All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Facebook has censored a report by the world’s most famous investigative journalist, Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh, on the destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines between Russia and Germany.
While discouraging its users from posting Hersh’s article, Facebook instead recommends a website that is funded and partially owned by the government of NATO member Norway.
The Nord Stream system consisted of two sets of two pipelines each (known as Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2) that delivered natural gas from Russia, through the Baltic Sea, to Germany.
Nord Stream AG, the Switzerland-based international consortium that built and oversees the pipelines, is owned by five European companies. Russia’s state gas giant Gazprom has 51% of the shares, but the other 49% belong to two German companies, a Dutch firm, and a French company.
In September 2022, the Nord Stream pipelines were sabotaged in a suspicious explosion, in what amounted to a terror attack on the energy infrastructure of Europe.
World-renowned investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported that the pipelines were blown up by the US government, in an operation overseen by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland.
If a Facebook user posts a link to this report by Hersh, a notice pops up that says:
“Before you share this content, you might want to know there’s additional reporting from Faktisk. Pages and websites that repeatedly publish or share false news will see their overall distribution reduced and be restricted in other ways”.
The page Facebook links to, Faktisk, is a fact-checking website from Norway, which is funded and partially owned by the government of that NATO member state.
Faktisk discloses that one of its owners and main funders is NRK: the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, a state-owned media outlet.
NRK states clearly on its website, “NRK is Norway’s biggest media house. The broadcaster is state-owned and the Parliament (Stortinget) has given the mandate and the ownership role to the Ministry of Culture”. It notes that “NRK is publicly financed (97%) by a individual tax everybody in Norway has to pay”.
The editor-in-chief of Faktisk, Kristoffer Egeberg, discloses in his biography on the website that he served in the Norwegian Armed Forces as a soldier and officer, participating in NATO and UN operations in Lebanon, Bosnia, and Kosovo.
What this means it that Facebook is censoring a report by the world’s most famous investigative journalist and instead promoting a website partially owned and funded by a NATO member state, Norway, which is edited by a former Norwegian military officer who participated in NATO operations.
Facebook censored a report by Pulitzer Prize winner Seymour Hersh on the Nord Stream pipeline attack, forcing users to instead read a website funded/owned by NATO member Norway
Press freedom: a casualty of the West's information war on Russia
Despite attacks on Hersh, US government and media fail to provide alternative explanation
The US government publicly denied Hersh’s report on the Nord Stream attacks, but Washington has always rejected the investigative journalist’s stories, which have consistently proven to be true.
Hersh won his Pulitzer Prize for exposing the 1968 My Lai massacre in Vietnam, in which the US military killed hundreds of civilians. The US government had denied this massacre, although it was later proven to have happened.
Similarly, Washington initially denied Hersh’s blockbuster 2004 report exposing the US military’s use of torture at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, which was similarly proven to be correct.
In response to Hersh’s report on the Nord Stream attacks, anonymous US government officials used the New York Times to undermine the reporter, instead blaming an unidentified “pro-Ukrainian group”, which they claimed was not linked to the Ukrainian government or any other NATO member state.
Washington and its allies in the corporate media have been desperate to smear Hersh, nitpicking over very minor details he may have mistakenly reported, but they have utterly failed to provide any tangible evidence or compelling alternative explanation of how the Nord Stream pipelines were destroyed.
It would be extremely difficult for a small ragtag “pro-Ukrainian group” to sabotage these pipelines. The attack clearly involved a lot of planning and resources, which suggests that a state was very likely involved.
A worker testing part of the Nord Stream pipelines
Western governments censor Russian (and Iranian) media outlets
Facebook is by no means the only US social media giant that has censored dissident voices over the war in Ukraine.
YouTube, which is owned by Google, blocked the channels of Russia’s state media outlet RT everywhere on the planet.
Furthermore, the European Union banned RT and Sputnik, another Russian state media outlet.
If someone in the EU tries to access the Twitter profiles of RT or Sputnik, a message appears stating, “Account Withheld”.
The US government even went so far as to seize the domain name of Iran’s state media outlet Press TV.
“The domain presstv.com has been seized by the United States Government”, reads a notice on the website, published jointly by the Departments of Justice and Commerce.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All images in this article are from GER unless otherwise stated
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
January 27th of this year marked fifty years since the draft was officially suspended in the United States. And while young American men are still forced to register with the Selective Service, we have been fortunate to go without a draft for half a century, despite Washington’s hyper-aggressive foreign policy.
That amount of time can make things feel distant. And even though the program is all set to fire right back up with a word from the president, there’s a sense that the draft is an issue from a different era.
But the war in Ukraine offers a window into what conscription looks like in today’s day and age. Both sides have resorted to forcing a part of the population to put their lives on the line to serve the interests of the regimes in Kyiv and Moscow. And the lack of condemnation, or even interest, from our fellow Americans should concern all advocates of self-ownership.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, both Ukraine and Russia continued to require male citizens to serve time in the military, though the term was gradually reduced from two years to one.
In 2013, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovychabolished conscription. Less than a year later, the new Western-backed Ukrainian government reinstated the draft and forced men to fight the people of eastern Ukraine who didn’t want to live under the new government in Kyiv.
