Our Asia Pacific Website

November 27th, 2020 by Global Research News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Our Asia Pacific Website

Subscribe to the Global Research Newsletter

November 6th, 2020 by Global Research News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Subscribe to the Global Research Newsletter

Nuestro sitio en español: Globalizacion.ca

November 5th, 2020 by Global Research News

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on Nuestro sitio en español: Globalizacion.ca

Pour Accéder à la Version Mobile de Mondialisation.ca

August 14th, 2017 by Global Research News

Nous faisons face présentement à une problème technique.

Pour accéder à la version mobile de mondialisation.ca, cliquez sur le Menu principal de Globalresearch.ca (version mobile), (en haut à gauche) et ensuite cliquez sur Mondialisation.ca.

 

A partir de la semaine prochaine le problème technique devrait être résolu.

Amitiés à tous nos lecteurs

 

  • Posted in Desktop Only, English
  • Comments Off on Pour Accéder à la Version Mobile de Mondialisation.ca

Today’s Most Popular Stories on Global Research

August 22nd, 2015 by Global Research News

  • Posted in Desktop Only, English
  • Comments Off on Today’s Most Popular Stories on Global Research

GR’s Ukraine Report: 800+ articles

August 22nd, 2015 by Global Research News

Fighting Lies and Searching for Truths

July 19th, 2015 by Global Research

The world is globalizing and information has become more accessible to more people than ever before. We are, indeed, in unprecedented times, and we face unprecedented challenges.

The aims of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) and Global Research are to battle the tidal waves of misinformation and propaganda washing our minds on a daily basis. We have separated ourselves from the corporate controlled mainstream news, whose only objective is to serve their corporate masters. We take no assistance from the major foundations such as Rockefeller, Ford, and MacArthur, who act as patrons (and thus pacifiers) of the alternative and critical voices challenging the forces of globalization.

We do this in order to remain an independent voice, challenging all that needs to be challenged and exposing all that remains in the dark. Bringing light to a dimly lit world is no easy task, and though the aim and method is “independence,” we are, in fact, entirely dependent upon YOU, our readers. Without your support, we cannot continue our operations nor expand our horizons and opportunities. Global Research is indebted to our readers, and we are here for you and because of you. If you would like Global Research to continue and to grow, we need your support now more than ever.

By making a donation  to Global Research, you  assist journalists, researchers and contributors who have either lost their jobs with the mainstream media or who have been excluded from employment opportunities as professional journalists for their pledge to the truth. We send our thanks to all who have contributed so far by donating or becoming a member!

The mainstream media is owned by bankers and corporate kingpins. Not only that, but it has been historically and presently infiltrated by covert government agencies, seeking to deceive and propagandize their agendas. The CIA has long had associations with major mainstream news publications. By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc. The CIA even ran a training program “to teach its agents to be journalists,” who were “then placed in major news organizations with help from management.”

At Global Research, we seek to not only expose and criticize the larger picture, but to point the finger at the media, itself, and examine who is lying, why they lie, and how they get away with it.

To continue in our endeavours, we need our readers to continue in their support.

One important and helpful thing that all of our readers can do is to help spread our name and information by “sharing and  “liking” our Facebook page here. We post articles daily that will appear in your news feed so that you don’t have to come to us, we can bring our information straight to you. “Like” our page and recommend us to your friends. Every bit helps! You can also subscribe to our RSS feed

You can also support us by continuing to send us your much needed donations which allow us to continue our day-to-day operations and help us expand our scope and content.

Supporting Global Research is supporting the cause of truth and the fight against media disinformation.

Thank you.

The Global Research Team

FOR ONLINE DONATIONS

For online donations, please click below:

VISIT THE DONATION PAGE

FOR DONATIONS BY MAIL

To send your donation by mail, kindly send your cheque or international money order, made out to CRG, to our postal address:

Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

PO Box 55019
11, Notre-Dame Ouest,

Montreal, QC, H2Y 4A7
CANADA

FOR DONATIONS BY FAX
For payment by fax, please print the credit card fax authorization form and fax your order and credit card details to Global Research at 514 656 5294

You can also support us by purchasing books from our store! Click to browse our titles.

Global Research Articles on the Environment

December 22nd, 2014 by Global Research News

Analysis on Climate Change and Global Warming. 100+ GR Articles

December 9th, 2014 by Global Research News

  • Posted in Desktop Only, English
  • Comments Off on Analysis on Climate Change and Global Warming. 100+ GR Articles

Global Research’s Ukraine Report

November 21st, 2014 by Global Research News

Global Research Editor’s Note

We bring to the attention of our readers the following text of Osama bin Laden’s interview with Ummat, a Pakistani daily, published in Karachi on September 28, 2001. It was translated into English by the BBC World Monitoring Service and made public on September 29, 2001.

The authenticity of this interview remains to be confirmed. It is available in recognized electronic news archives including the BBC. Its authenticity has not been questioned.  

The interview tends to demystify the Osama bin Laden persona.

Osama bin Laden categorically denies his involvement in the 9/11 attacks.  Bin Laden’s statements in this interview are markedly different from those made in the alleged Osama video tapes.

In this interview, Osama bin Laden exhibits an understanding of US foreign policy. He expresses his views regarding the loss of life on 9/11. He focusses on CIA support to the narcotics trade.

He also makes statements as to who, in his opinion, might be the likely perpetrator of  the September 11 attacks.

This is an important text which has not been brought to the attention of Western public opinion.

We have highlighted key sections of this interview.

It is our hope that the text of this interview, published on 28 September 2001 barely a week before the onset of the war on Afghanistan, will contribute to a better understanding of the history of Al Qaeda, the role of Osama bin Laden and the tragic events of September 11, 2001.

This interview is published for informational purposes only. GR does not in any way endorse the statements in this interview.

Michel  Chossudovsky, September 9, 2014


Full text of September 2001 Pakistani paper’s “exclusive” interview with Usamah Bin-Ladin

Ummat (in Urdu)

translated from Urdu

Karachi, 28 September 2001, pp. 1 and 7.

Ummat’s introduction

Kabul: Prominent Arab mojahed holy warrior Usamah Bin-Ladin has said that he or his al-Qa’idah group has nothing to do with the 11 September suicidal attacks in Washington and New York. He said the US government should find the attackers within the country. In an exclusive interview with daily “Ummat”, he said these attacks could be the act of those who are part of the American system and are rebelling against it and working for some other system. Or, Usamah said, this could be the act of those who want to make the current century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity. Or, the American Jews, who are opposed to President Bush ever since the Florida elections, might be the masterminds of this act. There is also a great possibility of the involvement of US intelligence agencies, which need billions of dollars worth of funds every year. He said there is a government within the government in the United States.

The secret agencies, he said, should be asked as to who are behind the attacks. Usamah said support for attack on Afghanistan was a matter of need for some Muslim countries and compulsion for others. However, he said, he was thankful to the courageous people of Pakistan who erected a bulwark before the wrong forces. He added that the Islamic world was attaching great expectations with Pakistan and, in time of need, “we will protect this bulwark by sacrificing of lives”.

Following is the interview in full detail:

Ummat: You have been accused of involvement in the attacks in New York and Washington. What do you want to say about this? If you are not involved, who might be?

Usamah [Osama bin Laden]: In the name of Allah, the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the earth as an abode for peace, for the whole mankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad for our guidance. I am thankful to the Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and Momin true Muslim people of Pakistan who refused to believe in lie of the demon.

I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people.

Such a practice is forbidden ever in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children, and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel.

There is also a warning for those Muslim countries, which witnessed all these as a silent spectator. What had earlier been done to the innocent people of Iraq, Chechnya, and Bosnia?

Only one conclusion could be derived from the indifference of the United States and the West to these acts of terror and the patronage of the tyrants by these powers that America is an anti-Islamic power and it is patronizing the anti-Islamic forces. Its friendship with the Muslim countries is just a show, rather deceit. By enticing or intimidating these countries, the United States is forcing them to play a role of its choice. Put a glance all around and you will see that the slaves of the United States are either rulers or enemies of Muslims .

The US has no friends, nor does it want to keep any because the prerequisite of friendship is to come to the level of the friend or consider him at par with you. America does not want to see anyone equal to it. It expects slavery from others. Therefore, other countries are either its slaves or subordinates.

However, our case is different. We have pledged slavery to God Almighty alone and after this pledge there is no possibility to become the slave of someone else. If we do that, it will be disregardful to both our Sustainer and his fellow beings. Most of the world nations upholding their freedom are the religious ones, which are the enemies of United States, or the latter itself considers them as its enemies. Or the countries, which do not agree to become its slaves, such as China, Iran, Libya, Cuba, Syria, and the former Russia as received .

Whoever committed the act of 11 September are not the friends of the American people. I have already said that we are against the American system, not against its people, whereas in these attacks, the common American people have been killed.

According to my information, the death toll is much higher than what the US government has stated. But the Bush administration does not want the panic to spread. The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the US system, but are dissenting against it. Or those who are working for some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own civilization, nation, country, or ideology could survive. They can be any one, from Russia to Israel and from India to Serbia. In the US itself, there are dozens of well-organized and well-equipped groups, which are capable of causing a large-scale destruction. Then you cannot forget the American Jews, who are annoyed with President Bush ever since the elections in Florida and want to avenge him.

Then there are intelligence agencies in the US, which require billions of dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year. This funding issue was not a big problem till the existence of the former Soviet Union but after that the budget of these agencies has been in danger.

They needed an enemy. So, they first started propaganda against Usamah and Taleban and then this incident happened. You see, the Bush administration approved a budget of 40bn dollars. Where will this huge amount go? It will be provided to the same agencies, which need huge funds and want to exert their importance.

Now they will spend the money for their expansion and for increasing their importance. I will give you an example. Drug smugglers from all over the world are in contact with the US secret agencies. These agencies do not want to eradicate narcotics cultivation and trafficking because their importance will be diminished. The people in the US Drug Enforcement Department are encouraging drug trade so that they could show performance and get millions of dollars worth of budget. General Noriega was made a drug baron by the CIA and, in need, he was made a scapegoat. In the same way, whether it is President Bush or any other US president, they cannot bring Israel to justice for its human rights abuses or to hold it accountable for such crimes. What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United Sates? That secret government must be asked as to who made the attacks.

Ummat: A number of world countries have joined the call of the United States for launching an attack on Afghanistan. These also include a number of Muslim countries. Will Al-Qa’idah declare a jihad against these countries as well?

Usamah: I must say that my duty is just to awaken the Muslims; to tell them as to what is good for them and what is not. What does Islam says and what the enemies of Islam want?

Al-Qa’idah was set up to wage a jihad against infidelity, particularly to encounter the onslaught of the infidel countries against the Islamic states. Jihad is the sixth undeclared element of Islam. The first five being the basic holy words of Islam, prayers, fast, pilgrimage to Mecca, and giving alms Every anti-Islamic person is afraid of it. Al-Qa’idah wants to keep this element alive and active and make it part of the daily life of the Muslims. It wants to give it the status of worship. We are not against any Islamic country nor we consider a war against an Islamic country as jihad.

We are in favour of armed jihad only against those infidel countries, which are killing innocent Muslim men, women, and children just because they are Muslims. Supporting the US act is the need of some Muslim countries and the compulsion of others. However, they should think as to what will remain of their religious and moral position if they support the attack of the Christians and the Jews on a Muslim country like Afghanistan. The orders of Islamic shari’ah jurisprudence for such individuals, organizations, and countries are clear and all the scholars of the Muslim brotherhood are unanimous on them. We will do the same, which is being ordered by the Amir ol-Momenin the commander of the faithful Mola Omar and the Islamic scholars. The hearts of the people of Muslim countries are beating with the call of jihad. We are grateful to them.

Ummat: The losses caused in the attacks in New York and Washington have proved that giving an economic blow to the US is not too difficult. US experts admit that a few more such attacks can bring down the American economy. Why is al-Qa’idah not targeting their economic pillars?

Usamah: I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are against the system, which makes other nations slaves of the United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom. This system is totally in control of the American Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States. It is simply that the American people are themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the principles and laws laid by them. So, the punishment should reach Israel. In fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the US is not uttering a single word.

Ummat: Why is harm not caused to the enemies of Islam through other means, apart from the armed struggle? For instance, inciting the Muslims to boycott Western products, banks, shipping lines, and TV channels.

Usamah: The first thing is that Western products could only be boycotted when the Muslim fraternity is fully awakened and organized. Secondly, the Muslim companies should become self-sufficient in producing goods equal to the products of Western companies. Economic boycott of the West is not possible unless economic self-sufficiency is attained and substitute products are brought out. You see that wealth is scattered all across the Muslim world but not a single TV channel has been acquired which can preach Islamic injunctions according to modern requirements and attain an international influence. Muslim traders and philanthropists should make it a point that if the weapon of public opinion is to be used, it is to be kept in the hand. Today’s world is of public opinion and the fates of nations are determined through its pressure. Once the tools for building public opinion are obtained, everything that you asked for can be done.

Ummat: The entire propaganda about your struggle has so far been made by the Western media. But no information is being received from your sources about the network of Al-Qa’idah and its jihadi successes. Would you comment?

Usamah: In fact, the Western media is left with nothing else. It has no other theme to survive for a long time. Then we have many other things to do. The struggle for jihad and the successes are for the sake of Allah and not to annoy His bondsmen. Our silence is our real propaganda. Rejections, explanations, or corrigendum only waste your time and through them, the enemy wants you to engage in things which are not of use to you. These things are pulling you away from your cause.

The Western media is unleashing such a baseless propaganda, which make us surprise but it reflects on what is in their hearts and gradually they themselves become captive of this propaganda. They become afraid of it and begin to cause harm to themselves. Terror is the most dreaded weapon in modern age and the Western media is mercilessly using it against its own people. It can add fear and helplessness in the psyche of the people of Europe and the United States. It means that what the enemies of the United States cannot do, its media is doing that. You can understand as to what will be the performance of the nation in a war, which suffers from fear and helplessness.

Ummat: What will the impact of the freeze of al-Qa’idah accounts by the US?

Usamah: God opens up ways for those who work for Him. Freezing of accounts will not make any difference for Al-Qa’idah or other jihad groups. With the grace of Allah, al-Qa’idah has more than three such alternative financial systems, which are all separate and totally independent from each other. This system is operating under the patronage of those who love jihad. What to say of the United States, even the combined world cannot budge these people from their path.

These people are not in hundreds but in thousands and millions. Al-Qa’idah comprises of such modern educated youths who are aware of the cracks inside the Western financial system as they are aware of the lines in their hands. These are the very flaws of the Western fiscal system, which are becoming a noose for it and this system could not recuperate in spite of the passage of so many days.

Ummat: Are there other safe areas other than Afghanistan, where you can continue jihad?

Usamah: There are areas in all parts of the world where strong jihadi forces are present, from Indonesia to Algeria, from Kabul to Chechnya, from Bosnia to Sudan, and from Burma to Kashmir. Then it is not the problem of my person. I am helpless fellowman of God, constantly in the fear of my accountability before God. It is not the question of Usamah but of Islam and, in Islam too, of jihad. Thanks to God, those waging a jihad can walk today with their heads raised. Jihad was still present when there was no Usamah and it will remain as such even when Usamah is no longer there. Allah opens up ways and creates loves in the hearts of people for those who walk on the path of Allah with their lives, property, and children. Believe it, through jihad, a man gets everything he desires. And the biggest desire of a Muslim is the after life. Martyrdom is the shortest way of attaining an eternal life.

Ummat: What do you say about the Pakistan government policy on Afghanistan attack?

Usamah: We are thankful to the Momin and valiant people of Pakistan who erected a blockade in front of the wrong forces and stood in the first file of battle. Pakistan is a great hope for the Islamic brotherhood. Its people are awakened, organized, and rich in the spirit of faith. They backed Afghanistan in its war against the Soviet Union and extended every help to the mojahedin and the Afghan people. Then these are the same Pakistanis who are standing shoulder by shoulder with the Taleban. If such people emerge in just two countries, the domination of the West will diminish in a matter of days. Our hearts beat with Pakistan and, God forbid, if a difficult time comes we will protect it with our blood. Pakistan is sacred for us like a place of worship. We are the people of jihad and fighting for the defence of Pakistan is the best of all jihads to us. It does not matter for us as to who rules Pakistan. The important thing is that the spirit of jihad is alive and stronger in the hearts of the Pakistani people.

Copyright Ummat in Urdu, BBC translation in English, 2001

Read about Osama Bin Laden in Michel Chossudovsky’s international best-seller

According to Chossudovsky, the  “war on terrorism” is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

Order Directly from Global Research

original

America’s “War on Terrorism”

by Michel
Chossudovsky

Click to Get the Latest Global Research Articles

December 23rd, 2013 by Global Research News

  • Posted in Desktop Only, English
  • Comments Off on Click to Get the Latest Global Research Articles

Click for Latest Global Research News

November 22nd, 2013 by Global Research News

Today’s Most Popular Stories

October 15th, 2013 by Global Research News

A deluge of articles have been quickly put into circulation defending France’s military intervention in the African nation of Mali. TIME’s article, “The Crisis in Mali: Will French Intervention Stop the Islamist Advance?” decides that old tricks are the best tricks, and elects the tiresome “War on Terror” narrative.TIME claims the intervention seeks to stop “Islamist” terrorists from overrunning both Africa and all of Europe. Specifically, the article states:

“…there is a (probably well-founded) fear in France that a radical Islamist Mali threatens France most of all, since most of the Islamists are French speakers and many have relatives in France. (Intelligence sources in Paris have told TIME that they’ve identified aspiring jihadis leaving France for northern Mali to train and fight.) Al-Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), one of the three groups that make up the Malian Islamist alliance and which provides much of the leadership, has also designated France — the representative of Western power in the region — as a prime target for attack.”

What TIME elects not to tell readers is that Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is closely allied to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG whom France intervened on behalf of during NATO’s 2011 proxy-invasion of Libya – providing weapons, training, special forces and even aircraft to support them in the overthrow of Libya’s government.

As far back as August of 2011, Bruce Riedel out of the corporate-financier funded think-tank, the Brookings Institution, wrote “Algeria will be next to fall,” where he gleefully predicted success in Libya would embolden radical elements in Algeria, in particular AQIM. Between extremist violence and the prospect of French airstrikes, Riedel hoped to see the fall of the Algerian government. Ironically Riedel noted:

Algeria has expressed particular concern that the unrest in Libya could lead to the development of a major safe haven and sanctuary for al-Qaeda and other extremist jihadis.

And thanks to NATO, that is exactly what Libya has become – a Western sponsored sanctuary for Al-Qaeda. AQIM’s headway in northern Mali and now French involvement will see the conflict inevitably spill over into Algeria. It should be noted that Riedel is a co-author of “Which Path to Persia?” which openly conspires to arm yet another US State Department-listed terrorist organization (list as #28), the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) to wreak havoc across Iran and help collapse the government there – illustrating a pattern of using clearly terroristic organizations, even those listed as so by the US State Department, to carry out US foreign policy.Geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar noted a more direct connection between LIFG and AQIM in an Asia Times piece titled, “How al-Qaeda got to rule in Tripoli:”

“Crucially, still in 2007, then al-Qaeda’s number two, Zawahiri, officially announced the merger between the LIFG and al-Qaeda in the Islamic Mahgreb (AQIM). So, for all practical purposes, since then, LIFG/AQIM have been one and the same – and Belhaj was/is its emir. “

“Belhaj,” referring to Hakim Abdul Belhaj, leader of LIFG in Libya, led with NATO support, arms, funding, and diplomatic recognition, the overthrowing of Muammar Qaddafi and has now plunged the nation into unending racist and tribal, genocidal infighting. This intervention has also seen the rebellion’s epicenter of Benghazi peeling off from Tripoli as a semi-autonomous “Terror-Emirate.” Belhaj’s latest campaign has shifted to Syria where he was admittedly on the Turkish-Syrian border pledging weapons, money, and fighters to the so-called “Free Syrian Army,” again, under the auspices of NATO support.

Image: NATO’s intervention in Libya has resurrected listed-terrorist organization and Al Qaeda affiliate, LIFG. It had previously fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, and now has fighters, cash and weapons, all courtesy of NATO, spreading as far west as Mali, and as far east as Syria. The feared “global Caliphate” Neo-Cons have been scaring Western children with for a decade is now taking shape via US-Saudi, Israeli, and Qatari machinations, not “Islam.” In fact, real Muslims have paid the highest price in fighting this real “war against Western-funded terrorism.”

….

LIFG, which with French arms, cash, and diplomatic support, is now invading northern Syria on behalf of NATO’s attempted regime change there, officially merged with Al Qaeda in 2007 according to the US Army’s West Point Combating Terrorism Center (CTC). According to the CTC, AQIM and LIFG share not only ideological goals, but strategic and even tactical objectives. The weapons LIFG received most certainly made their way into the hands of AQIM on their way through the porous borders of the Sahara Desert and into northern Mali.

In fact, ABC News reported in their article, “Al Qaeda Terror Group: We ‘Benefit From’ Libyan Weapons,” that:

A leading member of an al Qaeda-affiliated terror group indicated the organization may have acquired some of the thousands of powerful weapons that went missing in the chaos of the Libyan uprising, stoking long-held fears of Western officials.”We have been one of the main beneficiaries of the revolutions in the Arab world,” Mokhtar Belmokhtar, a leader of the north Africa-based al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb [AQIM], told the Mauritanian news agency ANI Wednesday. “As for our benefiting from the [Libyan] weapons, this is a natural thing in these kinds of circumstances.”

It is no coincidence that as the Libyan conflict was drawing to a conclusion, conflict erupted in northern Mali. It is part of a premeditated geopolitical reordering that began with toppling Libya, and since then, using it as a springboard for invading other targeted nations, including Mali, Algeria, and Syria with heavily armed, NATO-funded and aided terrorists.

French involvement may drive AQIM and its affiliates out of northern Mali, but they are almost sure to end up in Algeria, most likely by design.

Algeria was able to balk subversion during the early phases of the US-engineered “Arab Spring” in 2011, but it surely has not escaped the attention of the West who is in the midst of transforming a region stretching from Africa to Beijing and Moscow’s doorsteps – and in a fit of geopolitical schizophrenia – using terrorists both as a casus belli to invade and as an inexhaustible mercenary force to do it.

  • Posted in Desktop Only, English
  • Comments Off on The Geopolitical Reordering of Africa: US Covert Support to Al Qaeda in Northern Mali, France “Comes to the Rescue”

Latest Global Research Articles. Subscribe to GR’s RSS Feed

December 30th, 2012 by Global Research News

  • Posted in Desktop Only, English
  • Comments Off on Latest Global Research Articles. Subscribe to GR’s RSS Feed

Salafism and the CIA: Destabilizing the Russian Federation?

September 14th, 2012 by F. William Engdahl

Part I: Syria comes to the Russian Caucasus

On August 28 Sheikh Said Afandi, acknowledged spiritual leader of the Autonomous Russian Republic of Dagestan, was assassinated. A jihadist female suicide bomber managed to enter his house and detonate an explosive device.

The murder target had been carefully selected. Sheikh Afandi, a seventy-five-year old Sufi Muslim leader, had played the critical role in attempting to bring about reconciliation in Dagestan between jihadist Salafi Sunni Muslims and other factions, many of whom in Dagestan see themselves as followers of Sufi. With no replacement of his moral stature and respect visible, authorities fear possible outbreak of religious war in the tiny Russian autonomous republic.[1]

The police reported that the assassin was an ethnic Russian woman who had converted to Islam and was linked to an Islamic fundamentalist or Salafist insurgency against Russia and regional governments loyal to Moscow in the autonomous republics and across the volatile Muslim-populated North Caucasus region.

Ethnic Muslim populations in this region of Russia and of the former Soviet Union, including Uzbekistan, Kyrgystan and into China’s Xinjiang Province, have been the target of various US and NATO intelligence operations since the Cold War era ended in 1990. Washington sees manipulation of Muslim groups as the vehicle to bring uncontrollable chaos to Russia and Central Asia. It’s being carried out by some of the same organizations engaged in creating chaos and destruction inside Syria against the government of Bashar Al-Assad. In a real sense, as Russian security services clearly understand, if they don’t succeed in stopping the Jihadists insurgency in Syria, it will come home to them via the Caucasus.

The latest Salafist murders of Sufi and other moderate Muslim leaders in the Caucasus are apparently part of what is becoming ever clearer as perhaps the most dangerous US intelligence operation ever—playing globally with Muslim fundamentalism.

Previously US and allied intelligence services had played fast and loose with religious organizations or beliefs in one or another country. What makes the present situation particularly dangerous—notably since the decision in Washington to unleash the misnamed Arab Spring upheavals that began in Tunisia late 2010, spreading like a brushfire across the entire Islamic world from Afghanistan across Central Asia to Morocco—is the incalculable wave upon wave of killing, hatreds, destruction of entire cultures that Washington has unleashed in the name of that elusive dream named “democracy.” They do this using alleged Al-Qaeda groups, Saudi Salafists or Wahhabites, or using disciples of Turkey’s Fethullah Gülen Movement to ignite fires of religious hatred within Islam and against other faiths that could take decades to extinguish. It could easily spill over into a new World War.

Fundamentalism comes to Caucasus

Following the dissolution of the USSR, radical Afghanistani Mujahadeen, Islamists from Saudi Arabia, from Turkey, Pakistan and other Islamic countries flooded into the Muslim regions of the former USSR. One of the best-organized of these was the Gülen Movement of Fethullah Gülen, leader of a global network of Islamic schools and reported to be the major policy influence on Turkey’s Erdogan AKP party.

Gülen was quick to establish The International Dagestani-Turkish College in Dagestan. During the chaotic days after the Soviet collapse, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation officially registered and permitted unfettered activity for a variety of Islamic foundations and organizations. These included the League of the Islamic World, the World Muslim Youth Assembly, the reportedly Al-Qaeda friendly Saudi foundation ‘Ibrahim ben Abd al-Aziz al-Ibrahim.’ The blacklist also included Al-Haramein a Saudi foundation reported tied to Al-Qaeda, and IHH, [2] a Turkish organization banned in Germany, that allegedly raised funds for jihadi fighters in Bosnia, Chechnya, and Afghanistan, and was charged by French intelligence of ties to Al Qaeda.[3] Many of these charities were covers for fundamentalist Salafists with their own special agenda.

As many of the foreign Islamists in Chechnya and Dagestan were found involved in fomenting the regional unrest and civil war, Russian authorities withdrew permission of most to run schools and institutions. Throughout the North Caucasus at the time of the Chechyn war in the late 1990’s, there were more than two dozen Islamic institutes, some 200 madrassas and numerous maktabas (Koranic study schools) present at almost all mosques.

The International Dagestani-Turkish College was one that was forced to close its doors in Dagestan. The College was run by the Fethullah Gülen organization.[4]

At the point of the Russian crackdown on the spread of Salafist teaching inside Russia at the end of the 1990’s, there was an exodus of hundreds of young Dagestani and Chechyn Muslim students to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other places in The Middle east, reportedly to receive training with the Gülen movement and various Saudi-financed organizations, including Salafists. [5] It is believed in Russia that the students trained by Gülen supporters or Saudi and other Salafist fundamentalist centers then were sent back to Dagestan and the North Caucasus to spread their radical strain of Islam.

By 2005 the situation in the Caucasus was so influenced by this Salafist intervention that the Chechen Salafist, Doku Umarov, cited by the UN Security Council for links to Al-Qaeda,[6] unilaterally declared creation of what he called the Caucasus Emirate, announcing he planned to establish an Islamic state under Sharia law encompassing the entire North Caucasus region including Dagestan. He modestly proclaimed himself Emir of the Caucasus Emirate. [7]

*  *  *

WWIII Scenario

*  *  *

 

Part II: Salafism at war with Sufi tradition

Salafism, known in Saudi Arabia as Wahhabism, is a fundamentalist strain of Islam which drew world attention and became notorious in March 2001 just weeks before the attacks of September 11. That was when the Salafist Taliban government in Afghanistan willfully dynamited and destroyed the historic gigantic Buddhas of Bamiyan on the ancient Silk Road, religious statues dating from the 6th Century. The Taliban Salafist leaders also banned as “un-islamic” all forms of imagery, music and sports, including television, in accordance with what they considered a strict interpretation of Sharia.

Afghani sources reported that the order to destroy the Buddhas was made by Saudi-born jihadist Wahhabite, Osama bin Laden, who ultimately convinced Mullah Omar, Taliban supreme leader at the time to execute the act.[8]

Before and…After Salafist Taliban …

While Sufis incorporate the worship of saints and theatrical ceremonial prayers into their practice, Salafis condemn as idolatry any non-traditional forms of worship. They also call for the establishment of Islamic political rule and strict Sharia law. Sufism is home to the great spiritual and musical heritage of Islam, said by Islamic scholars to be the inner, mystical, or psycho-spiritual dimension of Islam, going back centuries.

As one Sufi scholar described the core of Sufism, “While all Muslims believe that they are on the pathway to God and will become close to God in Paradise–after death and the ‘Final Judgment’– Sufis believe as well that it is possible to become close to God and to experience this closeness–while one is alive. Furthermore, the attainment of the knowledge that comes with such intimacy with God, Sufis assert, is the very purpose of the creation. Here they mention the hadith qudsi in which God states, ‘I was a hidden treasure and I loved that I be known, so I created the creation in order to be known.’ Hence for the Sufis there is already a momentum, a continuous attraction on their hearts exerted by God, pulling them, in love, towards God.” [9]

The mystical Islamic current of Sufism and its striving to become close to or one with God is in stark contrast to the Jihadist Salafi or Wahhabi current that is armed with deadly weapons, preaches a false doctrine of jihad, and a perverse sense of martyrdom, committing countless acts of violence. Little wonder that the victims of Salafist Jihads are mostly other pacific forms of Islam including most especially Sufis.

The respected seventy-five year old Afandi had publicly denounced Salafist Islamic fundamentalism. His murder followed a July 19 coordinated attack on two high-ranking muftis in the Russian Volga Republic of Tatarstan. Both victims were state-approved religious leaders who had attacked radical Islam. This latest round of murders opens a new front in the Salafist war against Russia, namely attacks on moderate Sufi Muslim leaders.

Whether or not Dagestan now descends into internal religious civil war that then spreads across the geopolitically sensitive Russian Caucasus is not yet certain. What is almost certain is that the same circles who have been feeding violence and terror inside Syria against the regime of Alawite President Bashar al-Assad are behind the killing of Sheikh Afandi as well as sparking related acts of terror or unrest across Russia’s Muslim-populated Caucasus. In a very real sense it represents Russia’s nightmare scenario of “Syria coming to Russia.” It demonstrates dramatically why Putin has made such a determined effort to stop a descent into a murderous hell in Syria.

Salafism and the CIA

The existence of the so-called jihadist Salafi brand of Islam in Dagestan is quite recent. It has also been deliberately imported. Salafism is sometimes also called the name of the older Saudi-centered Wahhabism. Wahhabism is a minority originally-Bedouin form of the faith originating within Islam, dominant in Saudi Arabia since the 1700’s.

Irfan Al-Alawi and Stephen Schwartz of the Centre for Islamic Pluralism give the following description of Saudi conditions under the rigid Wahhabi brand of Islam:

Women living under Saudi rule must wear the abaya, or total body cloak, and niqab, the face veil; they have limited opportunities for schooling and careers; they are prohibited from driving vehicles; are banned from social contact with men not relatives, and all personal activity must be supervised including opening bank accounts, by a male family member or “guardian.” These Wahhabi rules are enforced by a mutawiyin, or morals militia, also known as “the religious police,” officially designated the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (CPVPV) who patrol Saudi cities, armed with leather-covered sticks which they freely used against those they considered wayward. They raid homes looking for alcohol and drugs, and harassed non-Wahhabi Muslims as well as believers in other faiths.” [10]

It’s widely reported that the obscenely opulent and morally-perhaps-not-entirely-of- the-highest-standards Saudi Royal Family made a Faustian deal with Wahhabite leaders. The deal supposedly, was that the Wahhabists are free to export their fanatical brand of Islam around to the Islamic populations of the world in return for agreeing to leave the Saudi Royals alone.[11] There are, however, other dark and dirty spoons stirring the Wahhabite-Salafist Saudi stew.

Little known is the fact that the present form of aggressive Saudi Wahhabism, in reality a kind of fusion between imported jihadi Salafists from Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and the fundamentalist Saudi Wahhabites. Leading Salafist members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood were introduced into the Saudi Kingdom in the 1950’s by the CIA in a complex series of events, when Nasser cracked down on the Muslim Brotherhood following an assassination attempt. By the 1960’s an influx of Egyptian members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Saudi Arabia fleeing Nasserite repression, had filled many of the leading teaching posts in Saudi religious schools. One student there was a young well-to-do Saudi, Osama bin Laden.  [12]

During the Third Reich, Hitler Germany had supported the Muslim Brotherhood as a weapon against the British in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East. Marc Erikson describes the Nazi roots of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood thus:

…as Italian and German fascism sought greater stakes in the Middle East in the 1930s and ’40s to counter British and French controlling power, close collaboration between fascist agents and Islamist leaders ensued. During the 1936-39 Arab Revolt, Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, head of German military intelligence, sent agents and money to support the Palestine uprising against the British, as did Muslim Brotherhood founder and “supreme guide” Hassan al-Banna. A key individual in the fascist-Islamist nexus and go-between for the Nazis and al-Banna became the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini.[13]

After the defeat of Germany, British Intelligence moved in to take over control of the Muslim Brotherhood. Ultimately, for financial and other reasons, the British decided to hand their assets within the Muslim Brotherhood over to their CIA colleagues in the 1950s. [14]

According to former US Justice Department Nazi researcher John Loftus,  “during the 1950s, the CIA evacuated the Nazis of the Muslim Brotherhood to Saudi Arabia. Now, when they arrived in Saudi Arabia, some of the leading lights of the Muslim Brotherhood, like Dr Abdullah Azzam, became the teachers in the madrassas, the religious schools. And there they combined the doctrines of Nazism with this weird Islamic cult, Wahhabism.” [15]

“Everyone thinks that Islam is this fanatical religion, but it is not,” Loftus continues. “They think that Islam–the Saudi version of Islam–is typical, but it’s not. The Wahhabi cult has been condemned as a heresy more than 60 times by the Muslim nations. But when the Saudis got wealthy, they bought a lot of silence. This is a very harsh cult. Wahhabism was only practised by the Taliban and in Saudi Arabia–that’s how extreme it is. It really has nothing to do with Islam. Islam is a very peaceful and tolerant religion. It always had good relationships with the Jews for the first thousand years of its existence.” [16]

Loftus identified the significance of what today is emerging from the shadows to take over Egypt under Muslim Brotherhood President Morsi, and the so-called Syrian National Council, dominated in reality by the Muslim Brotherhood and publicly led by the more “politically correct” or presentable likes of Bassma Kodmani. Kodmani, foreign affairs spokesman for the SNC was twice an invited guest at the Bilderberg elite gathering, latest in Chantilly, Virginia earlier this year.[17]

The most bizarre and alarming feature of the US-financed  regime changes set into motion in 2010, which have led to the destruction of the secular Arab regime of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muhammar Qaddafi in Libya, and the secular regime of President Ben Ali in Tunisia, and which have wreaked savage destruction across the Middle East, especially in the past eighteen months in Syria, is the pattern of emerging power grabs by representatives of the murky Salafist Muslim Brotherhood.

By informed accounts, a Saudi-financed Sunni Islamic Muslim Brotherhood dominates the members of the exile Syrian National Council that is backed by the US State Department’s Secretary Clinton and by Hollande’s France. The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood is tied, not surprisingly to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood of President Mohammed Morsi who recently in a meeting of the Non-Aligned in Iran called openly for the removal of Syria’s Assad, a logical step if his Muslim Brothers in the present Syrian National Council are to take the reins of power. The Saudis are also rumored to have financed the ascent to power in Tunisia of the governing Islamist Ennahda Party,[18] and are documented to be financing the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated Syrian National Council against President Bashar al-Assad. [19]

Part III: Morsi’s Reign of Salafi Terror

Indicative of the true agenda of this Muslim Brotherhood and related jihadists today is the fact that once they have power, they drop the veil of moderation and reconciliation and reveal their violently intolerant roots. This is visible in Egypt today under Muslim Brotherhood President Mohammed Morsi.

Unreported in mainstream Western media to date are alarming direct reports from Christian missionary organizations in Egypt that Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood has already begun to drop the veil of “moderation and conciliation” and show its brutal totalitarian Salafist colors, much as Khomeini’s radical Sharia forces did in Iran after taking control in 1979-81.

In a letter distributed by the Christian Aid Mission (CAM), a Christian Egyptian missionary wrote that Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood “announced they would destroy the country if Morsi didn’t win, but they also said they will take revenge from all those who voted for [his opponent Ahmed] Shafiq, especially the Christians as they are sure we did vote for Shafiq. Yesterday they began by killing two believers in el Sharqiya because of this,” the missionary added, speaking on condition of anonymity.[20]

This report came only weeks after Egyptian State TV (under Morsi’s control) showed ghastly video footage of a convert from Islam to Christianity being murdered by Muslims. The footage showed a young man being held down by masked men with a knife to his throat. As one man was heard chanting Muslim prayers in Arabic, mostly condemning Christianity, another man holding the knife to the Christian convert’s throat began to cut, slowly severing the head amid cries of “Allahu Akbar” (“Allah is great”), according to transcripts. In the letter, the Egyptian missionary leader added that, “soon after Morsi won, Christians in upper Egypt were forcibly prevented from going to churches.” Many Muslims, the letter claimed, “also began to speak to women in the streets that they had to wear Islamic clothing including the head covering. They act as if they got the country for their own, it’s theirs now.” [21]

Already in 2011 Morsi’s Salafist followers began attacking and destroying Sufi mosques across Egypt. According to the authoritative newspaper Al-Masry Al-Youm (Today’s Egyptian), 16 historic mosques in Alexandria belonging to Sufi orders have been marked for destruction by so-called ‘Salafis’. Alexandria has 40 mosques associated with Sufis, and is the headquarters for 36 Sufi groups. Half a million Sufis live in the city, out of a municipal total of four million people. Aggression against the Sufis in Egypt has included a raid on Alexandria’s most distinguished mosque, named for, and housing, the tomb of the 13th century Sufi Al-Mursi Abu’l Abbas.[22]

Notably, the so-called “democratically elected” regime in Libya following the toppling of Mohamar Qaddafi by NATO bombs in 2011, has also been zealous in destroying Sufi mosques and places of worhip. In August this year, UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova expressed “grave concern” at the destruction by Islamic Jihadists of Sufi sites in Zliten, Misrata and Tripoli and urged perpetrators to “cease the destruction immediately.” [23] Under behind-the-scenes machinations the Libyan government is dominated by Jihadists and by followers of the Muslim Brotherhood, as in Tunisia and Egypt. [24]

The explosive cocktail of violence inherent in allowing the rise to power of Salafist Islamists across the Middle East was clear to see, symbolically enough on the night of September 11,th when a mob of angry supporters of the fanatical Salafist group, Ansar Al-Sharia, murdered the US Ambassador to Libya and three US diplomats, burning the US Consulate in Bengazi to the ground in protest over a YouTube release of a film by an American filmmaker showing the Prophet Mohammed indulging in multiple sex affairs and casting doubt on his role as God’s messenger. Ironically that US Ambassador had played a key role in toppling Qaddafi and opening the door to the Salafist takeover in Libya. At the same time angry mobs of thousands of Salafists surrounded the US Embassy in Cairo in protest to the US film. [25]

Ansar Al-Sharia (“Partisans of Islamic law” in Arabic) reportedly is a spinoff of Al-Qaeda and claims organizations across the Middle East from Yemen to Tunisia to Iraq, Egypt and Libya. Ansar al-Sharia says it is reproducing the model of Sharia or strict Islamic law espoused by the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Islamic State of Iraq, a militant umbrella group that includes al-Qaeda in Iraq. The core of the group are jihadists who came out of an “Islamic state”, either in Afghanistan in the mid-1990s, or among jihadists in Iraq after the US-led invasion in 2003.[26]

The deliberate detonation now of a new round of Salafist fundamentalist Jihad terror inside Muslim regions of the Russian Caucasus is exquisitely timed politically to put maximum pressure at home on the government of Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Putin and the Russian Government are the strongest and most essential backer of the current Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, and for Russia as well the maintenance of Russia’s only Mediterranean naval base at Syria’s Tartus port is vital strategically. At the same time, Obama’s sly message to Medvedev to wait until Obama’s re-election to evaluate US intent towards Russia and Putin’s cryptic recent comment that a compromise with a re-elected President Obama might be possible, but not with a President Romney, [27] indicate that the Washington “stick-and-carrot” or hard cop-soft cop tactics with Moscow might tempt Russia to sacrifice major geopolitical alliances, perhaps even that special close and recent geopolitical alliance with China.[28] Were that to happen, the World might witness a “reset” in US-Russian relations with catastrophic consequences for world peace.

F. William Engdahl*  is the author of Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order

Notes:

[1] Dan Peleschuk, Sheikh Murdered Over Religious Split Say Analysts, RIA Novosti, August 30, 2012, accessed in

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20120830/175517955.html.

[2] Mairbek  Vatchagaev, The Kremlin’s War on Islamic Education in the North Caucasus, North Caucasus Analysis Volume: 7 Issue: 34, accessed in http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=3334

[3] Iason Athanasiadis, Targeted by Israeli raid: Who is the IHH?, The Christian Science Monitor, June 1, 2010, accessed in http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2010/0601/Targeted-by-Israeli-raid-Who-is-the-IHH.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Mairbek Vatchagaev, op. cit.

[6] UN Security Council, QI.U.290.11. DOKU KHAMATOVICH UMAROV, 10 March 2011, accessed in http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1267/NSQI29011E.shtml. The UN statement reads: “Doku Khamatovich Umarov was listed on 10 March 2011 pursuant to paragraph 2 of resolution 1904 (2009) as being associated with Al-Qaida, Usama bin Laden or the Taliban for “participating in the financing, planning, facilitating, preparing, or perpetrating of acts or activities by, in conjunction with, under the name of, on behalf of, or in support of”, “recruiting for”, “supplying, selling or transferring arms and related materiel to” and “otherwise supporting acts or activities of” the Islamic Jihad Group (QE.I.119.05), the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (QE.I.10.01), Riyadus-Salikhin Reconnaissance and Sabotage Battalion of Chechen Martyrs (RSRSBCM) (QE.R.100.03) and Emarat Kavkaz (QE.E.131.11).”

[7] Tom Jones, Czech NGO rejects Russian reports of link to alleged Islamist terrorists al-Qaeda, May 10, 2011, accessed in http://www.ceskapozice.cz/en/news/society/czech-ngo-rejects-russian-reports-link-alleged-islamist-terrorists-al-qaeda?utm_source=tw&utm_medium=enprofil&utm_campaign=twennews.

[8] The Times of India, Laden ordered Bamyan Buddha destruction, The Times of India, March 28, 2006.

[9] Dr. Alan Godlas, Sufism — Sufis — Sufi Orders:

[10] Irfan Al-Alawi and Stephen Schwartz, Wahhabi Internal Contradictions as Saudi Arabia Seeks Wider Gulf Leadership, Center for Islamic Pluralism, May 21, 2012, accessed in http://www.islamicpluralism.org/2040/wahhabi-internal-contradictions-as-saudi-arabia

[11] Irfan Al-Alawi and Stephen Schwartz, Wahhabi Internal Contradictions as Saudi Arabia Seeks Wider Gulf Leadership, May 21, 2012, accessed in http://www.islamicpluralism.org/2040/wahhabi-internal-contradictions-as-saudi-arabia.

[12] Robert Duncan, Islamic Terrorisms Links to Nazi Fascism, AINA, July 5, 2007, accessed in http://www.aina.org/news/2007070595517.htm.

[13] Marc Erikson, Islamism, fascism and terrorism (Part 2), AsiaTimes.Online, November 8, 2002, accessed in http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/DK08Ak03.html.

[14] Ibid.

[15] John Loftus, The Muslim Brotherhood, Nazis and Al-Qaeda,  Jewish Community News, October 11, 2006, accessed in http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/loftus101106.htm

[16] Ibid.

[17] Charlie Skelton, The Syrian opposition: who’s doing the talking?: The media have been too passive when it comes to Syrian opposition sources, without scrutinising their backgrounds and their political connections. Time for a closer look …, London Guardian, 12 July 2012, accessed in http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/12/syrian-opposition-doing-the-talking.

[18] Aidan Lewis, Profile: Tunisia’s Ennahda Party, BBC News, 25 October 2011, accessed in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15442859.

[19] Hassan Hassan, Syrians are torn between a despotic regime and a stagnant opposition: The Muslim Brotherhood’s perceived monopoly over the Syrian National Council has created an opposition stalemate, The Guardian, UK, 23 August, 2012, accessed in http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/syrians-torn-despotic-regime-stagnant-opposition.

[20] Stefan J. Bos, Egypt Christians Killed After Election of Morsi, Bosnewslife, June 30, 2012, accessed in http://www.bosnewslife.com/22304-egypt-christians-killed-after-election-morsi.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Irfan Al-Alawi, Egyptian Muslim Fundamentalists Attack Sufis, Guardian Online [London],

April 11, 2011, accessed in http://www.islamicpluralism.org/1770/egyptian-Muslim-fundamentalists-attack-sufis

[23] Yafiah Katherine Randall, UNESCO urges Libya to stop destruction of Sufi sites, August 31, 2012, Sufi News and Sufism World Report, accessed in http://sufinews.blogspot.de/.

[24] Jamie Dettmer, Libya elections: Muslim Brotherhood set to lead government, 5 July, 2012, The Telegraph, London, accessed in http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/9379022/Libya-elections-Muslim-Brotherhood-set-to-lead-government.html.

[25] Luke Harding, Chris Stephen, Chris Stevens, US ambassador to Libya, killed in Benghazi attack: Ambassador and three other American embassy staff killed after Islamist militants fired rockets at their car, say Libyan officials, London Guardian, 12 September 2012, accessed in http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/12/chris-stevens-us-ambassador-libya-killed.

[26] Murad Batal al-Shishani, Profile: Ansar al-Sharia in Yemen, 8 March 2012, accessed in  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17402856.

[27] David M. Herszenhorn, Putin Says Missile Deal Is More Likely With Obama, The New York Times, September 6, 2012, accessed in http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/world/europe/putin-calls-missile-deal-more-likely-if-obama-wins.html. According to an interview Putin gave on Moscow’s state-owned RT TV, Herszenhorn reports, “Mr. Putin said he believed that if Mr. Obama is re-elected in November, a compromise could be reached on the contentious issue of American plans for a missile defense system in Europe, which Russia has strongly opposed. On the other hand, Mr. Putin said, if Mr. Romney becomes president, Moscow’s fears about the missile system — that it is, despite American assurances, actually directed against Russia — would almost certainly prove true.

“Is it possible to find a solution to the problem, if current President Obama is re-elected for a second term? Theoretically, yes,” Mr. Putin said, according to the official transcript posted on the Kremlin’s Web site. “But this isn’t just about President Obama. “For all I know, his desire to work out a solution is quite sincere,” Mr. Putin continued. “I met him recently on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Los Cabos, Mexico, where we had a chance to talk. And though we talked mostly about Syria, I could still take stock of my counterpart. My feeling is that he is a very honest man, and that he sincerely wants to make many good changes. But can he do it? Will they let him do it?”

[28] M.K. Bhadrakumar, Calling the China-Russia split isn’t heresy, Asia Times,  September 5, 2012, accessed in http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NI05Ad01.html.

 

  • Posted in Desktop Only, English
  • Comments Off on Salafism and the CIA: Destabilizing the Russian Federation?

Welcome to the newly redesigned Global Research website!

September 8th, 2012 by Global Research

Dear Readers,

Welcome to the newly redesigned Global Research website!

We are very proud to launch an updated version of our website, featuring the same timely and analytical content as before, in a display that will be easier for our readers to navigate so that you can get the information you need as quickly and easily as possible.

On this website, you will be able to access an archive of more than 30,000 articles published by Global Research.

We thank all of our readers for the feedback you have sent us over the years and hope you will enjoy your browsing experience.

These changes would not be possible without your support, and for that we extend our sincere appreciation.

To help us cover the costs of important projects and necessary upgrades like this, we kindly ask that you consider making a donation to Global Research.

We also take this opportunity to invite you to become a Member of Global Research

If we stand together, we can fight media lies and expose the truth. There is too much at stake to choose ignorance.

Be aware, stay informed, spread the message of peace far and wide.

Feedback and suggestions regarding our new website are most welcome. To post a comment, kindly visit us on the Global Research facebook page

Sincerely,

 

The Global Research Team

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Joe Biden both spoke at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on Tuesday. The first-mentioned addressed his audience via video while the second spoke in person. These two world leaders’ speeches couldn’t have been more different, though. President Xi presented a pragmatic and inclusive way for the world to move forward from the pandemic while Biden focused mostly on a hegemonic view of the future. It’s important to elaborate more on their differences.

President Xi’s speech was much shorter than his American counterpart’s. He got straight to the point by drawing attention to four topics: beating COVID-19; revitalizing the global economy; promoting win-win policies in international relations; and improving global governance so that it truly embraces the trend of multilateralism. The Chinese leader’s speech rehashed some of the points that he made last year, but they took on a renewed importance since the pandemic continues to rage and international relations remain uncertain.

Nevertheless, President Xi expressed confidence that the peaceful development of humanity is irreversible. He’s optimistic that a new form of international relations is emerging whereby countries treat one another with mutual respect and prioritize the central role of the United Nations (UN). Furthermore, he’s sure that developing nations will continue to grow and pledged his country’s support for them to this end, including through the sharing of green technologies. President Xi also has no doubt that COVID-19 will be defeated.

By contrast, Biden’s speech was much longer than his Chinese counterparts after clocking in at roughly forty minutes. Like President Xi, he too talked about beating COVID-19 and countering climate change, but only for a minimal portion of his speech. Most of it was about how America intends to shape what he described as this decisive decade by continuing to promote democracy and its conception of human rights, supporting anti-corruption protesters across the world, and ensuring compliance with its envisioned world order.

