corporate oligarchy bent on total control and global domination through the imposition of martial law here at home and by fomenting wars abroad.
Even now, we are being pushed and prodded towards a civil war, not because the American people are so divided but because that’s how corrupt governments control a populace (i.e., divide and conquer).
These are dangerous times.
These are indeed dangerous times but not because of violent crime or terrorism or illegal immigration.
No, the real danger that we face comes from none other than the U.S. government and the powers it has granted to its standing armies to rob, steal, cheat, harass, detain, brutalize, terrorize, torture and kill American citizens with immunity.
The danger “we the people” face comes from masked invaders on the government payroll who crash through our doors in the dark of night, shoot our dogs, and terrorize our families.
This danger comes from militarized henchmen on the government payroll who demand absolute obedience, instill abject fear, and shoot first and ask questions later.
This danger comes from greedy, power-hungry bureaucrats on the government payroll who have little to no understanding of their constitutional limits.
This danger comes from greedy politicians and corporations for whom profit trumps principle.
Consider, if you will, all of the dastardly, devious, diabolical, dangerous, debilitating, deceitful, dehumanizing, demonic, depraved, dishonorable, disillusioning, discriminatory, dictatorial schemes inflicted on “we the people” by a bureaucratic, totalitarian regime that has long since ceased to be “a government of the people, by the people and for the people.”
Americans have no protection against police abuse.
Americans are little more than pocketbooks to fund the police state.
Americans are no longer innocent until proven guilty.
Americans no longer have a right to private property.
Americans no longer have a say about what their children are exposed to in school.
Americans are powerless in the face of militarized police.
Americans no longer have a right to bodily integrity.
Americans no longer have a right to the expectation of privacy.
Americans can no longer rely on the courts to mete out justice.
Americans no longer have a representative government.
I haven’t even touched on the corporate state, the military industrial complex, SWAT team raids, invasive surveillance technology, zero tolerance policies in the schools, overcriminalization, or privatized prisons, to name just a few, but what I have touched on should be enough to show that the landscape of our freedoms has already changed dramatically from what it once was and will no doubt continue to deteriorate unless Americans can find a way to wrest back control of their government and reclaim their freedoms.
Indictments, impeachments and elections will not save us.
History may show that from this point forward, we will have left behind any semblance of constitutional government and entered into a totalitarian state where all citizens are suspects and security trumps freedom.
Even with its constantly shifting terrain, this topsy-turvy travesty of law and government has become America’s new normal.
From Clinton to Bush, then Obama to Trump and now Biden, it’s as if we’re caught in a time loop, forced to re-live the same thing over and over again: the same assaults on our freedoms, the same disregard for the rule of law, the same subservience to the Deep State, and the same corrupt, self-serving government that exists only to amass power, enrich its shareholders and ensure its continued domination.
There can be no denying that the world is indeed a dangerous place, but it’s the government that poses the gravest threat to our freedoms and way of life, and no amount of politicking, parsing or pandering will change that.
It is easy to be diverted, distracted and amused by political circuses and entertainment spectacles.
What is far more difficult to face up to is the reality of life in America, where “we the people” are at a distinct disadvantage in the face of the government elite’s power grabs, greed and firepower.
The Constitution doesn’t stand a chance against a federalized, globalized standing army protected by legislative, judicial and executive branches that are all on the same side.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
“Turbo cancer” is a non-medical term that has arisen to describe very aggressive and rapidly progressive cancers following Pfizer or Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and suppression of the immune system.
I have written 12 substacks about turbo cancers so far:
UK – 49 year old army nurse Billie-Joe Graham (click here)
Billie-Joe Graham served on the frontlines during the Gulf War. After leaving the Army, Billie-Joe became a midwife. She was working as a midwife for South Tyneside Healthcare Trust at the time of her death.
After suffering stomach pains, which she thought might be gallstones, she visited her doctor. She was diagnosed with stomach cancer on March 29, 2022 and passed away 12 days later on April 10, 2022.
She was due to start cancer treatment on April 11, 2022. She died before she could even start treatment.
UK – 37 year old father of two, Danny Johnston (click here)
Starting in November 2022, 37 year old Danny Johnston would regularly vomit blood. He thought he had a stomach ulcer. He had an endoscopy on Nov.30, 2022 but there was no evidence of cancer.
He was diagnosed with cancer on Jan.14, 2023 and died a month later on Feb.17, 2023.
He was about to start chemotherapy but he died before he could start treatment.
UK – 37 year old dad, Jamie Thompson, died weeks after going to emergency for stomach pain (click here)
37 year old Jamie Thompson visited emerg beginning of Nov.2022 complaining of stomach pain.
Tests revealed the 37-year-old from Middlesborough had cancer in his stomach, chest and lung.
A couple of weeks later his friends called an ambulance when he took a turn for the worse. He was sent for another scan and the mass on his stomach had grown significantly.
Jamie had a biopsy and suffered a cardiac arrest shortly after. He had also suffered a brain bleed and died on Nov. 22, 2022.
UK – 39 year old dad who complained of sore stomach on honeymoon died 2 months later of gastric cancer.
“We came back from our honeymoon in July, and a week later he went to hospital with pain in his stomach. He never left hospital again.
“It was two months between diagnosis and him passing away.”
UK – 39 year old UK man died 1 week after appointment for hernia (click here)
A 39-year-old man died just a week after going to the hospital for a hernia in his groin.
It turned out he had advanced stomach cancer that had been spreading to several parts of his body.
There is another pattern of stomach cancers that are not as rapidly lethal, and usually take about a year to kill:
UK – 39 year old mom of 3 dies battling very rare stomach cancer for 14 months (click here)
Lisa’s oncologist reportedly told her she had more chance of being struck by lightning than getting this form of cancer.
“Even when she was battling this horrible disease alongside intense chemo, radiotherapy and suffering a blood clot on her lung, She never once complained.”
Cedar Hill, MO – 31 year old Northwest High School teacher Jessica Kozlen died after 16 month battle with stage 4 metastatic jejunal adenocarcinoma (click here)
On July 4, 2021 she called her brother and asked him what it felt like when he had appendicitis. He told her to go to emerg.
“They ran a lot of tests and they ended up doing a CT scan and it revealed that she hadlate stage cancer that had spread to her colon and liver and it had already spread significantly” he said.
Stephen said he was told Kozlen’s cancer basically has no symptoms until it is in an advanced stage.
“It’s a very rare form of cancer that is very hard to treat,” he said.
She started chemotherapy right away, had some success, but then it started to fail. She died on Nov.1, 2022.
Japan – 31 year old national volleyball player Naonobu Fuji died on March 10, 2023, after battling stage 4 gastric cancer for 12 months.
On Feb. 27, 2022 he announced publicly that he had stage 4 gastric cancer with brain metastases.
Washington Post editor, 35 year old Roshania Patel died on Oct. 25, 2022 from gastric cancer.
UK – 47 year old British heavyweight boxer Mark Potter died in Nov. 2022 after 11 month battle with gastric cancer (click here)
Nicholas Lloyd Webber, composer and record producer and son of composer Andrew Lloyd Webber died at age 43 from gastric cancer after 18 month battle (click here)
Twitter Reports
My Take…
The underlying mechanism of turbo cancer is most likely some type of COVID-19 vaccine induced immune system suppression that gives rise to rapidly growing and rapidly progressive cancers of the breast, lung, colon, gastric, gallbladder, pancreas, brain, lymphoma, leukemia and so on.
There are a number of theories in regards to what is causing COVID-19 vaccine induced immune system dysfunction: TLR suppression, T-cell dysfunction, IgG4 shift, DNA contamination of mRNA vials with plasmids containing SV40 promoter, p53 inhibition, PD-L1 elevation, NK cell exhaustion and many more.
PD-L1 has been associated with gastric cancer (click here). PD-L1 is a protein called “the ligand of programmed cell death 1” and is found on immune cells. It binds PD-1 which is also found on immune cells (activated T-cells & others).
The interaction of PD-1 with its ligand PD-L1 induces a suppression of T-cell receptor signaling and results in a down regulation of the immune response, which enables cancer cells to escape immune destruction. (click here)
There are new cancer drugs that target PD-L1/PD-1 to restore cancer cell directed immune response and killing of cancer cells.
COVID-19 mRNA Spike protein upregulates PD-L1 and this is even more pronounced with Omicron spike than with original Wuhan spike. Although the authors of one study concluded that this promotes immune evasion of COVID-19 and causes severe disease, upregulation of PD-L1 will also allow cancers to evade the immune system. (click here)
Pfizer & Moderna mRNA vaccines may be upregulating PD-L1 which could be causing several types of aggressive “turbo” cancers, including gastric cancers.
Even more concerning, it is possible that bivalent Omicron COVID-19 mRNA boosters may be causing even higher PD-L1 levels than the original strains of COVID-19, which could mean that if the original COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are indeed carcinogenic (via upregulation of PD-L1), the Omicron COVID-19 boosters are even worse and more likely to cause aggressive cancers.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Senegal was the scene of demonstrations and widespread property damage in the wake of the conviction of opposition leader Ousmane Sonko who was tried by the courts in absentia in early June.
Sonko, a former tax inspector and co-founder of the African Patriots of Senegal (PASTEF) opposition party, had been charged with sexual assault, however, his conviction was for the corruption of a minor.
Supposedly the charges stemmed from Sonko’s interaction with a woman at a massage parlor, according to press reports. Even after the conviction and sentencing, Sonko has not been arrested by the authorities in Senegal. He was given 15 days to file an appeal in the courts to his conviction and sentence to two years in prison.
Image: Ousmane Sonko (Licensed under the Public Domain)
The opposition leader’s supporters say that the charges against him are politically motivated in order to prevent Sonko from running for president in 2024. He contested in the 2019 elections and came in third after the incumbent President Macky Sall. The PASTEF party leads a coalition of opposition parties called Liberate the People which represents the second largest bloc in the National Assembly of Senegal.
Aggravating the social situation in Senegal is the controversy surrounding whether President Sall will seek re-election after serving two terms. The Senegalese constitution will have to be changed for Sall to run once again. Sonko, who is 48-years-old, has a strong following among the youth who represent the largest demographic inside the country. Due to the post-colonial crisis of many African states, unemployment and poverty among young people remains disproportionately high in many countries such as Senegal.
Reports from Senegal indicate that 16 people lost their lives during the demonstrations which began during early June. Extensive damage was done in the area around the Cheikh Anta Diop University in Dakar.
Extensive damage was reportedly done at the Cheikh Anta Diop University in Dakar where thousands of student, faculty and administrative documents were damaged. The university is named after the eminent historian and anthropologist who challenged the European theories of African inferiority. His books “The Cultural Unity of Black Africa” (1959), the “African Origin of Civilization” (1974) and “Civilization or Barbarism” (1991) remain major sources in continental research.
Although President Macky Sall has not commented extensively on the unrest, several opposition leaders and international human rights organizations have criticized his administration for utilizing live ammunition in the efforts to halt the demonstrations. However, supporters of the ruling Alliance for the Republic party and other political forces have accused Sonko of deliberately fueling the violent activities. (See this)
Political Background to the Current Crisis
Senegal, a former French colony, gained its independence from France in 1960. The country from the time of its liberation maintained close relations with Paris as well as the United States.
Since 1960, the country has been relatively stable in comparison to several of the neighboring states in West Africa. There has never been a military coup in Senegal over the last 63 years of its independence. Over the last four decades there has been a multiparty political system. Only four people have served as president: Leopold Senghor, Abdou Diouf, Abdoulaye Wade and the current head-of-state Macky Sall.
Senegal is known for its keen interests in the preservation of African history and culture. The first President Leopold Senghor was a writer and theoretician who advanced his own ideas related to the role of post-colonial societies in Africa. He expressed the concept of “Negritude” which also held substantial influence leading up to the 1960s in other geopolitical regions such as the Caribbean and among African Americans in the U.S. His form of Negritude advanced a version of socialism which did not challenge the inherent exploitative conditions which resulted from colonial rule. During his tenure in office, Senegal remained within the French monetary zone where its currency remained pegged to the CFA Franc. He also relied on French advisors for governmental and military affairs.
In later years during the 1960s, Senghor’s theories were challenged by more revolutionary African leaders such as Dr. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, President Ahmed Sekou Toure of Guinea, Amilcar Cabral of Guinea-Bissau, President Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, among others. Alternative concepts such as the African Personality, African Democratic Revolution, Ujamaa, Pan-Africanism, Scientific Socialism, Marxism-Leninism, etc. supported the armed struggles to overthrow colonialism and imperialism along with the construction of a non-capitalist society.
The First Pan-African Cultural Festival held in Algeria during August 1969, in many ways represented a repudiation of the ideas espoused by Senghor and Martinique-born poet and political leader Aimee Cesaire. Senghor remained in power from 1960 to 1980. During his administration there was the removal and imprisonment of his prime minister, Mamadou Dia, in 1962, who was accused of attempting a coup against the president.
Since the early phase of the African independence movements of the 1950s and 1960s, there has been greater emphasis on political pluralism. The African Union (AU), which grew out of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) formed 60 years ago in 1963, took a stronger position against military interventions in political governance.
Nonetheless, in the last three years several countries in West Africa have experienced military coups. Mali, Guinea-Conakry, Burkina Faso and Chad underwent military seizures of power. These coups are reflections of the economic and security crises which have spread across the continent. Although the U.S. and France have escalated their military presence on the continent through the Pentagon’s Africa Command (AFRICOM) and Paris’ Operation Barkhane, the capacity of numerous AU member-states to stabilize their countries have drastically declined.
Senegal, Africa and the New Cold War
With President Sall having been Chairperson of the AU during the previous year, his international stature has brought media attention to the country. During 2022, Sall and the Commission Chair of the AU, Faki Moussa Mahamat, travelled to Russia and met with President Vladimir Putin in the city of Sochi.
The purpose of the trip was to seek a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine war which has caused agriculture shortages in various African states. Ukraine and Russia supply large amounts of grain and other staple food products to African countries. The plan for a corridor for the supply of food from Ukraine and Russia was first proposed at this meeting between the AU officials and Putin.
Since this time period, the AU has announced the formation of a delegation to travel on a peace mission to both Ukraine and the Russian Federation. The seven-member African delegation is scheduled to visit Russia and Ukraine in mid-June.
The position of the AU member-states has been a cause for much consternation by Washington and other NATO member-states. Despite political and economic pressures being exerted by the administration of President Joe Biden towards African governments to line up behind the NATO proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, this delegation was committed to continuing with its mission.
“The Brazzaville Foundation is pleased to announce that Vladimir Zelensky, President of Ukraine, will receive on Friday, June 16, 2023, in Kiev, and Vladimir Putin, President of Russia, will receive on Saturday, June 17, 2023 in St. Petersburg the following Heads of State: Cyril Ramaphosa, President of the Republic of South Africa; Azali Assoumani, President of the African Union and President of the Union of Comoros; Denis Sassou Nguesso, President of the Republic of Congo; Yoweri Museveni, President of the Republic of Uganda; Macky Sall, President of the Republic of Senegal and Hakainde Hichilema, President of the Republic of Zambia,” the organization said in a communique distributed on Thursday in South Africa.
On May 16, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa announced that Russian and Ukrainian authorities had agreed to host an African delegation to seek a peaceful resolution to the conflict. Ramaphosa was speaking on behalf of a group of six African countries: Egypt, the Republic of the Congo, Senegal, South Africa, Uganda and Zambia. Now the incumbent chair of the African Union, the Comoros, has been added to this list.”
Undoubtedly, the Biden administration will continue its efforts to undermine any semblance of an independent foreign policy among African states as it relates to the Russian Federation as well as the People’s Republic of China. In specific reference to the Republic of South Africa, a bi-partisan group of Congressman and Senators have written a letter to President Biden demanding that he take economic measures against Pretoria for their supposed support for Moscow in its special military operation in Ukraine. The African National Congress (ANC) government has been accused of supplying weapons to Russia by the U.S. ambassador to South Africa. All of these accusations and threats are designed to destabilize the South African government and society.
Any opportunity created by imperialism to undermine the sovereignty and independence of African states will be utilized by Washington, London, Paris and Brussels. Irrespective of the outcome of the national elections in Senegal during 2024, the U.S. and its allies will continue to pursue their hegemonic designs aimed at maintaining neo-colonialism in Africa and other geopolitical regions of the world.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
The Ukrainian blonde had the smell of trouble. She had perched herself, along with her mute friend, in a restaurant across from the famed South Melbourne Market. On arriving at the modish, glorious bit of real estate known as Tipsy Village, a Polish establishment famed for accented French cuisine, she shrieked: “Why do you have Ruskie dumplings on your menu?”
Although I do not fully agree with Henry Wallace’s arguments, I find his speeches inspiring and think they offer us great potential at this dangerous moment in history. There is also an argument to be made that another world was possible that did not include the Cold War of the 1950s, or the Cold War of 2023 (the second “cold war” works on the basic principle that “Cold Wars repeat: first as tragedy and again as farce”).
Henry A. Murray has much to answer for. Between 1959 and 1961, the Harvard psychology academic, as the leader of a team of equally unprincipled academics, was responsible for conducting an CIA-funded experiment most unethical on 22 undergraduates. The individuals in question were pseudonymised. One particularly youthful figure, named “Lawful”, was the mathematically gifted Theodore John Kaczynski.
Turkey has become the target point of a mass migration, which is rarely seen in the world. This essentially started with the Syrian war in 2011 and continues with Libya, Iraq, African countries, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Russians and Ukrainians.
As a psychologist and long-time psychotherapist, I am convinced that man is good, social and capable of living together without weapons and war. However, he is psychologically irritated due to his manipulation in family upbringing and by social institutions.
She constitutes a powerful voice in the understanding and analysis of US hegemony and the global political economy. Her first book published in 1970 entitled, Silent Surrender: The Multinational Corporation in Canada, predicted with foresight more than half a century ago, what is happening today.
Dr. Faisal Mekdad, Syria’s Foreign Minister, is in Saudi Arabia for meetings held on June 11 and 12, which marks his third visit to the Kingdom in the last three months. In April, he made his initial visit and accompanied President Assad to Jeddah to attend the Council of the League of Arab States summit on May 19.
The White House is developing plans to expand the number of permanent members to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), the Washington Post reported on Monday. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield is spearheading the effort to enlarge the body by adding six new members.
The U.S. military did not properly maintain accountability for thousands of pieces of equipment transferred to the government of Ukraine as part of the former’s security assistance program in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion, according to a new government watchdog report.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) today launches its annual assessment of the state of armaments, disarmament and international security. A key finding of SIPRI Yearbook 2023 is that the number of operational nuclear weapons started to rise as countries’ long-term force modernization and expansion plans progressed.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
I want to thank Matt Ehret to pointing out the speeches by Henry Wallace, Franklin Roosevelt’s vice president and later Secretary of Commerce under Harry Truman, concerning Russia and the threat of a world war, and a cold war.
Although I do not fully agree with Henry Wallace’s arguments, I find his speeches inspiring and think they offer us great potential at this dangerous moment in history. There is also an argument to be made that another world was possible that did not include the Cold War of the 1950s, or the Cold War of 2023 (the second “cold war” works on the basic principle that “Cold Wars repeat: first as tragedy and again as farce”).
The first speech of 1946 was the one that led to President Truman demanding his resignation. The second speech of 1947 was made once he had positioned himself in explicit opposition to the Truman administration. Wallace suggests a “competition of ideas” for mutual benefit that has strong appeal for us today.
*
Henry Wallace, Secretary of Commerce
September 12, 1946, Madison Square Garden, New York
Tonight, I want to talk about peace—and how to get peace. Never have the common people of all lands so longed for peace. Yet, never in a time of comparative peace have they feared war so much. During the past year or so, the significance of peace has been increased immeasurably by the atomic bomb, guided missiles and airplanes which soon will travel as fast as sound. We cannot rest in the assurance that we invented the atom bomb—and therefore that this agent of destruction will work best for us. He who trusts in the atom bomb will sooner or later perish by the atom bomb—or something worse.
To achieve lasting peace, we must study in detail just how the Russian character was formed—by invasions of Tartars, Mongols, Germans, Poles, Swedes, and French; by the czarist rule based on ignorance, fear and force; by the intervention of the British, French and Americans in Russian affairs from 1919-1921; by the geography of the huge Russian land mass situated strategically between Europe and Asia; and by the vitality derived from the rich Russian soil and the strenuous Russian climate. Add to all this the tremendous emotional power which Marxism and Leninism gives to the Russian leaders—and then we can realize that we are reckoning with a force which cannot be handled successfully by a ‘Get tough with Russia’ policy. ‘Getting tough’ never brought anything real and lasting—whether for schoolyard bullies or businessmen or world powers. The tougher we get, the tougher the Russians will get.
We most earnestly want peace with Russia—but we want to be met half way. We want cooperation. And I believe that we can get cooperation once Russia understands that our primary objective is neither saving the British Empire nor purchasing oil in the Near East with the lives of American soldiers.
On our part we should recognize that we have no more business in the political affairs of Eastern Europe than Russia has in the political affairs of Latin America, Western Europe and the United States. The Russians have no more business in stirring up native communists to political activity in Western Europe, Latin America and the United States than we have in interfering in the politics of Eastern Europe and Russia. We know what Russia is up to in Eastern Europe, for example, and Russia knows what we are up to. We cannot permit the door to be closed against our trade in Eastern Europe any more than we can in China. But at the same time we have to recognize that the Balkans are closer to Russia than to us—and that Russia cannot permit either England or the United States to dominate the politics of that area.
Russian ideas of social-economic justice are going to govern nearly a third of the world. Our ideas of free enterprise democracy will govern much of the rest. The two ideas will endeavor to prove which can deliver the most satisfaction to the common man in their respective areas of political dominance. Under friendly peaceful competition the Russian world and the American world will gradually become more alike. The Russians will be forced to grant more and more of the personal freedoms; and we shall become more and more absorbed with the problems of social-economic justice.
We are here tonight because , not for an American crusade in the name of hatred and fear of communism, but for a world crusade in the name of brotherhood of man.
The name of crisis facts is withheld, time is denied, hysteria is whipped up, congress is asked to rush through a momentous decision, as if great armies were already on the march. I hear no armies marching. I hear a world crying out for peace. The truth is that the president and his republican backers are less concerned with the need of the free people, for food than with the need of the American navy for oil. The plan to contain communism is really secondary to the push for oil.
For every glamorous admiral, who boasts “it’s nobody’s damn business where we go”, there are 10 drab, but practical, procurement officers to add “and we’ll get there with the oil from the middle east.” If we took the matter to the United Nations, and the Russians exercised their veto, the moral burden would be on them. When we act independently, outside the framework of the United Nations, the moral burden is on us.
(Both speeches are redacted and I have not found the original texts yet)
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on Fear No Evil.
Emanuel Pastreich served as the president of the Asia Institute, a think tank with offices in Washington DC, Seoul, Tokyo and Hanoi. Pastreich also serves as director general of the Institute for Future Urban Environments. Pastreich declared his candidacy for president of the United States as an independent in February, 2020.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Henry A. Murray has much to answer for. Between 1959 and 1961, the Harvard psychology academic, as the leader of a team of equally unprincipled academics, was responsible for conducting an CIA-funded experiment most unethical on 22 undergraduates. The individuals in question were pseudonymised. One particularly youthful figure, named “Lawful”, was the mathematically gifted Theodore John Kaczynski.
A central theme of the experiments was examining the effects of stress, characterised by what Murray called “vehement, sweeping, and personally abusive” attacks. Ideals and beliefs were assailed; egos pulverised. For Murray, this came naturally. He had cut his teeth designing psychological screening tests for the forerunner to the CIA, the Office of Strategic Services. It was perfect preparation for what came to be known as Multiform Assessments of Personality Development Among Gifted College Men.
Kaczynski was the less than grateful recipient of the higher end of the experiment. “I had been talked or pressured,” he told his attorney Michael Mello in August 1998, “into participating in the Murray study against my better judgment.” It is indisputable that he, along with other subjects, had been sufficiently deceived to be victims of a breach of experimental ethics known more commonly as the Nuremberg Code.
Drafted in the aftermath of the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial of German concentration camp doctors, the code stressed the importance of informed consent. “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential,” declared the judges responsible for formulating the code. The subject should also be “so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress…”
Kaczynski can hardly be said to go on to better things, but they were certainly bigger. In terms of notoriety, his position in the technology obsessed undergrowth of the United States was assured by his murderous and maiming efforts. His favourite method: the package bomb, 16 of which were mailed to his intended victims. Three people died; 23 were injured.
A central tenet of Kaczynski’s thought was levelled at those complicit representatives of what he called the Industrial Society and its state manifestation. Far from being critical of power, its methods, and its wielding by bureaucrats and planners, its members were adjutants and prosecutors of a sinister agenda of behavioural control.
The profiles of the victims, actual and intended, constituted a true fruit salad, at times erratic and scattered: academics in engineering, psychology, genetics and computer science; the president of the California Forestry Association; a computer store owner; an advertising executive; American Airlines Flight 444 and the United Airlines President.
In its unifying theme, the manifesto, Industrial Society and Its Future, opens its barrels on the role of technology. “The Industrial Revolution and its consequences,” goes the grave opening, “have been a disaster for the human race.” While it had “greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in ‘advanced’ countries”, society had been destabilised, life made “unfulfilling”. Humans had been subjected to “indignities” and “widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well)”. The “natural world” had also suffered.
James Ley, reflecting on Kaczynski’s writing, finds his understanding of technology to be “the ultimate constraint on freedom, beyond any specific laws or political arrangements that might obtain.” The conservatives are deluded for conniving in the destruction of their own ideals in embracing technology; leftists merely pursue goals of improvement without dealing with the elephant in the room: the properties of technological enslavement.
In an area of surveillance capitalism, inexorable data mining, and Mark Zuckerberg, there is something haunting about this. The manifesto may not be the sprightliest work of originality, but the vision is contemporary and relevant. The technological society systematically oppresses; it cannot be regulated. With that monstrous genie out of the bottle, it can only be, according to Kaczynski, destroyed.
Kaczynski defied the authorities and the technological state he so despised, eluding capture for almost two decades. Being incapable of summoning the forces to destroy technology, he eschewed it, becoming a rustic version of the Savage in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, the man who “ate civilization”, and in so doing ate his own wickedness.
He lived in a cabin near Lincoln, Montana, a place in every sense off the grid: no electricity, no television, no telephone. He moved about with a bicycle. He took an interest in regeneration in nature. He even foraged. This was his way of romancing the notion of the “pre-industrial city”, as he termed it, where the “19th century frontiersman” could create “change himself, by his own choice.” Change for the “modern man”, in contrast, was “imposed”.
Despite isolation, his pride proved too powerful, the need for recognition, consuming. His efforts to get the New York Times and Washington Post to publish his 35,000-word manifesto undid him. His brother David, and sister-in-law, on realising he was the author, identified him. The FBI, furnished by letters and documents provided by David, joined the dots, arresting Kaczynski on April 3, 1996.
The stage was set for the Unabomber to become a figure of medical interest. At trial, fearing that his brother would receive the death sentence, David, and the defence, opted for psychopathological grounds. Did the Murray experiments tip him over? The lawyers ran with the argument that the Harvard experience had provided the bricks and mortar of paranoid schizophrenia. Their client begged, with tenacious fury, to differ. His terrorism had been principled, rational, his Weltanschauung outlined in his manifesto. To suggest medical illness and disturbance was to give into the pathologizing agenda, something that would render him mad and therefore illegitimate as a thinker.
Far from being mad, the dystopia of Kaczynski’s industrial society has found solid roots. And the forces behind it, be they the myriad of social networks, data hungry platforms and the increasingly agitated discussion about Artificial Intelligence and its generative properties, implicates us all.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]
Alle Artikel von Global Research können in 51 Sprachen gelesen werden, indem Sie die Schaltfläche Website übersetzen unterhalb des Namens des Autors aktivieren.
Um den täglichen Newsletter von Global Research (ausgewählte Artikel) zu erhalten, klicken Sie hier.
Klicken Sie auf die Schaltfläche “Teilen”, um diesen Artikel per E-Mail an Ihre Freunde und Kollegen weiterzuleiten. Folgen Sie uns auf Instagram und Twitter und abonnieren Sie unseren Telegram-Kanal. Sie können die Artikel von Global Research gerne weiterveröffentlichen und mit anderen teilen.
***
Einführung in Thematik
Als Psychologe und langjähriger Psychotherapeut bin ich der Überzeugung, dass der Mensch gut, sozial und fähig ist, ohne Waffen und Krieg zusammenzuleben (1). Er ist jedoch psychisch irritiert, was auf seine Manipulation in der familiären Erziehung und durch die gesellschaftlichen Institutionen zurückzuführen ist.
Nur ein manipulierter Mensch ist in der Lage, seinen Artgenossen Leid zuzufügen: Kriege, Terroraktionen, Entführung von Kindern und Vermietung an Pädophile, Organhandel, Entvölkerungsprogramme, Vertreibung, Bevölkerungsaustausch, Geschichtsfälschung und so weiter und so fort.
Seinen Artgenossen Gewalt und Pein zuzufügen oder loszumarschieren und loszuschlagen, wenn der Staat zu den Waffen ruft, das ist nicht das Resultat eines freien Willens. Die Erziehung der Menschen hat bewirkt, dass sie den staatlichen Autoritäten gehorchen müssen. Ihr Gefühlsleben ist so geprägt, dass sie nicht „NEIN!“ sagen können. Dass er Vater und Mutter in der Kinderstube folgen musste, trägt der Erwachsene ein Leben lang mit – ohne dass ihm das bewusst ist.
Doch die Psychologie zeigt uns, dass man den Menschen helfen kann, sich ihrer teils unbewussten Gefühle und ihres Verhaltens bewusst zu werden. Sie können sich so umorientieren, dass sie den Artgenossen kein Leid mehr zufügen.
Dieser psychologische Erklärungsansatz des menschlichen Gefühlslebens und Verhaltens entspricht nicht nur der menschlichen Natur, er wirkt im Gegensatz zur moralischen Argumentation – der Frage nach Gut und Böse – auch versöhnlich.
Nur der manipulierte Mensch fügt seinen Artgenossen Leid zu
Einige Beispiele aus jüngster Zeit machen deutlich, was zwischen uns Menschen möglich ist:
So hat laut „anti-spiegel“ vom 6. Juni eine russische Menschenrechtsstiftung einen Fall von organisiertem Handel mit ukrainischen Kindern aufgedeckt, die über Zwischenstationen bis nach Südamerika gelangt sind, wo sie offenbar für Geld an Pädophile „vermietet“ werden.
Angesichts einer weiteren Pädophilie-Enthüllung auf „Instagram“ warnte Tucker Carlson, der ehemalige Star-Moderator von „Fox-News“ vor einer gewollten Zerstörung der westlichen Werte und glaubt, dass hinter dem Vormarsch des Nihilismus und der Verengung des Meinungskorridors System steckt. Es geht seiner Meinung nach darum, die Werte und die Moral in der Gesellschaft zu zerstören sowie zeitgleich jedes Aufbegehren dagegen zu kriminalisieren, um Angst und Schrecken für den Machterhalt zu verbreiten (2).
Beim Gipfeltreffen der „Europäischen Politischen Gemeinschaft“ am 1. Juni in Moldawien verkündete EU-Chefdiplomat Josef Borrell seine Vision von einer nochmals erweiterten EU inklusive Türkei und Aserbeidschan und sagte: “Dies werde der ‚Aufbruch in eine Welt ohne Russland‘“. So offen sprach noch kein westlicher Politiker über die wahren Pläne der Expansion (3).
Die weltbekannte Forscherin und Autorin Dr. Naomi Wolf deckte auf, dass Pfizers „Killerinjektionen“ (König) nicht entwickelt wurden, um die Menschheit vor einer Krankheit zu retten, sondern um sie zu dezimieren. Es handelt sich um einen Entvölkerungsplan, der aus den eigenen Dokumenten des riesigen US-amerikanischen Pharmaunternehmens hervorgeht.
Die Sprecherin des russischen Außenministeriums Marija Sacharowa nahm die sprachliche Entgleisung von US-Senator Lindsay Graham in Kiew zum Anlass („Russen sterben – das ist das Beste, wofür wir je Geld ausgegeben haben“), um an die umfangreichen Finanzhilfen und Investitionen der USA an Hitler-Deutschland zu erinnern, die bereits zum Zweiten Weltkrieg geführt haben (4).
Nach einer Meldung des Online-Medienportals „InfoBRICS“ stellte der ehemalige US-Kongressabgeordnete und Ex-Präsidentschaftskandidat Ron Paul fest, dass die Bedeutung des US-Dollars rasch abnimmt – und das erst der Anfang sei. Es sollte niemanden überraschen, dass andere Nationen „endlich versuchen“, dem US-Dollar Konkurrenz zu machen. Grund für die Schwächung der US-Währung sei die Müdigkeit anderer Länder gegenüber der US-amerikanischen Interventionspolitik.
Wörtlich meinte er:
„Wir sind eine interventionistische Regierung. Wir greifen in die persönliche Freiheit ein, wir greifen in die wirtschaftliche Freiheit ein. Wir mischen uns in die inneren Angelegenheiten aller anderen Nationen der Welt ein. Wir sagen ihnen, was sie zu tun haben, wir verhängen Sanktionen, um sie zu bestrafen, und dann wundern wir uns. (…).“ (5)
Abschließend ein Auszug aus der Kurzgeschichte „Die Klage des Zugvogels“ (6) des vor 15 Jahren in Nürnberg verstorbenen kirgisischen Schriftstellers Tschingis Aitmatow. im Antlitz klirrender Waffen und menschlicher Zerstörung warnt der tierische Beobachter die Menschen:
„Behüt euch der Himmel vor Leid, das kein Mensch mehr erträgt, vor Feuersbrünsten, die keiner mehr löscht, vor blutigen Kriegen, die keiner aufhält, vor Taten, die keiner mehr gutmacht. Behüt euch der Himmel vor Leid, das kein Mensch mehr erträgt.“ (7)
Zeit der Vernunft?
Lange Zeit hat die Menschheit gefühlsmäßig im Mittelalter gelebt; es hat gegolten, was der Pfarrer gesagt hat. Neue Gedanken waren nicht erlaubt; sie sind geahndet worden. Doch im Laufe von Jahrhunderten hat sich die Menschheit aus dem Mittelalter herausentwickelt und sich Gedanken gemacht über die Welt, den lieben Gott und den Himmel. Viele Menschen haben es so weit gebracht, dass sie zweifeln, ob das stimmt, was ihnen der Pfarrer einst erzählt hat. Sie haben angefangen zu denken. Damit begann die Zeit der Vernunft. Doch wie sieht diese Zeit der Vernunft heute aus?
Zwar haben die Menschen in der Technik und auch sonst im Leben ungeheure Fortschritte gemacht, doch eines haben sie nicht erkannt: sich selbst. An sich selbst, ihre Psyche, sind sie nicht herangetreten. Obwohl sie angefangen haben, sich verantwortlich zu fühlen für das, was hier auf der Welt geschieht, haben sie sich selbst und den anderen Menschen nicht erkannt. Deshalb sind sie auch nicht vernünftig, wenn es darauf ankommt, sondern sie versagen. Und das trotz der zunehmenden Vernunft und obwohl sie sich die Natur in den Dienst gestellt haben und auf dem Mond gelandet sind.
Kein Mensch hat vor der Zeit der Vernunft über sich selbst, über seine Gefühle und sein Leben Bescheid gewusst, bis der Arzt Sigmund Freud (1856-1930) in Wien die Entdeckung gemacht hat, dass der Mensch ein Unbewusstes hat. Obwohl Freud Spekulationen angestellt hat, die heute verneint werden, war seine Entdeckung von großer Bedeutung.
Der Tiefenpsychologe Alfred Adler (1870-1937) erkannte dann, dass man dem Menschen helfen kann. Mit Unterstützung eines Psychotherapeuten kann er umorientiert werden, können seine Gefühle reformiert werden und er kann sich schließlich für die Vernunft entscheiden. Leider gibt es heute noch wenige Psychologen, die sich den Problemen der Menschen annehmen. Das Wissen des Menschen, der sich dem Studium der Psychologie zuwendet, fällt in der Regel auf den alten Boden. Er ist religiös, national, patriotisch, staatsgläubig. Er steht auf dem Standpunkt, das System zu erhalten.
Auch werden die Menschen bewusst irregeführt und irregeleitet, sodass sie nicht zur Vernunft kommen. Die Beurteilung des Stellvertreterkrieges der US-NATO gegen Russland zeigt dies in aller Deutlichkeit. Dass sich die Menschen diese Irreführung gefallen lassen, das ist auf die Erziehung zurückzuführen. Die Forschungsergebnisse der Psychologie lehren uns, dass die Erziehung so gestaltet ist, dass bereits das Kind in den ersten Lebensjahren nur folgen und nicht „NEIN“ sagen kann.
Die Manipulation beginnt in Elternhaus und Schule – und wird von Staat, Kirche und Konzernmedien mitgetragen
Bereits in der Kindheit werden die Menschen so manipuliert, dass sie dann auf alles eingehen, zu allem fähig sind. Es gibt kaum einen Menschen, der heil davongekommen ist.
Diese Manipulation wird vom Staat und der Kirche mit ihren verschiedenen Institutionen mitgetragen und weitergeführt. Er wird so manipuliert, dass er nicht fähig ist, sich klare Gedanken zu machen; im entscheidenden Moment fällt er um. Obwohl der Westen zum Beispiel mit allen erlaubten und unerlaubten Mitteln, die ihm zur Verfügung stehen, gegen den Osten kämpft, wird er von den meisten Bürgern der USA und Europas gefühlsmäßig und materiell unterstützt. Das machen wir als gute Christen. Während die Menschen in vielen Teilen der Welt hungern müssen, rüsten wir auf und erzeugen nicht das Lebensnotwendige. Damit bereiten wir den neuen Weltkrieg vor.