After serving their time as active duty soldiers, Ukrainian conscripts remained in a reserve status, eligible to be recalled until the age of 55.
Within hours of the first Russian airstrikes that signaled the beginning of the February 2022 invasion, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky declared martial law, called up men in the reserves, conscripted new soldiers, and prohibited men between the ages of 18 and 60 from leaving the country.
Zelensky also authorized the “release” of convicts with combat experience to bolster Kyiv’s forces. At the same time, conscription appears to have been implemented as a new form of punishment. Men caught breaking curfew and getting into street fights have received conscription notices after being detained by police.
Russian conscription followed a similar trajectory to Ukraine’s after the fall of the USSR. The mandatory term of military service for Russian men was rolled back to one year in 2008. And as recently as 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin voiced support for abolishing conscription.
But, genuine or not, those sentiments disappeared as the region descended into war. Shortly after the February invasion, Russia held its spring draft and conscripted 134,500 people. 120,000 were conscripted last Fall. The Russian government has claimed conscripted soldiers are only being sent to replace volunteer soldiers in their posts, with the volunteer soldiers then sent to the front in Ukraine, but some have disputed this.
Today, over a year into the invasion, Ukraine is relying more on conscripts as their losses mount. Until recently, officials could only deliver draft notices to someone’s home address. Some found they could avoid the summons by staying away from their official addresses.
New rules allow officials to track down new conscripts wherever they may be. Men are being stopped in the street and questioned about their draft status. With few eligibility exceptions available and a brutal front line, the stricter rules have many Ukrainian men fearing for their safety. The conscripts have so far received worse equipment and inferior training than the volunteer forces before being sent into battle.
Russia has also had an issue tracking down new conscripts. The Kremlin’s approach has been to transition to a digital platform. All eligible men are required to register through an online government portal. Draft notices are sent out electronically and are considered “delivered” immediately, meaning the man is instantly on the clock for reporting to his local recruitment office.
In the enduring words of William Norman Grigg, “conscription indisputably rests on the assumption that each individual is the State’s property, to be sacrificed when those controlling the State deem it necessary for their protection.”
The draft may lie dormant in the U.S., but that assumption remains. The war in Ukraine serves as a reminder that conscription is not extinct. It remains a clear and present threat to liberty.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Most relationships undergo transition with the passage of time from appreciation of each other to a “state of having,” a desire to possess or even to control the other. But the present pivotal moment in the Russian-Indian relationship shows that an equal relationship does not fall into that trap.
External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar drew attention to this salience while addressing a Russian-Indian business forum last week in Delhi, when he called the relationship among the “steadiest” in global relations, and pointed out that the partnership is drawing so much attention today not because it has changed but because it has not.
The “liberal internationalist” camp in the Indian media and think tank circuit and ill-informed sections of opinion who launched an assault on the Indian stance on Ukraine crisis are lately grasping the raison d’être of the government’s handling of the fraught situation that carried risks of a potential confrontation between the West and Russia.
All signs are that Washington, from where Indian lobbyists usually draw encouragement, too has decided to reconcile itself to the Modi Government’s unambiguous message to the West that India will pursue a relationship with Russia in its self-interest and will go in whichever directions its interests lie.
Thus, a commentary by the Voice of America took note on Sunday against the backdrop of a 50-member Indian business delegation setting out for Russia in an initiative to deepen economic ties: “India and Russia are also in talks for a free trade deal… Moscow has become India’s largest supplier of crude oil… New Delhi has not joined U.S-led Western sanctions on Moscow or condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine outright but has been calling for a negotiated resolution of the conflict. It is also continuing to step up its economic engagement with Russia despite Western calls to gradually distance itself from Moscow.
“Even though New Delhi has strengthened strategic partnerships with the United States and other Western countries in the last two decades, it maintains close ties with Moscow… While Western countries want India to decrease its reliance on Russian imports to isolate Moscow over the Ukraine war, New Delhi has remained firm in maintaining its economic engagement with Russia.”
The above excerpts acknowledge that on its part, India is also signalling that this paradigm need not necessarily be construed as a zero-sum game and Washington is accepting, even if grudgingly, that it cannot bully India into submission. Arguably, President Biden’s invitation to Prime Minister Modi for a state visit to the White House in June and his subsequent decision to take part in the G20 Summit in New Delhi in September testify to the US’ creative response to the robustness of Indian diplomacy to sequester ties with Russia from predators.
The real challenge facing the Biden administration, though, is to take the US-Indian relationship out of the rut of a quintessentially transactional relationship and create a genuine partnership of mutual benefit, which, from the Indian perspective, fits into Modi’s road map to “transform India into a developed country” though the coming quarter century, as he put it in a public speech in Kochi on Monday.
To be sure, the Indian expectations are riding high on development and Delhi will not be content with a mere subaltern role in the US’ global strategy. The US and its allies see India as a “balancer” in the Indo-Pacific, but quite obviously, New Delhi has bigger plans.
The Russian proposal to make use of its vast export earnings out of oil sales to India by investing the funds in manufacturing industry in India for export to Russia; the deal on adopting the Russian financial messaging system for cross-border payments; the acceptance of Indian Ru-Pay cards and UPI in Russia and Russia’s MIR cards and Fast Payments System in India; the operationalisation of the Maritime Corridor connecting Vladivostok and Chennai — these testify to the keenness of both countries to put in place the necessary underpinnings for a massive expansion of the Russian-Indian trade and economic ties in the very near future.