The aforesaid foresees NATO and the Quad playing larger roles, and Biden promised that the US will call out alleged human rights violations in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Republic, Russia’s Chechen Republic, and other parts of the world. These information warfare attacks as well as his implied criticisms of China’s Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) as corrupt and low-quality infrastructure projects expose his claim of not wanting a new cold war to have been nothing more than a bald-faced lie.

Upon comparing the Chinese and American Presidents’ speeches, it’s clear which one sincerely cares about the world and which cares only for his own country’s interests at everyone else’s expense. President Xi is truly committed to restoring predictability and stability to international relations through China’s promotion of legitimate multilateralism unlike the American model of relying on small cliques of countries obsessed with zero-sum games. Biden, by contrast, is only interested in worsening new cold war tensions on various pretexts.

This tale of two speeches shows just how divergent their respective visions are. Quite naturally, the vast majority of the world will stand in solidarity with President Xi’s views. There’s a genuine desire to move beyond the outdated and counterproductive models of the past in jointly charting a community of shared future for mankind where people rightly become the center of all policymaking. Only those countries that are either terribly misled or under American control will support Biden’s dangerous and selfish games.

UNGA 2021 allowed the whole world to see the differences between China and the US. Only the UN can provide leadership during these uncertain times in accordance with international law, not any individual country or clique thereof. The world must come closer together in pursuit of shared interests connected to their people’s development, not move further apart as a result of self-interested geopolitical games. President Xi’s vision is thus expected to resonate with the global masses while Biden’s will mostly be ignored or ridiculed.

*

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

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

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

Featured image is from The White House Facebook Page

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

September 24th, 2021 by Global Research News

Video: A Final Warning to Humanity from Former Pfizer Chief Scientist Michael Yeadon

Dr. Mike Yeadon, September 22 , 2021

 

Bombshell: FDA Allows Whistleblower Testimony that COVID-19 Vaccines Are Killing and Harming People!

Brian Shilhavy, September 20 , 2021

 

Video: #Yes, It’s a “Killer Vaccine”: Michel Chossudovsky

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 17 , 2021

 

India State of 241 Million People Declared COVID-free after Government Promotes Ivermectin

Infowars.com, September 20 , 2021

 

Bluetooth Vaccine? Does the Injected COVID “Non-Vaccine” Connect with Devices?

Makia Freeman, September 18 , 2021

 

The COVID-19 “Vaccine” and the Nuremberg Code. Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 16 , 2021

 

Stop the Covid Holocaust! Open Letter

Rabbi Hillel Handler, September 16 , 2021

 

220,000 Military Service Members Say ‘No’ to Biden’s Forced COVID Injections: File Lawsuit Claiming They Already Have Natural Immunity

Leo Hohmann, September 13 , 2021

 

Video: Has Justin Trudeau Been Duly Vaccinated? Registered Nurse Expresses Doubt on Authenticity of Trudeau’s Vaccine Jab

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 20 , 2021

 

The Conspiracy Theorists Were Right; It Is a “Poison-Death Shot”

Mike Whitney, September 19 , 2021

 

Video: Funeral Director John O’Looney Blows the Whistle on COVID

John O’Looney, September 19 , 2021

 

The Claim that COVID Jabs Are Safe and Effective Has Fallen Apart. “Forcing Employees to be Stabbed by Covid Jabs”

Prof. Anthony J. Hall, September 21 , 2021

 

Local Detroit TV Asks for Stories of Unvaxxed Dying from COVID – Gets over 180K Responses of Vaccine Injured and Dead Instead

Brian Shilhavy, September 16 , 2021

 

The “Secret Agenda” of the So-called Elite and the COVID mRNA Vaccine. “Reducing World Population”?

Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, September 19 , 2021

 

Pfizer Admits Israel Is the Great COVID-19 Vaccine Experiment

Dr. Joseph Mercola, September 21 , 2021

 

Shockingly, CDC Now Lists Vaccinated Deaths as Unvaccinated

Dr. Joseph Mercola, September 15 , 2021

 

“Is the Virus Fictitious”? Laboratories in US Can’t Find COVID-19 in One of 1,500 Positive Tests

Xander Nieuws, September 6 , 2021

 

Are These Findings the Death Blow for Vaccine Passports?

Dr. Joseph Mercola, September 17 , 2021

 

More Evidence that They Know the COVID Vaccine Is Killing and Maiming People and Yet They Continue Their Death Program

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, September 22 , 2021

 

The Significance of the Resignations of FDA Officials Responsible for Vaccine Safety

Jeffrey A. Tucker, September 21 , 2021

 

Two Top Virologists’ Frightening Warnings About COVID Injections: Ignored by Government and Big Media

Joel S. Hirschhorn, August 23 , 2021

 

COVID Vaccines Bloody Travesty: From Shots to Clots

Joel S. Hirschhorn, September 20 , 2021

 

Digital Tyranny and the Rockefeller-Gates WHO “Vaxx-Certificate Passport”: Towards a World War III Scenario

Peter Koenig, September 13 , 2021

 

COVID Vaxx Certificates — Borderless Genocide

Peter Koenig, September 20 , 2021

 

Indisputable Science. Diabolical Crimes against Humanity: “I Refuse to be Silent”: Stephen Lendman

Stephen Lendman, September 22 , 2021

 

Video: Vaccine Injuries and Deaths: Whistleblower Exposes VAERS Corruption

Deborah Conrad, September 21 , 2021

 

Diagnostic Lab Certified Pathologist Reports 20 Times Increase of Cancer in Vaccinated Patients

Great Game India, September 21 , 2021

 

Covid Cases Fall in the Least Vaccinated Countries

Rodney Atkinson, September 22 , 2021

 

Political Commentator Kim Iversen Unpacks ‘Alarming and Shocking’ COVID Data from Israel

Children’s Health Defense, September 20 , 2021

 

Oregon Senators File Formal Grand Jury Petition Calling for Investigation into CDC’s Willful Misconduct to Hyperinflate COVID-19 Data Following Federal Law Violations

Stand for Health Freedom, September 17 , 2021

 

The Covid Outbreak: “Biggest Health Scam of the 21st Century.” Report by 1500 Health Professionals

United Health Professionals, September 19 , 2021

 

The Great Reset: Population Control and the Plotting of a “Managerial Revolution”

Cynthia Chung, September 21 , 2021

 

Thousands of Fetal Deaths and Injuries Now Reported Following COVID-19 Injections of Pregnant Women

Brian Shilhavy, September 22 , 2021

 

The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 24 , 2021

 

Pulmonary Nurse of 31 Years Testifies How He Followed the COVID Protocols, Unknowingly that They Could Result in the Deaths of Patients

Brian Shilhavy, September 23 , 2021

 

Twilight’s Last Gleaming. Biden’s So-called Vaccine Mandates. Judge Napolitano

Judge Andrew P. Napolitano, September 16 , 2021

 

A Letter to the Unvaccinated

Dr. Angela Durante, September 19 , 2021

 

31 Reasons Why I Won’t Take the Vaccine

Rabbi Chananya Weissman, September 19 , 2021

 

Conquered by a Fake Pandemic, We Can Kiss America Good-bye

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, September 20 , 2021

 

Video: Towards Digital Tyranny. # Say No to the Covid Vaccine Passport

Peter Koenig, September 18 , 2021

 

Is Gene Editing the New Name for Eugenics? “Enter Bill Gates”

F. William Engdahl, September 19 , 2021

 

Perspective on the Covid Pandemic. Somebody is Lying through their Teeth.

Jeff Harris, September 21 , 2021

 

Video: Why Vaccine Passports Are Illegal in Canada

Nicholas Wansbutter, September 15 , 2021

 

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 19 , 2021

 

Where Is the Virus? Dr. Janet Menage, BMJ

Janet Menage, September 19 , 2021

 

Canadian Elections: Conservative Leader O’Toole’s COVID Plan: “Vaccines on Steroids”

William Walter Kay, September 19 , 2021

 

24,526 Deaths 2,317,495 Injuries Following COVID Shots Reported in European Union’s Database of Adverse Drug Reactions

Brian Shilhavy, September 15 , 2021

 

57 Top Scientists and Doctors Release Shocking Study on COVID Vaccines and Demand Immediate Stop to All Vaccinations

Dr. Roxana Bruno, August 17 , 2021

 

New Movement Launched by Physicians, Including Dr. Robert Malone, to Fight Medical Tyranny

Joel S. Hirschhorn, September 23 , 2021

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

A lawyer for a woman claiming her use of Roundup herbicide caused her to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma sparred with a longtime Monsanto scientist in court on Wednesday, forcing the scientist to address numerous internal corporate documents about research showing Monsanto weed killers could be genotoxic and lead to cancer.

The testimony by former Monsanto scientist Donna Farmer marked her second day on the stand and  came several weeks into the case of Donnetta Stephens v. Monsanto, the fourth Roundup trial in the United States, and the first since 2019. Juries in three prior trials all found in favor of plaintiffs who, like Stephens, alleged they developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma due to their use of Roundup or other Monsanto herbicides made with the chemical glyphosate. Thousands of people have filed similar claims.

Bayer AG, which bought Monsanto in 2018, has earmarked more than $14 billion to try to settle all of the U.S. Roundup litigation, but many plaintiffs have refused to settle, and cases continue to go to trial.

A “genotox hole”

In hours of contentious back-and-forth, interrupted repeatedly by objections from a Monsanto attorney, Stephens’ lawyer William Shapiro quizzed Monsanto toxicologist Donna Farmer about emails and documents dating back to the late 1990s that focused on research – and the company’s handling of that research – into whether or not the company’s herbicide products could cause cancer.

In one line of questioning, Shapiro asked Farmer about emails in which she and other company scientists discussed the company’s response to outside research that concluded the company’s glyphosate-based herbicides were genotoxic, meaning they damaged human DNA. Genotoxicity is an indicator that a chemical or other substance may cause cancer.

Shapiro focused during one series of questions on work done by a scientist named James Parry, who Monsanto hired as a consultant in the 1990s to weigh in on the genotoxicity concerns about Roundup being raised at the time by outside scientists. Parry’s report agreed there appeared to be “potential genotoxic activity” with glyphosate, and recommended that Monsanto do additional studies on its products.

In an internal Monsanto email dating from September 1999 written to Farmer and other company scientists, a Monsanto scientist named William Heydens said this about Parry’s report:

“let’s step back and look at what we are really trying to achieve here. We want to find/develop someone who is comfortable with the genetox profile of glyphosate/Roundup and can be influential with regulators and Scientific Outreach operations when genetox issues arise. My read is that Parry is not currently such a person, and it would take quite some time and $$$/studies to get him there. We simply aren’t going to do the studies Parry suggests.”

In a separate email revealed through the litigation, Farmer wrote that Parry’s report put the company into a “genotox hole” and she mentioned a suggestion by a colleague that the company should “drop” Parry.

Farmer testified that her mention of a “genotox hole” referred to problems with “communication” not about any cancer risk. She also said that she and other Monsanto scientists did not have concerns with the safety of glyphosate or Roundup, but did have concerns about how to respond to paper and research by outside scientists raising such concerns.

Shapiro pressed Farmer on her reaction to Parry’s finding:

“You thought it would be okay on behalf of Monsanto to receive information as you did from Dr. Parry that this Roundup product was genotoxic or could be, you thought it would be okay to go ahead and continue to sell the product, correct?”

Farmer replied:

“We didn’t agree with Professor Parry’s conclusions at the time that it may be, could be, capable of being genotoxic. We had other evidence….  We had regulators who had agreed with our studies and conclusions that it was not genotoxic.”

Her answer was interrupted as Shapiro objected, saying he was asking a yes or no question and Farmer’s attempt to respond beyond that should be stricken. The judge agreed and struck part of the response.

Continuing his questioning, Shapiro asked:

“Well that didn’t work out to have Dr. Parry be the spokesperson for Monsanto, did it Dr. Farmer?

“I would disagree with you because there is still a lot more to this Professor Parry, working with him, and I’d be happy to…” Farmer replied before being cut off by another Shapiro objection and the judge’s striking of everything following the first five words.

A similar pattern played out throughout Farmer’s testimony as Stephens’ lawyer objected to Farmer’s attempts to provide extended answers to multiple questions posed, and Monsanto’s lawyer Manuel Cachan objecting repeatedly to Shapiro’s questions as “argumentative.”

Ghostwriting and “FTO”

Shapiro asked Farmer to address multiple issues expressed in the internal corporate emails, including one series in which Monsanto scientists discussed ghostwriting scientific papers, including a very prominent paper published in the year 2000 that asserted there were no human health concerns with glyphosate or Roundup.

Shapiro additionally asked Farmer to address a strategy Monsanto referred to in emails as “Freedom to Operate” or “FTO”. Plaintiffs’ lawyers have presented FTO as Monsanto’s strategy of doing whatever it took to lessen or eliminate restrictions on its products.

And he asked her about Monsanto emails expressing concerns about research into dermal absorption rates – how fast its herbicide might absorb into human skin.

Farmer said multiple times that information was not being presented in the correct context, and she would be happy to provide detailed explanations for all of the issues raised by Shapiro, but was told by the judge she would need to wait until questioning by Monsanto’s lawyers to do so.

Zoom trial

The Stephens trial is taking place under the oversight of Judge Gilbert Ochoa of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County in California. The trial is being held via Zoom due to concerns about the spread of Covid-19, and numerous technical difficulties have plagued the proceedings. Testimony has been halted multiple times because jurors have lost connections or had other problems that inhibited their ability to hear and view the trial testimony.

Stephens is one of tens of thousands of plaintiffs who filed lawsuits against Monsanto after the World Health Organization’s cancer experts classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen with an association to non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

The three prior trials were all lengthy, in-person proceedings loaded with weeks of highly technical testimony about scientific data, regulatory matters and documents detailing internal Monsanto communications.

*

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

Featured image is from Maui Independent

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

 

Dr. Alexander Van der Bellen, who was inaugurated as the Federal President of the Republic of Austria on January 26, 2017, has taken another undemocratic, authoritarian position that anyone unemployed because of the state’s lockdowns who refuses the vaccine will lose ALL benefits. This is absolute tyranny and a disgrace to any country that pretends to be free. It has been reported:

“Unusual measure: Austria’s Minister of Labor Martin Kocher (ÖVP) has decided to block unemployment benefits for job seekers if they do not apply for a reasonable position because a vaccination is required there or simply not accepting an offered position.”

Something is seriously wrong. The vaccination was supposed to protect you, but now the unvaccinated threaten the vaccinated. Does that then prove that the vaccinations do not work? If the death rate is less than 1%, then why are governments forcing such vaccines?

The object seems to be to justify tracking all people. If we cannot do anything without a COVID passport, then we are right back to the same type of control as Adolf Hitler. You cannot get on a train in France without a COVID passport. Canada is doing the same thing for travel. Australia is turning the country into a concentration camp where you cannot travel more than 5k from your residence even if vaccinated.

Meanwhile, with this experimental vaccine, we have no idea of the long-term effects. We are supposed to trust the likes of Bill Gates, who is a college dropout with no medical background whatsoever. Our politicians are not trying to kill off people, but they are trying to alter society from the land of freedom to a fully tracked concentration camp where they must know everything we are doing. This is all because they intend to eliminate democracy and adopt the 2030 Agenda of Klaus Schwab, who I can tell you is a notorious control freak.

Europe is gradually transforming into a concentration camp. Some think it will soon return to normal if they comply, but NO VACCINE will ever eliminate any coronavirus, the same with the flu or the common cold. It is IMPOSSIBLE, for it also resides in animals. So this has been one giant lie, and they feed it out to us one tiny step at a time. Then they are complete, and it is too late to resist.

While our politicians are simply looking for control, Gates has an entirely different agenda, pretending to care about society, and at the same time, holding secret meetings about reducing the population of the world. And this is the guy our politicians embrace? I think they are too busying counting their money and dreaming of absolute power. Creating COVID Passports will be the same as the income tax in 1913 which was 1% only on the rich. It is now criminal not to file an income tax and if you put cash in a safe deposit box, read the fine print – that is now money laundering defined as hiding money from the government. COVID Passports will be permanent – they will not vanish because there will NEVER be a return to NORMAL. Anyone who believes the government is simply a sublime fool.

*

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

Featured image is from AE

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

A new profile of Dr. Hector Carvallo of Argentina is titled “A Lifeline from Buenos Aires,” and it focuses of his use of and advocacy for ivermectin as a treatment for COVID-19. The doctor is a professor of medicine and former director of a large hospital, retired from University of Buenos Aires. TrialSite has followed his ivermectin studies. By February 2020, our pandemic was already looking dangerous to the world. And later that month, Hector’s wife, Mirta Carvallo, MD, heard that “something’s going on with ivermectin in Australia,” and she informed her husband of this: scientists at Monash University in Australia had shown that ivermectin could fight SARS-CoV-2 in vitro. Hector was intrigued; the anti-parasite medicine had already saved millions of folks in the southern hemisphere from river blindness, known as onchocerciasis. The doctor and his wife had often prescribed the drug for scabies, rosacea, and other ailments, and he says it is “one of the safest medicines I’ve ever used. ”Considered one of the most important drugs of the 20th century, ivermectin’s creators won the Nobel Prize 2015 for their work on the drug. The important source of this story can be viewed here.

Crying for Joy, Then Crying from Frustration

Mere weeks later, prior to any official reporting of the Australian findings, Hector and a colleague conducted the first human trials of ivermectin as a prophylactic preventative against COVID-19. “I am not ashamed to say I cried when we got the results,” Carvallo remembers. Yet months later, for a very different reason, Hector reports, “I cried again.” This time his emotions were due to the medical authorities in Argentina began an effort to suppress knowledge about ivermectin’s safety and efficacy, question Hector’s results, and even attack his reputation. The doctor is reportedly soft-spoken and gracious personally, and he speaks perfect English partially due to a childhood attachment to TV medical drama, the latter inspired him to be a doctor. Within days of his wife hearing rumors of ivermectin from down under, Dr. Carvallo met with a top Argentine infectious disease expert, Dr. Roberto Hirsch, to discuss ivermectin.

Not an Animal Drug Only

Little known in North America and Europe except for veterinary use—or perhaps for lice or scabies—ivermectin was reputed to inhibit RNA viruses such as dengue, Zika, and yellow fever in vitro. It is thought that the drug blocks virus’s capacity “to transport from a cell’s watery cytoplasm to its nucleus.” In early March 2020, Carvallo and his colleague penned a message to the Journal of the American Medical Association. Noting the drugs, “virucidal properties,” the letter offered that ivermectin might be “a safe, potent, widely available and cheap prophylaxis against Covid, urgently in need of swift investigation. ”They also posited that the drug might be effective against active COVID-19 cases, that it could be a treatment as well as a preventative. “But the editor of JAMA said he was not interested. He gave us no good reason,” Carvallo says. “I was surprised. I wrote to say, ‘At least take it as a possibility,’ but we never heard back. So, we decided to form our own trials. We would replicate what the Australians had done in vitro, but we would do it in vivo.”

Observational Studies Show Great Promise

The doctors then proposed an experiment to the ethics committee of Eurnekian Hospital: giving weekly ivermectin to about 100 hospital workers who were often exposed to COVID-19 patients. Another 100 who chose not to take ivermectin functioned as the control group. Carvallo and Hirsh both felt that lengthy RCT’s would be unethical: “If I had to post my hypothesis atop a pile of corpses, that’s criminal,” he said. Their approach was a “classic” type of research, an observational study. “Elated” by the proposed study, hospital officials, said yes to the idea, and the government health office quickly approved the protocols. The trial started in April, without funding or RCT formality, and utilizing donated medicine. 131 subjects used ivermectin, and 98 did not. The results were stunning: of the 98 who did not use ivermectin, 11 contracted the virus, of the 131 who had gotten the drug, zero cases of COVID-19 were found. “Word spread quickly through the hospital, and the union representing our health care workers demanded the prophylaxis be given to everyone [on staff] who wanted it. With this large “volunteer pool” available, the doctors started a second and expanded version of the trial. Due to running out of free medicine, this expanded study ended in August 2020. The findings: of 407 folks in the control group, 58.2 were infected with SARS-CoV-2, of 788 patients treated with ivermectin (and carrageenan), zero had contracted the virus.

“Not Allowed to Keep Investigating Ivermectin”

By this point, the doctors had begun a new study of folks already suffering with COVID-19. They signed up 135 outpatients with mild symptoms and 32 in patients with moderate to severe symptoms. All were given ivermectin on a weekly basis. The hospitalized also got steroids and a blood thinner if symptoms warranted. Four weeks later, none of the 135 required going to the hospital. One inpatient, an 82-year-old with “severe co-morbidities,” died. So, the doctors saw that there was a death rate of 3.2 percent of those using their protocol, far less than the 23.5 percent overall rate for hospitalized patients in Argentina. Days later, Carvallo got a call at home. The secretary for the health minister was on the line, and “he said I was not allowed to keep investigating ivermectin, or it would put my job in jeopardy. I was baffled. I said, ‘Why?’ and he would give me no answer—And that’s when I cried again, from frustration. I’m not ashamed to say I cried because it’s true.” Now, a year and a half later, “ivermectin still struggles for official recognition as an anti-Covid agent despite the large body of research in its favor.”

Three Phases of Truth

The May 2021 issue of Antibiotics Review, for example, put out a metanalysis of ivermectin which showed that 100% of 36 prophylaxis and early treatment studies showed positive results, and 26 of the studies showed “statistically significant improvements.” But in August 2021 FDA was “still pounding the same drum it first pounded in June 2020, when the Australian researchers published their findings.” FDA warned, “Taking a drug meant for horses and cattle to prevent or treat COVID-19 is dangerous and could be fatal.” To Carvallo, this mockery and bad information were “very frustrating.” Next, on September 2, the outlet BuzzFeed put out a lengthy and critical look at the doctor’s work. They reported that the studies “raised questions about how the study’s data was collected and analyzed.” Carvallo says the ivermectin backlash is “not a matter of ignorance.” He notes that NIH, CDC, and FDA have read the pertinent studies. The doctor feels that a double standard is in place: “The more expensive a compound is, the less quantity of evidence is required to get it approved. “But when a compound is cheap and available,” he opined, “that’s another matter.” He is confident that eventually, ivermectin will be widely used against COVID-19. “All truth passes through three phases,” he told BuzzFeed. “First it is ridiculed, then it is violently opposed, then it is accepted as self-evident. We are in phase two now.”

*

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

Featured image is from TrialSiteNews

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Ivermectin Wars: Dr. Hector Carvallo Versus the Medical Establishment
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

White House claims anything but dishonourable discharge for refusing vaccines would “detract from readiness and limit a commander’s options for enforcing good order and discipline.”

The Biden administration is pushing for dishonourable discharges and even court martialing for troops who disobey orders to get COVID vaccines.

GOP Representative Mark Green of Tennessee proposed an amendment this week to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would prohibit “any discharge but honorable” for troops who refuse vaccines.

The White House responded with a statement noting

“The Administration strongly opposes section 716,” reasoning that it would “detract from readiness and limit a commander’s options for enforcing good order and discipline when a Service member fails to obey a lawful order to receive a vaccination.”

The statement added

“To enable a uniformed force to fight with discipline, commanders must have the ability to give orders and take appropriate disciplinary measures.”

Responding to the statement, Rep. Green said

“I am appalled that the Biden Administration is trying to remove my amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that prevents anything but an honorable discharge for service members who refuse to get the COVID-19 vaccine.”

Green added

“This was a bipartisan amendment — every Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee agreed to it.”

“No American who raises their hand to serve our Nation should be punished for making a highly personal medical decision,” Green previously urged.

Another section of the bill, 720, proposes that troops who have previously had COVID-19 should be exempted from a vaccine mandate. The Biden administration also opposes it, claiming it creates “a new and overly broad exemption from the vaccination requirement for previous infection that would undermine the effectiveness of the requirement.”

The House is expected to vote on the NDAA early Thursday morning.

As we have previously noted, there has been significant resistance to vaccine mandates among military service members.

Tucker Carlson revealed Monday that a bizarre presentation was given to troops sardonically ridiculing vaccine mandates with links to satanism, as the military pushes mandates, even for elite navy SEALS who have had the virus and have natural immunity.

*

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The global agenda to inoculate every man, woman and child is coming straight to your dinner plate. A team of scientists from the University of California, Riverside are researching ways to turn your GROCERIES into mRNA vaccines. In order to combat “vaccine hesitancy” in the population, these scientists want to distribute coronavirus spike proteins throughout the food supply. This experiment could give rise to a new paradigm of vaccination that gives Big Pharma total control over the food supply, as they venture to genetically alter food to inundate the population with more blood clotting spike proteins.

Is this the reason why GMO/vaccine investor Bill Gates is buying up farmland across the United States? Will all current vaccines and hundreds of future vaccine experiments be carried out through the food supply?

Genetic modification of the food supply could soon be used to vaccinate the population

The future of bio-warfare and human experimentation will likely be carried out through the food supply, and advertised as safe. By altering the cytoplasm of edible plants, scientists hope to introduce foreign spike protein toxins into your food. These vaccine-pimping scientists are already experimenting on lettuce and spinach plants, to develop a new species of greens that can vaccinate people more often and in a less invasive manner. These new designer greens can be grown at home, too. The scientists are working on a way to quantify the correct dosage of spike protein per plant while demonstrating that the plant can replicate enough mRNA to out-perform the current vaccine supply.

“Ideally, a single plant would produce enough mRNA to vaccinate a single person,” Juan Pablo Giraldo, lead researcher and associate professor in UCR’s Department of Botany and Plant Sciences. “We are testing this approach with spinach and lettuce and have long-term goals of people growing it in their own gardens,” he added. “Farmers could also eventually grow entire fields of it.”

Giraldo strives to demonstrate that DNA containing mRNA vaccines can successfully be integrated into plant cells. To do this, the researchers intend to alter the chloroplast of the plant cell. The chloroplast takes in the sun’s energy and converts it to sugar and other molecules that the plant needs in order to grow. The scientists want to interfere with this natural process and instruct the cytoplasm to generate spike proteins and other foreign molecules that can be introduced as antigens into humans.

Giraldo and his team have already demonstrated that the chloroplast is capable of expressing foreign genes that are not part of the plant’s natural design. This genetic modification was accomplished by enclosing foreign genetic material in a protective casing and then inserting it into the plant’s cells. The goal is to introduce these GMOs into humans so their immune system can be programmed to fight antigens and viral sequences that scientists have pre-selected and designed.

Is a new paradigm of food-based vaccines upon us?

At UC San Diego, Nicole Steinmetz has already developed nanotechnologies that can deliver genetic material to the chloroplast of plants. Steinmetz tinkers with plant virus nanoparticles and repurposes them to deliver foreign genes into the plant’s cells.

This is not the only edible vaccine experiment currently underway. Scientists from the University of Ottawa have been working on an edible vaccine for coronaviruses for over a year.

The Ottawa Hospital is already testing the first prototype. This edible vaccine expresses viral antigens inside the lettuce and spinach plants. Their goal is to deliver the spike proteins to the human body without altering the protein synthesis of human cells. The current vaccine supply must be kept refrigerated at extremely low temperatures. If this research effort can demonstrate the delivery of spike proteins throughout the food supply, the current vaccine supply could be scrapped in favor of a new paradigm of food-based vaccination. This experiment could forever alter the food supply, turning healthy, healing foods into bio-warfare playgrounds that globalists can use to exploit the human race.

Sources include:

CTVNews.ca

NaturalNews.com

News.ecr.edu

*

 

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

Featured image is from Natural News

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

As we have previously reported here at Health Impact News, the government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) now lists twice as many deaths following COVID-19 shots for the past 9 months as deaths following ALL vaccines for the past 30 years!

Not only is this information from the government’s own database NOT being reported in the pharma-funded corporate media, but nurses and other frontline workers are now coming forward to report that very few deaths and injuries from the COVID-19 shots are actually being reported to VAERS due to tremendous pressure by the pro-vaccine crowd to NOT report them.

Their voices are being censored by the corporate media.

Here is a video report we have compiled of nurse whistleblowers (including a physician’s assistant’s testimony) explaining just how difficult it is for anyone to actually file a report for COVID-19 vaccine injuries and deaths.

This is from our Bitchute channel, and will also be on our Rumble channel.

So what are the REAL numbers of those already dead or permanently injured from the COVID-19 shots?

Dr. Jessica Rose recently did an expert analysis on the VAERS data and the problem of underreporting. Dr. Jessica Rose has a BSc in Applied Mathematics and completed her MSc in Immunology at Memorial University of Newfoundland in Canada. She completed her PhD in Computational Biology at Bar Ilan University and then did her first Post Doctorate at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Molecular Biology.

This is maybe the most brilliant analysis of the VAERS data I have seen so far. What Dr. Rose did was take an independent analysis of a single VAERS event, one that the FDA and CDC admitted was an adverse reaction based on trials before the shots were even authorized, anaphylaxis, and then looked at independent studies reporting the rate of anaphylaxis to determine the true percentage, compared to what is actually being reported in VAERS.

What she found was that anaphylaxis was being underreported in VAERS by 41X. Taking that variable and then applying it to other events, such as death, she arrived at the 150,000 death figure. See the full analysis here.

*

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

All images in this article are from HIN

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Dr. Danice Hertz said people like her who have been seriously injured by COVID vaccines are being dismissed or ignored, and because health officials won’t research their injuries and potential treatments, they have nowhere to turn.

Danice Hertz, a 64-year-old physician who was “horribly ill” and “incapacitated” after getting Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, claims U.S. health agencies are ignoring thousands of adverse events.

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Hertz said if she could go back in time, she would not have gotten vaccinated.

Hertz said she has been in contact with numerous health agencies, physicians and researchers — including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), U.S. Surgeon General and doctors at Harvard and Stanford universities and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles — in an effort to obtain help for the neurological injuries she suffered after getting the vaccine.

Hertz told The Defender there are thousands of people like her — who have been injured by COVID vaccines — who are suffering and need help, yet they’re ignored by mainstream media and U.S. health agencies. Meanwhile, COVID vaccine mandates are being rolled out for millions of Americans, with barely any discussion of the risks.

Hertz, a gastroenterologist who retired in October, got her first and only dose of Pfizer’s vaccine on Dec. 23, 2020.

“There was an opportunity to get the vaccine because the hospital was giving it to every doctor,” Hertz said. “I didn’t know if I would need to go back into the workforce, so I ran to get it. Within 30 minutes, I started experiencing adverse effects.”

“I waited the 15 minutes you’re required to wait after you get it, and I went to the car and my face started burning,” Hertz said. “I drove home five minutes away, and by the time I walked through the door, I told my husband to call the paramedics.”

Hertz said within 24 hours she developed neurological symptoms, including severe paresthesias in her face, tongue, scalp, chest wall and limbs, as well as tremors, twitching, weakness, headaches, tinnitus and imbalance.

“My blood pressure was 186 over 127, which I’ve come to find is characteristic of these reactions,” Hertz said.

Hertz called her doctor, and took Benadryl and steroids in case she was having an allergic reaction. The next day her face turned completely numb.

Hertz said:

“My entire face felt like it was burning — like acid had been poured on my face. I had sensations throughout my body like it was vibrating. I felt like I had a tight band around my waist, chest pain and shortness of breath, and I went to bed for seven days.”

Hertz followed up with an allergist who treated her with steroids in case she was experiencing an allergic reaction to the vaccine. After a few weeks of no improvement, Hertz met with the chief neurologist at Cedars-Sinai.

“I saw six neurologists, five allergists, three rheumatologists, and no one had a clue,” Hertz said. “They did blood work, skin biopsies, an MRI and more, and nothing really came up. Unfortunately, if a doctor doesn’t know what’s wrong with you they’re done with you, though that’s not how I practice.”

Early on, when Hertz was evaluated by the first neurologist, the neurologist asked her about a “CISA consult” with the CDC.

According to the CDC’s website, the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project was established in 2001 to address the unmet vaccine safety clinical research needs of the U.S.

CISA is a national network of vaccine safety experts from the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office and seven medical research centers, plus other partners who address vaccine safety issues, conduct high-quality clinical research and assess complex clinical adverse events following vaccination.

The CISA Project also provides consultation to U.S. clinicians who have vaccine safety questions about a specific patient residing in the U.S. It also provides consultation to U.S. healthcare providers and public health partners on vaccine safety issues, and reviews clinical adverse events following immunization involving U.S.-licensed vaccines.

Hertz’s case was accepted into the CISA Project and was presented at the CDC’s grand rounds on March 23. Following the meeting, a physician forwarded a letter to Hertz suggesting she had “mast cell disorder.”

The CISA Project never followed up with her.

Mast cell activation syndrome (or mast cell disorder) is a condition in which a patient experiences repeated episodes of the symptoms of anaphylaxis — allergic symptoms such as hives, swelling, low blood pressure, difficulty breathing and severe diarrhea.

Systemic mastocytosis can cause skin lesions, pain in inner organs, bone pain, diarrhea and vomiting, weight loss and cardiovascular symptoms.

Hertz contacted the NIH and was evaluated remotely by Dr. Avindra Nath, a physician-scientist who specializes in neuroimmunology and is intramural clinical director of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke at the NIH.

Hertz said she sent the NIH her blood for a study, because they were seeing quite a few patients like her. She also sent her blood to doctors at Stanford and Harvard for evaluation.

The Harvard physician also thought Hertz had mast cell activation, and put her on medications, but they didn’t help.

“I’m now on a lot of medications for mast cell activation, but I’m still quite ill,” Hertz said.

“I don’t think that’s [mast cell activation] the whole explanation of what’s happening to us,” Hertz said. “I’m still here nine months later. I still don’t know what’s wrong with me. I am not as sick as I was initially, but I still get attacks where I feel like I’m being electrocuted, and my husband can actually feel my legs and arms vibrating.”

Hertz started a Facebook group that now has more than 160 people who have experienced neurological problems after a COVID vaccine, and can’t find help with their conditions.

“We have 160 people in this private Facebook group and we all know each other very well and are trying to help each other,” Hertz said. “Together we’ve been trying very very hard to get help.”

“Although my group consists of 160 members who had legitimate adverse reactions to COVID vaccines, there are other groups I’m aware of that have thousands,” she added.

Hertz said the mainstream media does not want to talk to anyone in her group who’s been injured because they’re not allowed to publish about vaccine injuries. “There are a lot of people who have had neurological reactions and a lot of people don’t know it’s vaccine-related,” she said.

Hertz and her group managed to get a Zoom meeting with Dr. Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) at the FDA, to discuss their vaccine injuries, but were disappointed when he did not show up for the meeting.

Hertz explained:

“We had a very important Zoom meeting with Marks set up. I think it was the day they announced Pfizer’s vaccine was given full FDA approval. We [the group] didn’t know in advance it was going to be approved.

“We all prepared speeches to plead with Marks for help and he didn’t show up. The head of the communications showed up –– not a science person. She listened to us. Her response after listening to us for a full hour was, ‘well if you could give me your VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] number, I’ll have everyone look into your VAERS cases and we will see what we can do to help you.’”

Hertz said the FDA representative completely missed the point. “We were here to represent a large number of people who’ve been injured and need medical care, yet we got no response,” she said.

U.S. agencies are aware of vaccine injuries

Hertz said there are different theories for adverse reactions like hers, but she doesn’t think any have been proven or that enough research has been done.

“Some people think it’s an immune-mediated neuropathy where nerves are attacked by antibodies triggered by the vaccine,” Hertz said. “A doctor in California claims he found a spike protein produced by the vaccine in our monocytes — as he is doing research on members in the group.”

Hertz said several members of her private Facebook group went to the NIH for treatment, especially those who were paralyzed after getting the vaccine and can’t use their legs.

“The NIH is aware of what is happening but publicly has been dismissive of vaccine adverse reactions,” Hertz said.

“Early on when I was so sick in early January, I tried to figure out whom I should contact — and I did contact another gentleman at the NIH who is very high up in the NIAID [National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases],” Hertz said. “He told me they are ‘very aware’ of these reactions and are looking into them.”

“They knew about these adverse reactions before the vaccines were released from the clinical trials,” Hertz said.

In a Feb. 11 email exchange (see below)  between Hertz and the NIH and NIAID (the agency led by Dr. Anthony Fauci) just two months after COVID vaccines received Emergency Use Authorization, an official acknowledged other reactions like the ones Hertz experienced had been reported and agencies were aware of them.

Page 5

Hertz said she believes the NIH conveys a different position behind the scenes than the one the agency presents to the public. She said she believes it’s because the NIH is funded by the FDA.

Hertz has had several communication exchanges with Marks and Dr. Janet Woodcock, FDA acting commissioner. Neither Marks, nor Woodcock took Hertz’ concerns seriously, but instead, wished her the best with her debilitating vaccine injuries.

Hertz said Woodcock initially said she would like to help, but then responded again saying:

“I am so very sorry for your ordeal. It seems what is missing is what they call a ‘research definition,’ in other words a syndromic framework to describe what is being experienced, since it may not fit into current diagnostic categories. Possibly one of the academic researchers you have consulted could work on that. I don’t have insight into how this could be approached from a treatment standpoint.”

In other words, they are not interested in hearing about these reactions, Hertz said in an email to the NIH where she described the FDA’s response.

In the email, Hertz said:

“It is shocking to me that they completely blow off these reports of hundreds  and thousands  suffering with severe reactions. I would think they would want to know as much as possible about these reactions. Something is very wrong and these adverse reactions to the vaccines are being covered up. It is a great disservice to so many who are suffering like me.”

On Feb. 1, Hertz reached out to her team of physicians, the CDC and Marks regarding her experience and those of five other women who developed neurological problems after Pfizer’s vaccine. Hertz asked why their neurological reactions were being ignored.

Hertz wrote:

“As most of you know me, I am a 64-year-old gastroenterologist who suffered a terrible reaction 30 minutes after receiving the first dose of the Pfizer Covid vaccine. I am still very symptomatic almost 9 weeks out with severe paresthesias, chest tightness, tremor, dizziness, headaches. I am on the internet seeking information and came across an article in a journal Neurology Today. I wrote a comment after the article about my reaction. I have subsequently been contacted by five other women who have had very similar neurological reactions to mine and are all quite ill weeks after receiving their vaccines.

“They have had similar difficulty in getting appropriate medical care as the medical community knows nothing about these reactions. They, too, have reported their reactions to the drug companies, the regulatory governmental agencies, and there has been no response or documentation of their reactions.

“It is apparent that these neurological reactions are not unheard of. Why are they not being addressed? Why are our reports being ignored? We do not have any desire to frighten the public about the vaccine, but we all very much would like to get medical care and fear that we will not recover from these debilitating symptoms. We were all previously healthy. We are considering going to the media as we are terribly frustrated at the lack of transparency. Any advice from you would be greatly appreciated.”

Marks responded that he was “so sorry” to hear of her symptoms, that the FDA takes adverse events seriously and said he asked the pharmacovigilance team to follow up with her. To date, neither Marks, nor the pharmacovigilance team have followed up.

On March 17, an official at the NIH emailed Hertz — and copied Pfizer — acknowledging more than 1,000 neurological side effects reported to VAERS, and promising to present them to the scientific community, which to date, has not been done.

The official said:

“If you look at VAERS database there are more than 1,000 neurological side effects already reported but in order to present it to scientific community we have to gather as much information as we can before sending it out. I promise you we will report your issue and other cases that we are reviewing now and I really [would] appreciate if you kindly give us 1-2 weeks to collect comprehensive information before publicizing it.”

In an April 15 email to Marks, Woodcock, the CDC and NIH, Hertz said:

“Why is this being kept a secret? When will the public be made aware so we can get treatment? Will we recover? You have no idea the pain and suffering that many people have been going through. I wish you could experience what we are experiencing to understand my pleas. It is very difficult to live this way. At times, I am in so much pain that I don’t want to live. It is so shocking to me that this suppression of information and the truth can occur in our country. As a physician, I never imagined this could occur here in the United States, with our great medical system and regulatory agencies.

“Please bring these reactions public so medical care will be available to the many like me who are suffering agonizing symptoms resulting from these vaccines. Eventually, the truth will be told. We need help now.”

Hertz said she received a response from Woodcock, who said the FDA is “looking into these neurological reactions.” But there has been no follow-through or acknowledgement of her injuries — or the injuries thousands of others are experiencing.

Hertz, who is pro-vaccine, said she is concerned the FDA, NIH, CDC and pharmaceutical companies are ignoring vaccine injuries.

Hertz explained:

“We want the medical community to be educated about these reactions so they don’t dismiss us, so that they can validate what has happened and treat us. We need research done to discover what happened and to create treatments. And now there are vaccine mandates and people like us cannot get vaccinated again. There are many in my group who are physicians and cannot go back to work until they’re fully vaccinated but they can’t go back to work and it’s not easy to get an exemption. We need to look at that.”

On May 24, Hertz and 79 other individuals who were injured by Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca (U.S. clinical trial) vaccines wrote a letter to Dr. Vivek Murthy, U.S. Surgeon General and the White House pleading with them to validate their reactions so they could be addressed properly.

The group stated:

“We have all shared very similar adverse reactions to these vaccines. We were previously healthy individuals. Our reactions occurred within minutes to a few short days after receiving the vaccines. There is no doubt that the vaccines caused our reactions.

“Our reactions have included nausea, weight loss, heartburn, diarrhea/constipation, sleep disturbances, chest pains, headaches, facial and sinus pressure, dizziness, severe weakness and fatigue, painful paresthesias throughout the body, severe painful paresthesias focused on the face, tongue and scalp, internal vibrations and tremors, muscle twitching and muscle spasms, brain fog and mental status changes, memory loss, tinnitus, impaired/blurred vision, elevated blood pressure and heart rate, bulging veins, heart issues and weakness. Several in our group have experienced paralysis of the lower extremities and to this day remain paralyzed. Many of us have been ill for five months.”

Nobody in the group had any of the above symptoms prior to getting a COVID vaccine.

“They [the injuries] are leaving the majority of us disabled and unable to return to our jobs as medical and other healthcare professionals, parents, teachers, scientists, etc.,” the group wrote.

“Not only have we been impacted physically, but mentally and financially as well. Most of us are unable to work, or are on a reduced work schedule. This is continuing for us without any end in sight.”

“WE NEED HELP,” the group wrote. “The constant messaging that the vaccines are safe and with zero acknowledgement of these adverse neurological reactions has made it impossible for us to obtain medical treatment. We are ‘collateral damage’ in the effort to stop the pandemic.”

The group told Murthy that until adverse reactions are acknowledged, it will be impossible to receive care. “We are pleading that you make the medical community aware of these reactions so we can get the medical care we need,” the group wrote.

U.S. health agencies don’t want people to know about vaccine injuries

When asked by The Defender why the U.S. health agencies would cover up vaccine adverse events, suppress research and fail to provide those injured with adequate treatments, Hertz responded:

“The pandemic is horrible. It’s a real problem. But they made calculated decisions on how to protect the most people, and I don’t know who made these decisions but they’ve decided vaccinating as many people as possible will save more people than attending to the vaccine injuries. I think they do not want to create fear or panic and to publicize the fact there are injuries.”

Hertz said she believes what’s happening with COVID vaccines is a crime against our country.

“If there is anything I could do, I would go back in time and take that shot out of me,” Hertz said. “I took every single vaccine that ever came out, and I had never had a reaction to anything. I went in that day without any concern because it had been cleared by the FDA. I feel like an idiot.”

Hertz said she submitted several reports to VAERS, but the CDC never followed up. She received a call from one clerical person just confirming the report and she told them, “I am a physician. I am severely ill. I’m fearful of my life. I did report to Pfizer in written and verbal form, and nobody has ever called me back.”

Page 83

Hertz reached out to Dr. Marks again on Feb. 23 after not receiving a follow-up as promised, and another official with CBER responded. The official referred her to VAERS, and told her how to request information about her adverse event and how to obtain a copy of the report. He also suggested she request a CISA consult from the CDC, which she had already done.

Hertz responded:

“Thank you for your recommendation to contact VAERS. Unfortunately this is not helpful as it has already been done. Hopefully, you will become aware of the injuries some people are experiencing from the vaccines and educate the medical community so that medical care will be available for people like me.”

The official asked whether she had filled out her report correctly and that he was under the impression VAERS will contact her if “follow-up information is needed.”

Hertz said she provided contact information on the VAERS report she filed and was “fully aware of the many hundreds of reports with similar reactions in the VAERS database,” as were the people in her group with similar severe reactions. “We and our physicians have requested CDC CISA consults which have been completely unhelpful,” Hertz said.

Hertz explained:

“I would think the FDA and CDC would want to know about these reactions. We have all been seriously ill. It is truly shocking that our reports have not been taken seriously and that the FDA is not asking for follow up from us. There is apparently no concern about people being injured by the vaccines.

“The suggestions you make in both of your emails to me are nonsensical. I am a physician, not a moron. You skirt the issue that there are many of us that have been injured by the vaccines and are being ignored. Your emails are insulting and demeaning. You are completely missing my point. I guess that is just representative of how seriously you are taking the fact that there are many people being severely injured by the Covid vaccines and are struggling to get validation and medical care because these reactions are being hidden from the medical community.

“This is truly shocking. Having practiced medicine for 33 years, I always had faith in our regulatory agencies. Now, having been seriously injured by this vaccine and struggling to be taken seriously and get medical assistance, I no longer have faith.”

On July 2, Hertz reached out to one of her contacts at the NIH again asking if there was anyone studying adverse reactions like hers, and the group she represents. She wrote, “We have been abandoned by the government, and the medical community knows nothing about these adverse reactions. We desperately need medical help.”

There was no response.

Hertz said that as a physician, she is pro-vaccine but she is also “pro-informed consent,” and she has always given that to her patients.

“Whatever I did to them, if it was a procedure like a colonoscopy or prescribing a medication, I always provided them with the risks involved,” Hertz said. “There has been no informed consent with the [COVID] vaccine, and if I would have known I never would have gotten it.”

Hertz said the public needs to be given accurate and complete information about the risks and the ability to make a choice. “To make that choice for them is wrong,” she said.

*

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

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

Featured image is from CHD

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The CEO of pharmaceutical giant Moderna says that even younger people will have to get vaccine booster shots at least once every three years, meaning that a two-tier society which punishes the unvaccinated could remain in place indefinitely.

According to Stephane Bancel, the pandemic will continue for at least another year, at which point there will be enough vaccine doses “so that everyone on this Earth can be vaccinated.”

This includes jabs for infants and booster shots for those who require them.

“Those who don’t get vaccinated will immunize themselves naturally because the Delta variant is so contagious,” said Bancel, although he went on to assert that such people would still get ill.

“You can either get vaccinated and have a good winter. Or you don’t do it and risk getting sick and possibly even ending up in hospital,” said the Moderna CEO.

Bancel says life will return to normal “in a year,” but that this will be dependent on people continuing to receive regular COVID-19 booster jabs.

The CEO said older and vulnerable people would “undoubtedly” need refresher shots at least once a year, while even younger people who face an infinitesimal chance of dying from the virus will need booster shots every three years.

Israel has already signaled that vaccine passports will incorporate mandatory proof of an individual having received booster shots.

This means that those hoping to ride out the pandemic while remaining unvaccinated, with all freedoms returned next year, may actually face a permanent bio-security police state which keeps them under de facto lockdown forever.

Those who for whatever reason refuse to take their booster jabs will also face discrimination when it comes to travel and basic lifestyle activities in many countries.

Despite Bancel’s insistence that the entire planet will have been offered a vaccine within a year, according to Amnesty International, “Moderna has not yet delivered a single vaccine dose to a low-income country.”

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on CEO of Moderna Says Even Young Will Need to Take Vaccine Booster Shots Indefinitely
  • Tags: ,

Video: Trust the Science! James Corbett

September 24th, 2021 by James Corbett

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

We are being told to trust the science.

But what science? From which scientists?

Join James for this week’s edition of The Corbett Report podcast as he explores the transparent lies of the “settled science” crowd and how those lies will increasingly be used to run our lives in the new biosecurity state.

*

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

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Australian Government Shuts Down Melbourne Construction Sites Amid Protests over Vaccine Mandates

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

It seems that ever since Hillary Clinton lost to Donald Trump in the U.S. presidential election of 2016 the western media and numerous politicians have been working especially hard to convince the world that the Russian government is little better than a modern version of Josef Stalin’s USSR. Part of the effort can be attributed to the Democratic Party’s desire to blame someone other than the unattractive candidate Hillary for the defeat, but there is also something more primitive operating behind the scenes, something like a desire to return to a bipolar world in which one knew one’s enemies and one’s friends.

The anti-Russian bias has manifested itself in a number of ways, to include the fabricated libel referred to as Russiagate, but it also featured personal denigration of the Russian leadership as a rogue regime inclined to employ assassination by poisoning against its critics and political opponents.

The first widely publicized assassination of a Russian dissident took place in London in 2006. Alexander Litvinenko, a former Federal Security Service (FSB) officer and critic of the government who had sought asylum in England, died after he met two Russian acquaintances in a hotel bar and was reportedly poisoned by a dose of radioactive polonium inserted into his cup of tea. The Russians whom he had met with were named by the British police but the Russian government refused extradition requests. Without any evidence, the British media claimed that Litvinenko had been killed under orders from Putin personally.

More recently, the poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia on March 4th, 2018 made headlines around the world. Sergei was living near Salisbury England and his daughter was visiting from Moscow when they were found unconscious on a park bench. A policeman later investigating the incident also suffered from the effects of what appeared to be a nerve agent, which investigative sources claimed had been sprayed on to the front door handle of the Skripal residence. Both Sergei and Yulia survived the incident.

There was quite a bit that was odd about the Skripal case, which came at a time when there was considerable tension between Russia and the NATO allies over issues like Syria and Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin was regularly demonized, seen in the western media as a malevolent presence stalking the world stage.