Vor allem die autoritäre Erziehung ergibt eine Tendenz in unserem Denken und Fühlen, dass wir keine andere Meinung kennen. Wir sind so manipuliert, dass wir auf die Lockrufe der Autoritäten hereinfallen und deshalb den wahnsinnigen Stellvertreterkrieg der US-NATO gegen Russland, in dem die ukrainische und russische Jugend verblutet, mit wenigen Ausnahmen voll unterstützen.
Die Konzern-Medien leisten zu diesem Übel einen bedeutenden Beitrag. Ihre käuflichen Journalisten tragen durch die Schaffung von Feindbildern, durch Kriegstreiberei, Manipulation und Propaganda ihren Teil zur Verdummung der Massen bei. Gefällige Journalisten bekommen dafür sogar ein millionenschweres Euro-Honorar von den Regierungen (8).
Bereits im Jahr 1889 bezeichnete die Friedens-Nobelpreisträgerin Bertha von Suttner die Presse als „Werkzeug des Kriegsministeriums“, das „im Dienste der Massenverdummung, der Hetze und der Hasspropaganda“ steht (9). Dabei wären die Journalisten eigentlich dazu verpflichtet, den Menschen „Friedensstifter“ zu sein. Doch sie übernehmen keine Verantwortung für das Gemeinwohl der Menschheit.
Wir sind die Schweigenden!
Da wir Menschen das Produkt der Erlebnisse in unserer Kindheit sind, kommt es entscheidend darauf an, wie wir unsere Beziehungspersonen erlebt haben, wieviel Vertrauen und wie viel Mut wir mitbekommen und welche Stimmung wir erlebt haben. Wir müssen keine Schläge abbekommen haben. Oft sind es der Missmut, die Verneinung und die Ablehnung, die wir als Kind erfahren haben, die uns als unbewusste Gefühlsregungen im späteren Leben nicht froh werden lassen.
Dabei haben es die Eltern meist gut gemeint. In ihrer Unwissenheit waren sie streng oder haben uns verwöhnt. Jedenfalls waren sie nicht imstande, mit dem Kind richtig umzugehen. So kann zum Beispiel die erlernte Angst, die eigene Meinung zu äußern oder nichts Falsches zu sagen, auch noch beim Erwachsenen zum Schweigen führen. Er getraut sich nichts zu sagen, weil er vielleicht einen Fehler begehen könnte oder das nicht ganz stimmt, was er sagen will.
Das hat der Erwachsene schon als Kind abbekommen! In der Kindheit hat man ihm das vermittelt – diese Angst, genau zu sein, ganz genau! Viele Menschen werden dadurch zu Schweigenden.
Sich die Ergebnisse der psychologischen Forschung zu eigen machen!
Wenn sich die Menschen die Ergebnisse der psychologischen Forschung zu eigen machen und sich selbst und ihre Mitmenschen kennen lernen, dann wird sich ihre Sichtweise auf die staatlichen Gegebenheiten und die gesamte Gesellschaftsordnung entscheidend ändern und sie werden für sich und ihre Nachkommen ein menschenwürdiges Leben schaffen (10).
Die Veränderung der durch und durch gewalttätigen Welt muss aus ihnen selbst kommen.
*
Hinweis an die Leser: Bitte klicken Sie auf die obigen Schaltflächen zum Teilen. Folgen Sie uns auf Instagram und Twitter und abonnieren Sie unseren Telegram-Kanal. Fühlen Sie sich frei, Artikel von Global Research erneut zu veröffentlichen und zu teilen.
Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel ist Schul-Rektor, Erziehungswissenschaftler und Diplom-Psychologe. Nach seinen Universitätsstudien wurde er wissenschaftlicher Lehrer in der Erwachsenenbildung. Als Pensionär arbeitete er als Psychotherapeut in eigener Praxis. In seinen Büchern und Fachartikeln fordert er eine bewusste ethisch-moralische Werteerziehung sowie eine Erziehung zu Gemeinsinn und Frieden. Für seine Verdienste um Serbien bekam er 2021 von den Universitäten Belgrad und Novi Sad den Republik-Preis „Kapitän Misa Anastasijevic“ verliehen.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Turkey has become the target point of a mass migration, which is rarely seen in the world.
This essentially started with the Syrian war in 2011 and continues with Libya, Iraq, African countries, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Russians and Ukrainians.
The largest part of the refugees is from Syria: according to official figures, they number more than 4 million, and according to unofficial figures, they exceed 7 million.
The ruling AKP government provides all kinds of opportunities to asylum seekers under temporary protection.
Even more than it provides to its own citizens; Syrians are officially the priority group in housing, food, education and health.
Migrants have trouble adapting wherever they go, revealing their violence-dominated feudal culture and arousing reactions from the local people.
There are many terorrists hiding among them also.
After the Taliban’s victory in Afghanistan, Afghan military young men, who came to Turkey via Iran, are also engaged in arms and drug smuggling.
While they are concentrated in cities such as Istanbul, Ankara, Adana, Mersin, Gaziantep, Sakarya, Kilis, and Urfa, the largest population is in Hatay, Turkey’s most strategic province.
When Hatay was destroyed by the last earthquake, the Turkish population here decreased and the Syrians increased.
Asylum seekers also played an important role in the last presidential election.
How Does?
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, whose votes decreased among Turkish voters due to the high cost of living, found the solution by making Syrians citizens and voters.
According to official figures, more than 250,000 Syrians voted in the election.
This number is expected to increase further in the local elections in 2024.
Speaking of elections; Asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, who were not mentioned much in the first round of elections on May 14, played an important role in the second round of elections on May 28.
CHP Chairman and Presidential candidate Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu turned the election into a referendum whether refugees should go or stay in the second round and met with Zafer Party, the critical party of the last period.
Kılıçdaroğlu and Özdağ agreed on the return of asylum seekers to their countries as soon as possible.
According to Victory Party Chairman Ümit Özdağ, there are at least 13 million asylum seekers and illegal immigrants in Turkey.
Özdağ describes this situation as “Demographical Occupation”.
In the nuclear world where hybrid wars prevail, migration is now a kind of war tool.
The winner of the election, in which the person who will rule Turkey until 2028 is determined, was the former President Erdoğan, who was elected by the votes of Turks abroad (mainly those who earn euros in Europe and benefiting from the economic crisis in the country) and citizens of asylum seekers.
When the result of the election became clear, the streets of Türkiye became the scene of the victory demonstrations of the refugees.
Some Syrian Arabs even said, “You infidels will go, this place will be ours as the Ottoman Empire,” addressing the secular Turks from the CHP.
Ozdag, the leader of the Victory Party, who made politics in line with Atatürk’s nationalist line, wrote the following words on his Twitter account regarding these scenes:
“Syrians celebrate the occupation. They hate the Victory Party, which resists the occupation. What are you AK Party members celebrating? 11 billion dollars a year we will spend on Syrians? Our soldiers who will be martyred in northern Syria? The pain of our girls who will be harassed on the streets? Selling drugs? Rents going up? Life getting expensive? The uncontrollable rise of the currency that will happen tomorrow or 3 days later? The sale of the last government institutions we have? What are you celebrating, brothers?”
Although those who give such reactions are easily accused of racism, it is becoming increasingly impossible even in the most liberal segments to remain indifferent as the world is experiencing an unprecedented foreign invasion.
The Erdogan government provides social benefits that even support Syrian refugees to have many children.
The source of water comes mainly from the EU.
They don’t want refugees from “forrest” come to their “garden”.
According to the immigration detention agreements with Turkey, billions of euros in aid are being given to Turkey.
One of those who want Syrians to stay in Turkey is the USA.
For the second Kurdish state (after Barzanistan) that it plans to establish in eastern Syria, the fact that the Arab population in that region is in Turkey is in the interest of Washington.
Erdogan’s scrambling to reach an agreement with Syrian President Assad is also based on this.
Assad has repeatedly called for Syrians in Turkey to return after the war, which actually ended in 2018, with amnesty dozens of times.
However, the Syrians who make a living on aid in Turkey are content with their lives, they only go to their homeland during the holidays.
As a result, a problem that will cause a headache for Turkey in the coming decades and may even threaten its territorial integrity is almost ignored in the world.
A tradesman from Hatay describes the extent of the demographic occupation with these words:
“The Syrian population in Hatay has increased so much that they come to us and say, ‘We have taken back Hatay, which Atatürk took from us.’ When we oppose them, 40-50 people can come and attack us. There is no Turkish population left in Kırıkhan district. They rob shops, they use their houses as markets.”
One final note; before the Syrian civil war, the mines on the Turkish border were cleared. Today, the mines on the Iranian border are being cleared. Afghans and Pakistanis come from this border every day and post their videos on tiktok.
What do we expect?
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Hasan Erel is a Turkish journalist-writer. He worked as a diplomacy and foreign news reporter and editor in TRT and other media for 30 years. He is a frequent commentator of Sputnik News radio and CRI Turk in Turkiye.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Introduction to the topic
As a psychologist and long-time psychotherapist, I am convinced that man is good, social and capable of living together without weapons and war (1). However, he is psychologically irritated due to his manipulation in family upbringing and by social institutions.
Only a manipulated human being is capable of inflicting suffering on his fellow human beings: Wars, terrorist actions, kidnapping of children and renting them to paedophiles, organ trafficking, depopulation programmes, displacement, population exchange, falsification of history and so on and so forth.
Inflicting violence and torment on one’s fellow human beings or marching off and striking when the state calls to arms is not the result of free will.
The education of the people has caused them to have to obey the state authorities. Their emotional life is shaped in such a way that they cannot say “NO!”. The fact that he had to follow his father and mother in the nursery is carried by the adult throughout his life – without him being aware of it.
But psychology shows us that people can be helped to become aware of their partly unconscious feelings and behaviour. They can reorient themselves in such a way that they no longer cause suffering to their fellow species.
This psychological approach to explaining human emotional life and behaviour not only corresponds to human nature, it also has a conciliatory effect in contrast to moral reasoning – the question of good and evil.
Only the manipulated human inflicts suffering on his fellow species
Some recent examples make clear what is possible between us humans:
For example, according to “anti-spiegel” of 6 June, a Russian human rights foundation has uncovered a case of organised trafficking of Ukrainian children who have reached South America via intermediate stops, where they are apparently “rented out” to paedophiles for money.
In the face of yet another paedophilia revelation on “Instagram”, Tucker Carlson, the former star anchor of “Fox News”, warned of a deliberate destruction of Western values and believes that there is a system behind the advance of nihilism and the narrowing of the corridor of opinion. In his opinion, it is about destroying values and morals in society and at the same time criminalising any rebellion against them in order to spread fear and terror for the sake of maintaining power (2).
At the summit meeting of the “European Political Community” in Moldova on 1 June, EU chief diplomat Josef Borrell announced his vision of a further enlarged EU including Turkey and Azerbaijan and said: “This will be the ‘dawn of a world without Russia'”. No Western politician has ever spoken so openly about the true plans of expansion (3).
World-renowned researcher and author Dr Naomi Wolf revealed that Pfizer’s “killer injections” (König) were not developed to save humanity from a disease, but to decimate it. It is a depopulation plan that emerges from the giant US pharmaceutical company’s own documents.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mariya Zakharova took the opportunity of US Senator Lindsay Graham’s linguistic gaffe in Kiev (“Russians dying – that’s the best thing we’ve ever spent money on”) to recall the extensive US financial aid and investment to Hitler’s Germany that had already led to World War II (4).
According to a report by the online media portal “InfoBRICS”, former US Congressman and ex-presidential candidate Ron Paul stated that the importance of the US dollar is rapidly declining – and that this is just the beginning. It should surprise no one that other nations are “finally trying” to compete with the US dollar. The reason for the weakening of the US currency, he said, is other countries’ fatigue with US interventionist policies.
Literally, he said:
“We are an interventionist government. We interfere with personal freedom, we interfere with economic freedom. We interfere in the internal affairs of every other nation in the world. We tell them what to do, we impose sanctions to punish them, and then we wonder. (…).” (5)
Finally, an excerpt from the short story “The Lament of the Migratory Bird” (6) by the Kyrgyz writer Chingiz Aitmatov, who died 15 years ago in Nuremberg. in the face of clashing weapons and human destruction, the animal observer warns people:
“Heaven protect you from suffering that no human being can bear, from conflagrations that no one can extinguish, from bloody wars that no one can stop, from deeds that no one can make good. Heaven protect you from suffering that no one can bear any more.” (7)
Time of reason?
For a long time, humanity lived emotionally in the Middle Ages; what the priest said applied. New thoughts were not allowed; they were punished. But in the course of centuries, humanity has evolved out of the Middle Ages and thought about the world, God and heaven. Many people have come to the point where they doubt whether what the priest once told them is true. They began to think. This was the beginning of the age of reason. But what does this time of reason look like today?
Although people have made tremendous progress in technology and also in other areas of life, there is one thing they have not recognised: themselves. They have not approached themselves, their psyche. Although they have begun to feel responsible for what is happening here in the world, they have not recognised themselves and the other human being. That is why they are not reasonable when it comes down to it, but fail. And this in spite of their increasing reason and in spite of the fact that they have put nature at their service and landed on the moon.
No human being knew about himself, his feelings and his life before the age of reason, until the physician Sigmund Freud (1856-1930) made the discovery in Vienna that humans have an unconscious. Although Freud made speculations that are denied today, his discovery was of great importance.
The depth psychologist Alfred Adler (1870-1937) then realised that people could be helped. With the help of a psychotherapist, he can be reoriented, his feelings can be reformed and he can finally choose reason. Unfortunately, there are still few psychologists today who take care of people’s problems. The knowledge of the person who turns to the study of psychology usually falls on the old ground. He is religious, national, patriotic, believer in the state. He stands on the standpoint of preserving the system.
People are also deliberately misled and misled so that they do not come to their senses. The assessment of the US-NATO proxy war against Russia shows this very clearly. The fact that people put up with this misleading is due to their upbringing. The research results of psychology teach us that upbringing is designed in such a way that already in the first years of life the child can only follow and not say “NO”.
The manipulation begins in the parental home and school – and is supported by the state, the church and the corporate media.
Already in childhood, people are manipulated in such a way that they then respond to everything, are capable of everything. There is hardly a person who has escaped unscathed.
This manipulation is carried along and continued by the state and the church with its various institutions. He is manipulated in such a way that he is not capable of thinking clearly; at the decisive moment he falls down. For example, although the West is fighting the East with all the permissible and impermissible means at its disposal, it is supported emotionally and materially by most of the citizens of the USA and Europe. This is what we do as good Christians. While people in many parts of the world have to starve, we arm ourselves and do not produce the necessities of life. In doing so, we are preparing for the new world war.
Above all, authoritarian education results in a tendency in our thinking and feeling that we know no other opinion. We are so manipulated that we fall for the lure of the authorities and therefore, with few exceptions, fully support the insane proxy war of the US-NATO against Russia, in which Ukrainian and Russian youth are bleeding to death.
The corporate media contribute significantly to this evil. Their venal journalists contribute to the dumbing down of the masses by creating images of the enemy, by warmongering, manipulation and propaganda. Pleasing journalists even receive a multi-million euro fee from governments for this (8).
As early as 1889, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Bertha von Suttner described the press as a “tool of the war ministry” that is “in the service of mass stupefaction, agitation and hate propaganda” (9). Journalists would actually be obliged to be “peacemakers” for the people. But they do not take responsibility for the common good of humanity.
We are the silent ones!
Since we humans are the product of our childhood experiences, what matters is how we experienced our relationship persons, how much trust and how much courage we received and what kind of mood we experienced. We don’t have to have been beaten. Often it is the displeasure, the denial and the rejection that we experienced as a child that, as unconscious emotions, do not make us happy in later life.
Yet the parents usually meant well. In their ignorance they were strict or spoiled us. In any case, they were unable to deal with the child properly. For example, the learned fear of expressing one’s own opinion or of not saying the wrong thing can lead to silence even in the adult. He does not dare to say anything because he might make a mistake or what he wants to say is not quite right.
The adult already got that as a child! He was taught this in childhood – this fear of being precise, very precise! Many people become silencers as a result.
Embrace the results of psychological research!
If people make the results of psychological research their own and get to know themselves and their fellow human beings, then their view of state conditions and the entire social order will change decisively and they will create a humane life for themselves and their descendants (10).
The change in the thoroughly violent world must come from within themselves.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a school rector, educational scientist and qualified psychologist. After his university studies, he became an academic teacher in adult education. As a retiree he worked as a psychotherapist in his own practice. In his books and professional articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral education in values as well as an education for public spirit and peace. For his services to Serbia, he was awarded the Republic Prize “Captain Misa Anastasijevic” by the Universities of Belgrade and Novi Sad in 2021.
This weekend, friends and family will be meeting up in Montreal to celebrate Kari Polyani Levitt’s 100th birthday.
While Kari’s health is fragile, she remains firm in her incisive understanding and analysis of World events, committed to national sovereignty and fundamental human rights.
She constitutes a powerful voice in the understanding and analysis of US hegemony and the global political economy.
Her first book published in 1970 entitled, Silent Surrender: The Multinational Corporation in Canada. predicted with foresight more than half a century ago, what is happening today.
“First published in 1970, Silent Surrender helped educate a generation of students about Canadian political economy. Kari Polyani Levitt details the historical background of foreign investments in Canada, their acceleration since World War II, and the nature of intrusions by multinational corporations into a sovereign state”.
More than fifty years later, this is her message to Canadians:
“Well, yes, I think those of us who were concerned about the way in which Canadian business was selling themselves out to American multinationals, we were concerned that it would lead to a loss of sovereignty.
And I think it has. It has happened. We have less sovereignty than we had some time ago.” (Kari Polyani Levitt, June 30, 2021)
Long Live Kari Polyani Levitt
***
Below is the transcript of her July 2021 interview with Michael Welch on the Global Research News Hour.
Kari Polanyi Levitt focused her attention on how Canada is losing its sovereignty and its independence on the world stage and on how we might be able to claim the soul of a proud nation once again.
Transcript- Interview with Professor Polanyi Levitt, June 30, 2021
Global Research: Since you wrote your book 50 years ago to the present, there seems to have been more integration between our two countries, right?
Kari Polanyi Levitt: There has been, yes.
GR: I mean is it something that you may have foreseen way back when? Or is this more of a, I mean, from the time you wrote that book to today, is this pretty much the kind of result you would have expected?
KPL: Well, yes, I think those of us who were concerned about the way in which Canadian business was selling themselves out to American multinationals, we were concerned that it would lead to a loss of sovereignty. And I think it has. It has happened. We have less sovereignty than we had some time ago.
GR: The growth since that time, I mean, we’ve had their Free Trade Agreements, right? In the 1980s the Canada US Free Trade Agreement, the NAFTA, and we had military…our militaries became more and more tightly connected. Which strengthened continentalism even further. Where all of these separate decisions just added onto US investments to increase US control of Canada or was it part of the same pattern. First you increase investment then you try more and more integration—
KPL: I would think, yes,part of the same pattern.
GR: Yeah, so are you saying that, what I’m asking is, how far back had the various stages of integration been planned? Is it kind of like a timeline where you say, now this, and then, and then we’re going to throw in a Free Trade Agreement when the time is right? Or did this idea of free trade and then other aspects of integration just sort of come along when the time was right?
KPL: Well, the Free Trade Agreement of the kind we’re talking about were a global phenomenon they were not unique to Canada. But we had what they like to call globalization which really meant they… the power of international capital, particularly the financial capital. What I would like us to talk about is that as we are approaching Canada Day and many people are questioning whether they should celebrate or rather concern themselves about the phenomenon of the residential schools and the young people in the unmarked graves. I like to talk about thepresent and what happened since I wrote that book. It is an important book. And it remains important.
GR: Well for certain, I mean, in 2021 we are recognizing now that the residential schools have definitely had a, have been a horrific part of our past. But have we really come to the point where…is something special happening now, or are we just seeing our whole, are we just seeing our whole… just finding a way of shifting our dependence on the residential schools to something else. Because it seems as if, for all the acco–… everything that the prime minister is saying, Indigenous peoples are still being subjected to brutal things like the higher-than-average representation in the jails for example. What is your take on that?
KPL: The fact is that the way that this country was built, it was built by, by people who saw the Indigenous people in a very negative way. And the residential schools would never have happened if it were not part of the culture of this country. And I think many people are seeing that this is regrettable and bad. And that something should be done to improve the relationship between the settler communities that constitute the Canadian population and the Indigenous people.
GR: Yeah, do you…do the signs show that we are going to be going in that direction?
KPL: I’m not sure. There are obviously an increasing number of Canadians who are only now learning about this, and they are concerned. But to tell you the truth, when you called me about discussing foreign policy, I thought that’s what we were going to do. And what I think is that Canada, in many ways, has a good name in the world but we are notacting on our own initiative. We are following in the wake of the United States in foreign policy. And I think that this is a very dangerous situation because no matter how much I consider the existence of challenges facing humanity, one of them is how to prevent ourselves from engaging in mutual destruction by the use of atomic weapons. And because we are a party to NATO, Canada is not following an independent foreign policy but his only going along with whatever is the current concern of the United States. I would like us to exert our independence, and that is one of the advantages of having nations.
GR: The military is…there’s no clear division between the militaries, but can you see the nation in any way…I mean are we so united that we can’t break loose even if we wanted to? I mean, when it comes to votes at the UN on nuclear missiles or anything like that, I mean do we even have the power any more to stand up against the United States?
KPL: We have as muchor as littleas we ever had before. We don’t have less. Although the scandal of the residential schools is a negative. It reduces the legitimacy with which Canada can play a role on the international stage. It’s a blot on our record. And for all kinds of good reasons, something has to be done. But I am thinking about is more, what could Canada do as a medium power in the world with a good reputation, and its sort of commitment to the United Nations. And I think that we should examine what has been our foreign policy.
GR: Is there a particular foreign policy where we could start expressing our independent way of thinking that we could distance ourselves from the United States?
KPL: Well, the obvious one is the field of diplomacy, I mean, we had developed a lot of independent economic and political relations with China, which is the up-and-coming power in the next century.
GR: What about in terms of military policy, getting out of any relationship with the United States on shooting down missiles, well basically what NORAD does, you know, is that something we could even break out of?
KPL: Well, maybe so, but I think more to the point, we should develop our independent relations with other countries. What is clear, is that in theworld, that we have to have a… what do they call it again…a world order that is multinational. In other words, there are a number of legitimate political entities in this world who have to be included in a multi-polarworld. And that multi-polarworld would include China and the United States and Canada. But we should be included, not as a satellite of the United States, but on our own independence. And I think we have, we, the government of Canada made a big mistakein acceding to this demand by the Americans to arrest the lady representing the very important IT company. That was a…because what she was accused of was a violation of US sanctions againIran, and this is not a criminal act in Canadian law, because Canada did not agree to sanctions against Iran. So that was a big mistake, and it was done entirely because our government said, under some compulsion to act in the way that it did. There wasacompulsion to play a subsidiary roleregarding relation with the US. And we have done huge damage to Canada’s relationship with China and there are individuals now, Canadian individuals in China who are paying the price.
GR: I know that…there’s an election coming up possibly this fall, I’m wondering if your views on Canada’s need to distinguish itself could possibly play any role in this election and who would you need more inclined to vote towards?
KPL: I don’t know…I couldn’t announce it. I know I would not vote for the Conservatives. I do not trust them. So, I don’t know yet who I’m going to vote for. But what I would like to see the Government of Canada do is to take some initiative in the matter of banning new nuclear weapons. And there was a motion introduced in the General Assembly of the UN some months ago to that effect. And Canada shamefully did not express an opinion in favour of what is clearly the popular view of the majority of member states of the UN.
GR: Kari Polanyi Levitt, I really appreciate everything you’ve had to say today, and I know that we’re kind of getting to the end of her time, but I just wanted to offer you the opportunity to close with any thoughts that you may have that you, that we as Canadians can be more alert to as we move forward toward and beyond the next election.
KPL: Well, I think that Canada should certainly consider its membership of NATO because, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and it is a military alliance andinrecent years it has been involved in military conflicts in the regions of the Middle East which are having really nothing to do with the North Atlantic. And I don’t think that…. I think we have to, we should reconsider, and the reasons why it might be difficult for the Canadian government to take a position against nuclear weapons is precisely because North America is so closely integrated with the US, and the US would never never agree to that request. I think I will just leave it there.
GR: Professor Polanyi Levitt I think we’ve come to the end, and I wanted to know how, I feel extremely privileged to have this conversation with you, and I wish you all the best in your coming years.
KPL: That is very kind of you, thank you. And I really like the work that Global Research is doing. I disagree with them about some things, about global warming, but that’s it, a minor disagreement, in my opinion. And one other thing. In order as a Canadian I canagain feel proud of, to be a national of this country, our government has to take some action, whether it’s in the area of international diplomacy or some other area, because I do not seeit as accountableto be only ashamed of the Government of Canada for what they have done relationship with the Indigenous people. I would like to feel good about the country,whichhas a lot of good things going for it.
GR: Yeah, that’s a good way to close going into Canada Day. So that’s…Well, you take care and again thank you so much for this interview.
KPL: Thank you!
Kari Polanyi Levitt (born June 14, 1923 in Vienna, is a Professor (Emerita) of Economics at McGill University, Montreal.
Kari is an outstanding economist and geopolitical analysis, committed to economic sovereignty and the alleviation of poverty and social inequalities Worldwide. She is the daughter of Karl Polanyi.
First published in 1970, Silent Surrender helped educate a generation of students about Canadian political economy. Kari Levitt details the historical background of foreign investments in Canada, their acceleration since World War II, and the nature of intrusions by multinational corporations into a sovereign state.
.
Silent Surrender was prophetic in predicting that the ultimate consequence of relinquishing control of the Canadian economy to United States business interests would be political disintegration through the balkanization of the country and its eventual piecemeal absorption into the American imperial system. Republished with a new preface by noted scholar Mel Watkins and a postscript by the author, Silent Surrender’s basic argument and underlying economic analysis remain remarkably fresh, particularly the question of whether cultural integration into continental American life has proceeded to a point where Canada is no longer a meaningful national community.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
In a major setback to jailed WikiLeaks founder and journalist, Julian Assange, a UK High Court judge dismissed his appeal against his extradition to the US. In a 3-page decision handed down on Tuesday, June 6, Justice Jonathan Swift of the High Court of Justice in London rejected all eight grounds of appeal against the extradition order that was sanctioned by the UK Home Office around a year ago.
Despite the setback, Assange is expected to file a renewed application challenging Justice Swift’s decision. According to a statement released by lawyer and Assange’s wife Stella, the defense will be preparing a renewed application for appeal to be filed by Tuesday, June 13, challenging the decision before two different High Court judges in a public hearing. This appeal attempt is the last legal recourse for Assange who has been fighting against the US extradition attempt for over three years.
In her statement announcing the decision to appeal, Stella Assange said that they “remain optimistic that we will prevail and that Julian will not be extradited to the United States where he faces charges that could result in him spending the rest of his life in a maximum security prison for publishing true information that revealed war crimes committed by the U.S. government.”
Expressing the disappointment of the family and supporters, Assange’s father John Shipton said, “Julian’s family watch on, horrified, and all fair-minded people the world over watch with profound disquiet and alarm.” He added that his son’s grounds for appeal were “clear, firm and just.”
Years-long legal ordeal
The US extradition plea was initially rejected by a district court judge in London in January 2021 on grounds of Assange’s mental health and the risk of suicide and other bodily harm if he was extradited.
This decision was overturned by the High Court in London in December that year based on diplomatic assurances given by the US after the district court’s decision. In June 2022, the UK Home Office sanctioned the extradition based on the High Court’s decision.
Assange, who was arrested and dragged out of the Ecuadorian embassy in April 2019, has spent four years without a charge or conviction throughout this litigation period in a high-security prison in Belmarsh in the outskirts of London.
Rights groups condemn verdict
The decision by Justice Swift has raised alarm among press freedom advocates around the world, with Reporters Without Borders (RSF) pointing out that Assange is now “dangerously close” to extradition.
“It is absurd that a single judge can issue a three-page decision that could land Julian Assange in prison for the rest of his life and permanently impact the climate for journalism around the world,” said Rebecca Vincent, director of campaigns at RSF, in a statement released in response to the judge’s decision.
If extradited, Assange will stand trial before a federal grand jury in the US on 18 charges that carry a combined prison sentence of 175 years. Of the 18 charges leveled against him, 17 are under the infamous US Espionage Act. The indictment against him, initiated under the Donald Trump administration and continued under President Joe Biden, is the first time ever a publisher has been charged under the Act.
“The historical weight of what happens next cannot be overstated; it is time to put a stop to this relentless targeting of Assange and act instead to protect journalism and press freedom,” Vincent added.
In their statement, the RSF reiterated their demand to President Biden to drop the charges against Assange, close the case against him, and allow for his release without further delay.
In the dismissed appeal, Assange’s defense team had raised several issues with the extradition sanctioned by former UK Home Secretary Priti Patel during the Boris Johnson-led Conservative government. Among the key grounds raised by the defense was that if extradited, Assange will face a politically-motivated trial in the US, in violation of the extradition treaty between the two countries.
The defense also raised matters like Assange’s deteriorating mental and physical health; the fact that he was being prosecuted for publishing what falls within the ambit of protected speech; unsafe prison conditions in the US; and also how the US has misrepresented several facts throughout the course of the extradition trial.
In the meanwhile, calls have been raised from Assange’s home country of Australia demanding the intervention of the Labor-led government of Anthony Albanese. Andrew Wilkie, an independent federal legislator who leads the Parliamentary Julian Assange group, has reiterated his stand against the extradition.
“Mr Assange is an Australian citizen and journalist, whose matter should not even be before a court, as the case has always been an intensely political matter,” Wilkie said in a statement responding to Justice Swift’s decision. “Enough is enough. The US must drop the extradition and discontinue these charges immediately. And the Australian Government must continue to speak up and push for an immediate end to this matter as Julian’s life is at stake.”
Similarly, Green Party senator Peter Whish-Wilson tweeted that the Australian prime minister “must pick up the phone today to call Joe Biden and intervene. Julian Assange must not be extradited to the US where press freedoms will die the minute they seal the door of his high-security gaol cell.”
Progressives and Assange supporters in Australia are also mobilizing to protest against the looming extradition. In Melbourne, a rally has been organized outside the UK consulate, with Gabriel Shipton, Assange’s brother, expected to address the protesters. Similar such mobilizations are expected in different parts of the country.
While the Albanese government has repeatedly expressed concerns about Assange’s case and has claimed that they are making use of diplomatic channels to secure his release, the closed-door nature of these diplomatic negotiations have raised concerns from progressives regarding the government’s dedication on the matter.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Dr. Faisal Mekdad, Syria’s Foreign Minister, is in Saudi Arabia for meetings held on June 11 and 12, which marks his third visit to the Kingdom in the last three months. In April, he made his initial visit and accompanied President Assad to Jeddah to attend the Council of the League of Arab States summit on May 19.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, known as MbS, promoted the aid and recovery of Syria through his position as host of the Arab League Summit in May. MbS asked for an Arab decision to bring Syria back to the brotherly league of Arab nations, while the US voiced condemnation of the plan.
“This is a strong signal to America that ‘we’re reshaping and redrawing our relations without you’,” said Abdulaziz Al-Sager, Chairman of the Gulf Research Centre.
MbS took on his leadership role at the helm of the biggest oil exporter in the world while putting the interests of his nation first, and not bowing to pressure from the US Biden administration, who have used undiplomatic language to describe MbS and voiced open threats directed against Saudi Arabia.
The US demanded that Saudi Arabia participate in the Obama-Biden war on Syria for regime change beginning in 2011. The American plan utilized terrorists who raped, maimed, and murdered across Syria while being financed by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The project failed, and the Syrian people fought back against the Muslim Brotherhood and Radical Islam to remain the only secular country in the Middle East.
In April, Mekdad and Prince Farhan, the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia, discussed a comprehensive political settlement to the Syrian crisis and restoring Syria’s role in the Arab world.
Syria announced that Saudi Arabia has agreed to resume direct flights between Syria and Saudi airports and they are expected to begin at the end of June. A Saudi technical team arrived on May 28 in Syria to prepare for the reopening of the Saudi Arabian embassy in Damascus.
US Saudi relations
When US President Biden visited MbS last July, he came to demand an increase in oil production to lower the gas prices in the US, but he left empty-handed. On June 8, US Secretary of State Blinken sat with MbS and during the visit MbS announced he will cut oil production in July, raising the price of gasoline to US consumers.
Blinken has voiced the US condemnation of allowing Syria to return to the Arab League, and the US is actively planning revenge on the Kingdom and any other Arab countries who dare to participate in rebuilding the homes, infrastructure, and livelihood of the Syrian people.
Instead of looking for a peaceful solution for the US-engineered conflict in Syria, Blinken is focused solely on coercing Saudi Arabia into normalization with Israel through the Abraham Accords, which according to Blinken is an American “priority”.
Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan seemed unmoved by Blinken’s urging, and said that normalization with Israel would have “limited benefits” without “finding a pathway to peace for the Palestinian people.”
MbS has repeatedly called for the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, east Jerusalem, and Gaza, which would meet existing UN resolutions. However, such a move is impossible in Israel under the current Jewish extremist regime of Benjamin Netanyahu.
MbS is in the midst of his Vision 2023 which calls for peace and prosperity for the Middle East. Blinken has no vision for the Middle East, and his priority is to maintain the status quo in Palestine by keeping 6 million people under a brutal military dictatorship. Blinken is oblivious to the suffering of the Syrian people and their neighbors the Palestinians.
During Blinken’s visit to Riyadh, he co-hosted a meeting of foreign ministers from the global coalition fighting the Islamic State (IS) and pledged nearly $150 million for efforts in Syria and Iraq. The coalition includes more than 80 countries and new funding for the program amounts to more than $600 million. The money will flow through the US partner in Syria, the Kurdish communist administration in the northeast.
Mohammed bin Salman paves a new road
MbS isn’t to blame for the destruction in Syria, which was before his time. His vision 2030 is a plan for regional peace and prosperity, including Syria. He has emerged as a global player untethered from Washington. He has started massive economic and social reforms which span from tourism, sports, entertainment, education, commerce, and investments.
Repairing relations with neighbors in Yemen, Qatar, Iran, and Syria are cornerstones in his diplomatic efforts. Regardless of criticism from Washington, MbS insists on working toward a political solution in Syria that will be Arab-driven and seeks to use UN resolution 2254 as a roadmap.
MbS held a phone call with Russian President Putin on Wednesday, and Venezuelan President Maduro visited MbS before Blinken arrived. The Crown Prince seeks cooperation and diplomacy with varied leaders and is not bound by Oval Office dictates, while pursuing Saudi Arabia’s national interests.
US sanctions, sanctions, and more sanctions
The US Congress is considering yet another round of sanctions on Syria, which prevent the Syrian people from rebuilding homes, schools, hospitals, and infrastructure that was destroyed or damaged by the US-sponsored terrorists.
The new bill is called the Syrian Anti-Normalization Act of 2023 and would be an addition to the already paralyzing Caesar Act of 2020. The new bill seeks to impose heavy fines on any country that would dare to help the Syrian people rebuild and recover. Arab countries normalizing their relations with Syria would be prevented from helping in the rebuilding.
Experts point to the fact that sanctions only hurt the Syrian people and impede their recovery and prevent jobs and livelihoods from recovering. The law provides for financial penalties to be imposed any time a country made an investment, grant, contract, or donation worth more than $50,000 to parts of Syria held by Damascus, which hold the largest territory and includes all of the major cities of Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, Hama, and Latakia. The US protects terrorists in Idlib, and the communist-administrated region in the northeast, but none of those areas have a large city. The largest group of Syrian civilians live under the administration of the central government seated in Damascus.
Syria analyst Joshua Landis of the University of Oklahoma believes sanctions on Damascus will not bring justice to the Syrian people, but further impoverish them. Due to US sanctions, medical equipment sits idle in hospitals because sanctions prevent ordering replacement parts. Occasionally, chemotherapy drugs are unavailable in Syria because foreign manufacturers are afraid to face penalties for sending products to Damascus. Building houses in Syria starts with wooden frame, and Syria does not have hardwood forests, so wood must be imported. However, countries such as Canada, Sweden, and Norway will not sell wood to Syrian merchants for fear of penalties.
EU summit
‘Supporting the future of Syria and the region’ will be held in Brussels on June 14 and 15. The meeting does not address or consider the needs of 15 million Syrians living under the central government, but exclusively focuses resources on the civilians held hostage by terrorists in Idlib, and the needs of foreign countries who are hosting Syrian refugees, such as Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon.
This meeting is the main pledging event of 2023 for donations for Syrians who do not live under the Damascus administration. However, the vast majority of Syrians will never be helped or see any improvement in their lives by this meeting. This demonstrates the priorities of the Western democracies: to support the terrorist leaders who hold 3 million in Idlib, and to make sure that Syrian refugees living in tents in Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon are kept from starvation, but held as pawns which will prevent their return home to Syria.
The US and its allies in the European Union are not considering the lives of 15 million people living in Syria. They created the war, supported the terrorists who destroyed the country and divided it, but they refuse to participate in the recovery process for the Syrian people.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Ken Klippenstein, an investigative journalist at The Intercept, has exposed how the Pentagon very quietly launched a new internal division, dubbed the “Influence and Perception Management Office” (IPMO), in March.
Its existence is not strictly secret, although there has been no official announcement of its launch, let alone an explanation from Department of Defense (DoD) officials as to its raison d’être or modus operandi. Its budget likewise remains a mystery but purportedly runs into the “multimillions.”
Pentagon financial documents from 2022 offer a laconic and largely impenetrable description of IPMO. The Office, it is said, “will serve as the senior advisor” to Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence & Security, Ronald S. Moultrie, on “strategic and operational influence and perception management (reveal and conceal) matters”:
It will develop broad thematic influence guidance focused on key adversaries; promulgate competitive influence strategies focused on specific defense issues, which direct subordinate planning efforts for the conduct of influence-related activities; and fill existing gaps in policy, oversight, governance, and integration related to influence and perception management matters. [IPMO]…provides necessary support to National Defense Strategy…to address the current strategic environment of great power competition.”