Jaishankar’s speech at the business forum last week stressed the imperative need to boost India’s exports to Russia while his Russian counterpart in the inter-governmental joint economic commission Russian Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturev called for intensifying negotiations on a free trade agreement with India and working on an investment protection pact.
Bilateral trade has crossed $45 billion — something unthinkable until Russia turned its back on the West and began pressing the pedal on alternative partnerships in Asia to replace the European partners. On its part, the Modi government has been quick to seize the new opportunity, especially at a time of post-pandemic recovery and the inflation-ridden European and US economies sliding into recession.
This is a golden opportunity for India to gain special privileged access to the vast mineral resources of Siberia and the Russian Far East and the contemporary El Dorado of the Russian Arctic. There is great complementarity here insofar as India with its growth trajectory, presents itself as a long-term market for Russia’s resource-based industry across the board.
There are no contradictions really in the Russian-Indian relationship. Some Indian analysts keep parroting the US propaganda that Russia is becoming China’s “junior partner” and that is eroding the Russian-Indian mutual trust. This calumny stems out of either a flawed understanding or, more likely, a deliberate, contrived distortion that does not take into account the reality that Russia and China are “civilisation states,” each in its own right — and they are neighbours with a troubled history — which simply does not allow them to opt for a relationship in a hierarchical order that a formal alliance entails.
The heart of the matter is that Indian ingenuity lies in creating synergy out of the dynamic Russian-Indian-Chinese [RIC] triangle that could create an optimal external environment for its foreign policies to operate regionally and globally. The entrenched narrative on Sino-Indian relationship, which successive Indian governments have fostered, poses an impediment. That said, it is not a legacy of the Modi government.
Russia is well-placed to create verve in the RIC triangle as its bilateral ties expand and deepen with both China and India. Modi government pursues a “de-ideologised” foreign policy riveted on national interests. This is only to be expected as the world order changes, since India is looking to maximise its interests and embrace a larger strategic and security role for itself.
However, fundamentally, India remains a stakeholder in a democratised multipolar international order. Russia appreciates this nuance and has neverbeen prescriptive.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar (L) and Russian Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov at a Russian-Indian business forum organised jointly by the Ministry of External Affairs & Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce & Industry, New Delhi, April 17, 2023 (Source: Indian Punchline)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Thanks to Al Jazeera for bringing this important article to our attention.
Copyright Al Jazeera (April 2023)
***
UN officials have said that one side in the Sudan conflict has seized control of a national health lab in the capital of Khartoum that holds biological material, calling it an “extremely dangerous” development.
The announcement on Tuesday came as officials warned that more refugees could flee Sudan despite a ceasefire between rival forces.
The fighting has plunged Sudan into chaos, pushing the already heavily aid-dependent African nation to the brink of collapse. Before the clashes, the UN estimated that a third of Sudan’s population – or about 16 million people – needed assistance, a figure that is likely to increase.
Dr Nima Saeed Abid, the World Health Organization’s representative in Sudan, expressed concerns that “one of the fighting parties” – he did not identify which one – had seized control of the central public health laboratory in Khartoum and “kicked out all of the technicians”.
“That is extremely, extremely dangerous because we have polio isolates in the lab. We have measles isolates in the lab. We have cholera isolates in the lab,” he told a UN briefing in Geneva by video call from Port Sudan. “There is a huge biological risk associated with the occupation of the central public health lab in Khartoum by one of the fighting parties.”
The expulsion of technicians and power cuts in Khartoum mean that “it is not possible to properly manage the biological materials that are stored in the lab for medical purposes,” WHO said.
The lab is located in central Khartoum, close to flashpoints of the fighting that have pitted Sudan’s military against the Rapid Support Forces, a paramilitary group that grew out of the government-backed Popular Defence Forces – called “Janjaweed” by the rebels – implicated in atrocities in the Darfur conflict.
Dozens of hospitals have shuttered in Khartoum and elsewhere across the country due to the fighting and dwindling medical and fuel supplies, according to the Sudanese Doctors’ Syndicate.
“If the violence does not stop, there is a danger that the health system will collapse,” the UN agency warned Friday.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: A staff member works at National Public Health Laboratory in Khartoum, Sudan in this undated image posted to social media on December 31, 2020. [File: National Public Health Laboratory – Sudan/Handout via Reuters]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Recent statements by two Biden administration officials hint that the United States is finally noticing that the world around them is changing.
On April 11, CIA Director William Burns spoke at Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.In a somewhat stunning statement that has, perhaps, not been so clearly and publicly articulated before, Burns said that we are in one of “those times of transition that come along a couple of times a century. Today the United States still has a better hand to play than any of our rivals, but it is no longer the only big kid on the geopolitical bloc. And our position at the head of the table isn’t guaranteed.”