Observers noted that the British investigation of the poisoning relied from the start “…on circumstantial evidence and secret intelligence.” And there was inevitably a rush to judgment. British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson blamed Russia before any chemical analysis of the alleged poisoning could have taken place. British Prime Minister Theresa May told Parliament shortly thereafter to blame the Kremlin and demand a Russian official response to the event in 36 hours, declaring that the apparent poisoning was “very likely” caused by a made-in-Russia nerve agent referred to by its generic name novichok. The British media was soon on board, spreading the government line that such a highly sensitive operation would require the approval of President Putin himself. Repeated requests by Russia to obtain a sample of the alleged nerve agent for testing were rejected by the British government in spite of the fact that a military grade nerve agent would have surely killed both the Skripals as well as anyone else within 100 yards.

The expulsion of scores of Russian diplomats and imposition of sanctions soon followed with the United States and other countries following suit. The report of the new sanctions was particularly surprising as Yulia Skripal had subsequently announced that she intends to return to her home in Russia, leading to the conclusion that even one of the alleged victims did not believe the narrative being promoted by the British and American governments.

The response within the United States was also immediate and threatening. A New York Times editorial on March 12th entitled Vladimir Putin’s Toxic Reach thundered:

“The attack on the former spy, Sergei Skripal, who worked for British intelligence, and his daughter Yulia, in which a police officer who responded was also poisoned, was no simple hit job. Like the 2006 murder of Alexander Litvinenko, another British informant, who was poisoned with radioactive polonium 210, the attack on Mr. Skripal was intended to be as horrific, frightening and public as possible. It clearly had the blessing of President Vladimir Putin, who had faced little pushback from Britain in the Litvinenko case. The blame has been made clearer this time and this attack on a NATO ally needs a powerful response both from that organization and, perhaps more important, by the United States.”

But the story of the poisoning of the Skripals begun to come apart very quickly. Former UK Ambassador Craig Murray detailed how the narrative was cooked by “liars” in the government to make it look as if the poisoning had a uniquely Russian fingerprint. Meanwhile prize winning U.S. investigative reporter Gareth Porter summed up the actual evidence or lack thereof, for Russian involvement, suggesting that the entire affair was “based on politically-motivated speculation rather than actual intelligence.”

The head of Britain’s own top secret chemical weapons facility Porton Down even contradicted claims made by May and Johnson, saying that he did not know if the nerve agent was actually produced in Russia as the chemical formula was revealed to the public in a scientific paper in 1992 and there were an estimated twenty countries capable of producing it. Some speculated that a false flag operation by the British themselves, the CIA or Mossad, was not unthinkable. Development of novichok type poisons is known to have taken place at both Porton Down and at the U.S. chemical weapon facility Fort Dietrich Maryland.

But the most damning evidence opposing a Russian role in the alleged poisonings was that Moscow had no motive to kill a former British double agent who had been released from a Kremlin prison in a spy swap after ten years in prison and who was no longer capable of doing any damage. If Moscow had wanted him dead, they could have killed him while he was still in Russian custody. Putin had an election coming up and Russia was to be the host of the World Cup in the summer, an event that would be an absolute top priority to have go smoothly without any complications from a major spy case.

There is now new evidence that the claims of Russian involvement in the alleged assassination attempt was fraudulent, engineered by the British government, possibly in collusion with American intelligence, to smear Vladimir Putin in particular. Bulgarian investigative journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva has written an article entitled “UK Defense Ministry Document Reveals Skripals’ Blood Samples Could have been Manipulated.”

Relying on a series of British-version Freedom of Information Act queries, Gaytandzhieva determined that there was a considerable gap between the time when it was claimed the Skirpals’ blood was drawn and the time when it was actually tested for possible poisons at Porton Down. The gap is inexplicable and means in legal terms that the chain of custody was broken. It further suggests that the samples could have been deliberately diverted and tampered with.

Gaytandzhieva, who provides copies of the relevant government documents in her article, sums up her case as “New evidence has emerged of gross violations during the UK investigation into the alleged poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury on 4th March 2018.” The Ministry of Defense, which is in charge of the British military laboratory DSTL Porton Down which analyzed the Skripals blood samples responded to a request that “Our searches have failed to locate any information that provides the exact time that the samples were collected.” The samples “were collected at some point between 16:15 on 4 March 2018 and 18:45 on 5 March 2018. Even the time of arrival at Porton Down is indicated as “approximate.”

She also cites some expert testimony,

“A British toxicologist [commented] that ‘It is inconceivable that with such a visibility case, and the obvious significance of any and all biological samples, normal and expected sample logging and documentation did not take place. The person drawing the sample, in any clinical or forensic setting knows that the date and time must be recorded, and the donor positively identified. In a criminal case, evidence gleaned from these samples would be thrown out as inadmissible… This lack of protocol is either very sloppy or clandestine.”

If the Skripals case sounds very similar to the recent alleged poisoning of Russian dissident Alexei Navalny it should, as the same rush to judgement by many of the same players took place. Navalny became ill while on a flight from Tomsk to Moscow on August 20th, 2020 and was taken to a hospital in Omsk after an emergency landing. The Russian hospital could not find any poison in his blood and attributed his condition to metabolic disorder. Two days later, the Russian government allowed Navalny to be transported to a hospital in Germany which then announced that the Putin government had poisoned Navalny with novichok, which became the story that was read and televised worldwide. Interestingly, there is now evidence that the air medevac team was standing by and ready even before anyone knew Navalny was ill, suggesting that it was planned in advance. Once in Germany, as in the case of the Skripal poisoning, the evidence of the crime mysteriously disappeared for a while. Blood samples and water bottles allegedly containing the novichok were sent to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons offices for verification. They took five days to arrive.

The doubts regarding both the Skripals and Navalny poisonings might suggest that the Cold War never really ended, at least from the Anglo-American perspective. Whatever Vladimir Putin has been doing for the past three years hardly touches on genuine U.S. or British interests, unless one considers the governance of places like Ukraine and Syria to be potentially threatening. That someone, somewhere, somehow seems to be making an effort to isolate and delegitimize President Putin by making him an international poisoner is tragedy elevated by its absurdity to the level of farce. It serves no purpose and, in the end, can only lead to mistrust on all sides that can in turn become very, very ugly.

*

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

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

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Longstanding Holy See tradition opposes liberation theology, liberal morality, ordaining women, equity and social justice.

Pontiffs notoriously reject what just societies cherish most dearly.

In his book, titled “God and His Demons,” Michael Parenti exposed the myth of organized religion being above reproach.

Criticizing Old and New Testament dogma, he challenged notable religious figures by exposing their dark side, saying:

“The god of the Holy Bible – so much adored in the United States and elsewhere – is ferociously vindictive, neurotically jealous, intolerant, vainglorious, punitive, wrathful, sexist, racist, xenophobic, homophobic, sadistic and homicidal.”

“As they say, it’s all in the Bible. Beware of those who act in the name of such a god.”

Author John Allen slammed Pope Benedict XVI, saying he “believe(d) the best antidote to political totalitarianism is ecclesial totalitarianism.”

He and other pontiffs exercised dictatorial powers, governing as they wished, their decrees having final say.

Mixing religion with politics, Roman Catholicism and other hard-right faiths spread ideological extremism to mass audiences.

Claiming to serve God’s will, they tread where they don’t belong by siding with wealth, power and privilege over equity and justice for all.

Before becoming archbishop of Buenos Aires in 1998, then a cardinal in 2001, Jorge Mario Bergoglio (Pope Francis) supported Argentina’s military dictatorship (March 1976 – December 1983) – including its brutal dirty war backed by Washington.

Thousands disappeared. In detention centers, they were tortured, many eliminated.

Communists, socialists, independent journalists, human rights supporters, trade unionists, priests endorsing social justice, and students were targeted.


See:

Who is Pope Francis? Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Argentina’s “Dirty War”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky


In his earlier capacity, Pope Francis was complicit in what went on, supporting instead of denouncing it responsibly.

As pontiff, he operates in similar fashion with greater authority.

Last Christmas eve, he pushed toxic flu/covid mass-jabbing instead of forthrightly opposing what harmed countless millions over the past eight months.

Urging mass-jabbing “for all,  especially for the most vulnerable and needy of all regions of the planet (sic),” he called toxins designed to destroy health “morally acceptable.”

Who better to push poison than the Bishop of Rome with over a billion followers worldwide.

On Monday, Vatican News reported the following:

Effective October 1, “(t)he Governorate of Vatican City State” decreed that entry into its territory “will only be permitted to persons who are in possession of a Vatican Green Pass…European Green Pass, or a foreign (flu/covid) green pass attesting to (having been jabbed) or recovered from (the) SARS-COV-2” virus that doesn’t exist, adding:

“Entry will also be granted to those who have a negative molecular or antigenic test for the (nonexistent) SARS-COV-2 virus.”

The above decree came in response to remarks by Pope Francis on September 7.

Policy now decreed is necessary to ensure “the health and well-being of the working community (sic) while respecting the dignity, rights and fundamental freedoms of each of its members (sic).”

Francis called for “adopt(ing) every suitable measure to prevent, control and counteract the health emergency” that doesn’t exist.

The decree is signed by Cardinal Giuseppe Bertello, president of the Pontifical Commission for the Vatican City State and its Governorate.

Its provisions apply the Vatican City State’s citizens, residents, staff, and other workers.

No exemptions are permitted except for limited numbers of individuals participating in “liturgical celebrations for the time strictly necessary for the performance of the rite.”

They’ll be required to wear masks, maintain social distancing, and not enter areas outside of worshipping space.

Health passports where mandated have nothing to do with protecting what’s too precious to lose.

They have everything to do with draconian social control with tyrannical rule in mind.

If protecting public health was prioritized in the West, the Vatican City State and elsewhere, all things flu/covid never would have been mandated or urged — especially no mass-jabbing with health destroying toxins.

“Verification of compliance with new (Vatican) norms will be carried out by the Service for the Health and Safety of Workers in the workplaces of the Directorate of Health and Hygiene,” Vatican News reported.

Left unexplained is that the new policy has nothing to do with its stated purpose.

It has everything to do with Vatican dark forces going along with draconian US/Western policies that are all about destroying public health and fundamental freedoms.

According to an unnamed Vatican City civil servant critic:

“I look to the church to take care of its flock.”

“To see this happening in the Vatican is both uncharitable and scientifically ignorant.”

“As many scientific studies have shown, (jabbing) does not render one immune or unable to transmit the virus.”

It “increases the potential for carrying a higher virus load.”

“I will never take an abortion tainted vaccine.”

Aborted fetal cells are used in making bioweaponized flu/covid jabs.

Last February, a Holy See decree called for “appropriate measures aimed at preventing, tracking, and dealing with unique situations of a public health emergency” that didn’t exist then or now.

The decree covered “instruments required for an adequate and proportional response to the (nonexistent) health risk” — notably mass-jabbing with health destroying toxins.

It virtually mandated “measures…deemed necessary (sic)” for public interactions and what it called risks to the safety of residents and staff, saying:

“Voluntary adherence to a (jabbing) program must, therefore, take into account the risk that any refusal by a person concerned may pose a risk to him or herself, to others, and to the working environment.”

On the phony pretext of “protecting the community (from) those who refuse (jabs) in the absence of health reasons…(draconian) measures (will be adopted that have nothing to do with) minimiz(ing) danger(s)” that don’t exist.

Article 6 of the Vatican’s 2009  Rules for the Protection of Human Dignity and Fundamental Rights (sic) stipulates the following:

“(R)efusal to undergo preventive or periodic (medical) examinations… entail(s) consequences for employees of various degrees that can go as far as interruption of the employment relationship.”

“For job holders, this is equivalent to renouncing the employment relationship.”

Will Vatican City State refuseniks be isolated from others?

Will those with jobs be fired, fined, or otherwise punished?

Vatican City State policies follow draconian Western ones.

Will its residents and staff rebel?

“Will they resist what no one should tolerate anywhere?

*

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

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/how-wall-street-fleeces-america/

“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/banker-occupation-waging-financial-war-on-humanity/

A Parable of (All-American) Violence

September 24th, 2021 by Kelly Denton-Borhaug

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

As a religious studies professor, I know a parable when I see one. Consider the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and the final events in this country’s war in Afghanistan as just such a parable taken directly from the history of our moment.

The heart-wrenching last days of that war amounted to a cautionary tale about the nature of violence and the difficulty Americans have honestly facing their own version of it. As chaos descended on Kabul, and as the Biden administration’s efforts to evacuate as many Afghans and Americans as possible were stretched to the limit, one more paroxysm of senseless violence took center stage.

A suicide bomber sent by the Islamic State group ISIS-K struck Kabul’s airport, killing and maiming Afghans as well as American troops. The response? More violence as a Hellfire missile from an American drone supposedly took aim at a member of the terror group responsible. The U.S. military announced that its drone assassination had “prevented another suicide attack,” but the missile actually killed 10 members of one family, seven of them children, and no terrorists at all. Later, the Pentagon admitted its “mistaken judgment” and called the killings “a horrible tragedy of war.”

How to react? Most Americans seemed oblivious to what had happened. Such was the pattern of the last decades, as most of us ignored the staggering number of civilian casualties from our country’s bombing and droning of Afghanistan. As for the rest of us, well, what else could you do but hold your head and cry?

In fact, those final events in Afghanistan crystallized an important truth about our post-9/11 history: the madness of making war the primary method for dealing with potential global conflict and what’s still called “national security.” Throughout these years, our leaders and citizens alike promoted delusional dreams of violence (and glory), while minimizing or denying the nature of that violence and its grim impact on everyone touched by it.

With respect to the parables of the New Testament gospels, Jesus of Nazareth is reported to have said, “Those who have ears, let them hear.” In this case, however, Americans seem unable to listen.

Parables are compact, supposedly simple stories that, upon closer examination, illustrate profound spiritual and moral truths. But too few in this country have absorbed the truth about the misplaced violence that characterized our occupation of Afghanistan. Our culture remained both remarkably naïve and blindly arrogant when it came to widespread assumptions about our violent acts in the world that only surged thanks to the further militarization of this society and the wars we never stopped fighting.

The Costs of War in Well-Being, Money, and Morality

Over the last 20 years, according to a report from the National Priorities Project, the U.S. dedicated $21 trillion to an obsessive militarization of this country and to the post-9/11 wars that went with it. Nearly one million people died in the violence, while at least 38 million were displaced. Meanwhile, more than a million American veterans of those conflicts came home with “significant disabilities.” Deployment abroad brought not just death but devastation to all-too-many military families. Female spouses too often bore the brunt of care for returning service members whose needs were unfathomably wrenching. The maltreatment of children in military families “far outpaced the rates among non-military families” after increasing deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq and children of deployed parents showed “high levels of sadness.”

Many analysts have pointed to the culture of lies and self-deceit that characterized these years. American leaders, political and military, lost their own moral grounding and were dishonest with the citizenry they theoretically represented. But we citizens also share in that culpability. Andrew Bacevich recently asked why the American people didn’t hold their leaders to a more stringent accounting of the wars of the last 20 years. Why were Americans so willing to go along with the unremitting violence of those conflicts year after year, despite failure after failure? What he called the “Indispensable Nation Syndrome” was, he suggested, at least partially to blame — a belief in American exceptionalism, in our unique power to know what’s best for the world and grasp what the future holds in ways other nations and people couldn’t.

In the post-9/11 period, such a conviction mixed lethally with a deepening commitment to violence as the indispensable way to preserve what was best about this country, while fending off imagined threats of every sort. Americans came to believe ever more deeply, ever more thoughtlessly, in violence as a tool that could be successfully used however this country’s leaders saw fit.

The unending violence of our war culture became a kind of security blanket, money in the bank. Few protested the outlandish Pentagon budgets overwhelmingly approved by Congress each year, even as defeats in distant lands multiplied. Violence would protect us; it would save us. We couldn’t stockpile enough of it, or the weapons that made it possible, or use it more liberally around the globe — and increasingly at home as well. Such a deep, if remarkably unexamined, belief in the efficacy of violence also served to legitimate our wars, even as it helped conceal their true beneficiaries, the corporate weapons producers, those titans of the military-congressional-industrial complex.

As it happens, however, violence isn’t a simple tool or clothing you can simply take off and set aside once you’ve finished the job. Just listen to morally injured military service members to understand how deep and lasting violence turns out to be — and how much harder it is to control than people imagine. Once you’ve wrapped your country in its banner, there’s no way to keep its barbs from piercing your own skin, its poison from dripping into your soul.

Canaries in the Coal Mine of War, American-Style

Listening intently to the voices of active-duty service members and veterans can cut through the American attachment to violence in these years, for they’ve experienced its costs and carried its burden in deeply personal ways. Think of them as the all-too-well-armed canaries in the coal mine of our post-9/11 wars, taking in and choking on the toxicity of the violence they were ordered to mete out in distant lands. Their moral injuries expose the fantasy of “using violence cleanly” as wishful thinking, a chimera.

Take Daniel Hale who, while serving in the Air Force, participated in America’s drone-assassination program. Once out of the service, his moral compass eventually compelled him to leak classified information about drone warfare to a reporter and speak out against the drone brutality and inhumanity he had witnessed and helped perpetrate. (As the Intercept reported, during five months of one operation in Afghanistan, “nearly 90% of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets.”)

Convicted of violating the Espionage Act and given 45 months in prison, he wrote, in a letter to the judge who sentenced him, “Your Honor, the truest truism that I’ve come to understand about the nature of war is that war is trauma. I believe that any person either called upon or coerced to participate in war against their fellow man is promised to be exposed to some form of trauma. In that way, no soldier blessed to have returned home from war does so uninjured.” Having agonized about “the undeniable cruelties” he perpetrated, though he attempted to “hold his conscience at bay,” he eventually found that it all came “roaring back to life.”

Or listen to the voice of former Army reservist and CIA analyst Matt Zeller. Having grown up in a family steeped in the American military tradition and only 19 years old on September 11, 2001, he felt “obligated” to do something for his country and signed up. “I bought into it,” he would later say. “I really believed we could make a difference. And it turns out… you don’t come back the same person. I wasn’t prepared for any of that. And I don’t think you really can be.” Describing his post-service efforts to assist Afghans “endangered by their work with the United States” who were fleeing the country, he said, “I feel like this is atoning for all the shit that I did previously.”

Such voices disrupt the dominant narrative of the post-9/11 era, the unshakeable belief of our military and political leaders (and perhaps even of most Americans) that committing violence globally for two decades in response to that one day of bloody attacks on this country would somehow pay off and, while underway, could be successfully contained, distanced, and controlled. There was a deep conviction that, through such violence, we could purchase the world we wanted (and not just the weapons the military-industrial complex wanted us to pay for). Such was the height of American naïveté.

The Inequality and Inhumanity of Violence

Norwegian sociologist Johan Galtung has defined violence as an “avoidable assault [on] basic human needs and more generally [on] life.” But how many Americans in these years ever seriously considered the possibility that the violence of war could be avoided? Instead, in response to that one day of terrible violence in our own land, perpetual conflict and perpetual violence became the American way of life in the world, and the consequences at home and abroad couldn’t have been uglier.

Who bothered to consider other avenues of response in the wake of 9/11? The U.S. invaded Afghanistan five weeks after that day, while the Bush administration was already preparing the way for a future invasion of Iraq (a country which had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11). I’ll never forget the confusion, shock, and fear in the early weeks after those attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The world was grieving with us, but the dominant urge for violent revenge took shape with breathtaking speed, so quickly that it all seemed the natural course of events. Such is the nature of violence. Once it’s built into the structures of human society and government planning, it all too often takes precedence over any other possible course of action whenever conflict or danger arises. “There’s no other choice,” people say and critical thinking shuts down.

We in the United States have yet to truly face the personal as well as national costs of the violence that was so instantly woven into the fabric of our response to 9/11. Within a few days, for instance, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was already talking about a global war on terror targeting 60 countries! Most Americans blithely believed that we could strike in such a fashion without being truly affected ourselves. People generally failed to consider how such a recourse to endless violence would conflict, morally speaking, with the nation’s own deepest values.

But philosophers know that such violence almost invariably turns out to be grounded in inequality and so sharply conflicts with this country’s most basic values, especially the idea that human beings are equal. To act violently against the other, people must believe that the object of violence is somehow less worthy, of less value than themselves. In these years, they had to believe that the endless targets of American violence, like those seven dead children in Kabul, not to speak of the future lives and psychic well-being of the soldiers who were sent to deliver it, didn’t truly matter. They were all “expendable.”

No wonder military training always includes a process of being schooled in dehumanizing others. Otherwise, most people just won’t commit violence in that fashion. The sharp assault on their own values, their own humanity, is too great.

The commemorations of the 20th anniversary of 9/11 spotlighted the limits of the world that two decades of such wars have embedded in our national soul. With rare exceptions, there was a disparity when it came to grief. Countless reports mourned the victims and first responders who died here that day, but few were the ones who extended remembrance and grief to the hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions who have died in our wars in distant lands ever since. Where was the grief for them? Where was the sense of regret or introspection about what 20 years of unmitigated violence has wrought around the world and what it has undoubtedly changed in the moral character of this country itself?

For, believe me, all of us have been impacted morally by our government’s insistent attachment to violence. It’s helped destabilize our own core humanity, its toxicity penetrating all too deeply into the soul of the nation.

Recently, I was asked whether I agreed or disagreed with the statement, “I can be trained to kill and participate in killing and still be a good person.”

As a theologian, an American, and a human being, I find myself filled with dread when I attempt to sort this out. One thing I do know, though. I may be a civilian, but along with the members of the U.S. military, I can’t escape sharing complicity in the killing that’s gone on in my nation’s name, in that war on terror that became a war of terror. I remain part of the group that committed those crimes over so many seemingly endless years and that truth weighs ever more heavily on my conscience.

*

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

Kelly Denton-Borhaug, a TomDispatch regular, has long been investigating how religion and violence collide in American war-culture. She teaches in the global religions department at Moravian University. She is the author of two books, U.S. War-Culture, Sacrifice and Salvation and, more recently, And Then Your Soul is Gone: Moral Injury and U.S. War-Culture.

Featured image: U.S. jets bombing Afghanistan. These attacks will not end despite the formal U.S. withdrawal by September 11th. [Source: wired.com]


waronterrorism.jpgby Michel Chossudovsky
ISBN Number: 9780973714715
List Price: $24.95
click here to order

Special Price: $18.00

In this new and expanded edition of Michel Chossudovsky’s 2002 best seller, the author blows away the smokescreen put up by the mainstream media, that 9/11 was an attack on America by “Islamic terrorists”.  Through meticulous research, the author uncovers a military-intelligence ploy behind the September 11 attacks, and the cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

The expanded edition, which includes twelve new chapters focuses on the use of 9/11 as a pretext for the invasion and illegal occupation of Iraq, the militarisation of justice and law enforcement and the repeal of democracy.

According to Chossudovsky, the  “war on terrorism” is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.

September 11, 2001 provides a justification for waging a war without borders. Washington’s agenda consists in extending the frontiers of the American Empire to facilitate complete U.S. corporate control, while installing within America the institutions of the Homeland Security State.

30 Facts You Need to Know: Your COVID Cribsheet

September 24th, 2021 by Kit Knightly

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

Our Thanks to Off-Guardian for bringing this important article to our attention

We get a lot of e-mails and private messages along these lines “do you have a source for X?” or “can you point me to mask studies?” or “I know I saw a graph for mortality, but I can’t find it anymore”. And we understand, it’s been a long 18 months, and there are so many statistics and numbers to try and keep straight in your head.

So, to deal with all these requests, we decided to make a bullet-pointed and sourced list for all the key points. A one-stop-shop.

Here are key facts and sources about the alleged “pandemic”, that will help you get a grasp on what has happened to the world since January 2020, and help you enlighten any of your friends who might be still trapped in the New Normal fog.

*

Part I: “COVID Deaths” and Mortality

1. The survival rate of “Covid” is over 99%. Government medical experts went out of their way to underline, from the beginning of the pandemic, that the vast majority of the population are not in any danger from Covid.

Almost all studies on the infection-fatality ratio (IFR) of Covid have returned results between 0.04% and 0.5%. Meaning Covid’s survival rate is at least 99.5%.

2. There has been NO unusual excess mortality. The press has called 2020 the UK’s “deadliest year since world war two”, but this is misleading because it ignores the massive increase in the population since that time. A more reasonable statistical measure of mortality is Age-Standardised Mortality Rate (ASMR):

By this measure, 2020 isn’t even the worst year for mortality since 2000, In fact since 1943 only 9 years have been better than 2020.

Similarly, in the US the ASMR for 2020 is only at 2004 levels:

For a detailed breakdown of how Covid affected mortality across Western Europe and the US click here. What increases in mortality we have seen could be attributable to non-Covid causes [facts 7, 9 & 19].

3. “Covid death” counts are artificially inflated. Countries around the globe have been defining a “Covid death” as a “death by any cause within 28/30/60 days of a positive test”.

Healthcare officials from Italy, Germany, the UK, US, Northern Ireland and others have all admitted to this practice:

Removing any distinction between dying of Covid, and dying of something else after testing positive for Covid will naturally lead to over-counting of “Covid deaths”. British pathologist Dr John Lee was warning of this “substantial over-estimate” as early as last spring. Other mainstream sources have reported it, too.

Considering the huge percentage of “asymptomatic” Covid infections [14], the well-known prevalence of serious comorbidities [fact 4] and the potential for false-positive tests [fact 18], this renders the Covid death numbers an extremely unreliable statistic.

4. The vast majority of covid deaths have serious comorbidities. In March 2020, the Italian government published statistics showing 99.2% of their “Covid deaths” had at least one serious comorbidity.

These included cancer, heart disease, dementia, Alzheimer’s, kidney failure and diabetes (among others). Over 50% of them had three or more serious pre-existing conditions.

This pattern has held up in all other countries over the course of the “pandemic”. An October 2020 FOIA request to the UK’s ONS revealed less than 10% of the official “Covid death” count at that time had Covid as the sole cause of death.

5. Average age of “Covid death” is greater than the average life expectancy. The average age of a “Covid death” in the UK is 82.5 years. In Italy it’s 86. Germany, 83. Switzerland, 86. Canada, 86. The US, 78, Australia, 82.

In almost all cases the median age of a “Covid death” is higher than the national life expectancy.

As such, for most of the world, the “pandemic” has had little-to-no impact on life expectancy. Contrast this with the Spanish flu, which saw a 28% drop in life expectancy in the US in just over a year. [source]

6. Covid mortality exactly mirrors the natural mortality curve. Statistical studies from the UK and India have shown that the curve for “Covid death” follows the curve for expected mortality almost exactly:

The risk of death “from Covid” follows, almost exactly, your background risk of death in general.

The small increase for some of the older age groups can be accounted for by other factors.[facts 7, 9 & 19]

7. There has been a massive increase in the use of “unlawful” DNRs. Watchdogs and government agencies have reported huge increases in the use of Do Not Resuscitate Orders (DNRs) over the last twenty months.

In the US, hospitals considered “universal DNRs” for any patient who tested positive for Covid, and whistleblowing nurses have admitted the DNR system was abused in New York.

In the UK there was an “unprecdented” rise in “illegal” DNRs for disabled people, GP surgeries sent out letters to non-terminal patients recommending they sign DNR orders, whilst other doctors signed “blanket DNRs” for entire nursing homes.

A study done by Sheffield Univerisity found over one-third of all “suspected” Covid patients had a DNR attached to their file within 24 hours of hospital admission.

Blanket use of coerced or illegal DNR orders could account for any increases in mortality in 2020/21.[Facts 2 & 6]

Part II: Lockdowns

8. Lockdowns do not prevent the spread of disease. There is little to no evidence lockdowns have any impact on limiting “Covid deaths”. If you compare regions that locked down to regions that did not, you can see no pattern at all.

“Covid deaths” in Florida (no lockdown) vs California (lockdown)

“Covid deaths” in Sweden (no lockdown) vs UK (lockdown)

9. Lockdowns kill people. There is strong evidence that lockdowns – through social, economic and other public health damage – are deadlier than the “virus”.

Dr David Nabarro, World Health Organization special envoy for Covid-19 described lockdowns as a “global catastrophe” in October 2020:

We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of the virus[…] it seems we may have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition […] This is a terrible, ghastly global catastrophe.”

A UN report from April 2020 warned of 100,000s of children being killed by the economic impact of lockdowns, while tens of millions more face possible poverty and famine.

Unemployment, poverty, suicide, alcoholism, drug use and other social/mental health crises are spiking all over the world. While missed and delayed surgeries and screenings are going to see increased mortality from heart disease, cancer et al. in the near future.

The impact of lockdown would account for the small increases in excess mortality [Facts 2 & 6]

10. Hospitals were never unusually over-burdened. the main argument used to defend lockdowns is that “flattening the curve” would prevent a rapid influx of cases and protect healthcare systems from collapse. But most healthcare systems were never close to collapse at all.

In March 2020 it was reported that hospitals in Spain and Italy were over-flowing with patients, but this happens every flu season. In 2017 Spanish hospitals were at 200% capacity, and 2015 saw patients sleeping in corridors. A paper JAMA paper from March 2020 found that Italian hospitals “typically run at 85-90% capacity in the winter months”.

In the UK, the NHS is regularly stretched to breaking point over the winter.

As part of their Covid policy, the NHS announced in Spring of 2020 that they would be “re-organizing hospital capacity in new ways to treat Covid and non-Covid patients separately” and that “as result hospitals will experience capacity pressures at lower overall occupancy rates than would previously have been the case.”

This means they removed thousands of beds. During an alleged deadly pandemic, they reduced the maximum occupancy of hospitals. Despite this, the NHS never felt pressure beyond your typical flu season, and at times actually had 4x more empty beds than normal.

In both the UK and US millions were spent on temporary emergency hospitals that were never used.

Part III: PCR Tests

11. PCR tests were not designed to diagnose illness. The Reverse-Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test is described in the media as the “gold standard” for Covid diagnosis. But the Nobel Prize-winning inventor of the process never intended it to be used as a diagnostic tool, and said so publicly:

PCR is just a process that allows you to make a whole lot of something out of something. It doesn’t tell you that you are sick, or that the thing that you ended up with was going to hurt you or anything like that.”

12. PCR Tests have a history of being inaccurate and unreliable. The “gold standard” PCR tests for Covid are known to produce a lot of false-positive results, by reacting to DNA material that is not specific to Sars-Cov-2.

A Chinese study found the same patient could get two different results from the same test on the same day. In Germany, tests are known to have reacted to common cold viruses. A 2006 study found PCR tests for one virus responded to other viruses too. In 2007, a reliance on PCR tests resulted in an “outbreak” of Whooping Cough that never actually existed. Some tests in the US even reacted to the negative control sample.

The late President of Tanzania, John Magufuli, submitted samples goat, pawpaw and motor oil for PCR testing, all came back positive for the virus.

As early as February of 2020 experts were admitting the test was unreliable. Dr Wang Cheng, president of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences told Chinese state television “The accuracy of the tests is only 30-50%”. The Australian government’s own website claimed “There is limited evidence available to assess the accuracy and clinical utility of available COVID-19 tests.” And a Portuguese court ruled that PCR tests were “unreliable” and should not be used for diagnosis.

You can read detailed breakdowns of the failings of PCR tests here, here and here.

13. The CT values of the PCR tests are too high. PCR tests are run in cycles, the number of cycles you use to get your result is known as your “cycle threshold” or CT value. Kary Mullis said: “If you have to go more than 40 cycles[…]there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.”

The MIQE PCR guidelines agree, stating: “[CT] values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,”Dr Fauci himself even admitted anything over 35 cycles is almost never culturable.

Dr Juliet Morrison, virologist at the University of California, Riverside, told the New York Times: Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive…I’m shocked that people would think that 40 [cycles] could represent a positive…A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35″.

In the same article Dr Michael Mina, of the Harvard School of Public Health, said the limit should be 30, and the author goes on to point out that reducing the CT from 40 to 30 would have reduced “covid cases” in some states by as much as 90%.

The CDC’s own data suggests no sample over 33 cycles could be cultured, and Germany’s Robert Koch Institute says nothing over 30 cycles is likely to be infectious.

Despite this, it is known almost all the labs in the US are running their tests at least 37 cycles and sometimes as high as 45. The NHS “standard operating procedure” for PCR tests rules set the limit at 40 cycles.

Based on what we know about the CT values, the majority of PCR test results are at best questionable.

14. The World Health Organization (Twice) Admitted PCR tests produced false positives. In December 2020 WHO put out abriefing memo on the PCR process instructing labs to be wary of high CT values causing false positive results:

when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain.

Then, in January 2021, the WHO released another memo, this time warning that “asymptomatic” positive PCR tests should be re-tested because they might be false positives:

Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

15. The scientific basis for Covid tests is questionable. The genome of the Sars-Cov-2 virus was supposedly sequenced by Chinese scientists in December 2019, then published on January 10th 2020. Less than two weeks later, German virologists (Christian Drosten et al.) had allegedly used the genome to create assays for PCR tests.

They wrote a paper, Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR, which was submitted for publication on January 21st 2020, and then accepted on January 22nd. Meaning the paper was allegedly “peer-reviewed” in less than 24 hours. A process that typically takes weeks.

Since then, a consortium of over forty life scientists has petitioned for the withdrawal of the paper, writing a lengthy report detailing 10 major errors in the paper’s methodology.

They have also requested the release of the journal’s peer-review report, to prove the paper really did pass through the peer-review process. The journal has yet to comply.

The Corman-Drosten assays are the root of every Covid PCR test in the world. If the paper is questionable, every PCR test is also questionable.

Part IV: “Asymptomatic Infection”

16. The majority of Covid infections are “asymptomatic”.From as early as March 2020, studies done in Italy were suggesting 50-75% of positive Covid tests had no symptoms. Another UK study from August 2020 found as much as 86% of “Covid patients” experienced no viral symptoms at all.

It is literally impossible to tell the difference between an “asymptomatic case” and a false-positive test result.

17. There is very little evidence supporting the alleged danger of “asymptomatic transmission”. In June 2020, Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said:

From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual,”

A meta-analysis of Covid studies, published by Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in December 2020, found that asymptomatic carriers had a less than 1% chance of infecting people within their household. Another study, done on influenza in 2009, found:

…limited evidence to suggest the importance of [asymptomatic] transmission. The role of asymptomatic or presymptomatic influenza-infected individuals in disease transmission may have been overestimated…”

Given the known flaws of the PCR tests, many “asymptomatic cases” may be false positives.[fact 14]

Part V: Ventilators

18. Ventilation is NOT a treatment for respiratory viruses. Mechanical ventilation is not, and never has been, recommended treatment for respiratory infection of any kind. In the early days of the pandemic, many doctors came forward questioning the use of ventilators to treat “Covid”.

Writing in The Spectator, Dr Matt Strauss stated:

Ventilators do not cure any disease. They can fill your lungs with air when you find yourself unable to do so yourself. They are associated with lung diseases in the public’s consciousness, but this is not in fact their most common or most appropriate application.

German Pulmonologist Dr Thomas Voshaar, chairman of Association of Pneumatological Clinics said:

When we read the first studies and reports from China and Italy, we immediately asked ourselves why intubation was so common there. This contradicted our clinical experience with viral pneumonia.

Despite this, the WHO, CDC, ECDC and NHS all “recommended” Covid patients be ventilated instead of using non-invasive methods.

This was not a medical policy designed to best treat the patients, but rather to reduce the hypothetical spread of Covid by preventing patients from exhaling aerosol droplets.

19. Ventilators killed people. Putting someone on a ventilator who is suffering from influenza, pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or any other condition which restricts breathing or affects the lungs, will not alleviate any of those symptoms. In fact, it will almost certainly make it worse, and will kill many of them.

Intubation tubes are a source of potential a infection known as “ventilator-associated pneumonia”, which studies show affects up to 28% of all people put on ventilators, and kills 20-55% of those infected.

Mechanical ventilation is also damaging to the physical structure of the lungs, resulting in “ventilator-induced lung injury”, which can dramatically impact quality of life, and even result in death.

Experts estimate 40-50% of ventilated patients die, regardless of their disease. Around the world, between 66 and 86% of all “Covid patients” put on ventilators died.

According to the “undercover nurse”, ventilators were being used so improperly in New York, they were destroying patients’ lungs:

This policy was negligence at best, and potentially deliberate murder at worst. This misuse of ventilators could account for any increase in mortality in 2020/21 [Facts 2 & 6]

Part VI: Masks

20. Masks don’t work. At least a dozen scientific studies have shown that masks do nothing to stop the spread of respiratory viruses.

One meta-analysis published by the CDC in May 2020 found “no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks”.

Another study with over 8000 subjects found masks “did not seem to be effective against laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections nor against clinical respiratory infection.”

There are literally too many to quote them all, but you can read them: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Or read a summary by SPR here.

While some studies have been done claiming to show mask do work for Covid, they are all seriously flawed. One relied on self-reported surveys as data. Another was so badly designed a panel of experts demand it be withdrawn. A third was withdrawn after its predictions proved entirely incorrect.

The WHO commissioned their own meta-analysis in the Lancet, but that study looked only at N95 masks and only in hospitals. [For full run down on the bad data in this study click here.]

Aside from scientific evidence, there’s plenty of real-world evidence that masks do nothing to halt the spread of disease.

For example, North Dakota and South Dakota had near-identical case figures, despite one having a mask-mandate and the other not:

In Kansas, counties without mask mandates actually had fewer Covid “cases” than counties with mask mandates. And despite masks being very common in Japan, they had their worst flu outbreak in decades in 2019.

21. Masks are bad for your health. Wearing a mask for long periods, wearing the same mask more than once, and other aspects of cloth masks can be bad for your health. A long study on the detrimental effects of mask-wearing was recently published by the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Dr. James Meehan reported in August 2020 he was seeing increases in bacterial pneumonia, fungal infections, facial rashes .

Masks are also known to contain plastic microfibers, which damage the lungs when inhaled and may be potentially carcinogenic.

Childen wearing masks encourages mouth-breathing, which results in facial deformities.

People around the world have passed out due to CO2 poisoning while wearing their masks, and some children in China even suffered sudden cardiac arrest.

22. Masks are bad for the planet. Millions upon millions of disposable masks have been used per month for over a year. A report from the UN found the Covid19 pandemic will likely result in plastic waste more than doubling in the next few years., and the vast majority of that is face masks.

The report goes on to warn these masks (and other medical waste) will clog sewage and irrigation systems, which will have knock on effects on public health, irrigation and agriculture.

A study from the University of Swansea found “heavy metals and plastic fibres were released when throw-away masks were submerged in water.” These materials are toxic to both people and wildlife.

Part VII: Vaccines

23. Covid “vaccines” are totally unprecedented. Before 2020 no successful vaccine against a human coronavirus had ever been developed. Since then we have allegedly made 20 of them in 18 months.

Scientists have been trying to develop a SARS and MERS vaccine for years with little success. Some of the failed SARS vaccines actually caused hypersensitivity to the SARS virus. Meaning that vaccinated mice could potentially get the disease more severely than unvaccinated mice. Another attempt caused liver damage in ferrets.

While traditional vaccines work by exposing the body to a weakened strain of the microorganism responsible for causing the disease, these new Covid vaccines are mRNA vaccines.

mRNA (messenger ribonucleic acid) vaccines theoretically work by injecting viral mRNA into the body, where it replicates inside your cells and encourages your body to recognise, and make antigens for, the “spike proteins” of the virus. They have been the subject of research since the 1990s, but before 2020 no mRNA vaccine was ever approved for use.

24. Vaccines do not confer immunity or prevent transmission. It is readily admitted that Covid “vaccines” do not confer immunity from infection and do not prevent you from passing the disease onto others. Indeed, an article in the British Medical Journal highlighted that the vaccine studies were not designed to even try and assess if the “vaccines” limited transmission.

The vaccine manufacturers themselves, upon releasing the untested mRNA gene therapies, were quite clear their product’s “efficacy” was based on “reducing the severity of symptoms”.

25. The vaccines were rushed and have unknown longterm effects. Vaccine development is a slow, laborious process. Usually, from development through testing and finally being approved for public use takes many years. The various vaccines for Covid were all developed and approved in less than a year. Obviously there can be no long-term safety data on chemicals which are less than a year old.

Pfizer even admit this is true in the leaked supply contract between the pharmaceutical giant, and the government of Albania:

the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known

Further, none of the vaccines have been subject to proper trials. Many of them skipped early-stage trials entirely, and the late-stage human trials have either not been peer-reviewed, have not released their data, will not finish until 2023 or were abandoned after “severe adverse effects”.

26. Vaccine manufacturers have been granted legal indemnity should they cause harm. The USA’s Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP) grants immunity until at least 2024.

The EU’s product licensing law does the same, and there are reports of confidential liability clauses in the contracts the EU signed with vaccine manufacturers.

The UK went even further, granting permanent legal indemnity to the government, and any employees thereof, for any harm done when a patient is being treated for Covid19 or “suspected Covid19”.

Again, the leaked Albanian contract suggests that Pfizer, at least, made this indemnity a standard demand of supplying Covid vaccines:

Purchaser hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pfizer […] from and against any and all suits, claims, actions, demands, losses, damages, liabilities, settlements, penalties, fines, costs and expenses

Part VIII: Deception and Foreknowledge

27. The EU was preparing “vaccine passports” at least a YEAR before the pandemic began. Proposed COVID countermeasures, presented to the public as improvised emergency measures, have existed since before the emergence of the disease.

Two EU documents published in 2018, the “2018 State of Vaccine Confidence” and a technical report titled “Designing and implementing an immunisation information system” discussed the plausibility of an EU-wide vaccination monitoring system.

These documents were combined into the 2019 “Vaccination Roadmap”, which (among other things) established a “feasibility study” on vaccine passports to begin in 2019 and finish in 2021:

This report’s final conclusions were released to the public in September 2019, just a month before Event 201 (below).

28. A “training exercise” predicted the pandemic just weeks before it started. In October 2019 the World Economic Forum and Johns Hopkins University held Event 201. This was a training exercise based on a zoonotic coronavirus starting a worldwide pandemic. The exercise was sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and GAVI the vaccine alliance.

The exercise published its findings and recommendations in November 2019 as a “call to action”. One month later, China recorded their first case of “Covid”.

29. Since the beginning of 2020, the Flu has “disappeared”.In the United States, since February 2020, influenza cases have allegedly dropped by over 98%.

It’s not just the US either, globally flu has apparently almost completely disappeared.

Meanwhile, a new disease called “Covid”, which has identical symptoms and a similar mortality rate to influenza, is supposedly sweeping the globe.

30. The elite have made fortunes during the pandemic. Since the beginning of lockdown the wealthiest people have become significantly wealthier. Forbes reported that 40 new billionaires have been created “fighting the coronavirus”, with 9 of them being vaccine manufacturers.

Business Insider reported that “billionaires saw their net worth increase by half a trillion dollars” by October 2020.

Clearly that number will be even bigger by now.

*

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

Featured image is from OffGuardian

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

1) Iran’s independence 

The Iranian revolution was a leading factor which set Jimmy Carter’s government to incite division and conflict in Afghanistan, which shares an extensive western border with Iran.

From the early spring of 1979, plans were formulating in Washington to surround, isolate and overthrow the new Islamic Republic of Iran; while simultaneously a US strategy was developing to back the Afghan mujahideen jihadists, with president Carter officially sanctioning such support on 3 July 1979. Afghanistan was an important piece on the chess board in this imperialist game, as its neighbour Iran had made the swift transformation from US client state to staunch enemy of America.

Carter’s successor as president, Ronald Reagan, said that “Iran encompasses some of the most critical geography in the world”, of which Afghanistan is interlinked with. Reagan noted also that Iran occupies “a critical position from which adversaries could interfere with oil flows from the Arab states that border the Persian Gulf. Apart from geography, Iran’s oil deposits are important to the long-term health of the world economy”. (1)

As the Americans knew too well, their old enemy the Soviet Union was in early 1979 watching Iran’s independence with glee – while American allies in the region, like the dictatorships in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, were hardly reassured. Of further concern to Carter was that, in late April 1978, a Marxist-Leninist government had taken power in the Afghan capital Kabul.

On 30 April 1978 Harold Saunders, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, warned that Washington should “seek to avoid driving the new regime [in Afghanistan] into a closer embrace with the Soviet Union than it might wish”. (2)

On 17 May 1978, an unspecified number of Soviet Communist Party advisers arrived in Kabul, to assist the Afghan communist leader Nur Muhammad Taraki in safeguarding his government (3). President Taraki’s position was vulnerable, as his rapid and progressive reforms faced resistance from fundamentalist and conservative muslims. Among those Russians arriving in the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA) on 17 May were Yuri Gankovsky and Nikolai Simonenko, the latter holding the status of head of the Afghanistan sector for the Soviet Union.

On 27 June 1978, a group of 48 Soviet officials landed in the Afghan capital, so as to provide counsel to Taraki’s cabinet. In mid-July 1978 David D. Newsom, the US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, said that the US should continue a “monitoring action” on Afghanistan. According to president Taraki following a meeting with Newsom, the American diplomat said he felt there was a “new chill” in US-Afghan relations. (4)

On 23 August 1978 Taraki, reflecting on anti-communist skirmishes in Afghanistan which had occurred that summer, told the Soviet representative in Kabul, Alexander Puzanov, that he had freshly uncovered “an anti-government plot” (5). Taraki claimed it involved the US, West Germany, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran and also China.

In January 1979 on the recommendation of the American ambassador to Afghanistan, Adolph Dubs, the US State Department proposed a $310,000 program for 1979-1980, in order to train Afghan officers. (6)

2) Prestige

The presence of a new far-left government in Afghanistan was, from the American point of view, serious enough, while Iran’s revolution was especially grating with the power brokers in Washington.

Dean Acheson, former US Secretary of State, said in 1962 that a reaction by America when its “power, position and prestige” are challenged is not a “legal issue”, and that the US should feel no constraints by international law in such circumstances (7). Acheson was a lawyer too one might add, and he was speaking here to the American Society of International Law.

On 14 November 1978 the Soviet diplomat in Afghanistan, Puzanov, outlined that “already more than 700 Soviet advisers and experts work on a free-of-charge basis in civil ministries and in the military field in Afghanistan”. (8)

Eight days later on 22 November 1978, the Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev said Russian material assistance should go to “such states as the People’s Republic of Yemen, Ethiopia, Angola, Afghanistan, and some others”.

On 5 December 1978, presidents Brezhnev and Taraki signed a milestone 20 year Treaty of Friendship centred on “co-operation in the military field”. The treaty stipulated that Taraki could request Soviet military aid, if he felt threatened. The official response in Washington to this deal was apparently mild concern, but in private the Carter White House was increasingly disconcerted at the Soviet-Afghan links (9). It was a natural development for Moscow to pursue such relations, considering the close proximity of Afghanistan to the Soviet Union coupled with the political leanings of Taraki’s government.

On 17 December 1978, Puzanov informed Taraki of Moscow’s decision to furnish the Afghan communists with military supplies and armaments, worth 24 million roubles (10). In addition, Afghanistan would receive a bonus loan of 12 million roubles, with the Kremlin allowing the Afghans 10 years to pay it back, a welcome gift.

3) Strategic importance

By the spring of 1979, the Soviet Union looked to be in a position where it could start making inroads into US hegemony in the Middle East. Were this to unfold, and if Moscow could avoid becoming caught in a spider’s web in Afghanistan, it is unlikely that the USSR would have collapsed in 1991.

Afghanistan is situated in the heart of the long-coveted Eurasia: lying beside the Middle East, China, South Asia and Central Asia. It can be remembered that close collaboration, between Afghanistan and Soviet Russia, was not merely a phenomenon that can be recalled in living memory.

The Belarusian-born Soviet diplomat, Andrei Gromyko, wrote that

“Shortly after the October 1917 revolution the Soviet Republic and its neighbour, Afghanistan, established diplomatic relations. Soviet political and material support was one of the chief factors in Afghanistan’s victory, in its almost 100 year struggle for independence from its British colonisers. It is therefore not surprising that Soviet-Afghan relations have long been of a friendly nature”. (11)

In January 1979 Zbigniew Brzezinski, the powerful National Security Advisor, had gained control over US covert operational planning with president Carter’s full support. Brzezinski, born in Warsaw, Poland, was by instinct hostile to the USSR, and it had long bothered him how, in the post-World War II period, Poland was under the Soviet sphere of control. Even the New York Times, continually supportive of aggressive US militarism, admitted that Brzezinski had “a rigid hatred of the Soviet Union”. (12)

One of Brzezinski’s great hopes was to have a role in harming the Soviets, “of giving to the USSR its Vietnam War”, he insisted to Carter. From early 1979, Brzezinski and other Carter administration officials were pushing for Washington to begin clandestine activities in Afghanistan, and to support the mujahideen insurgency there. A US National Security Archive chronology highlighted,

“Having control over covert operations enables Brzezinski to take the first steps toward a more aggressively anti-Soviet Afghan policy, without the State Department’s knowing very much about it”. (13)

By early February 1979, moves had already been made by the Americans against the Afghan communists (14). On 2 February, the Washington Post reported on a joint program run by the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, in which at least 2,000 Afghan militants were being trained in former Pakistani army bases beside Afghanistan.

4) Overthrowing the USSR

The Carter administration’s plan to suck the Russians into the Afghan trap was intent on delivering a heavy, perhaps grievous blow, to the USSR. Brzezinski said that US covert actions in Afghanistan, which largely enticed the Soviets to engage militarily there, had induced “a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire”. (15)

The West’s desire to eliminate communist Russia had preceded the Second World War. At Soviet Russia’s founding when World War I was reaching its end, the leading Western states (America, Britain and France) and their allies had attempted to oust the Bolshevik government by invading Russia in 1918. Part of the aim was to restore a pro-Western, White Russian outfit in the Kremlin.

Through Winston Churchill’s firm support, in autumn 1919 the British deployed poison gas in northern Russia against Bolshevik troops (16); and this despite the horrors of chemical warfare fresh in the memory from the First World War. Scholars and diplomats, like John Lewis Gaddis and George Kennan, traced the Cold War’s origins to around 1917-1918.

By 1920, it was clear the Western military attack on Soviet Russia had failed to achieve its objectives. A generation later, with the defeat of Nazi Germany becoming a probability in World War II, the Soviet Union was again identified as the West’s principal foe from 1942-1943.