Nonetheless, references to “reveal and conceal” and “influence and perception management” are tantalizing in the extreme. So too, is IPMO’s position within the U.S. national security structure and the Office’s acting director being intimately tied to the Pentagon’s spookiest operations.
Despite its low-key rollout, IPMO looks set to be a hugely influential new DoD agency in the future, waging ceaseless information warfare at home and abroad. What makes the new venture all the more sinister is that such capabilities are nothing new; the Pentagon has managed multiple similar, if not identical, operations in the past and continues to do so, despite significant controversy and public backlash.
Indeed, the DoD’s official dictionary has a dedicated definition of “perception management”, linking the practice to “psychological operations,” which are defined as actions intended to influence the “emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior” of target governments, organizations, groups, and individuals:
Actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders at all levels to influence official estimates, ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator’s objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception, and psychological operations.”
This, of course, begs the question of why a new incarnation of what came before and never went away is now being inaugurated by the U.S. defense establishment. As we shall see, no reassuring answers are forthcoming.
“Signature Reduction”
Despite the lack of a public paper trail, a memo outlining IPMO’s modus operandi was acquired by Klippenstein. It offers a hypothetical scenario in which the Pentagon “wants to influence Country A’s leaders to stop purchasing a weapon system from Country B” because it believes the sale “might jeopardize DoD’s military advantage, in some way, if the U.S. ever had to engage in armed conflict with Country A.”
“Assuming IPMO has worked to establish the desired behavior change, how might key influencers be identified that have sway over these leaders’ thought processes, beliefs, motives, reasoning, etc. (including ascertaining their typical modes and methods of communication)?” the memo reads. “Thereafter, assuming an influence strategy is developed, how might the DIE [Defense Intelligence Estimate] or IC [Intelligence Community] determine if DoD’s influence activities are working (aside from waiting and watching hopefully that Country A eventually stops purchasing the weapons system in question from Country B)?”
The document was signed by IPMO director James Holly, previously Director of Special Programs for the U.S. Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). During this time, he ran espionage operations for an unnamed paramilitary organization in Iraq and was an intelligence officer for a Combined Joint Task Force in Afghanistan.
Precisely what these roles entailed is not certain. However, that he made the leap from JSOC to IPMO is striking, given the Command is the nucleus of all the Pentagon’s spookiest, most sensitive operations. The division very rarely makes the news, but when it does, the stories are invariably remarkable and disturbing. For example, in May 2021, Newsweek exposed how the Command operates “the largest undercover force the world has ever known” under a program named “Signature Reduction.” In all, 60,000 people – “more than ten times the size of the clandestine elements of the CIA” – are part of this secret army, “many working under masked identities and in low profile.” Working both at home and overseas, its operatives carry out covert assignments using civilian cover “in real life and online, sometimes hiding in private businesses and consultancies, some of them household name companies.”
“Dozens of little-known and secret government organizations support the program, doling out classified contracts and overseeing publicly unacknowledged operations. Altogether, the companies pull in over $900 million annually to service the clandestine force, doing everything from creating false documentation and paying the bills and taxes of individuals operating under assumed names to manufacturing disguises and other devices to thwart detection and identification, to building invisible devices to photograph and listen in on activity in the most remote corners of the Middle East and Africa.”
A series of photos from the Signature Reduction program provided to Newsweek by William Arkin | Editing by MintPress News
This cloak-and-dagger militia moves entirely in the shadows and may contravene U.S. laws, the Geneva Conventions, basic standards of accountability, and various codes of military conduct. Chief among the latter is the longstanding principle that the military does not conduct covert operations on American soil. Yet, JSOC has circumvented this restriction ever since its founding in December 1980, operating under a veil of almost total official secrecy, all the while often in tandem with the CIA.
In June 1984, The New York Times outlined how JSOC effectively acted as a law unto itself, quickly evolving far beyond its original remit to “collect intelligence to plan for special military operations” into “a nighttime operation, with its own weapons procurement and research, as well as communications.”
Two months earlier, a senior Pentagon official told elected lawmakers that the Command was not “an agency of interest to the intelligence oversight committee” and refused to answer questions about its activities.
Nonetheless, the Times offered a brief overview of what was known about JSOC’s activities over the prior four years. In addition to assisting the illegal invasion of Grenada, the Command had provided extensive assistance to CIA cloak-and-dagger operations in Central America. In particular, it supported the fascist Contras in Nicaragua, helping the Agency sidestep Congressional restrictions on its brutal efforts to topple the elected left-wing Sandinista government.
“Prohibited, Covert Propaganda”
JSOC’s involvement in that CIA dirty war is particularly notable given this period gave rise to the very concept of “perception management” as a legitimate form of psychological warfare to be waged by the CIA, Pentagon, and other government agencies against the domestic population.
The overriding objective of this Reagan administration push was to falsely paint the murderous Contras as heroic freedom fighters. In reality, the Contras, with CIA direction, funding and arms, deliberately targeted civilian infrastructure, including schools and hospitals, slaughtered priests, nuns, labor activists, students, peasants and indigenous citizens.
In turn, the social democratic Sandinistas were transformed into viciously repressive autocrats, ruling Nicaragua with an iron fist and transforming their country into a “beachhead” for Soviet invasion of the U.S. Similar propaganda messaging has been employed in every American proxy war since, from Yugoslavia to Ukraine. All this activity, the full extent of which may never be known, represented egregious violations of the 1948 Smith-Mundt Act, which places strict restrictions on the domestic dissemination of state propaganda.
Take, for instance, the Office of Public Diplomacy, a dedicated pro-Contra propaganda unit run by Reagan’s top National Security Council aide Oliver North, who was simultaneously working with cocaine traffickers to arm the Nicaraguan “rebels.” The unit was found to have broken a welter of U.S. laws by separate official investigations into the Iran-Contra scandal. The U.S. Comptroller General, for example, concluded the Office engaged in “prohibited, covert propaganda…beyond the range of acceptable agency public information activities.”
An ad placed by the Young Republicans under the cognizance of the Office of Public Diplomacy, March 20, 1985. Credit | NSA Archive
Yet, despite such damning findings, the “perception management” techniques honed by these assorted units, and many of the formal and informal structures contemporaneously created to disseminate CIA, Pentagon, and White House propaganda, did not go anywhere.
Two decades later, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the Pentagon under Donald Rumsfeld’s leadership struck upon the bright idea of creating the Office of Strategic Influence to deliberately plant “misleading” black propaganda in the foreign media, which would then be picked up by the U.S. media.
In a perverse twist, precisely this strategy was used by British foreign intelligence service MI6 as far back as 1998 to lay the foundationsfor the Iraq War. Under “Operation Mass Appeal”, the agency circulated dubious or even fabricated “intelligence” to editors and journalists on its payroll the world over, influencing the output of leading international news outlets. The spooks sought to “shape public opinion about Iraq and the threat posed by WMD.”
The Office of Strategic Influence operated in secret from its launch in October 2001 until February of the next year, when the mainstream media caught wind of its existence. Due to intense outcry, just a week later, it was officially shuttered at Rumsfeld’s request. Yet, at a November 2002 press conference, the defense secretary made unguarded remarks starkly indicating it very much lived on thereafter:
The Office of Strategic Influence. You may recall that. And ‘oh my goodness gracious isn’t that terrible, Henny Penny, the sky is going to fall.’ I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing, fine, I’ll give you the corpse. There’s the name. You can have the name, but I’m gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done. And I have.”
Of World War III and UFOs
The Klippenstein-secured memo suggests IPMO is involved in identical propaganda operations to those described here. It notes the Office “is tasked with the development of broad thematic messaging guidance and specific strategies for the execution of DoD activities designed to influence foreign defense-related decision-makers to behave in a manner beneficial to U.S. interests.”
Given that Washington is again heavily engaged in a Nicaragua-style proxy war in Ukraine, an accompanying propaganda unit would be of enormous use. After all, despite the Western media’s best efforts to whitewash the issue, Nazi sympathies of soldiers and military units remain stubbornly flagrant.
The phenomenon of Swastika tattoo and military patch-toting fighters is so profuse that, earlier this month, the New York Times was prompted to publish an article bemoaning how such National Socialist iconography leaves “diplomats, Western journalists and advocacy groups in a difficult position.” On the one hand, “calling attention to the iconography risks playing into Russian propaganda,” on the other, “saying nothing allows it to spread.” The wider question of why so many Ukrainian nationalists eagerly elect to exhibit such emblems was unexplored.
Fittingly too, in December 2022, independent journalist Jack Murphy published an investigation alleging the CIA was “using a European NATO ally’s spy service to conduct a covert sabotage campaign inside Russia under the agency’s direction,” in which JSOC was a key player. The Command purportedly supports these operations “with targeting information from intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms, such as drones, that can see and hear deep into Russia.”
Further clues as to the sudden push to formally codify what the Pentagon has been doing with total impunity for so long may likewise be provided by the online records of private security company Sancorp Consulting, which offers “counter-insider threat solutions, artificial intelligence and machine learning, IT solutions, identity and data activities, intelligence and counterintelligence solutions” to private sector and state clients.
An index of Sancorp’s “past performance” for customers lists providing “specialized and sensitive administrative, security, policy, operations, and analytic support services” to none other than IPMO. Since-deleted records from the company’s website indicate it also counts the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) as a client.
This DoD division is charged with investigating UFOs and other unexplained aerial phenomena. The Pentagon has of late exhibited a pronounced interest in flying saucers, just as it did during the Cold War. Then, the purpose was to bamboozle and bedevil the public while providing cover for experimental U.S. military innovations, aircraft, and testing. There is little cause to believe the DoD’s motives have changed in the present day.
Declassified documents show that for years, the Navy Office of the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information Warfare, known as N2N6, currently exercises complete control over the dissemination of UFO-related information to American audiences on behalf of the Pentagon. This extends to directing Pentagon divisions to respond to media inquiries and FOIA requests from journalists and the public and how.
Perhaps the Pentagon has decided to bring these responsibilities in-house. Coincidentally, on June 6, an Air Force veteran and former member of the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency went public with claims that extraterrestrial craft are routinely recovered in secret by the U.S. government.
This shock exposé couldn’t have come at a better time. As the New Cold War ramps up, and ever-more threatening tech is inevitably road-tested in the skies above Area 51 and other shadowy military installations in the U.S. and elsewhere, it is necessary to misdirect public attention away from the known to the unknown and unknowable. Meanwhile, U.S. military chiefs regularly and openly talk about waging war on China in the very near future – which makes constructing a dedicated propaganda office in advance all the more expedient.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist and MintPresss News contributor exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions. His work has previously appeared in The Cradle, Declassified UK, and Grayzone. Follow him on Twitter @KitKlarenberg.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The White House is developing plans to expand the number of permanent members to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), the Washington Post reported on Monday. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield is spearheading the effort to enlarge the body by adding six new members.
The UNSC is the organization’s most powerful body, wielding the power to impose binding resolutions. Known collectively as the “P5,“ the US, UK, France, China and Russia are currently permanent members on the council, which includes a total of ten rotating members. In September, President Joe Biden said the body should be expanded to include countries from Latin America and Africa.
Under the proposal the Biden administration is developing, six new permanent members will be added to the UNSC. The White House has not put forward its plan, leaving it unclear what countries may be added to the council. Washington has previously advocated for Germany, Japan and India to receive spots on the UNSC.
However, the new members will not have the veto power held by the core five members. UNSC rules allow for any of the five permanent members to kill any resolution unilaterally.
Ukraine has called for Moscow to be removed from the Security Council, citing its ongoing invasion.
“Russia has turned the seat of a permanent member into a throne of impunity,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba wrote in an op-ed published at the Hill. “Russia never legally acquired its status as a permanent UN Security Council member and must lose its seat in this esteemed chamber.”
Reforming the UNSC is expected to meet stiff resistance. An unnamed American official told the Post that Thomas-Greenfield is trying to “forge some consensus on a sensible, credible proposal that could actually succeed and achieve reform.”
Barbara Woodward, the UK ambassador to the UN, argued that the proposed changes to the council could be used against Russia.
“We must respond to Russia’s egregious use of the veto to protect itself, and update the council’s membership to give a wider, more diverse range of countries a voice,” she said.
Some officials disagree and believe that such reforms could damage Western power.
“Any reform of the Security Council may well reduce the weight of the West. So this is a reality,” a UN diplomat told the Post. “And the question is, are we really pushing for that now? Is it just nice rhetoric that we want to do this, or are we really serious when we say we want to do it now?”
The proposal is also likely to face opposition from states whose rivals may become permanent council members, risking major regional power shifts. For example, Pakistan objects to the expansion, anticipating that its longtime adversary India will get a seat.
“This is undemocratic; it is unequal; it is contrary to the principle of sovereign equality of states which is part of the [UN] charter,” said Munir Akram, Islamabad’s UN ambassador.
Any change to the UNSC would need to clear a series of hurdles, including formal approval from 128 states on the UN General Assembly as well as the sitting UN Security Council members. For the US, that means ratification by the Senate.
Passing the legislature seems unlikely as a group of Republican senators oppose Russia remaining on the UNSC. After Russia invaded Ukraine last year, a large group of Republican Senators introduced a resolution urging the Biden administration to remove Moscow from the body.
“It’s high time to remove Russia from the United Nations Security Council if for no other reason than the unwarranted and violent invasion of Ukraine,” Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND) said, adding, “Vladimir Putin’s thuggery and aggression should have consequences at every level.”
The Kremlin has vetoed a series of measures brought before the UNSC that condemned the Russian war in Ukraine. Washington has previously used the body to pass measures for cover for wars in Libya, Syria and Yemen.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Kyle Anzalone is news editor of the Libertarian Institute, opinion editor of Antiwar.com and co-host of Conflicts of Interest with Will Porter and Connor Freeman.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The U.S. military did not properly maintain accountability for thousands of pieces of equipment transferred to the government of Ukraine as part of the former’s security assistance program in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion, according to a new government watchdog report.
The assessment from the Defense Department’s inspector general published on Monday states that military personnel responsible for rapidly transferring material to Ukraine through an aerial port in Jasionka, Poland, “did not fully implement their standard operating procedures to account for defense items and could not confirm the quantities of defense items received against the quantity of items shipped” in three of five shipments examined by defense officials.
The inconsistent implementation of standard gear accountability procedures occurred primarily due to U.S. military personnel failing to fill out the necessary paperwork for defense material transferred to Ukrainian forces, according to the assessment, a problem compounded by a lack of logistics training for inexperienced personnel on the part of commanders.
In one case, a shipment containing “thousands of small arms, night vision optic devices, and various types of cold weather gear” turned up in Jasionka without a manifest, forcing U.S. military personnel to crack open shipping crates and count items by hand with no real frame of reference for how many items they were supposed to receive in the first place.
As a result of these issues, there was an “increased risk” that the U.S. military is providing “more or less equipment” than authorized and “may not be able to verify” the specific number of defense materials sent to Ukraine, according to the DOD IG report, which emphasized that “although we identified gaps in accountability that increase risk, we did not find any evidence of loss, theft, or diversion of defense items being provided to Ukraine during the course of our evaluation.”
The DoD IG report provides the first major snapshot of how the Pentagon has managed the approximately $31.7 billion in “defense items” transferred to the Ukrainian government since the start of Russia’s invasion. An October 2022 audit of the DoD’s broader accountability of equipment provided to Ukraine remains classified and subject to a Freedom of Information Act request.
Concerns over accountability for U.S. military gear funneled into Ukraine — already pronounced following the seizure of military assistance provided to the now-defunct U.S.-backed government of Afghanistan by the Taliban — have dogged the U.S. military aid effort since the outset of Russia’s invasion despite repeated assurances from the State Departmentand Pentagon that the U.S. government takes oversight seriously.
Indeed, a September 2022 diplomatic cable from the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv reported by Politico described ongoing challenges facing U.S. military officials tasked with maintaining consistent oversight in an active war zone, so far that “kinetic activity and active combat between Ukrainian and Russian forces create an environment in which standard verification measures are sometimes impractical or impossible,” per the cable.
The Russian government has seized upon Western anxieties surrounding large defense material transfers to argue that a significant number of Western-supplied weapons “have already entered, or will soon enter, the black market” across Europe, as a spokesperson for Russia’s foreign ministry claimed in October 2022. Some pro-Russian media cite a since-retracted CBS News report that claimed just 30% of weapons sent to Ukraine actually made it to the front lines.
While Ukrainian and European authorities have dismissed Russia’s claims as propaganda, U.S. lawmakers introduced legislation as recently as this past February to establish a special inspector general explicitly to “ensure that any funding sent to Ukraine for military, economy, and humanitarian aid receives independent and objective oversight and audits,” As House Armed Services Committee vice chairman Rep. Rob Wittman said in a statement at the time.
“Efforts by the United States and our European allies throughout the last year have clearly demonstrated to Putin his actions will not go without consequences, and I believe we should continue to take strong actions to hold Putin responsible,” Wittman said. “At the same time, we owe Americans peace of mind that their hardworking taxpayer dollars are being used in an efficient manner that prioritizes American interests.”
When asked about the effort, Pentagon spokesman Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder emphasized that the U.S. takes accountability for U.S. military assistance to Ukraine “very seriously.”
“We have an active and proactive whole-of-government system, as you’ve highlighted, to prevent the illicit diversion of weapons into Eastern Europe,” Ryder told reporters at the time. “And to this date we have not seen any evidence of any type of widespread diversion of any of the assistance that we’ve provided.”
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Jared Keller is the managing editor of Task & Purpose. His writing has appeared in Aeon, the Los Angeles Review of Books, the New Republic, Pacific Standard, Smithsonian, and The Washington Post, among other publications. Contact the author here.
Featured image: An airman loads weapons cargo bound for Ukraine onto a C-17 Globemaster III during a security assistance mission at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware, Sept. 14, 2022. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Marco A. Gomez).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The Biden administration is expected to provide Ukraine with controversial depleted uranium ammunition for use with US-made Abrams tanks, The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.
Depleted uranium is a byproduct of enriched uranium and is extremely dense, making it a good material for penetrating armor. But depleted uranium is radioactive, and it’s been linked to cancer, birth defects, and environmental damage in areas it’s been used, including Iraq, where US forces frequently fired the toxic munitions and the impact is still being felt today.
According to the Journal report, there has been a debate within the White House over whether or not to provide Ukraine with depleted uranium rounds. Some officials have raised concerns about the criticism the US could face for providing weapons that might cause health and environmental damage.
The Pentagon has been pushing for the US to arm the Abrams tanks it sends to Ukraine with depleted uranium. The US is refurbishing old Abrams tanks that are expected to arrive in Ukraine by the fall.
US-made Bradley Fighting Vehicles can also be armed with depleted uranium, earning them the nickname “tank killer.” Earlier this year, the White House refused to say if it would provide Ukraine with Bradleys armed with the controversial ammunition.
The UK has sent depleted uranium rounds to Ukraine for use with the British-made Challenger 2 tanks. The British took the step despite Russian warnings that it would treat Ukraine’s use of the radioactive ammunition the same as a dirty bomb. Russian President Vladimir Putin said his decision to deploy nuclear weapons to Belarus was a response to the UK arming Ukraine with depleted uranium.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.
Featured image: M1A2 SEP Abrams TUSK demonstrating Mounted Soldier System (Licensed under the Public Domain)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
NATO will begin its largest-ever air exercise on Monday.
The series of aerial manoeuvres being coordinated by Germany is intended to show the strength and unity of the Western military alliance, set against the backdrop of the Ukraine war.
The “Air Defender 23” exercise will run until 23 June, bringing together some 250 military aircraft from 25 NATO members and partner states, including Japan and Sweden.
Up to 10,000 people will take part in the exercises, which are intended to strengthen interoperability and protection against drones and cruise missiles in the event of an attack on cities, airports or ports located on NATO territory.
The drill was designed in 2018, partly in response to Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, though it’s not specifically targeting “anyone”, said Army Chief General Ingo Gerhartz of the German Air Force.
Message to Putin
NATO is determined to defend “every centimetre” of its territory, said Gerhartz. But he added it will not send any flight “in the direction of Kaliningrad”, the Russian enclave bordering NATO members Poland and Lithuania.
“We are a defensive alliance and that is how this exercise is planned,” insisted the general.
Yet the manoeuvres will also aim to send a message to Russia, according to the US Ambassador in Germany, Amy Gutmann.
“I would be very surprised if a world leader did not take note of what this shows in terms of the spirit of this alliance, what the strength of this alliance means, and that includes Mr Putin,” she told reporters.
“By synchronising ourselves, we multiply our strength.”
Russia’s war against Ukraine has galvanised the US-led military alliance created nearly 75 years ago to confront the Soviet Union.
Finland and Sweden – traditionally officially neutral, though closely aligned with NATO – asked to join after Russia invaded Ukraine last year.
German General Gerhartz noted many pilots would be working together for the first time.
“It’s about nurturing the old relationships we have, but also building new relationships,” he said.
“It is about establishing what it means to face a great power in the context of a competition between great powers”.
Potential travel disruption
In an email seen by Euronews, Wizz Air warned customers flying from Latvia to Britain the exercise may impact multiple European airspaces.
It urged flyers to check their website before travelling to the airport.
“Even though these circumstances are beyond our control, we apologise for any potential inconvenience caused and we will work hard to minimise any travel disruptions.”
Asked about potential disruptions to civilian air travel during the exercise, General Gerhartz insisted planners would do “everything in their power” to limit flight delays or cancellations, with school holidays starting in parts of Germany.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Back in late May, the United States government “finally gave in to pressure” and decided to greenlight the delivery of F-16s to the Kiev regime. As a result, NATO’s European members were given the legal basis to deliver these old fighter jets to the Neo-Nazi junta. The troubled Biden administration has been mulling the move for months, while Ukrainian pilots have been conducting training in several NATO countries, including the US itself. Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued a stark warning to the political West regarding the delivery of nuclear-capable US-made F-16 fighter jets to the Kiev regime.
“We can expect anything from the leaders of the United States and other Western countries whom Washington has brought to its heel. They are proving the truth of this statement now that following the supplies of modern long-range artillery and tanks, they are getting ready, in earnest, to supply the F-16 jets. Some say they will make two squadrons available, others say eight. They are gearing up to continue the escalation of the war against us,” Lavrov stated and then added a stark warning: “We must keep in mind that one version of the F-16 can carry nuclear weapons.”
The Russian Foreign Minister made these comments mere days after troops from NATO took part in incursions into Russia proper, accompanied by escalating drone strikes against targets as far as Moscow itself. However, the mainstream propaganda machine was quick to decry Lavrov’s warnings as supposed “disinformation” and “baseless fearmongering”. The Business Insider claims, citing Hans Kristensen, the director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, that “Lavrov’s comments were misinformation, perhaps even disinformation”.
“It’s misinformation because he’s saying things that are not real and using it in a way to, I assume, create public concern or fearmongering about Western intentions,” Kristensen told the Business Insider, adding that
“Lavrov is using the nominal capability of the F-16 aircraft to say that the ones that might be sent to Ukraine could also be converted to nuclear, but that’s not the case. The F-16s that Ukraine is going to get — if and when it gets them — they’re not from the units that have the nuclear mission. There’s no way at all that any nuclear state in the West would give nuclear weapons, or nuclear weapons capability, to Ukraine. It’s completely out of the question.”
The F-16 is designed to be capable of launching nuclear strikes, usually with B61 thermonuclear bombs. The units deployed by NATO members such as Belgium and the Netherlands operate F-16 fighter jets capable of delivering nuclear weapons, specifically as part of their nuclear sharing agreements with the US.
And it’s precisely these countries (in addition to Denmark and others) that still operate F-16s and could very well be the first to send them to the Kiev regime. On the other hand, members such as Poland and Romania are extremely unlikely to do so, as the move would undermine their own security. This further reinforces the idea that the jets destined for the Neo-Nazi junta will be capable of delivering nuclear weapons.
Although the US is by far the largest operator of F-16 fighter jets, it still hasn’t announced plans to deliver them to the Neo-Nazi junta forces.
Washington DC’s propaganda machine insists that this is supposedly because “the US is reluctant to do so to avoid escalation with Moscow”. However, this is a moot point, as the belligerent thalassocracy has so far done everything in its power to antagonize Russia through a series of moves that have pushed the world dangerously close to a world-ending thermonuclear conflict. Still, this doesn’t seem to stop the US from going ahead with such plans, at the very least covertly. National Security Council coordinator John Kirby recently admitted this, stating that “the US has been forward-looking about future capabilities and needs”.
According to CNN, back in March, the US hosted two Ukrainian pilots at a military base in Tucson, Arizona, where USAF has been evaluating their skills to assess how much time they would need to learn to fly various American military aircraft, including the F-16. Still, while Washington DC is directly taking part in these efforts, it’s obvious they want to make it look like they’re not, which would explain why the US doesn’t want to send its own jets, but expects its overseas vassals and satellite states to do so.
And while the F-16’s capabilities against Russian jets such as the Su-35S or MiG-31BM are questionable at best (to say nothing of the Su-57), it’s not impossible that Washington DC is trying to give the Kiev regime a nuclear capability to deter a potential Russian counteroffensive that might ensue as the Neo-Nazi junta’s own offensive is failing miserably.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) today launches its annual assessment of the state of armaments, disarmament and international security. A key finding of SIPRI Yearbook 2023 is that the number of operational nuclear weapons started to rise as countries’ long-term force modernization and expansion plans progressed.
Read this press release in Catalan (PDF), French (PDF), Spanish (PDF) or Swedish (PDF).
Click here to download the sample chapter of SIPRI Yearbook 2023 on world nuclear forces.
Nuclear arsenals being fortified around the world
The nine nuclear-armed states—the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) and Israel—continue to modernize their nuclear arsenals and several deployed new nuclear-armed or nuclear-capable weapon systems in 2022.
Of the total global inventory of an estimated 12 512 warheads in January 2023, about 9576 were in military stockpiles for potential use—86 more than in January 2022 (see the table below). Of those, an estimated 3844 warheads were deployed with missiles and aircraft, and around 2000—nearly all of which belonged to Russia or the USA—were kept in a state of high operational alert, meaning that they were fitted to missiles or held at airbases hosting nuclear bombers.
Russia and the USA together possess almost 90 per cent of all nuclear weapons. The sizes of their respective nuclear arsenals (i.e. useable warheads) seem to have remained relatively stable in 2022, although transparency regarding nuclear forces declined in both countries in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
In addition to their useable nuclear weapons, Russia and the USA each hold more than 1000 warheads previously retired from military service, which they are gradually dismantling.
SIPRI’s estimate of the size of China’s nuclear arsenal increased from 350 warheads in January 2022 to 410 in January 2023, and it is expected to keep growing. Depending on how it decides to structure its forces, China could potentially have at least as many intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) as either the USA or Russia by the turn of the decade.
‘China has started a significant expansion of its nuclear arsenal,’ says Hans M. Kristensen, Associate Senior Fellow with SIPRI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Programme and Director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists (FAS). ‘It is increasingly difficult to square this trend with China’s declared aim of having only the minimum nuclear forces needed to maintain its national security.’
Although the UK is not thought to have increased its nuclear weapon arsenal in 2022, the warhead stockpile is expected to grow in the future as a result of the British government’s announcement in 2021 that it was raising its limit from 225 to 260 warheads. The government also said it would no longer publicly disclose its quantities of nuclear weapons, deployed warheads or deployed missiles.
In 2022 France continued its programmes to develop a third-generation nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) and a new air-launched cruise missile, as well as to refurbish and upgrade existing systems.
India and Pakistan appear to be expanding their nuclear arsenals, and both countries introduced and continued to develop new types of nuclear delivery system in 2022. While Pakistan remains the main focus of India’s nuclear deterrent, India appears to be placing growing emphasis on longer-range weapons, including those capable of reaching targets across China.
North Korea continues to prioritize its military nuclear programme as a central element of its national security strategy. While North Korea conducted no nuclear test explosions in 2022, it conducted more than 90 tests of missiles. Some of these missiles, which include new ICBMs, may be capable of carrying nuclear warheads. SIPRI estimates that the country has now assembled around 30 warheads and possesses enough fissile material for a total of 50–70 warheads, both significant increases over the estimates for January 2022.
Israel—which does not publicly acknowledge possessing nuclear weapons—is also believed to be modernizing its nuclear arsenal.
‘Most of the nuclear-armed states are hardening their rhetoric about the importance of nuclear weapons, and some are even issuing explicit or implicit threats about potentially using them,’ said Matt Korda, Associate Researcher with SIPRI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Programme and Senior Research Associate with the FAS Nuclear Information Project. ‘This elevated nuclear competition has dramatically increased the risk that nuclear weapons might be used in anger for the first time since World War II.’
‘With billion-dollar programmes to modernize, and in some cases expand, nuclear arsenals, the five nuclear weapon states recognized by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty seem to be moving further and further from their commitment to disarmament under the treaty,’ said Wilfred Wan, Director of SIPRI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Programme.
Nuclear diplomacy dealt a further blow by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
Nuclear arms control and disarmament diplomacy suffered major setbacks following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. In the wake of the invasion, the USA suspended its bilateral strategic stability dialogue with Russia. In February 2023 Russia announced it was suspending its participation in the 2010 Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START)—the last remaining nuclear arms control treaty limiting Russian and US strategic nuclear forces. Talks about a follow-on treaty to New START, which expires in 2026, were also suspended. Nevertheless, by SIPRI’s assessment, both countries’ deployed strategic nuclear forces remained within the New START limits as of January 2023.
Iran’s military support to Russian forces in Ukraine and the political situation in Iran also overshadowed talks on reviving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the 2015 agreement meant to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The JCPOA’s revival now seems increasingly unlikely.
The USA and the UK both declined to release information to the public concerning their nuclear forces in 2022, which they had done in previous years.
‘In this period of high geopolitical tension and mistrust, with communication channels between nuclear-armed rivals closed or barely functioning, the risks of miscalculation, misunderstanding or accident are unacceptably high,’ says Dan Smith, SIPRI Director. ‘There is an urgent need to restore nuclear diplomacy and strengthen international controls on nuclear arms.’
Global security and stability in increasing peril
The 54th edition of the SIPRI Yearbook reveals the continuing deterioration of global security over the past year. The impacts of the war in Ukraine are visible in almost every aspect of the issues connected to armaments, disarmament and international security examined in the Yearbook. Nevertheless, it was far from being the only major conflict being waged in 2022, and acute geopolitical tensions, mistrust and division had been growing long before Russia’s full-scale invasion of its neighbour.
‘We are drifting into one of the most dangerous periods in human history,’ says Dan Smith, SIPRI Director. ‘It is imperative that the world’s governments find ways to cooperate in order to calm geopolitical tensions, slow arms races and deal with the worsening consequences of environmental breakdown and rising world hunger.’
In addition to the usual detailed coverage of nuclear arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation issues, the SIPRI Yearbook presents data and analysis on developments in world military expenditure, international arms transfers, arms production, multilateral peace operations, armed conflicts and more. Special sections in SIPRI Yearbook 2023 explore the rise of private military and security companies such as the Wagner Group, and the related impact on peace and security; how the war in Ukraine has affected governance of space and cyberspace; the attacks on nuclear power plants during the fighting in Ukraine, and their implications; and the regulation of new technologies such as autonomous weapon systems.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
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.
The article below entitled Trump, The Manchurian Candidate: U.S. Foreign Policy and the Campaign to Destabilize the Trump Presidency waspublished on January 4, 2017 prior to the inauguration of president Trump.
In early January 2017, we predicted an unprecedented constitutional crisis characterized by a coordinated and carefully planned operation to destabilize the Trump presidency involving several stages, both before and after his inauguration.
According to Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, a corrupt political clique within the Democratic Party:
“…began the assault on Donald Trump seven years ago with absurd accusations that Trump teamed up with Russian President Putin to interfere in the US presidential election, throwing the victory to Trump.
This led to the absurd Department of Justice (sic) investigation of “Russiagate” which ended after years of dragging Trump through the mud with a Special Council’s report that the charge had no basis in fact and reflected poorly on the FBI’s honesty and professionalism”.
Trump was considered by “The Deep State” as a “political impediment” to the conduct of America’s “Long War” as defined by the Project for the New American Century. The unspoken objective was:
“to get rid of a President who intended to normalize relations with Russia, thus curtailing the budget and power of the military/security complex” (Paul Craig Roberts, emphasis added)
In January 2019, the FBI Russia investigation was quoted by the media as “evidence” that Trump was “wittingly or unwittingly” an agent of the Kremlin.
Even prior to the inauguration of president Trump, the US media in liaison with US intelligence had launched successive waves of smears directed against President elect Donald Trump.
The objective from the very outset was to discredit president Trump, presenting him as a Manchurian candidate serving the interests of the Kremlin.
RussiaGate initiated in 2016 has now reached its climax with the unscrupulous indictment of a former president of the United States. In the words of Judicial Watch:
“This day will go down in infamy. The unprecedented and corrupt indictment of President Trump is built on sand and is brazen election interference. It is an indictment about nothing. Biden’s further transforming of the FBI and Justice Department into political enforcers in order to jail his leading political opponent could lead to the end of our constitutional republic”
The indictment goes far beyond “election politics”. “The end of our constitutional republic” is an understatement.
What is a stake is the creation of a totalitarian regime as a means to carrying America’s global military and hegemonic agenda directed against all humanity. My January, 4 2017 article concludes with the following sentence:
“Is the tendency (at some future date) towards the adoption of martial law and the suspension of constitutional government?” (emphasis added)
It is worth noting that war preparations against Russia were already ongoing in 2016 under Obama’s “Operation Atlantic Resolve”. Had Hillary won the November 2016 presidential elections, the US-NATO war agenda would indelibly have gone into “high gear”.
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, June 14, 2023
Author’s Note:
Global Research is based in Canada. As an independent media, GR has no links to U.S. party politics, nor are we supporters of Donald Trump. Our mandate is to reveal the truth.
* * *
Trump, The Manchurian Candidate
U.S. Foreign Policy and the Campaign to Destabilize the Trump Presidency,
Regime Change in America
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, January 4, 2017
Introduction
Obama has formally accused Moscow of interfering in the US elections on behalf of Donald Trump [December 2016]. These are serious allegations. Whereas the sanctions are directed against Russia, the ultimate intent is to undermine the legitimacy of president-elect Donald Trump and his foreign policy stance in relation to Moscow.
According to the US media, the sanctions against Moscow were intended to “Box in President-elect Donald J. Trump” because Trump “has consistently cast doubt” that Putin was involved in the alleged hacking of the DNC. In an earlier report on Kremlin meddling, the NYT (December 15, 2016) depicted Donald Trump as “…a Useful Idiot”… an American president who doesn’t know he’s being played by a wily foreign power. (emphasis added)
But the accusations against Trump have gone far beyond the “Box in” Narrative.The unspoken truth pertaining to Obama’s Executive Order is that the punishment was intended for Trump rather than Putin.
The objective is not to “Box-In” the president-elect for his “unfamiliarity with the role of intelligence”. Quite the opposite: The strategy is to delegitimize Donald Trump by accusing him of high treason.
In recent developments, the director of National Intelligence James Clapper has “confirmed” that the alleged Russian cyberattack constitutes an “existential threat to our way of life”.
“Whether or not that constitutes an act of war [by Russia against the US] I think is a very heavy policy call that I don’t believe the intelligence community should make,” said Clapper.
That “act of war” not by Russia but against Russia seems to be have been endorsed by the outgoing Obama administration: several thousand tanks and US troops are being deployed on Russia’s doorstep as part of Obama’s “Operation Atlantic Resolve” directed against the Russian Federation.
Are these military deployments part of Obama’s “act of retribution” against Russia in response to Moscow’s alleged hacking of the US elections?
Is this a “fast-track” procedure on the part of the outgoing president with the support of US intelligence, intended to create political and social chaos prior to the inception of the Trump administration on January 20th?
According to Donbass DINA News: “A Massive US military deployment [on Russia’s border] should be ready by January 20 [2016].”
Political Insanity prevails.
And insanity could potentially unleash World War III.
Meanwhile the “real story” behind the hacking op. is not front page news. The mainstream media is not covering it.
Destabilizing the Trump Presidency
The ultimate intent of this campaign led by the Neocons and the Clinton Faction is to destabilize the Trump presidency.
Prior to the November 8 [2016] elections, former Secretary of Defense and CIA Director Leo Panetta had already intimated that Trump is a threat to National Security. According to The Atlantic, Trump is a “Modern Manchurian Candidate” serving the interests of the Kremlin.
Vanity Fair November 1 2016
The Atlantic October 8 2016
In the wake of the Grand Electors’ Vote (in favour of Trump) and Obama’s sanctions against Moscow, the accusations of treason directed against Donald Trump have gone into high gear:
“A specter of treason hovers over Donald Trump. He has brought it on himself by dismissing a bipartisan call for an investigation of Russia’s hacking of the Democratic National Committee as a “ridiculous” political attack on the legitimacy of his election as president.” (Boston Globe, December 16, emphasis added)
“Liberals are suggesting President-elect Donald Trump is guilty of treason after President Obama announced new sanctions against Russia and Trump praised Vladimir Putin’s response to the sanctions.” (Daily Caller, December 30, 2016, emphasis added)
Coordinated Operation to Destabilize the Trump Presidency?
Is Trump “in bed with the enemy”?
These are serious accusations allegedly backed up by US intelligence which cannot be brushed away.
Will they just be forgotten once Trump accedes to the White House? Unlikely. They are part of a propaganda campaign on behalf of powerful corporate interests.
What is at stake is tantamount to a carefully coordinated operation to destabilize the Trump presidency, characterized by several distinct components.
The central objective of this project against Trump is to ensure the continuity of the Neocons’ foreign policy agenda geared towards global warfare and Worldwide economic conquest, which has dominated the US political landscape since September 2001.