Burns’s classifying the transition that is now taking place as a “transition that come along a couple of times a century” echoes Chinese President Xi Jinping’s comment to Russian President Vladimir Putin last month that, “Together, we should push forward these changes that have not happened for 100 years” and recognizes the significance of the tectonic geopolitical shift that is occurring. The unipolar world is extinct and has been replaced by an evolving multipolar world in which the United States “is no longer the only big kid on the geopolitical bloc.” China’s diplomatic role in brokering an agreement between Saudi Arabia and Iran demonstrated America’s “position at the head of the table isn’t guaranteed.”
The ever strengthening partnership between Russia and China has tilted the weight of the world toward a multipolar one. In March, Xi visited Putin in Moscow where they not only “reaffirm[ed] the special nature of the Russia-China partnership,” but “signed a statement on deepening the strategic partnership and bilateral ties which are entering a new era.”
But the Sino-Russian relationship in the new multipolar world isn’t just bilateral. Countries are lining up to join Chinese and Russian-led multipolar organizations like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. From the call for multipolarity among the many African nations attending the Russia-Africa in a Multipolar World conference in Moscow in March, to Saudi Arabia’s assertionthat “We do not believe in polarization or selecting between one partner and another,” to India’s continued diplomatic and economic cooperation with Russia and China, to Brazil’s promise to uphold and strengthen multilateralism, to France’s surprising call for Europe to become a “third pole,” countries around the world are leaving the U.S.-led unipolar world for neutrality in a multipolar world.
One of the mechanisms for multipolarity is emancipation from the monopoly of the U.S. dollar. Most international trade is conducted in dollars, and most foreign exchange reserves are held in dollars. As the United States has recently demonstrated in Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and Russia, the position of the dollar allows it to be very powerfully and quickly weaponized.
Sanctions have not only accelerated the evolution of the multipolar world by creating a community of sanctioned countries that turn to each other, forming a second pole, but they have also weakened the U.S.-led unipolar world by weakening willingness to depend on the dollar.
In the second stunning statement by a U.S. official, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellensaid on April 16,
“There is a risk when we use financial sanctions that are linked to the role of the dollar that over time it could undermine the hegemony of the dollar.” She explained, “Of course, it does create a desire on the part of China, of Russia, of Iran to find an alternative.”
And find an alternative they have. Yellen’s statement suggests that the United States is beginning to recognize that escaping the monopoly of the U.S. dollar is gaining momentum as a mechanism for ending, not only the “hegemony of the dollar,” but of the United States itself.
Recent demonstrations of the American ability to cut off countries that challenge it has awoken opposition. Several countries and regions, including Russia, China, India, Iran, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, France, Latin America, BRICS, and the Eurasian Economic Union, have all expressed interest in and even made moves towards partially escaping the U.S. dollar.
Russia and China are now conducting 65% of their trade in their own currencies. China and Brazil are now conducting bilateral trade in their own currencies, as are China and Pakistan. Iran and Russia are now settling trade in rials and rubles instead of dollars and recently announced that they have circumvented the U.S. financial system by linking their banking systems as an alternative to SWIFT for trading with each other. Saudi Arabia has said that it sees “no issues” in trading oil in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. The Eurasian Economic Union has agreed on “a phased transition” from settling trade in “foreign currency” to “settlements in rubles.” Robert Rabil, Professor of political science at Florida Atlantic University, says that the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, and Israel have all made some movement away from the U.S. dollar.
Brazil has raised the idea of a Latin American currency. And Brazilian President Lula da Silva recently asked, “Why should every country have to be tied to the dollar for trade? Who decided the dollar would be the [world’s] currency?” “Why,” he suggested, “can’t a bank like the BRICS bank have a currency to finance trade between…BRICS countries?” BRICS and the SCO are both considering abandoning the dollar in favor of trade in the currencies of member states.
While American activity suggests a foreign policy that drives on, unaware of the new terrain its entered, the recent statements by Burns and Yellen suggest that at least some in the Biden administration are beginning to notice that the world is changing. U.S. hegemony, its “position at the head of the table,” is no longer “guaranteed.”
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Ted Snider is a regular columnist on U.S. foreign policy and history at Antiwar.com and The Libertarian Institute. He is also a frequent contributor to Responsible Statecraft and The American Conservative as well as other outlets.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Ignoring all Russian advises, the British government confirmed on April 26th that its depleted uranium weapons are already on Ukrainian soil. Moscow’s officials, anti-war activists and experts have repeatedly warned that such an escalation in the conflict should be avoided, but London has not observed the advice and has further violated a red line by sending radioactive weapons to the Kiev regime. It remains to be seen what the consequences of this dangerous measure will be.
The confirmation of the delivery of weapons was made by the Minister of Armed Forces of the United Kingdom, James Heappey, during a speech to the British Parliament. According to Heappey, depleted uranium ammunitions were sent to Ukraine along with other projectiles suitable for use in Challenger 2 tanks. The minister also added that British officials will not try to track where these weapons will be used.
“We have sent thousands of rounds of Challenger 2 ammunition to Ukraine, including depleted uranium armour-piercing rounds (…) [These weapons] re now under the control of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) (…) [UK’s Ministry of Defense] does not monitor the locations from where DU rounds are fired by the AFU in Ukraine”, the Minsiter said during the statement.