US Brigadier General Leslie Groves assumed control of the Manhattan Project (America’s atomic bomb program) in September 1942. In March 1944 Groves confided to the Polish physicist Joseph Rotblat,

“You realise of course that the main purpose of this [Manhattan] project is to subdue the Russians”.

On another occasion Groves remarked again on America’s atomic bomb development,

“There was never, from about two weeks from the time I took charge of the project, any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and the project was conducted on that basis”. (17)

This crucial testimony from a prominent US military official like Groves, indicates that as early as October 1942 the Soviets were beginning to be thought of as the Americans’ next major adversary.

5) The Domino Theory

– Within the space of a year (1978-79), the US had seen both Afghanistan and Iran become independent of its influence.

It sparked fears in Washington about the recurring domino theory: that other countries could fall like dominoes outside of US control, with revolution in Iran potentially spreading to nearby Iraq and Saudi Arabia, two further states rich in oil reserves. This was among the worst of scenarios for the White House. It was, for example, partly out of fear of dominoes falling that US governments launched wars of aggression in Indochina from the early 1960s.

On 15 February 1979, the Carter administration issued an official protest about purported Soviet activity in Iran of an “anti-American” nature. (18)

Five days later on 20 February 1979 president Carter, presumably referring to the Soviet Union, warned “other nations” against meddling in Iran, during a speech he gave at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. Carter continued that any such interference “will have serious consequences and will affect our broader relationship with them”. (19)

On 1 March 1979, US government departments conceded that the vital CIA TACKSMAN Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) sites – which had been located in northern Iran – were now closed down by the new Iranian leadership. In the Cold War era, the most important sites operated by the CIA were precisely these TACKSMAN intelligence facilities; which among other things enabled the Americans to secretly monitor Soviet missile tests. (20)

In the spring of 1979, the CIA was surveying Afghanistan as a replacement for its TACKSMAN sites (21). In mid-March 1979, an anti-communist revolt erupted around the ancient city of Herat, in western Afghanistan. It lasted for just a few days but resulted in many thousands of deaths. Among the men behind this insurrection was the Afghan-born Ismail Khan, who would later command a large mujahideen force against the Red Army in Afghanistan.

During the Herat revolt, Pakistani author Ahmed Rashid wrote that Khan’s forces were responsible for “killing Soviet and communist Afghan officers” and “Hundreds of Russians were killed” (22). Among the dead were some of the families of Soviet officers and military advisers. Herat’s civilian population, caught between the exchanges of gunfire and heavy weaponry, suffered a loss of life running into the low thousands at a minimum.

The 72-year-old Brezhnev was irate when informed about the Russian death toll in Herat. He agreed to increase military aid to the Afghan communists. However, no evidence existed through 1979 that Soviet troops were directly participating in combat operations in Afghanistan (23), until the Russian military offensive began in late December that year.

*

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

Shane Quinn obtained an honors journalism degree. He is interested in writing primarily on foreign affairs, having been inspired by authors like Noam Chomsky. 

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Notes

1 Ronald Reagan, “Address to the Nation on the Iran Arms and Contra Aid Controversy”, The American Presidency Project, 13 November 1986

2 Douglas Rivero, The Detente Deception: Soviet and Western Bloc Competition and the Subversion of Cold War Peace (University Press of America, 19 Dec. 2012) p. 106

3 Malcolm Byrne, Vladislav Zubok (assisted by National Security Archive staff), The Intervention in Afghanistan and the Fall of Detente, The National Security Archive

4 Ibid.

5 Ibid.

6 Diego Cordovez, Selig S. Harrison, Out of Afghanistan: The Inside Story of the Soviet Withdrawal (Oxford University Press, 29 June 1995) p. 34

7 Paul Craig Roberts, “How America Was Lost”, Foreign Policy Journal, 8 November 2013

8 Byrne, Zubok, The National Security Archive

9 Ibid.

10 Ibid.

11 Andrei Gromyko, Memories: From Stalin to Gorbachev (Arrow Books Limited, 1 Jan. 1989) p. 306

12 Bill van Auken, “Zbigniew Brzezinski, architect of the catastrophe in Afghanistan, dead at 89”, World Socialist Web Site, 29 May 2017

13 Byrne, Zubok, The National Security Archive

14 Ibid.

15 Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Le Nouvel Observateur, Prof. Michel Chossudovsky, “America Initiated the War on Afghanistan 40 Years Ago: U.S. Recruitment of ‘Islamic Terrorists’ Started in 1979. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Introductory Note by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky”, Global Research, 15 October 2001, Republished 22 August 2021

16 Giles Milton, “Winston Churchill’s shocking use of chemical weapons”, The Guardian, 1 September 2013

17 Peter Kuznick, “Truman’s ‘human sacrifice’ to subdue Moscow”, newagebd.net, 5 August 2020

18 Byrne, Zubok, The National Security Archive

19 New York Times, “Text of Speech by President Carter at Georgia Tech”, 21 February 1979

20 Jeffrey T. Richelson, The CIA and Signals Intelligence, The National Security Archive

21 Robert M. Gates, From the Shadows: The Ultimate Insider’s Story of Five Presidents and How They Won the Cold War (Simon & Schuster, 1st edition, 7 May 1996) p. 132

22 Ahmed Rashid, Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia (Yale University Press, 8 Feb. 2001) p. 37

23 Byrne, Zubok, The National Security Archive

Featured image: Brzezinski visits Osama bin Laden and other Mujahideen fighters during training.

The European Energy Crisis Is About to Go Global

September 24th, 2021 by Irina Slav

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

It was only a matter of time, really. In a globalized world, energy crunches can hardly remain regionally contained for very long, especially in a context of damaged supply chains and a rush to cut investment in fossil fuels. The energy crunch that began in Europe earlier this month may now be on its way to America. For now, all is well with one of the world’s top gas producers. U.S. gas exporters have enjoyed a solid increase in demand from Asia and Europe as the recovery in economic activity pushed demand for electricity higher. According to a recent Financial Times report, there is a veritable bidding war for U.S. cargos of liquefied natural gas between Asian and European buyers—and the Asians are winning.

Coal exports are on the rise, too, and have been for a while now, especially after a political spat had China shun Australian coal. But supply is tightening, Argus reported earlier this month. In July, according to the report, U.S. coking coal exports dropped by as much as 20.3 percent from June. The report noted supply was constrained by producers’ limited access to funding and a labor shortage that has plagued many industries amid the pandemic.

All this should be good news for U.S. producers of fossil fuels. But it may easily become bad news as winter approaches. The Wall Street Journal’s Jinjoo Lee wrote earlier this week high energy prices could be the next hot import for the United States. Lee cited data showing gas inventory replenishment was running below average rates for this season, and gas in storage in early September was 7.4 percent below the five-year average.

Coal inventories are also running low because of stronger exports, with prices for thermal coal three times higher than they were a year ago. According to calculations from the Energy Information Administration cited in the WSJ report, coal inventories in the United States could fall to less than half last year’s inventory levels by the end of the year. Last year, energy demand was depressed because of the pandemic. This year, the U.S. economy is firing on all cylinders once again.

No wonder electricity prices are already going up.

In a way, the events in Europe could be seen as a trailer of what might happen in the United States. It is a trailer because it shows all the worst bits. The United States is much more energy independent than, say, the UK, and that’s a big plus. Yet exports bring in revenues, and it would require government intervention to make gas producers cut exports.

In an alarming move, such intervention was requested last week by a manufacturing industry group. Industrial Energy Consumers of America, an organization representing companies producing chemicals, food, and materials, asked the Department of Energy to institute limits on the exports of liquefied natural gas in order to avoid soaring prices and gas shortages during the winter, Reuters reported on Friday.

Opinions seem to differ on whether rising LNG exports are in fact hurting U.S. consumers. But the fact is that gas prices are already double what they were a year ago. According to the IECA, they are not, however, high enough to motivate a ramp-up in natural gas production. Therefore, in order to stockpile enough gas for the winter, the U.S. government must force a reduction in exports.

The LNG industry is, of course, against this. The executive director of Center for Liquefied Natural Gas told Reuters most LNG exports are shipped under long-term fixed-price contracts that have no relation to benchmark gas prices and their movements. Yet some cargos are sold on the spot market.

“Buyers of LNG who compete for natural gas with U.S. consumers are state-owned enterprises and foreign government-controlled utilities with automatic cost pass through,” Paul Cicio, president of IECA, said, as quoted by Reuters. “U.S. manufacturers cannot compete with them on prices.”

Traders are already getting jittery, and this will likely contribute to price uncertainty; regardless of how the fundamentals situation develops. Again, Europe is at the heart of the uncertainty – or rather the certainty that prices have higher to climb. But now, China has added to concern about gas supply and the potential for shortages.

For now, China’s biggest problem seems to be coal rather than gas. A recent Bloomberg report said that China coal power plant operators are struggling to buy enough coal to keep their plants running, and some are being forced to shut down their boilers because of insufficient coal supply. This, however, might lead to stronger gas demand to ensure enough electricity and heating for the winter. This will further exacerbate the difference between global demand and supply.

The European energy crunch is spilling over into other regions. The blame game has begun with culprits ranging from years of underinvestment in local gas production to a Gazprom scheme to get Nord Stream 2 approved by Germany. For now, it is still unclear how much of the price surge is due to a gap between demand and supply and how much of it is due to market nervousness, at least according to RBC commodity strategist Christopher Louney, as quoted by the WSJ’s Lee. This question is less important than another, however, and it is a scary one:

Just how bad could things get this winter?

*

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

Irina is a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing on the oil and gas industry.

Featured image is from OilPrice.com

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Newspapers throughout Europe are talking about UK shortages and Brexit.

Spanish daily El País said last week that Brexit, worker shortages and the pandemic are hitting supplies in the United Kingdom.

Referencing shortages that plagued Britain in the 1970s, eventually leading to the arrival of Margaret Thatcher’s neoliberalism, the newspaper said Britain is returning to the days when it was “not uncommon to make excuses for breach of contract.”

‘Like a boycotted Cuba’

Also in Spain, La Vanguardia talks about KFC struggling to find chickens and having to close branches and McDonald’s not serving milkshakes and soft drinks.

It continues highlighting medicines are expiring before even arriving in British hospitals and pharmacies, fruits and vegetables are rotting in the fields, pubs are finding it hard to get hold of beer and water bottles are “evaporating”.

“In many many shops and supermarkets there isn’t milk, and the image of empty shelves has become usual, as if it were a boycotted Cuba,” the paper reported earlier this month.

French daily Libération used an almost bare toilet roll with the last sheet hanging reading “Brexit”.

And Le Parisien reported yesterday that gas stations run by UK’s BP and US rival ExxonMobil have closed in the UK due to fuel shortages caused by a lack of delivery drivers.

In a statement received by AFP, BP admits that it is “suffering from petrol supply problems at some sales sites in the United Kingdom”, caused by “delivery delays due to the lack of truck drivers across the UK”.

‘No one to transport fuel’

In Germany, Der Spiegel also reported yesterday about petrol shortagres, saying: “There would be enough fuel available – but nobody is there to transport it”.

Italy’s Repubblica TV talked about “Great Britain’s post-Brexit apocalipse” earlier this month.

And last month, Dissapore reported Brexit and Covid are putting Christmas at risk.

​​”London, Manchester, Cambridge, Birmingham: In all these cities there is a supply crisis that is hitting supermarkets and fast food,” the publication’s article read.

‘UK is in serious trouble’

Europe’s reporting of post-Brexit Britain sparked many reactions – with one user saying: “Brexit and its consequences are news all over the globe because what is happening in the UK isn’t happening there.

“Regardless of what the UK government says, the UK is in serious trouble.”

James Taylor said they must be “jealous” as there is no room for food in the UK because “our shelves are stacked full of sovereignty”.

And Paul Niland said: “Note. All of these countries also have Covid to deal with. Also note. The list of upsides contains nothing more than slogans.”

*

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

Featured image is from TLE

Pakistani Diplomacy Is on a Roll

September 24th, 2021 by M. K. Bhadrakumar

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

An Indian news website that is wired into Panjshir Valley reported this morning that Amrullah Saleh, former Afghan vice president and security tsar in the Ghani government has relocated to Tajikistan and that that he was given a safe passage by the Tajikistan government. 

This comes within days of the “lengthy meeting” in Dushanbe on September 17 between Tajik President Emomali Rahmon and Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan where they thrashed out the terms of a consensus approach towards the Taliban Govt in Kabul. 

Imran Khan later hinted that he would be working on Rahmon’s preconditions for accepting the Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Rahmon himself said in a major speech later in the presence of Imran Khan that he was “satisfied with the process of regular political contacts between our states, including at the highest level,” and expressed interest in connectivity with the ports of Karachi and Gwadar and in “joining regional corridors and transport projects”.

Rahmon stressed that “stabilising the situation in Afghanistan, as a country connecting regional and international transport networks, is especially important” for Dushanbe. He expressed the hope that peace and stability in Afghanistan “will be restored in the near future and the interests of all political and ethnic groups in Afghanistan will be taken into account. We support inclusive government in this country with the participation of all social groups.” 

Importantly, Rahmon and Imran Khan agreed that the “speedy elimination of the conflict and tensions in the Panjshir province by declaring a ceasefire and opening roads for providing humanitarian assistance is one of the most important tasks today.” And the two leaders also “agreed to direct all efforts to achieve these goals.”

Rahmon concluded, “We agreed to facilitate negotiations between the Taliban and Tajiks in Dushanbe. read more 

Dushanbe has finally accepted the Taliban as a reality. Imran Khan has won over Rahmon who has been an obdurate, seemingly recalcitrant critic of the Taliban.

It is entirely conceivable that Rahmon provided “safe passage” to Saleh so that the deck is clear for ending the strife in Panjshir Valley and reconciliation talks with the Taliban to begin.

Since then, a joint Russian-Chinese-Pakistani diplomatic mission to Kabul on September 21-22 has held talks with the acting Taliban Prime Minister Mohammad Hasan Akhund, acting Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi, acting Finance Minister Hidayatullah Badri and other senior officials, aside former Afghan President Hamid Karzai and and former Chairman of the High Council for National Reconciliation Abdullah Abdullah. 

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has stated that “in-depth and constructive discussions” took place on the whole range of issues, “especially on inclusiveness, human rights, economic and humanitarian issues, friendly relations between Afghanistan and other countries, especially neighbouring countries, and the unity and territorial integrity” of the country. The Taliban leaders appreciated that the 3 countries “are playing a constructive and responsible role in consolidating peace and stability” in Afghanistan. 

It appears that the inputs from the meeting in Kabul have gone into the meeting of the foreign ministers of the permanent members of the UN Security Council on Wednesday in New York chaired by Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. In subsequent remarks to the media, Guterres sounded optimistic.  

Importantly, this P-5 meeting took place at the initiative of the UK, a day after Prime Minister Boris Johnson met President Biden on Tuesday at the White House. 

A readout from 10 Downing Street later summed up that Johnson and Biden agreed that “the best way to honour all those who gave their lives to make Afghanistan a better place will be to use all the diplomatic and humanitarian tools at our disposal to prevent a humanitarian crisis and preserve the gains made in Afghanistan.”

The restrained language reflects the mellowed tone in Biden’s brief references in his UN GA speech on Tuesday where he en passe spoke of “closing this period of relentless war (in Afghanistan) and opening a new era of relentless diplomacy.” Biden made no threatening references to “out-of-the-horizon” military operations directed at Afghanistan and eschewed any demonising of the Taliban. 

Interestingly, Biden did advocate the rights of women but “from Central America to the Middle East, to Africa, to Afghanistan — wherever it appears in the world.” 

The bottom line is that the Pakistani line on the imperative need to engage with the Taliban government is steadily gaining traction. The Pakistani mantra is: “Be realistic. Show patience. Engage. And above all, don’t isolate.” — as a AP dispatch neatly summed up an exclusive interview with Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi on Wednesday on the sidelines of the UN GA in New York. read more

On granting recognition to the Taliban government, Imran Khan told the BBC this week,

“We will collectively take a decision… We think that all the neighbours will get together, we will see how they [Taliban] progress, and whether to recognise them or not will be a collective decision.” 

He underscored,

“There will not be any long-term sustainable peace in Afghanistan unless all the factions, all the ethnic groups are represented.” 

Pakistan’s decision to work for and through a regional consensus, is a tactically prudent course, that raises the comfort level of Afghanistan’s neighbours. Imran Khan’s understanding with Rahmon becomes vital. 

Imran Khan was at his persuasive best in the BBC interview, candidly discussing the international community’s anxieties over the rights of women under Taliban rule, etc. But his unspoken message is hard-hitting: What is the alternative to engaging with the Taliban government — nudging it, cajoling it, incentivising it? 

Perhaps, it smacks of a poker game where Imran Khan knows Pakistan is holding a strong hand and doesn’t have to flaunt it while claiming victory. But Pakistan has learned from the experience of the 1990s — high risk of going out on a limb in a triumphalist frame of mind. 

Today, the external environment is working favourably for Pakistani diplomacy. China’s readiness to salvage the Afghan economy is an altogether new factor. Again, with the Biden Administration disinclined to get into further entanglements in Afghanistan and Central Asia and big-power strategic competition accelerating elsewhere globally, the neighbouring countries of Afghanistan are becoming the main stakeholders — Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, China and Pakistan — and their number one priority is the stability of Afghanistan.

The Turkmenistan president Berdimuhamedow probably spoke for the region when he said in his speech at the UNGA earlier this week:

“The situation there is not easy, the government and public institutions that are being formed are very fragile. This is why assessing the situation in the country requires ultimate consistency, prudence and responsibility — both in words and actions. 

“The situation in Afghanistan has changed, and when forming an approach to it, one needs to abandon ideological preferences, old grudges, phobias and stereotypes, thinking first and foremost about Afghan people who are tired of wars and turbulences and dream of a peaceful and quiet life.

“Turkmenistan is deeply interested in a politically stable and safe Afghanistan. We call for normalising the situation in Afghanistan as soon as possible and expect that new government agencies will operate effectively in the interests of all Afghan people. Turkmenistan will continue to provide comprehensive economic support and humanitarian assistance to Afghanistan.” 

Indeed, the mood in the region is radically changing. It is noticeable too that Afghanistan has become a much calmer place. Violence and bloodshed have ceased. The civil war conditions are receding. 

The change of mood is reflected in a recent interview by Karzai to the Iranian media where he said that the Taliban are from Afghanistan and part of its people, they love their homeland and want calm and a peaceful life.

*

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

Featured image: Acting Prime Minister of Taliban Interim Government Mohammad Hasan Akhund and senior ministers met the special envoys of Russia, China and Pakistan in Kabul, Afghanistan, September 21, 2021  (Source: Indian Punchline)

Pulmonary Nurse of 31 Years Testifies How He Followed the COVID Protocols, Unknowingly that They Could Result in the Deaths of Patients

By Brian Shilhavy, September 23, 2021

In this public testimony, Mr. Spence relates how he followed all the advice in the beginning of how the medical system wanted him to treat COVID patients, even though so much of it went against his 30+ years of experience in treating patients with respiratory illnesses.

30,000+ Women in UK Report Menstrual Problems after COVID Shots, but Menstrual Issues Not Listed as Side Effect

By Megan Redshaw, September 23, 2021

Reports of adverse reactions include heavier-than-usual periods, delayed periods and unexpected vaginal bleeding. Most women who reported a change to their period after vaccination found it returned to normal the following cycle, according to the author of the editorial, Dr. Victoria Male, a reproductive specialist at Imperial College in London.

The Revenge of White Colonialism Motivates the AUKUS Alliance Against China

By Danny Haiphong, September 23, 2021

AUKUS is primarily a military relationship but is said to include broad economic measures that undoubtedly seek to counter China’s rise in all spheres of development.

‘This Cannot Happen’: Biden DHS Seeks Contractor for Migrant Detention Center at Guantánamo Bay

By Jessica Corbett, September 23, 2021

The solicitation for bids—which requires some guards who speak Spanish and Haitian Creole—comes as the administration is under fire for mass deportations of migrants, including thousands of Haitians.

Video: ‘Liberal Media Darling’ George W. Bush Confronted by Iraq Veteran

By Steve Watson, September 23, 2021

An Iraq veteran gave George W. Bush a stark reminder this past weekend that although he’s now a liberal media darling, there are plenty of Americans who remember the lies that led to millions of deaths.

American Medical Association Instructs Doctors to Deceive

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, September 23, 2021

The Winter 2021 “AMA COVID-19 Guide: Background/Messaging on Vaccines, Vaccine Clinical Trials & Combatting Vaccine Misinformation,” issued by the American Medical Association (AMA) raises serious questions about the AMA’s adherence to transparency, honesty, ethics and the moral standards to which it will hold its members.

Eurasia Takes Shape: How the SCO Just Flipped the World Order

By Pepe Escobar, September 23, 2021

As a rudderless West watched on, the 20th anniversary meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was laser-focused on two key deliverables: shaping up Afghanistan and kicking off a full-spectrum Eurasian integration.

How Can You be Content with a Counterfactual Explanation of an Orchestrated “Pandemic”?

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, September 23, 2021

The mRNA vaccines in effect train the virus to escape immune response, thus creating variants that are not controlled by immune responses. Alternatively, adverse vaccine reactions are called “variants.”

New Movement Launched by Physicians, Including Dr. Robert Malone, to Fight Medical Tyranny

By Joel S. Hirschhorn, September 23, 2021

When Americans see the data on COVID deaths of over 600,000, who or what should they blame?  The truth is this: Better than blaming the virus they should blame hospitals and the vast majority of physicians.

Welcome to the CO2 Monitoring Credit Card that Cuts You Off at Your Carbon Max

By Makia Freeman, September 23, 2021

Doconomy is a CO2 monitoring credit card backed by the UN (United Nations), WEF (World Economic Forum) and Mastercard which promises to track your carbon spending – and cut you off once you reach your permitted carbon maximum.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: How Can You be Content with a Counterfactual Explanation of an Orchestrated “Pandemic”?

The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People

September 24th, 2021 by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

Share this article, far and wide.

.

.

UPDATE

There is a worldwide upward trend of vaccine deaths and injuries. 

The latest official figures (August 30, 2021) point to approximately: 

38,488 mRNA vaccine reported and registered deaths in the EU, UK and US (combined) and

6.3 million reported “adverse events”.

But only a small fraction of the victims or families of the deceased will go through the tedious process of reporting vaccine related deaths and adverse events to the national health authorities. 

Moreover, the health authorities are actively involved in obfuscating the deaths and injuries resulting from the “unapproved” and “experimental” mRNA “vaccine”.

Based on historical data (Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS, p. 6)

“Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. … less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. (emphasis added)

***

While we are not in a position to establish precise estimates, we are able to establish the order of magnitude.

Multiply the official figures (registered and recorded) by the relevant parameter to get the REAL NUMBERS of deaths and injuries.  

Very High Numbers  

Assuming that 10% of deaths and adverse events are reported (a very conservative assumption according to Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc, p. 6)

The mRNA “Vaccine” would have resulted in

AT LEAST 380,000 deaths and 63 million “adverse events” for a combined population of approximately 830 million (UK, EU, US). 

Video: The mRNA vaccine was launched in mid to late December 2020. 

 

In many countries, there was a significant shift in mortality following the introduction of the mRNA vaccine

Source: HeathData.org

The government are LYING.

It’s a killer Vaccine.

Moreover, the official figures are manipulated. Vaccine related deaths are often attributed to Covid-19.

Peer reviewed reports confirm the causes  of vaccine related deaths and adverse effects (injuries) including among others blood clots, thrombosis, myocarditis, fertility. 

DO NOT GET VACCINATED.

STAND IN SOLIDARITY WITH THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN VACCINATED.

INFORM PEOPLE ACROSS THE LAND ON THE HEALTH RISKS. 

SPREAD THE WORD.

TAKE A FIRM STANCE AGAINST THE VACCINE PASSPORT. 

The legitimacy of politicians and their Big Money sponsors must be challenged.

We must act with a single voice nationally and internationally.

Our First Task is to disable the fear campaign

The COVID-19 “vaccination” programme should be halted immediately worldwide.

 

Michel Chossudovsky, September 3, 2021

***

Introduction

Let us be under no illusions, it’s not only “experimental”, it’s a Big Pharma “killer vaccine” which modifies the human genome. The evidence of mortality and morbidity resulting from vaccine inoculation both present (official data) and future (e.g. undetected microscopic blood clots) is overwhelming. 

Numerous scientific studies published independently confirm the nature of the Covid-19 mRNA vaccine which is being imposed on all humanity. 

The stated objective is to enforce the Worldwide vaccination of 7.9 billion people in more than 190 countries, to be followed by the imposition of a digitized “vaccine passport”. Needless to say this is a multi-billion dollar operation for Big Pharma.

Bill Gates and WHO’s Director General Dr. Tedros

The global vaccine project entitled COVAX is coordinated Worldwide by the WHO, GAVI, CEPI, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in liaison with the World Economic Forum (WEF),  the Wellcome Trust, DARPA and Big Pharma which is increasingly dominated by the Pfizer-GSK partnership established barely four months before the onset of the Covid-19 crisis in early January 2020.  

The Covid-19 Timeline 

Fake figures of covid-19 positive cases and covid-19 related deaths. Lies upon lies.

There is a complex timeline. The covid crisis is marked by several stages leading up to the implementation of mass vaccination Worldwide in December 2020.

A fake Worldwide Public Health Emergency (PHEIC) was announced by the WHO on January 30, 2020 (based on 83 positive cases Worldwide outside China), followed by the onset of the crisis in air travel and international commodity trade (Trump on January 31, 2020), the February 20, 2020 financial crash, the March 11, 2020 lockdown, followed by the second, third waves and fourth waves. When will it end?

For further details on the Timeline see Chapter II of

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

The March 11, 2020 Lockdown and Its Devastating Social and Economic Consequences

Starting on March 11, 2020, 44,279 so-called confirmed RT-PCR “positive cases” (Worldwide out of China) and 1440 Covid deaths were used to justify:

  • social confinement,
  • the lockdown and closure of 190 national economies, crisis of the global economy,
  • extensive corporate bankruptcies in key sectors of economic activity,
  • the outright elimination of small and medium sized enterprises,
  • the triggering of poverty and mass unemployment,
  • social distancing, the face mask, no social and family gatherings,
  • devastating impacts on mental health,
  • an engineered crisis of the national health system,
  • the closure of schools, colleges and universities,
  • the closure of museums, concert halls, cultural and sport events,
  • institutional collapse and the disruption of civil society.

The stated objective has always been to save lives.

The outcome of these policies have literally destroyed people’s lives. Millions of people Worldwide have been driven into extreme poverty.

And then ten months later the Covid-19 vaccine has come to our rescue.

It was announced in early November 2020 and launched Worldwide in late December.

The fear campaign has spearheaded compliance and acceptance to higher authority.

Video

Click the lower right corner to access full-screen

.

.

The mRNA Vaccine

The mRNA vaccine was presented as an everlasting solution, as a means to curbing the epidemic, saving lives, reopening our shattered national economies and restoring a sense of normality in our daily lives.

A massive propaganda campaign was initiated in support of the vaccine.

A fake promise of a new life. A return to reason and normalcy.

All of this turned out to be an illusion, spearheaded by lies and fabrications.

The ideology of the financial elites and the billionaire foundations was imposed: The vaccine was upheld as a means to carrying out the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset”:

“You’ll Own Nothing and Be Happy”: a  stylized future predicated on debt and extreme poverty coupled with a ‘killer vaccine”.

What is envisaged under “The Great Reset” (Klaus Schwab, image left) is a scenario whereby the global creditors will have appropriated by 2030 the World’s wealth, while impoverishing large sectors of the World Population.

The billionaire elites do not hide their intent. In 2030 “You’ll own nothing, And you’ll be happy.”

(see video below)

 

Lies through omission: the dramatic trend in mortality and morbidity related to the vaccine (confirmed by official sources) since early January 2021 had been carefully obfuscated.

“Killer Virus” or “Killer Vaccine”? 

The first question which stands out is: Do We Need a Vaccine?

The answer is NO! There is no scientific basis whatsoever which justifies the gene-edited vaccine as a means to saving lives and protecting people’s health Worldwide.

The alleged “scientific justification” for the vaccination program relies on the three simple and misleading “phrases” or “labels” which are totally invalid:

  • SARS-COV-2 is a “killer virus”
  • There is a rising Worldwide trend of covid-19 infection,
  • People are dying as a result of the covid-19 infection.

Refutation of Above Statements

1. SARS-CoV-2 is “a killer virus”.

That’s the cornerstone of the 24/7 fear and media disinformation campaign upheld by persistent statements by politicians and national health authorities.

Both the peer-reviewed as well the WHO, CDC “official” definitions of SARS-CoV-2 say exactly the opposite. Their definitions of SARS-2 repeal their own lies. (For details see Appendix)

2. There is a Rising Worldwide Trend of Covid-19 infection.

This alleged trend is said to be corroborated by a rapidly increasing number of covid positive cases.

The methodology used to generate these figures is dependent upon the WHO sponsored  Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test, the estimates of which are tabulated Worldwide by the national health authorities.

While the estimates of the rRT-PCR have been questioned from the very outset, it is now confirmed by the WHO in a January 20, 2021 advisory that the rRT-PCR test adopted as a means to detecting SARS-COV-2  positive cases is TOTALLY invalid. (This pertains to Covid positive data tabulated since late January 2020). (See Appendix)

3.   People are Dying as a Result of the Covid-19 Infection.

We are told that there is a rising trend of Covid-19 mortality. Namely deaths which are allegedly the result of  the SARS-2 viral infection.

There is ample evidence that these Covid-19 related probable causes of death and the underlying data on Covid-19 mortality are manipulated by the national health authorities. Tests, autopsies and postmortems are not conducted. The mortality statistics pertaining to Covid-19 are TOTALLY invalid. (see Appendix which focusses on the US covid related mortality data )

In summary, 

  • 1. there is no killer virus, 
  • 2. the measurement of covid positive cases is invalid, 
  • 3. the Covid-19 mortality data are manipulated. 

All of these statements are amply documented. For details see Appendix to this article  below.

I should mention that the so-called “emergency use” clause to justify an experimental and unapproved vaccine is also invalid. Why? Because the emergency use criterion relies on erroneous estimates of the rRT-PCR covid positive cases (fake) and Covid-19 related mortality data, both of which are invalid. (See Appendix)

The Vaccine. Hidden Agenda? 

The vaccine does not save lives nor does it contain the pandemic, because there is no pandemic. It’s a money-making operation for Big Pharma in the hundreds of billions of dollars (see data below).

Moreover, it’s not a one time vaccine jab. Several doses are contemplated. It is slated to extend over a period of at least two years.

It is applied Worldwide without exceptions. Not a single country with the exception of Burundi, Tanzania and Haiti had the courage to refuse the “killer vaccine”.

While there is no reliable evidence, it is worth noting that the presidents of Tanzania and Burundi died under mysterious circumstances.

Haiti was until recently the only country in the Western Hemisphere which refused categorically to implementing the mRNA vaccine. In a bitter irony, immediately following president Jovenel Moise’s assassination (July 7, 2021), president Joe Biden promptly sent half a million vaccine doses (and more to come) (courtesy of Uncle Sam) which were delivered by COVAX to Port au Prince six days later on July 14.

This first shipment to Haiti was  part of a US Aid program consisting of 500 million doses of the “killer vaccine” which is slated to be sent to a large number of developing countries   (For further details see below). 

Mortality and Morbidity: While there is “No Killer Virus”, there is a “Killer Vaccine”.

The evidence is overwhelming. At the time of writing (mid-July 2021), almost 20,000 Covid vaccine deaths were  recorded in the European Union (July 17, 2021). In the US the number of registered vaccine related deaths is of the order of 12,000 (July 9, 2021).

According to the EudraVigilance database (July 17, 2021) there were  18,928 deaths and 1,823,219 injuries reported following injections of four experimental COVID-19 shots.

From the total of injuries recorded in the EU, “half of them (904,609) are serious injuries“. According to EuroViligance (quoted by by Brian Shilhavy):

Seriousness … can be classified as ‘serious’ if it corresponds to a medical occurrence that results in death, is life-threatening, requires inpatient hospitalisation, results in another medically important condition, or prolongation of existing hospitalisation, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect.”

According to the latest figures (from government sources) for the EU, Britain and the US (combined), there are 38,488 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 6.3 million injuries reported on 1 August 2021


EU/EEA/Switzerland to 31 July 2021 – 20,595 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.94 million injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 21 July 2021 – 1,517 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.1 million injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 23 July 2021 – 11,940 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 2.4 million injuries, per VAERS database.


These are official statistics based on a formal process of registration of deaths and injuries. The actual number of deaths and injuries triggered by the mRNA vaccine are much higher.

A small fraction of the victims or families of the deceased will go through the tedious process of reporting vaccine related deaths and injuries to the national health authorities. In this regard, according to a study conducted by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc., fewer than 1% of vaccine related adverse effects are  reported.  (see Electronic Support for Public Health–Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (ESP:VAERS, p. 6).

Adverse events from drugs and vaccines are common, but underreported. … less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. (emphasis added)

The latest official figures (August 30, 2021) point to approximately 38,488 mRNA vaccine reported and registered deaths in the EU, UK and US (combined) and 6.3 million reported adverse effects.

Multiply the figures by the relevant parameter to get the REAL numbers. we are talking about very high numbers.

There is Worldwide upward trend of vaccine related mortality and morbidity which is amply documented. Peer reviewed reports confirm the causes  of vaccine related deaths and injuries including among others blood clots, thrombosis, myocarditis, fertility.


 

Video: Impact of Covid Vaccinations on Mortality (December 2020- April 2021). Selected Countries

 

Source: HeathData.org


Hidden Injuries: The Microscopic Blood Clots

The persons vaccinated will not be immediately aware of the injuries incurred. The latter in most cases are not discernible,  nor are they recorded. While “Big Blood Clots” resulting from the vaccine are revealed and reported by those vaccinated, an important study by Canada’s Dr. Charles Hoffe, suggests (yet to be fully confirmed) that the mRNA vaccine generates “microscopic blood clots”.

“The blood clots we hear about which the media claim are very rare are the big blood clots which are the ones that cause strokes and show up on CT scans, MRI, etc.

The clots I’m talking about are microscopic and too small to find on any scan. They can thus only be detected using the D-dimer test.”

“These people have no idea they are even having these microscopic blood clots. The most alarming part of this is that there are some parts of the body like the brain, spinal cord, heart and lungs which cannot re-generate. When those tissues are damaged by blood clots they are permanently damaged.

“These shots are causing huge damage and the worst is yet to come.” 

Below is his interview, with Laura Lynn Tylor Thompson (also available on  Rumble channel).

Big Pharma. Pfizer’s Near Global Monopoly

Hundreds of billions of dollars are at stake. This is the largest and most expensive vaccine project in World history which is slated to be financed by tax dollars Worldwide, putting an obvious strain on the public debt of numerous countries.

The vaccine program is accompanied by a “timeline”  consisting of recurrent mRNA inoculations over “the next two years and beyond”. As documented above, it will have devastating impacts on mortality and morbidity Worldwide.

What is at stake is a multi-billion dollar Big Money operation for Big Pharma with Pfizer in the lead.

Pfizer-BioNTech (allied with Moderna Inc) is in the process of consolidating its Worldwide (near monopoly) position  by pushing out its major competitors including AstraZenaka and Johnson and Johnson (J & J).

Pfizer has been pressuring politicians to endorse their mRNA vaccine. It’s political lobbying is also directed against its Big Pharma competitors. According to Bureau Investigates report:

One official who was present in the unnamed country’s negotiations described Pfizer’s demands as “high-level bullying” and said the government felt like it was being “held to ransom” in order to access life-saving vaccines.

Ironically, in the EU, the reported deaths and injuries were used by the European Commission to cancel the renewal of the contract with AstraZeneka, despite the fact that there were substantially more deaths and injuries associated with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

In April 2021, the EU Commission confirmed that it would “end AstraZeneca and J&J vaccine contracts at expiry”.  “The Pfizer shot will take precedence”. Never mind your followup dose with AstraZeneka, the health authorities have instructed people to get their second or third jab with Pfizer or Moderna (thereby visibly violating medical norms).

Having sidelined its competitors, Pfizer-BioNTech has jacked up the price of the vaccine vial. Pfizer has literally cornered both the EU and US markets. A near global vaccine monopoly is in the making.

The European Union

In mid-April 2021 the President of the European Commission confirmed that Brussels is in process of negotiating  a contract with Pfizer for the production of 1.8 billion mRNA vaccine doses, which represents 23 percent of the World’s population.

That’s exactly four times the population of the 27 member states of the European Union (448 Million, 2021 data), which confirms that several followup doses of the “killer vaccine” are envisaged, despite the trend in mortality and morbidity which the governments and the media are attempting to suppress as part of a  hideous disinformation campaign.

Pfizer and the US Market

A similar pattern is occurring in the US and Canada. In July 2020, Pfizer signed a $1.95 billion contract with the U.S. government for 100 million dosesAnd then in December 2020 another 100 million doses were delivered.

In Canada, another 35 million doses of Pfizer and Moderna vaccine vials are slated to be delivered.

And now July 2021 the Biden administration has ordered 200 million more doses of the Pfizer vaccine. “for children’s shots and possible boosters”

But that’s not all: in early June 2021, Biden ordered 500 million Pfizer-BionTech doses of the “killer virus” to be sent as “US Aid” to developing countries (courtesy of Uncle Sam). What is the underlying intent?

 

 

In most Western countries including the US and Canada, the retail price of the vaccine is “Free”.

In the US, the purchase of 900 million doses of Pfizer-BionTech vaccine vials is Big Money for Big Pharma: Massive profits for Pfizer, all of which are slated to be financed by tax revenues coupled with a dramatic expansion of the US public debt.

In the first quarter of  2021 (January through March 2021), the gross revenues accruing to Pfizer and Moderna were as follows:

#1. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. U.S. sales were $2.038 billion; global sales were $5.833 billion.

#2. Moderna COVID-19 vaccine. U.S. sales, $1.358 billion; global sales, $1.733 billion.

Recently announced (23 July 2021), Pfizer has jacked up the price of its vaccine vial from $19.50 to $28.00.

Multiply $28.00 by three vaccine doses per person for a World population of 7.9 billion, What do you get?

This is not an estimate, it’s an “order of magnitude”: 663.6 billion dollars  ($28.00 x 3 x 7.9 billion = $663.6 billion).

It is all for a good cause: save lives?

We are talking about a multi-billion dollar operation at tax payers expense, which has resulted in a pattern of vaccine related deaths and injuries. And the governments are fully aware of what is happening.

Pfizer’s Criminal Record

Is Pfizer “a reliable partner” as claimed by the EU Commission President van der Leyen?

A global vaccine monopoly is unfolding controlled by a company which has a criminal record (2009) with the US Department of Justice.

It was not the routine civil class action law suit waged against the pharmaceutical industry. It was a criminal indictment for “fraudulent marketing”.  While there were no arrests, Pfizer was so to speak “Put on Parole” under a US DOJ indictment.

In a historic US Department of Justice decision in September 2009, Pfizer Inc. pleaded guilty to criminal charges. It was “The Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement” in the History of the U.S. Department of Justice.

To view the C-Span Video Click Screen below 

 

Pfizer to Acquire A Near Monopoly of the Global Covid Vaccine Market

And now among all major Big Pharma actors, it’s a company with a criminal record which has established a de facto near monopoly at a World Level.

Can we trust a Big Pharma vaccine conglomerate which pleaded guilty to criminal charges by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) including “fraudulent marketing” and “felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act”?

‘Fraudulent marketing” in the case of the Pfizer-BioNTech’s  “killer vaccine” is a gross understatement. What is the Value of   Human Life? There is no monetary value to human life

Can we trust the politicians in high office who granted these multibillion Euro/dollar contracts to Pfizer, which are funded by tax revenues?

Is this a “mistake” on the part of the national health authorities? The experimental mRNA “vaccine” has resulted in an upward trend in  mortality and morbidity Worldwide. Meanwhile, Big Pharma profits are in the hundreds of billions.

And governments, acting on behalf of Big Pharma are pressuring people to get vaccinated to no avail imposing penalties to those who refuse.

National health authorities claim that the Covid-19 “vaccine” will save lives. That’s a lie.

Do we Know What’s inside the Pfizer Vaccine Vial?

The causes of vaccine related deaths and injuries have not been addressed by the health authorities.

What is inside the vaccine vial? National health authorities have not made public the results of their lab exams. It is unclear as to whether those lab exams of the vaccine vials have been conducted.

Below is a review of  the analysis and laboratory research conducted by the independent Quinta Columna Spanish team.

Graphene Oxide Nano-particules

According to lab exams conducted by the Spanish Quinta Columna research team, graphene oxide nano-particles have been detected in the vial of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

The preliminary results of their research (analysis by electron microscopy and spectroscopy) are far-reaching. Graphene oxide is a toxin which triggers thrombi and blood coagulation. It also has an impact on the immune system. Graphene oxide accumulated in the lungs can have devastating impacts.

Video: Interview with Ricardo Delgado Martin

 

The results of the Spanish study, yet to be fully confirmed and ascertained, suggest that the recorded vaccine related deaths and “adverse events” (quoted above for the EU, UK and US) could be the result of graphene oxide nano-particles contained in the Covid vaccine vial.

This is a controversial study. There are scientists and medical doctors who disagree with the results of the Spanish study.

The evidence has to be either ascertained or refuted. What is required is that independent scientists and health professionals conduct their own lab analysis of the contents of the vaccine vial.

Similarly, we call upon the national health authorities of the 193 member states of the UN which are currently vaccinating their people, to conduct their own study and analysis of the vaccine vial. And if graphene-oxide is detected, the vaccination program should immediately be discontinued.

See summary of their report entitled Graphene Oxide Detection in Aqueous Suspension, Observational study in Optical and Electron Microscopy. Full Study (English)

Also of significance, (acknowledged by national health authorities) graphene oxide nano-particles are also contained in the face mask.

 

The Electromagnetic Properties of the mRNA Vaccine

What is triggering the electromagnetic effects which have been detected in people who have been vaccinated?

These effects have been amply documented and confirmed by independent sources including those vaccinated. The national health authorities have failed to provide an explanation.

See the study conducted by the European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance.

Below are two videos produced by the Spanish Research team at La Quinta Columna.

Video

 

To watch the video below click HERE. (or  screen below)

Video 

 

.

Concluding Remarks. The Vaccine Passport

The data from official sources quoted above confirm unequivocally that the Covid-19 “vaccine” has resulted in an upward trend in vaccine related mortality and morbidity.

In turn, the studies of Dr. Charles Hoffe and the Spanish Research Team (Quinta Columna) which remain to be fully ascertained, point to possible “future impacts” of the vaccine  on human health.

According to official data based on reported / registered deaths and injuries, there is no doubt: this is a “killer vaccine”.

So why are governments pressuring people to get vaccinated?

Heads of State and heads of government Worldwide are being pressured, bribed, coopted and/or threatened by powerful financial interests into accepting the Covid vaccine consensus.

The vaccine passport is the endgame, which constitutes a transition towards digital tyranny.

At the time of writing, the vaccine passport has already been imposed in several countries including France and Italy.

In France, this was not an initiative of president Emmanuel Macron (it was imposed upon him). Macron is a political proxy acting on behalf of the financial and billionaire foundations. Macron is a former bank staff of the Rothschilds.

In turn, the Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi (former president of the European Central Bank) is an instrument of Goldman Sachs.

Bill Gates has play a key role. His foundation finances the WHO.

He has developed ties at a personal level with numerous heads of state and heads of government in all major regions of the World with a view to effectively carrying out this vaccine project.

The global capitalist elites control the so-called “classe politique”. The governments are liars.

From the very outset, the unspoken objective of the corona crisis (based on lies and deception) was to ultimately impose the contours of a Worldwide totalitarian regime, entitled “Global Governance” (by unelected officials). In the words of the late David Rockefeller:

“…The world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” (quoted by Aspen Times, August 15, 2011, emphasis added)

The Global Governance scenario imposes an agenda of social engineering and economic compliance.

The “intellectual elite” referred to by David Rockefeller is made up of numerous generously funded “scientists”, technocrats and “scholars” (e.g. Drosten, Neil Ferguson, et al) whose models and research findings have been used to justify the lockdown policies and the “killer vaccine”.

The mRNA vaccine should be halted and discontinued immediately Worldwide

The Protest Movement. Bastille 2.0

Acts of protest and resistance must question the legitimacy of both the financial architects of this crisis as well as the governments involved in imposing the vaccine:

The legitimacy of politicians and their powerful corporate sponsors must be questioned, including the police state measures adopted to enforce the closure of economic activity, the imposition of a digital vaccine passport as well as the wearing of the face mask, social distancing, etc.

This network must be established (nationally and internationally) at all levels of society, in towns and villages, work places, parishes. Trade unions, farmers organizations, professional associations, business associations, student unions, veterans associations, church groups would be called upon to integrate this movement.

The first task would be to disable the fear campaign and media disinformation as well put an end to Big Pharma’s Covid vaccination programme.

The corporate media should be directly challenged, without specifically targeting mainstream journalists, many of whom have been instructed to abide by the official narrative. This endeavour would require a parallel process at the grassroots level, of sensitizing and educating fellow citizens on the nature of  virus, the impacts of the vaccine and the lockdown.

“Spreading the word” through social media and independent online media outlets will be undertaken bearing in mind that Google as well as Facebook are instruments of censorship.

The creation of such a movement, which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of the financial elites as well as the structures of political authority at the national level, is no easy task. It will require a degree of solidarity, unity and commitment unparalleled in World history.

It will also require breaking down political and ideological barriers within society (i.e. between political parties) and acting with a single voice.

We must also understand that the “corona project” is an integral part of the U.S. imperial agenda. It has geopolitical and strategic implications. It will also require eventually unseating the architects of this diabolical “pandemic” and indicting them for crimes against humanity. (Michel Chossudovsky, December 2020. With some minor changes)

In the words of Doctors for Covid Ethics:

“The Gene-based “Vaccines” are Killing People. Governments Worldwide Are Lying to You the People, to the Populations They Purportedly Serve”

About the Author

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.

He has undertaken field research in Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific and has written extensively on the economies of developing countries with a focus on poverty and social inequality. He has also undertaken research in Health Economics (UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC),  UNFPA, CIDA, WHO, Government of Venezuela, John Hopkins International Journal of Health Services (1979, 1983)

He is the author of twelve books including The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003), America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005),  The Globalization of War, America’s Long War against Humanity (2015).

He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.  His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. In 2014, he was awarded the Gold Medal for Merit of the Republic of Serbia for his writings on NATO’s war of aggression against Yugoslavia. He can be reached at [email protected]

See Michel Chossudovsky, Biographical Note

Michel Chossudovsky’s Articles on Global Research


APPENDIX

Below are details on the three main criteria outlined at the outset of this article which are used to uphold the official narrative as well as justify the implementation of a Worldwide vaccination program with a view to saving lives.

1. there is no killer virus

2. the measurement of covid positive cases is invalid

3. the Covid-19 mortality data is manipulated.

Much of the analysis and statements below are contained in Chapter III of Michel Chossudovsky’s E-Book entitled

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

as well in an article entitled

The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis

 

1. There is No Killer Virus 

SARS-CoV-2 is presented and upheld as “a killer virus”. That’s the cornerstone of the 24/7 fear and media disinformation campaign upheld by persistent statements by politicians and national health authorities.

It is a killer virus? Both the peer-reviewed as well the WHO, CDC “official” definitions of SARS-CoV-2 say exactly the opposite. Their definitions of SARS-2 repeal their own lies.

Screenshot The Hill, March 19, 2020

Lies through omission: the media has failed to reassure the broader public.

Below is the official WHO definition of Covid-19:

Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses which may cause illness in animals or humans.  In humans, several coronaviruses are known to cause respiratory infections ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). The most recently discovered coronavirus causes coronavirus disease COVID-19.

“The most common symptoms of COVID-19 are fever, dry cough, and tiredness. … These symptoms are usually mild and begin gradually. Some people become infected but only have very mild symptoms. Most people (about 80%) recover from the disease without needing hospital treatment. Around 1 out of every 5 people who gets COVID-19 becomes seriously ill and develops difficulty breathing.”

According to Anthony Fauci (Head of NIAID), H. Clifford Lane and Robert R. Redfield (Head of CDC) in the New England Journal of Medicine 

“…the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci  is lying to himself. In his public statements he says that Covid is “Ten Times Worse than Seasonal Flu”.

He refutes his peer reviewed report quoted above. From the outset, Fauci has been instrumental in waging the fear and panic campaign across America:

Screenshot The Hill, March 19, 2020

Covid-19 versus Influenza (Flu) Virus A and Virus B (and subtypes) (Bear in mind seasonal influenza is not a coronavirus)

Rarely mentioned by the media or by politicians: The CDC (which is an agency of the US government) confirms that Covid-19 is similar to Influenza

“Influenza (Flu) and COVID-19 are both contagious respiratory illnesses, but they are caused by different viruses. COVID-19 is caused by infection with a new coronavirus (called SARS-CoV-2) and flu is caused by infection with influenza viruses. Because some of the symptoms of flu and COVID-19 are similar, it may be hard to tell the difference between them based on symptoms alone, and testing may be needed to help confirm a diagnosis. Flu and COVID-19 share many characteristics, but there are some key differences between the two.”

If the public had been informed and reassured that Covid is “similar to Influenza”, the fear campaign would have fallen flat.

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky,

2. The Measurement of Covid Positive Cases is Invalid

We are told that there is a pandemic characterized by a rising Worldwide trend of Covid-19 infection. This alleged trend is said to be corroborated by a rapidly increasing number of covid positive cases.

The methodology used to generate these figures is dependent upon the WHO sponsored  Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test, the estimates of which are tabulated Worldwide by the national health authorities.

While the estimates of the rRT-PCR have been questioned from the very outset, it is now confirmed beyond doubt that the rRT-PCR test adopted as a means to detecting the  SARS-COV-2 virus cases is TOTALLY invalid. 

(This pertains to Covid positive data tabulated since late January 2020).

The Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test was adopted by the WHO on January 23, 2020 as a means to detecting the  SARS-COV-2 virus, following the recommendations of  a Virology research group (based at Charité University Hospital, Berlin), supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (For Further details see the Drosten Study)

Exactly one year later on January 20th, 2021, the WHO retracts. They don’t say “We Made a Mistake”. The retraction is carefully formulated. (See original WHO document here)

While the WHO does not deny the validity of their misleading January 2020 guidelines, they nonetheless recommend “Re-testing” (which everybody knows is an impossibility).

The contentious issue pertains to the number of amplification threshold cycles (Ct). According to Pieter Borger, et al

The number of amplification cycles [should be] less than 35; preferably 25-30 cycles. In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture…(Critique of Drosten Study)

The World Health Organization (WHO) tacitly admits one year later that ALL PCR tests conducted at a 35 cycle amplification threshold (Ct) or higher are INVALID. But that is what they recommended in January 2020, in consultation with the virology team at Charité Hospital in Berlin.

If the test is conducted at a 35 Ct threshold or above (which was recommended by the WHO), segments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected, which means that ALL the so-called confirmed “positive cases” tabulated in the course of the last 14 months are invalid.

According to Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, et al, the Ct > 35 has been the norm “in most laboratories in Europe & the US”.

The WHO’s Mea Culpa

Below is the WHO’s carefully formulated “Retraction”. The full text with link to the original document is in annex:

WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology. (emphasis added)

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.

“Invalid Positives” is the Underlying Concept 

This is not an issue of  “Weak Positives” and “Risk of False Positive Increases”. What is at stake is a “Flawed Methodology” which leads to invalid estimates.

What this admission of the WHO confirms is that the estimate of covid positive from a PCR test (with an amplification threshold of 35 cycles or higher) is invalid. In which case, the WHO recommends retesting:  “a new specimen should be taken and retested…”.

The WHO calls for “Retesting”, which is tantamount to “We Screwed Up”.

That recommendation is pro-forma. It won’t happen. Millions of people Worldwide have already been tested, starting in early February 2020. Nonetheless, we must conclude that unless retested, those estimates (according to the WHO) are invalid.  

The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis By Prof Michel Chossudovsky,  

Another issue which has bearing on the Validity of the rTC-PCR test is that the SARS-1, (2003) was used in the PCR-test as a proxy for SARS-COV-2, because no information was available pertaining to the “isolation” and “identity” of SAR-CoV-2. This was recommended to the WHO on the grounds that the genetic fragments of SARS-1 are similar to those of SARS-CoV-2.

What it also implies is that statement regarding “variants” and mutations pertaining to SARS-CoV-2 are totally meaningless inasmuch as the PCR test from the outset included a similar 2003 virus as a proxy for SARS-CoV-2. i.e. mutations in relation to what? SARS-2 or SARS-Co-2 (the identity of which has not been made public.

The  RT-PCR data cannot under any circumstances be used to justify the imposition of a vaccine, which is presented to public opinion as a means to saving lives, when in fact it is leading to an upward trend in vaccine related mortality and morbidity.

3.  The Covid-19 Mortality Data is Manipulated

We are told that there is a rising trend of Covid-19 mortality, namely deaths which are allegedly the result of  SARS-2 viral infection.

There is ample evidence that these Covid-19 related “probable” causes of death and the underlying data on Covid-19 mortality are manipulated by the national health authorities.

In the US, the mortality statistics pertaining to Covid-19 are TOTALLY invalid. 

The “More Often than Not” Clause

On March 21, 2020 the following specific guidelines were introduced by the CDC regarding Death Certificates (and their tabulation in the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS). The instructions to the certifiers are to identify COVID-19 as the “Underlying Cause of Death” “More Often Than Not”.

Will  COVID-19 be the underlying cause of death?  This concept is fundamental. The underlying cause of death is defined by the WHO as “the disease or injury that initiated the train of events leading directly to death”.  

What the CDC is recommending with regards to statistical coding and categorization is that COVID-19 is expected to  be the underlying cause of death “more often than not.” 

The CDC combines these two criteria. “underlying cause of death”, more often than not.

The above directive is categorical. Below are CDC concepts and justifications

“The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID- 19 being the underlying cause more often than not.”

The certifier cannot depart from the CDC criteria. Covid-19 is imposed. Read carefully the CDC criteria above:

“What happens if certifiers report terms other than the suggested terms?”

There are no loopholes. These CDC directives have contributed to categorizing Covid-19 as the recorded “cause of death”. Two fundamental concepts prevail throughout:

The “underlying cause of death”

The “More Often than Not” Clause which falsifies the Cause of Death 

And these criteria are imposed despite the fact that the RT-PCR test used to corroborate the “cause of death” provides misleading results.

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky,

 

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on The “Killer Vaccine” Worldwide. 7.9 Billion People

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Albert Spence is a pulmonary nurse with 31 years of experience. He recently gave public testimony before the South Carolina State Legislature on “therapeutic options” for COVID-19.

Once again, we are finding that nurses who have been working on the frontlines treating COVID-19 patients are the most informed people in the U.S. right now who truly know what is going on in the hospitals, especially when it comes to COVID-19 protocols, and the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines.”

We absolutely need to be listening to these frontline workers right now instead of the talking head “doctors” on TV who never actually treat patients, if we truly want to know what the truth is. Wall Street and the pharmaceutical industry now control the corporate media, and they will never publish testimonies like this, even though it is public knowledge now having been recorded by the South Carolina legislature.

In this public testimony, Mr. Spence relates how he followed all the advice in the beginning of how the medical system wanted him to treat COVID patients, even though so much of it went against his 30+ years of experience in treating patients with respiratory illnesses.

But when the COVID patients started dwindling down in his ward at the beginning of this year, and he found out that the CDC had changed the threshold for PCR tests by reducing the tests from 40 cycles to 28, then he realized what was happening, and it horrified him.

He had been unwittingly assisting in killing his patients by just “doing what I was told.” He now knows that these patients were dying from the COVID protocols, and not COVID-19.

I lost sleep over it. I was having chest pain over it. It woke me up in the middle of the night – hit me hard. I could not sleep.

Because my first week or two there (COVID ward), I didn’t lead them to the gate, but I’m the guy that euthanized people.

They call it “comfort care.” But when you get to the point where you can’t take (oxygen mask) off, you get so upset. You haven’t seen your family except through maybe an iPad, in weeks.

And you’re never going to come off the high flow, and the doctor says: “You’ve done your best. But this is going to be it for you.”

And so the patients get all teary eyed and upset, and they call in the palliative team, and they all hold their hands and cry.

But they said: “We can keep you comfortable.”

Here comes Albert (referring to himself). He’s got the morphine and ativan, and I load them up and take off the high flow, and they gas themselves to death.

And I’m the guy who was pushing the buttons, like in the gas chambers at Auschwitz.

This is from our Bitchute channel, and it is also on our Rumble channel.

*

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

Featured image is from HIN

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Pulmonary Nurse of 31 Years Testifies How He Followed the COVID Protocols, Unknowingly that They Could Result in the Deaths of Patients
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

A federal district court in Los Angeles has ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the “Service”) violated the law when they failed to list the imperiled Joshua tree under the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”).

The Service disregarded overwhelming scientific evidence showing that climate change poses a major threat to the Joshua tree’s survival when the agency denied listing the species as threatened under the Act. The decision stems from a 2019 lawsuit filed by WildEarth Guardians, challenging the Service’s decision that the desert icon did not warrant federal protection, despite all the available scientific evidence pointing to the same conclusion: Joshua trees will be in danger of extinction throughout most of their current range by century’s end from climate change driven habitat loss, invasive grass fueled wildfire, and other stressors.

“The Court’s decision represents a monumental step forward for the Joshua tree, but also for all climate-imperiled species whose fate relies upon the Service following the law and evaluating the best scientific data available with respect to forecasting future climate change impacts,” said Jennifer Schwartz, staff attorney for WildEarth Guardians and lead attorney on the case. “The Court’s unequivocal holding—that the Service cannot summarily dismiss scientific evidence that runs counter to its conclusions—will force the federal government to confront the reality of climate change and begin focusing on how to help species adapt.”

WildEarth Guardians first filed a petition to list the Joshua tree as “threatened” under the ESA in 2015and the Service found the listing “not warranted” in August 2019. Under the Trump administration, the Service ignored every available peer-reviewed study to model future climate impacts to Joshua tree—all of which agree that the vast majority (roughly 90%) of the species’ current range will be rendered unsuitable by the end of the 21st century. The Court lambasted the Service’s decision in the ruling stating that “[i]n concluding that climate change will not affect Joshua trees at a population- or species level, the Service relies on speculation and unsupported assumptions.”

Notably, while the decision was issued by the Service under the Trump administration, the Service refused to budge from its indefensible position—or even consider taking a fresh look at the finding—even under the Biden administration. In addition to the litigation, Guardians filed emergency petitions to protect two species of Joshua tree in May 2021, following the release of even more conclusive climate change findings and the large Cima Dome fire that swept through the Mojave National Preserve and killed an estimated 1.3 million Joshua trees. But the Service has failed to respond to the renewed petitions.

“While we are grateful to the Court for this positive decision, we are very disappointed that the Biden administration failed at several junctures to do what’s right by these iconic Joshua trees,” said Lindsay Larris, wildlife program director for WildEarth Guardians. “The time and money the federal government spent defending a decision that the Court could clearly see was wrong—instead of using these funds to conserve species and determine how to mitigate massive biodiversity loss from climate change—is tragic and, unfortunately, telling. We need this administration to take swift action to protect species and habitat, not just deliver nice messages about the importance of fighting climate change while defending the damaging actions of the prior administration.”

The Court order now directs the Service to reconsider its decision, taking into account the best available science, including climate change models, in issuing a new decision for the Joshua tree. Pursuant to the ESA, this decision is required to be issued within the next 12 months, though the Service will now have 60 days to decide whether or not to appeal the decision.

“For the sake of the Joshua tree and the overwhelming majority of the public who believe in conservation, science, and protection of species and habitat, we are optimistic that the Service will use this opportunity to quickly issue a decision to protect the Joshua tree,” said Schwartz. “Our climate-imperiled species—plants and animals alike—do not have time for political gamesmanship that questions unambiguous science. Now is the time for action to preserve what we can of the natural world before it is too late.”

*

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

Featured image: Joshua Tree. Photo by AdobeStock.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on WildEarth Guardians Scores Groundbreaking Legal Win for the Joshua Tree
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

“If we were to follow the scientific method, as it was taught in textbooks … we would immediately see this observation of menstrual cycle changes in tens of thousands of women as a signal, for which necessary questions would need to be asked,” Dr. Lawrence Palevsky told The Defender.

According to an editorial published Sept. 16 in The BMJ, more than 30,000 reports of menstrual irregularities and vaginal bleeding had been made, as of Sept. 2, to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA) Yellow Card Scheme — the UK system for collecting and monitoring adverse reactions following COVID vaccines.

Reports of adverse reactions include heavier-than-usual periods, delayed periods and unexpected vaginal bleeding. Most women who reported a change to their period after vaccination found it returned to normal the following cycle, according to the author of the editorial, Dr. Victoria Male, a reproductive specialist at Imperial College in London.

To date, none of the COVID vaccine manufacturers list any issues pertinent to menstrual health as a side effect. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, common side effects of COVID vaccines include: pain at the site of vaccination, tiredness, fatigue and fever.

Male called for further investigation into potential effects of COVID vaccines on menstrual health — but said the problem lies with the body’s immune response, not the vaccine.

“Menstrual changes have been reported after both mRNA and adenovirus vectored COVID-19 vaccines, suggesting that if there is a connection, it is likely to be a result of the immune response to vaccination rather than a specific vaccine component,” Male wrote.

According to the MHRA, evaluation of Yellow Card reports does not support a link between changes to menstrual periods and COVID vaccines, because the number of reports is low compared to the number of people vaccinated, and the prevalence of menstrual disorders generally.

However, the way in which Yellow Card data are collected makes firm conclusions difficult, according to Male.

According to the most recent data from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) — the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. — between Dec. 14, 2020 and Sept. 10, 2021, there have been 8,793 total reports of menstrual disorders after vaccination with a COVID vaccine.

Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events, which means the number of actual adverse events evolving menstrual disorders could be much higher.

In an interview with Medical News Today, Dr. Sarah Gray — a general practitioner who for 15 years who ran a specialist women’s health clinic for the UK’s National Health Service — said:

“The control of menstrual bleeding is complex with potential effects from the brain, ovaries and uterus itself. It is plausible that the effects of [SARS-CoV-2] infection or vaccination on the immune system could affect this control pathway, and any research would be greatly valued.”

Gray also noted, “women’s health has not been a research priority for 20 years and there is much we do not know.”

Dr. Kathryn Clancy, assistant professor at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said she is involved in similar research into acute immune activation and menstrual repair mechanisms.

“I am dismayed that the research design of [COVID] vaccine trials makes it impossible at this time to actually explore this relationship, and hope drug and vaccine manufacturers in the future take these considerations into account,” Clancy said.

In an email to The Defender, Dr. Lawrence Palevsky, pediatrician, lecturer and author, said:

“If we were to follow the scientific method, as it was taught in textbooks (knowing full well there is no longer any adherence to the scientific method), we would immediately see this observation of menstrual cycle changes in tens of thousands of women as a signal, for which necessary questions would need to be asked.”

Palevsky — who is part of an independent research group collecting data from unvaccinated women who experienced menstrual changes after being around others who recently received COVID vaccines — said a necessary study would examine the contents of the injection, and assess the chemical natures of these contents and their effects on human physiology and women’s reproductive systems.

“A true adherence to the scientific method would allow for answers to be reported without bias or prejudice for a desired outcome of the results,” Palevsky said.

Palevsky explained:

“There is a long list of side effects that the manufacturers of the injection sent to the FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] in the fall of 2020. Many of the injuries people are reporting after receiving these injections, including bleeding, blood clots, autoimmunity, Guillain-Barré syndrome and many others, are well known to the manufacturers and the FDA but, the powers that be continue to ignore the reports of people presenting with these real-time adverse events, as if they have nothing to do with the injections, at all.

“Essentially, they gathered the data in clinical trials but have kept them completely under wraps.”

Palevsky said he believes the spike protein could play a role in the menstrual irregularities women are reporting, along with “other factors we may not know because no one is doing the appropriate research.”

As The Defender reported Sept. 8, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) awarded one-year supplemental grants totaling $1.67 million to five institutions to explore potential links between COVID vaccines and menstrual changes, after thousands of women reported menstrual irregularities after vaccination in the U.S.

According to the NIH website, some women have reported experiencing irregular or missing menstrual periods, heavier-than-usual bleeding and other menstrual changes after receiving COVID vaccines.

The new funding will go toward research to determine whether the changes may be linked to COVID vaccination itself, and how long the changes last. Researchers will also seek to clarify the mechanisms underlying potential vaccine-related menstrual changes.

So far, no published studies have examined — or offered conclusive evidence — of possible links between the vaccines and menstruation.

*

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

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

Featured image is from CHD

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 30,000+ Women in UK Report Menstrual Problems after COVID Shots, but Menstrual Issues Not Listed as Side Effect
  • Tags: ,

Physicians Declaration: Global COVID Summit in Rome, Italy

September 23rd, 2021 by International Alliance of Physicians and Medical Scientists

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

We the physicians of the world, united and loyal to the Hippocratic Oath, recognizing the profession of medicine as we know it is at a crossroad, are compelled to declare the following;

WHEREAS, it is our utmost responsibility and duty to uphold and restore the dignity, integrity, art and science of medicine;

WHEREAS, there is an unprecedented assault on our ability to care for our patients;

WHEREAS, public policy makers have chosen to force a “one size fits all” treatment strategy, resulting in needless illness and death, rather than upholding fundamental concepts of the individualized, personalized approach to patient care which is proven to be safe and more effective;

WHEREAS, physicians and other health care providers working on the front lines, utilizing their knowledge of epidemiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology, are often first to identify new, potentially life saving treatments;

WHEREAS, physicians are increasingly being discouraged from engaging in open professional discourse and the exchange of ideas about new and emerging diseases, not only endangering the essence of the medical profession, but more importantly, more tragically, the lives of our patients;

WHEREAS, thousands of physicians are being prevented from providing treatment to their patients, as a result of barriers put up by pharmacies, hospitals, and public health agencies, rendering the vast majority of healthcare providers helpless to protect their patients in the face of disease.  Physicians are now advising their patients to simply go home (allowing the virus to replicate) and return when their disease worsens, resulting in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary patient deaths, due to failure-to-treat;

WHEREAS, this is not medicine. This is not care. These policies may actually constitute crimes against humanity.

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS:

RESOLVED, that the physician-patient relationship must be restored. The very heart of medicine is this relationship, which allows physicians to best understand their patients and their illnesses, to formulate treatments that give the best chance for success, while the patient is an active participant in their care.

RESOLVED, that the political intrusion into the practice of medicine and the physician/patient relationship must end. Physicians, and all health care providers, must be free to practice the art and science of medicine without fear of retribution, censorship, slander, or disciplinary action, including possible loss of licensure and hospital privileges, loss of insurance contracts and interference from government entities and organizations – which further prevent us from caring for patients in need. More than ever, the right and ability to exchange objective scientific findings, which further our understanding of disease, must be protected.

RESOLVED, that physicians must defend their right to prescribe treatment, observing the tenet FIRST, DO NO HARM. Physicians shall not be restricted from prescribing safe and effective treatments. These restrictions continue to cause unnecessary sickness and death. The rights of patients, after being fully informed about the risks and benefits of each option, must be restored to receive those treatments.

RESOLVED, that we invite physicians of the world and all health care providers to join us in this noble cause as we endeavor to restore trust, integrity and professionalism to the practice of medicine.

RESOLVED, that we invite the scientists of the world, who are skilled in biomedical research and uphold the highest ethical and moral standards, to insist on their ability to conduct and publish objective, empirical research without fear of reprisal upon their careers, reputations and livelihoods.

RESOLVED, that we invite patients, who believe in the importance of the physician-patient relationship and the ability to be active participants in their care, to demand access to science-based medical care.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed this Declaration as of the date first written.

Sign the Declaration here.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Physicians Declaration: Global COVID Summit in Rome, Italy
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Revenge of White Colonialism Motivates the AUKUS Alliance Against China

Afghanistan: Ex-Bagram Inmates Recount Stories of Abuse, Torture

September 23rd, 2021 by Agnieszka Pikulicka-Wilczewska

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Hajimumin Hamza walks through a long, dark corridor and carefully inspects the area as if he has never seen it before. Today, the 36-year old bearded man in a black turban and a traditional two-piece garment is a guide to fellow Taliban fighters in the place whose name he would rather forget. His eyes stop at a solitary chair standing on the pathway.

“They used to tie us to this chair, our hands and feet, and then applied electric shocks. Sometimes they used it for beatings, too,” Hamza says, recounting the torture he underwent during his captivity in Bagram prison between 2017 and the onset of the fall of Kabul last month, when he managed to escape.

The United States set up the Parwan Detention Facility, known as Bagram, or Afghanistan’s Guantanamo, in late 2001 to house armed fighters after the Taliban launched a rebellion following its removal from power in a military invasion.

The facility located within the Bagram airbase in the Parwan province was meant to be temporary. But it turned out otherwise. It housed more than 5,000 prisoners until its doors were forced open, days before the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan on August 15.

Sultan, who was jailed at Bagram between 2014 and August 2021, says he lost his teeth during what came to be known as enhanced interrogation techniques that rights groups say amounted to torture and violated international law. The 42 year old, who does not share his surname, opens his mouth to demonstrate the damage.

Read the full article here.

*

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

Featured image: Hamza recounts the torture he endured during his imprisonment at Bagram [Agnieszka Pikulicka-Wilczewska/Al Jazeera]

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The solicitation for bids—which requires some guards who speak Spanish and Haitian Creole—comes as the administration is under fire for mass deportations of migrants, including thousands of Haitians.

“This is an embarrassingly bad decision. Do better.”

That’s how U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) responded Wednesday to reporting that the Biden administration, already under fire this week for its immigration policies, “is seeking a private contractor to operate a migrant detention facility at the U.S. naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, with a requirement that some of the guards speak Spanish and Haitian Creole.”

Though the White House, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) did not respond to requests for comment, the revelation from NBC News‘ Jacob Soboroff and Ken Dilanian sparked widespread condemnation.

“This cannot happen,” tweeted Erika Andiola, chief advocacy officer at the Texas-based rights group RAICES. She added a message directed at President Joe Biden: “Shame on you.”

Andiola wasn’t alone in taking aim at the president and other leaders in his administration.

The National Immigrant Justice Center called out Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. If NBC‘s reporting—which is backed up by public records—is true, “then you have lost your way,” the group said.

BuzzFeed, in 2016, described the so-called Migrant Operations Center at the naval base as “a building reminiscent of a budget hotel on an isolated side of the base far from its commercial district and the military detention center.”

DHS’ posting says in part that the center “has a capacity of 120 people and will have an estimated daily population of 20 people, however the service provider shall be responsible to maintain on site the necessary equipment to erect temporary housing facilities for populations that exceed 120 and up to 400 migrants in a surge event.”

The contract solicitation for the facility comes as President Joe Biden faces global criticism for his administration’s response to thousands of Haitian migrants who gathered at a camp on the Texas-Mexico border in the context of its broader policies on asylum and deportation.

Soboroff and Dilanian noted that the records “provided no indication that the Biden administration is planning to transfer migrants from the southern border to Guantánamo Bay,” which has been used by previous U.S. administrations to detain aslyum-seekers.

As TIME detailed in 2015:

In 1991, in the wake of a coup d’état in Haiti, thousands of Haitians fled by sea for the United States. In December of that year, Guantánamo Bay became the site of a refugee camp built to house those who sought asylum while the [George H.W.] Bush administration figured out what to do with them. Throughout the years that followed, the camp became home to thousands of native Cubans, too, who had also attempted to flee to the U.S. for political asylum. In the summer of 1994 alone, TIME wrote the following May, “more than 20,000 Haitians and 30,000 Cubans were intercepted at sea and delivered to hastily erected camps in Guantánamo.” In 1999, during conflict in the Balkans (and after the Haitian and Cuban refugees had been sent home or on to the States), the U.S. agreed to put up 20,000 new refugees at Guantanamo, but that plan ended up scrapped for being too far from their European homelands.

In a book initially published anonymously, former DHS official Miles Taylor claimed that former President Donald Trump discussed sending migrants to the U.S. naval base that is also infamously home to a torturous military prison, but it never actually happened.

Soboroff and Dilanian reported that immigrant rights advocates say the facility’s past use “was driven in part by the fact that some of the Haitians were HIV-positive.”

Wendy Young, president of the immigrant advocacy group Kids in Need of Defense, told NBC that the Biden administration’s potential plans are “highly concerning,” explaining that when the facility was used in the 1990s, it “proved highly deficient in terms of providing the services that migrant families and children urgently need, including legal representation.”

“Instead of defaulting to a law enforcement response grounded in deterrence, the administration should instead live up to our legal and ethical obligation to allow Haitians to apply for asylum,” Young said. “Conditions in Haiti underscore how essential that is.”

Even though Haiti is still reeling from the July assassination of former President Jovenel Moïse that was followed by a deadly earthquake and tropical storm last month, the Biden administration has ramped up deportations of Haitians in recent days under a pair of widely criticized removal policies, one of which the administration is defending in court.

From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

*

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

Featured image: The entrance to Camp 1 in detention camp’s Camp Delta (Source: Public Domain)

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

An Iraq veteran gave George W. Bush a stark reminder this past weekend that although he’s now a liberal media darling, there are plenty of Americans who remember the lies that led to millions of deaths.

Corporal Mike Prysner was captured on video launching into a tirade against Bush during a speech in Beverly Hills.

“When are you going to apologize for the million Iraqis who are dead because you lied?” Prysner yelled at Bush.

“You lied about weapons of mass destruction! You lied about connections to 9/11! You sent me to Iraq! You sent me to Iraq!” Prysner continued.

Bush can be heard responding “you said you’d behave yourself.”

As he was bundled out of the room, Prysner demanded Bush “apologise” adding “my friends are dead, you killed people.”

Watch:

Following a 9/11 memorial speech in which he directly compared supporters of President Trump to Al Qaeda terrorists, Bush is being held up as an icon by the left.

As journalist Glenn Greenwald noted last week,

“it turned into this love-fest. I mean they dripped with effusive praise for him because of what he said, essentially that the 9/11 attacks are the same as the three hour riot on January 6th, and more importantly that the people who did 9/11, Al Qaeda, are similar or identical to ‘the same foul spirit’ as he put it, Trump supporters essentially.”

“A domestic war on terror against your fellow citizens is music to the ears of American liberals because they want nothing more than treating their political adversaries, like the Bush administration treated Al Qaeda,” Greenwald asserted.

Watch:

*

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

Chromothripsis: Bad News for Gene Editing

September 23rd, 2021 by Claire Robinson

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

CRISPR gene editing is often presented as a straightforward, precise, and safe procedure. But recent research findings on CRISPR gene editing for gene therapy applications show it can lead to massive damage to chromosomes. The phenomenon is known as chromothripsis.

An article in Nature Biotechnology about the new findings describes chromothripsis as “an extremely damaging form of genomic rearrangement that results from the shattering of individual chromosomes and the subsequent rejoining of the pieces in a haphazard order”.

And now there are signs that the findings are hitting gene editing companies’ stock.

“You cannot make this go away”

The authors of the new study, published in Nature Genetics, conclude that “chromothripsis is a previously unappreciated on-target consequence” of the double-strand breaks in the DNA that CRISPR gene editing is designed to bring about. The fact that the damage occurs “on-target” – at the intended edit site – means that any attempts to target the CRISPR gene editing more precisely will not solve this problem, as pointed out in the Nature Biotechnology article by one of the researchers on the study, David Pellman of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School. He said, “You cannot make this go away by making the cutting more specific.”

Cancer worries

The major worry with chromothripsis in therapeutic settings is that it can lead to cancer or an inherited disease in any children of the affected patient. It would only take a single cell to be affected by chromothripsis to result in a cancer.

This has implications for animal gene editing, as edited animals could be prone to cancer. But it also spells bad news for plant gene editing, where chromosomal damage would lead to changes in the function of genes that could in turn result in unexpected toxicity or allergenicity, as well as unpredictable effects on wildlife.

Effect “cannot be completely avoided”

While an expert interviewed for the Nature Biotechnology article is upbeat about the ability of the gene editing field to “innovate its way around” this and any other problems that arise from CRISPR processes, the researchers on the original paper seem less convinced.

This is evident from the preprint version of their article, which appeared on BioRxiv before the peer-reviewed version was published in Nature Biotechnology. In the preprint version, the authors bluntly call chromothripsis “a catastrophic mutational process” and warn that it is “an on-target toxicity that may be minimized by cell manipulation protocols or screening but cannot be completely avoided in many genome editing applications”.

However, this wording is absent from the final published version. The original downbeat conclusion on the impossibility of avoiding chromothripsis has been watered down to the bland statement, “As genome editing is implemented in the clinic, the potential for extensive chromosomal rearrangements should be considered and monitored.”

Investors running scared

Others who remain unconvinced that this inherent problem of CRISPR can be solved may include investors in CRISPR-based companies. An article for the investment news outlet Seeking Alpha says that the “new data concerning chromothripsis may affect the long-term outlook of companies such as Crispr Therapeutics”. The stock of these companies (collected in a fund known as ARKG), which was previously surging, suddenly slumped in July this year, the same month that the Nature Biotechnology study was published.

The Seeking Alpha article continues, “The long-term impact on health of gene editing may not be known until around 2040.” It concludes, “Given the uncertain outlook, investors may be wise to re-evaluate their positions in companies employing DNA double strand breaks to edit the genome.”

Seeking Alpha does not go so far as to blame the chromothripsis findings as the sole or main cause of ARKG’s slump, but notes it as “one contributory factor”.

Chromothripsis is just the latest in a long list of unintended CRISPR-induced outcomes that can occur at the intended edit site and thus cannot be avoided by improving CRISPR targeting. In spite of this, policymakers in the UK and the EU persist in echoing industry lobbyists’ narratives that CRISPR gene editing is precise and the outcomes predictable.

*

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

Featured image: Kumamon Y. Watson via Wiki Commons. Reproduced under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

American Medical Association Instructs Doctors to Deceive

September 23rd, 2021 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The Winter 2021 “AMA COVID-19 Guide: Background/Messaging on Vaccines, Vaccine Clinical Trials & Combatting Vaccine Misinformation,” issued by the American Medical Association raises serious questions about the AMA’s adherence to transparency, honesty, ethics and the moral standards to which it will hold its members

The guide lists nine “key messages” the AMA wants doctors to focus on when communicating about COVID-19. This includes stressing the importance of eliminating nonmedical vaccine exemptions, the importance of flu vaccines and COVID shots, and expressing confidence in vaccine development

In the guide, the AMA instructs doctors on how to disinform the public using psychological and linguistic tools. This includes explicit instructions on which words to swap for other more narrative-affirming choices

Word swaps include changing “hospitalization rates” to “deaths,” two terms that are not even remotely interchangeable

Swapping the term “Operation Warp Speed” for “standard process” is another rather egregious misdirection. The two are not interchangeable. In fact, they’re diametrically opposed to one another

*

The Winter 2021 “AMA COVID-19 Guide: Background/Messaging on Vaccines, Vaccine Clinical Trials & Combatting Vaccine Misinformation,”1 issued by the American Medical Association (AMA) raises serious questions about the AMA’s adherence to transparency, honesty, ethics and the moral standards to which it will hold its members.

The AMA was founded in 1847 and is the largest professional association and lobbying group of physicians and medical students in the U.S. According to the AMA itself, its mission is to promote the art and science of medicine and the betterment of public health.

How then do they explain this “COVID-19 messaging guide,” which explicitly teaches doctors how to deceive their patients and the media when asked tough questions about COVID-19, treatment options and COVID shots?

AMA Teaches Doctors How to Deceive

“It is critical that physicians and patients have confidence in the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines as they become available for public use,” the “AMA COVID-19 Guide” states, adding:2

“To overcome vaccine hesitancy and ensure widespread vaccine acceptance among all demographic groups, physicians and the broader public health community must continue working to build trust in vaccine safety and efficacy, especially in marginalized and minoritized communities with historically well-founded mistrust in medical institutions.”

Indeed, the entire guide is aimed at teaching doctors how to foster confidence in the medical profession in general, as it pertains to treatment of COVID-19, but in particular as it pertains to the experimental COVID shots.

The guide provides “suggested narratives” for various engagements, such as when communicating on social media, as sell as “talking points to guide external communications,” such as when being interviewed. It lists nine specific “key messages” that they want doctors to focus on when communicating about COVID-19. These key messages can be summarized as follows:

  • Express confidence in vaccine development
  • Stress the importance of vaccines
  • Highlight the need to combat the spread of vaccine misinformation
  • Adhere to updated ethical guidance for physicians and medical personnel, which says they have a moral obligation to get vaccinated themselves
  • Give general vaccine recommendations, such as the recommendation for everyone over the age of 6 months, including pregnant women, to get an annual flu shot
  • Stress the importance of eliminating nonmedical vaccine exemptions
  • Highlight the increased availability of flu vaccines, and the importance of getting a flu shot even if you’ve gotten a COVID injection
  • Highlight the importance of including minorities, both in vaccine trials and as trusted messengers who can “promote social pressure” to get minorities vaccinated and dispel historical distrust in medical institutions
  • Denounce scientific analyses “predicated on personal opinions, anecdote and political ideologies”

AMA Concerned About Disinformation

On page 7 of the guide, under the science narrative heading, the AMA declares it is “deeply concerned that rampant disinformation and the politicization of health issues are eroding public confidence in science and undermining trust in physicians and medical institutions,” adding that “Science should be grounded in a common understanding of facts and evidence and able to empower people to make informed decisions about their health.”3

To that end, the AMA is calling upon “all elected officials to affirm science and fact in their words and actions,” and for media to “be vigilant in communicating factual information” and to “challenge those who chose to trade in misinformation.”

 AMA Then Instructs Doctors on How to Disinform

It’s a disappointment, then, to find the AMA instructing doctors on how to misinform the public using a variety of psychological and linguistic tools. Perhaps one of the most egregious examples of this is the recommended “COVID-19 language swaps” detailed on page 9.

As you can see below, the AMA explicitly instructs doctors to swap out certain words and terms for other, more narrative-affirming choices. Shockingly, this includes swapping “hospitalization rates” to “deaths” — two terms that are not even remotely interchangeable!

Hospitalization rate refers to how many people are sick in the hospital with COVID-19, whereas death refers to how many people have died. The first term refers to people who are still alive, and the other refers to patients who are not alive.

It strains credulity that the AMA would actually tell doctors to substitute a factual data point with an outright lie. But with this swap, are they not telling doctors to state that people are dead, when in fact they’ve only been hospitalized with COVID-19?

covid 19 language swaps

Another highly questionable word swap is to not address the nitty, gritty details of vaccine trials, such as the number of participants, and instead simply refer to these trials as having gone through “a transparent, rigorous process.”

Swapping the factual term “Operation Warp Speed” for “standard process” is another outrageous misdirection. The two simply aren’t interchangeable. In fact, they’re actually diametrically opposed to one another. Standard process for vaccine development includes a long process of over a decade and a large number of steps that were either omitted or drastically shortened for the COVID shots.

Following standard process is what makes vaccine development take, on average, 10 years and often longer. Operation Warp Speed allowed vaccine makers to slap together these COVID shots in about nine months from start to finish. You cannot possibly say that the two terms describe an identical process.

The Power of Language

Other language swaps are less incredulous but still highlight the fact that the AMA wants its members to help push a very specific and one-sided narrative that makes power-grabbing overreaches and totalitarian tactics sound less bad than they actually are, and make questionable processes sound A-OK.

Language is a powerful tool with which we shape reality,4 because it shapes how we think about things. As noted by storyteller and filmmaker Jason Silva:5

“The use of language, the words you use to describe reality, can in fact engender reality, can disclose reality. Words are generative… We create and perceive our reality through language. We think reality into existence through linguistic construction in real-time.”

For example, “lockdown” sounds like involuntary imprisonment imposed by a totalitarian regime, which is what it is, whereas “stay-at-home order” sounds far less draconian. After all, “home” is typically associated with comfort and safety.

The same goes for using “COVID protocols” in lieu of “COVID mandates, directives, controls and orders.” “Protocols” sounds like something that is standard procedure, as if the COVID measures are nothing new, whereas “mandates, controls and orders” imply that, indeed, we’re in medical fascism territory, which we are.

How to Steer, Block, Deflect and Stall Inconvenient Questions

The AMA could have instructed its members to simply stick to the facts and be honest — and in some sections, it does do that — but it doesn’t end there. Rather, the AMA provides a full page of instructions on how to steer the conversation, and how to block, deflect and stall when faced with tough questions where an honest answer might actually break the official narrative.

Here’s a sampling of these instructions. I encourage you to read through page 8 of the guide, and pay attention to these psychological tricks when listening to interviews or reading the news.

It’s worth noting that the AMA also stresses that: 1) Doctors are to speak for the AMA, and 2) doctors are NOT to offer their personal views. Speaking for the AMA is listed under “Your Responsibilities” when being interviewed, while not discussing personal views is listed under “Interview Don’ts.”

AMA Is Rapidly Eroding All Credibility

The AMA’s guidance isn’t all bad. Some of its advice makes perfect sense. But the inclusion of language swaps that result in false statements being made, and tools for steering, blocking, deflecting, redirecting and stalling in order to avoid direct answers do nothing but erode credibility and thus trust in the medical community.

Its direct instruction to not share personal views is another trust-eroding strategy. When people talk to their doctor, they want to hear what that doctor actually thinks, based on their own knowledge and experience.

They don’t expect their doctor — or a doctor appearing in an interview — to simply rehash a narrative dictated by the AMA. If we cannot trust our medical professionals to give their honest opinions and give direct answers, there’s little reason to even discuss our concerns with them, and that’s the opposite of what the AMA claims it seeks to achieve.

The AMA is concerned about the proliferation of misinformation and eroding trust, yet it’s telling its members to keep their professional views to themselves and lie about COVID deaths. With this guidance document, the AMA is essentially implicating itself as a source and instigator of medical misinformation that ultimately might injure patients.

In a Stew Peters Show interview (see top of this article), Dr. Bryan Ardis criticized the AMA guidance document, pointing out that while the AMA claims it put out the guidance to prevent political ideologies from dictating medicine, it is actually proving that the AMA itself is deferring to political ideology rather than medical facts.

The AMA wants its members to act as propagandists for a particular narrative — using “politically correct language” — rather than sharing information and acting in accordance with their own conscience and professional insight. As noted by Peters:

“If a doctor’s just going to repeat what the AMA tells them, why have doctors at all? You can get plenty of starving propagandists at any liberal college, but instead we want to turn our medical professionals into ideological zombies with stethoscopes.”

Sen. Warren Threatens Amazon to Ban ‘The Truth About COVID-19’

Since the publication of my latest book, “The Truth About COVID-19,” which became an instant best seller on Amazon.com, there’s been a significant increase in calls for censorship and ruthless attacks against me.

Most recently, so-called “progressive” U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., in an outrageous, slanderous and basically unconstitutional attempt to suppress free speech, sent a letter to Amazon, demanding an “immediate review” of their algorithms to weed out books peddling “COVID misinformation.”

Warren specifically singled out “The Truth About COVID-19” as a prime example of “highly ranked and favorably tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures” that she wants to see banned from sale.

Two days later, U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., followed in Warren’s footsteps, sending letters to Facebook and Amazon, calling for more prolific censorship of vaccine information. Even President Joe Biden has recently used a debunked report as his sole source to call for my censorship.

Sadly, these attacks are being levied by the very people elected to safeguard democracy and our Constitutional rights. Essentially, what they are calling for is modern-day book burning. This is a democracy, not a monarchy.

*

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

Notes

1, 2, 3 AMA COVID-19 Guide

4 A Mind for Language: How Language Shapes Our Reality, Senior Thesis Philosophy by Eric Tompkins, 2011

5 Thymindoman.com Does Language Construct Reality?

Featured image is from NOQ Report

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Reiner Fuellmich presents the results of the investigations of the Berlin Corona Committee to date.

Watch the video below.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Berlin Corona Investigation. Ongoing Crimes Against Humanity: “We Are Dealing with Psychopaths”. Reiner Fuellmich
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Conflict in Eastern Ukraine continues simmering, with relatively regular escalations that lead to a few servicemen deaths and injuries.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) also made it a habit of targeting various civilian infrastructures, mostly damaging buildings but sometimes injuring civilians.

Most recently, on the morning of September 21st, the UAF opened fire on the town of Yasinovataya firing 15 shells from a 120-mm mortar.

A kindergarten was damaged, as well as a sanatorium boarding the school. All the children had to be taken to a bomb shelter and injuries were avoided, but a pipeline nearby was struck in the shelling.

The UAF carried out the attack from their position from the separation line in the village of Verkhnetoretskoe, which was split in two between the Donetsk People’s Republic troops and Kiev.

On the previous day, shelling on the area left more than 400 civilians without electricity due to UAF shelling on a transformer substation.

Damage to civilian infrastructure is an almost daily occurrence. On September 17th, shelling on Donetsk city left 3 civilians injured and 7 buildings damaged.

These escalations are commonly unrelated to the situation on the frontline, but rather on political processes in and around Ukraine, including in its neighboring Russia.

Usually, a ramping up in shelling activity is observed when a Western official is visiting, or Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky appears to inspect the frontlines.

Over the past few days, there have been elections in Russia, including in Crimea.

The Kiev regime was likely preparing for the elections on the peninsula in advance. In early September, it turned out that an August 23rd sabotage attack in the Crimean village of Perevalnoe was organized by Ukrainian military intelligence.

The elections in Crimea are a hot topic in the international arena, with Turkey refusing to recognize its results.

Kiev strictly opposes any political engagement in Crimea, and the increased shelling and targeting of various civilian infrastructure is a form of punishment by the UAF.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin is yet to take any response measures, and only urges Kiev not to move forward with its multi-faceted military preparations such as deploying more and more troops and hardware closer to the Russian borders.

Meanwhile, the US and Ukraine have launched a new Rapid Trident-2021 joint military exercise in a show of force, involving 6,000 soldiers from fifteen countries. At the same time, former American ambassador to Kiev John Herbst claimed that, in case of an open conflict with Moscow, the UAF should expect no actual help from the United States.

Still, a potentially incoming Iron Dome missile defense system could make Kiev even bolder in its provocations in Eastern Ukraine and lead to even more exchanges in the coming months.

*

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

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

PayPal: [email protected], http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Kiev Targets Civilians in Eastern Ukraine as Punishment for Crimea Election
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

As a rudderless West watched on, the 20th anniversary meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was laser-focused on two key deliverables: shaping up Afghanistan and kicking off a full-spectrum Eurasian integration.

The two defining moments of the historic 20th anniversary Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Dushanbe, Tajikistan had to come from the keynote speeches of – who else – the leaders of the Russia-China strategic partnership.

Xi Jinping: “Today we will launch procedures to admit Iran as a full member of the SCO.”

Vladimir Putin: “I would like to highlight the Memorandum of Understanding that was signed today between the SCO Secretariat and the Eurasian Economic Commission. It is clearly designed to further Russia’s idea of establishing a Greater Eurasia Partnership covering the SCO, the EAEU (Eurasian Economic Union), ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and China’s Belt and Road initiative (BRI).”

In short, over the weekend, Iran was enshrined in its rightful, prime Eurasian role, and all Eurasian integration paths converged toward a new global geopolitical – and geoeconomic – paradigm, with a sonic boom bound to echo for the rest of the century.

That was the killer one-two punch immediately following the Atlantic alliance’s ignominious imperial retreat from Afghanistan. Right as the Taliban took control of Kabul on 15 August, the redoubtable Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of Russia’s Security Council, told his Iranian colleague Admiral Ali Shamkhani that “the Islamic Republic will become a full member of the SCO.”

Dushanbe revealed itself as the ultimate diplomatic crossover. President Xi firmly rejected any “condescending lecturing” and emphasized development paths and governance models compatible with national conditions. Just like Putin, he stressed the complementary focus of BRI and the EAEU, and in fact summarized a true multilateralist Manifesto for the Global South.

Source: The Cradle

Right on point, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev of Kazakhstan noted that the SCO should advance “the development of a regional macro-economy.” This is reflected in the SCO’s drive to start using local currencies for trade, bypassing the US dollar.

Watch that quadrilateral

Dushanbe was not just a bed of roses. Tajikistan’s Emomali Rahmon, a staunch, secular Muslim and former member of the Communist Party of the USSR – in power for no less than 29 years, reelected for the 5th time in 2020 with 90 percent of the vote – right off the bat denounced the “medieval sharia” of Taliban 2.0 and said they had already “abandoned their previous promise to form an inclusive  government.”

Rahmon, who has never been caught smiling on camera, was already in power when the Taliban conquered Kabul in 1996. He was bound to publicly support his Tajik cousins against the “expansion of extremist ideology” in Afghanistan – which in fact worries all SCO member-states when it comes to smashing dodgy jihadi outfits of the ISIS-K mold.

The meat of the matter in Dushanbe was in the bilaterals – and one quadrilateral.

Take the bilateral between Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and Chinese FM Wang Yi. Jaishankar said that China should not view “its relations with India through the lens of a third country,” and took pains to stress that India “does not subscribe to any clash of civilizations theory.”

That was quite a tough sell considering that the first in-person Quad summit takes place this week in Washington, DC, hosted by that “third country” which is now knee deep in clash-of-civilizations mode against China.

Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan was on a bilateral roll, meeting the presidents of Iran, Belarus, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. The official Pakistani diplomatic position is that Afghanistan should not be abandoned, but engaged.

That position added nuance to what Russian Special Presidential Envoy for SCO Affairs Bakhtiyer Khakimov had explained about Kabul’s absence at the SCO table:

“At this stage, all member states have an understanding that there are no reasons for an invitation until there is a legitimate, generally recognized government in Afghanistan.”

And that, arguably, leads us to the key SCO meeting: a quadrilateral with the Foreign Ministers of Russia, China, Pakistan and Iran.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Qureshi affirmed: “We are monitoring whether all the groups are included in the government or not.” The heart of the matter is that, from now on, Islamabad coordinates the SCO strategy on Afghanistan, and will broker Taliban negotiations with senior Tajik, Uzbek and Hazara leaders. This will eventually lead the way towards an inclusive government regionally recognized by SCO member-nations.

Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi was warmly received by all – especially after his forceful keynote speech, an Axis of Resistance classic. His bilateral with Belarus president Aleksandr Lukashenko revolved around a discussion on “sanctions confrontation.” According to Lukashenko:

“If the sanctions did any harm to Belarus, Iran, other countries, it was only because we ourselves are to blame for this. We were not always negotiable, we did not always find the path we had to take under the pressure of sanctions.”

Considering Tehran is fully briefed on Islamabad’s SCO role in terms of Afghanistan, there will be no need to deploy the Fatemiyoun brigade – informally known as the Afghan Hezbollah – to defend the Hazaras. Fatemiyoun was formed in 2012 and was instrumental in Syria in the fight against Daesh, especially in Palmyra. But if ISIS-K does not go away, that’s a completely different story.

Particular important for SCO members Iran and India will be the future of Chabahar port. That remains India’s crypto-Silk Road gambit to connect it to Afghanistan and Central Asia. The geoeconomic success of Chabahar more than ever depends on a stable Afghanistan – and this is where Tehran’s interests fully converge with Russia-China’s SCO drive.

What the 2021 SCO Dushanbe Declaration spelled out about Afghanistan is quite revealing:

1. Afghanistan should be an independent, neutral, united, democratic and peaceful state, free of terrorism, war and drugs.

2. It is critical to have an inclusive government in Afghanistan, with representatives from all ethnic, religious and political groups of Afghan society.

3. SCO member states, emphasizing the significance of the many years of hospitality and effective assistance provided by regional and neighboring countries to Afghan refugees, consider it important for the international community to make active efforts to facilitate their dignified, safe and sustainable return to their homeland.

As much as it may sound like an impossible dream, this is the unified message of Russia, China, Iran, India, Pakistan and the Central Asian ‘stans.’ One hopes that Pakistani PM Imran Khan is up to the task and ready for his SCO close-up.

That troubled Western peninsula

The New Silk Roads were officially launched eight years ago by Xi Jinping, first in Astana – now Nur-Sultan – and then in Jakarta.

This is how I reported it at the time.

The announcement came close to a SCO summit – then in Bishkek. The SCO, widely dismissed in Washington and Brussels as a mere talk shop, was already surpassing its original mandate of fighting the ‘three evil forces’ – terrorism, separatism and extremism – and encompassing politics and geoeconomics.

In 2013, there was a Xi-Putin-Rouhani trilateral. Beijing expressed full support for Iran’s peaceful nuclear program (remember, this was two years before the signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, also known as the JCPOA).

Despite many experts dismissing it at the time, there was indeed a common China-Russia-Iran front on Syria (Axis of Resistance in action). Xinjiang was being promoted as the key hub for the Eurasian Land Bridge. Pipelineistan was at the heart of the Chinese strategy – from Kazakhstan oil to Turkmenistan gas. Some people may even remember when Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, was waxing lyrical about an American-propelled New Silk Road.

Now compare it to Xi’s Multilateralism Manifesto in Dushanbe eight years later, reminiscing on how the SCO “has proved to be an excellent example of multilateralism in the 21st century,” and “has played an important role in enhancing the voice of developing countries.”

The strategic importance of this SCO summit taking place right after the Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) in Vladivostok cannot be overstated enough. The EEF focuses, of course, on the Russian Far East – and essentially advances interconnectivity between Russia and Asia. It is an absolutely key hub of Russia’s Greater Eurasian Partnership.

A cornucopia of deals is on the horizon – expanding from the Far East to the Arctic and the development of the Northern Sea Route, and involving everything from precious metals and green energy to digital sovereignty flowing through logistics corridors between Asia and Europe via Russia.

As Putin hinted in his keynote speech, this is what the Greater Eurasia Partnership is all about: the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), BRI, India’s initiative, ASEAN, and now the SCO, developing in a harmonized network, crucially operated by “sovereign decision-making centers.”

So if the BRI proposes a very Taoist “community of shared future for human kind,” the Russian project, conceptually, proposes a dialogue of civilizations (already evoked by the Khatami years in Iran) and sovereign economic-political projects. They are, indeed, complementary.

Glenn Diesen, Professor at the University of South-Eastern Norway and an editor at the Russia in Global Affairs journal, is among the very few top scholars who are analyzing this process in depth. His latest book remarkably tells the whole story in its title: Europe as the Western Peninsula of Greater Eurasia: Geoeconomic Regions in a Multipolar World. It’s not clear whether Eurocrats in Brussels – slaves of Atlanticism and incapable of grasping the potential of Greater Eurasia – will end up exercising real strategic autonomy.

Diesen evokes in detail the parallels between the Russian and the Chinese strategies. He notes how China “is pursuing a three-pillared geoeconomic initiative by developing technological leadership via its China 2025 plan, new transportation corridors via its trillion-dollar Belt and Road Initiative, and establishing new financial instruments such as banks, payment systems and the internationalization of the yuan. Russia is similarly pursuing technological sovereignty, both in the digital sphere and beyond, as well as new transportation corridors such as the Northern Sea Route through the Arctic, and, primarily, new financial instruments.”

The whole Global South, stunned by the accelerated collapse of the western Empire and its unilateral rules-based order, now seems to be ready to embrace the new groove, fully displayed in Dushanbe: a multipolar Greater Eurasia of sovereign equals.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Cradle.

Pepe Escobar, born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture in Moscow. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.

He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Cradle

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Here is a collection of articles from Global Research documenting the Covid Deception that has been fostered on the Western World.  The deception that is being forced on people is so counterfactual that it is difficult to avoid the question whether a very dark agenda is in play.  Our insouciance and inaction are allowing the net of deception to close us in and prevent our resistance. 