Let us first review the nature of the Neocons’ foreign policy stance.
Background on The Neocons’ Foreign Policy Agenda
In the wake of 9/11, two major shifts in US foreign policy were devised as part of the 2001 National Security Strategy (NSS).
The first pertained to the “global war on terrorism” against Al Qaeda, the second introduced the preemptive “defensive war” doctrine. The objective was to present “preemptive military action” –meaning war as an act of “self-defense” against two categories of enemies, “rogue States” and “Islamic terrorists”:
“The war against terrorists of global reach is a global enterprise of uncertain duration. …America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed.(National Security Strategy, White House, 2002, http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html
The preemptive war doctrine also included the preemptive use of nuclear weapons on a “first strike” basis (as a means of “self-defence”) against both nuclear and non-nuclear states. This concept of a preemptive first strike nuclear attack was firmly endorsed by Hillary Clinton in her election campaign.
In turn, the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT) launched in the wake of 9/11 has come to play a central role in justifying US-NATO military intervention in the Middle East on “humanitarian grounds” (R2P), including the instatement of so-called “No Fly Zones”. GWOT also constitutes the cornerstone of media propaganda.
The military and intelligence dimensions of the Neocons’ project are contained in The Project for the New American Century formulated prior to the accession of George W. Bush to the White House. The PNAC also posits a “Revolution in Military Affairs” requiring a massive budget outlay allocated to the development of advanced weapons systems including a new generation of nuclear weapons.
The Neocon project also includes a menu of “regime change”, “color revolutions”, economic sanctions and macro-economic reforms directed against countries which fail to conform to Washington’s demands.
In turn, the globalization of war supports Wall Street’s global economic agenda: The (secretly negotiated) Atlantic and Pacific trade blocks (TPP, TTIP, CETA, TISA), coupled up with IMF- World Bank- WTO “surveillance” are an integral part of this hegemonic project, intimately related to US military and intelligence operations.
“The Deep State” and The Clash of Powerful Corporate Interests
Global capitalism is by no means monolithic. What is at stake are fundamental rivalries within the US establishment marked by the clash between competing corporate factions, each of which is intent upon exerting control over the incoming US presidency. In this regard, Trump is not entirely in the pocket of the lobby groups. As a member of the establishment, he has his own corporate sponsors and fund raisers. His stated foreign policy agenda including his commitment to revise Washington’s relationship with Moscow does not fully conform with the interests of the defence contractors, which supported Clinton’s candidacy.
There are powerful corporate interests on both sides, which are now clashing. There are also overlapping allegiances and “cross-cutting alliances” within the corporate establishment. What we are witnessing are “inter-capitalist rivalries” within the spheres of banking, oil and energy, the military industrial complex, etc.
Is “The Deep State” divided? These corporate rivalries are also characterized by strategic divisions and clashes within several agencies of the US State apparatus including the intelligence community and the military. In this regard, the CIA is deeply embedded in the corporate media (CNN, NBC, NYT. WP, etc) which is waging a relentless smear campaign against Trump and his alleged links to Moscow.
But there is also a countervailing campaign within the intelligence community against the dominant Neocon faction. In this regard, the Trump team is contemplating a streamlining of the CIA (aka purges). According to a member of the Trump transition team (quoted by the Wall Street Journal, January 4, 2017),
“The view from the Trump team is the intelligence world [is] becoming completely politicized, … They all need to be slimmed down. The focus will be on restructuring the agencies and how they interact.”
This project would also affect CIA operatives responsible for propaganda embedded within the mainstream media. This would inevitably create profound divisions and conflicts within the US intelligence apparatus, which could potentially backlash on the Trump presidency. it is unlikely that a Trump administration would be able to undermine the inner structures of US intelligence and CIA sponsored media propaganda.
Continuity in US Foreign Policy?
Crafted in the late 1940s by US State Department official George F. Kennan, the “Truman Doctrine” sets the ideological foundations of America’s post-war hegemonic project. What these State department documents reveal is continuity in US foreign policy from “Containment” during the Cold War to today’s post 9/11 doctrine of “Pre-emptive Warfare”.
In this regard, the Neocons’ Project for the New American Century’s blueprint (cited above) for global conquest should be viewed as the culmination of a post-war agenda of military hegemony and global economic domination formulated by the State Department in 1948 at the outset of the Cold War.
Needless to say, successive Democratic and Republican administrations, from Harry Truman to George W. Bush and Barack Obama have been involved in carrying out this hegemonic blueprint for global domination, which the Pentagon calls the “Long War”.
In this regard, the Neocons have followed in the footsteps of the “Truman Doctrine”. In the late 1940s, George F. Kennan called for building a dominant Anglo-American alliance based on “good relations between our country and [the] British Empire”. In today’s world, this alliance largely characterizes the military axis between Washington and London, which plays a dominant role inside NATO to the detriment of Washington’s (continental) European allies. It also includes Canada and Australia as key strategic partners.
Of significance, Kennan underscored the importance of preventing the development of continental European powers (e.g. Germany, France, Italy) which could compete with the Anglo-American axis. The objective during the Cold War and its aftermath was to prevent Europe from establishing political as well as economic ties with Russia. In turn, NATO largely dominated by the US has prevented both Germany and France from performing a strategic role in World affairs.
Trump Foreign Policy Realignments
It is highly unlikely that a Trump administration would depart from the mainstay of US foreign policy.
While the Trump team is committed to a socially regressive and right wing agenda on the domestic front, certain foreign policy realignments are possible including a softening of the sanctions against Russia, which could potentially have an impact on the multibillion dollar contracts of the military industrial complex. This in itself would be a significant achievement which could contribute to a period of Detente in East-West relations.
Moreover, while Trump has put together a right wing cabinet of generals, bankers and oil executives, which largely conforms to the mainstay of the Republican Party, the bi-partisan “entente cordiale” between Democrats and Republicans has been broken. Meanwhile, there are powerful voices within the GOP who are supportive of the “anti-Trump faction”.
The divisions between these two competing factions are nonetheless significant. With regard to US foreign policy, they largely pertain to US-Russia bilateral relations which have been jeopardized by the Obama administration as well as to the ongoing US military agenda in Syria and Iraq. They also have a bearing on the European Union, which has been affected by Obama’s economic sanctions against Russia.
The sanctions have resulted in a dramatic decline in EU trade and investment with the Russian Federation. In conformity with the “Truman Doctrine” discussed above, US foreign policy under the Neocons, particularly since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, had sought to dismantle the Franco-German alliance and weaken the European Union.
Of relevance in relation to recent developments in Ukraine and Eastern Europe, George F. Kennan explicitly pointed in his 1948 State Department brief, to “a policy of containment of Germany, within Western Europe”. What Kennan’s observations suggest is that the US should be supportive of a European Project only inasmuch as it supports US hegemonic interests. And that is precisely what the Neocons have achieved under the Bush and Obama administrations:
“Today both Francois Hollande and Angela Merkel are taking their orders directly from Washington. The 2003 invasion of Iraq was a turning point. The election of pro-US political leaders (President Sarkozy in France and Chancellor Angela Merkel in Germany) was conducive to a weakening of national sovereignty, leading to the demise of the Franco-German alliance. ” (Michel Chossudovsky America’s Blueprint for Global Domination: From “Containment” to “Pre-emptive War”. Global Research, 2014)
The more significant question is whether this realignment under a Trump administration will restrain the deployment of NATO troops and military hardware in Eastern Europe on Russia’s doorstep. Will it be conducive to nuclear disarmament?
While Trump’s foreign policy agenda has been the target of “dirty politics” by the Clinton faction, the new administration has powerful corporate backers who will no doubt challenge the Neocons including those operating within the intelligence community. It is worth noting that Trump also has the support of the pro-Israel lobby as well as Israeli intelligence. In December, the head of Mossad met up with the Trump team in Washington.
The Timeline of the Destabilization Project
At the outset, prior to the November 8 elections, the project to disrupt and destabilize the Trump presidency consisted of several coordinated and interrelated processes some of which are ongoing while others have already been completed (or are no longer relevant):
the media smear campaign against Trump, which has taken on a new slant in the wake of the November 8 [2016] elections (ongoing);
the engineered anti-Trump protest movement across the US, coordinated with media coverage, petitions, with the objective to disrupt (ongoing);
The vote recount in three swing states, (No longer relevant)
The passing of H.R 6393: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, which includes a section directed against so-called “pro-Moscow independent media”, in response to Moscow’s alleged interference in the US elections in support of Donald Trump;
The Electoral College Vote on December 19 [2016] (No longer relevant)
The Petition launched by California Sen Barbara Boxers on Change.org pertaining to the electoral College vote (No longer relevant)
The ongoing “Disrupt” Campaign intent upon disrupting the January 20, 2017 Presidential Inauguration Ceremony.
The possibility of an impeachment procedure is already contemplated during the first year of his mandate.
The Catch Phrase is “Disrupt”. The Objective is “Disrupt”
In turn, the Disruptj20.org website is calling for the disruption of the inauguration of Donald Trump on January 20, 2017:
#DisruptJ20 is supported by the work of the DC Welcoming Committee, a collective of experienced local activists and out-of-work gravediggers acting with national support. We’re building the framework needed for mass protests to shut down the inauguration of Donald Trump and planning widespread direct actions to make that happen. We’re also providing services like housing, food, and even legal assistance to anyone who wants to join us.
What are the Possible Outcomes?
The propaganda campaign together with the other components of this operation (protest movement, anti-Trump petitions, etc) are used as a means to discredit an elected-president.
This media propaganda campaign against an incoming president is unprecedented in US history. While the MSM routinely criticize politicians in high office including the president of the US, the media narrative in this case is fundamentally different. The incoming president is the target of an organized media smear campaign which will not subside upon Trump’s accession to the White House.
Concurrently, an engineered and coordinated protest movement against Trump has been ongoing since November 8. [2016] In fact it started on the evening of November 8 prior to the announcement of the election results. The protests have all the appearances of a “color revolution” style op.
The media also provides a biased coverage of the engineered protest movement. The organizers and recruiters are serving the interests of powerful corporate lobby groups including the defence contractors. They are not serving the interests of the American people
It is unlikely that these various initiatives including the Disrupt campaign will have a significant bearing on Trump’s inauguration. Our assessment suggests, however, that the president-elect will accede to the White House amidst an aura of controversy.
Impeachment is the “Talking Point”
The propaganda campaign will continue in the wake of Trump’s inauguration intimating accusations of treason. The impeachment of Donald Trump has already been contemplated, prior to his accession to the presidency. In the words of the Huffington Post (January 1, 2017):
“There is only one constitutional way to remove a president, and that is via impeachment.
What’s needed is a citizens’ impeachment inquiry, to begin on Trump’s first day in office.
The inquiry should keep a running dossier, and forward updates at least weekly to the House Judiciary Committee. There will be no lack of evidence.”
Change.org which organizes the engineered protest movement has launched a petition to impeach Trump:
Change.org petition campaign
Boston Globe, December 16, 2016
Huffington Post, December 26, 2016
The American People are the Unspoken Victims: The Need for A Real Mass Movement
The American people are the unspoken victims of this clash between competing capitalist factions. Both factions are serving the interests of the elites to the detriment of the US electorate.
In turn, meaningful real grassroots opposition to Trump’s right-wing social policy agenda has been “kidnapped” by an engineered protest movement financed and controlled by powerful economic interests. The organizers of this movement are acting on behalf of powerful elite interests. People are misled. What is required in the months ahead is the development of “real” social movements against the new Trump administration with regard to broad social and economic issues, civil rights, health care, job creation, environmental issues, foreign policy and US led wars, defense expenditure, immigration, etc.
Independent grassroots movements must consequently be divorced from the engineered protests backed and financed (directly or indirectly) by corporate interests. This is no easy task. The funding and “manufacturing of dissent”, the manipulation of social movements, etc. are firmly entrenched.
Ironically, neoliberalism finances activism directed against neoliberalism. “Manufacturing dissent” is characterized by a manipulative environment, a process of arm-twisting and subtle cooptation of individuals within progressive organizations, including anti-war coalitions, environmentalists and the anti-globalization movement.
“Co-optation is not limited to buying the favors of politicians. The economic elites –which control major foundations– also oversee the funding of numerous NGOs and civil society organizations, which historically have been involved in the protest movement against the established economic and social order.” (Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, September 20, 2010)
Is America gearing Towards a Deep-seated Constitutional Crisis
At this stage it is difficult to predict what will happen under a Trump administration. What seems abundantly clear, however, is that America is gearing towards a deep-seated political crisis, with major social, economic and geopolitical ramifications.
Is the tendency (at some future date) towards the adoption of martial law and the suspension of constitutional government?
Note: This article relies in part on previous texts written by the author pertaining to the US elections.
Comments Off on Donald Trump, The Manchurian Candidate: U.S. Foreign Policy and the Campaign to Destabilize the Trump Presidency. Regime Change in America
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the indictment of former President Donald Trump:
This day will go down in infamy. The unprecedented and corrupt indictment of President Trump is built on sand and is brazen election interference. It is an indictment about nothing. Biden’s further transforming of the FBI and Justice Department into political enforcers in order to jail his leading political opponent could lead to the end of our constitutional republic. The indictment has followed years of prosecutorial misconduct, harassment, and abuse victimizing Trump. Not only is Trump innocent but he is a crime victim.
Joe Biden wants to distract from his own personal corruption and join the ranks of foreign dictators by trying to jail and turn Trump into a political prisoner. Congress should act immediately and do everything possible under the law to undo this attempt to wreck our republican form of government. Every candidate for public office should denounce this attack on our elections.
Let’s hope the courts recognize this sham indictment for what it is and shut it down. In the meantime, Judicial Watch will continue to hold the Biden administration accountable for its role in the worst corruption scandal in American history – the effort to abuse and destroy President Trump!
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
U.S. propaganda is powerful. Responding to an increase in U.S. attacks on China, a delegation was organized by the China / U.S. Solidarity Network, which then visited China from May 11 to May 31.
One focus of the trip was a visit to Xinjiang (pronounced Shinjaang) province to gather video footage and interviews that give a more realistic picture of this vast and quickly modernizing, multiethnic region. Footage for the documentary, currently named “Voice of Xinjiang,” focuses on an area with 4,000 years of history, which is at the center of the ancient Silk Road that today is a major hub in China’s ambitious Belt and Road trade program.
Sara Flounders and Arjae Red with Young Pioneers in Urumqi, May 2023.
The Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (XUAR) is a vast arid, mountainous and high-desert region in China’s far northwest. Xinjiang has significant oil and mineral reserves and is currently China’s largest natural gas-producing region. The province — although the largest in geographic area, covering one-sixth of China’s total land mass — is sparsely populated, having only 2% of China’s 1.4 billion population. Of Xinjiang’s population of 25 million, 60% belong to 13 ethnic minorities.
The two major cities we visited — Urumqi and Kashgar — are over 1,000 miles from one another. The surrounding fully mechanized farms were part of our visit.
These cities are part of the “Silk Road,” the great historic trade route that connects Eastern Asia to Central and South Asia, the Middle East and Europe. Xinjiang has vital and strategic international importance. It borders eight countries: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Russia, the Republic of Mongolia, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Within China, it shares borders with three autonomous province/regions: Gansu, Qinghai and Tibet.
Source: silkroadtravel.com
Today the population is actively learning new high-tech skills, which play a pivotal role in Xinjiang’s industrial development and its expanded commercial networks of high-speed trains and communications, which reach countries throughout Asia and into Europe and Africa.
Vibrant communities, zero ‘slave labor’
Torrents of U.S. media reports had told us to expect cities under martial law, military forces of occupation and heavily armed police on every corner. The Indigenous population, especially the Uygur people, are described as an impoverished and isolated population, who are allegedly forced into slave labor and doing backbreaking work in the fields or being locked inside concentration camps.
Coming from the New York City area, I expected a police force of at least equal size. The New York City police force is the world’s eighth-largest armed body. On our return, reports of “Stop and Frisk” programs centered on Black and Brown youth dominated the media: “Too many people in New York City are stopped, searched and frisked illegally, federal monitor says.” (abc7ny.com)
What we saw in Xinjiang was vibrant cities — Kashgar and Urumqi — full of tens of thousands of tourists, along with the local population of many nationalities. Huge and colorful marketplaces and bazaars, almost all of them run by Uygur families, stretched for many blocks. Busy subway lines crossed the cities. Everywhere we saw food markets brimming with inexpensive produce. Restaurants, cafes and street food stalls were packed with local people. In the evenings, the streets were full — not silent and ominous.
Our observations are backed up by numerous international studies that are ignored in the Western media.
The illiteracy rate in Xinjiang has fallen to 2.66%, lower than the country’s impressive 2.85% national average. At the time of the 1949 Chinese Revolution, illiteracy was 80% throughout China and more than 90% in Tibet and Xinjiang. Today 97.51% of small children are in preschool programs. Some 98.82% of the youth are enrolled in senior high schools in Xinjiang. (tinyurl.com/bdfyxn29)
A useful study of the area’s health and education achievements, as of 2022, can be found on the website of the South Asia Journal at “Excellent Xinjiang Health, Growth & Education Outcomes Contradict Sinophobic U.S. Lies.” (southasiajournal.net, Jan. 22, 2022)
Drives through the countryside revealed fully mechanized agriculture with tractors, planters, drone sprayers, irrigation canals and acres of plastic-topped greenhouses. We did not see any fields with workers doing hand labor of hoeing, picking and trimming. This is confirmed in numerous reports and many photos. The mechanization of cotton production is at 90%. (tinyurl.com/37s3e7e9)
In Kashgar, the 15th-century Idkah Mosque can house up to 20,000 worshipers. It is only one of the numerous Islamic centers and mosques, which we saw while walking the city streets and in several villages. Tall, slender minarets and dome-shaped roofs seemed to be a part of every block.
The narrative that China is destroying mosques and Islamic centers is continually pushed in the U.S. and Western media. It is regularly countered, however, by representatives from Muslim countries.
Arab and Muslim countries don’t agree with U.S. coverage
On April 27, 2021, the China Global Television Network English-language program “The Point with Liu Xin” interviewed ambassadors from Pakistan, Palestine and Syria, after they had made extensive visits to Xinjiang. They accused Western media of intentionally overlooking “the economic, social and cultural rights that Muslim Uygurs and other ethnic minorities enjoy in the region.”
Palestinian ambassador to China, Fariz Mehdawi said: “You know, the average of mosques, if you have to calculate it all, it’s something like 2,000 inhabitants for one mosque. This ratio, we don’t have it in our country. It’s not available anywhere.” (tinyurl.com/2w5mjdww)
The ambassadors praised the setting up of industries and advanced agriculture, poverty alleviation programs, a focus on education and health, and people-centered policies throughout Xinjiang. Their commentary aligns with what we saw on our visit.
No Arab or Muslim countries have joined in the U.S. rewriting of history and its targeted attacks on China. This is because these countries know that the U.S. government is responsible for 30 years of massively disruptive wars, sanctions, drone attacks and targeted assassinations in a series of Muslim countries, including Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia and Afghanistan.
They know that more than 2.2 million people are incarcerated in the U.S., the largest prison population in the world, and the history of systematic genocide of Indigenous nations in the U.S. is well-known around the world. The U.S. claim that it is a protector of the Muslim population of China’s Xinjiang province reeks of racist hypocrisy.
Just before the COVID-19 shutdown of world travel in 2019, the Council of Foreign Ministers under the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), with 57 member states one of the largest intergovernmental bodies in the world, had endorsed and commended China’s treatment of its Muslim citizens, following a fact-finding trip to the region. (hongkongfp.com, March 3, 2019)
A week after our trip to Xinjiang, a large delegation from the League of Arab States, including top official representatives from more than 16 Arab/Muslim countries, went to many of the same sites we had visited. Egypt, Bahrain, Algeria, Djibouti, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, Oman, Comoros, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Mauritania and Palestine were represented, along with several departments of the Arab League and the China-Arab States Cooperation Forum.
Their June 1 press statement, released by the Embassy of China in Syria, described the top-level delegation’s findings. The statement said: “Through visits to Urumqi, Kashgar and other places, we saw social harmony, economic development, people of all ethnic groups living in harmony in Xinjiang and accelerated progress in various undertakings. We truly understood the truth about the development of Xinjiang and recognized the true purpose of some international forces to smear and even demonize Xinjiang.”
Charge of ‘genocide’ to justify U.S. sanctions
The U.S. corporate media, U.S. major think tanks and strategists have labeled this modernization of Xinjiang “genocide.” The schools, universities and vocational training centers are labeled “concentration camps.” Based on these fabricated charges, intense new sanctions have been rammed through the U.S. Congress against all products and goods coming from the Xinjiang region. U.S. sanctions will impact all of China’s cotton exports.
China is the world’s largest exporter of cotton, and before the sanctions legislation, the U.S. was the largest importer of China’s cotton. All commodities using lithium, nickel manganese, beryllium, copper and gold mined in Xinjiang will also be impacted by U.S. sanctions. These include the manufacture of solar panels, electric vehicles made by auto companies and other products from chip makers, electronics and energy firms.
The only support for the wild, unsubstantiated charges used to justify new rounds of U.S. sanctions has come from the G7 imperialist countries and their allies.
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, NPR, Radio Free Asia and other U.S.-funded “human rights” and news organizations unanimously claim that the government of China has carried out “massive and systematic abuse” against Muslims living in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region. Their reports of “forced labor” and religious and cultural suppression are uncritically and widely circulated by the Western corporate media. These reports were preparation for new rounds of harsher sanctions against Chinese exports.
Arjae Red, Sara Flounders and Lee Siu Hin, right, with fruit and nut vender, Nazar, in Urumqi, May 2023.
First signed by President Joe Biden in December 2021, the “Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act” took effect June 23, 2022. Under this latest anti-China measure, all goods made in Xinjiang province are banned, unless the importer can demonstrate the imports were produced “free of forced labor.” (New York Times, April 8, 2022)
This latest U.S. anti-China propaganda campaign is based on unsubstantiated claims that Uygur people have been forced to take up new jobs in industries recently relocated to Xinjiang.
Welcome changes for farmers and herders
We visited Toltay Farm, outside of Kashgar, the home of an extended family, who had for generations been forced to constantly migrate with their herds of cattle, sheep and camels to find forage in an arid land. They are now able to live stable lives, due to new animal husbandry and farming techniques and government subsidies for new equipment.
They now use the crushed fodder that is extracted from a wide variety of farm products. It is grown on irrigated land, crisscrossed with a network of government-built canals. There are acres of greenhouses topped with plastic. The family proudly showed us their herds, now fattening in pens. With the assistance of technology, local herders can watch over their herds and monitor their health by checking their smart phones. (tinyurl.com/ydmyjzha)
At a local primary school, teachers explained that classes were held in Uygur and Mandarin.
The state farm has been divided into lots, with some families choosing to farm cotton, vegetables or wheat, while others focus on raising animals. We visited families who leased out their land while they trained in construction or as mechanics and equipment operators. Other families were working in new industries but still living in the villages. Very few had left the region, because their lives were now prosperous and stable.
We visited the home of a young veterinarian from a herding family. He described his free education and his care of the small herds belonging to 400 families. At each home we were offered plates of melons, yogurt and fresh bread.
In Urumqi on the side of a road, we visited a Kazak family with a small dairy operation. They buy milk from surrounding families’ herds. The daughter, Sembat, who had just graduated from the agricultural university, ran the store. She insisted we try at least a taste of each of their milk, yogurt and cheese products from horses, camels, goats, sheep and cows. Each taste was sharply different.
Her father described the government program that had opened this new life for them. They invited us into their home, where a traditional yurt, which was erected on its side, was full of beautifully woven pillows and carpets. The yurt is now reserved for family gatherings.
As U.S. imperialism’s hostility to China increases — with military threats, new rounds of sanctions and increasing efforts to inflame hostility against China with wild fabrications — it is crucial to hear first-person reports from people in the region who are proud of the reality of their changed lives.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on Workers World.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Maybe you may remember Michael Rubin. He worked with Douglas Feith’s Office of Special Plans (OSP), a neocon pro-war outfit set-up in the Pentagon by then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. The OSP’s objective was to create a series of false pretenses to invade Iraq in 2003.
According to Karen Kwiatkowski, a retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel whose assignments included duties as a Pentagon desk officer, the Office of Special Plans represented a “subversion of constitutional limits on executive power and a co-option through deceit of a large segment of the Congress.”
Rumsfeld and vice president Dick Cheney used the OSP to publicize “hot garbage” from a cast of dubious characters produced by Ahmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress, including “Curveball” (Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, a German intelligence asset pretending to be an Iraqi chemical engineer).
The lies that killed over a million Iraqis were dismissed as “intelligence failures” and swept under the rug. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, Rubin, and other neocons were never held responsible for the massive war crimes they perpetuated.
Rubin demands the nazified post-coup government of Ukraine receive nukes. Rubin believes the 1994 Budapest Memorandum (exchanging Soviet-era nukes deployed to Ukraine in exchange for sovereignty) was a monumental error. “The simple fact is this: United States maintains nuclear weapons because they are an effective deterrent against other nuclear states. Ukraine should have the same right,” Rubin writes.
Rubin and his neocon co-conspirators are not interested in “an effective deterrent” in Ukraine; they are interested in destroying the Russian state, the same as they destroyed the Iraqi state. However, Iraq, despite neocon lies, never had nuclear weapons (and the chemical weapons they did possess were supplied US corporations). Russia controls the largest arsenal of nukes in the world.
The non-proliferation mafia might howl with outrage, but the West must gear its nuclear policy toward reality, not wishful thinking or an empty façade of a treaty regimen by which revisionist states no longer abide.
Please read between the lines. According to this entitled “senior fellow,” the neocon “reality” envisions nuclear war as the most effective way to overthrow Putin and dismember the Russian Federation. Rubin, of course, does not call directly for nuclear war. However, his demand that Ukraine be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons will result in precisely that outcome. Imagine Ukraine’s Azov Battalion neo-nazis using nukes to target the Kremlin instead of hit-or-miss drones.
Rubin’s clarion call for nuclear destruction was crossposted on 19FortyFive, a “center-right” website that has produced neocon propaganda subsequently picked up by The New York Times, Newsweek, The Washington Post, The Hill, Reuters, and Voice of America (CIA propaganda), among others. It should be noted that 19FortyFive was until very recently a “regional defense publication.”
With the Ukrainian counter-offensive underway, the threat that Russia might use tactical nuclear weapons is increasingly a likelihood. It would be unfair to blame Kyiv. There is no moral equivalence. Russia invaded Ukraine; not the other way around. So long as Ukraine was on the verge of victory, Putin would arrive at this point of nuclear retaliation.
Nonsense. Zelenskyy’s “counter-offensive” has thus far failed miserably, a fact even the war propaganda media is obliged to admit. Thus, Russia does not need to use nuclear weapons. Rubin, however, is able to make his bogus claim thanks to the fiction of Russian desperation over defeat, a false narrative telegraphed daily by a mendacious and cynically fantasist corporate propaganda media.
As should be expected, Rubin completely ignores the fact Russia went into eastern Ukraine to prevent the ethnic cleansing and slaughter of ethnic Russians. For the neocons, responsible for massive war crimes in the Middle East (Iraq, Syria, Libya), human life is expendable. Disease, malnutrition, infant mortality, DU-produced cancer—these are the preferred tools for regime change and the destruction of targeted societies resistant to neoliberal serfdom.
Rubin believes the prospect of USG nukes handed over to Russian-hating neo-nazi ultranationalists in Ukraine will save the day and prevent military action “not only against Ukraine but also against Moldova and the Baltic States,” a claim that is utter BS.
Meanwhile, more rational Americans, while small in number, are increasingly concerned about the escalatory behavior of the USG, under the sway of vicious and murderous neocons, which will put an end to not only civilization but all life on planet Earth.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Paraquat is an herbicide and registered desiccant that has been used on American farms since 1964. A desiccant is a chemical that speeds up the ripening of the crop and dries it out, which facilitates harvesting and allows it to be harvested sooner than were the crop left to dry naturally
Fifty countries have banned paraquat due to its extreme toxicity and adverse effects on health. A single sip is lethal to a human. A considerable body of evidence also links paraquat to Parkinson’s disease
As of mid-March 2023, 2,998 lawsuits filed by farmers with Parkinson’s disease had been consolidated in Illinois federal court. The first bellwether trial is scheduled to begin in October 2023. Class actions have also been filed with state courts in California, Florida, Pennsylvania and Washington. The first state court trial is scheduled to begin in September 2023 in California
The discovery process has unearthed a trove of documents showing Syngenta knew as early as the 1960s that paraquat posed neurological risks and kept the evidence from regulators
Research shows paraquat becomes exponentially more hazardous in combination with plant lectins, as the lectins help shuttle paraquat into your brain, where it induces the neuronal degeneration seen in Parkinson’s disease. Many of the foods treated with paraquat are high-lectin foods, such as peas, beans and potatoes, so strive to buy organic whenever possible
*
Paraquat is an herbicide and registered desiccant that has been used on American farms since 1964. A desiccant is a chemical that speeds up the ripening of the crop and dries it out, which facilitates harvesting and allows it to be harvested sooner than were the crop left to dry naturally.
Desiccation is also used to improve profits, as farmers are penalized when the grain contains moisture. The greater the moisture content of the grain at sale, the lower the price they get.
While 50 countries have banned paraquat due to its extreme toxicity and adverse effects on health (a single sip is lethal to a human1), the chemical remains legal in the U.S., provided farmers receive training on its application. Proper application doesn’t ensure its safety, however, as recent lawsuits by thousands of farmers make clear.
Paraquat Linked to Parkinson’s Disease
A considerable body of evidence2 links paraquat to Parkinson’s disease and, as of mid-March 2023, 2,998 lawsuits filed by farmers with Parkinson’s disease had been consolidated in Illinois federal court. The first bellwether trial is scheduled to begin in October 2023.3
The farmers are suing Syngenta, the lead manufacturer, and Chevron, a key distributor, arguing the herbicide caused their disease, and that the manufacturer was aware of this risk and concealed it from the public.
The discovery process has unearthed a trove of documents4 showing Syngenta has indeed known that paraquat poses neurological risks and feared the possibility of lawsuits for decades.
Most of the paraquat lawsuits are taking place in Illinois federal court, but class actions have also been filed with state courts in California, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Washington. The first state court trial is scheduled to begin in September 2023 in California.5 As reported by the Miller & Zois law firm, which is handling paraquat cases in all 50 U.S. states:6
“Parkinson’s disease is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder of the brain that affects primarily the motor system, the part of the central nervous system that controls movement.
The characteristic symptoms of Parkinson’s disease are its ‘primary’ motor symptoms: resting tremor; bradykinesia (slowness in voluntary movement and reflexes); rigidity; and postural instability. There is currently no cure for Parkinson’s disease.
Existing treatments do not slow or stop their progression; such treatments are capable only of temporarily and partially relieving motor symptoms. These treatments also have unwelcome side effects the longer they are used.
Paraquat is a toxic chemical that is a highly effective plant killer. Unfortunately, the same properties that make paraquat toxic to plant cells also make it highly damaging to human nerve cells and create a substantial risk to anyone who uses it.
Oxidative stress is a major factor in — if not the precipitating cause of — the degeneration and death of dopaminergic neurons which is the primary pathophysiological cause of Parkinson’s disease.
Paraquat is designed to injure and kill plants by creating oxidative stress, which causes or contributes to causing the degeneration and death of plant cells. Similarly, Paraquat injures and kills animals by creating oxidative stress, which causes the degeneration and death of animal cells.
The causal link between Paraquat and Parkinson’s disease is well established. Hundreds of animal studies involving various routes of exposure have found that paraquat creates oxidative stress that results in pathophysiology consistent with that seen in human Parkinson’s disease.
Many epidemiological studies have also found an association between Paraquat exposure and Parkinson’s disease, including multiple studies finding a two- to five-fold or greater increase in the risk of Parkinson’s disease in populations with occupational exposure to paraquat compared to populations without such exposure.”
Attorneys working on these cases have also highlighted recent research7 linking paraquat exposure to end stage renal disease,8 so it’s possible that the litigation effort against Syngenta might expand even further.
Syngenta Obfuscated the Evidence
In a June 2, 2023, article9 in The Guardian, journalist and author Carey Gillam reviews evidence from the paraquat lawsuits showing Syngenta has known about the chemical’s risk to human health for decades, and went out of its way to bury that evidence.
Some of the research10 out there suggests lifetime exposure to paraquat raises your risk of Parkinson’s by as much as 250% (odds ratio 2.5), primarily through oxidative stress. In the 2020 book, “Ending Parkinson’s Disease: A Prescription for Action,” four leading neurologists also cite paraquat as a causative factor for the condition.11
Not surprisingly, Syngenta relied on the same strategies developed and perfected by the tobacco industry in years past. While independent researchers kept linking paraquat to Parkinson’s disease, Syngenta sowed doubt by maintaining the evidence was “fragmentary” and “inconclusive,” even though it wasn’t.
Indeed, internal documents obtained during the discovery process reveals Syngenta knew that paraquat accumulated in the human brain and could permanently impair the central nervous system.12,13,14 As reported by Gillam:15
“Though it worked to publicize research that supported paraquat safety, Syngenta kept quiet about a series of in-house animal experiments that analyzed paraquat impacts in the brains of mice, according to company records and deposition testimony.
Scientists who study Parkinson’s disease have established that symptoms develop when dopamine-producing neurons in a specific area of the brain called the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNpc) are lost or otherwise degenerate. Without sufficient dopamine production, the brain is not capable of transmitting signals between cells to control movement and balance.
The Syngenta scientist Louise Marks did a series of mouse studies between 2003 and 2007 that confirmed the same type of brain impacts from paraquat exposure that outside researchers had found. She concluded that paraquat injections in the laboratory mice resulted in a ‘statistically significant’ loss of dopamine levels in the substantia nigra pars compacta.”
Jeopardizing Human Health for Profit
The company withheld these and other internal research results from regulators and denounced the validity of independent science showing neurological effects.
Worse, when Syngenta met with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials in 2013 to update the agency on its internal research, the company claimed studies showed paraquat, even at high doses, did NOT reduce dopamine-producing neurons, directly contradicting Marks’ findings.16
Similarly, in a follow-up presentation to the EPA in 2017,17 Syngenta claimed that paraquat had “no effect” in the brain and that a “causal relationship between paraquat and Parkinson’s was not supported.”
During a recent deposition, Dana Dixon, lead for product safety operations at Syngenta, was asked point blank if the information presented to the EPA was a lie. Dixon claimed they were “not hiding” Marks’ results, but rather chose to “focus on other studies” that refuted it.18
Syngenta ‘Swat Team’ Beat Down Negative Reports
At one point, Syngenta also worked behind the scenes to keep a highly regarded scientist involved in the study of Parkinson’s off the EPA’s advisory panel, and internal documents show company officials wanted to make sure the effort could not be traced back to them.19
As reported by Gillam, Syngenta also had a special “swat team” tasked with the immediate rebuttal of any new reports of adverse effects:20
“… files reveal an array of tactics, including enlisting a prominent UK scientist and other outside researchers who authored scientific literature that did not disclose any involvement with Syngenta …
[M]isleading regulators about the existence of unfavorable research conducted by its own scientists; and engaging lawyers to review and suggest edits for scientific reports in ways that downplayed worrisome findings.
The files also show that Syngenta created what officials called a ‘Swat team’ to be ready to respond to new independent scientific reports that could interfere with Syngenta’s ‘freedom to sell’ paraquat.
The group, also referred to as ‘Paraquat Communications Management Team,’ was to convene ‘immediately on notification’ of the publication of a new study, ‘triage the situation’ and plan a response, including commissioning a ‘scientific critique.’
A key goal was to ‘create an international scientific consensus against the hypothesis that paraquat is a risk factor for Parkinson’s disease,’ the documents state.”
In internal company documents from 2003, Syngenta officials discussed the need for a “coherent strategy across all disciplines focusing on external influencing, that proactively diffuses the potential threats that we face,” including influencing the future work by external researchers.
They also hired external scientists to write papers in support of paraquat without disclosing their relationship with the company. Ghostwriting scientific studies was also a tactic employed by Monsanto, to hide known dangers associated with its Roundup herbicide.
Lawyers Played Central Role in Obfuscation of Evidence
As detailed by Gillam, corporate defense lawyer Jeffrey Wolff also appears to have played a central role in the obfuscation of evidence. He instructed Syngenta scientists on how to take notes and manage communications to ensure the company would be able to claim attorney-client privilege in the case of litigation.
For example, action notes taken were to be labeled “Work Product Doctrine Material Confidential” and carry an attorney-client privilege statement.21 Wolff also had an active role in editing various scientific statements, reports and presentations to hide or downplay negative internal findings.
For example, a 2009 internal presentation by a company scientist on paraquat and Parkinson’s disease was reviewed by Wolff, who objected to a statement that said a majority of cases were related to environmental causes. Instead, Wolff suggested the presentation state that the “great majority of PD cases are idiopathic or of unknown cause.”
In another case, Wolff recommended removing the written admission that paraquat caused loss of neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta from a scientific slide show, and instead only mention it verbally during the presentation. As reported by Gillam, the heavy involvement of lawyers is also straight out of the tobacco industry’s dirty playbook:22
“The involvement of lawyers with the scientists at Syngenta appears similar to highly criticized practices by the tobacco industry in the 1970s and ’80s that downplayed the dangers of smoking, said Thomas McGarity, former EPA legal adviser and co-author of the 2008 book titled ‘Bending Science: How Special Interests Corrupt Public Health Research.’
‘It looks like the paraquat maker has adopted nearly every strategy we outlined in our book about bending science,’ McGarity said. ‘Science matters. We have to be able to depend on science,’ he said.
‘When it is perverted, when it is manipulated, then we get bad results. And one result is that pesticides that cause terrible things like Parkinson’s remain on the market.’”