When asked by some parliamentarians about the health dangers posed by these weapons, Heappey claimed that this threat would be “low”. Interestingly, he even mentioned that the risk assessment is based on monitoring UK veterans who have already used them on the battlefield. In fact, the minister seems to completely ignore that a series of recent studies point to the opposite, showing serious health problems both in the soldiers who manipulated this equipment and in the victims of the ammunition. The problems include several risks commonly attributed to radioactive substances, such as cancer, fetal deformity, deficiency of fertility, among others.
Commenting on the case with journalists, Doug Weir, an expert linked to the Conflict and Environment Observatory, stated that when DU penetrators strike a target “they fragment and burn, generating chemically toxic and radioactive DU particulate that poses an inhalational risk to people”. Several other scientists have expressed similar views after analyzing the results of these munitions in Iraq and other countries where NATO troops have used them. However, London and Washington continue to deny evidence of these dangers.
It must be remembered that Moscow has repeatedly asked London to reconsider its plan to send these munitions to Kiev. In a recent statement, spokespersons for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia stated that the British measure would be an absolute “imprudence, irresponsibility”. Furthermore, in March, the Russian Ministry of Defense warned that the use of such projectiles could “cause irreparable harm” to the health of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians as well as inflict “tremendous economic damage to the agro-industrial complex” in the region, citing the weapon’s impact during the previous experience in Iraq.
However, despite the warnings, the shipment of these weapons was already expected. In March, US and British troops held a training program with Ukrainian soldiers to teach them how to properly handle depleted uranium munitions. The plan was very well prepared and echoes NATO’s interest in taking the proxy war with Russia to the most dangerous levels of military escalation, ignoring any humanitarian, environmental or social concerns.
Legally, depleted uranium weapons are a complex issue. There is no international convention banning them as there is no consensus among specialists on how to define these weapons. These munitions are really radioactive, which is why some experts believe they should be considered nuclear weapons under the legal principle of analogy. However, its radiation is lower than that of natural uranium, which leads other specialists to reject this classification.
Some other experts believe that a viable solution to the problem of these projectiles would be to consider them chemical weapons, since they contain toxic substances, regardless of the level of radioactivity. But this creates a problem for the western powers that have them, since the US and the UK are signatories to the Chemical Weapons Convention, which would oblige them to destroy their depleted uranium stocks. Not by chance, both countries reject any initiative in this sense and prefer that these weapons remain without specific legislation, so that they can continue using them with impunity.
Indeed, given the absence of specific regulation, Moscow could consider the use of depleted uranium against its troops as a true nuclear attack, which would allow the Russians to react with their arsenal of mass destruction. This is unlikely to happen, as Moscow has repeatedly shown its interest in seeking the most peaceful and humanitarian solutions possible to the conflict, sometimes even ignoring violations against red lines just to avoid escalation.
However, regardless of what the Russian response will be, it is certain that damage to Ukrainian soldiers and the civilian population in the combat zone are inevitable. And the responsibility for that lies with NATO.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Lucas Leiroz is a journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
British Armed Forces Minister James Heappeyhas confirmed that Ukraine received controversial depleted uranium from the UK for use with British-made Challenger 2 tanks.
MacAskill asked if the UK was keeping track of how many depleted uranium rounds Kyiv was using, but Heappey declined to say.
“For operational security reasons, we will not comment on Ukrainian usage rates for the rounds provided,” he said.
Heappey also said the depleted uranium rounds are now “under the control” of Ukraine’s armed forces and that the British Defense Ministry was not monitoring where the radioactive rounds were being used.
“The Ministry of Defence does not monitor the locations from where DU rounds are fired by the AFU in Ukraine,” he said.
Depleted uranium is typically created as a byproduct of producing enriched uranium and is extremely dense, making it an effective metal to pierce tank armor. Since the munitions are radioactive, they are linked to cancer and birth defects, especially in Iraq, where US forces used an enormous number of the controversial munitions during the Gulf War and the 2003 invasion.
Russia previously warned it would treat the use of depleted uranium in Ukraine the same as a dirty bomb. The UK ignored the Russian warning and first confirmed in March it was sending the munitions. In response, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced he would deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus.
The US could have also sent depleted uranium munitions to Ukraine as The Bradley Fighting Vehicles the US provided Kyiv can be equipped with the munitions. But the White House has refused to say if the Bradleys that have arrived in Ukraine came with depleted uranium ammunition.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dave DeCamp is the news editor of Antiwar.com, follow him on Twitter @decampdave.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
This was first published on GR in December 2021.
This brilliant documentary by Tim Gielen reveals how a small group of super rich criminals have been buying virtually everything on earth, until they own it all.
From media, health care, travel, food industry, governments… That allows them to control the whole world. Because of this they are trying to impose the New World Order.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Rumours and streaks of hysteria are running rife about what such artificial intelligence (AI) systems as ChatGPT are meant to do. Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy recently showed himself to be ignorant with terror about the search bot created by OpenAI. “ChatGPT taught itself to do advanced chemistry. It wasn’t built into the model. Nobody programmed it to learn complicated chemistry. It decided to teach itself, then made its knowledge available to anyone who asked. Something is coming. We aren’t ready.”