Some of these articles below give one part of the deception but aren’t aware of other parts of the deception and thus give some ground to the official narrative.  When you read them keep in mind these established points: 

(1) the PCR test is faulty and the false positives from this test are the foundation of the alleged “pandemic,”

(2) deaths and injuries from the mRNA vaccines are attributed to Covid, not to the vaccine, and are not reported as reactions to the vaccine,

(3) the mRNA vaccines in effect train the virus to escape immune response, thus creating variants that are not controlled by immune responses. Alternatively, adverse vaccine reactions are called “variants.”

Clearly, the mRNA vaccines do not protect.  They worsen the situation.

Pfizer’s own former Vice President and Chief Science Officer tells you this himself:

I have given you enough facts in articles on my website that if you don’t understand by now that The Covid Deception is an attack on your health, your career, and your civil liberties there is no hope for you. 

If the information below fails to rouse you, you are as good as dead.

***

Video: Vaccine Injuries and Deaths: Whistleblower Exposes VAERS Corruption

By Deborah Conrad, September 21, 2021

The Claim that COVID Jabs Are Safe and Effective Has Fallen Apart. “Forcing Employees to be Stabbed by Covid Jabs”

By Prof. Anthony J. Hall, September 21, 2021

Pfizer Admits Israel Is the Great COVID-19 Vaccine Experiment

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, September 21, 2021

The Significance of the Resignations of FDA Officials Responsible for Vaccine Safety

By Jeffrey A. Tucker, September 21, 2021

The Great Reset: Population Control and the Plotting of a “Managerial Revolution”

By Cynthia Chung, September 21, 2021

Worldwide Blood Trail of “Good Business”: The Trillion Dollar COVID-19 “Vaccine” Market

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, September 21, 2021

Diagnostic Lab Certified Pathologist Reports 20 Times Increase of Cancer in Vaccinated Patients

By Great Game India, September 21, 2021

Children, COVID Vaccines and “Informed Parental Consent”: An Open Letter to Ontario Premier Doug Ford

By Dr. John Cunnington, September 21, 2021

More Evidence that They Know the COVID Vaccine Is Killing and Maiming People and Yet They Continue Their Death Program

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, September 22, 2021

Perspective on the Covid Pandemic. Somebody is Lying through their Teeth.

By Jeff Harris, September 21, 2021

Experts Tell FDA Vaccines ‘Harm More People Than They Save,’ but NIH Director Believes Boosters Will be Approved in Coming Weeks

By Megan Redshaw, September 21, 2021

And this one, Now they are going to kill the children, an article from the New York Post

*

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

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, where this article was originally published. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Alliance for Natural Health

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Pfizer plans to request Emergency Use Authorization from the FDA based on data from its phase 2/3 trial for children ages 5 to 11, as experts question the company’s data and need for kids to be vaccinated against COVID.

Pfizer said Monday a phase 2/3 trial showed its COVID vaccine was safe and generated a “robust” antibody response in children ages 5 to 11, but experts warn Pfizer’s data is misleading, and some question the need for kids to be vaccinated in the first place.

These are the first results released for this age group for a COVID vaccine, and the data has not yet been peer-reviewed or published, CNN reported.

Pfizer said it plans to request Emergency Use Authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) soon. FDA officials said once data is submitted, the agency could authorize a vaccine for younger children in a matter of weeks.

In a statement, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said:

“We are eager to extend the protection afforded by the vaccine to this younger population, subject to regulatory authorization, especially as we track the spread of the Delta variant and the substantial threat it poses to children.”

The trial included 2,268 participants ages 5 to 11, and used a two-dose regimen of the vaccine administered 21 days apart. The trial used a 10-microgram dose — smaller than the 30-microgram dose used for those 12 and older.

Dr. Bill Gruber, a Pfizer senior vice president and pediatrician, told Associated Press (AP) that after a second dose, children 5  to 11 years old experienced similar or fewer temporary side effects — such as sore arms, fever or aches — than teens experience.

“I think we really hit the sweet spot,” Gruber said. “I feel a great sense of urgency. There’s pent-up demand for parents to be able to have their children returned to a normal life.”

Pfizer and BioNTech didn’t disclose many details about the trial, including whether any of the kids in the trial experienced myocarditis, a rare heart condition seen in a small number of adolescents and young adults, CNBC reported.

The companies said data for the other two age cohorts from the trial — children 2 to 5  years of age and children 6 months to 2 years — are expected as soon as the fourth quarter of this year.

In New Jersey, Dr. Nisha Gandhi enrolled her 10-year-old daughter, Maya Huber, in the Pfizer study at Rutgers University. Once she knows she is protected from COVID, Maya told AP, her first goal will be “a huge sleepover with all my friends.”

Maya said it was exciting to be part of the study even though she was “super scared” about getting jabbed. But “after you get it, at least you feel happy that you did it and relieved that it didn’t hurt,” she said.

As The Defender reported, Maddie de Garay, age 12, who also participated in one of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine trials for 12- to 15-year-olds, was paralyzed after her second dose.

De Garay’s severe adverse reaction to Pfizer’s vaccine was excluded from the clinical trial data presented to the public, according to Steve Kirsch, founder of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund, who challenged the FDA’s safety panel during the Sept. 17 hearing about de Garay’s case.

“Before Maddie got her final dose of the vaccine she was healthy, got straight A’s, had lots of friends and a life,” her mother said. “Now she is in a wheelchair.”

Dr. Elizabeth Mumper, pediatrician, president and CEO of The RIMLAND Center and member of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Scientific Advisory Committee, in an email to The Defender said, Pfizer did not share specific data on efficacy or side effects, and CHD remains skeptical of “science by press release.”

Mumper said:

“This clinical trial of 2,268 children is not large enough to detect relatively rare adverse outcomes, like myocarditis, nor is it long enough to detect long-term side effects. CHD remains concerned that the risk of taking this new technology injection is higher than the benefits for children in the 5-11 age group.”

Mumper said since children are usually asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic from COVID infections, Pfizer cannot make accurate conclusions about the impact on hospitalizations or severe illness in children 5 to 11 years old.

In addition,

“the Pfizer study apparently relied on measurements of antibody responses, extrapolating from adult data to imply protection,” Mumper said. “COVID has taught us that T cell and natural killer cell responses are a crucial part of immune protection. CHD eagerly awaits the actual data so we can do a more detailed analysis.”

According to AP, the FDA required what is called an immune “bridging” study — evidence that the younger children developed antibody levels already proven to be protective in teens and adults — and that’s what Pfizer reported Monday in a press release, not a scientific publication.

Dr. Peter Marks, director of FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said the pediatric studies should be large enough to rule out any higher risk to young children. Yet, Pfizer’s study isn’t large enough to detect any extremely rare side effects, such as the heart inflammation that sometimes occurs after the second dose, mostly in young men, Marks said.

Why are we vaccinating children against COVID?

A new study published in Science Direct questioned the need for vaccinating children against COVID. The study found the bulk of official COVID-attributed deaths per capita occurred mostly in the elderly with high comorbidities, while COVID-attributed deaths were negligible in children.

By comparison, the study’s authors found the bulk of normalized post-vaccination deaths occurred mostly in the elderly with high comorbidities, while the normalized post-vaccination deaths were small, but not negligible, in children.

Researchers pointed out clinical trials for COVID vaccines were very short (a few months), had samples not representative of the total population and for adolescents/children, and had poor predictive power because of their small size.

Further, clinical trials for COVID vaccines did not address changes in biomarkers that could serve as early warning indicators of elevated predisposition to serious diseases, the researchers said.

“Most importantly, the clinical trials did not address long-term effects that, if serious, would be borne by children/adolescents for potentially decades,” the study concluded.

As the study noted, more than 285 million doses of COVID vaccines had been administered in the U.S. from Dec. 14, 2020, through May 24, 2021.

During this time, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) — a passive surveillance system managed jointly by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and FDA — received 4,863 reports of death among people who received a COVID vaccine. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

According to the study, the best-case scenario cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each vaccination compared to COVID in the most vulnerable 65 and older demographic.

The risk of death from COVID decreases drastically as age decreases, said the researchers, and the longer-term effects of the vaccine on lower age groups will increase their risk-benefit ratio, perhaps substantially.

Experts spoke out against vaccines for kids at prior FDA meeting

During an FDA meeting June 10 to discuss granting EUA for COVID vaccines for children under 12, several experts spoke out against the plan, saying the benefits don’t outweigh the risks for young children.

Peter Doshi, Ph.D., associate professor at University of Maryland School of Pharmacy and senior editor of The BMJ, said during the open public hearing session, there is no emergency that would warrant using EUA to authorize COVID vaccines for children.

Pointing to Pfizer’s clinical trial of 12- to 15-year-olds which supported the vaccine’s EUA for that age group, Doshi said the harms outweighed the benefits and those who had the placebo were “better off” than those who received the vaccine.

Doshi said few children in Pfizer’s trial benefited because they didn’t get COVID, already had COVID or were asymptomatic. Doshi pointed to data from the CDC showing 23% of 0- to 4-year-olds at the time, and 42% of 5- to17-year-olds already had COVID and acquired robust natural immunity.

As for long-term side effects, Doshi said many severe side effects occur beyond six weeks after dosing.

Doshi reminded the FDA it cannot authorize or approve a medical product in a population unless the benefits outweigh the risks in that same population.

Dr. Cody Meissner, director of pediatric infectious diseases at Tufts University School of Medicine, said children are at low risk of severe disease from the virus and more study is needed about safety in younger age groups.

“Before we start vaccinating millions of adolescents and children, it’s important to find out what the consequences are,” Meissner said, noting a low COVID hospitalization rate among children.

As The Defender reported, the authors of an op-ed published in July in The BMJ argued against vaccinating children, stating:

“ … the assertion that vaccinating children against SARS-CoV-2 will protect adults remains hypothetical. Even if we were to assume this protection does exist, the number of children that would need to be vaccinated to protect just one adult from a bout of severe COVID-19 — considering the low transmission rates, the high proportion of children already being post-COVID, and most adults being vaccinated or post-COVID — would be extraordinarily high.

“Moreover, this number would likely compare unfavorably to the number of children that would be harmed, including for rare serious events.”

In June, a group of more than 40 doctors, medics and scientists called the UK government’s plan to vaccinate children for COVID “irresponsible, unethical and unnecessary.”

In an open letter addressed to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, the group said no one under 18 should be vaccinated for COVID because evidence shows the virus poses almost no risk to healthy children.

Also in June, America’s Frontline Doctors, a non-partisan, not-for-profit organization, filed a request for a temporary restraining order, which was denied, against the emergency use of COVID vaccines in children under age 16.

The group’s founder, Dr. Simone Gold, said:

“This is an experimental biological agent whose harms are well-documented (although suppressed and censored) and growing rapidly, and we will not support using America’s children as guinea pigs.”

Pfizer’s COVID vaccine is currently authorized for emergency use in people as young as age 12. Moderna is authorized for people 18 and older, although the company has asked the FDA to authorize its use in children as young as 12. Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine is authorized in people 18 and older.

Members of the FDA’s advisory panel, public health experts and scientists have expressed concerns about using COVID vaccines in the pediatric population.

*

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

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

Featured image is from CHD

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Pfizer Says COVID Vaccine for 5- to 11-Year-Olds Is Safe and Shows ‘Robust’ Antibody Response, Experts Say Not So Fast
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

The Testimonies Project was created to provide a platform for all those who were affected after getting the covid-19 vaccines, and to make sure their voices are heard, since they are not heard in the Israeli media.

We hope this project will encourage more and more people to tell their story.

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Israel’s Testimonies Project: Platform for Those Affected by the Covid-19 “Vaccine”
  • Tags: ,

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

When Americans see the data on COVID deaths of over 600,000, who or what should they blame?  The truth is this: Better than blaming the virus they should blame hospitals and the vast majority of physicians.  Why?  Because the medical establishment has never had the courage to stand up to the medical tyranny engineered by Fauci and implemented by the CDC and FDA.  People still are dying from COVID because their physicians refuse to genuinely follow the science and prescribe cheap, safe and proven generics like ivermectin.

Of course, there have always been a minority of doctors who have since March 2020 been curing their patients of COVID by using a variety of protocols that US hospitals and their doctors refuse to use.

Why are so many nurses and physicians refusing to be vaccinated?  Because they have seen on a daily basis large numbers of patients suffering and dying not from the virus but from the COVID vaccines.

Now one of the most respected physicians and medical researchers, Dr. Robert Malone, has spearheaded a movement to combat medical tyranny by organizing physicians from all over the world and creating a Physicians Declaration.  Here are some key highlights from this historic action, including my comments to more explicitly say what is not said in the Declaration.

  • There is an unprecedented assault on our ability to care for our patients.
  • Public policy [think Fauci] has chosen to ignore fundamental concepts of science, health and wellness, instead embracing a “one size fits all” treatment strategy [think COVID vaccines] that results in too much illness and death when the individualized, personalized approach to health care is safe and equally or more effective [people are dying from vaccines, not from generics like ivermectin].
  • Thousands of physicians are being denied the right [by the corporations they work for to provide treatment to their patients [think ivermectin] as a result of barriers put up by pharmacies, hospitals, and public health agencies, rendering the vast majority of healthcare providers helpless to protect their patients in the face of disease.  Physicians are now advising their patients to simply go home (allowing the virus to incubate) and return when their disease worsens, resulting in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary patient deaths due to failure-to-treat [other than using vaccines].
  • Physicians must defend their right to prescribe treatment, observing the tenet FIRST, DO NO HARM.  Physicians shall not be restricted from prescribing safe and effective treatments [other than vaccines].  These restrictions continue to cause unnecessary sickness and death.  The rights of patients, after being fully informed about the risks and benefits of each option [especially vaccines that for most people pose more risks than benefits], must be restored to receive those treatments [such as ivermectin].
  • We invite patients, who believe in the importance of the physician-patient relationship and the ability to be active participants in their care, to demand access to science-based medical care [generics such as ivermectin].

That last point is where you, the reader, must join this revolt and demand from your physicians and hospitals your right to get access to generic medicines like ivermectin.  Print the Declaration and give it to your doctor, and if you are sent to a hospital bring a copy with you.  If this Declaration simply remains words but not profound changes in the practice of medicine in this pandemic, then all hope for saving lives will be lost.

We are rapidly approaching the point where more people will die from COVID vaccines than the virus.  Fauci and his allies will not easily admit their many evil wrong actions.  If you want to examine extensive medical science details on the emerging Vaccine Dystopia, then read this truth-telling article.

*

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

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, author of Pandemic Blunder and many articles on the pandemic, worked on health issues for decades.  As a full professor at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, he directed a medical research program between the colleges of engineering and medicine.  As a senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association, he directed major studies on health-related subjects; he testified at over 50 U.S. Senate and House hearings and authored hundreds of articles and op-ed articles in major newspapers.  He has served as an executive volunteer at a major hospital for more than 10 years.  He is a member of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and America’s Frontline Doctors.

Featured image is from NOQ Report

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

As It Did with Castro in Cuba and Noriega in Panama, the “Mighty Wurlitzer” of U.S. Propaganda Defused Antiwar Sentiment by Painting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as a Brutal Animal Who Had to Be Removed.

In 1991, famed MIT linguist Noam Chomsky published a political pamphlet called Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda, which provided an examination of U.S. war propaganda and its success from Woodrow Wilson’s World War I Creel Commission to Bush Sr.’s war on Iraq.

According to Chomsky, “Propaganda is to democracy what the bludgeon is to a totalitarian state.” It lulls the masses into acquiescence while preserving the illusion of an open society.

U.S. propaganda had been especially effective because it is subtly designed to arouse moral outrage against the government’s targets by playing up their human rights abuses—real or imagined.

[Source: amazon.com]

Chomsky’s analysis applies particularly well to the Syrian conflict, where U.S. propaganda has been so good that Chomsky himself at times was taken in by it.

For example, in a Democracy Now! interview on April 5, 2017, Chomsky called the Bashar al-Assad regime “[a] moral disgrace carrying out horrendous acts, the Russians with them.” This is the official U.S. position, which obscures the horrendous acts committed by Assad’s opponents—jihadist terrorists with whom the U.S. has been allied since the war began.[1]

It is revealing that the majority of Syrians—whom the U.S. is purportedly there to protect against the evil Assad—do not consider Assad to be a “moral disgrace.” A 2012 poll found that 55 percent supported him and tens of thousands were mobilized for pro-government rallies when the Arab Spring protests broke out in March 2011.

Thousands rally in support of Syria's Assad | China News | Al Jazeera

Pro-Assad rally after Arab Spring protests broke out in Daraa in 2011. [Source: Aljazeera.com]

Chomsky was among the signatories to a March 2021 letter decrying the emergence of “pro-Assad allegiances in the name of anti-imperialism among some who normally identify as progressive and left“ and “spread of manipulative disinformation that routinely deflects attention away from the well-documented abuses of Assad and his allies,” and results in alignment with the “governments of Russia and China.”[2]

Chomsky also signed a petition published in the New York Review of Books that bought the deceitful and morally hollow U.S. pretense that it needed to stay in Syria to protect the Kurds from a Turkish invasion.

But the truth is that the U.S. has used and then treacherously deserted the Kurds multiple times—not just in Syria but throughout the Middle East—as Chomsky himself has written about. After luring the Kurds into supporting its policies with insincere promises of promoting an independent Kurdish nation, the U.S. callously abandoned them to slaughter by Saddam Hussein in Iraq, by Assad in Syria, and most recently by Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey.

World War in Syria

A.B. Abrams has published a new book, World War in Syria: Global Conflict on Middle Eastern Battlefields (Atlanta: Clarity Press, 2021), which effectively debunks U.S. state propaganda about Syria, and shows the war for what it is—a regime-change operation directed by the U.S. waged via proxy that evolved into a world war that gave an opportunity for many different countries to settle geopolitical scores.

The major players in the conflict included Qatar, Turkey, Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, France, Britain, Israel, and the United States which armed and financed jihadist insurgents seeking to topple the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

On the other side, Iran, Russia, Iraq, Hezbollah (Lebanese insurgent group) and North Korea provided military support to the Assad regime that enabled its survival.

The official narrative in the U.S. cast Assad as a butcher and the insurgents favorably.

The U.S. claimed it was arming “moderate rebels” to oust Assad—though most of the rebels were in fact Islamic jihadists.

[Source: theduran.com]

The U.S. had long sought Assad’s removal because he had ruled over an independent state that was outside the Western sphere of influence and allied with Iran, which the U.S. wanted to isolate.

Image [Heads of state Hafez al Assad, Muammar al-Qaddafi and Yasser Arafat during the 4th summit of the Steadfastness and Confrontation National Front, in Tripoli, April 12, 1980]

Hafez al-Assad, Syria’s ruler from 1970 to 2000, with Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) leader Yasser Arafat in the 1970s. The trio were considered enemies of the U.S. as Arab nationalists and leftists. [Source: limacharlienews.com]

Assad further had resisted U.S. designs to build an oil pipeline that could undercut supply routes from Russia.

After 9/11, Washington planned to attack and destroy the governments in seven Middle East countries, with the final target being Iran.

As of 2021, with Ba’athist Iraq toppled, Lebanon on the verge of collapse, Hezbollah militarily stretched and the Chinese and Russian friendly governments of Libya and Sudan violently overthrown with Western backing, this strategy had largely succeeded.

Colonial and Neo-Colonial Past

Syria gained its independence from France in April 1946 after its people had endured years of French occupation and terror.

A picture containing text, outdoor, group, person Description automatically generated

Syrians celebrate Independence Day on April 17, 1946. [Source: twitter.com]

In 1948, Syria waged a war, along with Egypt, Jordan and Iraq, against Jewish settlers in Palestine who established the State of Israel, which included territory historically considered part of Syria.

Multiple coups and countercoups were launched in Syria over the next 22 years.

The first, in 1949, was engineered by the CIA against President Shukri al-Quwatli, who was targeted because of his lack of enthusiasm for the Trans-Arabian pipeline, which was intended to transport Saudi Arabian oil to Europe through Syrian territory.

Quwatli’s successor, a general with a “strong pro-French orientation” named Husni al-Zaim, ran what Pentagon cables described as an “army-supported dictatorship with a “strong anti-Soviet attitude.”

His government approved the pipeline in its first week in power, but was overthrown five months later by colonel Sami al-Hinnawi, whose short-lived administration was toppled by another colonel, Adib Shishakli in December.

Shishakli’s pro-Western government lasted four years before he too was toppled in a coup.

In January 1957, after Quwatli had been re-elected, CIA director Allen Dulles submitted a report warning that the new Syrian Cabinet was “oriented to the left” and, two months later, warned President Dwight Eisenhower of an “increasing trend toward a decidedly leftist, pro-Soviet government.”

The CIA subsequently went into motion to try to engineer the Syrian government’s overthrow.

The effort was headed by CIA coup masters Howard Stone and Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of Theodore Roosevelt.

The coup attempt made use of Syrian dissidents based in neighboring Lebanon, one of the most firmly Western-aligned states in the Arab world.

It aimed to restore Adib Shishakli to power—even though he was a figure of ill-repute described by CIA Station Chief in Damascus Miles Copeland as having committed “sacrilege, blasphemy, murder, adultery and theft.”

Considerable investments were made at this time to arm and win over Syria’s radical Islamist opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood, which backed the coup and was later called upon to carry out assassinations of officials the CIA or Britain’s MI6 wanted taken out.

Owing to strong internal opposition, the 1957 CIA coup plot failed, although the CIA continued to plot regime-change operations, including during the presidency of John F. Kennedy.

Syria’s strategic position was particularly important because it bordered one of the NATO alliance’s most powerful member states—Turkey.

Ba’athism and the Assad Dynasty

In 1958, Syria entered a period of short-lived union with the nationalist government in Egypt led by Gamal Abdel Nasser, and in 1966 the Ba’ath party consolidated its power, resulting in closer cooperation with the Soviet Union.

Ba’athism was a school of socialist Arab nationalism thought that stressed the need for rejuvenation of the Arab nation against threats and humiliations by Western imperial powers.

Its rule was consolidated under the long reign of Hafez al-Assad, a former Captain in the Syrian army who established a strong state capable of more effectively resisting foreign intervention.

Security forces were restructured under his direction into a new “coup-proof system.”

Assad’s administration at the same time oversaw the establishment of popular organizations to widen political participation—including the General Union of Peasants, the General Federation of Trade Unions, General Women’s Federation and General Union of Students—and moved to build institutions which raised living standards and established infrastructure projects including that which provided electricity to the rural population.

The greatest threat to the state came from Islamist elements which led an uprising in Hama in 1982 that resulted in the deaths of more than 1,000 Syrian military personnel and was violently crushed by Assad.

At the time, Damascus accused U.S. intelligence and Western-aligned Arab states Saudi Arabia and Egypt of having supported the jihadists—foreshadowing 2011.

The U.S. National Security Council published a paper around this time titled “The Destabilization of Syria,” which promoted the idea of encouraging Turkey to support attacks on Syria from its northern border—another strategy adopted in the latest Syrian war.

Reuters correspondent Patrick Seale said that Syria was viewed by the Reagan administration as “the enemy, the most militant of Israel’s neighbors, the closest to Moscow, the only substantial obstacle to U.S. designs for the region”—which has changed very little today.

Hafez’s son Bashar, who took over when his father died in 2000, defused sectarian divisions by appointing many Sunni to his Cabinet even though he was an Alawite, an offshoot of Shiism.

An ophthalmologist by training, Bashar was more pro-Western than his father, having presided over Syria’s economic transition away from the Ba’athist state-centered economic system and adopting a neoliberal reform agenda.

In his first years in office, his major reforms included privatization of universities, banks, and media, reducing subsidies on a number of basic goods, reducing tariff protections for domestic industries, and breaking the state monopoly on education which the party had maintained since 1963.

Assad also began considering Syria’s realignment away from traditional partners such as North Korea and Russia and towards closer partnership with the Western world—prompting John Kerry among others to see Assad as a potential asset.

However, Hezbollah’s victory in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon War caused a panic in elite U.S. circles—and intensified the long-held goal of regime change.

U.S. Historical Support for Islamic Extremists

The Syrian war should not be seen in isolation but as part of a larger pattern of the U.S. allying with Islamic fundamentalists in the attempt to fulfill its foreign policy goals.

A key precedent was established in Indonesia in the 1950s when the CIA gave a million dollars to the Islamist Masjumi Party to bolster its election chances and thwart the socialist regime of Achmed Sukarno and the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI) which, at the time, was the largest Communist party in Southeast Asia.

When Sukarno was overthrown in 1965 in a CIA-backed coup, the Islamists partook in a mass orgy of violence directed against Sukarno and the PKI.

The U.S. embassy established kill lists as rivers and streams became clogged with dead bodies.

The killings of 1965-66

Indonesia mass killings of 1965-66 in which Muslim fundamentalists backed by the CIA participated. [Source: insideindonesia.org]

In the 1980s, the CIA mobilized Islamic jihadist groups in Pakistan to fight the Soviet-backed regime in Afghanistan. The CIA at the time openly recruited militants from Arab states in Africa as well as from Saudi Arabia while framing the insurgency as a righteous struggle against communist totalitarianism.

Afghan mujahideen - Wikipedia

Forerunners of the Syrian jihad: Islamic fighters mobilized by the CIA in Pakistan during the 1980s to fight the “evil” Soviet empire. [Source: wikipedia.org]

Graham E. Fuller, a key architect of the jihadist insurgency in Afghanistan, stated in the 1990s that “the policy of guiding the evolution of Islam and of helping them against our adversaries worked marvelously well in Afghanistan against the Red Army. The same doctrines can still be used to destabilize what remains of Russian power.”

And indeed they have been.

Jihadis R US

Leaked emails from leading private intelligence firm Stratfor, which included notes from a meeting with Pentagon officials, confirmed that the war in Syria was waged from the outset as part of a subversive operation by NATO members that was designed to force a “collapse of the [Syrian] state from within.”

The documents further showed that air operations against Syria to tip the balance in favor of anti-government militant groups were under serious consideration from the war’s earliest days, with the Pentagon believing that demonization of the Syrian state, namely through “media attention on a massacre” by government forces, would be vital to facilitating an air attack.

The Syrian rebellion began with the eruption of Arab Spring protests in the city of Daraa in March 2011 after school children were arrested for painting anti-government graffiti.

While there were legitimate grievances—exacerbated by a period of drought which prompted rural-urban migration—the uprising was dominated by jihadi elements from the outset.

The Free Syrian Army (FSA) favored by the U.S., according to Foreign Policy magazine, was a “Turkish-backed proxy force with ties to extremist groups,” and was responsible for “killing scores of unarmed civilians.”

One of its offshoots, the Khalid ibn Al Waleed brigade—claimed to be part of the “moderate opposition” to Assad—broadcast the beheading of unarmed prisoners by a child using a machete on the internet and claimed to have beheaded 80 other prisoners.

The founder of another group that received U.S. and Saudi funding, Jaysh al-Islam, was an extremist scholar influenced by Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabist Islam. He pledged to his fighters that “the jihadists will wash the filth of the rafda [a slur for Shiites] from Greater Syria, they will wash it forever if Allah wills it.”

As in Afghanistan in the 1980s, young Sunni men from across the Muslim world streamed across the Syria-Turkey border to try to achieve this latter goal.

Jordan’s King Abdullah II referred to them as “jihadists whose central aim is to create a seventh-century theocracy in the heart of the Middle East.”

Many of the groups later consolidated into the Al-Nusra Front whose elite fighters came from Chechnya, Dagestan, and included Uyghurs from China’s Xinjiang province among other places.

In May 2015, when the jihadists took control of the ancient city of Palmyra, they proceeded to demolish the World Heritage site located there and conducted mass executions of captured soldiers and more than 400 civilian supporters.

A picture containing sky, ground, outdoor, beach Description automatically generated

A photographer holding a picture of Palmyra’s Temple of Bel in front of the remains of the historic temple after it was destroyed by ISIS jihadists in September 2015. Later it was retaken by government forces. [Source: news.artnet.com]

CIA officers assisted Qatar in procuring weapons for the rebel opposition in Syria, while others posted in Turkey worked with Turkish intelligence to channel the weapons to the insurgents.

By March 2013 more than 160 military cargo flights from Saudi Arabia and Qatar had landed in Turkey and Jordan and, by 2016, Saudi Arabia was providing $700 million per year in funding for insurgent groups—around 40% of the Syrian state’s pre-war defense budget.

Some jihadist attacks—including rocket attacks on Damascus International Airport—were ordered directly by Saudi Prince Salman bin Sultan, the son of the Saudi Defense Minister.

Turkish forces meanwhile established brigades named in honor of the Ottoman empire, which Turkish leader Recep Tayip Erdogan was intent on re-establishing.

Timber Sycamore

The primary U.S. operation to arm Syrian insurgents was Operation Timber Sycamore, carried out by the CIA with support from British, Qatari, Saudi and Jordanian intelligence services and the Pentagon.

The program saw relatively little regulation of whom the arms went to, and lacked accountability, as weaponry very consistently ended up in the hands of UN-recognized terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda and IS.

A picture containing person, military uniform, outdoor, people Description automatically generated

U.S. Marines and Jordanian Army soldiers collaborate in Amman, Jordan. [Source: wikipedia.org]

U.S. military personnel deployed to Syria directly included Special Forces, engineering experts and medical and psychological warfare teams who were supplied through a network of small airstrips set up on Syrian soil which received MC-130 and CV-22 transports.

Small numbers of U.S. troops embedded with rebel counterparts—including the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)—and called in air strikes from U.S. bases in Jordan, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, and other countries.

According to Abrams, the U.S. was “in effect invading Syria to seize a portion of its territory and was doing so in a much more subtle and cost-free way than prior operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama or other target states.”

Israel—Choosing the Islamic State

This invasion was carried out with the support of Israel, which armed and supported the anti-government insurgents in Syria and launched hundreds of missile strikes—including some that succeeded in killing Hezbollah and Iranian Quds Force commanders.

The Israelis had a strong interest in overseeing the overthrow of the Assad government, which would represent the final death of the Arab nationalist threat that had overhung the Jewish state since the early 1950s.

Such an outcome would also facilitate much greater freedom of action for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in the region, with Syrian ballistic missiles, chemical weapons and air defenses all having for decades been directed primarily at restraining Israel’s military power.

Israel furthermore wanted to strike a blow at Hezbollah and Iran—Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon stated that, “in Syria, if it is a choice between Iran and the Islamic State, I choose the Islamic State … Our greatest enemy is the Iranian regime that has declared war on us.”[3]

Double Standards on Human Rights

During the U.S. campaign to seize Raqqa from the Islamic State in alliance with the SDF in 2017, the U.S. used depleted uranium shells—one of the most toxic weapons in the world with often horrifying long-lasting effects—against civilian areas.

The U.S. Air Force was also reported to have used white phosphorus munitions [known as Willie Peter in Vietnam] in the town of Hajin in Deir ez-Zor.

Exposure to Willie Peter caused deep burns which were extremely difficult to heal, and its fumes were highly toxic, with the strike on Hajin reportedly causing large fires.

The use of these weapons exposed the double standards of U.S. policy in its professed concern for human rights—as its military operation resulted in large-scale human rights abuses and atrocities.

During the campaign to seize Raqqa, U.S.-led coalition air strikes were killing at one point more than 100 civilians per day.

North Korea, Hezbollah, and Iran

To counter the foreign invasion, the Assad regime drew support from Hezbollah, the Lebanese resistance group, and North Korean People’s Army (KPA) advisers who had fought alongside the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) in all its major wars since the Six-Day War in 1967.[4]

Representatives of the insurgency claimed in 2013 that Korean pilots flew Syrian Air Force aircraft in combat and that North Korea deployed special forces units which were considered “fatally dangerous on the battlefield.”

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah—who had himself received military training in North Korea—justified Hezbollah’s intervention on the grounds that the West’s goal in Syria was to “push the country into chaos and internal battles like in Iraq.”

Washington think tanks had indeed called for Syria’s partition along sectarian lines—much as they had done with Iraq.

In 2017, the respected Hezbollah fighters formed a “Golan Liberation Brigade” with Iraq’s Harakat Hezbollah Al Nujaba militia, aiming to end the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights.

With the North Koreans, Hezbollah played an instrumental role in the SAA’s capture of Al Qusayr in the spring of 2013 in one of the war’s turning points.

Iran’s extensive involvement in the war was exemplified by its carrying out more than 700 drone strikes against Islamic State targets in Syria, some of which operated in close proximity to U.S. forces.

Iran’s influential Fatemiyoun Brigade, comprised primarily of Shiites from Afghanistan’s Hazara minority, was formed in 2014 with support from Iran’s Quds force.

The Hazara faced severe religious and ethnic discrimination in Afghanistan stemming from their support for the 1980s’ Soviet government and had a long-standing grudge against Wahhabist jihadist groups which could be settled on the battlefield in Syria.

Information War

According to Abrams, the Obama era saw the maturing of information warfare capabilities that were so key to the Syrian conflict.

The Obama administration laid the ground for major investments in information warfare by the State Department, forming a close public-private sector partnership with American tech giants to capitalize on their unique capabilities to manipulate public opinion globally.

As The New York Times reported in an article entitled “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings,” not only were the uprisings against the Syrian state from March 2011 closely connected to Western NGOs, where the leaders of several anti-government groups had received training, but the U.S. Congress and State Department had worked with tech giants to strengthen these operations.

The Times reported: “A number of the groups and individuals directly involved in the revolts and reforms sweeping the region … received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House.”

Skills provided included using social networking and mobile technologies to promote calls for political change along Western lines. Among those sponsoring the meeting were Facebook, Google, MTV, Columbia Law School, and the State Department.

A leak of Hillary Clinton’s emails shows cooperation between Google and the State Department to undermine the Syrian government.

Google Ideas director Jared Cohen, formerly an adviser to Clinton, wanted to encourage defections among the Syrian armed forces and launched a “defection tracker,” which was designed to “encourage more people to defect and give confidence to the rebel opposition.”

Google also renamed various streets in Damascus after jihadi leaders—which was also done in Libya.

A key part of the information war was control over the media, which blamed the Syrian government for atrocities later found to have been committed by the FSA and other insurgents.

In August 2012, for example, the Western media reported that the massacre of 245 people in the Daraya suburb was carried out by “Assad’s army”; however, an investigation by British journalist Robert Fisk found that the FSA had been responsible.

Alternative media sources meanwhile attacked critics of the war who exposed U.S. government deceptions as “defenders of Syria’s bloodthirsty dictator and butcher,” to quote Spencer Ackerman in the hip Wired magazine.

In 2018, The Intercept published an article by Mehdi Hassan entitled “Dear Bashar Al-Assad Apologists: Your Hero Is a War Criminal Even If He Didn’t Gas Syrians.” Who these Assad apologists were, Hassan never says.

Graphical user interface, text Description automatically generated

[Source: caityjohnstone.medium.com]

The White Helmets—a humanitarian organization nicknamed for its protective hats that allegedly saved over 100,000 war victims—were an important part of the information war.

Photographs published in alternative media, however, exposed them as a creation of U.S. and British intelligence agencies.

White Helmets co-founder James Le Mesurier, a former member of the Olive Group private security firm, was a suspected British MI6 agent who died under suspicious circumstances.

Canadian journalist Eva Bartlett reported from the front lines in Syria that the White Helmets frequently staged videos for propaganda purposes.

British reporter Vanessa Beeley showed that they had ties to private security firms and the “deep state” in both the U.S. and UK and were comprised of members of al-Qaeda-linked terror groups. Their purpose, she said was to fabricate atrocities and provide pretexts for Western military intervention.

Chemical Gas Attacks Blamed on “Animal Assad”

The information war reached its apex over allegations of sarin gas attacks in Syria which Western governments and media blamed on Assad.

Alleged chemical attacks in eastern Ghouta provided a pretext for the Obama administration to try to initiate air strikes on Syria in the fall of 2013, and for the Trump administration to escalate the air war in 2018.

In April 2018, Trump tweeted:

Many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria. Area of atrocity is in lockdown and encircled by Syrian Army, making it completely inaccessible to outside world. President Putin, Russia and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad. Big price to pay…”

However, Carla Del Ponte, the former chief prosecutor of two UN international criminal law tribunals who served on the international commission of inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, reported that “opponents of the regime in Syria were the ones conducting the Sarin gas attacks.”

The case for the insurgents being responsible was further strengthened by a study by Theodore A. Postol, a professor of science, technology, and national security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Richard M. Lloyd, an analyst at Tesla Laboratories.

The two analysts suggested that the rockets that delivered the nerve agent were propelled by motors taken from BM-21 122 mm artillery rockets which were used extensively by both the SAA and by insurgent forces. Calculating potential maximum ranges for the sarin-filled rockets, the experts concluded that the attack could not have been carried out by the SAA positions as Western governments and media had previously asserted.

Additional reports indicated that the chemical weapons used in Ghouta in 2013 had been supplied by Saudi Arabian intelligence services, which had provided significant material support to the insurgency.

In February 2018, U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis stated that the U.S. had “reports from the battlefield from people who claim [chemical weapons] have been used [but] we do not have evidence of it.”

President Barack Obama in short had cherry-picked evidence from select intelligence reports to make a case before the public for bombing Syria, and Trump had done the same, but proof was never established—just like with the WMD in Iraq.

Russia to the Rescue

The Russians entered the war in September 2015 on the invitation of the Syrian government. Particularly valuable were Russia’s new Su-34 strike fighters which Russian state media dubbed the “ultimate ISIL-crushing machine.”

Hardline hawks in the U.S. like Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) began to warn that Russia was “walking over Obama like a small child,” prompting greater U.S. arms supplies to the rebels and demands for a more expansive U.S. bombing campaign.

Russian armed forces proved critical in helping the SAA to retake Syria’s largest city, Aleppo, in 2016, fighting an enemy equipped with American TOW anti-armor missiles provided by the CIA.

This was another major turning point in the war—which the mainstream media as usual misrepresented.

Lalkar: Syria: The liberation of Aleppo

Aleppo residents celebrate the liberation of their city from jihadist terrorist rule with Russian support. [Source: lalkar.org]

Afterwards, the Russians stayed to help reconstruct Aleppo and provided hot food to the 100,000 refugees who chose to escape to government-controlled territory [in Jibreen] from an eastern-Aleppo rebel enclave. Vanessa Beeley reported that the people said “Jibreen was heaven compared to life in East Aleppo [under rebel control]. They could not just believe how well they were being treated—the Russians were hugely appreciated.”

According to Abrams, the Russian military intervention was “historically significant for shaping the future of its Middle Eastern ally and preventing Damascus from suffering the same fate as Kabul had in 1992.”

The danger was an increasing threat of a war with the U.S., which directly fought Russian troops in Syria on several occasions.

Kurds

Washington’s policy in Syria often lacked coherence as it was committed to stamping out ISIL while at the same time supported militant jihadist groups fighting the Assad government who sometimes also fought each other.

At a certain point, the U.S. came to consider its ally Turkey as being too independent and was accused of being behind a failed 2019 coup attempt against Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.[5]

After the Russian intervention, the Obama administration offered support to the Kurdish enclave in Rojava—which attracted leftists in its embrace of anarchist governing ideals—and its People’s Protection (YPG) militias which fought the Islamic State, Turkey, and the Assad regime.

A picture containing person, outdoor, people, crowd Description automatically generated

Fighters from the Rojava enclave which had embraced a decentralized model of governance and tried to establish more of a cooperative economy in the war zone. [Source: weirdworldwire.com]

U.S. bombing helped the YPG gain victory at the Battle of Kobani in March 2016 which cemented ties between the Rojava and the U.S.

The latter relationship—along with U.S. backing of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) helped to give the U.S. an important foothold in Syria—though one that was threatened by the Russians who also courted the YPG.

Lost War

The U.S. strategy aimed by the late 2010s to keep “the Assad regime out of areas liberated from ISIS [IS],” as U.S. Special Envoy to Syria Fred Hof put it.

The capture of Raqqa in October 2017 enabled U.S. access to the Al Omar oil field, the largest in Syria, which could sustain operations in the country and undermine Syria’s post-reconstruction efforts.

The U.S. and its proxies also maintained control over parts of the city of Idlib, where the standoff with Damascus was expected to continue in the late 2020s.

Besides seizing oil fields, the U.S. began intensifying economic warfare efforts during the Trump presidency through sanctions that were justified under fraudulent pretexts—as is the norm.

The Biden administration showed signs of an even harder line against Syria than Trump. It a) doubled down on the sanctions; b) sent a military convoy in its first week; and c) conducted air strikes against Iranian Quds-force-backed militias in its sixth week.

The Syrian war by this point had been for all intents and purposes lost, enabling Syria to avoid the fate of Afghanistan, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Libya and so many other countries that were balkanized and destroyed by U.S. invasion.

In many ways it was a pyrrhic victory for Syria, though, as the country sustained 380,000 to 580,000 deaths and $250 billion in infrastructural damage, and could no longer affect regional affairs beyond its own borders.

Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda

Success of the U.S. propaganda was apparent when Donald Trump faced a barrage of criticism when he proposed withdrawing U.S. troops from Syria in October 2019.

Even left-wing intellectuals were aghast, warning about reprisals by Turkey against the Kurds.

The U.S. in Syria had perfected ways of selling a war of aggression as an act of humanitarian intervention.

The public had been conditioned to view Assad just as Trump portrayed him—an animal—fitting a pattern of leaders targeted by the U.S. for regime change, including Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, Muammar Qaddafi, Slobodan Milošević and others.

Lost in the mainstream media depictions were the larger geopolitical stakes of the Syrian war, the brutality of the jihadist rebels backed by the U.S. and its proxies, and how the war fit a long pattern of U.S. regime-change operations.

The public today remains deluded in believing that only a long-term U.S. military presence could save Syria and its people.

This view reflects an engrained colonial mentality, which has haunted Syrians for decades and has proven very difficult to shake.

*

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

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

Notes

1. In a 2016 interview by Daniel Falcone and Saul Isaacson in Truthout, Chomsky was asked about Assad and said, “He’s pretty horrible. In this case, I don’t think he’s really being demonized. It’s pretty awful.” 

2. The letter further asserted that the pro-Assad “writers and outlets have mushroomed in recent years, and have often positioned Syria at the forefront of their criticisms of imperialism and interventionism, which they characteristically restrict to the West; Russian and Iranian involvement is generally ignored.” That Russia and Iranian intervention may have helped Syria preserve its autonomy, was welcomed by the local population and saved Syria from the fate of countries destroyed by U.S. imperialism is not considered. Unlike in past cases Chomsky has chronicled, the disinformation is now supposedly being promoted not by mainstream corporate media but by independent writers and intellectuals perniciously in the service of foreign powers and Bashar al-Assad and resulting in mounting opposition to U.S. intervention, which somehow is a bad thing. 

3. Former Israeli Consul General in New York Alon Pinkas told The New York Times that the status quo, in which Syrians were killing each other was favorable to Israel. He stated: “For Jerusalem, the status quo, horrific as it may be from a humanitarian perspective, seems preferable to either a victory by Mr. Assad’s government and his Iranian backers or a strengthening of rebel groups, increasingly dominated by Sunni jihadists. This is a playoff situation in which you need both teams to lose, but at least you don’t want one to win—we’ll settle for a tie. Let them bleed, hemorrhage to death; that’s the strategic thinking here. As long as this lingers, there’s no real threat from Syria.” 

4. Bolstering Syria represented part of a broader North Korean effort to push back against Western interests in the Third World. Pyongyang was among the first to offer Damascus its support once the Islamist insurgency had escalated, and was one of just twelve states to vote against UN General Assembly Resolution 66/253 condemning the Syrian state in February 2012. 

5. Turkish authorities issued warrants for two CIA agents accused of being behind the coup including Henri J. Barkey. 


Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

Mark Taliano combines years of research with on-the-ground observations to present an informed and well-documented analysis that refutes  the mainstream media narratives on Syria. 

Voices from Syria 

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-1-6

Author: Mark Taliano

Year: 2017

Pages: 128 (Expanded edition: 1 new chapter)

List Price: $17.95

Special Price: $9.95 

Click to order

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

This article was originally published in May 2021.

The visible surface of the Sun, or the photosphere, is around 6,000°C. But a few thousand kilometres above it – a small distance when we consider the size of the Sun – the solar atmosphere, also called the corona, is hundreds of times hotter, reaching a million degrees celsius or higher.

This spike in temperature, despite the increased distance from the Sun’s main energy source, has been observed in most stars, and represents a fundamental puzzle that astrophysicists have mulled over for decades.

In 1942, the Swedish scientist Hannes Alfvén proposed an explanation. He theorised that magnetised waves of plasma could carry huge amounts of energy along the Sun’s magnetic field from its interior to the corona, bypassing the photosphere before exploding with heat in the Sun’s upper atmosphere.

The theory had been tentatively accepted – but we still needed proof, in the form of empirical observation, that these waves existed. Our recent study has finally achieved this, validating Alfvén’s 80 year-old theory and taking us a step closer to harnessing this high-energy phenomenon here on Earth.

Burning questions

The coronal heating problem has been established since the late 1930s, when the Swedish spectroscopist Bengt Edlén and the German astrophysicist Walter Grotrian first observed phenomena in the Sun’s corona that could only be present if its temperature was a few million degrees celsius.

This represents temperatures up to 1,000 times hotter than the photosphere beneath it, which is the surface of the Sun that we can see from Earth. Estimating the photosphere’s heat has always been relatively straightforward: we just need to measure the light that reaches us from the Sun, and compare it to spectrum models that predict the temperature of the light’s source.

Over many decades of study, the photosphere’s temperature has been consistently estimated at around 6,000°C. Edlén and Grotrian’s finding that the Sun’s corona is so much hotter than the photosphere – despite being further from the Sun’s core, its ultimate source of energy – has led to much head scratching in the scientific community.

The extreme heat of the Sun’s corona is one of the most vexing problems in astrophysics.

Scientists looked to the Sun’s properties to explain this disparity. The Sun is composed almost entirely of plasma, which is highly ionised gas that carries an electrical charge. The movement of this plasma in the convection zone – the upper part of the solar interior – produces huge electrical currents and strong magnetic fields.

These fields are then dragged up from the Sun’s interior by convection, and burble onto its visible surface in the form of dark sunspots, which are clusters of magnetic fields that can form a variety of magnetic structures in the solar atmosphere.

This is where Alfvén’s theory comes in. He reasoned that within the Sun’s magnetised plasma any bulk motions of electrically charged particles would disturb the magnetic field, creating waves that can carry huge amounts of energy along vast distances – from the Sun’s surface to its upper atmosphere. The heat travels along what are called solar magnetic flux tubes before bursting into the corona, producing its high temperature.

A diagram of the sun's different features

Sunspots are darker patches on the Sun’s surface. Siberian Art/Shutterstock

These magnetic plasma waves are now called Alfvén waves, and their part in explaining coronal heating led to Alfvén being awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1970.

Observing Alfvén waves

But there remained the problem of actually observing these waves. There’s so much happening on the Sun’s surface and in its atmosphere – from phenomena many times larger than Earth to small changes below the resolution of our instrumentation – that direct observational evidence of Alfvén waves in the photosphere has not been achieved before.

But recent advances in instrumentation have opened a new window through which we can examine solar physics. One such instrument is the Interferometric Bidimensional Spectropolarimeter (IBIS) for imaging spectroscopy, installed at the Dunn Solar Telescope in the US state of New Mexico. This instrument has allowed us to make far more detailed observations and measurements of the Sun.

Combined with good viewing conditions, advanced computer simulations, and the efforts of an international team of scientists from seven research institutions, we used the IBIS to finally confirm, for the first time, the existence of Alfvén waves in solar magnetic flux tubes.

New energy source

The direct discovery of Alfvén waves in the solar photosphere is an important step towards exploiting their high energy potential here on Earth. They could help us research nuclear fusion, for instance, which is the process taking place inside the Sun that involves small amounts of matter being converted into huge amounts of energy. Our current nuclear power stations use nuclear fission, which critics argue produces dangerous nuclear waste – especially in the case of disasters including the one that took place in Fukushima in 2011.

Creating clean energy by replicating the nuclear fusion of the Sun on Earth remains a huge challenge, because we’d still need to generate 100 million degrees celsius quickly for fusion to occur. Alfvén waves could be one way of doing this. Our growing knowledge of the Sun shows it’s certainly possible – under the right conditions.

We’re also expecting more solar revelations soon, thanks to new, ground-breaking missions and instruments. The European Space Agency’s Solar Orbiter satellite is now in orbit around the Sun, delivering images and taking measurements of the star’s uncharted polar regions. Terrestrially, the unveiling of new, high-performance solar telescopes are also expected to enhance our observations of the Sun from Earth.

With many secrets of the Sun still to be discovered, including the properties of the Sun’s magnetic field, this is an exciting time for solar studies. Our detection of Alfvén waves is just one contribution to a wider field that’s looking to unlock the Sun’s remaining mysteries for practical applications on Earth.

*

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

 is a Post-Doctoral Research Assistant, Department of Physics, Aberystwyth University

 is a Reader in Physical Sciences, Aberystwyth University

Featured image is from Shutterstock

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Sun’s Atmosphere Is Hundreds of Times Hotter Than Its Surface – Here’s Why
  • Tags:

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Doconomy is a CO2 monitoring credit card backed by the UN (United Nations), WEF (World Economic Forum) and Mastercard which promises to track your carbon spending – and cut you off once you reach your permitted carbon maximum.

Welcome to the impending green dystopia of Agenda 2030. As I mentioned in my previous article New Study Analyzes Implementation of Agenda 2030 Personal Carbon Allowances, the manmade climate change agenda is still being rapidly pushed forward while the NWO (New World Order) controllers see how much mileage they can squeeze out of the COVID Cult craziness. It is a strong possibility they will pivot at some point from the fake COVID emergency to the fake climate emergency and try to convince the population to go along with equally strict rules in some sort of climate lockdown scenario. Regardless of if and when that happens, the objective of both operations is the same: segregation (punishing those who refuse to acquiesce) and control. The long term Agenda 2030 technocratic plan is to introduce a social credit system in all Western nations, then the whole world, based on carbon creditsand modeled after the authoritarian sesame credit system in China, which already locks dissenters out of full economic participation. Exactly the same thing, just on a smaller scale, was recently proposed by Victorian Premier Dan Andrews when he advocated a vaccinated economy.