Lectins in Food Shuttle Paraquat Into the Brain
Disturbingly, animal research shows paraquat becomes exponentially more hazardous in combination with plant lectins. The cruel irony here is that paraquat is widely used as an herbicide and desiccant on lectin-rich crops in particular, including wheat, soybeans, potatoes, cereal grains and beans.
According to the study23 in question, published in the journal NPJ Parkinson’s Disease in 2018, plant lectins help shuttle paraquat into your brain, where it does the most damage. As reported by the authors:
“Increasing evidence suggests that environmental neurotoxicants or misfolded α-synuclein generated by such neurotoxicants are transported from the gastrointestinal tract to the central nervous system via the vagus nerve, triggering degeneration of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta (SNpc) and causing Parkinson’s disease (PD).
We tested the hypothesis that gastric co-administration of subthreshold doses of lectins and paraquat can recreate the pathology and behavioral manifestations of PD in rats …
These data demonstrate that co-administration of subthreshold doses of paraquat and lectin induces progressive, L-dopa-responsive parkinsonism that is preceded by gastric dysmotility. This novel preclinical model of environmentally triggered PD provides functional support for Braak’s staging hypothesis of idiopathic PD.”
Here again, we see the central role of the substantia nigra pars compacta, the very area of the brain that Syngenta scientist Marks found to be adversely impacted by paraquat. What’s more, the combination of paraquat and lectins could well be the underlying mechanism behind “idiopathic” Parkinson’s, which Wolff wanted listed as the primary “cause.”
Paraquat in Food Supply Puts Your Health at Risk
This also means that farmers aren’t the only ones at risk. Direct exposure is only one way by which paraquat can cause harm. Ingestion through food is the other, and oftentimes, that food is also high in lectins, which multiplies the danger. Reporting on the 2018 findings, Medical News Today wrote:24
“[P]araquat, once in the stomach, causes alpha-synuclein to be misfolded and then helps it travel to the brain. Scientists believe that alpha-synuclein runs along the vagus nerve, which itself runs between the stomach and the brain.
In fact, recent studies have shown that the vagus nerve has a direct connection with the substantia nigra, making it a prime suspect in Parkinson’s disease. This direct link also helps explain why digestive problems often precede the motor symptoms of Parkinson’s by several years.
To investigate, the researchers fed rats small doses of paraquat for 7 days. They also fed them lectins … As expected, they identified Parkinson’s-related changes … As study co-author Prof. Thyagarajan Subramanian explains:
‘We were able to demonstrate that if you have oral paraquat exposure, even at very low levels, and you also consume lectins … then it could potentially trigger the formation of this protein — alpha-synuclein — in the gut. Once it’s formed, it can travel up the vagus nerve and to the part of the brain that triggers the onset of Parkinson’s disease.’
This series of experiments demonstrates how the interplay between two ingested compounds can conspire to create and then transport toxic protein structures from the gut to the brain.”
Take-Home Message
The take-home message here is that foods treated with paraquat may be just as hazardous as direct exposure on a farm. Paraquat is considered one of the “best” drying options for legumes in particular, which are also particularly high in lectins.
As a result, many foods that vegetarians and vegans rely on may pose significant health hazards — and in more ways than one, as lectins are also problematic in and of themselves. In February 2022, I posted an interview with Dr. Steven Gundry, author of “The Plant Paradox,” in which we reviewed the health hazards of lectins.
As explained by Gundry, plant lectins can wreak havoc on your health by attaching to your cell membranes, causing inflammation, damage to your nerves and cell death. Some can also interfere with gene expression and disrupt endocrine function.
So, while lectins can cause severe health problems in and of themselves, by spraying paraquat on lectin-rich crops, those crops are made exponentially more hazardous, as the lectins act as transport vehicles for the toxic herbicide.
You can reduce lectin concentration by pressure cooking, for example, but if you’re starting out with contaminated food, you’re dealing with extra-toxic kinds of lectins. To avoid or at least minimize these hazards, it’s important to buy organic beans, peas, potatoes and other high-lectin foods from a reputable source, ideally a local farmer you can trust.
The other take-home message from all this is that chemical companies are among the least trustworthy sources out there. Like Monsanto before them, Syngenta officials have spent decades hiding the dangers of paraquat, while untold numbers of people got sick, suffered and died.
As noted by Bruce Blumberg, professor of developmental and cell biology at the University of California, Irvine, in response to the revelations about Syngenta’s obfuscation of evidence:25
“It is highly unethical for a company not to reveal data they have that could indicate that their product is more toxic than had been believed. [These companies are] trying to maximize profits and they jeopardize public health, and it shouldn’t be allowed. That is the scandal.”
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The Ukrainian blonde had the smell of trouble. She had perched herself, along with her mute friend, in a restaurant across from the famed South Melbourne Market. On arriving at the modish, glorious bit of real estate known as Tipsy Village, a Polish establishment famed for accented French cuisine, she shrieked: “Why do you have Ruskie dumplings on your menu?”
The Polish host, a man of butter mild manners and infinite tolerance, covered in stout glory, took it in his stride. “That is what they are called where I come from and that is what we serve,” Peter Barnatt stated with serene clarity. (Such wickedness! Such a radical disposition!) The blonde shrieking wonder continued to invest in the dumplings some satanic quality, as if each one had been a shell, soldier, a weapon massed and launched against her pristine homeland which she had, it seemed, abandoned. “We would just like coffees,” she demanded. His temper finally disturbed, the host insisted that, as the two were not intent on dining, might just as well leave.
In a luxurious huff, they exited. Such behaviour was fascinating for being irresolvable – no dining establishment worth its salt and cutlery should ever change that aspect of things. But for them, the issue had been decided, a prejudice firmed up and solid.
Names on the menu are a signature of a restaurant’s worth. Besides, dishes do not invade countries in tanks nor bomb cities. The episode was also strikingly, amusingly moronic. Food had been made out as somehow guilty, disgusting, revolting – all because of a name, an identity. The sin had moved in the dough, the mixture and the potatoes, dumplings with agency. The restaurateur was all the more guilty for hosting them.
Since the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the gastro-culture war on serving dishes with a Russian name, be it with hint, flavour, or substance, has been total. Hatred of the Kremlin has become bigotry towards the dish. In Madrid, Sergiy Skorokhvatov, himself Ukrainian and an owner of a restaurant called Rasputin serving both Russian and Ukrainian cuisine, sensed trouble. He ventured into the thorny world of online discussions to clarify the nature of what he was serving, which was considered wise given what has happening to other restaurants serving Russian fare.
This method of insurance was not full proof. “I thought that changing things would help us, but then people started posting similar stuff about us – ‘Don’t go to Russian restaurants’ – and pictures of blown-up buildings in Ukraine.”
When politics ventures into the field of gastronomy, imbecility is sovereign, its crown heavy. The French restaurant chain Maison de la Poutine, specialising in the combination of chips, cheese curds and gravy (poutine, you might say), was harassed for having a name vaguely approximating to the Russian president. This was strikingly reminiscent of the semi-literate mob that vandalised the home of Dr Yvette Cloete, a specialist paediatrician who had been confused for being a paedophile.
All of this presents itself in rather darkly hilarious fashion. In Poland, the Ruskie pierogi have been given a battering and vanishing, reincarnated with new names, emerging from kitchens reborn and de-Russified. The idea of Ukrainian pierogi is all the rage. The cheese and potato-filled wonders have again come to commandeer such interest in the food wars. Those who buck the trend end up receiving tongue lashings from the virtuous. Never mind that the idea of ruskie has little to do with the modern state machine that is Russia than the geographic mash which featured Kievan Rus.
The mighty fine diplomats of the kitchen could point to other origins in a peaceful overture. The first dumplings of this sort were a Chinese invention, and Marco Polo was good enough to bring them across to Europe. In Poland, the Polish bishop Jacek Orodwąż is said to have been key in introducing the dumpling in the 13th century. Having had a snack of them in Kyiv, the taste was sufficiently delightful to convince him to bring the recipe back to the homeland. But it took till 1682 for the first known pierogi recipe to make its way into a cookbook – Poland’s oldest, in fact – known as the Compendium Ferculorum by Stanisław Czerniecki.
As with so many food varieties now celebrated in their various forms from the cheap mundane to the scandalously extortionate, the original pierogi came to be seen as a nourishing weapon against famine and starvation. It did what it had to. All else is refined exaggeration, with a sense, where needed, of aesthetic pleasure.
Unfortunately for those in the restaurant business, the patron can be an unpredictable sort. For many who enter the premises, the ego of the person who eventually sits down to the meal becomes sprightly, and bad behaviour comes to the fore. One acts as one would not at home. Bigotry sings darkly; prejudice hollers in a jarring register. “Care for another vodka?” the tolerant host can only say to such conduct. Then comes the priestly gobbet of wisdom: “It makes the fish you eat swim.”
The other side of this fraught equation is that the restaurant with fine service and conversational owners is a place of sheer pleasure, conciliation, understanding. Over food, bread broken, dessert consumed, the labels of hatred disappear into musings and mutterings, even if only momentary. Take the vodka; let the fish swim.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
I think it is generally accepted that the practice of medicine has changed radically over the past fifty or so years. The medicalization and corporatization of life have “progressed” simultaneously as most doctors have become obedient servants of the corporate state.
But wait, one may object, and with some justification.
The development of micro-surgical techniques has significantly improved the methods of many operations that were formally very invasive and posed a great risk to the elderly and chronically sick. Many people have had knee, hip, and heart surgeries – to name a few – that would have been problematic or impossible in the past. Body part replacements are now common. Soon everyone will be half-mechanical on the way to full robotization with a bit of pig and cow thrown in for good measure. Whether this is good is debatable on many levels, but the “procedures” (a word that seems to have replaced the more gruesome sounding words “operations” or “surgeries”) have clearly become more efficient and less invasive. These micro-surgical techniques have surely saved lives and improved the quality of life for many.
So much for the technology. I have a little medical tale to tell.
My best friend, an athletic man in his mid-seventies in excellent health and athletic shape, went to a new doctor at a medical practice since his doctor of thirty-five years had retired. The visit was for an annual physical that was required under the practice’s rules. He had previously met this doctor for a required brief meet-and-greet introduction and all seemed copacetic.
This time, he was ushered into the examination room where he sat and waited for the doctor. A nurse took his blood pressure and pulse and departed. The doctor soon arrived with an iPad and sat down next to him. He put the man’s records up on the screen. He then proceeded to review a list of inoculations my friend did or didn’t have. My friend – let’s call him Joe – has always been a guy who took very little medicine and was rarely sick; at the most he would take an aspirin or a few ibuprofen after a vigorous workout.
“I see you had a tetanus shot,” said the doctor.
“Yes, after I cut my hand.”
“And at your age it’s good you had a pneumonia vaccine.”
“I did,” said Joe, “but I kind of regret it.”
“Oh no, at your age you are at great risk from dying from pneumonia,” replied the doctor. He added, “And you haven’t had your shingles vaccination, which I highly recommend. It’s covered by Medicare now. You don’t want to get shingles; it’s terrifying.”
Joe said nothing.
“And you are due for a flu vaccine.”
“I never had one and never will,” said Joe.
“At your age you can die from the flu. It’s very dangerous. I definitely recommend you get it.”
“No thanks.”
“You really should.”
His voice rising, the doctor said, “And I see you have not gotten any Covid vaccines. You are really risking your life by not doing so. You must get them.”
Joe then succinctly explained his deep knowledge about Covid, the “vaccines,” their lack of testing, the mRNA technique, the deaths and injuries, etc. – all the reasons he opposed them.
The doctor became agitated. He argued back; explained how he had gone to Yale and studied the mRNA process under Drs. F. Teufelmeister and A. E. Newman and that he knew the vaccines were very safe and effective blah blah blah.
Joe said, “It doesn’t matter that you went to Yale. I emphatically disagree.”
This incensed the doctor, who blurted out, “If it was allowed, I would hold you down and inject you right now.”
“Is that so?” said Joe, incredulous.
The annual physical ended soon thereafter.
The doctor never laid a hand on Joe to examine him. No stethoscope; no ear, throat or nose checks; no hands on any part of his body – the exam was exclusively about vaccinations, read off a screen. Technical in all regards. All about how Joe was so very vulnerable and could die without them. The doctor was Big Pharma’s mouthpiece. Death threats devoid of any human touch, cold and sterile, and a wish that he could hold Joe down and forcibly inject him, the touch of the fascist mind expressed in a wish.
When Joe told me this story, I, being a student of the sociology of medicine, was reminded of the history of eugenics and the sick minds of people who think they can cull the herd because of their power and prestige.
The sordid history that continues under euphemisms such as genetic research. Here was a doctor who dared to say what others no doubt think as well: “I would hold you down and inject you right now,” if only I could.
But since he can’t, the state must find other ways to coerce, such as compulsory medical requirements. Such are totalitarian dreams made of, when death has become a commodity used to sell the dreams of reason, and the healer’s art, once linked to working with nature, has become an adjunct of state propaganda.
Thumbing through it, Joe came to a page where I had underlined the following:
The ritualization of crisis, a general trait of a morbid society, does three things for the medical functionary. It provides him with a license that usually only the military can claim. Under the stress of crisis, the professional who is believed to be in command can easily presume immunity from the ordinary rules of decency and justice. He who is assigned control over death ceases to be an ordinary human. As with the director of a triage, his killing is covered by policy. More important, his entire performance takes place in an aura of crisis.
On my way home I stopped to pick up my sister’s mail. The AARP Bulletin was in the box with her letters. This is one of two publications of the AARP organization, a powerful lobbying group and medical insurance company with 38 million members for people fifty years-old and over. The AARP Bulletin and AARP The Magazine are the largest circulation publications in the United States with a combined distribution of approximately 67 million.
Is there anything not to fear in this morbid culture where crises are promoted faster than the therapeutic and hygienic “remedies” offered to deal with them? Create the diseases and all the bogeymen and then offer pseudo-solutions straight from the sorcerer’s playbook.
Build the fear and they will come, knocking at the sorcerers’ doors.
If it were allowed, I would lift you up with a simple truth.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.
Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense
He is the author of Seeking the Truth in a Country of Lies
“Seeking Truth in a Country of Lies is a dazzling journey into the heart of many issues — political, philosophical, and personal — that should concern us all. Ed Curtin has the touch of the poet and the eye of an eagle.” Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
“Edward Curtin puts our propaganda-stuffed heads in a guillotine, then in a flash takes us on a redemptive walk in the woods — from inferno to paradiso. Walk with Ed and his friends — Daniel Berrigan, Albert Camus, George Orwell, and many others — through the darkest, most-firefly-filled woods on this earth.” James W. Douglass, author, JFK and the Unspeakable
“A powerful exposé of the CIA and our secret state… Curtin is a passionate long-time reform advocate; his stories will rouse your heart.” Oliver Stone, filmmaker, writer, and director
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Pregnant women who took toxic, experimental COVID-19 mRNA vaccines have been suffering all kinds of complications, from miscarriages, stillbirths to sudden deaths.
In this article, I will examine the sudden deaths of live-born infants of COVID-19 mRNA vaccinated mothers, who died shortly after birth.
CASE 1 – UK – Young mother Laura Barnes had fatal blood clots at 32 weeks of pregnancy. Her infant died at 2 months of age on July 30, 2022 of “unknown causes”.
Young UK mother Laura Barnes developed blood clots at 32 weeks pregnancy which led to an emergency caesarean section and the birth of her baby Dexter Khan-Barnes. She died from the blood clots during delivery in April, 2022. (click here)
Her prematurely born baby, Dexter, stayed in neonatal unit 6 weeks and was discharged home with dad.
Two months later, dad put baby down to sleep in bed next to his 14 month old brother. He woke up at 5am to find the baby’s arms limp and eyes discolored. Despite being rushed to the hospital, baby Dexter was pronounced dead on July 30, 2022.
Coroner Richard Taylor said a post-mortem found no evidence of prior illness or injuries that could have contributed to Dexter’s death, and no cause of death could be found.
Summing up the evidence, Mr Taylor said: ‘In these circumstance, it is not possible to completely exclude accidental air obstruction as having caused to contributed to Dexter’s death. As such, the cause of death remains unascertained.‘
Key details:
The young mother, Laura Barnes was COVID-19 vaccinated (the media uses unvaccinated deaths as propaganda, so when vaccine status is not reported, the deceased person was always COVID-19 vaccinated).
Her mother told the court that Laura had “suffered a stroke in the months’ prior to her death” (click here) (possibly due to clotting issues from her COVID-19 vaccines)
Laura suffered fatalblood clots which forced an emergency caesarean at 32 weekspregnancy
Baby spent 6 weeks in neonatal unit before being sent home (which is normal)
Baby died 2 months later and no cause of death could be found. (click here)
Were pregnant women warned about the risks of Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines causing premature labor? NO.
Were pregnant women warned about the risks of Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines causing infant deaths shortly after delivery? NO.
It is clear that both Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines are causing premature labor. When the fetus is too premature (i.e. under 22 weeks), its chances of survival are low. By 24 weeks, chances of survival rise to 60-70%.
But what about infants of COVID-19 vaccinated mothers who die days, weeks or months after delivery?
Do these cases simply get buried as SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome)?
One of the sudden infant death cases described above had a very rare heart tumor (caused by mother’s COVID-19 mRNA vaccines?)
But what about the case of 2 month old baby Dexter Khan-Barnes? His mother had blood clots and died at 32 weeks pregnancy. Her baby then died at 2 months of age of “unknown causes”? Pathologist had no idea why baby died? That’s not acceptable.
I have written a substack about infants of COVID-19 vaccinated mothers coming down with myocarditis, two of them have died from it (click here).
mRNA vaccinated mothers deliver LNPs with COVID-19 spike protein mRNA to their unborn children through the placenta. The consequences of this were never studied by Pfizer or Moderna.
This trans-placental delivery of LNP/mRNA is causing miscarriages, stillbirths, premature labor and sudden deaths of newly born infants.
All of which are being ignored by the medical establishment.
Was baby Dexter producing COVID-19 mRNA vaccine spike protein? We will never know as the pathologist closed the case with the conclusion “cause of death unknown”.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
On Monday, the growing international influence of China was again rubberstamped, with the signing of a comprehensive bilateral cooperation deal between Beijing and Honduras, both countries having only established formal relations in the past two months.
Coming only three months after a Chinese-brokered deal established a rapprochement between former Gulf rivals Iran and Saudi Arabia, and a similar deal organised by Russia led to Riyadh restoring ties with Syria, Honduran President Xiomara Castro’s official visit to Beijing is yet another development in the emergence of the new multipolar world.
Going by historical trends related to Honduras and the wider Latin American region, it may also indicate that a Washington-organised coup attempt targeting the country, intended to maintain US hegemony, is on its way.
In 2009, husband of Xiomara Castro and then-President Manuel Zelaya was overthrown and exiled by the Honduran military in a dispute over proposed changes to the country’s constitution relating to the length of Presidential terms.
Investigative website WikiLeaks would later reveal that although the US Embassy in Honduras privately recognised Zelaya’s removal from power as a military coup d’etat, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton refused to acknowledge it publicly, which would have resulted in the US being legally mandated to suspend all support for the new post-coup Honduran government of Roberto Michelleti; the reasoning for this being her view of Zelaya as a troublesome Hugo Chávez-style leader, one who wouldn’t comply easily with demands related to Washington’s interests in the region.
Indeed, Honduras had served as a strategic US military outpost during the 1980s, with thousands of US troops stationed in the country for the purpose of providing arms and training to Contra rebels, who were then sent on to wage war against the Sandinista government of neighbouring Nicaragua, previously under the leadership of US-backed Anastasio Somoza until his overthrow in 1979.
This would be part of a Cold War US policy in the region which involved the arming and training of anti-communist groups in order to prevent the Soviet Union gaining a foothold in Latin America; with perhaps the most notorious implementation of this policy being Operation Condor.
A covert CIA programme in the same vein as Operation Cyclone which would play out later in Afghanistan, Operation Condor saw the US throw its support behind numerous military juntas in Latin America in order to maintain regional hegemony, with the most well-known being the 1973 coup d’état which saw General Augusto Pinochet come to power in Chile.
In 1970, the election of Socialist candidate Salvador Allende as President of Chile, and his subsequent nationalisation of the lucrative copper mining and telecommunications industries, would lead to the multinational ITT placing pressure on Washington to oust the Chilean leader from power, with the communications giant holding a 70% stake in Chile’s telecom infrastructure.
In order to protect corporate interests and to maintain Washington’s influence in the region, a violent CIA-backed coup would be launched in Chile on the 11th of September 1973.
Involving the seizure of key sites around the country by the Chilean military, the coup would end with the bombing and seizure of the La Moneda Presidential Palace. Allende, who refused to flee in exile, would die amidst the chaos, his death initially reported as a suicide, though with foul play strongly suspected.
The post-coup junta of Pinochet would see the introduction of neoliberal market reforms which would allow US corporate interests to again take a foothold in Chile, and which endeared him to the subsequent British and US governments of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. His rule, which saw the state-sponsored executions of 3,000 political dissidents and the forcible exiling of 200,000 more, would last until 1990, with the Cold War coming to an end the following year.
The cessation of hostilities between western free market capitalism and eastern communism wouldn’t result in an end to US interference in Latin America however.
As recently as 2020, Operation Gideon, a Bay of Pigs-style coup attempt involving US mercenaries and likely given covert authorisation by the White House, took place in Venezuela in an attempt to remove the government of Nicolás Maduro – like his predecessor Hugo Chávez, a long-time target of the regime-change lobby owing to the pairs nationalisation policies in the oil-rich nation.
Now, with Honduras establishing diplomatic ties with China amidst the new multipolar world, it may only be a matter of time until Tegucigalpa is again subjected to something similar.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Gavin O’Reilly is an activist from Dublin, Ireland, with a strong interest in the effects of British and US Imperialism. Secretary of the Dublin Anti-Internment Committee, a campaign group set up to raise awareness of Irish Republican political prisoners in British and 26 County jails. His work has previously appeared on American Herald Tribune, The Duran, Al-Masdar and MintPress News. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. Support him on Patreon.
Featured image: National flags of China, Honduras Photo: CFP
Was the Kiev regime behind the plot to blow-up the Kakhovka dam? “A war crime” against the Ukrainian people, instigated by the Zelensky government? The mainstream media in chorus blames Russia. Ask yourself, why on earth would Russia flood its own positions within the territories under its control?
The US, which had imposed Article 9 on an occupied Japan, came to regret its recrafting of Japan as a “peace state,” and began steadily exerting pressure on it to revive and expand its military. Thus, with US encouragement, Japan has, over time, indeed built formidable land, sea, and air forces, evading constitutional proscription by calling them “Self-Defence” forces (rather than Army, Navy, and so on).
The growing US-China rivalry and Russia-Western allies’ geopolitical tension have shaken the international peace and security system’s foundation and significantly shaped Russia’s diplomacy with Africa.
The broad range of reported side effects of the COVID jab is astounding. Effects involve just about every part, organ and system of the body, including a range of eye problems.
While the politicians and extremists manufactured hatred and wickedness to further their own agendas for ages to keep the masses oppressed, common people on both sides continued to share feelings of open mindedness and friendship to restore the neglected geography and blocked history.
There is much at stake for the ruling class and its law-enforcement surrogates in the mass campaign taking place in Dekalb County, Georgia to prevent the construction and operation of a training center which will cost tens of millions in tax dollars.
The goal of the newly formed International Center for 9/11 Justice is to organize, preserve, and present the best 9/11 research of the past two decades, conduct groundbreaking new research, and provide renewed direction, energy, and unity to the worldwide pursuit of 9/11 justice as it moves into its third decade.
Viral transmission is just one of multiple vaccine-related issues for which the FDA has not updated product labeling. In January, a group of us — current and former FDA advisers and academics from around the country — tried to fix this problem by asking the FDA to make critical changes to official product labels. But four months later, in a 33-page response letter, the agency denied almost every single request.
A new report published Monday by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons shows that the world’s nine nuclear-armed countries spent more than $157,000 per minute on their atomic weaponry last year, enriching private contractors at the risk of imperiling humankind.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Was the Kiev regime behind the plot to blow-up the Kakhovka dam? “A war crime” against the Ukrainian people, instigated by the Zelensky government?
The mainstream media in chorus blames Russia.
Ask yourself, why on earth would Russia flood its own positions within the territories under its control?
Our message to MSM journalists: It’s “elementary logic”. Use your common sense.
Why would they do it? A “Russian Roulette style ritual Hara-kiri” ordered by the Kremlin?
Video Interview: Michel Chossudovsky
This video is also available on Youtube
To leave a comment, click Rumble on the lower right corner of the screen.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The World Health Organization has recently announced the launch of a vaccine passport system which aims to “strengthen global health security.”
Watch the video below.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
To the 9/11 truth community and the world:
It is with great hope and a deep commitment to achieving truth and justice regarding the events of 9/11 that we are announcing the launch of the International Center for 9/11 Justice.
The Center is a new iteration of the former International Center for 9/11 Studies, founded in 2008 by attorney James Gourley. It is being relaunched in partnership with two other cornerstone organizations of the 9/11 truth movement: the Journal of 9/11 Studies and the 9/11 Consensus Panel.
The goal of the newly formed International Center for 9/11 Justice is to organize, preserve, and present the best 9/11 research of the past two decades, conduct groundbreaking new research, and provide renewed direction, energy, and unity to the worldwide pursuit of 9/11 justice as it moves into its third decade.
As we all know, 9/11 was a turning point in our history. Present-day developments — including perpetual war and colossal military spending, the continued curtailment of civil liberties, far-reaching digital surveillance, and an increasingly propagandistic news media — flow largely from that turning point, which makes getting to the bottom of what happened that day more urgent than ever.
In addition to conducting research and carrying out educational activities, the Center will spearhead all types of initiatives aimed at raising mass public awareness and sparking broad-based demand for justice for the millions of people affected by 9/11.
Chief among those initiatives right now is helping the family of British 9/11 victim Geoff Campbell open a new inquest into his death in the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The Campbell family submitted a petition for a new inquest to the UK attorney general in August 2021 and nearly two years later is still awaiting a determination. If the inquest goes forward, it will be the first ever real government investigation into the events of 9/11.
The Center’s other major initiative in the short term is producing the feature-length documentary Peace, War and 9/11, set for release in September 2023. The documentary features the late Dr. Graeme MacQueen — a widely beloved leader in the 9/11 truth movement who in his final months was instrumental in building the new Center — presenting his analysis of 9/11 and the related 2001 anthrax attacks.
We were moved to form this organization following the passing of eminent 9/11 scholar Dr. David Ray Griffin late last year. As we contemplated where the 9/11 truth movement stood, we had a shared sense that the best evidence of the movement needed to be consolidated, that more potentially game-changing research needed to be undertaken, and that new impetus needed to be instilled in order for the pursuit of 9/11 justice to continue forward.
Our dear friend Graeme MacQueen once said: “The story of 9/11 is not over yet. It’s up to us to construct a humane ending to this story — an ending which has justice and truth in it. That’s our job, and let’s do it.”
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Financial Review newspaper, Australia, 24 February 2023
Since the most influential of those is Foreign Affairs, I shall here present excerpts from that ‘news’-analysis and commentary:
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine was meant to be his crowning achievement, a demonstration of how far Russia had come since the collapse of the Soviet empire in 1991. Annexing Ukraine was supposed to be a first step in reconstructing a Russian empire. Putin intended to expose the United States as a paper tiger outside Western Europe and to demonstrate that Russia, along with China, was destined for a leadership role in a new, multipolar international order.
It hasn’t turned out that way. Kyiv held strong, and the Ukrainian military has been transformed into a juggernaut, thanks in part to a close partnership with the United States and Western allies. …
At this point, the Russian public has not risen up to oppose the war. …
The chances that a pro-Western democrat would become Russia’s next president are vanishingly small. Far more likely is an authoritarian leader in the Putinist mold. A leader from outside the power vertical could end the war and contemplate better relations with the West. …
Putin’s invasion of Ukraine as a first step in refashioning a Russian empire has had the opposite effect. The war has diminished his ability to strong-arm Russia’s neighbors. …
Putin’s fall could translate into civil war and Russia’s disintegration. …
If Russia were to disintegrate and lose its influence in Eurasia, China would move in. …
Since they’ve been wrong now for over a decade, why do people still read such false ‘news’ media? Is it because these hate-mongering lies are all that the billionaires who control the media want them to say, and so it’s all that the audiences in these countries are being presented as ‘news’? So: how can those countries be ‘democracies’, if all that their publics get to see as ‘news’ is hate-mongering lies that constantly then become disconfirmed by subsequent events? It’s all“WMD in Iraq”. Only the personnel and names change; it’s the same ‘news’, but merely different people.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The growing US-China rivalry and Russia-Western allies’ geopolitical tension have shaken the international peace and security system’s foundation and significantly shaped Russia’s diplomacy with Africa.
While that seems to be the general trend across the board, the Federal Republic of Nigeria is also getting highly renewed attention from Moscow. Historically Nigeria, like a number of African states, has had relations from the Soviet times and still maintains traditional relationships after the Soviet’s collapse in 1991. Nevertheless, it is interesting to explicitly note that a new wave of democratic change has also blown all over Africa. We can convincingly point to the fact that old ideological friends of the Soviet Union changed camps and transformed in favour of the capitalist-democratic model, in line with the changing political dynamics inside Africa and around the world.
In practical terms, the Soviet Union offered enormous assistance during the decolonization process of African countries in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and the Kremlin’s policy, at that period, for the newly liberated African countries included:
To gain a lasting presence in the African continent,
To have a voice in African affairs,
To undermine Western influence in the African continent by equating capitalism with imperialism, and
To keep communist China out of the African continent.
In pursuit of its foreign policy agenda, the Soviet Union maintained diplomatic relations between Nigeria and many on the continent. There were 48 diplomatic offices across Africa. Nigeria established diplomatic relations on November 25, 1960, after it had attained political independence from Britain. The mission was formally opened in 1961.
There are noticeable bits of historical landmarks between Nigeria and Russia. Olusegun Obasanjo visited Russia in 2001. That was followed by Muhammadu Buhari in 2019. However, in June 2009, Dmitry Medvedev, president of Russia, visited Nigeria for the first time and held topmost state-level talks on possible nuclear energy, oil exploration and military cooperation. There were talks also focusing on establishing a petrochemical plant in Nigeria. There was also a declaration on principles of friendly relations and partnership between Nigeria and the Russian Federation.
Russia’s second-largest oil company, and privately controlled Lukoil, has gone back and forth these several years with plans to expand its operations in Nigeria and several West African countries. There has been a long-dead silence after Gazprom, the Russian energy giant, signed an agreement with the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) on the exploration and exploitation of gas reserves with a new joint venture company known as NiGaz Energy Company.
Despite the complexities and obstacles, Nigeria is still high on Russia’s agenda for reviving multifaceted business ties, at least to share the market and take up opportunities similar to external players such as the United States, Europe and China. We sincerely acknowledge efforts by Russians now gearing up to revamp the Ajaokuta Iron and Steel Complex, which was abandoned after the collapse of the Soviet Union three decades ago, and further take up energy, oil and gas projects in Nigeria, as well as facilitate trade between Nigeria and Russia.
Further to the above, there could be specific points of focus in the current relations: The strategic point of convergence between Moscow and Abuja is stability in the West African region, which is vital for both countries in their interests. It could best be achieved through ensuring security, boosting economic development, expanding tentacles in energy and infrastructure projects and raising cooperation with the regional bloc – the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).
Suffice it to say that Russia’s passion for humanitarian cooperation is strongly recommended here. This will help sustain its traditional sphere of influence in the western region of Africa. The main reasons are that Nigeria is considered the economic powerhouse. Ghana now hosts the headquarters of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), spanning 54 states over the next years with the potential to unite more than 1.3 billion people in a $2.5 trillion economic bloc. It has the potential to generate a range of benefits through supporting trade creation, structural transformation, productive employment and poverty reduction. The AfCFTA opens up more opportunities for both local African and foreign investors from around the world.
Both African and foreign policy experts argue that African countries need to support meaningful dialogue and take steps toward addressing the economic dimensions in the continent and this must necessarily reflect in their relations with potential external partners while, at the same time, maintaining their territorial integrity and political independence. We strongly believe that African economic diplomacy and partnerships could be raised to appreciably new levels the Russia-Africa relations. This is where I shared my views with both foreign and our African experts that these measures will contribute tremendously, in pursuit of the economic integration of our continent, towards the attainment of the well-known vision: Agenda 2063, the Africa We Want.
Egypt, Nigeria, and South Africa are the biggest economies on the continent, and Nigeria, for example, plays a major role in the West African region. The Nigerian economy is based on private enterprise, but the state participates in many ways. That is why Russia has to redirect its focus to the private sector to enhance its economic profile. In this case, Nigeria, Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast) and other countries have enormous potential to cooperate with Russia in the West African region. According to reports, on different occasions, former Vice President Yemi Osinbajo expressed keen interest in developing bilateral cooperation and spoke frankly about the need to increase the presence of Russian companies in Nigeria.
Three key factors are at work here for Russia to get a foothold in West Africa. First, Russia is seen as the provider of security, and Russia’s defence capabilities continue to play a crucial role in maintaining stability in the region. One more point here is the French-speaking Sahel-5 (Burkina et al.) is nearly under the control of Russia. Reports pointed out that cooperation among forces from the so-called G5 countries – Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger – remains difficult given the anti-French sentiments in the country, forcing under-equipped local armies to quickly step up their game against Islamist rebels in the volatile Sahel region.
With high interest, Russians are consistently pushing for military-technical cooperation. For Nigeria, Russian military equipment supply could be a high-value addition to the fight against the notorious Boko Haram, which threatens West African states. Many experts say conflict resolution should be coordinated and undertaken within the framework of multilateralism, which, of course, falls within Russia’s interest in forging relations with respective Security Councils of ECOWAS, the African Union and the United Nations.
Second, an opportunity to have market access to the West African region if potential Russian investors decide to locate some kind of production with the rules and regulations put in place under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). Unlike Russia, United States investors look forward to exploring several opportunities in the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), a policy signed by African countries to make the continent a single market. Russian investors could similarly pursue public-private partnerships that support Russian and African businesses, including women-owned and led Small- and Medium-Scale Enterprises (SMEs).
Third, to carefully look at optional ways of utilizing civil society and private sector organizations. If Russia wants to play a pivotal role in advancing its economic influence, it has to navigate, leverage or make inroads into the private sector. Understanding these factors is crucial in formulating policies and appropriate mechanisms for realizing them. Worth to say that efficiency and effectiveness must reflect in its policy implementation. On the other hand, the shifting geopolitical landscape dictates new refined strategies. It also implies the ability to choose the multi-alignment dimension of countries rather than just dealing with a few in the region.
Notwithstanding multiple challenges with pursuing general policy goals in Africa, I would also note here in this article that Russia has maintained a traditional friendship, particularly with Nigeria and broadly with West Africa, so it is important that some focus be given to issues raised here at the forthcoming Russia-Africa summit. The critical focus areas are agriculture, energy, oil and gas, telecommunications, healthcare, transport, financing, marine exploration, aerospace, and other areas where Russian technology can have a comparative advantage.
Many Russian companies such as Lukoil, Gazprom, Rosatom and Rosneft are some of Russia’s energy and power industries actively engaged in Nigeria, Egypt, Angola, Algeria and Ethiopia. It must be stressed that in 2018, “Nigerian oil and gas Exploration Company Oranto Petroleum announced that it would be cooperating with Russia’s largest oil producer, Rosneft, to develop 21 oil assets across 17 African countries.” Unfortunately, this has not materialized due to Rosneft’s lack of interest in doing business in Africa. Additionally, Russian Rosatom has signed nuclear energy agreements with 18 African countries, including Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia and Rwanda, to address the power needs of those countries.
The Russian strategic policy interest in Africa and given the strong limitation of its current capability, according to Paul Stronski, one-time Senior Analyst for Russian domestic politics for the U.S. State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research, “in many respects, Russia’s re-emergence in Africa, is an earnest attempt to resume relations where they were left when the Soviet Union departed the scene.” Paul Stronski further argues, “In sub-Saharan Africa, Russia’s priority is on exploiting new commercial opportunities and securing diplomatic support for its positions in multilateral institutions.”
The trade volume between Russia and Africa was $ 14.5 billion annually in 2020. However, this figure pales insignificance when compared with China, whose trade with Africa has attained $ 165 billion per annum during the same period and $ 254 billion in 2021, even with its late-comer status in Africa. This is to say that the doubling of trade relations within the next five years between Africa and Russia, as stated by Vladimir Putin in 2019, Sochi is not only a vision in the right direction of growing Russia’s partnership with Africa but also a desirable imperative.
In this sense, a new partnership with Africa could be defined not in terms of ideology but by alternative economic and developmental options which give Africa competitive parity. There are two distinctive initiatives which are appreciated:
(i) President Vladimir Putin’s debt cancellation of twenty billion dollars ($20 billion) owed to Russia by African countries, which, in his very own word, “was not only a mark of generosity but also a manifestation of pragmatism.”
(ii) The systematization of regular summits. The joint declaration says, “At the initiative of African participants, a new dialogue mechanism – the Russia-Africa partnership forum – has been created. Top-level meetings will occur within its framework once every three years, alternately in Russia and African states. And, the foreign ministers of Russia and three African countries – the current, future and previous chairpersons of the African Union – will meet for annual consultations.”
The two sides have set goals and tasks for further developing Russia-Africa cooperation. They moved from an “ad hoc approach” and often controversial decision-making modalities to “a more comprehensive structured long-term policy plan” dealing with relations.
Beyond the summit, it is necessary to follow up on the concrete decisions as these will give a new impetus to the wide-ranging and long-term multifaceted relations with the countries in West Africa. Ghana, Nigeria and a few countries are already traditional markets for foreign producers and investors, including the United States, Europe, China, India, and even the Gulf states. Ghana and Nigeria open wide windows and doors to the real African market, beginning with the formidable Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) regional market.