Melanie Mitchell, an academic who knows a thing or two about the field, was bemused and tweeted as much. “Senator, I’m an AI researcher. Your description of ChatGPT is dangerously misinformed. Every sentence is incorrect. I hope you will learn more about how this system actually works, how it was trained, and what its limitations are.”
Senator, I'm an AI researcher. Your description of ChatGPT is dangerously misinformed. Every sentence is incorrect. I hope you will learn more about how this system actually works, how it was trained, and what it's limitations are.
Murphy retorted indignantly that he had not meant what he said. “Of course I know that AI doesn’t ‘learn’ or ‘teach itself’ like a human. I’m using shorthand.” Those criticisms, he argued, had the intention of bullying “policymakers away from regulating new technology by ridiculing us when we don’t use the terms the industry uses.”
Like birds of a feather, Murphy’s intervention came along with the Future of Life Institute’s own contribution in the form of an open letter (the Letter). The document makes a number of assertions expected from an institute that has warned about the risks of supremely intelligent AI systems. Literally thousands digitally flocked to lend their names to it, including tech luminaries such as Elon Musk (a warning there), and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak. (Currently, the number of signatures lies at 27,567.)
The letter makes the plea that a six-month moratorium is necessary for humanity to take stock about the implications of AI. “Should we develop nonhuman minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart, obsolete and replace us? Should we risk loss of control of our civilization. Such decisions must not be delegated to unelected tech leaders.” Emphatically, it continues: “Powerful AI systems should be developed only once we are confident that their effects will be positive and their risks will be manageable.”
The Letter is unimpressive, clumsy, and clear in its effort to manufacture anxiety. While there is much to be said about having considered debates on the way AI is developing, one must ask where this plea is coming from. When billionaires demand a halt in technological practice, scepticism should start tickling the conscience. Suddenly, such voices demand transparency, accountability and openness, the very things they have shunned through their money-making endeavours. And who are the unelected tech leaders in any case?
As for the level of anxiety, the powerful and wealthy will always have bundles of it. If there is one commodity they truly want to share with the rest of us – call it anxiety as socialism – it’s their own fears writ large and disseminated as our fears. AI is that perfect conduit, a case of both promise and terror, therefore needing strict control. “The only things that can oppress US billionaires,” muses the Indian journalist and writer Manu Joseph, “are disease, insurrection, aliens and paranormal machines, the reason they tend to develop exaggeration [sic] notions of their dangers.”
For Mitchell, the authors and backers had embraced an all too gloomy predicament of humanity in the face of AI. “Humans,” she wrote earlier this month, “are continually at risk of over-anthropomorphizing over-trusting these systems, attributing agency to them when none is there.”
The useful premise for the unnerved fearmongers yields two corollaries: the attempt to try to halt the changing nature of such systems in the face of innovation; and the selling factor. “Public fear of AI is actually useful for the tech companies selling it, since the flip-side of the fear is the belief that these systems are truly powerful and big companies would be foolish not to adopt them.”
Moratoria in the field of technology tend to be doomed ventures. The human desire to invent even the most cataclysmically foolish of devices, is the stuff of Promethean legend. Consider, for instance, the debate on whether the US should develop a weapon even more destructive than the atomic bomb. The fear, then, was that the godless Soviets might acquire a superbomb, a muscular monster based on fusion, rather than fission.
In the seminal document received by US President Harry Truman on April 14, 1950, fears of such a discovery are rife. Written by Paul Nitze of the US State Department’s Policy Planning Office, it warned “that the probable fission bomb capability and the possible thermonuclear bomb capability of the Soviet Union have greatly intensified the Soviet threat to the security of the United States.” The result of such a fear became the hydrogen bomb.
The more level headed pragmatists in the field acknowledge, as do the listed authors of Stochastic Parrots (they include Mitchell) published on the website of the DAIR Institute, that there are “real and present dangers” associated with harms arising from AI, but this is qualified by the “acts of people and corporations deploying automated systems. Regulatory efforts should focus on transparency, accountability and preventing exploitative labor practices.”
Perhaps, suggests Mitchell, we should aim for something akin to a “Manhattan Project of intense research” that would cover “AI’s abilities, limitations, trustworthiness, and interpretability, where the investigation and results are open to anyone.” A far from insensible suggestion, bar the fact that the original Manhattan Project, dedicated to creating the first atomic bomb during the Second World War, was itself a competition to ensure that Nazi Germany did not get there first.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The long-term crisis in the relations between the Russian Federation and Ukraine entered its final – war phase on February 24th, 2022. The official reactions to the latest dramatic events in East Europe, which come from the Westerners, including the most important overseas Western political address, are usually dominated by two phrases: “flagrant violation of international public law” and “violation of the territorial integrity of an internationally recognized state“. The perpetrator of the acts is, of course, Russia, and, as it is claimed, the innocent victim is neighboring Ukraine. However, the same Westerners do not want to see either flagrant violations by the Kiev regime of human rights in the Donbass Region since 2014 onward or flagrant violations of international public law and territorial integrity of the internationally recognized state in the case of the Balkans (Yugoslavia) in the 1990s.
From the author
The ignorant attitude towards the provisions of international public law relevant to the Balkan case resulted, therefore, in the break-up of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the long wars in its two former federal units (Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina) that took about 150,000 lives, produced more than two million displaced people and left behind a region to this day, almost three decades later, it has not politically stabilized and consolidated.