Doconomy, the CO2 Monitoring Credit Card and Climate 13

Doconomy (abbreviated DO) is a company registered in Sweden however they have the full backing and support of NWO organizations such as the UN. The card is available in Sweden right now. They are in a partnership with Mastercard, an entrenched company of the Corporatocracy. Here’s what the WEF (the same globalist organization whose head Klaus Schwab promotes the Internet of Bodies) writes in support of their CO2 monitoring credit card in the Doconomy.com website:

While many of us are aware that we need to reduce our carbonfootprint, advice on doing so can seem nebulous and keeping atab is difficult. DO monitors and cuts off spending, when we hitour carbon max.

The card features the slogan “DO. Everyday Climate Action” and also has a piece of propaganda on the back side which states “I am taking responsibility for every transaction I make to help protect the planet” which reads like 2nd grade brainwashing. Note the symbolism of the all-seeing eye on the back side of the card in the image above, taking from the UN’s SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals), specifically goal #13, which states: “Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.”

UN quote climate carbon footprint

CO2 Monitoring Credit Card to Entrench the Carbon Lie Even Further

The aim of Doconomy is to entrench the demonization of carbon even further. It’s to trick you into associating every purchase – literally every single one of your economic transactions – with an alleged carbon cost according to the faulty manmade climate change science. By imposing an artificial limit on how many transactions you can make, such a synthetic system would be greatly divorced from the biological reality of the carbon cycle, the necessity of carbon in all forms of life here and the life-giving nature of carbon dioxide. The Doconomy website asks: “With fat, sugar and salt levels labeled on food we buy, why shouldn’t our CO2 emissions be just as visible?” It continues: “This type of information shouldn’t be a premium or luxury that consumers pay for, but rather an essential part of every shopping journey.” They want you to swallow the entire propagandistic idea of a carbon footprint, feel guilty for consuming energy and services, and acquiesce to arbitrary restrictions under the delusion it will somehow help the Earth.

Carbon Sucking Operations Begin – Part of Terraforming the Earth?

If you think the whole demonization of carbon is insane, it gets worse. Take a look at this. NWO frontman Bill Gates – who only “had dinners” with pedophile and Mossad agent Jeffrey Epstein, even though Gates is on the flight logs of the Lolita Express – has talked in interviews about the carbon sequestration or carbon sucking technology that he is funding. The technology is also referred to as direct air capture. Companies are popping up around the world, such as this one in Canada and this one in Iceland, who are actively taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, then pumping it into stones, the ground or the ocean in order to permanently remove it from the atmosphere.

As with the NWO in general, there are many levels to this. On one level, carbon sucking is being promoted by the oil companies because it’s an easy out; it’s a way they can alleviate their guilt by trying to counterbalance or offset their incredibly dirty and polluted product (crude oil) with claims they are caring for the environment. It’s not quite clear, however, that reducing CO2 has any connection at all with how polluting oil and petroleum products can be. On another level, carbon sucking reinforces the construction of a synthetic economy – a carbon economy – where carbon is the new currency and measurement of economic activity.

On still another level, I think it is wise to be highly skeptical of carbon sucking in terms of how it will affect the atmosphere. Given that plants need and thrive from CO2, and we humans in turn thrive from the greenification of the planet, what kind of world are we creating by deliberately removing this gas of life carbon dioxide from the natural O2-CO2 cycle of respiration and photosynthesis? Experts and studies have shown that plants do best with high carbon ppm (parts per million) concentrations – here is one study of many showing how plants grew optimally at concentrations between 915-1151 ppm, far above the target of 300 ppm set by climate change organizations. Is there an ulterior motive which involves the terraforming of the planet to make it less suitable for human life and more suitable for other lifeforms? This question needs more investigation, but for now, I regard any attempts to remove CO2 from the atmosphere with deep suspicion.

Final Thoughts

CO2 monitoring credit cards and carbon sucking are both part of the same initiative to invent a new enemy – this time the element carbon, an indispensable element of human life. It diverts attention away from genuine forms of pollution. It creates a new form of measurement and a new artificial economy based on that which is already controlled by the NWO, who can arbitrarily decide what a person’s maxium carbon limit or carbon allowance will be. This is yet more insidious propaganda, which, if enough people fall for it, will become another pretext for the widspread removal of our rights and freedom. Stay alert and aware.

*

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

This article was originally published on The Freedom Articles.

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles, author of the book Cancer: The Lies, the Truth and the Solutions and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com. Makia is on Odysee/LBRY and Steemit.

All images in this article are from TFA

Video: A Final Warning to Humanity from Former Pfizer Chief Scientist Michael Yeadon

By Dr. Mike Yeadon, September 22, 2021

Listen to Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer, talking about the pandemic and the COVID vaccine.

80 Groups, 57 Doctors, 19 Scientists Join CHD in Urging Pennsylvania to Reject ‘Smart Meters’ Mandate

By Children’s Health Defense, September 22, 2021

Children’s Health Defense on Sept. 15 filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in support of a lawsuit challenging the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission’s interpretation of the state’s 2008 law mandating smart meters.

Covid Cases Fall in the Least Vaccinated Countries

By Rodney Atkinson, September 22, 2021

World wide COVID daily cases have been falling since 19th August. They fell 24% between 19th August and 15th September but they fell least in the most vaccinated countries and most in the least vaccinated countries.

Indisputable Science. Diabolical Crimes against Humanity: “I Refuse to be Silent”: Stephen Lendman

By Stephen Lendman, September 22, 2021

What US/Western dark forces — including their public health fraudsters — and supportive MSM press agents suppress about flu/covid is most crucial for everyone to know.

LancetGate: “Scientific Corona Lies” and Big Pharma Corruption. Hydroxychloroquine versus Gilead’s Remdesevir

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, September 22, 2021

Since this article was first published more than a year ago on July 11, 2020 under the title LancetGate: “Scientific Corona Lies” and Big Pharma Corruption. Hydroxychloroquine versus Gilead’s Remdesivir on July 3, 2020, there has been a virtual censorship of debate on Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Ivermectin largely directed against medical doctors.

Thousands of Fetal Deaths and Injuries Now Reported Following COVID-19 Injections of Pregnant Women

By Brian Shilhavy, September 22, 2021

Everyone acknowledges and agrees that VAERS is vastly under-reported, but now we have an expert analysis on just how under-reported adverse events are from Dr. Jessica Rose. Her conservative estimate based on a careful analysis of the data is that the events recorded in VAERS need to be multiplied by X41.

Canada’s Elections: People’s Party of Canada (PPC) Took a Firm Stance on the “Covid Mandate” and Vaccine Passport

By John C. A. Manley, September 22, 2021

While the PPC has been speaking out against the vaccine passport, they haven’t spoken out against the vaccine itself. The vaccine is not “safe and effective” and I think they need to say that.

The COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate: Letter to President of the University of Guelph: Prof. of Virus Immunology

By Dr. Byram W. Bridle, September 22, 2021

As a viral immunologist that has been working on the front lines of the scientific and medical community throughout the duration of the declared COVID-19 pandemic, I feel compelled to speak on behalf of the many who will not, due to extreme fear of retribution.

Freedom from Fear: Stop Playing the Government’s Mind Games

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, September 22, 2021

This plague on our nation—one that has been spreading like wildfire—is a potent mix of fear coupled with unhealthy doses of paranoia and intolerance, tragic hallmarks of the post-9/11 America in which we live and the constantly shifting crises that keep the populace in a state of high alert.

Global Economic Chaos? BlackRock and Citi Get on Board the “Climate Train”

By Chris MacIntosh, September 22, 2021

The awesome thing here is that what is taking place is that our competition on bidding for coal assets has disappeared in a cloud of woke smoke. This will quickly become geopolitical, and the question is this: can BlackRock, Citi, Prudential, HSBC, and their other woke mates decide the fate of nations?

AUKUS vs China: Inching Toward War

By Brian Berletic, September 22, 2021

Despite claims that the alliance is aimed at no particular country (and no particular country was mentioned during its announcement), the Western media has not reported it as such, and China – the obvious target of this “AUKUS” alliance – doesn’t perceive it as such.

One Year on Since the Farm Laws – India’s Farmers’ Struggle Set to Intensify

By Colin Todhunter, September 22, 2021

It is now one year since controversial farm bills were passed into law in India in September 2020. The  three bills and the subsequent legislation have triggered a massive 15-month farmers’ protest that has attracted worldwide attention and support.

Morrison’s Dangerous Fantasies Represent a Danger to Australia’s Future

By James ONeill, September 22, 2021

The Australian prime minister Scott Morrison was not short of hyperbole in announcing the deal. He described the relationship with the United States as the “forever partnership”. As the old joke goes, there are only two forever’s, death and taxes.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: A Final Warning to Humanity from Former Pfizer Chief Scientist Michael Yeadon

Global Research in Troubled Waters: We Need Your Support

September 23rd, 2021 by The Global Research Team

Dear Readers,

As some of you may recall, around this time last year, Global Research needed your help to “stay afloat”. Our financial situation was in bad shape and we were metaphorically sinking. Happily, many of you have since thrown us a lifeline in the form of a donation or a membership subscription, allowing us to patch up and sail onwards.

Our readership has expanded. Despite media censorship, we are now navigating at more than 100 thousand page views a day.

We are living in the midst of a worldwide crisis which threatens fundamental human rights and freedom of expression.

We have published extensively on these issues. We have also expanded our video productions.

We will need all the support we can get if we are to make this a reality: Can you help us? Click below for more details on how you can contribute…

Click to donate:

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation


Click to become a member (receive free books!):

Click to view our membership plans

Author’s Note and update

Since this article was first published more than a year ago on July 11, 2020 under the title LancetGate: “Scientific Corona Lies” and Big Pharma Corruption. Hydroxychloroquine versus Gilead’s Remdesivir on July 3, 2020, there has been a virtual censorship of debate on Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Ivermectin largely directed against medical doctors.

On May 22, Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report  by National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, was published by the New England Journal of Medicine, (NEJM)

On June 29, 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who is the head of NIAID granted the “Greenlight” to Gilead Sciences Inc. despite the fact that the study of the new experimental drug was “preliminary”.The NIH-NIAID sponsored report (May 22) was used to justify a major agreement with Gilead Sciences Inc.

A $1.6 billion agreement between the HHS and Gilead Sciences Inc. was announced on June 29th, 2020 despite the fact that NIH NIAID study published in the NEJM was considered “preliminary”. In the late 1990s, Gilead Sciences Inc was headed by Donald Rumsfeld (1997-2001), who later joined the George W. Bush administration as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006).

In recent developments, there is an ongoing campaign to suppress both Hydroxycholoroquine as well as Ivermectin as effective preventive and curative drugs.

The objective has been to sustain the vaccination campaign on behalf of Big Pharma.

A revised version of this article was published as a chapter in the author’s E-book entitled:

The 2020-21 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

I should mention that there are recent reports of Covid-19 related deaths of hospitalized patients treated with Remdesevir.

 

Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, October 25, 2020, May 27, 2021, August 1, 2021, September 22, 2021

***

Introduction

There is an ongoing battle to suppress Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a cheap and effective drug for the treatment of Covid-19. The campaign against HCQ is carried out through slanderous political statements, media smears, not to mention an authoritative peer reviewed “evaluation”  published on May 22nd by The Lancet, which was based on fake figures and test trials.

The study was allegedly based on data analysis of 96,032 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 between Dec 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020 from 671 hospitals Worldwide. The database had been fabricated. The objective was to kill the Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) cure on behalf of Big Pharma.

While The Lancet article was retracted, the media casually blamed “a tiny US based company” named Surgisphere whose employees included “a sci-fi writer and adult content model” for spreading “flawed data” (Guardian). This Chicago based outfit was accused of having misled both the WHO and national governments, inciting them to ban HCQ. None of those trial tests actually took place.

While the blame was placed on Surgisphere, the unspoken truth (which neither the scientific community nor the media have acknowledged) is that the study was coordinated by Harvard professor Mandeep Mehra under the auspices of Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) which is a partner of the Harvard Medical School.

When the scam was revealed, Dr. Mandeep Mehra who holds the Harvey Distinguished Chair of Medicine at  Brigham and Women’s Hospital apologized:

I have always performed my research in accordance with the highest ethical and professional guidelines. However, we can never forget the responsibility we have as researchers to scrupulously ensure that we rely on data sources that adhere to our high standards.

It is now clear to me that in my hope to contribute this research during a time of great need, I did not do enough to ensure that the data source was appropriate for this use. For that, and for all the disruptions – both directly and indirectly – I am truly sorry. (emphasis added)

Mandeep R. Mehra, MD, MSC  (official statement on BWH website)

But that “truly sorry” note was just the tip of the iceberg. Why?

Studies on Gilead Science’s Remdesivir and Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) Were Conducted Simultaneously by Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH)

While The Lancet report (May 22, 2020) coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra was intended “to kill” the legitimacy of HCQ as a cure of Covid-19, another important (related) study was being carried out (concurrently) at BWH pertaining to Remdesivir on behalf of Gilead Sciences Inc. Dr. Francisco Marty, a specialist in Infectious Disease and Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School was entrusted with coordination of the clinical trial tests of the antiviral medication Remdesivir under Brigham’s contract with Gilead Sciences Inc:

Brigham and Women’s Hospital began enrolling patients in two clinical trials for Gilead’s antiviral medication remdesivir. The Brigham is one of multiple clinical trial sites for a Gilead-initiated study of the drug in 600 participants with moderate coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and a Gilead-initiated study of 400 participants with severe COVID-19.

… If the results are promising, this could lead to FDA approval, and if they aren’t, it gives us critical information in the fight against COVID-19 and allows us to move on to other therapies.”

While Dr. Mandeep Mehra was not directly involved in the Gilead Remdesevir BWH study under the supervision of his colleague Dr. Francisco Marty, he nonetheless had contacts with Gilead Sciences Inc: “He participated in a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April 2020 as part of the Covid-19 debate” (France Soir, May 23, 2020)

What was the intent of his (failed) study? To undermine the legitimacy of Hydroxychloroquine?

According to France Soir, in a report published after The Lancet Retraction:

The often evasive answers produced by Dr Mandeep R. Mehra, … professor at Harvard Medical School, did not produce confidence, fueling doubt instead about the integrity of this retrospective study and its results. (France Soir, June 5, 2020)

Was Dr. Mandeep Mehra in conflict of interest? (That is a matter for BWH and the Harvard Medical School to decide upon).

Who are the Main Actors? 

Dr. Anthony Fauci, advisor to Donald Trump, portrayed as “America’s top infectious disease expert” has played a key role in smearing the HCQ cure which had been approved years earlier by the CDC as well as providing legitimacy to Gilead’s Remdesivir.

Dr. Fauci has been the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since the Reagan administration. He is known to act as a mouthpiece for Big Pharma.

Dr. Fauci launched Remdesivir in late June (see details below). According to Fauci, Remdesevir is the “corona wonder drug” developed by Gilead Science Inc. It’s a $1.6 billion dollar bonanza.

Gilead Sciences Inc: History

Gilead Sciences Inc is a Multibillion dollar bio-pharmaceutical company which is now involved in developing and marketing Remdesivir. Gilead has a long history. It has the backing of major investment conglomerates including the Vanguard Group and Capital Research & Management Co, among others. It has developed ties with the US Government.

In 1999 Gilead Sciences Inc, developed Tamiflu (used as a treatment of seasonal influenza and bird flu). At the  time, Gilead Sciences Inc was headed by Donald Rumsfeld (1997-2001), who later joined the George W. Bush administration as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). Rumsfeld was responsible for coordinating the illegal and criminal wars on Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003).

Rumsfeld maintained his links to Gilead Sciences Inc throughout his tenure as Secretary of Defense (2001-2006). According to CNN Money (2005): “The prospect of a bird flu outbreak … was very good news for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld [who still owned Gilead stocks] and other politically connected investors in Gilead Sciences”.

Anthony Fauci has been in charge of the NIAID since 1984, using his position as “a go between” the US government and Big Pharma. During Rumsfeld’s tenure as Secretary of Defense, the budget allocated to bio-terrorism increased substantially, involving contracts with Big Pharma including Gilead Sciences Inc. Anthony Fauci considered that the money allocated to bio-terrorism in early 2002 would: 

“accelerate our understanding of the biology and pathogenesis of microbes that can be used in attacks, and the biology of the microbes’ hosts — human beings and their immune systems. One result should be more effective vaccines with less toxicity.” (WPo report)

In 2008, Dr. Anthony Fauci was granted the Presidential Medal of Freedom by president George W. Bush “for his determined and aggressive efforts to help others live longer and healthier lives.”

The 2020 Gilead Sciences Inc Remdesivir Project

We will be focussing on key documents (and events)

Chronology 

February 21: Initial Release pertaining to NIH-NIAID Remdesivir placebo test trial

April 10: The Gilead Sciences Inc study published in the NEJM on the “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir”

April 29: NIH Release: Study on Remdesivir (Report published on May 22 in NEJM)

May 22, The BWH-Harvard Study on Hydroxychloroquine coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra published in The Lancet

May 22Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report  National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, New England Journal of Medicine, (NEJM) 

June 5: The (fake) Lancet Report (May 22) on HCQ is Retracted.

June 29, Fauci announcement. The $1.6 Billion Remdevisir HHS Agreement with Gilead Sciences Inc

April 10: The Gilead Sciences Inc. study published in the NEJM on the “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir”

A Gilead sponsored report was published in New England Journal of Medicine in an article entitled  “Compassionate Use of Remdesivir for Patients with Severe Covid-19” . It was co-authored by an impressive list of 56 distinguished medical doctors and scientists, many of whom were recipients of consulting fees from Gilead Sciences Inc.

Gilead Sciences Inc. funded the study which included several staff members as co-authors.

The testing included a total of 61 patients [who] received at least one dose of remdesivir on or before March 7, 2020; 8 of these patients were excluded because of missing postbaseline information (7 patients) and an erroneous remdesivir start date (1 patient) … Of the 53 remaining patients included in this analysis, 40 (75%) received the full 10-day course of remdesivir, 10 (19%) received 5 to 9 days of treatment, and 3 (6%) fewer than 5 days of treatment.

The NEJM article states that “Gilead Sciences Inc began accepting requests from clinicians for compassionate use of remdesivir on January 25, 2020”. From whom, From Where? According to the WHO (January 30, 2020) there were 82 cases in 18 countries outside China of which 5 were in the US, 5 in France and 3 in Canada.

Several prominent physicians and scientists have cast  doubt on the Compassionate Use of Remdesivir study conducted by Gilead, focussing on the small size of the trial. Ironically, the number of patients in the test  is less that the number of co-authors: “53 patients” versus “56 co-authors”

Below we provide excerpts of scientific statements on the Gilead NEJM project (Science Media Centre emphasis added) published immediately following the release of the NEJM article:

‘Compassionate use’ is better described as using an unlicensed therapy to treat a patient because there are no other treatments available. Research based on this kind of use should be treated with extreme caution because there is no control group or randomisation, which are some of the hallmarks of good practice in clinical trials. Prof Duncan Richard, Clinical Therapeutics, University of Oxford.

 “It is critical not to over-interpret this study. Most importantly, it is impossible to know the outcome for this relatively small group of patients had they not received remdesivir. Dr Stephen Griffin, Associate Professor, School of Medicine, University of Leeds.

 “The research is interesting but doesn’t prove anything at this point: the data are from a small and uncontrolled study.  Simon Maxwell, Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Prescribing, University of Edinburgh.

“The data from this paper are almost uninterpretable. It is very surprising, perhaps even unethical, that the New England Journal of Medicine has published it. It would be more appropriate to publish the data on the website of the pharmaceutical company that has sponsored and written up the study. At least Gilead have been clear that this has not been done in the way that a high quality scientific paper would be written.  Prof Stephen Evans, Professor of Pharmacoepidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

 “It’s very hard to draw useful conclusions from uncontrolled studies like this particularly with a new disease where we really don’t know what to expect and with wide variations in outcomes between places and over time. One really has to question the ethics of failing to do randomisation – this study really represents more than anything else, a missed opportunity.” Prof Adam Finn, Professor of Paediatrics, University of Bristol.

To review the complete document of Science Media Centre pertaining to expert assessments click here

April 29: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Study on Remdevisir. 

On April 29th following the publication of the Gilead Sciences Inc Study in the NEJM on April 10, a press release of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) on Remdevisir was released.  The full document was published on May 22, by the NEJM under the title:

 Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report (NEJM) 

The study had been initiated on February 21, 2020. The title of the April 29 Press Release was:

“Peer-reviewed data shows remdesivir for COVID-19 improves time to recovery”

It’s a government sponsored report which includes preliminary data from a randomized trial involving 1063 hospitalized patients. The results of the trial labelled Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial (ACTT) are preliminary, conducted under the helm of Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID):

An independent data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) overseeing the trial met on April 27 to review data and shared their interim analysis with the study team. Based upon their review of the data, they noted that remdesivir was better than placebo from the perspective of the primary endpoint, time to recovery, a metric often used in influenza trials. Recovery in this study was defined as being well enough for hospital discharge or returning to normal activity level.

Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received placebo (p<0.001). Specifically, the median time to recovery was 11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who received placebo. Results also suggested a survival benefit, with a mortality rate of 8.0% for the group receiving remdesivir versus 11.6% for the placebo group (p=0.059).  (emphasis added)

In the NIH’s earlier February 21, 2020 report (released at the outset of the study), the methodology was described as follows:

… A randomized, controlled clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the investigational antiviral remdesivir in hospitalized adults diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) …

Numbers. Where? When? 

The February 21 report confirmed that the first trial participant was “an American who was repatriated after being quarantined on the Diamond Princess cruise ship” that docked in Yokohama (Japanese Territorial Waters). “Thirteen people repatriated by the U.S. State Department from the Diamond Princess cruise ship” were selected as patients for the placebo trial test. Ironically, at the outset of the study, 58.7% of the “confirmed cases” Worldwide (542 cases out of 924) (outside China),  were on the Diamond Cruise Princess from which the initial trial placebo patients were selected.

Where and When: The trial test in the 68 selected sites? That came at a later date because on February 19th (WHO data), the US had recorded only 15 positive cases (see Table Below).

“A total of 68 sites ultimately joined the study—47 in the United States and 21 in countries in Europe and Asia.” (emphasis added)

In the final May 22 NEJM report entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report

There were 60 trial sites and 13 subsites in the United States (45 sites), Denmark (8), the United Kingdom (5), Greece (4), Germany (3), Korea (2), Mexico (2), Spain (2), Japan (1), and Singapore (1). Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either remdesivir or placebo. Randomization was stratified by study site and disease severity at enrollment

The Washington Post applauded Anthony Fauci’s announcement (April 29):

“The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony S. Fauci, …  fall short of the magic bullet or cure… But with no approved treatments for Covid-19,[Lie] Fauci said, it will become the standard of care for hospitalized patients …The data shows that remdisivir has a clear-cut, significant, positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery,” Fauci said.

The government’s first rigorous clinical trial of the experimental drug remdesivir as a coronavirus treatment delivered mixed results to the medical community Wednesday — but rallied stock markets and raised hopes that an early weapon to help some patients was at hand.

The preliminary results, disclosed at the White House by Anthony Fauci, chief of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which led the placebo-controlled trial found that the drug accelerated the recovery of hospitalized patients but had only a marginal benefit in the rate of death.

… Fauci’s remarks boosted speculation that the Food and Drug Administration would seek emergency use authorization that would permit doctors to prescribe the drug.

In addition to clinical trials, remdesivir has been given to more than 1,000 patients under compassionate use. [also refers to the Gilead study published on April 10 in the NEJM]

The study, involving [more than] 1,000 patients at 68 sites in the United States and around the world (??), offers the first evidence (??) from a large (??), randomized (??) clinical study of remdesivir’s effectiveness against COVID-19.

The NIH placebo test study provided “preliminary results”. While the placebo trial test was “randomized”, the overall selection of patients at the 68 sites was not fully randomized. See the full report.

May 22: The Fake Lancet Report on Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

It is worth noting that the full report of the NIH-NIAID) entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report was released on May 22, 2020 in the NEJM, on the same day as the controversial Lancet report on Hydroxychloroquine.

Immediately folllowing its publication, the media went into high gear, smearing the HCQ cure, while applauding the NIH-NIASD report released on the same day.

Remdesivir, the only drug cleared to treat Covid-19, sped the recovery time of patients with the disease, … “It’s a very safe and effective drug,” said Eric Topol, founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute. “We now have a definite first efficacious drug for Covid-19, which is a major step forward and will be built upon with other drugs, [and drug] combinations.”

When the Lancet HCQ article by  Bingham-Harvard was retracted on June 5, it was too late, it received minimal media coverage. Despite the Retraction, the HCQ cure “had been killed”.

June 29: Fauci Greenlight. The $1.6 Billion Remdesivir Contract with Gilead Sciences Inc

Dr. Anthony Fauci granted the “Greenlight” to Gilead Sciences Inc. on June 29, 2020.

The semi-official US government NIH-NIAID sponsored report (May 22) entitled Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report (NEJM) was used to justify a major agreement with Gilead Sciences Inc.

The Report was largely funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

On June 29, based on the findings of the NIH-NIAID Report published in the NEJM, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced on behalf of the Trump Adminstration an agreement to secure large supplies of the remdesivir drug from Gilead Sciences Inc. for the treatment of Covid-19 in America’s private hospitals and clinics.

The earlier Gilead study based on scanty test results published in the NEJM (April 10), of 53 cases (and 56 co-authors) was not highlighted. The results of this study had been  questioned by several prominent physicians and scientists.

Who will be able to afford Remdisivir? 500,000 doses of Remdesivir are envisaged at $3,200 per patient, namely $1.6 billion (see the study by Elizabeth Woodworth)

The Drug was also approved for marketing in the European Union. under the brandname Veklury.

If this contract is implemented as planned, it represents for Gilead Science Inc. and the recipient US private hospitals and clinics a colossal amount of money.

 

[error in above title according to HHS: $3200]

According to The Trump Administration’s HHS Secretary Alex Azar (June 29, 2020):

“To the extent possible, we want to ensure that any American patient who needs remdesivir can get it. [at $3200] The Trump Administration is doing everything in our power to learn more about life-saving therapeutics for COVID-19 and secure access to these options for the American people.”

Remdesivir versus Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

Careful timing:

The Lancet study (published on May 22) was intended to undermine the legitimacy of Hydroxychloroquine as an effective cure to Covid-19, with a view to sustaining the $1.6 billion agreement between the HHS and Gilead Sciences Inc. on June 29th. The legitmacy of this agreement rested on the May 22 NIH-NIAID study in the NEJM which was considered “preliminary”. 

What Dr. Fauci failed to acknowledge is that Chloroquine had been “studied” and tested fifteen years ago by the CDC as a drug to be used against coronavirus infections.  And that Hydroxychloroquine has been used recently in the treatment of Covid-19 in several countries.

According to the Virology Journal (2005) Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread”. It was used in the SARS-1 outbreak in 2002. It had the endorsement of the CDC. 

HCQ is not only effective, it is “inexpensive” when compared to Remdesivir, at an estimated “$3120 for a US Patient with private insurance”.

Below are excerpts of an interview of Harvard’s Professor Mehra (who undertook the May 22 Lancet study) with France Soir published immediately following the publication of the Lancet report (prior to its Retraction).

Dr. Mandeep Mehra: In our study, it is fairly obvious that the lack of benefit and the risk of toxicity observed for hydroxychloroquine are fairly reliable. [referring to the May 22 Lancet study]

France Soir: Do you have the data for Remdesivir?

MM: Yes, we have the data, but the number of patients is too small for us to be able to conclude in one way or another.

FS: As you know, in France, there is a pros and cons battle over hydroxychloroquine which has turned into a public health issue even involving the financial lobbying of pharmaceutical companies. Why not measure the effect of one against the other to put an end to all speculation?  …

MM: In fact, there is no rational basis for testing Remdesivir versus hydroxychloroquine. On the one hand, Remdesivir has shown that there is no risk of mortality and that there is a reduction in recovery time. On the other hand, for hydroxychloroquine it is the opposite: it has never been shown any advantage and most studies are small or inconclusive In addition, our study shows that there are harmful effects.

It would therefore be difficult and probably unethical to compare a drug with demonstrated harmfulness to a drug with at least a glimmer of hope.

FS: You said that there is no basis for testing or comparing Remdesivir with hydroxychloroquine, do you think you have done everything to conclude that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous?

MM: Exactly. …

All we are saying is that once you have been infected (5 to 7 days after) to the point of having to be hospitalized with a severe viral load, the use of hydroxychloroquine and its derivative is not effective.

The damage from the virus is already there and the situation is beyond repair. With this treatment [HCQ] it can generate more complications

FS Mandeep Mehra declared that he had no conflict of interest with the laboratories and that this study was financed from the endowment funds of the professor’s chair.

He participated in a conference sponsored by Gilead in early April 2020 as part of the Covid-19 debate.

France Soir, translated by the author, emphasis added, May 23, 2020)

In Annex, see the followup article by France Soir published after the scam surrounding the data base of Dr. Mehra’s Lancet report was revealed.

Concluding Remarks

 Lies and Corruption to the nth Degree involving Dr. Anthony Fauci, “The Boston Connection” and Gilead Sciences Inc.

The Gilead Sciences Inc. Remdesivir study (50+ authors) was published in the New England Journal of Medicine (April 10, 2020).

It was followed by the NIH-NIAID Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 — Preliminary Report on May 22, 2020 in the NEJM.  And on that same day, May 22, the “fake report” on Hydroxychloroquine by BWH-Harvard Dr. Mehra was published by The Lancet.

Harvard Medical School and the BWH bear responsibility for having hosted and financed the fake Lancet report on HCQ coordinated by Dr. Mandeep Mehra.

Is there conflict of interest? BWH was simultaneously involved in a study on Remdesivir in contract with Gilead Sciences, Inc.

While the Lancet report coordinated by Harvard’s Dr. Mehra was retracted, it nonetheless served the interests of Gilead Sciences Inc.

It is important that an independent scientific and medical assessment be undertaken, respectively of the Gilead Sciences Inc New England Journal of Medicine (NEMJ) peer reviewed study (April 10, 2020) as well as the NIH-NIAID study also published in the NEJM (May 22, 2020). 


ANNEX

Retraction by France Soir

The fraud concerning the Lancet Report was revealed in early June. France Soir in a subsequent article (June 5, 2020) points to the Boston Connection: La connexion de Boston, namely the insiduous relationship between Gilead Sciences Inc and Professor Mehra, Harvard Medical School as well as the two related Boston based hospitals involved.

 

 

(excerpts here, to access the complete text click here translation from French by France Soir, emphasis in the original article)

The often evasive answers produced by Dr Mandeep R. Mehra, a physician specializing in cardiovascular surgery and professor at Harvard Medical School, did not produce confidence, fueling doubt instead about the integrity of this retrospective study and its results.

… However, the reported information that Dr. Mehra had attended a conference sponsored by Gilead – producer of remdesivir, a drug in direct competition with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) – early in April called for further investigation

It is important to keep in mind that Dr. Mandeep Mehra has a practice at the Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) in Boston.

That study relied on the shared medical records of 8,910 patients in 169 hospitals around the world, also by Surgisphere.

Funding for the study was “Supported by the William Harvey Chair in Cardiovascular Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. The development and maintenance of the collaborative surgical outcomes database was funded by Surgisphere.”

The study published on May 22 sought to evaluate the efficacy or otherwise of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, alone or in combination with a macrolide antibiotic.  …

It is therefore noteworthy that within 3 weeks, 2 large observational retrospective studies on large populations – 96,032 and 8,910 patients – spread around the world were published in two different journals by Dr. Mehra, Dr. Desai and other co-authors using the database of Surgisphere, Dr. Desai’s company.

These two practising physicians and surgeons seem to have an exceptional working capacity associated with the gift of ubiquity.

The date of May 22 is also noteworthy because on the very same day, the date of the publication in The Lancet of the highly accusatory study against HCQ,  another study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine concerning the results of a clinical trial of…remdesivir.

In the conclusion of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, “remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults hospitalized with Covid-19 and evidence of lower respiratory tract infection.”

Concretely: on the same day, May 22nd, one study demeaned HCQ  in one journal while another claimed evidence of attenuation on some patients through remdesivir in another journal.

It should be noted that one of the main co-authors, Elizabeth “Libby”* Hohmann, represents one of the participating hospitals, the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, also affiliated with Harvard Medical School, as is the Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, where Dr. Mandeep Mehra practices.

Coincidence, probably.

Upon further investigation, we discovered that the first 3 major clinical trials on Gilead’s remdesivir were conducted by these two hospitals:

“While COVID-19 continues to circle the globe with scientists following on its trail, Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) and Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH) are leading the search for effective treatment.

“Both hospitals are conducting clinical trials of remdesivir.”

MGH has joined what the National Institute of Health (NIH) describe as the first clinical trial in the United States of an experimental treatment for COVID-19, sponsored by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of NIH. MGH is currently the only hospital in New England to participate in this trial, according to a list of sites shared by the hospital.

” It’s a gigantic undertaking, with patients registered in some 50 sites across the country, getting better.

“The NIH trial, which can be adapted to evaluate other treatments, aims to determine whether the drug relieves the respiratory problems and other symptoms of COVID-19, helping patients leave hospital earlier.**

As a reminder, the NIAID/NIH is led by Antony Fauci, a staunch opponent of HCQ.

Coincidence, probably.

At the Brigham, two additional trials initiated by Gilead, the drug developer, will determine whether it alleviates symptoms in patients with moderate to severe illness over five- and ten-days courses. These trials will also be randomized, but not placebo controlled, and will include 1,000 patients at sites worldwide. Those patients, noted Francisco Marty, MD, Brigham physician and study co-investigator, will likely be recruited at an unsettlingly rapid clip.”

As a result, the first major clinical trials on remdesivir launched on March 20, whose results are highly important for Gilead, are being led by the MGH and BWH in Boston, precisely where Dr. Mehra, the main author of the May 22nd HCQ trial, is practising.

Small world! Coincidence, again, probably.

Dr. Marty at BWH expected to have results two months later. Indeed, in recent days, several US media outlets have reported Gilead’s announcements of positive results from the remdesivir clinical trials in Boston.:

“Encouraging results from a new study published Wednesday on remdesivir for the treatment of patients with COVID-19.**

Brigham and Dr. Francisco Marty worked on this study, and he says the results show that there is no major difference between treating a patient with a five-day versus a 10-day regimen.

…”Gilead Announces Results of Phase 3 Remdesivir Trial in Patients with Moderate COVID-19 

– One study shows that the 5-day treatment of remdesivir resulted in significantly greater clinical improvement compared to treatment with the standard of care alone

– The data come on top of the body of evidence from previous studies demonstrating the benefits of remdesivir in hospitalized patients with IDVOC-19

“We now have three randomized controlled trials demonstrating that remdesivir improved clinical outcomes by several different measures,” Gilead plans to submit the complete data for publication in a peer-reviewed journal in the coming weeks.

These results announced by Gilead a few days after the May 22 publication of the study in the Lancet demolishing HCQ, a study whose main author is Dr. Mehra, are probably again a coincidence.

So many coincidences adds up to coincidences? Really ?

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on LancetGate: “Scientific Corona Lies” and Big Pharma Corruption. Hydroxychloroquine versus Gilead’s Remdesevir
  • Tags:

U.S. Militarism’s Toxic Impact on Climate Policy

September 22nd, 2021 by Medea Benjamin

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

President Biden addressed the UN General on September 21 with a warning that the climate crisis is fast approaching a “point of no return,” and a promise that the United States would rally the world to action. “We will lead not just with the example of our power but, God willing, with the power of our example,” he said

But the U.S. is not a leader when it comes to saving our planet. Yahoo News recently published a report titled “Why the U.S. Lags Behind Europe on Climate Goals by 10 or 15 years.” The article was a rare acknowledgment in the U.S. corporate media that the United States has not only failed to lead the world on the climate crisis, but has actually been the main culprit blocking timely collective action to head off a global existential crisis.

The anniversary of September 11th and the U.S. defeat in Afghanistan should be ringing alarm bells inside the head of every American, warning us that we have allowed our government to spend trillions of dollars waging war, chasing shadows, selling arms and fueling conflict all over the world, while ignoring real existential dangers to our civilization and all of humanity.

The world’s youth are dismayed by their parents’ failures to tackle the climate crisis. A new survey of 10,000 people between the ages of 16 and 25 in ten countries around the world found that many of them think humanity is doomed and that they have no future.

Three quarters of the young people surveyed said they are afraid of what the future will bring, and 40% say the crisis makes them hesitant to have children. They are also frightened, confused and angered by the failure of governments to respond to the crisis. As the BBC reported, “They feel betrayed, ignored and abandoned by politicians and adults.”

Young people in the U.S. have even more reason to feel betrayed than their European counterparts. America lags far behind Europe on renewable energy. European countries started fulfilling their climate commitments under the Kyoto Protocol in the 1990s and now get 40% of their electricity from renewable sources, while renewables provide only 20% of electric power in America.

Since 1990, the baseline year for emissions reductions under the Kyoto Protocol, Europe has cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 24%, while the United States has failed to cut them at all, spewing out 2% more than it did in 1990. In 2019, before the Covid pandemic, the United States produced more oil and more natural gas than ever before in its history.

NATO, our politicians and the corporate media on both sides of the Atlantic promote the idea that the United States and Europe share a common “Western” culture and values. But our very different lifestyles, priorities and responses to this climate crisis tell a tale of two very different, even divergent economic and political systems.

The idea that human activity is responsible for climate change was understood decades ago and is not controversial in Europe. But in America, politicians and news media have blindly or cynically parroted fraudulent, self-serving disinformation campaigns by ExxonMobil and other vested interests.

While the Democrats have been better at “listening to the scientists,” let’s not forget that, while Europe was replacing fossil fuels and nuclear plants with renewable energy, the Obama administration was unleashing a fracking boom to switch from coal-fired power plants to new plants running on fracked gas.

Why is the U.S. so far behind Europe when it comes to addressing global warming? Why do only 60% of Europeans own cars, compared with 90% of Americans? And why does each U.S. car owner clock double the mileage that European drivers do? Why does the United States not have modern, energy-efficient, widely-accessible public transportation, as Europe does?

We can ask similar questions about other stark differences between the United States and Europe. On poverty, inequality, healthcare, education and social insurance, why is the United States an outlier from what are considered societal norms in other wealthy countries?

One answer is the enormous amount of money the U.S. spends on militarism. Since 2001, the United States has allocated $15 trillion (in FY2022 dollars) to its military budget, outspending its 20 closest military competitors combined.

The U.S. spends far more of its GDP (the total value of goods produced and services) on the military than any of the other 29 Nato countries—3.7% in 2020 compared to 1.77%. And while the U.S. has been putting intense pressure on NATO countries to spend at least 2% of their GDP on their militaries, only ten of them have done so. Unlike in the U.S., the military establishment in Europe has to contend with significant opposition from liberal politicians and a more educated and mobilized public.

From the lack of universal healthcare to levels of child poverty that would be unacceptable in other wealthy countries, our government’s under-investment in everything else is the inevitable result of these skewed priorities, which leave America struggling to get by on what is left over after the U.S. military bureaucracy has raked off the lion’s share – or should we say the “generals’ share”? – of the available resources.

Federal infrastructure and “social” spending in 2021 amount to only about 30% of the money spent on militarism. The infrastructure package that Congress is debating is desperately needed, but the $3.5 trillion is spread over 10 years and is not enough.

On climate change, the infrastructure bill includes only $10 billion per year for conversion to green energy, an important but small step that will not reverse our current course toward a catastrophic future. Investments in a Green New Deal must be bookended by corresponding reductions in the military budget if we are to correct our government’s perverted and destructive priorities in any lasting way. This means standing up to the weapons industry and military contractors, which the Biden administration has so far failed to do.

The reality of America’s 20-year arms race with itself makes complete nonsense of the administration’s claims that the recent arms build-up by China now requires the U.S. to spend even more. China spends only a third of what the U.S. spends, and what is driving China’s increased military spending is its need to defend itself against the ever-growing U.S. war machine that has been “pivoting” to the waters, skies and islands surrounding its shores since the Obama administration.

Biden told the UN General Assembly that “…as we close this period of relentless war, we’re opening a new era of relentless diplomacy.” But his exclusive new military alliance with the U.K. and Australia, and his request for a further increase in military spending to escalate a dangerous arms race with China that the United States started in the first place, reveal just how far Biden has to go to live up to his own rhetoric, on diplomacy as well as on climate change.

The United States must go to the UN Climate Summit in Glasgow in November ready to sign on to the kind of radical steps that the UN and less developed countries are calling for. It must make a real commitment to leaving fossil fuels in the ground; quickly convert to a net-zero renewable energy economy; and help developing countries to do the same. As UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres says, the summit in Glasgow “must be the turning point” in the climate crisis.

That will require the United States to seriously reduce the military budget and commit to peaceful, practical diplomacy with China and Russia. Genuinely moving on from our self-inflicted military failures and the militarism that led to them would free up the U.S. to enact programs that address the real existential crisis our planet faces – a crisis against which warships, bombs and missiles are worse than useless.

*

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

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.

Featured image is from CommonDreams

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

There are some things that bring joy to my soul. My pleasures are simple ones. Peanut butter on toast (the food of gods), witnessing Macron getting a slap, and this…

The awesome thing here is that what is taking place is that our competition on bidding for coal assets has disappeared in a cloud of woke smoke.

This will quickly become geopolitical, and the question is this: can BlackRock, Citi, Prudential, HSBC, and their other woke mates decide the fate of nations?

They are already affecting the fate of nations. Witness Canada and all of Western Europe.

I found a live shot of their respective energy policies:

But will they do the same to China? Will they do the same to Russia?

The answer to that will only be fully revealed in the due course of time, but we don’t really need any crystal balls here as we just watch actions, not words.

“China put 38.4 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-fired power capacity into operation in 2020, according to new international research, more than three times the amount built elsewhere around the world and potentially undermining its short-term climate goals.”

Nearly all of the 60 new coal plants planned across Eurasia, South America and Africa — 70 gigawatts of coal power in all — are financed almost exclusively by Chinese banks”

We see all of this on the ground, and while it is taking place, formerly reputable media outlets such as the FT, Reuters, and Bloomberg tell us that: “China’s belt and road initiative creates a problem for China with respect to their climate goals.”

Really?

There is no conflict or problem. Let me explain. Here is what is transpiring. They will keep paying lip service to the woke ideology while capturing the bulk of the energy market, and by the time we all wake up, they’ll control the world’s energy and logistics chains. And once they’ve done that, they’ll be able to control the reserve currency and once they’ve done that… well, they will be the dominant power. Game over. At this rate they’ll get there in a frighteningly rapid period of time. No more than a couple of decades.

BlackRock

Source: International Man

Every week I find myself saying to myself “I just can’t believe this sh**t I am reading.” It is the same old story. The West see themselves as above the East and that the West (North America and Europe) can dictate to the rest of the world what they must do.

From the BlackRock article:

“BlackRock Inc. and other major financial institutions are working on plans to accelerate the closure of coal-fired power plants in Asia in a bid to phase out the use of the worst man-made contributors to climate change.

“The world cannot possibly hit the Paris climate targets unless we accelerate the retirement and replacement of existing coal-fired electricity,” Don Kanak, chairman of Prudential’s insurance growth markets division, said in a statement. “This is especially in Asia where existing coal fleets are big and young and will otherwise operate for decades.””

So shut down coal fired power stations, and pray tell, what are you going to replace them with? How will this affect their standards of living?

Let’s put some numbers behind this to understand probabilities. China has a massive industrial sector. So massive it currently consumes 4x more primary energy than its transport sector and more primary energy than all of the US and European industrial sectors COMBINED. So, it’s big.

Will the CCP willingly negatively impact this sector whereby it threatens China’s growing lead in the global economy and, hence increasing global political influence? I’ll let you be the decider.

In contrast to the US, China uses 10x more coal than natural gas. In 2020, China built over 3x as much new coal capacity as all other countries combined, equal to one large coal plant PER WEEK. In fact, in 2020 alone China’s fleet of coal fired power plants was expanded by a net 29.8 GW.

Think that’s a lot? In 2020 they commissioned 73.5 GW of new coal plant proposals, which is over 5x that of the rest of the entire world combined.

Editor’s Note: The 2020s will likely to be an increasingly volatile decade. More governments are putting their money printing on overdrive. Negative interests are becoming the rule instead of the exception to it.

One thing is for sure, there will be a great deal of change taking place in the years ahead.

That’s precisely why legendary speculator Doug Casey and his team released an urgent new report titled Doug Casey’s Top 7 Predictions.

*

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

AUKUS vs China: Inching Toward War

September 22nd, 2021 by Brian Berletic

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on AUKUS vs China: Inching Toward War

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

What US/Western dark forces — including their public health fraudsters — and supportive MSM press agents suppress about flu/covid is most crucial for everyone to know.

A personal note:

Well into my 9th decade, I refuse to be silent about the most important issue in world history.

Nothing preceding it approached the gravity of what’s going on.

Made-in-the-USA by diabolical dark forces in cahoots with Western partners, Pharma and supportive media, virtually everything mandated and urged since last year is all about irreversibly harming maximum numbers of people worldwide.

Staying silent about the most diabolical crime against humanity imaginable borders on complicity with what’s going on.

Supporting it shares equal guilt with the crime of the century and all others preceding it.

Noncompliance, resistance and civil disobedience were never more urgent than now.

US/Western and go along regimes like apartheid Israel betrayed their people and humanity by pushing diabolical aims on the phony pretext of protecting public health they’re going all out to destroy.

Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) executive director Jane Orient MD earlier warned that flu/covid jabs not only are “unnecessary.”

They’re “more likely to harm than to benefit” anyone.

Most AAPS surveyed doctors know about “significant adverse reaction(s)” to jabbed individuals.

The vast majority of ones unjabbed believe risk(s) of shots (are greater) than (the) disease” they’re supposed to protect against but don’t.

Last spring, a Tel Aviv University study found that flu/covid variants are eight times more likely to be harmful to jabbed individuals than refuseniks.

Other data show that jabbed individuals are more likely to contract the viral illness and other serious diseases than their unjabbed counterparts.

Dr. Robert Malone — inventor of gene-based mRNA technology used by Pfizer and Moderna — earlier warned that their “spike protein…causes severe problems (including) bleeding disorders, blood clots throughout the body and heart problems.”

Their nanoparticle-based delivery system is unapproved because of serious harm it causes to health.

Studied for years, it’s known that the technology for human use causes widespread numbers of adverse events, many serious ones, including fatalities.

It’s known that lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) risk pathologic neuro-inflammation that could cause multiple sclerosis, ALS, or other serious diseases.

Based on research he conducted, COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund director Steve Kirsch earlier said that flu/covid jabs “likely killed over 25,800 Americans and disabled at least 1,000,000 more.”

On Monday, Health Impact News (HIN) quoted him saying that “expert analysis” showed that over 150,000 Americans died following jabs.

He likely referred to similar analysis by Jessica Rose, PhD (in computational biology), MSc (in immunology), and BSc (in applied mathematics) — currently a post-doctoral researcher:

Last May, I quoted her saying the following:

“Analysis suggests that (covid jabs) are likely the cause of reported deaths, spontaneous abortions, and anaphylactic reactions in addition to cardiovascular, neurological and immunological AEs.”

Because of hazards posed by jabs, “extreme care should be taken when making a decision to participate in this experiment” —that’s highly likely to turn out very badly, far worse than already.

On August 28, she and researcher Matthew Crawford said the following:

“Analysis of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database can be used to estimate the number of excess deaths caused by (flu/covid jabs).”

“A simple analysis shows that it is likely that over 150,000 Americans have been killed by (jabs) as of August 28, 2021.”

“Anaphylaxis (a severe, potentially life-threatening allergic reaction) is a well known side effect” from jabs.

Pharma-controlled CDC VAERS data “underreport(ed) (it) 50X to 123X” — to cover up numbers of deaths from jabs.

Estimates of underreporting and numbers of deaths following jabs “were validated multiple independent ways.”

“There is no evidence that these (jabs) save more lives than they cost.”

“Pfizer’s own study showed that adverse events consistent with (its mRNA jabs) were greater than the lives saved…”

“Without an overall statistically significant all-cause mortality benefit, and evidence of an optional medical intervention, (it’s) likely (that jabs) killed over 150,000 Americans” in 8 months.

Jabbing “mandates are not justifiable and should be opposed by all members of the medical community.”

“Early treatments using a cocktail of repurposed drugs with proven safety profiles are a safer, more effective alternative which always improves all-cause mortality in the event of infection, and there are also safe, simple, and effective protocols for prophylaxis.”

A Final Comment

America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) for practicing medicine ethically and responsibly said the following on the effectiveness of early flu/covid treatments.

Numerous studies prove it, including use of safe and effective hydroxychloroquinem (HCQ), ivermectin, zinc, and Vitamin D.”

“(A)ccording to various protocols…(they) prevent hospitalization and death due to” flu/covid.

AFLDS explained that over 32 studies “show 96% positive effects”from using one of these protocols as directed.

In 2015, the WHO included ivermectin in its list of essential medicines for human use prophylactically or treatment.

Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) founder Dr. Pierre Kory called ivermectin’s effectiveness in treating the viral illness “miraculous.”

Yet US/Western dark forces, their anti-public health officials, and MSM press agents falsely debunk and demean use of known safe and effective protocols for treating and curing flu/covid.

Their diabolical aim is all about causing mass-casualties.

It’s about suppressing information and use of known safe and effective protocols.

It’s about benefitting privileged interests by harming and eliminating maximum numbers of unwanted others.

*

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

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/how-wall-street-fleeces-america/

“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/banker-occupation-waging-financial-war-on-humanity/

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Listen to Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Vice President and Chief Science Officer of Pfizer, talking about the pandemic and the COVID vaccine.