“Today, for instance, Nigeria offers Russia the advantage of that cheap and robust labour. Given Russia’s recent experience of sanctions by America and its Western allies, a new model of doing business with Africa through investment has become not only sustainable but also imperative.” This was argued by Professor Shehu Abdullai Yibaikwal, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, with concurrent accreditation to the Republic of Belarus. In his academic lecture at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Federation, perhaps one of the sectors where this model of doing business can be symbiotically harnessed is the field of agriculture and its value chain as a result of the steep rise in the large African market and the projected certainty of huge returns on investment in this sector.
Russia has expressed deep interest in Nigeria, highly pledging to build nuclear power plants, petroleum pipelines, railways and infrastructure. Unfortunately, these corporate plans have not been realized; Russia sees instability or neo-colonialism as factors impeding its investment. Then there are also the project financing and legal aspects that must be mutually resolved.
Our part is to ensure sustainability by making partnerships more reliable, workable and long-termed. We still have skyline hope and optimism for building back better relations between the two countries, and most importantly within the context of the Declaration “On the Principles of Friendly Relations and Partnership between the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Nigeria” signed as far back in 2001, and the multilateral cooperation that was signed between Russia and Nigeria by both leaders at the first Russia-Africa Summit held in Sochi. The forthcoming second summit in July 2023 also signals Russia’s practical preparedness and commitment to work based on a single rule book for trade and investment and towards sustainable development growth across Africa.
To finalize this article, we should refer to the quote by Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Chairperson of the African Union (AU) in 2019 and co-chair of the first Russia-Africa Summit: “Our declaration has reaffirmed the goals of Agenda 2063 and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. We have approved a ministerial mechanism for promoting dialogue and partnership. We appreciate all these moves and believe they have created a solid foundation for further developing Russian-African relations.” Aware of this common responsibility, the Russian and African sides will continue coordinating their efforts to monitor the implementation of the documents adopted at the summit. This meets the desires and aspirations of African states and the Russian Federation.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Professor Maurice Okoli is a fellow at the Institute for African Studies and the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, Russian Academy of Sciences. He is also a fellow at the North-Eastern Federal University in Russia.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The broad range of reported side effects of the COVID jab is astounding. Effects involve just about every part, organ and system of the body, including a range of eye problems
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s data mining of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reveals reports ranging from eye discomfort, bruising and numbness, to serious conditions such as retinal vein and retinal artery occlusions, eye hemorrhage and retinal and ophthalmic migraines
Two recent papers highlight the risk of ophthalmic vascular events, which can lead to blindness, following the COVID jab. Less than 20% of patients who experience central retinal artery occlusion, i.e., a blockage in the main artery of the retina, regain functional visual acuity in the affected eye
A systematic review of 49 studies found that most vascular events involving the eyes occurred after the first dose, and were more common after the Pfizer and AstraZeneca shots
A second risk assessment concluded that, across age groups, the risk of retinal vascular occlusion more than doubled in the two years following the mRNA COVID jab
*
While U.S. health agencies have admitted that myocarditis (heart inflammation), and a related condition called pericarditis (inflammation of the heart sack), are potential side effects of the COVID jab,1 the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has ignored hundreds of other safety signals that have shown up during their Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) data mining of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
For example, in individuals aged 18 and older, there are 770 safety signals for different adverse events, and more than 500 of them have a stronger safety signal than myocarditis and pericarditis.2
Range of Eye Problems Reported Post-Jab
The broad range of reported side effects is also astounding. They involve just about every part, organ and system of the body, including a range of eye problems. For example, looking at the list of reported side effects in 18-and-over age group in the CDC’s PRR document,3 we find:
Ophthalmic Vascular Events Linked to COVID Jab
Two recent papers specifically highlight the risk of ophthalmic vascular events, which can lead to blindness, following the COVID jab. Basically, what we’re talking about are acute ischemic strokes that affect the eyes and can cause permanent loss of vision.
For example, according to research4 published in 2021, less than 20% of patients who experience central retinal artery occlusion,5 i.e., a blockage in the main artery of the retina, regain functional visual acuity in the affected eye.
The first paper, a systematic review6 of 49 studies published in the journal Vaccines in December 2022, found that most vascular events involving the eyes (46.2%) occurred after the first dose, and were more common after the Pfizer and AstraZeneca shots.
“Ophthalmic vascular events are serious vision-threatening side effects that have been associated with COVID-19 vaccination. Clinicians should be aware of the possible association between COVID-19 vaccines and ocular vascular events to provide early diagnosis and treatment,” the authors concluded.
Prolonged Increased Risk of Blindness Post-Jab
The second article was published May 2, 202 in NPJ Vaccines.7 Here, the researchers did a risk assessment to determine just how common retinal vascular occlusion — which can cause blindness — was after the COVID-19 jab. The results were devastating.
Across age groups, the risk more than doubled in the two years following the shot. For a detailed breakdown of retinal vascular occlusion incidence among various age groups, genders and ethnicities, see Table 2 on this page.8 According to Retsef Levi, that amounts to one additional case for every 300 seniors jabbed (age 64 and older), and one additional case for every 1,000 people jabbed between the ages of 18 and 64.9
According to the CDC,10 58,739,476 seniors aged 65 and older have received at least one dose. Divide that by 300, and we could be looking at 195,798 additional cases of retinal vascular occlusion and potential blindness among the elderly. And that’s just in the United States.
If we look at the 18 and older age group, the CDC claims 238,163,284 Americans have received at least one dose.11 Divide that by 1,000, and we’re potentially looking at an additional 238,163 instances of eye damage that could lead to blindness.
That’s an awful lot of visually impaired people. For reference, in 2017, an estimated 1.08 million Americans were blind.12 Of that 1.08 million, only 141,000 were younger than 40 (about 13%).
Retinal Vascular Occlusion Post-Jab Not Likely Coincidental
Patients included in the NPJ Vaccines study13 were jabbed between January 2020 and December 2022. Individuals with confirmed COVID-19, a history of retinal vascular occlusion, and those who used medication within four weeks of getting the jab that could affect blood coagulation were excluded. In the end, 739,066 “vaccinated” cohorts were matched to the same number of unvaccinated individuals at a ratio of 1-to-1. As reported in this paper:14
“Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are associated with several ocular manifestations. Emerging evidence has been reported; however, the causality between the two is debatable. We aimed to investigate the risk of retinal vascular occlusion after COVID-19 vaccination …
We employed multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models after performing a 1:1 propensity score matching between the vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts.
Individuals with COVID-19 vaccination had a higher risk of all forms of retinal vascular occlusion in 2 years after vaccination, with an overall hazard ratio of 2.19 (95% confidence interval 2.00–2.39).
The cumulative incidence of retinal vascular occlusion was significantly higher in the vaccinated cohort compared to the unvaccinated cohort, 2 years and 12 weeks after vaccination. The risk of retinal vascular occlusion significantly increased during the first 2 weeks after vaccination and persisted for 12 weeks.
Additionally, individuals with first and second dose of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 had significantly increased risk of retinal vascular occlusion 2 years following vaccination, while no disparity was detected between brand and dose of vaccines.
This large multicenter study strengthens the findings of previous cases. Retinal vascular occlusion may not be a coincidental finding after COVID-19 vaccination.”
The authors cite 10 different case reports15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24 of retinal vascular occlusion following vaccination, as well as two additional literary reviews25,26 on the condition as it relates to mRNA COVID “vaccination.” Unfortunately, both are behind a paywall. You can review the case reports, however, if you want.
As for how the mRNA COVID jab might cause retinal vascular occlusion, the authors’ hypothesis is that “molecular mimicry of the S protein, which shares sequence homology with human proteins, may play a central role.”
Special Vaccine Issue to Focus on Post-Jab Eye Problems
Apparently, medical scientists are concerned enough about what they’re seeing so far that the journal Vaccine has issued a call for manuscripts for a special issue of “Ophthalmic Adverse Events Following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination.” The submission deadline is December 31, 2023, so obviously, we won’t see this special edition until sometime in 2024. As noted in the manuscript request:27
“Over the past 20 months, several reports and studies have highlighted the adverse events (such as myocarditis, Guillain–Barré syndrome, etc.) following the administration of these vaccines. In this special edition, we are compiling case reports, series, review articles and studies focused on ophthalmic adverse events following SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations. The submissions may include:
1. Case of rare ophthalmic adverse events following vaccination
2. Studies reporting risk of ophthalmic adverse events following vaccine
3. Analysis of global databases reporting vaccine-associated ophthalmic adverse events
4. Review articles evaluating published literature on ocular adverse events with special emphasis on underlying potential mechanisms.”
Signs and Symptoms of Retinal Vascular Occlusion
In closing, it’s important to realize that the primary symptom of retinal vascular occlusion is a sudden change in vision — be it blurry vision, or a partial or complete loss of vision — typically only in one eye. Rarely ever is there pain.
Should this happen, seek evaluation immediately. The risk of more severe and/or permanent vision loss increases the longer the treatment delay. Your ophthalmologist (eye doctor) can give you a diagnosis, but it would be prudent to seek emergency room care if you suddenly lose your vision in one eye — particularly if you’ve received one or more mRNA COVID shots.
Since this is like a “stroke” in your eye, the sooner you are able to provide the tissue that is not being supplied with oxygen, the more likely it is you will recover function. We know that there are two supplements that will help with these types of reperfusion injuries, methylene blue and melatonin. I discussed this in my interview with Dr. Russel Reiter.
In May 2023, actor Jamie Foxx suffered what is being reported as a stroke that left him partially paralyzed and blind.28 Hollywood journalist AJ Benza claimed Foxx had been pressured to get the shot for the production of “Back in Action,” but sources close to Foxx claim his condition is unrelated to the COVID jab, and no one has even confirmed that he got the shot, although it was supposedly required on the set.
While it’s unclear if the mRNA shot had anything to do with Foxx’s sudden incapacitation, his condition resembles what I’ve discussed here, which drives home the point that this is something that needs to be taken seriously.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Health care providers rely on product labeling for accurate, unbiased and up-to-date information on medical products. But current Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved labels for the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines are obsolete, misleading and out of touch with regulators elsewhere. Whatever one thought of the initial shots, people are now getting boosted indefinitely with little reliable information about scientific developments.
Take the ongoing uncertainty over whether vaccines reduce viral transmission. We asked the FDA to clarify in labeling that there isn’t substantial evidence that mRNA vaccines reduce viral transmission. This was an easy ask — the FDA has repeatedly stated that effectiveness against transmission remains unproven. The agency said so in December 2020, when vaccines were first authorized, and again in August 2021, when it fully approved Pfizer’s vaccine. The agency still states on its website today: “While it is hoped this will be the case, the scientific community does not yet know if Comirnaty will reduce such transmission.”
Viral transmission is just one of multiple vaccine-related issues for which the FDA has not updated product labeling.
In January, a group of us — current and former FDA advisers and academics from around the country — tried to fix this problem by asking the FDA to make critical changes to official product labels. But four months later, in a 33-page response letter, the agency denied almost every single request.
In doing so, the FDA failed to follow the lead of regulators elsewhere, including in Europe and Japan. For instance, we cited the European regulator’s addition of heavy menstrual bleeding to product information as a potential vaccine adverse reaction. The FDA’s response was a sophisticated version of “who cares!” “Foreign regulatory agencies’ expectations and regulations regarding product labeling can differ from those of the U.S. FDA,” the agency wrote. The FDA also said the European Medicines Agency hadn’t proven causality with respect to that side effect.
The FDA also failed to warn about the documented risk of sudden death, even though myocarditis is now a well-recognized side effect, particularly among young men. To support adding “sudden death” to product labeling, we pointed to multipleautopsystudies on lethal vaccination-associated myocarditis. (Since our petition, another such study, with Korean public health officials as co-authors, was published last Friday and found eight cases of sudden cardiac death attributable to COVID-19 vaccination-related myocarditis.)
The FDA again rejected our request, arguing that the evidence “is not sufficient to demonstrate a causal association between sudden cardiac death and vaccination,” declaring “alternative causes of death…may not be apparent on autopsy.”
Federal law requires that product labeling lists adverse reactions that recipients may potentially experience. Of course, not every adverse event type reported in the postmarketing period needs be listed on the label (some may be totally coincidental) but instead “only those adverse events for which there is some basis to believe there is a causal relationship.”
With this in mind, we asked the FDA to add seven adverse event types to product labeling: multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), pulmonary embolism, sudden cardiac death, neuropathic and autonomic disorders, decreased sperm concentration, heavy menstrual bleeding and detection of vaccine mRNA in breastmilk.
For each of these, there is some basis to believe a causal relationship exists. For MIS-C, a serious medical event requiring hospitalization, a published study by CDC and FDA authors identified six children who developed MIS-C following vaccination that could not be explained by anything other than vaccination. (The children had no evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, previous MIS-C history, or alternative diagnoses.)
The FDA rejected our request, once again arguing that causality had not been definitively established. In other words, the FDA is not following its own rules. In refusing to add these adverse events to the label, the FDA invokes the strictest of standards (demonstrating causality), contradicting federal law that calls for using the “some basis to believe” standard.
Is it possible the FDA has failed to read the part of federal law that makes clear that “a causal relationship need not have been definitely established” prior to warning? Certainly, alternate explanations for observed adverse reactions should always be considered. But 100 percent proof of causality is a nearly impossible standard to meet, and the “some basis to believe” evidentiary standard was amply met by the peer-reviewed publications that we cited.
As to whether the vaccines block viral transmission, we thought it was fairly obvious that there is substantial public confusion over just what the vaccines can and cannot do. We pointed to messaging from public health leadership. Anthony Fauci, until recently director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, stated the vaccine turns individuals into virus “dead ends” and Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), declared “vaccinated people do not carry the virus.”
Such messaging creates widespread misunderstanding about exactly what these products can and cannot do, and we urged the FDA to use product labeling to help set the record straight.
But the FDA instead fired back, alleging we chose “selective statements” when quoting Fauci and Walensky. “Your Petition also does not account for countervailing statements made by some of these officials,” the reply stated. “Dr. Fauci has stated that the vaccines were not developed to protect against infection, and Dr. Walensky has stated that high viral loads in vaccinated individuals ‘suggest an increased risk of transmission.’” Meanwhile, the CDC’s website still informs people the vaccines are effective at “limiting the spread of the virus.”
Despite all the mixed messages, the FDA apparently thinks the public is somehow clear-eyed about all this. “We are not convinced that there is any widespread misconception about this,” was how the agency put it.
There was, however, one point the FDA did grant: our request to add data on the results from the manufacturers’ randomized trials of bivalent boosters. But there was a catch — it could do this only for Pfizer’s vaccine. For Moderna, the FDA said it was unable to update health care providers because “FDA has not conducted an evaluation of the data.” Yet somehow, the agency seems to have no issue with authorizing and recommending this booster, which it began doing last August.
The FDA’s double standard — failing to warn about potential harms, while simultaneously doing nothing to stop a sister agency from making unproven claims of benefit — harms patients and undermines the public’s trust in governmental institutions established to act in their interest.
Product labeling should be informative and accurate, not promotional. The law requires it, and following the law shouldn’t be optional.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Peter Doshi and Linda Wastila are faculty members at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy.
Kim Witczak is a drug safety advocate and serves as a consumer representative on an FDA advisory committee.
Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Last night he resigned as an MP after receiving the findings of an investigation into whether he knowingly misled parliament over the so-called “Partygate” scandal.
Johnson’s premiership was also undone by the scandal, in which he and his staff were accused of breaking social distancing rules during the Covid-19 pandemic.
This is a momentous event in British politics. No prime minister – not even Sir Anthony Eden, who lied to the British public over the Suez fiasco in 1956 – has left office with a fraction of the infamy that is now attached to Johnson.
For Britain, the event is as momentous as the resignation of USPresident Richard Nixon over the Watergate scandal. Like Nixon, Johnson will henceforth be remembered as a liar. Johnson was forced to quit not just Downing Street but also parliament after being exposed. Unlike Nixon, who had compensating achievements on his record, Johnson has none.
The consequences of last night are profound. First, let us consider the Conservative Party.
Late last year, Conservative Prime Minister Liz Truss was driven from office after her economic policies exploded in a grievous national humiliation.
Now her predecessor Johnson has been forced to leave parliament.
Even before last night’s unprecedented defenestration, the Conservatives looked doomed to defeat at the next general election. Now one wonders if they can survive at all. Perhaps it’s better they don’t.
Conservative rule is now synonymous with chaos, cronyism, moral corruption, personal greed and a shocking sense of entitlement. They have inflicted grave damage on the United Kingdom, and as a result, the country’s international reputation has never been lower.
Much of Johnson’s statement was directed at Prime Minister Rishi Sunak personally, driving a coach and horses through the convention that a former prime minister stays out of the limelight.
Johnson still believes his authority derives from his landslide election, not that he squandered all his popularity in office.
Sunak may be a safe pair of hands, but now he is being challenged by Johnson as a vote winner. He now has three by-elections on his hands to prove it. The latest MP to resign “with immediate effect” is Nigel Adams.
Secondly, one must consider the consequences for Brexit. Johnson was the national leader most personally associated with Brexit, first during the 2016 referendum, and then as the prime minister who sold his policy of “get Brexit done” to the British public in the 2019 general election.
Public opinion had already moved sharply away from Brexitbefore last night’s ruling by the Privileges Committee obliterated the remains of Johnson’s reputation.
With Brexit’s champion turned into a national pariah, demand for a return to the European Union will gain fresh momentum.
Brexit is increasingly being regarded by big business as a huge own goal, the only example where a country imposed economic sanctions on itself. If the US and EU are both investing heavily in their green economy, Britain is seen to be losing out by not doing the same. They lead, we have to follow. The logic of Brexit has been turned on its head.
But the third consequence is more immediate and potentially deadly for Sunak. Just a few hours before announcing that he was standing down, Johnson’s honour’s list was published.
The list contains a squalid collection of Johnson cronies. That was only to be expected from the disgraced former prime minister.
But a scandal is brewing over why it was allowed to go through at all.
King Charles put in impossible position
The choreography of yesterday’s events is highly concerning – and suspicious.
The day started with Nadine Dorries – the ardent, dyed-in-the-wool Johnson loyalist tipped for a peerage in the infamous Johnson list of resignation honours – telling Rupert Murdoch’s Talk TV that the “last thing” she would want is to resign from parliament and thus spring a by-election in her Bedfordshire constituency.
Five hours later she announced that she had changed her mind and would stand down as an MP “with immediate effect”.
Asked to explain herself, the former culture secretary said that “something significant did happen [today] to change my mind”, but would not say what it was.
The most likely assumption is that she received the news of Johnson’s decision to leave parliament from the mouth of Johnson himself.
Dorries’ change of mind is of critical importance because of the early evening news that Sunak had approved Johnson’s resignation honours list, allowing his former boss to bestow peerages and knighthoods upon dozens of his allies.
Only at 8pm did the bombshell announcement come that the former prime minister had resigned in response to the report of the Commons Privileges Committee.
From the look of things, King Charles has been put in an impossible position. It is all but inconceivable that the King would have approved Johnson’s honour’s list had he known that he had resigned.
So one must assume that in the early evening, when the King approved the list of names, he had no idea that there was an impending announcement from Johnson.
Johnson drags Sunak into another crisis
Whether Sunak knew of Johnson’s impending resignation before it happened, or whether he did not, Johnson has dragged a Conservative prime minister into his own moral squalor.
Rather like the Russian sappers who reportedly blew up the Nova Kakhovka dam in southern Ukraine, his exit from parliament wreaks of an ego that screams “Apres moi, le deluge”.
Johnson has impugned the honesty of a parliamentary enquiry, whose committee he himself set up and on whom there is a majority of Tories, including Sir Bernard Jenkin who was a Brexiteer long before Johnson.
He has swung a wrecking ball at Sunak’s claim to have gotten Brexit done. He has challenged what the Conservative Party is about. He has abused the resignation honours list. He has embarrassed the King. Sunak has been exposed as naive and negligent in fulfilling his duty to protect the monarchy from political scandal.
He has forced three by-elections and hinted he could at some point return. Would the party, let alone Sunak, allow him to do so as a Conservative candidate? Is Johnson going to reappear as a Nigel Farage simulacrum on the far right?
Johnson has dragged Sunak into his sordid legacy as prime minister. If he wishes to salvage his reputation, the first step Sunak must take is to scrap Johnson’s honours list.
But also like Putin’s soldiers, Johnson may have blown up quite a lot more of a dam than he intended.
Sunak would be wise to wave Johnson a speedy farewell because that is what the Conservative Party has to do for its own preservation.
Johnson’s political career has ended in fireworks. But ultimately it is his judgement and legacy that have gone up in flames.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Peter Oborne won best commentary/blogging in both 2022 and 2017, and was also named freelancer of the year in 2016 at the Drum Online Media Awards for articles he wrote for Middle East Eye. He was also named as British Press Awards Columnist of the Year in 2013. He resigned as chief political columnist of the Daily Telegraph in 2015. His latest book is The Fate of Abraham: Why the West is Wrong about Islam, published in May by Simon & Schuster. His previous books include The Triumph of the Political Class, The Rise of Political Lying, Why the West is Wrong about Nuclear Iran and The Assault on Truth: Boris Johnson, Donald Trump and the Emergence of a New Moral Barbarism.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Legacy of British Colonialism and Loss of Strategic Direction
While the politicians and extremists manufactured hatred and wickedness to further their own agendas for ages to keep the masses oppressed, common people on both sides continued to share feelings of open mindedness and friendship to restore the neglected geography and blocked history. For several centuries, India under Muslim governance progressed and moved as a progressive country with its own economy, diverse cultures of homogeneity, educational institutions, unparalleled architectures including the Taj Mahal and New Delhi’s Grand Mosque so visible from an aerial eye. The endless flow of myriad history keeps reminding of a glorious past refreshingly linked to the existing future. Abu Rehan Al-Burenni, a 10th century Muslim scholar wrote the first book on India: Kitab ul Hind. The British Raj perpetuated divides and religious hatred among the major ethno-religious groups to conquer India from the last Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar in 1857, taken to Burma and imprisoned in a garage. Historically, about two millions mostly Muslims were massacred by the British forces and called it a “Mutiny.” You will find the forbidden truth explained in: “British Colonialism and How India and Pakistan Lost Freedom.” Uncommon Thought Journal, USA and Global Research: 1/01/2022.
When people live in darkness, they lose sense of direction. Since 1947 partition of the Indian sub-continent, Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and other minorities lived in mutual fear and animosities – a prevalent culture discarding the meaning of national freedom and political independence.
While the masses still reflect the historic feelings of friendship and cultural sense of emotions, but political agents and so called leaders propel unexcitable shadows of fear and hatred, there are emerging passions of new generational thinking and behaviors to reach-out to a better sense of humanity for change, progress and peace.
Why do some of the leaders across India and Pakistan talk of historic divides and religious hatred while the 21st century information-age global cultures are embracing understanding of unity and collaborative strength to best serve the masses? Is it a psychological sickness to win elections and rule the people against their wishes? Leaders lack imagination of their own strengths and weaknesses when dealing with the aspirations of masses. Progressive nations produce leaders of new proactive visions and knowledge-based abilities to articulate new and sustainable future.
History could not have confined the tyranny and oppression of “divide and rule” of British imperialism against the will of the Indian masses. Canons of rationality clarify that national freedom granted to both new entities on August 14-15, 1947, was a fake chronology of time and history. The so called national freedom perpetuated a hybrid socioeconomic and political culture – part human- part vulture, British made no security arrangements to ensure communal peace and harmony which resulted in millions of people been killed in ethnic violence while migrating from one place to another. India and Pakistan continued to interact with one another as the most hated enemy of time and history, wars, threat of nuclear arsenals, Kashmir dispute and worst of all lack of direct people to people communication or business relationships – all seem to be part of a highly ruptured and purging pursuit of national freedom. Please see “Pakistan and India’s Leaders Mark Freedom from British Colonialism but Masses Look for Navigational Change.” Uncommon Thought Journal, USA: 8/18/2020.
People’s Revulsion against the Foggy Horizon for Change and Human Relationships
When moral, intellectual and spiritual values become stagnated, people think, act and adapt to a culture of suspicion, hatred and decadent norms. Hi-tech, speculative economies and advanced machines do not generate human feelings and affection but peoples do. To undo this unpleasant shadow of indo-Pakistan formative history, Abrar Hasan, a Pakistani and German citizen motorcycle tourist makes new waves of human aspirations and encompasses hearts and passions of young and old- men and women across India during his March 2023 tour of India.
The YouTube tells pleasantly harmonious interactive communication at various locations and citizens inviting him to their homes and hearts for a joyful time together. Rejecting impulse of necessity and cynicism, people of all consciousness – starting in South India onward to Delhi, Agra, Chandi Ghur, Amritsar, the Sikh Holy site of Golden Temple showed immense strength of goodwill, love an d friendship to welcome Abrar Hasan.
For long, Indian and Pakistani political governance was the hub of indecent rifts devoid of logic and truth just to appease the voters and evil mongers. Agreeably, animosities produce no positive relationships except unknown fears and clash of cultures and nations. This unhealthy situation prolonged between the two nations since 1947. The new and educated young generations in India and Pakistan do not necessarily live within the primitive limits of time and history and they are more proactive and rational beings well equipped with new imaginations for a better and a more promising future of friendship and mutual respects. Reflecting on large sentiments of national identities, it is thinkable to hope that the people of new generations will perform positively to deliver and enrich a new culture of thinking and behaviors resting upon habitual practices of sincerity, fraternity and candor for a sustainable future between the people of India and Pakistan.
Speaking rationally, British imperialism forcibly colonized the thoughts, perceptions and attributes of sociol-economic and political behaviors of the Indian masses. The legacy of the British Empire, its culture, systems of governance and divide and rule the people continues to this day. Should the people of Pakistan and India demand an apology from King Charles for the atrocities committed during the British Raj? Those who inherited the British legacy went on to protect their image by violence and aggression against the very people they were supposed to safeguard for change and progress. The Kashmir tragedy between India and Pakistan is the lingering instance of that legacy. In one shot, when false propaganda goes unchallenged, it breeds fear and hatred of the unknown and produces more shallow and insincere brand of leaders to occupy false platforms of political manifestations.
To challenge the ferocious climate of thinking and political maneuverability across India and Pakistan, the new and young educated and proactive generations of people should take initiatives to challenge the myth of historical ambiguities and distortion and bring into focus how to articulate a new beginning for a more promising and friendly relationship between the two nations. Individual conscience is the most powerful weapon of moral and intellectual integrity. We cannot predict the future but surely, We, the People of Conscience can take steps to make it happen out of our planned ideas and ideals for a much better and more delightful neighborly relationship. This could open up a new threshold of opportunities for free exchange of visits, exchange of students and scholars, poets, knowledge-based experts in reconciliation of sociol-economic and political landscapes and to ensure and protect religious harmony between all segments of the societies.
Imagine! One song can spark a moment of reflection, one flower can wake a dream, one hope will raise our spirits, one touch can show we care. In an age of global communications and citizenship, the friendship bonds of common people are indivisible and irreversible as the culture of India-Pakistan exist. We are not looking for magical pills to mend relationships overnight but for a free and sincere movement of thoughts and plans to enhance a movement for change and best of human progress and happiness. Truth is always living and inseparable from our inner mind and soul. Imagine, some 50 years earlier while a university student at Lahore Punjab University, we go to visit an adjacent border village. The Sikh family house lady welcomes us “ Bismillah” – welcome in the Name of God, my son and embraced me in her fold, it was an extreme moment of rejoice of my life and meeting of minds and souls. She offered freshly churned buttermilk (“lissi”) and dark wheat bread (“Bajra ki Rooti”) to welcome us to her house.
My late mother used to narrate stories of friendship with Sikhs and Hindu village women and whenever they used to meet, they would greet each other with “ Bismillah” – welcome to our house.
Mamma! If you are alive, I will cross over the seven seas from North America to meet you again and to thank you for your heartfelt emotions of sincerity and love. Truth always lives and elevates sincerity and love. We recall Larry S. Chengges shared the same manifestations:
Success is doing the best you can
in as many ways as you can
It is being just and honest and true…
not in a few things, but in everything you do.
It is in dreaming the greatest dreams…
And seeking the highest goals…
That we build the brightest tomorrow.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Mahboob A. Khawaja specializes in international affairs-global security, peace and conflict resolution with keen interests in Islamic-Western comparative cultures and civilizations, and author of several publications including the latest: One Humanity and the Remaking of Global Peace, Security and Conflict Resolution. Lambert Academic Publications, Germany, 12/2019.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
A new report published Monday by the Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons shows that the world’s nine nuclear-armed countries spent more than $157,000 per minute on their atomic weaponry last year, enriching private contractors at the risk of imperiling humankind.
Combined, nuclear-armed nations spent $82.9 billion on their arsenals last year, according to ICAN. The United States was the biggest spender, dumping $43.7 billion into its already massive arsenal in 2022—more than all of the other nuclear-armed countries combined.
“The U.S. Congress allocated $16 billion for the [National Nuclear Security Administration] in 2022 to spend on weapons activities,” ICAN’s report notes. “In 2022, the Department of Defense requested $27.7 billion for ‘nuclear modernization,’ including the ‘Ground-Based Midcourse Defense, B-21 Bomber, Columbia class submarine, and Nuclear Command, Control, and Communications.'”
Overall, the report shows global spending on nuclear weapons increased for the third consecutive year in 2022.
ICAN describes such spending as immensely wasteful and dangerous to global safety, rejecting commonplace claims that investments in nuclear weapons—particularly as a tool of deterrence—are essential to security.
“Through an ever-changing and challenging security environment, from security threats of climate change to the Covid-19 pandemic to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, nuclear weapons spending has steadily increased, with no resulting measurable improvement on the security environment,” the report states. “If anything, the situation is getting worse.”
ICAN argues that consistently growing nuclear weapons spending is an outcome of a vicious cycle whereby tax dollars finance the construction of nuclear weapons by private companies, which proceed to fund think tanks and hire lobbyists to make the case that nuclear weapons are essential to national security—leading governments to continue pouring money “down their nuclear weapons drains.”
Last year, according to ICAN’s findings, nearly $16 billion in new nuclear weapons contracts were awarded to private corporations.
The companies that received the contracts—such as Bechtel, Boeing, and General Dynamics—”turned around and invested in lobbying governments, spending $113 million on those efforts in the U.S. and France,” ICAN notes.
“Together,” the report continues, “nuclear weapon-producing companies, nuclear-armed governments, and those in nuclear alliances spent $21-36 million funding the ten of the most prominent think tanks researching and writing about nuclear weapons in nuclear-armed states.”
The think tanks highlighted in ICAN’s report include the Atlantic Council—which received funding from Bechtel, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and other major contractors in 2021—and the Brookings Institution, which “received between $600,000 and $1,199,997 from three companies that produce nuclear weapons: Leonardo, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman.”
ICAN published its report on the same day that a new analysis by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute showed that the number of operational warheads in nuclear-armed nations’ arsenals grew last year amid soaring tensions over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
According to ICAN, “Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and overt threats to use nuclear weapons have induced fear across the planet, but have also spurred a resilience and re-thinking of outdated concepts like nuclear deterrence,” which suggests the threat of nuclear retaliation is sufficient to deter nuclear-armed countries from using the civilization-threatening weaponry.
ICAN has argued that the idea of nuclear deterrence “makes nuclear use more likely because the threat of use of nuclear weapons must be credible, and so the nuclear-armed states are always poised to launch nuclear weapons.”
“Luck, not reason or strategy, has kept nuclear weapons from being used in warfare for the past 78 years. But we can’t count on our luck to hold in perpetuity,” the group’s new report states. “For the first time in decades, the general public was confronted with a very real threat of nuclear war in 2022. The threat that nuclear weapons pose, as long as they exist, became tangible, with iodine tablets selling out across Europe and an increase in demand for nuclear bunkers.”
ICAN concludes its report by imploring all nations to sign and ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), a legally binding international agreement that none of the nine nuclear-armed countries have signed. The United States and Russia, which together possess 90% of the world’s nuclear warheads, have both opposed U.N. resolutions welcoming the TPNW and urging countries to swiftly ratify it.
“The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is the multilateral response to the irresponsible behavior of all nuclear-armed states,” ICAN’s report says. “It is the normative barricade against threats to use nuclear weapons. All countries should join this landmark international instrument to prohibit the development and maintenance of nuclear weapons and prevent their eventual use by ensuring their elimination.”
From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Jake Johnson is a staff writer for Common Dreams.
Featured image: International anti-nuclear weapons demonstration and peace march to the United Nations in New York City. Photo: Collected
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The Democrats and Donald Trump reminds me of a bad horror movie, where the hapless protagonists only make the monster stronger with each attempt to eliminate it. So goes the Democrats’ endless attempts to finally rid America of the “scourge” of Donald Trump.
Thanks to the Durham Report we now know they started even before Trump was elected president. Hillary Clinton’s campaign – with the full knowledge of the candidate and the sitting president, Barack Obama – cooked up a “dirty trick” to portray Trump as an agent of Russia in their effort to deny Trump the White House.
When that didn’t work they weaponized the FBI, CIA and the rest of the “deep state” to undermine and hobble his presidency. They spied on Trump and his campaign staff using false information manufactured by the FBI.
When that didn’t work they impeached him under the false charge that he sought foreign assistance for his 2020 re-election bid. This time a spy, in the person of NSC staffer Alexander Vindman, was sent to listen in on Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian president Zelensky and then make all manner of false charges against Trump based on it.
Democrats were furious that Trump was less than enthusiastic about their plans to use Ukraine as a proxy to go to war with Russia. Vindman, though an active-duty US military officer, was of Ukrainian background and was loyal to the country of his origin rather than the country of his citizenship. He also openly defied the military chain-of-command and his commander-in-chief. Trump’s lack of enthusiasm for their “Project Ukraine” infuriated Vindman and he sought his revenge against the US President.
When that didn’t work they impeached Trump again over the false charge that he led an “insurrection” against the US government on January 6, 2021. The more surveillance video we see of this “insurrection,” the more it looks like a false-flag operation cooked up perhaps by Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Washington swamp to finally be rid of Trump. Hundreds of political prisoners have been held in solitary confinement on false accusations that they tried to overthrow the US government.
When that didn’t work and Trump’s re-election numbers looked more and more favorable while Biden’s approval rating continued to linger in the political basement, the Democrats have now indicted him over some classified documents apparently discovered in his residence in Florida.
The boxes and boxes of classified documents discovered at multiple Biden locations have disappeared into the memory hole with the help of the media. Nothing to see here.
Suddenly Donald Trump, who polling suggests would obliterate Joe Biden in a fair US election, faces 100 years in prison! Where else would you see the head of one political party arrest his main political opponent on cooked up charges? A banana republic!
For those of us who love this country, it is truly shocking to see this abuse of power. But there’s one thing these dirty tricksters never seem to understand: the more false evidence and false charges they cook up against Trump, the stronger Trump becomes. With these outrageous and continuous attacks on Trump, the Democratic Party (and plenty of Republicans) has lost all credibility. When this plan fails, and it will, I am afraid to think what they might try next.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The UK Labour Party’s latest corporate mega-donor is a pro-Israel businessperson whose firm profiteered from South African apartheid.
Gary Lubner’s company played an important role busting international sanctions against the South African apartheid regime in the 1980s.
Lubner even joined the police force responsible for South Africa’s brutal white supremacist regime in 1977.
He was an accountant for the firm throughout its sanctions-busting period in the 1980s and his father and uncle (who were also his bosses) personally donated to the ruling National Party, which was the architect of apartheid.
The issues raised in this article were put to Gary Lubner in detail. But a spokesperson, who did not give their name, issued only a terse blanket denial.
“These allegations are wholly inaccurate,” they claimed.
“Gary has a long history of opposing apartheid and working with many progressive organizations. He and his family worked very closely with their friend Nelson Mandela to help bring about lasting change in South Africa. Anything to the contrary is simply misleading and false.”
Rich donors
Last weekend, the Financial Timesquoted Lubner, saying he wanted to put Labour – the UK opposition party headed byKeir Starmer– into government “for a long time.”
The paper reported he has already donated close to a million dollars to Labour and that he planned to donate more than $6 million by the next general election.
The paper reported that this will make him “one of Labour’s biggest individual donors.”
Starmer thrust the party into a financial crisis when he took over from left-wing leader Jeremy Corbyn, who had left the party in healthy financial shape.
Starmer purged the left-wing membership base, with the result that the party lost around 200,000 members. Annual income from membership dues fell by more than $10.5 million.
But Starmer is now filling the gap with the support of wealthy business donors like Lubner.
The Financial Times did not report on Lubner’s pro-Israel donations.
But it also covered up the role of the Lubner family firm – PG Group – as an important backer of the South African apartheid regime.
“Routine murders and assassinations”
Gary Lubner joined PG Group in the 1980s, shortly before the firm began playing a major role helping the apartheid government to dodge international sanctions.
South African journalist Hennie van Vuuren told The Electronic Intifada that the Lubners’ support for the ruling apartheid party came at a time “when there were thousands of children who were imprisoned without trial” and when there were “routine murders and assassinations.”
Van Vuuren said of the Lubners that “it was very much in their financial interest” to break the sanctions. “I think absolutely: they profited from apartheid,” he said. “They almost certainly provided materials to the military and to various parts of the regime.”
The spokesperson did not respond when we put what van Vuuren told us to Lubner.
Gary Lubner stayed in South Africa until the late 1980s, joining PG Group’s international arm Belron in London a couple of years later. He was named Belron CEO in 2000 and retired earlier this year.
The firm started as a glass merchant in Cape Town during the late 19th century. But by 2010 it owned brand names all over the world (including Autoglass in the UK) and its annual sales were worth billions of dollars.
Although Gary Lubner – like many white South Africans – now claims to have been an opponent of apartheid all along, at the time his firm profited handsomely from supporting the regime.
In 2017, South African journalists published an investigation – based on archival documents – showing that the Lubners donated to the ruling National Party during the apartheid era.