The West demonstrated an identical attitude towards the branch of law that it is ardently calling for these days concerning Ukraine, several years after the end of those wars, when it decided to actively engage in “protecting the endangered human rights of Kosovo Albanians” and “stopping the humanitarian catastrophe to which they were exposed”, as the official Western narrative was, explaining 78 days of the barbaric campaign of bombing Serbia and Montenegro in the spring of 1999. As we know, it ended with the complete physical destruction of the country and the de facto exclusion of Kosovo from its constitutional and legal framework of the Republic of Serbia.
The self-proclaimed independence of Kosovo in February 2008 was, as well as the aggression against Serbia and Montenegro in 1999 contrary to all relevant customs of international public law. However, Western countries that today are leading in condemning similar Russian acts in Ukraine, were among the first to recognize the self-proclaimed independence of Kosovo.
From the author
The policy of “double standards” in international relations and global politics used by great powers is not unknown and unrecorded in history. However, after the Cold War 1.0 (1949−1989) up today, the absence of any Western standards in the practice of generally accepted and binding rules of the international “game”, however, is one of the focal dimensions of the international relations in the world politics. The well-known dictum that sums up that insight – “The strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they have to” – came from the pen of the famous ancient Greek historian and military leader from Athens – Thucydides (c. 460−c. 400 BC). Thus, almost two and a half millennia ago, the great historian taught that justice and rights, as its codified forms, exist in international relations and can only be among equals (inter pares). Major disagreements in this regard, which are the basis of what is happening today in Ukraine with potentially catastrophic consequences, occur when this “equal”, in this case, the great and powerful Russia, is not recognized as such and is not as such respected. Today, the Western policymakers made a crucial mistake with Russia as thinking this is the same state as it was in the 1990s during the wars of the Yugoslav succession. Unfortunately for them, today’s Russian Federation is not a Western puppet state from the Yeltzin’s period – it is today at least equal with the Western great powers including NATO as well. Those Western actors in global politics who would continue to overlook this “hard” fact concerning Russia and her role in the politics of the contemporary world, would lead the world to the dangerous edge of the abyss and push the world into it very quickly with their indolence and old policy of gangsterism in international relations.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović is a former university professor in Vilnius, Lithuania. He is a Research Fellow at the Center for Geostrategic Studies. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
In the summer of 2006, at the newly formed Journal of 9/11 Studies, we received a submission from a Canadian professor named Graeme MacQueen. The paper was entitled “118 Witnesses: The Firefighter’s Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers.” After peer-review comments were addressed, it was published and has become one of the most important articles in the 9/11 literature.
For the next seventeen years, Graeme went on to lead the 9/11 truth movement through his outstanding scholarship, his thoughtful approach, and his ability to instill trust in colleagues. Along with his remarkable intelligence and wide-ranging analytical skills, MacQueen’s dedication to peace and justice made him a force to be reckoned with. Although he became the leading expert on testimonies related to 9/11, including those from firefighters, first responders, and media sources, he contributed much more to the cause and his contributions will continue to light the way forward.
Our shared interests in 9/11 truth and Buddhism led us to become good friends. Graeme was an internationally recognized Buddhist scholar as I learned when reading random books on the subject at my local library. The text of a talk he gave at the University of Michigan in 1988, which he allowed me to publish on my blog years later, helped me to understand how he was different from other Buddhist leaders. He was the “unsmiling bodhisattva,” who did not act only with words—he put his whole life on the line for living beings.
In 2008, Graeme arrived in Bloomington, Indiana to give a presentation along with Canadian psychologist Laurie Manwell at the sold out Buskirk-Chumley Theater. His presentation, called “The Fictional Basis for the War on Terror,” was well-received and our discussions with Laurie in Bloomington initiated planning for a larger event to take place on the tenth anniversary of 9/11. That later event became the Toronto Hearings, which the three of us organized together with Adnan Zuberi and James Gourley.
A few years later Graeme became my co-editor at the Journal and served in that capacity for about five years. The deep respect people had for Graeme’s scholarship and his collaborative personality led to the submission of numerous excellent articles on various subjects. Due to his influence, we received submissions from esteemed philosopher John McMurtry, sociologist Edward Curtin, political scientist Peter Dale Scott, and attorney Stephen J. Looney, among others.
Graeme became recognized as a leading expert on 9/11 and, during this time, he published his highly influential book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy. The book establishes through careful analysis that the anthrax attacks were crimes committed by a group of people associated with the U.S. executive branch who were linked to, or identical with, those who committed the 9/11 crimes.
Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Graeme, from my perspective, is that he worked for peace and justice until his dying day. As with David Ray Griffin, who thought very highly of Graeme, he was diligent and very productive throughout the illness that took his life. He authored yet another book, this time in free, digital format that pulls together many of his most compelling writings. He completed interviews for an upcoming film that brings to light his tremendous contributions and undying commitment to peace. And he helped found a new organization that will lead research into the 9/11 crimes for many years to come.