Watch the video below.

*

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

Featured image: Dr Michael Yeadon, a former Pfizer vice president and co-founder of Doctors for COVID-19 Ethics. Photo credits: The Last American Vagabond / Odysee

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

I was expecting at least twelve seats won by Maxime Bernier and the People’s Party of Canada in yesterday’s Federal Election. They were the only party talking any sense when it came to their COVID-19 policy. They were the only logical choice on the ballots.

This morning I woke up to see they have zero seats.

Now, we could justly blame such a dismal lose on the brainwashed sheeple, as Madeleine K. Albright says in Fascism: A Warning:

Good guys don’t always win, especially when they are divided and less determined than their adversaries. The desire for liberty may be ingrained in every human breast, but so is the potential for complacency, confusion, and cowardice. And losing has a price.

But admitting such would probably put me in the “complacency” category. Instead, I think we need to look at the PPC’s message.

First, let me say, that I am a founding member of the People’s Party of Canada. I voted for them in the previous election. On a local level, I’ve sacrificed around forty hours of work over the last month, putting up this website for our candidate, writing daily emails and creating this full-colour, double-page flyer. I’ve stood by their platform and their message.

But my gut feeling has always been their message is too restrained. I think they would have won many seats in last night’s election if they had told the whole truth. They need to stop being politically correct about the COVID-19 narrative. Maxime Bernier repeatedly said they were trying to “flatten the lie.” But, in reality, there are like ten or twenty lies around COVID-19.

For example, while the PPC has been speaking out against the vaccine passport, they haven’t spoken out against the vaccine itself. The vaccine is not “safe and effective” and I think they need to say that.

The PPC is selling freedom. The other parties are selling safety.

Most people care more about safety than freedom.

Selling freedom is not working.

People think the vaccine, and a vaccine passport, will keep them safe—freedom be damned.

But the untested COVID-19 shot is not safe. The CDC currently reports nearly 15,000 deaths in the United States from this experimental mRNA injection. We know deaths are under-reported as the Vaccine Adverse Reporting System is very passive and not mandatory.

But for further evidence of the dangers of the vaccine, we need only look at the Moderna/Pfizer trials themselves, where five percent of healthy, young test subjects suffered severe reactions, and the other 95% suffered moderate to minor reactions. And that was in the first six weeks. We’ve no idea what the result will be for younger or older people, over the course of six years, with a new shot every six months.

Or do we? “A novel best-case scenario cost-benefit analysis showed very conservatively that there are five times the number of deaths attributable to each inoculation vs those attributable to COVID-19,” says a paper in Toxicology Report.

In my city we hear sirens every day with people suffering side effects. Nurses tell me stories about teens being treated for heart problems after their shot, and seniors dropping dead after inoculation. My sister-in-law has been in bed for three days after her second shot. My barber threw up all night. My friends mother died. A boy can’t use his right arm because of a blot clot.

Most of us now know someone who died unexpectedly after getting the shot, but we still don’t know someone who died of COVID. ABC asked viewers to submit stories of people they know who died of COVID-19 after refusing the vaccine. Instead of COVID death stories, they received 39,000 angry comments on their Facebook page like: “No stories on that. But a guy I knew got his shot and 2 days later dropped dead of a heart attack. Why don’t you report on THAT?” (See World Tribune for a summary.)

The D-dimer test, according to Dr. Charles Hoffe and others, shows 62% of people who get the shot have micro blood clots in their small blood vessels (e.g. their brain, lungs, kidneys, reproductive organs, etc.). Sure, they don’t die. Not right away. Instead their body gets weaker, and their cognitive function decreases. (Maybe that’s why they didn’t vote PPC?)

These are all facts. Just like it’s a fact that there has not been proven any benefit to the shot, as Dr. Ron Brown has shown in his peer-reviewed report on the Moderna/Pfizer trials.

I think the PPC needs to start telling the whole truth. We are already labelled as “anti-vaxxer,” so who cares? Let’s not stop there. Let’s get the full “COVID denier” label, too. What’s there to lose? Certainly not seats in last night’s election.

For the last eighteen months, the PPC has played softball with these psychopaths. They gave them a chance to back down, reap what profits they could from voluntary participants in their genocidal vaccine money-making scheme, and let life get back to normal. But psychopaths are crazy. They don’t take the olive branch. Instead, they snap them in half. Now’s it is time to bring out big white elephants.

I would recommend the People’s Party of Canada create a public health advisory team, pulling together all the doctors and nurses and researchers in Canada who have been shamed, censored and fired. Get the evidence in order, and show the country, and the world, the scam from beginning to end. Here’s what we know. Here’s what they did. Instead of keeping you safe, they have been causing death and harm through all the COVID measures, especially the vaccine. Call for a full investigation or just go ahead and launch one yourself. Let these tyrants know they are going to prison for the rest of their lives if they are found guilty.

You could even be nice, and offer amnesty to anybody who will step forward and blow the whistle.

Max Bernier needs to stop saying “we need to learn to live with the virus.” After 18 months of a “global pandemic” with millions of so-called “cases” they still haven’t isolated the virus. It’s fair to assume there is and never was a so-called SARS-COV-2 virus. Or if there was some genetic fragment floating around it wasn’t causing any devastating disease. There was never a pandemic, death rates were lower in 2020 than 2019 or even 2018. Hospitals were never overrun anymore than they usually are during cold and flu season (with a few odd exceptions in New York where they liked to put people with an anxiety attack on a ventilator).

Not only should there not be a vaccine passport, the party needs to promise to suspend the purchase, distribution and inoculation of these these useless and dangerous injections. It’s the job of the government to protect people from harmful enterprises, not cooperate with their execution.

We should turn the tables around and say: “You have the freedom to take the shot if you want. But we are not paying for it. You can use your own money to buy whatever drug you want from whatever company you want. But we need to save the money to pay for your medical bills arising from the side effects of these vaccines.”

I think the People’s Party fell short by trying to make their message too people-pleasing and freedom-orientated. In the end, people react to fear and want protection. There is plenty to fear from the current government, media and shadowy elites. I think we need to expose what they have done and what they are doing, and offer people protection from such deceptions—because sooner or later, the house of lies will collapse.

Yes, to freedom! But not freedom for the government to continue it’s tyrannical agenda. Most Canadians are complicit in the lies. Let’s stop trying to please them. Let’s present the facts as they are, call a poison a poison and end this corona madness before it gets any worse. And, I think we all know, it can get a lot worse.

I hope Maxime Bernier, all of the candidates, staff and volunteers, continue to fight for Canada. I just ask that they start bringing out the heavy artillery of unpopular facts, while heading to even higher grounds of truth.

*

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

John C. A. Manley has spent over a decade ghostwriting for medical doctors, naturopaths and chiropractors. Since March 2020, he has been writing articles that question and expose the contradictions in the COVID-19 narrative and control measures. He is also completing a novel, Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story. You can visit his website at MuchAdoAboutCorona.ca.

Featured image is from the author

Australia’s New Anti-China Alliance

September 22nd, 2021 by Pip Hinman

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Australia’s New Anti-China Alliance

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

 

 

 

 

It is now one year since controversial farm bills were passed into law in India in September 2020. The  three bills and the subsequent legislation have triggered a massive 15-month farmers’ protest that has attracted worldwide attention and support.

Farmers, farmers’ unions and their representatives demand that the laws be repealed and state that they will not accept a compromise. Farmers’ leaders welcomed the Supreme Court of India stay order on the implementation of the farm laws in January 2021 which remains in effect. However, based on more than 10 rounds of talks between farmers representatives and the government, it seems that the ruling administration will not back down.

In November 2020, a nationwide general strike took place in support of the farmers and in that month around 300,000 farmers marched from the states of Punjab and Haryana to Delhi for what leaders called a “decisive battle” with the central government.

But as the farmers reached the capital, most were stopped by barricades, dug up roads, water cannons, baton charges and barbed wire erected by police. The farmers set up camps along five major roads, building makeshift tents with a view to staying for months if their demands were not met.

Today, thousands of farmers remain camped at various points on the border. They have been there for nine months throughout the cold, the rain and the searing heat. In late March 2021, it was estimated that there were around 40,000 protestors camped at Singhu and Tikri at the Delhi border.

On 26 January, India’s Republic Day, tens of thousands of farmers held a farmer’s parade with a large convoy of tractors and drove into Delhi.

In September 2021, tens of thousands of farmers attended a rally in the city of Muzaffarnagar in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh (UP). Hundreds of thousands more turned out for other rallies in the state.

These huge gatherings come ahead of important polls in 2022 in UP, India’s most populous state with 200 million people and governed by Prime Minister Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). In the 2017 assembly polls, the BJP won 325 out of a total of 403 seats.

Speaking at the rally in Muzaffarnagar, farmers’ leader Rakesh Tikait stated:

“We take a pledge that we’ll not leave the protest site there (around Delhi) even if our graveyard is made there. We will lay down our lives if needed but will not leave the protest site until we emerge victorious.”

Tikait also attacked the Modi-led government for:

“… selling the country to corporates… We have to stop the country from getting sold. Farmers should be saved; the country should be saved.”

Farmers’ leaders are now calling for a nationwide general strike on 27 September.

Police brutality, the smearing of protesters by certain prominent media commentators and politicians, the illegal detention of protesters and clampdowns on free speech (journalists arrested, social media accounts closed, shutting down internet services) have been symptomatic of officialdom’s approach to the farmers’ struggle which itself has been defined by resilience, resoluteness and restraint.

But it is not as though the farmers’ struggle arose overnight. Indian agriculture has been deliberately starved of government support for decades and has resulted in a well-documented agrarian – even civilisation – crisis. What we are currently seeing is the result of injustices and neglect coming to a head as foreign agricapital (facilitated by the government’s farm laws) tries to impose its neoliberal ‘final solution’ on Indian agriculture.

A year on from the farm bills being passed into law, readers can access my articles on the farmers’ struggle below, which discuss the significance of the farm legislation, who is behind these laws, who will benefit and who will lose out. They also describe the implications for cultivators and the more than 60% of the nation’s population who rely on agriculture for a living as well as the health, social and economic consequences of displacing an indigenous agrifood system with one dominated by global players.

The farmers’ struggle represents a battle for the heart and soul of the nation and its future.

Illustration

The illustration that accompanies this article was created by artist Isa Esasi and is based on a photograph by Ravi Choudhary, a photojournalist with the Press Trust of India (PTI), which went viral in November 2020. The original image showed a paramilitary policeman raising his baton and about to bring it down on an elderly Sikh farmer.

Source: Isa Esasi

Despite claims that the photo was ‘fake’ and attempts to discredit it, not least by Amit Malviya, head of the BJP’s IT cell, India-based Boom, which describes itself as “an independent digital journalism initiative with a mission to fight misinformation”, tracked down Sukhdev Singh, the farmer in the photograph, and interviewed him. The farmer was targeted by two security personnel and he sustained injuries to his forearm, back and leg.

Articles on the farmers’ protest

*

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

Colin Todhunter specialises in development, food and agriculture.
He is a Researh Associate of the Centre for Globalization in Montreal.

Covid Cases Fall in the Least Vaccinated Countries

September 22nd, 2021 by Rodney Atkinson

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

World wide COVID daily cases have been falling since 19th August. They fell 24% between 19th August and 15th September but they fell least in the most vaccinated countries and most in the least vaccinated countries. In Scotland most hospitalisations and deaths are among the vaccinated. Big Tech censorship of grieving father of vaccine victim.

In Germany (vaccinated 66%), during the period world wide cases have been falling, daily cases actually rose 56% and in Israel they rose 65%.

 

In India the 240m populated State of Uttar Pradesh has virtually wiped out COVID cases (to about 15-20 per day) but has a vaccination rate of only 5.8% – they have relied on the widespread use of Ivermectin rather than vaccination! 

The UK reduction by 16% during the period is due (as predicted by Freenations in the last post) to the reduction in vaccinations taking place with a fall of 57% between 25th August and 14th September. But that fall cannot compare with the very large fall in cases in the lowest vaccinated countries of South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya and Bangladesh.

The above figures suggest that it is precisely the vaccination programmes and vaccination compulsion that are preventing a bigger fall in world wide COVID cases (and deaths – see Scotland death and hospitalisation figures below)

To continue the figures given in the last Post on this site the fall in UK vaccinations  continue to produce big falls in COVID case numbers.

UK vaccinations given:

UK COVID cases fall week on week:

 

It is now likely that as the vaccine numbers rise again with the obnoxious and totally illegal forced vaccination of schoolchildren *** that those children will with their higher viral loads (see Oxford University study in last Freenations post) infect teachers and parents.

So just as the world wide cases and deaths are falling the vaccine mad countries will be forcing the cases and deaths up again.

Scotland Deaths

As we showed in the previous post it is in Scotland that the true numbers of deaths from the vaccine have been revealed. The latest figures from Scotland show that the vaccinated now dominate both hospitalisations and deaths.

 

***Parents and grandparents should use the leaflets produced by Unity News Network to warn teachers, NHS staff, politicians and other that will be prosecuted for administering or recommending these vaccines to children: These are available in lots of 50, 100 or 150 and if you would like some please email [email protected].

Big Tech Censorship

See this.

In one of the most obscene examples of the censoring dictatorship of big tech corporations, Facebook has excluded the father whose son died from vaccine induced heart inflammation. Ernest Ramirez did an interview with Alex Jones of Infowars and described the death of his son five days after the Moderna vaccination. And when he tried to post a speech he gave in Austin Texas, Facebook blocked him because he “didn’t follow our community standards….on misinformation”. Young men are 14 times more susceptible to heart inflammation after taking a vaccination – but that has not stopped the US and UK Governments approving injections for 12-15 year olds.

I am sure we all live in hope that one day these arrogant, ignorant, censoring politicians and media controllers will pay a terrible price for their swaggering dictatorship and misinformation – and the deaths they have caused.

*

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

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

What Biden’s Vaccine Mandate Means for You

September 22nd, 2021 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

In his presidential campaign, Joe Biden promised he would not impose vaccine mandates. September 9, 2021, Biden issued an executive order, mandating all U.S. companies with 100 or more employees to require COVID vaccination or weekly testing, or face federal fines of up to $14,000 per violation

Biden is also requiring all federal employees and federal contractors to get the shots. Postal workers and members of Congress and their staff just happen to have been made exempt from this requirement

No exceptions for persons who have already had COVID and recovered, and therefore have antibodies to the virus, have been issued. Several lawsuits are underway by people who have natural immunity and don’t need or benefit from the mandated COVID shots

The Republican National Committee has announced they will sue the Biden administration for issuing an unconstitutional mandate

While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has granted full approval to Comirnaty, that product is not yet available. The only Pfizer shot currently available, called BNT162b2, remains under emergency use authorization, and the two differ widely in their legal liabilities

*

September 9, 2021, in a sweeping executive order,1 President Joe Biden mandated all U.S. companies with 100 or more employees to require COVID vaccination or weekly testing, or face federal fines of up to $14,000 per violation. Biden also ordered businesses to give time off to employees to receive the injections.

Biden is also requiring all federal employees and federal contractors to get the shots. For unspecified reasons, postal workers and members of Congress and their staff are exempt from the vaccine mandate. Biden did not make any exceptions for persons who have already had COVID and recovered, and therefore have antibodies to the virus.

He also said he’d use his “power as president” against any governor unwilling to follow the order “to get them out of the way.”2 Biden may be biting off more than he can chew, however, because as of September 11, 2021, 28 states were already pushing back against federal vaccine mandates.3

Many States Vow to Fight Back Unconstitutional Mandate

The backlash was swift. The Republican National Committee quickly announced they would sue the Biden administration for issuing an “unconstitutional mandate.” GOP Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel issued a statement:4

“Joe Biden told Americans when he was elected that he would not impose vaccine mandates. He lied. Now small businesses, workers, and families across the country will pay the price.

Like many Americans, I am pro-vaccine and anti-mandate. Many small businesses and workers do not have the money or legal resources to fight Biden’s unconstitutional actions and authoritarian decrees, but when his decree goes into effect, the RNC will sue the administration to protect Americans and their liberties.”

Nebraska Republican Sen. Ben Sasse told the Daily Caller:5

“President Biden is so desperate to distract from his shameful, incompetent Afghanistan exit that he is saying crazy things and pushing constitutionally flawed executive orders.

This is a cynical attempt to pick a fight and distract from the President’s morally disgraceful decision to leave Americans behind Taliban lines on the 20th anniversary of 9/11. This isn’t how you beat COVID, but it is how you run a distraction campaign — it’s gross and the American people shouldn’t fall for it.”

In a series of tweets, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem stated:6,7

“South Dakota will stand up to defend freedom @JoeBiden see you in court,” and “My legal team is standing by ready to file our lawsuit the minute Joe Biden files his unconstitutional rule. This gross example of federal intrusion will not stand.”

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp also issued a statement saying he intends to “pursue every legal option available” to halt Biden’s “blatantly unlawful overreach,” as did Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, who in a tweet stated:8

“This is exactly the kind of big government overreach we have tried so hard to prevent in Arizona — now the Biden-Harris administration is hammering down on private businesses and individual freedoms in an unprecedented and dangerous way. This will never stand up in court.

This dictatorial approach is wrong, un-American and will do far more harm than good. How many workers will be displaced? How many kids kept out of classrooms? How many businesses fined? The vaccine is and should be a choice. We must and will push back.”

Florida Governments Face Fines if Following Biden’s Order

In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis countered Biden’s edict with one of his own. Any local government that makes COVID vaccination a requirement for employment will be fined $5,000 per violation.During a September 13, 2021, press conference, DeSantis said:

“We are gonna stand for the men and women who are serving us. We are going to protect Florida jobs. We are not gonna to let people be fired because of a vaccine mandate.

You don’t just cast aside people who have been serving faithfully over this issue, over what’s basically a personal choice on their individual health. We cannot let these folks be cast aside. We cannot allow their jobs to be destroyed.”

I was going to include DeSantis’ speech in this article, but it has since been deleted for “violating YouTube’s community guidelines.” Imagine that, that they would actually remove a legally elected governor’s opinion on this topic because it violates

Biden Is Clearly Out of Legal Bounds

Biden’s executive order is unlikely to stand up in court, seeing how federal law prohibits the mandating of emergency use products, which by definition are experimental. As noted in a May 2021 report by The Defender:10

“The bottom line is this: mandating products authorized for Emergency Use Authorization status (EUA) violates federal law as detailed in the following legal notifications.11

All COVID vaccines, COVID PCR and antigen tests, and masks are merely EUA-authorized, not approved or licensed, by the federal government. Long-term safety and efficacy have not been proven.

EUA products are by definition experimental, which requires people be given the right to refuse them. Under the Nuremberg Code, the foundation of ethical medicine, no one may be coerced to participate in a medical experiment. Consent of the individual is ‘absolutely essential.’

Earlier this year, Mary Holland, Children’s Health Defense president and general counsel, and attorney Greg Glaser stated that federal law prohibits employers from mandating EUA COVID vaccines (or EUA COVID-19 tests or masks). Holland and Glaser wrote:12

‘If a vaccine has been issued EUA by the FDA, it is not fully licensed and must be voluntary. A private party, such as an employer, school or hospital cannot circumvent the EUA law, which prohibits mandates. Indeed, the EUA law preventing mandates is so explicit that there is only one precedent case regarding an attempt to mandate an EUA vaccine.’”

If you’re like most, you’re probably thinking, “Well, Biden’s executive order came after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration gave full approval to the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID shot Comirnaty, so the vaccine is not under EUA.” You’d be partially right. But mostly wrong.

The Difference Between Pfizer’s BNT162b2 Shot and Comirnaty

The FDA did indeed give full approval to Comirnaty, but that product is not predicted to be available for over a year. The only Pfizer shot currently available, called BNT162b2, remains under EUA. We have the FDA to thank for this unusual and befuddling situation, but the key take-home is that while approval has been granted to Comirnaty, that product is not obtainable.

The FDA wants BNT162b2 to be viewed as interchangeable with Comirnaty, but from a legal standpoint they clearly are not identical. BNT162b2, being under EUA, is indemnified against financial liability, whereas Comirnaty, once it becomes available, will not have that liability shield (unless Pfizer/BioNTech manage to get liability shielding for that product before its release).

In other words, if you’re injured by the BNT162b2, your only recourse is to apply for compensation from the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Act (CICP).13 Compensation from CICP is very limited and hard to get. In its 15-year history, it has paid out just 29 claims, fewer than 1 in 10.14,15,16

You only qualify if your injury requires hospitalization and results in significant disability and/or death, and even if you meet the eligibility criteria, it requires you to use up your private health insurance before it kicks in to pay the difference.

There’s no reimbursement for pain and suffering, only lost wages and unpaid medical bills. This means a retired person cannot qualify even if they die or end up in a wheelchair. Salary compensation is of limited duration, and capped at $50,000 a year, and the CICP’s decision cannot be appealed.

If normal circumstances apply to Comirnaty, were you to be injured by that injection, you’d be able to sue for damages under the national Vaccine Injury Compensation Plan (VICP),17 so from a legal perspective, there’s a rather significant difference between these two products.

Legal Notifications You Can Use

If your employer or school requires you to get a COVID shot, consider using the legal notifications provided by the Children’s Health Defense legal team. The notices inform employers and educational institutions that they are violating federal law.

Three separate notices are available for download from the Children’s Health Defense Legal Resources page;18 one for mask mandates, one for PCR testing and a third for vaccines. There, you can also find information on how to request a religious exemption for COVID-19 vaccine mandates in the workplace.

Vaccine Mandate Heralds Communist Style Social Credit System

In a September 13, 2021, episode of Fox News’ Fox & Friends, co-host Rachel Campos-Duffy warned that vaccine mandates are “the beginning of the communist-style social credit system,” adding:19

“Dr. Anthony Fauci is now saying that if you don’t have the vaccine, you shouldn’t be able to have air travel. I mean, this happens in China. In China … if you don’t agree with the government, you can’t get on a train. They block you. They have a way to do that, and this is the beginning of that system where if you’re a dissident, if you don’t agree with the party in power, you will be punished.”

Are we rushing toward a social credit system where behavior is either rewarded or punished based on the whims of those in charge of the system? Biden’s refusal to make exceptions for those with natural immunity, who by no stretch of the imagination actually need or benefit from a COVID shot, seems to indicate we’re definitely heading that way.

Giving people with natural immunity a health passport won’t work for the technocratic elite because the naturally immune aren’t on a vaccine subscription. The whole point of having a vaccine passport is that you lose your freedom every time a new booster rolls out. You either get the booster or lose your freedom.

People with natural immunity can’t be roped into this control scheme. What are they going to force the naturally immune to do in order to keep a valid passport? They can’t make money off natural immunity, and they can’t use it to control.

In a September 13, 2021, letter to Biden, Consumer Brands Association CEO Geoff Freeman listed 19 of 50 questions received from its member companies.20 Among those questions is whether Biden’s executive order includes religious or medical exemptions, including exemption due to natural immunity.

As reported by Newsweek,21 details of Biden’s plan will be ironed out by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), but in the meantime, Freeman called on the Biden administration to address some of the most pressing questions.

OSHA Lets Employers Off the Hook for Vaccine Injuries

Speaking of OSHA, in May 2021, the agency quietly revoked22 the requirement23 for employers who mandate the vaccine to record side effects as a work-related event. By doing so, OSHA relieved itself and employers from having to pay out workers’ comp if an employee is injured by a mandated COVID shot. OSHA tried to justify its decision, stating:

“OSHA does not wish to have any appearance of discouraging workers from receiving COVID-19 vaccination, and also does not wish to disincentivize employers’ vaccination efforts.

As a result, OSHA will not enforce 29 CFR 1904’s recording requirements to require any employers to record worker side effects from COVID-19 vaccination through May 2022. We will reevaluate the agency’s position at that time to determine the best course of action moving forward.”

People With Natural Immunity Turn to the Law

In the days ahead, our justice system is bound to clog up with lawsuits against employers, schools and governments alike. Law professor Todd Zywicki recently sued24 George Mason University in Virginia over their vaccine mandate, as he has natural immunity. Zywicki discussed his lawsuit in an August 6, 2021, Wall Street Journal commentary.25

His lawsuit pointed out that people with natural immunity have an increased risk of adverse reactions to the COVID shot — according to one study26 up to 4.4 times the risk of clinically significant side effects — and that the requirement violates due process rights, the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment, and is noncompliant with the Emergency Use Authorization.27

August 17, 2021, George Mason University caved before the case went to trial and granted Zywicki a medical exemption.28 Unfortunately, the school did not revise its general policy.

A number of other lawsuits have also been filed, including one by more than a dozen students and Children’s Health Defense against Rutgers University in New Jersey,29 and one by six Oregon workers who are suing the state on grounds that they already have natural immunity.30 The plaintiffs include two corrections officers, an EMT, a medical office manager, a school bus driver and a special agent in charge of an Oregon Department of Justice investigatory unit.

Jason Dudash, director of the Oregon chapter of the Freedom Foundation, which is representing the state employees, accused Oregon Gov. Kate Brown of becoming “power-hungry amid the pandemic.” “The courts must establish a more logical, science-based approach,” he said.31

Military Service Members Sue Over Vaccine Mandate

Military service members with natural immunity are also suing the Department of Defense, the FDA and the Department of Health and Human Services. As reported by The Defender:32

“The lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Staff Sergeant Daniel Robert and Staff Sergeant Holli Mulvihill, allege U.S. Sec. of Defense Lloyd Austin ignored the DOD’s own regulations and created an entirely new definition of ‘full immunity’ as being achievable only by vaccination.

According to the lawsuit, the military’s existing laws and regulations unequivocally provide the exemption the plaintiffs seek under Army Regulation 40-562 (‘AR 40-562’), which provides documented survivors of an infection a presumptive medical exemption from vaccination because of the natural immunity acquired as a result of having survived the infection …

Dr. Admiral Brett Giroir, HHS assistant secretary, stated in an interview Aug. 24 with Fox News: ‘So natural immunity, it’s very important … There are still no data to suggest vaccine immunity is better than natural immunity. I think both are highly protective.’

Yet on the same day, Austin issued a memo mandating the entire Armed Forces be vaccinated, in which he wrote: ‘Those with previous COVID-19 infection are not considered fully vaccinated.’

In that memo, plaintiffs allege Austin created a new term and concept, which contradicts the plain language of DOD’s own regulations, long-standing immunology practice, medical ethics and the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence regarding this specific virus.

Plaintiffs claim Austin, who is not a doctor, changed the DOD’s own regulation without providing ‘a scintilla of evidence to support it.’ They also allege Austin made the regulation change without going through the required rulemaking process, in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act review.”

The lawsuit also points out that Pfizer’s Phase 3 trials, which is the phase in which long-term side effects are detected, won’t be completed until 2023. Moreover, the lawsuit highlights the fact that Pfizer unblinded the two cohorts in the middle of the trial and eliminated the control group by offering the real “vaccine” to all controls.

In so doing, Pfizer turned the study from a placebo-controlled blinded trial into an open observational study, and the FDA allowed it. Observational studies carry nowhere near the same weight as placebo-controlled trials, as you don’t have anything to compare the treatment group against. It’s very easy to overlook even severe injuries when you have no control group.

Fauci Warns There Will Be ‘Many More Vaccine Mandates’

As we approach the two-year mark of this pandemic, it’s time for our judicial system to kick in and protect the public. The emergency powers granted to governors are not supposed to last forever, and the rights afforded us by the U.S. Constitution were never intended to be suspended and tossed aside in times of medical crises. It’s time this rampant lawlessness got reined in.

Whether or not that will happen remains to be seen. What we can be sure of is that if our legal system fails to do its duty, the beacon of freedom in this world will be lost. As reported by CNN,33Fauci is out there warning that “if more people aren’t persuaded to get vaccinated by messaging from health officials and ‘trusted political messengers,’ additional mandates from schools and businesses may be necessary.”

The technocratic elite will take it all the way because they are fighting for the Great Reset. And the Great Reset won’t work if people are free. They need leverage over the population, which is precisely what vaccine passports are all about.

Jacobson v. Massachusetts: A Ruling With Tragic Consequences

In closing, those who support the mandating of experimental COVID shots will typically point to the 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts case, which is often interpreted as giving government the right to force vaccinate everyone for the common good. However, as noted by Alex Berenson in a recent blog post,34 we ought to really look at the time at which that verdict was given.

In the years surrounding the 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts verdict, the U.S. Supreme Court also ruled in favor of racial discrimination, corporate monopoly, child labor and making questioning government a jailable offense. That same year, in 1905, they ruled workers have no rights. In 1923, they ruled minimum wage laws are illegal and in 1927 they OK’d forced sterilization based on the Jacobson ruling.

Most of these rulings have since been overturned, and for obvious reasons. Most people don’t agree with racial discrimination, monopolies and child labor anymore. Most agree that minimum wage laws are a good thing, and that questioning government is an unassailable right that is necessary for democracy to work. The 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts case is no different. It was made in and for a different time, when individual and human rights were routinely quashed.

As noted by National Vaccine Information Center president Barbara Loe Fisher in “How Fear of a Virus Changed Our World”:35

“Using bad logic and bad science while leaning heavily on the pseudo-ethic of utilitarianism, state governments were given the green light to legally require vaccination based on a ‘common belief’ that vaccination is safe and effective, rather than proven fact.

Piously waving the greater good flag to justify throwing civil liberties out the door, the court majority ruled that citizens do not have a legal right to be free at all times because there are ‘manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subjected for the common good’ …

But the justices also warned that mandatory vaccination laws should not be forced on a person whose physical condition would make vaccination ‘cruel and inhuman to the last degree.’ They said:

‘We are not to be understood as holding that the statute was intended to be applied in such a case or, if it was so intended, that the judiciary would not be competent to interfere and protect the health and life of the individual concerned. ‘All laws,’ this Court has said, ‘should receive a sensible construction’ …

During this time of fear and confusion, the Jacobson ruling also reminds us that it is democratically elected representatives in state legislatures who make public health laws governing people living in different states. That is because what is not defined in the U.S. Constitution as a federal activity is reserved for the states, which is an important check on federal government power.

Elected lawmakers in your state can choose to mandate a few or many vaccines with or without exemptions, while the federal government has the authority to mandate vaccinations for people entering the U.S. or crossing state borders.”

Sen. Warren Threatens Amazon to Ban ‘The Truth About COVID-19’

Since the publication of my latest book, “The Truth About COVID-19,” which became an instant best seller on Amazon.com, there’s been a significant increase in calls for censorship and ruthless attacks against me.

Most recently, so-called “progressive” U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., in an outrageous, slanderous and basically unconstitutional attempt to suppress free speech, sent a letter to Amazon, demanding an “immediate review” of their algorithms to weed out books peddling “COVID misinformation.”

Warren specifically singled out “The Truth About COVID-19” as a prime example of “highly ranked and favorably tagged books based on falsehoods about COVID-19 vaccines and cures” that she wants to see banned from sale.

Two days later, U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., followed in Warren’s footsteps, sending letters to Facebook and Amazon, calling for more prolific censorship of vaccine information. Even President Joe Biden has recently used a debunked report as his sole source to call for my censorship.

Sadly, these attacks are being levied by the very people elected to safeguard democracy and our Constitutional rights. Essentially, what they are calling for is modern-day book burning. This is a democracy, not a monarchy.

*

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

Notes

1 American Military News September 9, 2021

2, 3, 7 ZeroHedge September 11, 2021

4, 5 Daily Caller September 9, 2021

6 Twitter Kristi Noem September 9, 2021

8 Twitter Doug Ducey September 9, 2021

9 The Hill September 13, 2021

10 The Defender May 18, 2021

11, 18 Children’s Health Defense Legal Resources

12 The Defender January 29, 2021

13 Congressional Research Service Legal Sidebar CICP March 22, 2021 (PDF)

14 Life Site News June 15, 2021

15 Insurance Journal August 14, 2020

16 Insurance Journal December 29, 2020

17 HRSA September 2021

19 Media Matters September 13, 2021

20, 21 Newsweek September 13, 2021

22 Ogletree May 6, 2021

23 Ogletree April 21, 2021

24 Zywicki vs George Mason University Case 1:21-cv-00894

25 WSJ August 6, 2021

26 JAMA Internal Medicine August 16, 2021 [Epub ahead of print]

27, 28 Citizens Journal August 25, 2021

29 Children’s Health Defense vs Rutgers Case 2: 21-cv-15333

30 Oregon Live September 10, 2021

31 Washington Free Beacon September 10, 2021

32 The Defender September 1, 2021

33 CNN September 14, 2021

34 Alex Berenson Substack September 13, 2021

35 NVIC June 1, 2020

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

There have now been 1,614 recorded fetal deaths following COVID-19 injections of pregnant women in VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) as of 9/10/2021. (Source.)

Everyone acknowledges and agrees that VAERS is vastly under-reported, but now we have an expert analysis on just how under-reported adverse events are from Dr. Jessica Rose. Her conservative estimate based on a careful analysis of the data is that the events recorded in VAERS need to be multiplied by X41.

That would mean that a conservative estimate of the true numbers of fetal deaths would be 66,174 when their mothers are injected with a COVID-19 shot.

Besides the fetal deaths, we also know there are 96 recorded cases where a breastfed child was injured after the nursing mother took a COVID-19 shot. (Source.)

Again, if we multiply that number by X41, a conservative estimate would be about 3,936 adverse events in infants being breastfed when their mothers are injected.

Two of those resulted in the breastfed infant dying after the nursing mother was injected.

VAERS report ID 1532154 was apparently filed by the mother, a 36-year-old woman from New Mexico:

On July 17, my baby passed away.

I had been breastfeeding my 6 week old baby at the time that I received the first Pfizer vaccine on June 4, 2021.

He became very sick with a high fever about 2 weeks after I got the first Pfizer vaccine on June 21. He was treated for 2 weeks with IV antibiotics for a supposed bacterial infection.

However, they never found any specific bacteria, and called his diagnosis culture-negative sepsis. At the end of his hospital stay he tested positive for rhinovirus.

After the 14 day course of antibiotics, he was home for one week, but exhibited strange symptoms (e.g. swollen eyelid, strange rashes, vomiting).

I took him back to the hospital on July 15, where he presented with what they called an atypical Kawasaki disease.

He passed away shortly thereafter from clots in his severely inflamed arteries.

I am curious if the spike protein could have gone through the breast milk and caused an inflammatory response in my child.

They say Kawasaki disease presents very similarly to the Multi-System Inflammatory Syndrome in children that they are seeing in post Covid infections. (My baby also had unusual birth circumstances, as he was born at 37 weeks, triggered by a maternal appendicitis.)

However, if they know that antibodies go through the breastmilk as a good thing, then why wouldn”t the spike protein also go through the breastmilk and potentially cause problems. (Source.)

The other breastfeeding infant death is VAERS case 1166062 which lists Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura as one of the symptoms. Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura is a rare blood disorder in which blood clots form in small blood vessels throughout the body.

Patient received second dose of Pfizer vaccine on March 17, 2020 while at work. March 18, 2020 her 5 month old breastfed infant developed a rash and within 24 hours was inconsolable, refusing to eat, and developed a fever.

Patient brought baby to local ER where assessments were performed, blood analysis revealed elevated liver enzymes. Infant was hospitalized but continued to decline and passed away.

Diagnosis of TTP. No known allergies. No new exposures aside from the mother”s vaccination the previous day. (Source.)

Last week someone from the UK uploaded a video of a newborn allegedly suffering from the effects of a COVID-19 shot the mother was forced to take against her will as a condition for having the baby in the hospital.

“My niece had her second child last month and throughout her pregnancy she resisted being vaccinated. A month before the baby was born she was told that she would need a cesarean section and the hospital and doctors insisted that they would not allow her into the hospital unless she had the jab.

With such pressure, and the worry of her baby’s health, she felt forced to comply and take the COVID shot. Now the baby is in hospital, has uncontrollable intermittent ‘jitters’ that are worsening and needs a brain scan as they cannot fathom what is causing this 😢

Every test that has been done has come back negative so they are being transferred to the Great Ormond Street hospital to do further investigations.”

This is from our Bitchute channel. It is also on our Rumble channel.

*

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

Featured image is from HIN

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Several hundred elite Navy SEALs are in danger of being blocked from deploying with their special operator teams by the Pentagon after failing to get a mandatory COVID vaccine, according to a lawyer and pastor counseling them.

The number involved in the dispute with the Pentagon amounts to as many as a quarter or more of all active duty SEALs, a loss that could impact military readiness since SEAL teams play an outsized role in modern military operations, their advocates told Just the News. Some SEALS were given a deadline this week for the vaccine and have sought a religious exemption.

“My clients include several Navy SEALs who are a small part of a large group of SEALs and other military members who are being asked to choose between their faith and their ability to serve our nation,” said R. Davis Younts, a lieutenant colonel in the Air Force reserves and a JAG lawyer who is representing several of the special operators as a private lawyer. “They have been told that if they seek a religious accommodation, they likely will no longer be able to serve our country as Navy SEALs and been given an arbitrary deadline to comply with the vaccine mandate.

“My clients need time, and we are seeking at least a 90-day extension to vaccine mandate compliance deadline they have been given.”

Younts said the Pentagon has put its threat in writing that unvaccinated SEALs, including those who get a religious exemption or already have natural immunity, will be forbidden from deploying with their teams, all but ending their special operator careers. Some were given a deadline of this week, he said.

Pastor Jeff Durbin, a prominent anti-abortion activist and evangelical pastor from Arizona who has been ministering to the special operators for several weeks as they navigated the decision, said between a quarter to a third of all active-duty SEALS are involved in the dispute with the Pentagon, including some who already have COVID-19 immunity because they recovered from the disease.

“There are hundreds of Navy SEALs who have not been vaccinated, do not want to take the vaccine, or who have had and recovered from COVID and have the benefit of natural immunity,” Durbin told Just the News. “A large number of SEALS that I am speaking on behalf of are facing the very difficult decision that even with a legitimate religious exemption that is based upon their commitments to Christ, the Gospel, God’s Law, and the Constitution, they will no longer be Navy SEALs.

“They are essentially being asked to make a decision between their commitments to the lordship of Christ and their careers as Navy SEALs. Our country should be very concerned about what this would do to military readiness. Losing hundreds of Navy SEALs because of their legitimate and sincerely held Christian beliefs could be devastating to us as a nation.”

The Pentagon referred comment to the Navy, which did not immediately respond with a comment. A Navy source would only confirm that Nov. 28 is the deadline for all Navy personnel to get shots.

Tim Parlatore, a lawyer who helped win the acquittal of Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher in the alleged death of an ISIS prisoner, said he has confirmed large numbers of SEALS are declining to get the vaccine right now.

“It’s in the hundreds. And it’s not the senior leadership. It’s all the shooters and it is going to have a huge impact,” Parlatore said. “If they continue with this asinine police you are going to have the complete decimation of the SEAL teams,” he said.

Parlatore said the SEALS are not anti-vaccine; in fact they get all sorts of shots. He said they just believe more safety data needs to be be available to make their own judgment. And some already have immunity from surviving the disease, he noted.

Federal health regulators say the vaccine is safe for most Americans, while acknowledging some rare but serious adverse events, such as sudden cardiac disease for younger adults.

It reportedly takes up to $500,000 and a year or more to fully train Navy SEALs, among the most elite and celebrated of the military’s special forces. SEALs shouldered a disproportionately heavy load during the war on terror the last two decades, with teams often deploying multiple times to war zones, including black-operations Team Six, which killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.

Younts’ and Durbin’s accounts were confirmed to Just the News by other lawyers representing special operators as well as several members of the SEAL community, who confirmed large numbers of special operators could be sidelined in the next few days. Most would only talk on background for fear of losing their jobs, but warned of a potential security calamity.

Eric Greitens, a retired Navy SEAL and the former Missouri governor now running for U.S. Senate, said the Pentagon’s current position wrongly impacts the nation’s defenses and the personal careers of men who have given so much to their nation.

“This is wrong for national security,” Greitens said. “The only people who will benefit from destroying the combat capacity of Naval Special Operations are the Taliban, Russia, China and other adversaries around the world. This is also wrong at human level. These warriors have dedicated their lives to the nation, spent their youth and some of them their health defending this nation and now find themselves in trouble for no valid scientific, medical or military rationale. It is clear their out-of-control command is more concerned with political correctness than lethality, and thus is willing to squander national security and personal careers.”

Younts, a Pennsylvania-based lawyer, has been involved in defending service members for nearly two decades, and won an award as the top Air Force defense lawyer in the JAG corps. His work and writings have been showcased in the JAG corps official magazine.

Durbin runs the large evangelical Apologia Church in the Phoenix area and is best known for his ardent opposition to abortion. In 2017, he stirred criticism when he suggested abortion be treated the same as murder, which under some state laws is punishable by the death penalty. His position on abortion as a crime, however, got recent support when Pope Francis declared earlier this month that “abortion is murder.”

Durbin told Just the News he began ministering to Navy SEALs and other military members in recent weeks as they wrestled with the decision of whether to get the COVID-19 vaccine as mandated by the Pentagon. He said those he has counseled have a religious objection, are unable to speak publicly because of their allegiance to military discipline and know that even if they get a religious exemption they will be ending their SEAL careers if they refuse the shot under the current military position.

“These Navy SEALs are men of faith in Jesus Christ,” he said. “They feel as though they are being pushed to a decision between their faith in Christ, their commitments to God’s Law, and their desire to love their neighbors and uphold the principle of the preservation of human life versus their careers as Navy SEALs.”

He said the SEALs he is ministering to “are the epitome of silent professionals and they do not desire to nor can they speak for themselves.”

*

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

Featured image: U.S. Navy SEALs conducted a number of exercises with the Bulgarian military in the Black Sea in 2018, a clear message to Russia that the U.S. was prepared to escalate asymmetrical warfare targeting the Crimean Peninsula. 

New Hampshire House Speaker Files Bill to Block Vaccine Mandate

September 22nd, 2021 by The Center Square

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

New Hampshire House Speaker Sherman Packard is working on legislation that would ban state or local enforcement of COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

Packard, a Londonderry Republican, said his office is working on a bill that is aimed at blunting the impact of President Joe Biden’s new federal vaccine requirements to “prevent federal overreach, protect our citizens and prevent worker shortages should this mandate take place.”

“The end goal is to find a workable solution to this latest development out of Washington that is evolving as we learn more about the mandate,” Packard said in a statement to House GOP members. “We have made it clear that government mandates are not the path to success for vaccination rates and will only cause further division in this country.”

Packard urged constituents to reach out to congressional lawmakers and ask them to “speak out against this tyrannical policy that would displace thousands of workers and devastate our economy.”

Packard’s proposal, which was filed with the Office of Legislative Services, would need to be considered in the next legislative session that gets underway in January.

Biden’s mandate will require employers with more than 100 workers to require them to be vaccinated or tested for COVID-19 weekly. The new rules will apply to federal workers and contractors who do business with the federal government. Companies face fines of up to $14,000 per violation, Biden administration officials said.

The plan will also require vaccinations for about 17 million health care workers at hospitals and other facilities that receive federal Medicare or Medicaid funding.

The White House estimates the mandates will affect as many as 100 million Americans who are still not vaccinated against the virus, including thousands of workers in New Hampshire.

New Hampshire is not one of the 26 states that have a “state plan” agreement quote with the federal government requiring them to enforce workplace health and safety regulations.

Republican Gov. Chris Sununu said he opposes Biden’s vaccine mandate and expects New Hampshire will eventually join legal challenges against the nationwide requirements.

The state’s Attorney General, John Formella, was one of 20 Republican attorneys general who wrote to Biden last week urging him to drop his vaccine requirement for employers, calling the plan “disastrous and counterproductive.”

New Hampshire, like most states, has seen an uptick in COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations, with active infections averaging about 400 per day, according to state health officials.

Only 54.3% of New Hampshire residents are fully vaccinated, according to the state Department of Health and Human Services. Nearly 60% have had at least one shot, the agency says.

*

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

Featured image is from WikiWand

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

 

Children’s Health Defense on Sept. 15 filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in support of a lawsuit challenging the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission’s interpretation of the state’s 2008 law mandating smart meters.

Eighty safe-technology and environmental organizations on Sept. 15 joined the amicus brief in the court case challenging the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission’s (PAPUC) interpretation of Pennsylvania’s Act 129, a 2008 law to mandate smart meters and deny disability accommodation to people adversely affected by pulsed radio frequency (RF) radiation emitted by wireless devices, including smart meters.

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) filed the amicus brief in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

An amicus brief is filed by non-parties to a litigation to provide information that has a bearing on the issues and assist the court in reaching the correct decision. It comes from the latin words amici curiae, which means “friend of the court.”

“Smart” wireless utility meters have been deployed in the U.S. for a decade, replacing the analog mechanical meters that for decades were used reliably and safely, and were read monthly by “meter readers.”

They were promoted as part of the 2008 stimulus program, as an investment in energy conservation.

Smart meters contain transmitting antennas that continuously communicate electric usage to the utility company in real time. They allow companies to “punish” users for using electricity during high demand periods and reward them for using it at less busy times.

Smart meters now leading cause of sickness, especially in children

A decade after they were introduced, there is little to no evidence smart meters saved any energy. Instead, ample evidence shows that consumers had to carry a rate hike to fund the ever-increasing costs of these meters.

False readings by the meters have resulted in much higher bills for consumers. The meters have caused fires and violated privacy rights by selling consumers’ usage data.

But by far the worst consequence of widespread use of smart meters is that they have become a leading cause of sickness in adults and children.

To support the claims of adverse effects from exposure to smart meters, the amicus brief filed by CHD included a statement by scientists with expert knowledge of the impact of electromagnetic fields (EMF) and RF on human health.

Cumulatively, these scientists have published hundreds of studies on RF/EMF effects and reviewed thousands of others. They explain how smart meters cause widespread sickness because of how they operate.

According to Erik Anderson, the expert engineer whose report was included with the amicus, smart meters contain transmitting antennas that wirelessly transmit the data to the utility companies. They pulse intense levels of RF radiation up to 190,000 times a day, some exceeding even Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) allowed levels.

The report explains how RF emissions from the antennas, and the spikes of RF frequencies created by the meter’s Switch Mode Power Supply’s alternating-current-to-direct-current conversion process enter the house’s electric wiring, transforming the entire house into an antenna.

Signers of the amicus brief argued these meters must not be forced on those who are affected from RF exposure, and these people should be provided instead with analog meters.

What’s at stake

The original case was filed in Pennsylvania by four consumers who are suffering adverse reactions from exposure to wireless radiation.

They asked to be accommodated and were refused by PECO, the local utility company, and later by the PAPUC.

The plaintiffs appealed to Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court, which had ruled in October 2010 that the law does not mandate smart meters. All parties appealed to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, which agreed to hear the appeals.

“The risk posed by this case to everyone is imminent,” said Dafna Tachover of We Are The Evidence. “The court’s decision will affect not only Pennsylvania residents, but will have far-reaching implications nationwide. If the position of consumers and safe-tech organizations is rejected, there is little doubt that industry will mandate smart meters across the country.”

In fact, the push by utility companies to mandate smart meters has been growing, as these meters are part of “Smart Grid” and the “Internet-of-Things” network.

‘Tremendous health improvements’ after smart meters removed

The nationwide rollout of smart meters is based on the assumption they are safe because they comply with the FCC guidelines.

However, the amicus brief refers to the recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in CHD’s case challenging the FCC’s 2019 decision that the commission’s 1996 guidelines adequately protect the public from non-cancer harms from 5G and wireless-based technologies.

On Aug. 13, the court ruled against the FCC, stating the commission’s decision was capricious, arbitrary and not evidence-based.

Signers of the amicus brief argue that as a result of Aug. 13 ruling, although the FCC guidelines are still in effect, they cannot be considered an assurance of safety, and therefore the meters cannot be regarded as safe.

CHD also revealed in the brief that the FCC admitted to adverse neurological responses from RF frequencies, including frequencies in the range emitted by the smart meter SMPS (2-50 KHz).

The symptoms referenced by the FCC are similar to the symptoms reported by people who claim to suffer adverse effects from the smart meters. Symptoms include tingling, a feeling of electric shocks, sleep and cognitive problems.

The amicus brief also includes a statement signed by 57 physicians who jointly treat more than 3,000 patients adversely affected by exposure to wireless devices and infrastructure.

Most of these patients suffer from electrosensitivity (also known as radiation/microwave sickness), a condition in which people develop various symptoms, mainly neurological, as a result of exposure to this radiation. The physicians explain the effects of smart meters on their patients.

The leading signer of the amicus brief (besides CHD) is the Building Biology Institute, which certifies experts in mitigating EMFs. The organization works with doctors and patients to remediate exposures in patients’ homes.

Building Biology Institute President Larry Gust explained that the organization’s experts have witnessed both the widespread sickness created by smart meters and the tremendous health improvements after these meters are removed.

Regarding the interpretation of Pennsylvania’s 2008 Act 129, CHD argued the PAPUC’s interpretation of the law is false, claiming the statute (which is an opt-in statute) cannot be read to contain a universal mandate, and that it clearly envisions customer consent.

The brief states “regardless of the legislature’s word choice,” the state cannot lawfully force a customer to accept a smart or digital meter when mandatory installation results in disability discrimination, exacerbates existing impairments or forces people to abandon their home. It also argues there must be effective accommodation.

CHD contends neither the PAPUC nor the utility company can or should second-guess a treating physician’s finding of impairment and the need for RF exposure avoidance, and that to do so is prohibited by disability laws.

The amicus brief states:

“The impaired cannot be required to endure interminable and expensive proceedings that require them to meet an irrelevant and almost impossible evidentiary burden when the accommodation itself costs less than $100.”

The amicus brief effort was led by attorneys Dafna Tachover, CHD Chairman and Chief Legal Counsel, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Scott McCollough and Pennsylvania local counsel, Andrea Shaw.

*

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

Featured image is from CHD

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 80 Groups, 57 Doctors, 19 Scientists Join CHD in Urging Pennsylvania to Reject ‘Smart Meters’ Mandate
  • Tags: ,
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Morrison’s Dangerous Fantasies Represent a Danger to Australia’s Future