In a 1982 letter Bertie Lubner had written thanking then Prime Minister P. W. Botha “on behalf of my brother Ronnie” and himself for the “very wonderful evening which we spent with you, charming members of your family and other guests.”
Bertie Lubner fawned over the brutal apartheid leader, writing that “it is men with such high ideals and determination like yourself that create history.”
The letter from the Lubners to South African apartheid leader P. W. Botha. Click here for the full document.
Soon after the “very wonderful evening” in 1982, the Lubners donated to the prime minister’s party, National Party archives show. The letter from the Lubners and the donation receipt can be read in full at the end of this article.
As Hennie van Vuuren’s group Open Secrets reported in 2017, “Post-apartheid amnesia ensured that at the time of his death last year, [Bertie] Lubner was praised as a beloved philanthropist and iconic business leader with far too little said about his support for the establishment during apartheid.”
Shortly before he died in 2016, Bertie Lubner – Gary Lubner’s uncle and boss – admitted to van Vuuren that “we unfortunately had to undertake the breaking of sanctions because we were buying a lot of our timber products” from abroad.
Van Vuuren reported in his book Apartheid, Guns and Money, that the Lubners “would obtain documentation showing another country as the destination of imports, and, while at sea, that documentation would be changed and the timber would be brought to South Africa.”
Van Vuuren found another document in the archives that showed the Lubners’ firm offered to donate wood-stripping equipment to South African armed forces, which would then be used to benefit their anti-communist allies UNITA, a group that was at war with liberation fighters in neighboring Angola. After he was told the items were known as “wreck benches,” Bertie Lubner responded, “Are they for torture?”
Bertie Lubner was a member of the South Africa Foundation, a government coordinated propaganda group established in 1959 to “counter what the business community saw as lies peddled by anti-apartheid activists around the world,” van Vuuren reported in his book.
“A lot of what we did was behind the scenes where we had access in many ways that the government did not,” Basil Hersov, the foundation’s chair from 1977 to 1993, told van Vuuren.
Bertie Lubner justified the apartheid regime in his interview with the journalist, saying that “you had to accept it – that’s what the country’s laws were and you either lived by it or you buggered off.”
Van Vuuren wrote that, “Lubner argued that an important goal of the [South Africa Foundation] was to persuade countries to abandon their boycotts.”
Van Vuuren told The Electronic Intifada, “We don’t know exactly what they made from busting sanctions” but that they helped ensure “the preservation of the apartheid regime, and that benefited corporations like these.”
According to a South African embassy memo cited by van Vuuren, in 1985 Gary Lubner’s bosses Ronnie and Bertie Lubner led a group of prominent South African businessmen on a trip to Washington to express “interest in contributing to an independent pro-south African lobbying group.”
Van Vuuren has written that, “Ronnie and Bertie Lubner and some of their associates had indicated that they were willing to contribute up to $15 million for various projects to improve South Africa’s image abroad.”
“His dear friend Nelson Mandela”
When all this was exposed in South Africa, the family’s sympathizers defended them, claiming that it was “a complicated affair,” that Bertie Lubner was “the Jewish community’s favorite uncle” and that despite having been a supporter of and donor to apartheid stalwart P. W. Botha, he had also later spent time with “his dear friend, Nelson Mandela.”
Former president F. W. de Klerk – also from the National Party – defended the Lubners in 2017, claiming that by donating to his party, “They did not support apartheid, they supported the abolition of apartheid.”
Gary Lubner now claims to have worked against apartheid “from inside” the regime.
In a 2021 interview with the South African Jewish Museum, Lubner admitted to being a member of the South African police force during one of its most brutal periods.
He joined in 1977, not long after the Soweto Uprising of 1976 during which the white supremacist police force shot dead hundreds of Black protesters.
Lubner, who was 18 at the time, said he joined because “I had to do my conscription.” But he also said that, “when I look back now, it’s one of the best years I ever spent, as ironic as that sounds” because it “politicized” him.
As a student at the University of Cape Town he continued “doing more work for the police, because I had to do these [once-a-]month camps.”
But van Vuuren cast doubt on Lubner’s account, saying it’s “very easy in hindsight” to claim he fought apartheid but that “the hard edge of internal repression was led by the police” rather than the army, which Lubner avoided being conscripted into.
At the exact same time that young Black people were “fleeing the country on foot to go for training across southern Africa” Lubner “walked into the arms of the regime. He had a very powerful, very rich father. There’s no doubt that the Lubners could have sent him” abroad to study, but “Lubner chose not to do that.”
Gary Lubner admitted in the 2021 interview that he did not leave South Africa until the late 1980s.
As well as apartheid South Africa, the Lubner family have extensive ties to Israel.
Gary’s uncle (and late boss) Bertie Lubner was a major financial backer of Ben Gurion University of the Negev, starting in 1975. A South African fact-finding mission in 2011 found the university guilty of “institutional complicity and active collaboration with the Israeli military, occupation and apartheid practices.”
Jack Lubner is a campaigner against the Palestinian led boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement, and was an intern for the pro-Israel lobbyist Ruth Smeeth, when she sat in the UK’s House of Commons. He has also played a leading role in the Israel lobby’s recent smear campaign against the British Iraqi rapper and campaigner Lowkey.
The business-friendly option
In his Financial Times interview, Gary Lubner perpetuates the Israeli-led smear campaign against former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. He claimed that Jack was “abused, pilloried, attacked,” by Corbyn’s supporters during his leadership.
“Starmer got rid of them, to his credit,” Gary Lubner told the Financial Times “It was a real cancer in the party.”
According to The Times of London, “Labour is hopeful that although Lubner does not have an official role, he can encourage other leading business figures to pledge support.”
As the i newspaper put it, “the backers of the Blair and [Gordon] Brown governments are returning to Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour … it has finally convinced people that the Corbyn days are behind it, and it is a business-friendly option for the big donors once again.”
[This article originally misidentified the South African embassy memo as as US embassy memo. This has now been corrected in the text above. The quote about the “wreck benches” has also been clarified.]
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: Israel lobbyist Gary Lubner says he’s donating more than $6 million to the UK’s main opposition party. (YouTube)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The Dutch government launched its long-anticipated Great Reset-style farmer buyout scheme on Monday, which could potentially see upwards of ten thousand farms shut down forever to fall in line with the green agenda of the European Union.
Following years of political wrangling, the government of The Netherlands has launched its programme for buying out farms that do not comply with the EU’s Natura 2000 scheme supposedly meant to protect environmentally sensitive areas. The buyout programme will initially impact approximately 3,000 privately-owned farms which are deemed to emit too much nitrogen.
Starting next month, farmers will be able to apply for a buyout, which will be set at 120 per cent of the farm’s value. In addition to the top nitrogen emitters, the government will also offer buyouts for dairy, pig and poultry farmers to shut down in exchange for a payout of 100 per cent of their farm’s value. It is expected that some 8,000 farmers will be eligible for the second scheme, Dutch public broadcaster NOS reports.
In total, the government has allocated 1.4 billion euros to cover the two programmes. The buyout scheme, which will last until next April, will remain voluntary for now, however, the Dutch government has previously suggested that if uptake is not high enough it may be forced to impose mandatory buyouts.
The farmers’ group Agractie expressed concern over the launch, saying that while a website has been opened to allow farmers to see if they are eligible for a buyout, the other options, such as reducing emissions, are not currently explained, meaning that farmers cannot accurately judge which direction to take.
The move to shut down potentially thousands of farms in The Netherlands, despite the ongoing food crisis, could have a significant impact further afield given the country’s status as Europe’s largest exporter of meat and one of the largest dairy exporters in the world.
“Our government doesn’t cater to the wishes of its own citizens, it caters to globalist institutions whose interest it is to control the food supply, so they can control us.”
There has been widespread rejection of the government’s green agenda, however, with farmers launching large-scale tractor protests across the country over the past two years, which have shut down highways and critical infrastructure.
The resentment against the globalist government also saw the populist Farmer–Citizen Movement (BBB) sweep to victory in the Senate and local elections earlier this year, becoming the largest party in the country after previously holding zero seats. Yet, the neo-liberal coalition government of Prime Minister Mark Rutte was able to cobble together enough support to remain in power for the time being.
Some farmers have already expressed that they have no intention of participating in the buyout scheme and plan to hold on to their property. One dairy and poultry farmer Elton van Ginkel told the Nieuwsuur current affairs programme: “Over my dead body. I’ll move on, even if it’s with two cows.”
Another farmer, from the Gelderland province — the chief target of the scheme — Kalverboer Ben Apeldoorn said: “The sector itself has already reduced 8 per cent nitrogen in recent years despite the lack of policy. We are afraid it will never be enough. Even if we were to reduce nitrogen by half, it’s not good enough.”
He said that the political elites in The Hague will only be satisfied ‘when the last farmer is gone”, adding: “While the rest of the economy can continue to grow. Why should we participate in this process? We just have to be offered the right to exist.”
EXCLUSIVE: EU Becoming 'EUSSR' by Waging Green Agenda War on Farmers, MEP Says https://t.co/P1S3M8h30N
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: Dutch flag displayed in the window of a farm dwelling. Photo credit: Ewien van Bergeijk – Kwant
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The fake media machinery, obeying the dictates of the U.S. government, has started a new dangerous and infamous campaign against Cuba.
According to the U.S. newspaper The Wall Street Journal, which had the “honor” of putting the lie into circulation, there is an agreement between Cuba and China, in military matters, for the installation of an alleged espionage base.
The Fake News was immediately spread by other media, among them, CNN and Deutsche Welle, which misinformed its readers with the statement that “China will install a large base in Cuba to spy on the U.S.”
Carlos F. de Cossio, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, denied from Havana the allegations made by the media outlets about the existence of plans to install a base of the Asian country on Cuban soil.
“Regardless of Cuba’s sovereign rights in defense matters, our country is a signatory of the Declaration of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace, signed in Havana in January 2014”, stated Cossio.
He also ratified the island’s position of rejecting all foreign military presence in Latin America and the Caribbean, including that of numerous US military bases and troops, especially in the military base that illegally occupies a portion of the national territory in the province of Guantanamo.
This is not a light accusation; behind this false news lies the intentions of reactionary sectors in Washington that seek to justify the intensification of the blockade and escalate aggressive actions against the island.
It is part of a premeditated and sustained process aimed at destroying credibility, delegitimizing the government and justifying any punitive measure. Even though the Pentagon denied the article the lie has been set into motion.
Including Cuba in black lists of all kinds, accusing it of “threatening the national security of the U.S.”, in addition to the immediate effect on economic relations with the world, is aimed at destroying the reputation of the island, depriving it of international solidarity, isolating it from the world, so that no one will act against its aggressors in case they decide to use force.
Discrediting, through coordinated attacks, using all the resources of technology, carrying out long-lasting black campaigns, without rest, that psychologically affect the aggressor, that lower his self-esteem, that diminish his credibility and legitimacy, is part of every fallacy that is gestated against the Island.
The machinery of infamies, lies and provocations set in motion acts against Cuba with the objective of fabricating a casus belli (justification for war).
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Raul Capote is a professor, researcher and a special correspondent for Resumen Latinoamericano.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The United States spends more money per capita on healthcare than any other country on Earth – almost twice as much as Germany and triple Japan. To emphasize, this is the average spending on an individual level, so it’s triple the spending of Japan per person.
The US is the fattest and the sickest in terms of chronic disease rates in the world. Per Statista, “the CDC estimates that six in ten adults in the United States currently live with a chronic disease such as cancer, heart disease, or diabetes.” You probably know someone personally – in all likelihood, multiple people – who suffers from a chronic health condition.
Much of that disease burden is due to obesity. “Adult obesity rates have more than doubled since the 1980s — in the U.S. today, obesity affects over 42% of adults and 18% of youth. Obesity and its related complications are major drivers of rising healthcare costs, diminished health-related quality of life, and the recent decline in U.S. life expectancy,” per the STOP Obesity Alliance.
Many factors drive obesity – diet, lack of movement, poor sleep, hormonal deficiencies and imbalances, etc. But the medical system that profits off of obesity – while miseducating the public for profit — is one of the worst offenders.
Which brings us to a phenomenon some have dubbed the “obesity-industrial complex.”
Yes, the something-complex terminology, borrowed from the term “military-industrial complex” coined by President Eisenhower in his farewell address, is drastically overused. But, in the case of the obesity-industrial complex, the moniker isn’t without justification.
There exist many parallels between Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex and the obesity-industrial complex.
In fact, in one little-known facet of the infamous Eisenhower speech that I have written about previously, the outgoing president warns of the prospect of a silent technocratic coup over society and government by a “scientific-technological elite”:
“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present–and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
As George Carlin once observed, conspirators don’t need to meet in smoke-filled rooms when their interests converge. It’s a question of incentives. When all the requisite incentives are present, what begin as backroom conspiracies simply become the way the system works.
What’s not going on is a cabal of millions of evil general practitioner physicians twirling their cartoonish handlebar mustaches, plotting how best to sicken their patients and extract maximum cash in the process.
Obesity is first reframed as a medical problem that needs to be medicated, not a lifestyle problem that can be remedied in virtually all cases with simple dietary adjustments and exercise. This process, which I have written about before in the context of transgenderism, is called “medicalization.”
It’s classic problem-reaction-solution: first you create the problem, the public clamors for a proper reaction (looking to the government as a paternal protector and provider), and the interests that control the government offer their solution – which, not coincidentally, always involves more social control and profits for them.
Much like the military-industrial complex, in which weapons contractors launder scare stories through the media to induce support for more war, which they profit off of, the obesity-industrial complex benefits from perpetuating chronic disease because that’s how their bread gets buttered.
The corporate media is also intricately involved in the grift. They take pharma ad dollars to the tune of billions per year, and in exchange actively participate in the reframing of obesity as a medical problem requiring pharmaceutical intervention.
“During a prime-time breakfast slot on BBC Radio 4 last week, a leading obesity expert sang the praises of a blockbuster new weight-loss treatment.
The appetite-suppressing Wegovy injections were “one of the most powerful pharmaceutical tools” to date for treating obesity, Prof Jason Halford told the nation.
The problem, he said, would be ensuring enough people could get hold of them.”
The regulatory agencies of government, which are responsible for vetting new pharmaceutical products, likewise receive kickbacks — to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars in some cases — for greenlighting “breakthrough” new pharmaceutical products, no questions asked.
Everybody gets in on the grift – except, of course, the average consumer.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on The Daily Bell.
Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Coming July 18th is a new children’s book helping to normalize the idea that children aren’t born deficient in poisonous pharmaceutical injections. I’m Unvaccinated and That’s OK! is written by Dr. Shannon Kroner, who holds a Doctorate in Clinical Psychology and a Master’s in Special Education (according to her bio).
According to the synopsis, I’m Unvaccinated and That’s OK! is the story “of an unvaccinated child named Nicholas Novaks, who shares the many reasons why his parents have chosen not to vaccinate him.”
Being a fiction writer myself, I’m always happy to see others using this medium to help shift culture towards truth, or at least, acceptance of those who like truth. However, a reader of my email newsletter, named Karl, took issue with the use of the word “unvaccinated”…
“1st of all, nobody can become unvaccinated. Just like nobody can become uncircumcized. You either have been poisoned or mutilated or you’ve been left normal. You can’t reverse either injury.”
I’m a wordsmith, so I love this type of thinking. But, I’m not sure I agree with Karl. By adding “un” to a word, we are not necessarily saying it was reversed or undone. For example, “unconscious” according to Webster, simply means “not knowing or perceiving.”
Karl goes on to say:
“The book should rightly be called ‘I’m completely original and that’s way better than being poisoned or mutilated.'”
This is similar to the “pure blood” label many people are using. But are we completely original, pure and free of poisons? Seems like a far-fetched claim to make even if you grew up on an organic farm fasting on distilled water for 40 days and nights every month.
“We have to stop using ‘their’ terms as it keeps their psyop going.”
I do agree, I don’t think “unvaccinated” is helpful. It suggests we are lacking something important. I’ve no interest in labelling myself based on whether or not I rolled up my sleeve for some injection.
Maybe a better title for the book would have been, I Don’t Want Your Stupid Vaccineand You Can’t Make Me. Or how about, I Didn’t Get the Shot, Now Please Go Get a Life.
I asked my readers to brainstorm alternative titles that didn’t use the slightly pejorative word “unvaccinated.” Here are the top submissions (chosen by me)…
Curtis Holt suggested: I Didn’t Get the Shot. SO WHAT!
From Colorado, Freelance copywriter Ryan Healy (who gets paid big bucks to write headlines) suggested: I’m Not a Human Pincushion and That’s OK!
Author and poet, Sean Arthur Joyce, in British Columbia, made the astute observation that “Dr. Kroner could simply use I’m Not Vaccinated and That’s Okay! which removes the ‘un’ from the title.”
In the end, Dr. Shannon Kroner has taken action and created a tool to help save children from what appears to be literal democide. I don’t want to nitpick about the title. “Unvaccinated” may resonate better with certain people who would not be reached otherwise. Instead, I’d encourage more people to put out more children’s books from different angles and with different wording
You can find out more or pre-order a copy (I did!) through Dr. Kroner’s website.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
John C. A. Manley is the author of the full-length novel, Much Ado About Corona: Dystopian Love Story, which Patrick Corbett, former director/producer for W-5, Beachcombers and Dateline, calls ” a ripping story of courage, awakening and love.” Visit John’s website for more articles and a audio/video preview of his book: BlazingPineCone.com
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
One hundred and fifty young people from the United States and Canada arrived in Cuba in late April 2023, just days before International Workers Day. As members of CODEPINK’s youth cohort, our goal was to understand the Cuban political system, the US blockade and its impacts on everyday life. We sat in a room upon our arrival, listening to our trip hosts explain the issue of fuel shortages on the island. Before they were done talking, the microphones went silent. The power had gone out. The rest of the presentation sounded like faint whispers to the delegates sitting in the back of the room. We tried our best to hear, trying to silence all the background noise to no avail. Thinking of it now, there was no better way to understand how dire the situation was than to see it for ourselves.
In 1960, following the Cuban Revolution that propelled Fidel Castro to power, a memorandum from the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs to the Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs was written and later declassified. It stated that a majority of Cubans supported Fidel, and if the US wanted to counter the rise of communism in its backyard, it would have to deny “money and supplies to Cuba, decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation, and an overthrow of the government.”
The US imposed a blockade which still restricts necessary items from entering Cuba and prevents other countries from selling them to the island. On top of the embargo, the Biden Administration keeps Cuba on a state-sponsor of terrorism list, further restricting economic development. The goal of these policies are explicit in the 1960 memorandum: the US is trying to starve socialism out of Cuba. The purpose of the US policy towards Cuba is to create misery, and it’s proudly displayed on the State Department website.
And we certainly saw misery with our own eyes. Usually for May Day, millions of Cubans rally in Havana, celebrating socialism and workers. May Day was scaled down this year due to fuel shortages – Cuba has to conserve the fuel it has for farming and other necessities. US media certainly reported on it, but without any mention that it was the US government that was causing shortages of all kinds in Cuba.
Leading up to May Day, a massive storm swept through the island, causing emergencies that the Cuban government couldn’t effectively deal with because of the lack of fuel. We sat through multiple power outages, even in a hotel that had decent fuel access. We toured neighborhoods in transformation, learning how Cubans were developing their own communities to have better access to medical care, food and other life affirming services. Even those tours, full of hope and self determination, were plagued by outages. Tourism is a huge industry that helps sustain the Cuban economy, so tourists like us are usually shielded from occurrences like this. We had no way of truly grasping the day to day effects that these power shortages were having on Cubans outside of Havana.
Even though the people we met in Cuba had a thorough understanding of what our country was doing to theirs, they welcomed us with open arms. Not only were they kind to us, they were also hopeful for the kind of future we would build together – one where our two countries can base foreign policy on the person-to-person relationships we build rather than deferring to the dinosaurs in Washington who value the victory of their ideologies over millions of Cuban lives.
Our cohort visited the Blas Roca Contingent where we were warmly welcomed with fresh coconuts, t-shirts, and hats. We joined delegations from all over the world: Switzerland, Australia, Uruguay, Panama, just to name a few. It was amazing to see union leaders and organizers from all over the world come to Cuba to show support for the Cuban project. It was also transformative to see how well Cuban workers are taken care of. The entire facility we were in was a place for the workers and their entire families to come for food, community, and fun. The union even obtained 3 farms in the area in order to grow food for the workers and their families.
Later, a smaller group of us took a tour with a worker at the facility. He told us how his father had grown up very poor before the revolution and how much his family’s life changed for the better after the revolution. He spoke of the hardships of the blockade, especially not having access to fertilizers for farming which could easily double their yields. He also mentioned how he has had family emigrate to the USA and while he doesnt fault them for leaving, he himself could never leave the Cuban revolutionary project behind. He is a revolutionary through and through. His story is the kind that the policy makers in the US choose to ignore. Cubans on the island are charting their own course outside US hegemony and it is clear that the US’s policy is to try and deny them that right.
All of us, like the delegations that have gone before us and the countless ones who will go after, returned to the US with a deeply held commitment to end our country’s blockade on the Cuban people.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Eli Smith and Kaitlin Blanchard are members of the CODEPINK youth cohort the Peace Collective.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
People Astonished
Many people are astonished by the AI driven value-explosion in companies like NVIDIA.
Recently, NVIDIA’s stocks rose 25% from $ 800 million to nearly $ 1 trillion in market capitalization value (market cap). This currently means, that NVIDIA is valued at 123 times its current annual earnings, and some people question whether that is justified. But very few average people appreciate the enormous scope of AI. Even inside the tech industry, many were taken by surprise at the sudden boom in AI. Only the US government and the biggest US tech companies knew about it – and still, probably just the specialized financial traders and the big funds have found their way to know all about it.
The AI Industry Mirrors a Tsunami
The enormity of the coming impact of AI is difficult to measure. Because it is only beginning now. Because it will have a zillion influences. Because it will be everywhere. Because the AI systems and the industry are developing extremely fast. How do you measure such a thing? One sure way to fathom the enormity of the AI tsunami is to watch the industry – and follow the money.
How many people know that Microsoft alone is building 120 gigantic data centers all over the World this year alone? Yep. One new data center the size of three football fields filled with computers every 3 days.
I used AI to find out how much one such a data center might cost in investment. Using AI, you need to check concrete sources, references, which validate what you state. You need to find the right AI apps. Doing so, I found two concrete articles showing one data center costing $ 300 million and another data center costing $ 500 billion to build.
Knowing that Microsoft’s new data centers are gigantic, let’s use the $ 500 million as a proxy for what each of Microsoft’s 120 data centers will cost in total – and you come to $ 60 billion !! Quite some money. Just in one year. And believe me – out of these $ 60 billion, the concrete walls and the roof aren’t the costly items. The chips inside are ! Guess who makes most of those chips? According to Microsoft itself – it is NVIDIA.
Now, add to the above four more facts.
First – Microsoft is not done after building 120 gigantic AI data centers World-wide in 2023. How many more data centers are to come in 2024 and after, we don’t know. But just for getting a sense of it, let’s assume another 120 data centers to be erected by Microsoft. That’ll be another $ 60 billion on top of the first $ 60 billion, much of which will go to NVIDIA.
Second – Microsoft is also not the only company building gigantic data centers to run AI in the cloud for the whole World (minus Russia, of course). Google just announced that it too will run enormous cloud computing for AI. And recently, IBM did the same. I haven’t seen any statements from Google or IBM about their investments in building AI data centers, but AI requires petabytes of data (yes, that is more than a lot), and you simply need specialized enormous data centers if you want to be in that game where Microsoft, Google, and IBM play. Oh… by the way. I nearly forgot Amazon. Don’t believe Amazon earns its uncountable billions just on books on the internet. One of Amazon’s biggest businesses – perhaps Amazon’s biggest business – is cloud computing (incl. for the US government & security state).
Suddenly you have all of the usual suspects, Microsoft, Google, IBM, and Amazon all building countless of gigantic AI data centers – all needing the raw computing power that NVIDIA delivers.
Third – and here comes the best part for someone like NVIDIA. Chips get old, Fast. Well, they don’t age physically. But every 18 months (Moore’s law) chips get outdated by new chips with double their capabilities. That is, you not only have hundreds of gargantuan AI data centers to be filled with NVIDIA chips. These chips will every so often be thrown out and replaced with new and much better chips – also from NVIDIA.
Fourth – Government. The biggest business of all will want its own gigantic AI data centers. First, Government will use Microsoft AI data centers. But soon, Government wants its own – and bigger. And who else than the US security state Pentagon, CIA, FBI, and NSA will need this for analyzing and managing all the individuals they collect data about all over the World. Predictive policing – arrest or “stop and frisk” people before they do anything. Speak also of “social scoring” – that is not just a town in China. AI for Government will be BIG – even bigger than the gigantic JEDI data center project the US security state planned. Much bigger.
A Trillion Makes Sense
Suddeny, NVIDIA’s share value makes a lot more sense – even at a market cap of $ 1 trillion. And that is just NVIDIA.
There are special cable manufacturers who are the only ones capable of the high speed cables needed for AI data centers. There are memory chip manufacturers, like the Koreans. There are CPU manufacturers like AMD (also a giant). And there are lots of other hardware manufacturers and hardware designers, who will participate in the gold rush of AI data centers.
Then of course, additionally you have all the big software houses and upstart entrepreneurs in software building upon AI. They are going to get showered in gold too. IBM recently announced how EVERY company should not just use the AI of others (like of OpenAI) but build their own AI models with their own data set – of course using IBM’s AI-building tools and IBM’s AI computer centers. Enormous business. And of course KPMG, Cap Gemini, Deloitte, EY, SAP, ORACLE … you name it… will fill their pockets digging in the AI gold mine.
Wall Street is into AI too. AI trading will make big investors even richer.
No Stopping the Dynamic of AI
Even in a possible economic down-turn, the AI bonanza won’t stop. The US Government, like all governments, will always increase spending, even more in down-turns. Particularly on things the US can use to manage global citizens. And in a down-turn, many companies will double-down on their plans for AI in order to reduce costs, understand customer needs better, communicate better with customers and partners, expand sales, speed up product development, add unique AI-based customer services, optimize finances, and sell their ideas better to investors, in order to stay in business. Even Elon Musk wants to add AI to Twitter, and wants to found his own AI company X.AI drawing AI technology from self-driving Tesla cars over to Twitter. Meta wants something bigger than that, but just has problems to execute.
There is a whole new dynamic driven by AI coming up. This dynamic will have an enormous impact on EVERYTHING. Government. Financing. Manufacturing. Services. And it will drive its own set of AI industrial suppliers. Recently, a meeting of AI enthusiasts turned into a 5,000 people gathering in California, and they affectionately dubbed it the “Woodstock of AI”. Big companies. Small companies. Government. Start-ups. Everybody is going into AI. Everywhere, the AI opportunities will be like gold spread out on the street, just waiting to be picked up.
Only China and Russia are at a disadvantage. And that is by US design.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
There would appear to be no limit to Israeli bestiality towards the Palestinians and likewise no limit to how much that brutality has been enabled by the positions taken by successive US governments and the national media. Indeed, the self-defined Jewish state, which ironically claims to be a democracy, is perhaps the leading human rights violator in all the world due to its officially condoned genocide directed against the Palestinian people and its bombing and killing of neighboring Syrians and Lebanese without providing any convincing evidence that it is being threatened by them.
That apartheid Israel is essentially a criminal state that blithely goes about killing and stealing from the original inhabitants of the Middle East region might well be accepted as substantially true by most observers. But even given all of that, there is sometimes a story that emerges that is so shocking and disturbing that it becomes difficult to contemplate why the rest of the world has not risen-up and demanded an end to Israeli atrocities.
One such story is the recent murder by Israeli soldiers of a two-year-old boy Mohammad al-Tamimi. Unfortunately, heavily armed Israelis illegally occupying the West Bank and killing Palestinian children is not a rare occurrence. Fully 27 children have suffered that fate in the past six months, including some children being killed by Israeli bombing and rockets in Gaza. And the stories are often the same, with the Israeli government claiming that there were “terrorist threats,” often deliberately contrived provocations that rapidly develop into shooting ranges with the unarmed Palestinians as targets.
In this case, Mohammad al-Tamini was with his father, Haytam al-Tamimi, and had just been buckled into the back seat of the family car to go on a short trip to visit an uncle in a nearby village to celebrate an aunt’s birthday. The al-Tamimis live in the West Bank village of Nabi Saleh, located twelve miles northwest of Ramallah, which passes for the capital of what fragments of land the Palestinians have been able to preserve as a symbol of their national identity. The Israelis de facto are occupiers of nearly all of the West Bank and have military outposts scattered through the region to protect the armed and illegal Jewish settlers who are constantly harassing the remaining Palestinians and destroying their crops to force them to emigrate.
The remaining Palestinians in their villages and towns are constantly under siege and are subject to checkpoints, arbitrary arrests, and even murder at the hands of the Israel Defense Forces. One observer notes how the remaining Arab “communities are actually Palestinian enclaves that are prisons” with heavily armed 18 year old Israeli conscript soldiers free to run amok as they see fit. And when a Palestinian is killed, the Israeli soldiers know well that they will not in any way punished. An Israeli peace group has calculated that between 2017 and 2021 a soldier who murdered a civilian faced only a 0.87% probability that he would be investigated and indicted. There were only 11 such indictments in those years and the punishments eventually meted out were slaps on the wrist.
On June 1st, Mohammad was the victim of a band of Israeli soldiers, who later claimed to be chasing a car from which shots had allegedly been fired at a nearby illegal Jewish settlement Neveh Tzuf. The problem with the tale is that no one heard any shots until the Israeli soldiers blocked the village entrance before arriving in the center of Nabi Saleh in their jeeps and starting shooting in all directions. They then settled in for a few hours to engage in a bit of tormenting of the local residents by beating them and even firing at them at close range. Haytam Tamimi and his son Muhammad were among five Palestinians injured during the raid.
Seated in their vehicle, Mohammad was shot through the head and his father was wounded in the shoulder, apparently by fire from a sniper. Taken to a hospital, Mohammad lingered for four days before dying on Monday June 5th. His body was returned to his village for burial, which took place on the following day, but even then the Israelis chose not to avoid interfering in what was a tragic ceremony. Before and during the funeral, the Israeli military had surrounded the village and later that afternoon, while mourners were gathered at the al-Tamimi grandparents’ home, they entered into it for the third time since Mohammad was shot, beating and shooting villagers, injuring six people. One man sustained a gunshot wound in the pelvis, with the bullet entering his intestines. A woman was struck in her face with a rifle butt while another mourner was hit in the face with a rubber-coated steel bullet.
Ironically, on same day that Mohammad died the American Secretary of State Antony Blinkenaddressed the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) at its annual policy summit in Washington. AIPAC, it might be observed, exists to promote Israeli interests, which should make it subject to registry under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) but no one in the White House seems interested in enforcing that particular law or any other existing legislation pertaining to secret nuclear arsenals when Israel is involved. The last president who tried to register AIPAC’s predecessor organization the American Zionist Council was John F. Kennedy, and consider what happened to him possibly as a result.
Blinken, is himself a Jew and an avowed Zionist in an Administration awash with Jews and Zionists to include President Joe Biden, a supermarket Catholic, who calls himself a Zionist and effectively swears fealty to the Jewish state. Blinken is not really very good at blaming Israel for anything and when he is with a hardline Jewish gathering like the AIPAC Summit he is fully energized while he is making the audience feel good about its love for Israel. He enthused how the US-Israel partnership “touches on every aspect of our lives, from security to business, from energy to public health. And the depth and breadth of that partnership between our governments are matched only by the strength of the ties between our peoples. This partnership between the United States and Israel is indispensable.”
Blinken chose not to acknowledge that the “indispensable ties” between the US and the Jewish state is attributable to the large scale corruption of America’s political system by Israel and its Lobby to achieve such a status. And inevitably, Blinken made sure his friends in AIPAC understood that the Biden Administration sees the “blame” for the unrest in the Middle East just as does the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: Iran and Palestinian “terrorists” are largely at fault and Israel is the perpetual victim. He recalled how “Over the past several years, we’ve seen a rising tide of horrific violence that’s tragically and senselessly resulted in the loss of life of scores of civilians on both sides. That violence must end; its perpetrators must face equal justice under the law. The recent acts of terrorism – including nearly 1,000 rocket attacks launched toward Israel over just three days, some of them targeting Jerusalem – demonstrate the daily threat under which Israelis are forced to live. The fatal event at the border with Egypt – which resulted in the deaths of three Israeli soldiers – is another tragic reminder of these daily dangers.”
Image: Shireen Abu Akleh (Source: Middle East Eye)
Blinken did not seem interested in the dead Palestinian children nor in the murder of Palestinian-American Journalist Shireen Abu Akleh by Israeli soldiers back in May 2022. He is more enthusiastic when he is telling AIPAC how much US Treasury money and other goodies are flowing to a wealthy Israel from the American taxpayer, describing how “Now, we have to start from this. The US-Israel relationship is underwritten by the United States’ commitment to Israel’s security. [My emphasis] That commitment is non-negotiable; it is ironclad. We are – we are providing $3.3 billion in foreign military financing to Israel each year. On top of that, Israel receives $500 million in funding for missile defense. Tens of millions more for new counter-drone and anti-tunneling technologies. That is in keeping with the 2016 memorandum of understanding negotiated by the Obama-Biden administration – and it is more than at any point in the history of our relationship. We’re also delivering an additional $1 billion in funding to replenish supplies for Israel’s Iron Dome, the missile defense system that we developed together and that has saved countless lives. All of this – all of this has been secured in partnership with our Congress, with bipartisan support. We’re also expanding our joint military exercises that improve how our forces work together seamlessly. This year, we have more joint exercises scheduled than at any point in our history. We’re also conducting joint research and development on advanced military capabilities, working together on cutting-edge defense systems, including Israel’s new laser-focused Iron Beam. This robust support continues to be critical in [my emphasis] maintaining Israel’s qualitative military edge, buttressing its ability to defend itself, and to advancing our national interests. America is more secure when Israel is strong.”
It is interesting how Blinken concludes his argument supporting throwing bushels of money to Israel based on serving an American “national interest” and making us “more secure,” which is a complete lie, similar to what is being promoted to explain why we are in Ukraine. Maybe the Administration might consider some new talking points as the lies are getting ever more preposterous and the deficit spending of trillions of dollars has reached the point of no return. Blinken also lies big time when he attempts to resurrect the totally dead two state solution to Israel-Palestine, saying “Israel was founded — our partnership was built — on democratic values which include equal access by all people to their rights. And a two-state solution is vital to preserving Israel’s identity as a Jewish and democratic state.”
Blinken should perhaps be someday reincarnated as a Palestinian who has just lost his livelihood and home to an “equal access” Jewish settler and who every day experiences the Israeli organized increasing state violence that is directed against him. That might provide a different perspective. And it is interesting to note that the threat to Blinken’s imaginary two-state solution is also framed as coming from the Palestinians rather than from Israel. He denounced in his speech to AIPAC “any actions taken by any party that undermine the prospects of a two-state solution. That includes acts of terrorism, payments to terrorists in prison, violence against civilians, incitement to violence.” Take note that bombing and shooting children is not included, which is an Israeli speciality.
And, by the way Mr. Blinken, Israel was not founded on “democratic values.” It engaged in a massive program of ethnic cleansing that defined its creation — the Nakba for Palestinians, which killed thousands and drove at least 650,000 civilians from their homes. For the first 19 years of Israel’s existence, its Arab “citizens” were ruled under martial law and since then Palestinians have been legally discriminated against with Jewish supremacy and entitlement serving as the defining characteristics of the state.
Interestingly, in contrast to Blinken and Biden, at least one US Senator appears to have a conscience regarding dead people and he is surprisingly enough a Democrat! Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is calling on the Joe Biden administration to “publicly release its findings” into the shooting death of Shireen Abu Akleh. Van Hollen believes that a report compiled by the US security coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority shortly after the fact provides important information about the “the conduct of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) unit involved in that operation as well as other IDF units operating in the West Bank.” He commented “I strongly believe that its public release is vital to ensuring transparency and accountability in the shooting death of American citizen and journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and to avoiding future preventable and wrongful deaths – goals we should all support.” Van Hollen has been denied access to the classified State Department report over the past eleven months, which has been attributed to Biden Administration desire to block any demands for accountability on the part of Israel.
Van Hollen obviously was not briefed on the fact that Israel has a White House approved license to kill Americans and just about anyone else due to its “chosen” status. He should check out what happened to the death by Israeli army bulldozer of Rachel Corrie in 2003 and to the 34 sailors murdered and another 172 wounded by an Israeli attack on the USS Liberty on June 8th, 1967. When the Liberty was struggling to stay afloat President Lyndon Johnson ordered a cover-up which has led to Washington de facto taking orders from Tel Aviv and paying what amounts to an annual tribute to Israel as outlined in some detail by Blinken in his AIPAC speech. So, there you have it. We have on one hand a militarized ethno-religious state that rules over a suppressed minority with terror and killing that is being coddled by both US Republican and Democratic administrations because of Jewish power and, more to the point, the corruption obtainable by money and knowing how to use it for political advantage.
Killing a two-year-old little boy sitting in a car with his father is only the most recent of Israel’s war and human rights crimes, but it is particularly heinous and no one in the White House or State Department dares say squat. The murders in Palestine and the fantasy denial of Israeli culpability for anything by Blinken and Biden as well as by Donald Trump when he was in office speak for themselves. Who really rules the United States? What kind of monsters have we become under neocon/Zionist control? Is the bell that is tolling ringing for the demise of us as a nation? Ask about all those things now, because when Biden’s War on Antisemitism really goes into high gear one will likely be facing a jail sentence just for daring to pose those questions.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on The Unz Review.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected].
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
There is much at stake for the ruling class and its law-enforcement surrogates in the mass campaign taking place in Dekalb County, Georgia to prevent the construction and operation of a training center which will cost tens of millions in tax dollars.
In a vote by the Atlanta City Council on June 5, the legislative approval of the project took place despite the objections of hundreds of people.
This training facility, if completed, would cost at least $90 million. The center would be the largest of its kind in the United States. With Atlanta being a majority African American Southern municipality, it would be against the interests of its population to fund or allow such a project.
Historically, African Americans have been disproportionately impacted by police violence within their communities. The police represent the entry point of millions into the criminal industrial complex, where again, African Americans are sent to prison in far greater numbers to their percentage within the U.S. Consequently, it should not be surprising that many African Americans and other oppressed peoples along with their supporters are calling for the defunding of police and the abolition of the prison systems.
Concerned people stood in line for hours in order to make statements against the building of the complex located in a rural forested area outside of Atlanta. However, despite the growing opposition to the project, the City Council revealed that their status largely depends upon a subservience to the ruling class and the police.
Demonstrations surrounding the building of Cop City have resulted in the shooting death of one activist—Manuel Paez Teran (Tortuguita)–the arrests of hundreds and the now attempted framing of those who are organizing a defense campaign to provide legal assistance to people ensnared by the State of Georgia’s criminalization of protests. Many of those arrested in protest actions are being prosecuted on terrorism laws where if convicted could result in decades of imprisonment.
On May 31, agents of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) accompanied by local police agencies raided the offices of the Atlanta Solidarity Fund, arresting three of its officials. The activists are being charged with money laundering and charity fraud under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) laws. Statements from governmental officials in Georgia attempt to frame the activists opposing the construction of Cop City as terrorists with no legitimate right to exist in the state.
Micah Hersking, a key organizer in Atlanta noted that:
“This is a major escalation — they’re arresting those who defend the arrested. The implications of these arrests is that not only can you not protest, but you cannot defend those who are arrested for protesting. There is no first amendment in Atlanta.”
Another important figure in the opposition to Cop City, Kamau Franklin of the Community Movement Builders, was quoted as saying:
“This is targeting of organizers and movements by the police and the state. Bail funds have been a part of organizing the Civil Rights movement and labor movement. We will continue to fight back against cop city and the political arrest of our friends and comrades.”
Opponents of Cop City have two months to collect 75,000 signatures of registered voters which is the minimum needed to place the question on the ballot in November. People living near the area where the law-enforcement training center is being constructed would not be eligible to vote since they do not reside in the city of Atlanta.
Obviously, the City of Atlanta and the State of Georgia wants to crush the movement to stop Cop City. The recalcitrance of the municipal and state officials is reflective of the commitment of the Democratic and Republican parties to maintain the funding of law-enforcement in the country. As class contradictions escalate during a period of declining standards of living among the workers and oppressed along with record profits for the energy and other sectors of the economy, the ruling interests which control the banks, multi-national corporations and the defense industry, fear that there will inevitably be a sustained rebellion against the status quo.
Police and Electoral Politics
The police are the first line of defense for the ruling class since its principal purpose is to defend private property and the state apparatus. This fact has become quite clear since the mass demonstrations and rebellions of 2020 in the aftermath of a series of racist police and vigilante killings of Ahmaud Arbery of Georgia, Breonna Taylor of Louisville and the most notable, George Floyd of Minneapolis.
Dozens of people lost their lives during the summer and fall of 2020 in pitched battles with the police and vigilantes. Thousands of others were injured and arrested as then President Donald Trump evoked the slave-era Insurrection Act of the early 1800s. Federal troops and other agents were deployed to urban areas to assess and contain the demonstrations and rebellions.
Trump’s response to the George Floyd rebellion and the COVID-19 pandemic set the stage for his defeat by then former Vice President and Senator Joe Biden in November 2020. Yet, Biden and the Democratic Party have failed to pass the reform legislation which could address the increasing poverty among growing segments of the U.S. population. Neither has the Biden administration effectively addressed the burgeoning problems of infrastructural decline in areas across the country.
The inability of the Biden administration to usher through the House of Representatives and Senate the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act speaks volumes about the role of law-enforcement within capitalist society. Biden and other high profile Democratic officials have continued to denounce the demands emanating from the mass struggles for the defunding of police. Instead, projects such as Cop City continue to be prioritized by both ruling class political parties and their elected officials on the local, statewide and federal levels.
Biden’s lack of political success on a domestic level along with the military defeat in Afghanistan in 2021 and the escalating proxy war against the Russian Federation, has contributed immensely to his decline in popularity. African Americans, Latin Americans and other people of color communities were instrumental in the electoral alliance that defeated Trump in 2020. It is highly unlikely that Biden can win the White House for a second term without the electoral support of the oppressed peoples and the proletariat as a whole.
However, lessons from the last six decades indicate that it will take much more than the election of Democratic candidates to eradicate police brutality. The masses of the people, through the emergence of the movement in Atlanta to stop Cop City illustrates the incipient opposition to the further militarization of local and state police agencies.
Priorities Must be Redirected to Serve the Needs of the People
The proliferation of federal and private funding programs for law-enforcement agencies is only fueling the misconduct, brutality and murderous practices of the police. African Americans are still being gunned down by law-enforcement personnel, and in most cases, these officers are not arrested and prosecuted.
Resources need to be directed towards the social spending projects which have been abandoned by the Congress. There is a widespread need for services in the schools, communities and among people living with disabilities as well as senior population groups.
Infrastructural projects are desperate for federal, state and local funding. The recent problems with the railway industry where in East Palestine, Ohio a major accident has endangered the entire community. In Philadelphia, a fire sparked by a collision of a truck into an embankment led to the collapse of a bridge on the I-95 highway. A truck driver is known to be dead, while the searches of the wreckage may result in the discovery of even more bodies.
The rapid rise in the cost of living for working people is largely the result of inflation and the actual decline in real wages. Every month the Biden administration praises the relatively low unemployment rate in the U.S. and claims that this is a direct result of the government’s efforts.
However, money spent on the hundreds of military bases and wars of conquest and occupation could be channeled towards rebuilding urban areas based upon the educational, social and environmental needs of the masses of people. At the same time, funding earmarked and allocated to meet the social and educational needs of working and oppressed people domestically are often siphoned away to provide further assistance to the police and the large corporations.
These are fundamental issues that face the workers and oppressed in the U.S. and around the globe. These exploited and oppressed people must organize independently in order to make sure that their issues gain top priority in the ongoing struggle to win freedom and social justice for all.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: Atlanta Cop City banner at City Council meeting on June 5, 2023 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
This video features the layout of the case for war with Iraq in 2003, 20 years ago, based on the assertion of undiscovered weapons of mass destruction — nuclear, biological and chemical — that Saddam Hussein was concealing and might even deliver to a country, perhaps via Al Qaeda.
This analysis lays out how the intelligence was not only flawed but faked.
Plagiarized quotations from the internet had been slipped into the official UK intelligence report presented by Secretary of State Colin Powell to the United Nations Security Council pertaining to Iraq’s alleged WMD.
This fake intel report was drafted by PM Tony Blair’s Downing Street staff.
Damning evidence refuting Colin Powell’s official intelligence report was revealed by Dr. Glen Rangwala, Newham College, Cambridge on Britain’s Channel 4 TV on February 6, 2003, on the day following Secretary of State Colin Powell’s historic Iraq WMD presentation to the UN Security Council:
“I would call my colleagues’ attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed . . . which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities.” (Colin Powell, UN Security Council, February 5, 2003)
Powell was referring to “Iraq Its Infrastructure Of Concealment, Deception And Intimidation”, published on January 30, 2003.
The Iraq war was based on a Big Lie, which was known and documented MORE THAN A MONTH before the invasion of Iraq on March 20, 2003. Both the US and UK media remained mum. The US Congress and the House of Commons failed to act.
According to Rangwala, the British intelligence document was fake. It had not been prepared by British intelligence:
The Downing Street authors state they drew “upon a number of sources, including intelligence material” (p.1, first sentence). In fact, they copied material from at least three different authors and gave no credit to them. Indeed, they plagiarized, directly cutting and pasting or near quoting.
A close textual analysis suggests that the UK authors had little access to first-hand intelligence sources and instead based their work on academic papers, which they selectively distorted. Some of the papers used were considerably out of date. This leads the reader to wonder about the reliability and veracity of the Downing Street document.
It was a fake document prepared on the instructions of prime minister Blair with a view to building a “credible” justification to wage war on Iraq.
Rangwala’s analysis was more than a smoking gun. It revealed the Big Lie. It invalidated Colin’s Powell’s presentation to the UN Security Council.
Plagiarism had become a means to justifying the war on Iraq.
The Rangwala revelation was the “unspoken truth”. With the exception of Channel 4 and The Guardian, it was not the object of mainstream media coverage both before as well as after the March invasion of Iraq. Rangwala’s revelation had to be suppressed. The invasion of Iraq had already been scheduled for March 2003.
Dr David Kelly, Britain’s foremost expert on biological weapons, with direct access to WMD intelligence on Iraq also played a key role in revealing the “fake” Bush-Blair” WMD narrative.
In the months leading up to his death, he had become increasingly skeptical regarding Iraq’s alleged WMDs. Dr. David Kelly was found dead on July 18th, 2003. The official story was that he had committed suicide as contained in the Lord Hutton report.
Lord Hutton was confronted by Drs. Stephen Frost, Christopher Burns-Cox and David Halpin, who courageously challenged the “official narrative” presented by Lord Hutton on behalf of Tony Blair’s government.
This video produced by Michael Welch is narrated by Professor Michel Chossudovsky.
If you have any doubts, below is the text submitted by Dr. Rangwala to the House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs.
It was received as written evidence on 16 June 2003, published by The H. of C. on 3 July 2003 in the wake of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. And then it was forgotten.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
The “globalization of war” is a hegemonic project. Major military and covert intelligence operations are being undertaken simultaneously in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, sub-Saharan Africa, Central Asia and the Far East. The U.S. military agenda combines both major theater operations as well as covert actions geared towards destabilizing sovereign states.
Former American President Jimmy Carter said in 2018 that in America, there were 226 years of wars since its independence which took place 242 years ago thus leaving only 16 years of peace. Since WWII, there were 32 American military conflicts involving dozens of countries. Some of these military conflicts have lasted for over twenty years and some others are still continuing.
There are at least 182 children who died from COVID-19 vaccines hidden in the VAERS database, that don’t show up when you search for child vaccine deaths.
June 5, 2023, the World Health Organization and the European Commission announced the launch of a digital health initiative in which the WHO will establish a global COVID-19 vaccination certification system based on the European Union’s (EU) already existing Digital COVID Certificate.
Since unipolarity, the United States led invasions in the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia, in addition to increasing the siege towards China and Russia. From 2001 to the present, the 2008 crisis is the watershed. The second decade of the current century witnessed Russia’s reincorporation into world decision-making power through its war machine and China’s resurgence through the scope of its economic potential.
U.S. Think Tank Land hacks are not exactly familiar with Montaigne: “On the highest throne in the world, we still sit only on our own bottom.” Hubris leads these specimens to presume their flaccid bottoms are placed high above anyone else’s. The result is that a trademark mix of arrogance and ignorance always ends up unmasking the predictability of their forecasts.
This is the first time since then that they’ve conventionally fought a military peer, albeit by proxy for now. Even so, the West is still receiving the large-scale data that they require in order to fine-tune their plans ahead of possibly waging a direct war against one.
The United States is about militarism. Its economy is largely based on the military-industrial complex. It has hundreds upon hundreds of military bases in lands around the planet. Yet, despite a bloated military budget, the US fails to care for all its citizens, certainly not the millions of homeless, poor, and those unable to afford medical procedures because they are without medical insurance.
Recently, presidential candidate Bobby Kennedy Jr delivered an interview to Gateway Pundit where he called upon Joe Biden to follow through on the promise to declassify all reports relating to his uncle’s 1963 assassination which Biden himself had voted to support when the 1992 Kennedy Records Declassification Act was passed by Congress.
In post after post this morning, the corporate war propaganda media is attempting to blame Russia for the terrorist bombing of the Nova Kakhovka dam and hydroelectric power station on the Dnieper River. It is doing this by underscoring an accusation made by a documented serial liar, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and his coterie of Nazi-worshipping thugs, that Russia punched holes in the dam in order to flood the battlefield.
Today, in the mainstream narrative, there is much talk of a ‘food transition’. Big agribusiness and ‘philanthropic’ foundations position themselves as the saviours of humanity due to their much-promoted plans to ‘feed the world’ with ‘precision’ farming’, ‘data-driven’ agriculture and ‘sustainable’ production.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The New York Times continued its line of downplaying—or even celebrating—Nazis in Ukraine with a piece (6/5/23) that sought to explain away the frequency of Nazi symbols in photographs of the Ukrainian military. The Times commented that such imagery put “Western journalists” in a “difficult position,” noting that a Ukrainian press officer said journalists had asked Ukrainian soldiers to remove Nazi insignia before being photographed.
The headline read: “Nazi Symbols on Ukraine’s Front Lines Highlight Thorny Issues of History.” The chief concern, per the Times subhead, was the worry that evidence of Nazism in Ukraine “risks fueling Russian propaganda.”
‘Complicated relationship’
At issue was “the Ukrainian military’s complicated relationship with Nazi imagery, a relationship forged under both Soviet and German occupation during World War II.” The relationship is “delicate,” the Times says, because of Putin’s stated war aims of de-Nazification.
Times reporter Thomas Gibbons-Neff dismisses the idea that Ukraine needed de-Nazification on the grounds that, despite its “acceptance” of Nazi symbols in many cases, current President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is Jewish. This weak argument is made weaker, given that, regardless of his heritage, it is well-documented that Zelenskyy sits at the center of a power structure in which far-right, neo-Nazi forces are a key constituency.
Igor Kolomoisky, one of Zelenskyy’s key supporters, was even a backer of the Azov Battalion—a group, once described by the Times (3/15/19) as a “neo-Nazi paramilitary organization,” that has been integrated into the Ukrainian military.
None of this justifies an illegal invasion. But it is clear that important facts have been deliberately suppressed or omitted within the US press (FAIR.org, 1/15/22), impairing readers’ understanding of the conflicts’ sources and possible resolutions.
The relentless threat of being labeled “Putin apologists” has created a chilling effect at even the highest liberal establishment organizations. Per the Times:
Even Jewish groups and anti-hate organizations that have traditionally called out hateful symbols have stayed largely silent. Privately, some leaders have worried about being seen as embracing Russian propaganda talking points.
The Times story acknowledged that journalists are worried about reporting reality, noting that at one point, according to a Ukrainian press officer, journalists from an unnamed outlet had soldiers remove Nazi symbols before they were photographed. This is a serious allegation of journalists knowingly distorting their portrayal of reality for explicitly political reasons.
Pioneering the Holocaust
The Times did find someone credentialed to legitimize running cover for Nazis:
Ihor Kozlovskyi, a Ukrainian historian and religious scholar, said that the symbols had meanings that were unique to Ukraine and should be interpreted by how Ukrainians viewed them, not by how they had been used elsewhere.
“The symbol can live in any community or any history independently of how it is used in other parts of Earth.”
The distinction drawn between how Nazi symbols were used in Ukraine as opposed to “other parts of Earth” suggests that Nazism in Ukraine was somehow more benign than in other places. To the contrary, Ukraine was where the mass slaughter of Jews was pioneered, with an estimated 1.5 million people killed there, or one in every four Jewish victims of the Holocaust. These killings were largely carried out by Ukrainian nationalist militias; survivors of these units that participated in the Holocaust were granted veteran status by Ukraine in 2019, making them eligible for government benefits (Kyiv Post, 3/26/19).
The CIA’s Nazis
As part of his defense, Kozlovskyi references the postwar anti-Soviet struggles of these Ukrainian nationalists:
Today, as a new generation fights against Russian occupation, many Ukrainians see the war as a continuation of the struggle for independence during and immediately after World War II.
Kozlovskyi and the Times omit the fascist character of this “struggle for independence.” Though it is rarely acknowledged today, the United States had a robust policy of training and equipping former Nazis in Western and Eastern Europe—by no means “unique to Ukraine”—to act as anti-Communist paramilitaries.
Ukraine saw former SS and Nazi intelligence units receive support from the CIA as part of the nationalist movement against Communism. The Nazis we see in Ukraine today are direct descendents of these networks and organizations. Even if the Times refuses to reference this history, these symbols have their roots explicitly in US-backed Nazi movements, making their defense of the current Nazis all the more egregious.
Like many facts in this war, the Ukrainian Nazi problem and its origins have been relegated to the memory hole by US corporate media (FAIR.org, 2/23/22). What’s striking is just how common it was for establishment press to acknowledge Ukraine’s Nazi problem before the war began—with the issue even recognized by the US Congress.
However, as the Times reporting has reinforced, US journalists have decided that being on the right team in this war is more important than presenting an accurate picture of events to their audience. This latest Times piece underscores the role journalists play in manufacturing consent for US policy on this and many other fronts, even if it means rehabilitating Nazi paramilitaries.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Bryce Greene is a writer based in Indiana.
Featured image: New York Times photograph of a Ukrainian soldier wearing a patch that incorporates the Nazi Totenkopf symbol.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
There are at least 182 children who died from COVID-19 vaccines hidden in the VAERS database, that don’t show up when you search for child vaccine deaths.
How is VAERS doing this? It’s creative and diabolical:
Some brilliant investigative work was done by TheEagle88 who publishes his work on his substack and who made this shocking discovery (click here).
VAERS is hiding child deaths by leaving the “Age” box empty, even though the age is known. That way, anyone who is searching the VAERS database for child deaths with any age parameters, never finds them.
Notice that even though the age is known, the Age box is deliberately left blank. The date of vaccination is also known but was also left blank. This boy died in his sleep 3 days after taking Pfizer vaccine. As a parent, I’d want to know about this.
Once again, the age box is left empty, although it is known the boy is 17 years old.
Imagine parents who are concerned whether COVID-19 vaccines will impact the mental health of their children. This tragic case could have affected their decision to vaccinate their child. But this death is hidden, it does not come up in any search.
Once again, age is known but not entered where it should be. This was the saddest line in the report: “patient had been happy and playing computer games online with his friends until he went to bed at 23:00 on 30Nov2021. Found dead at 01 o’clock at night without prior symptoms of any kind”
This case was eventually altered and the description was removed entirely (click here).
The baby was alive when it was born. The age of the infant is 0, but instead, it’s left blank. Safe for pregnancy? It seems that “premature labor and a dead baby” is not exactly the definition of “safe”.
Nothing says “safe in pregnancy” like a pregnant woman at 40 weeks taking a Pfizer mRNA jab and having her baby die the next day. No age entered for the stillborn baby. Even “fetal death” is spelled wrong to make sure this case doesn’t show up in any search.
There are several of these cases. Mother has a healthy baby at 7wk 5d on Feb.3, 2021. She takes a Pfizer mRNA jab on Feb.4, 2021. Her next ultrasound shows that the fetusstopped growing on Feb.9, 2021 and “no heartbeat detected”. Miscarriage occurred on Feb.22, 2021.
I can see why someone is illegally altering VAERS reports to hide these tragic deaths.
This 13 year old boy died a horrific death only 11 days after his Pfizer jab: “Blood coming from his nose, frothing at the mouth, tongue was blocking his airway”.
This report involves the age group 5-11 years old. Age is intentionally left blank.
COVID-19 Vaccine pushers are doubling down on mRNA vaccinating children:
Dorit Reiss is a Professor of law at UCSF who specializes in “vaccines & law”. An unethical lawyer who supports big pharma.
My Take…
In this article, I showed only a few cases of post COVID-19 vaccine child deaths to give an example of what’s being hidden within VAERS but there are at least 182 child deaths that everyone can look at and examine themselves at this location created by “TheEagle88”: (CLICK HERE)
Everything else aside, it is shocking that given so many children have died from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, that these products still haven’t been pulled off the market.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
Comments Off on VAERS Is Cleverly Hiding 182 Child Deaths Caused by COVID-19 Vaccines. You’ll Never Find Them. These Are Some of the Most Shocking COVID-19 Vaccine Child Death Stories But They’re Hidden From Public!
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
June 5, 2023, the World Health Organization and the European Commission announced the launch of a digital health initiative in which the WHO will establish a global COVID-19 vaccination certification system based on the European Union’s (EU) already existing Digital COVID Certificate
This vaccine passport system will be expanded into a Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN) run by the WHO that will include “a wide range of digital products to deliver better health for all.” The vaccine passport will also, in time, cover all recommended vaccinations
WHO members have approved a $6.83 billion budget for the next two years, which will require a 20% hike in mandatory member fees.
The budget increase is needed because the WHO is being set up as the sole decisionmaker over public health globally through the proposed pandemic treaty and International Health Regulation (IHR) amendments, each of which reinforces the WHO’s authority and power through different avenues while erasing national sovereignty and human rights.
Baked into the pandemic treaty we also have One Health, which perfectly dovetails with The Great Reset narrative. When you add the treaty, the IHR amendments and One Health together, it becomes clear that the WHO is being set up as the de facto power center of the deep state, and this One World Government will rule everything.
*
June 5, 2023, the World Health Organization and the European Commission announced the launch of a “landmark digital health initiative to strengthen global health security.”1,2
As explained in the press release,3 as of this month, the WHO will establish a global COVID-19 vaccination certification system based on the European Union’s (EU) already existing Digital COVID Certificate (EU DCC) to “help facilitate global mobility and protect citizens across the world from ongoing and future health threats.”
Eventually, this vaccine passport system will be expanded into a Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN) run by the WHO that will include “a wide range of digital products to deliver better health for all.” The vaccine passport will also, in time, cover all recommended vaccinations, not just COVID-19.4 The press release continues:5
“This partnership will work to technically develop the WHO system with a staged approach to cover additional use cases, which may include, for example, the digitization of the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis. Expanding such digital solutions will be essential to deliver better health for citizens across the globe.
This cooperation is based on the shared values and principles of transparency and openness, inclusiveness, accountability, data protection and privacy, security, scalability at a global level, and equity. The European Commission and WHO will work together to encourage maximum global uptake and participation.”
Why Implement COVID Passport When Shots Don’t Work?
As reported by The Daily Sceptic, the announcement raises many questions:6
“Vaccine passports are controversial, even in the United Nations … June 30th 2021 … the UNESCO World Commission for the Ethics of Science and Technology and the UNESCO International Bioethics Committee released a joint statement warning that ‘any COVID-19 certificate … should account for scientific uncertainty regarding the degree of protection that specific vaccines, past infections and negative COVID-19 test results provide’ …
In light of these concerns, the UN agencies proposed that ‘a research program should be developed to assess their impact on society and public health, and the risks they might bring.’
The new press release from the WHO and EU makes no mention of the progress of this research program, or whether it has been established at all. Is it not necessary to ascertain the effectiveness and cost-benefit profile of an intervention before rolling it out globally and making it permanent?
Given how leaky COVID vaccines are, and how short-lived any protection offered by them might be — some studies even show the vaccinated suffering higher infection rates than the unvaccinated — it’s hard to imagine that vaccine passports delivered any real limitation of disease transmission.
But the WHO and EU don’t appear to regard this as a relevant question to ask. Is that because they blindly assume they are beneficial, or because they have other reasons for wanting to roll out this restrictive technology globally?”
The implementation of a vaccine passport system — which the WHO claimed it did not support when concerns were initially raised about it in 20217 — is a clear sign that the WHO fully expects to take the reins on global health, and that public health is not the primary incentive behind this power grab.
WHO Takeover Moves Full Speed Ahead
Already, WHO members have approved a $6.83 billion budget for the next two years (2024 through 2025), which will require a 20% hike in mandatory member fees.8,9 “Strategic priorities” that will receive large chunks of this funding include:10
Expanding universal health coverage to at least 1 billion people who do not currently have it
Ensuring 1 billion more people are “better protected from health emergencies”
Ensuring 1 billion more people can enjoy “better health and well-being”
Developing more effective and efficient WHO support to member countries
Eradicating polio (most likely through expanded vaccination programs)
That budget increase is also needed because the WHO is being set up as the sole decisionmaker over public health globally through the proposed pandemic treaty and International Health Regulation (IHR) amendments, each of which reinforces the WHO’s authority and power through different avenues while erasing national sovereignty and human rights.
If the WHO gets its way, it will no longer be a body that makes recommendations that countries can choose to follow. Rather, its “advice” will be akin to declarations of international law. Member states will be required to follow the WHO’s “recommendations” or face costly consequences.
Once the pandemic treaty and the IHR amendments are implemented, the WHO will have the authority to impose everything from climate lockdowns and border closures to mandatory vaccinations of all kinds. We’ve also warned that the WHO would implement a mandatory vaccine passport system for population control purposes, and with the announcement above, we can consider that a done deal.
The WHO will even have the authority to dictate what is truth and what is misinformation that must be censored. The WHO will essentially outlaw democracy worldwide because democracy cannot exist unless there is freedom of speech in public discourse.
Member states will have no choice but to censor what the WHO wants censored, because each country is also required to set up an enforcement agency to ensure the WHO’s edicts are followed nationwide, and that includes censorship activities.
For a further review of the WHO’s new Global Digital Health Certification Network, see John Campbell’s video review above.
It’s now beyond imperative that people understand where we’re headed, and that the COVID measures weren’t just responses to a given pandemic, but rather were the foundation for a totalitarian one world government where human rights and freedoms will no longer exist.
Indeed, the pandemic treaty redefines human rights as “health equity” and nothing else.The IHR amendments also eliminate individual rights and freedoms specifically.
IHR Article 3 is being amended as follows (strikethroughs in the text indicate that the text is to be deleted, and the additions or revisions are underlined in bold):
“The implementation of these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of personsbased on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development.”
In other words, bodily autonomy and personal choice are being replaced by one-size-fits-all medicine that has no regard for human dignity, human rights or fundamental freedoms. The right to opinions that differ from the WHO’s is also being removed on the national level.
IHR Article 2 is also being amended in such a way that the WHO will have the authority to take action on ANYTHING that has the “potential to impact public health,” and this includes everything from climate and pollution to agricultural land use and the food industry, as specified under the One Health agenda,11,12 which is baked into the pandemic treaty.
To understand what’s at stake, please review the article-by-article compilation of the proposed IHR amendments,13found here, and then compare that to the proposed treaty. A “Zero Draft” dated February 1, 2023, can be found here.14
As explained by the WHO back in 2021, the treaty is the “framework that recognizes the central role of the IHR.”15 So, these two instruments are designed and intended to work as a unit, with the treaty giving recognition to the IHR, and the IHR amendments stripping nations of their sovereignty.
But that’s not all. Baked into the pandemic treaty we also have One Health, which perfectly dovetails with The Great Reset narrative. When you add these three things together — the treaty, the IHR amendments and One Health — it becomes clear that the WHO is being set up as the de facto power center of the deep state, and this One World Government will rule everything.
Treaty Expands WHO’s Power Beyond Pandemics
As illustrated in the graphic16 below, the One Health agenda is based on the premise that a broad range of aspects of life and the environment have the potential to impact human health.
In addition to the life segments listed on this graph, the scope of One Health, according to a One Health Commission document,17 also includes communications, economics, civil society, global trade, commerce and security, public policy and regulation, research, noncommunicable diseases and much more.
Under the new treaty, the WHO will have unilateral power to make decisions about all of these areas, and its dictates will supersede and overrule any and all local, state and federal laws. In short, if the pandemic treaty is enacted, the WHO will not merely have the authority to dictate how countries prepare for and respond to pandemic threats: It will have the authority to dictate every aspect of our lives.
The WHO, in turn, is beholden to and does what its funders want, and the largest funder is Bill Gates (when you add together all his various donation sources). Gates, of course, is invested in all primary Great Reset necessities, including fake food, drugs, vaccines, surveillance and climate modification technologies.
One Health Is the Subversion of Holistic Health
As noted by David Bell, a senior scholar at Brownstone Institute, a public health physician and former medical officer and scientist at the WHO, the One Health agenda is really the subversion of the age-old holistic concept of health:18
“Ill health is a lever for fear, and death even more so, especially to those who believe that we are simply organic constructs that end in dust and decay. A cult feeding off these fears, holding that the entire biosphere is threatening us with diseases and death, would therefore have real potential for mass control.
Convince followers that humans are the poison that made this world so destructive, and you will also have a means to stoke hate against non-believers whilst adding guilt to the tools for compliance.
A cult based on fear of the world and the people who poisoned it, dressed up in philanthropy and virtue, has risen amongst us. Co-opting One Health terminology, it is now funded by the spoils of COVID, and empowered by technology that can take this medieval witch-hunting sect global.
The environment, everywhere, should be managed and protected for human benefit — physical, mental, and social. The One Health concept, centered in such common sense, was once no more than this. It is a rational way to express an age-old principle … Sanitation and improved nutrition will save more lives than the next round of profiteering brought to us by Pfizer.
However … One Health has been hijacked by self-proclaimed philanthropists … One Health is being corrupted in two ways, but for the same ends and by much the same people. Understanding one tells us about the people we are dealing with, the other reveals their motives.”
The One Health Ideology Is Anti-Human
As explained by Bell, One Health is an ideology that places human life and welfare on par with all other life, including plants and animals. This means that your life, and the lives of your children, are no more important than the lives of polar bears, trees, waterways and soil.
If your actions cause ecological harm, and the polar bear doesn’t, then you are the one who must be eliminated from the equation. That’s really the crux of this ideology. It’s not pro-environment but, rather, anti-human at its core.
“Within this ‘equitable’ worldview, humans become a pollutant,” Bell writes.19 “Ever-growing human populations have driven other species to extinction through environmental change, from the megafauna of ancient Australasia to the plummeting insect populations of modern Europe.
Humans become a plague upon the earth, and their restriction, impoverishment and death may therefore be justified for a greater good.
It is difficult for people to grasp that this is a guiding ideology of public figures, as it runs counter to most human moral systems or Natural Law … We must understand the ideology driving this movement, as they intend for us to follow their dictates, and they intend to indoctrinate our children.”
Expose the Barren Ideology of One Health
One Health is also designed to control the masses through fear. We’re constantly bombarded with predictions of doom and told we must be protected for our own good.
“Expanding this approach from a single virus to any aspect of the biosphere impacting human well-being, such as climate, provides an opportunity to use this totalitarian tool of population control to reshape society to the model that the purveyors of fear desire,” Bell notes, adding:
“Through amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and a new ‘pandemic treaty,’ the WHO is coupling this broad definition of One Health with a definition of ‘emergency’ that simply requires recognition of a threat rather than actual harm.
When applied to the WHO’s broad definition of health, ‘physical, mental and social well-being,’ almost all aspects of normal life could be included in its scope. Addressed through a proscriptive public health paradigm that encompasses global mandates, restrictions and censorship, and those running this agenda have an opportunity for unprecedented power …
[In] 2019, the WHO stated in its recommendations for pandemic influenza that border closures, quarantine, and prolonged business closures should never be undertaken in response to a pandemic. These measures would drive inequality and disproportionately harm low-income people, destroying both economies and social capital.
In 2020, refocusing priorities on a new constituency, the WHO promoted these same inequitable policies. The evidence did not change, but the constituency did. Wealthy people and corporations had become significant directive funders of WHO programs. Those who benefit from improved nutrition and sanitation cannot fund the WHO’s growing staff, but those profiting from the largesse of the COVID response can …
Evil is not defeated by hiding from it. It is fought by exposing the ideology that drives it, the greed, the lies, and the deceit … In the end, mad ideologues collapse under the weight of their own deceit and the shallowness of their dogmas.
The earth-mother religion of a corrupted One Health and the feudalist ambitions of its priests will be no different. We should not fear public health or a holistic view of the world. They are ours and can be a force for good. Rather, we should expose the hollowness of the people who would subvert them, driven by their own greed and barren ideologies.”
We’re Running Out of Time
Importantly, as noted by comedian Jimmy Dore in the featured video above, the pandemic treaty is not something that member nations must opt into. It’s an opt-out proposition. If a nation fails to opt out before the deadline, they automatically accept the treaty.
Based on the current timeline, the World Health Assembly (WHA) will vote on the pandemic treaty in May 2024, and it will take force 30 days later. That gives us just under a year and a half to get the U.S. to either opt out, or better yet, exit the WHO altogether.
The IHR amendments will also be voted on in May 2024. The 10-month deadline for member states to reject the amendments will expire in March 2025, and the amendments will come into force for any nation that did not reject them in May 2025. For any member that rejects the amendments, the 2005 IHR will apply.
Strangely enough, some of the IHR amendments have been adopted already. As reported by author and researcher James Roguski,20 they were adopted during the 75th World Health Assembly, May 27, 2022, even though nothing was signed. This is yet another testament to the rampant lawlessness and subversive tactics we’re dealing with.
Disturbingly, many Americans aren’t even aware that the U.S. government is about to relinquish our national sovereignty and everyone’s personal bodily autonomy to the WHO21 because mainstream media aren’t talking about it.
So, please, share this and any other articles you find on this subject with everyone you know, and continue to educate yourself. By far, these are the greatest threats to freedom the world has ever seen, and the risks apply evenly to everyone, no matter where you live.
Fact Checkers Take Advantage of Confusion
Keep in mind that while the IHR amendments and treaty address different areas of the WHO’s new power structure, they will work together to massively empower the WHO once both come into force. Also be aware that since the global takeover is happening on several fronts at the same time, it’s easy to get confused on the details, and this confusion can easily become fodder for fact checkers. As reported by The Defender:22
“The AP recently ‘fact-checked’ claims that the pandemic treaty endangers national sovereignty. According to the AP, it ‘does not overrule any nation’s ability to pass individual pandemic-related policies’ and ‘does not overrule any nations’ individual health or domestic policies.’ There would be ‘effectively no legal consequences for signatories who fail to adhere to it or violate its terms.’
The AP ‘fact-check’ doesn’t mention the proposed IHR amendments. [Author and researcher James] Roguski cited this as an example of the frequent conflation of the pandemic treaty and the IHR amendments. He said language eroding national sovereignty is not found in the pandemic treaty — but is found in the IHR amendments.
‘Everyone’s paying attention to the treaty,’ Roguski said. ‘They’re completely and totally cross-pollinating the details that are in the amendments, attributing them to the treaty, and getting ‘fact-checked’ to high heaven.”
Call on Congress to Withdraw US From the WHO
While the U.S. House and Senate have introduced identical bills to thwart the WHO’s power grab through the proposed pandemic treaty, that still might not protect us, because the treaty is specifically written to circumvent the Senate-approval process.23
A far more effective strategy would be for Congress to withhold its annual contributions to the WHO, and then withdraw the U.S. from the WHO altogether. I believe it may be worth supporting all these strategies. So, please, contact your representatives and urge them to:
Support the No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act24,25,26,27,28
Withhold funding for the WHO
Support U.S. withdrawal from the WHO
We also need to protect our nation against the IHR amendments. To that end, the World Council for Health has launched a global #StopTheWHO campaign. Here’s how you can get involved:29
Speak — Raise awareness on the ground and online. Use articles, posters, videos
Act — Campaign through rallies, political mobilization, legal notices and cases and similar campaigns
Collaborate with health freedom coalitions such as the World Council for Health
Engage global indigenous leadership to take a united stand against the WHO’s IHR
Activate people’s parliaments, legislatures or referendums to oppose the amendments
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Spend 5-10 min. to listen to an update from the front.
This video is sympathetic to Ukraine’s lost cause, but the desperate report you hear is censored by Western media.
Ukraine is constantly beaten back already by Russia’s forward positions.
Ukraine cannot even reach Russia’s first defensive lines – see this earlier update.
Ukraine is weak — completely incompetent – and completely losing everything for nothing.
Ukraine’s ridiculous attacks are neither “probing” or “shaping” operations, nor a real big offensive.
Sending forces – losing them – sending more forces – losing them too.
This is just a rambling waste of Ukraine’s best forces – all the best NATO had to supply and train.
Ukraine will NEVER get such a force again, as the one it is wasting away right now.
Ukraine has probably in less than a week lost more than 80 tanks and 200 armored vehicles. At this rate, Ukraine will after 15 days more have wasted 60% of the heavy equipment they received, still gotten nowhere – and be too thin to resist a devastating Russian counterattack.
But what else could you expect?
Ukraine is running out of everything – even brainpower.
Ukraine is running out of air defense.
Ukraine is running out of artillery ammunition.
Ukraine is running out of its last aircraft and helicopters.
Russia has lots and lots of cheap drones, guided bombs, and precision missiles to send from outside the reach of Ukraine.
Ukraine’s ammunition and fuel depots are being blown up all the time by Russian air attacks.
As Ukrainian front-line troops are grinded to nothing, Ukraine’s rotations of troops to the frontline is being destroyed by Russian air attacks.
All over Ukraine, Ukrainian bunkers and command posts incl. their content of NATO officers are being destroyed by Russian air attacks.
Ukraine’s electrical power supply is being destroyed by Russian air attacks, and Ukraine’s logistics are breaking down as electrical trains are deprived of electricity.
We don’t even know if Ukraine’s top-general Zaluzhnyi is mentally capable of leading the forces after reportedly suffering an air attack.
Ukraine is running an inferior force in numbers and firepower up against Russian superiority in defensive positions, fire positions, trenches, and minefields, artillery and air support.
Russia has superiority in numbers. Russia has superiority in heavy weapons, tanks, armored vehicles, and artillery. Russia has a navy, Ukraine just lost its last war ship.
Russia has superiority in logistics. Ukraine is reduced to a total population of 18-20 million.
Russia has got 15 million soldiers which it could mobilize, if need be. Russia has even gained superiority over NATO in sustained industrial military production.
As we could expect, neocon ex-general & secretary of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen now speaks of a NATO force to prevent Ukraine from collapsing.
But even with Americans, Poles, and Danes, any NATO intervention force will be weaker than the Ukrainian army was.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Karsten Riise is a Master of Science (Econ) from Copenhagen Business School and has a university degree in Spanish Culture and Languages from Copenhagen University. He is the former Senior Vice President Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Mercedes-Benz in Denmark and Sweden.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