Dr. Graeme MacQueen was a distinguished scholar and an exceptional human being long before I ever met him. Others who know more about his past will undoubtedly recount many remarkable aspects of his life. His founding of the Centre for Peace Studies at McMaster University is often cited as an accomplishment that represented his nature. I know that he authored or edited books on religion and non-violence and led peace initiatives in the war zones of Afghanistan, Croatia, Gaza, and Sri Lanka. He was also a dedicated husband and father and he often spoke of his wife and daughter.
Everyone who knew Graeme will miss him dearly. I’ll be forever grateful for his friendship and his leadership.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
BlackRock — there’s a good chance you have never heard of them. In less than 30 years, this American financial firm has grown from nothing to becoming the world’s largest and most trusted manager of other people’s money. The assets left in their care are worth a staggering 6.3 trillion US dollars – a figure with 12 zeroes.
Today, the United Nations Security Council is holding consultations on the future of Haiti. No Haitian individuals or organizations will be present at the meeting. Instead, Haiti will be represented by its occupying entities: The Core Group and the United Nations Integrated Office in Haiti (BINUH), the mandate of which is set to expire on July 23.
Following intense negotiations since April 22, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a powerful paramilitary organization, and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have agreed to a 72 hours ceasefire which started April 24 at midnight.
Even though the mRNA COVID jabs are the most dangerous medical products ever to hit the market, vaccine makers and U.S. health agencies are steamrolling ahead with a long list of mRNA-based shots, including combination shots to cover multiple viral infections at the same time.
A possible explanation is that Fox News, voluntarily or involuntarily, participated in an orchestration that established the precedent that reporting news different from the narrative, or news that is unfavorable to a person, company, or government institution, is defamation.
China played the pivotal role in building the bridge of peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Now, China is turning its efforts to negotiating an end to the war in Yemen, which has been a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
The rightward shift in domestic policy in France is reflective of the worsening economic conditions for workers within the European Union (EU) states. In many capitalist countries the living standards of the majority of people have declined precipitously in the last decade.
You might argue that physical money continues to be in great supply, so where is the danger of a global CBDC when society is awash with cash?Well, training a culture to use electronic money is requiring expanded time, even generations, for normalization to become established. However, cash can be made scarce — and then to dry up — relatively quickly.
Let me begin by saying everything is connected. And I don’t mean just banking collapses around the world, but COVID, energy shortages, food shortages, the Ukraine War, the economic suicide currently being committed by the European Union, also called wanton deindustrialization, the desperate attempt to introduce all controlling Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC), and also the ongoing, just started orchestrated international banking collapse.
London, the Euro-Atlantic capital of war and imperialism, has at least partly become one of the centres of the movement for peace, disarmament and a multipolar world based on respect for the right of nations to self-determination and their civilisational autonomy.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Today, the United Nations Security Council is holding consultations on the future of Haiti. No Haitian individuals or organizations will be present at the meeting. Instead, Haiti will be represented by its occupying entities: The Core Group and the United Nations Integrated Office in Haiti (BINUH), the mandate of which is set to expire on July 23.
The Haiti/Americas Team of the Black Alliance for Peace (BAP) and BAP member organization in Haiti, MOLEGHAF (Mouvement National pour la Liberté et L’égalité des Haïtiens pour la Fraternité or National Movement for Liberty and Equality of Haitians for Fraternity), denounce the Core Group’s and BINUH’s continued occupation of Haiti as well as their ongoing actions to undermine Haiti’s democracy and sovereignty.
Over the past year, we have witnessed massive popular protests that have been part of a broader struggle for a Haiti free from suffocating foreign interference. That includes manufactured “gang violence” and the illegitimate government installed by the United States and the Core Group. Yet, those speaking on behalf of Haiti refuse to recognize the core demands of the people for democracy, sovereignty and a just life.
BINUH and the Core Group do not represent Haitian people. Haitian people consider these entities occupation forces. BAP and MOLEGHAF have consistently demanded the Core Group and the so-called “International Community” acknowledge and atone for their role in the continuing deterioration of the situation in Haiti today.
As we have continually stated, the “crisis” in Haiti is a crisis of imperialism, a crisis initiated in 2004 by the United States, France and Canada, and consecrated by the United Nations. No decision about Haiti should be made by those who not only do not represent the people, but have also consistently harmed them.
Once again, we demand the disbanding of the Core Group, the removal of the BINUH office from Haiti, respect for the sovereign rights of the Haitian people, and NO MORE FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN HAITI!
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Comments Off on No More Foreign Interference in Haiti. The United Nations Integrated Office in Haiti (BINUH) and the Core Group Do Not Represent Haitian People!
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Following intense negotiations since April 22, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a powerful paramilitary organization, and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have agreed to a 72 hours ceasefire which started April 24 at midnight.
Washington has announced it will assist in the creation of a committee to oversee talks. It remains to be seen whether the deal will be implemented, though. At least two other ceasefires were announced since the violence started on April 15 and none of them have been held. About 400 people have already died. Israel has also offered to host the warring parties for talks. In February, Sudan joined a number of other states which have normalized their ties with the Jewish state – this being a divisive issue in the region. United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres has warned that the violence in the Sahel country risks “engulfing” the whole region and beyond.
The UN has been implementing evacuation measures in Sudan and the German military this week flew over 300 people out of the country, mostly German citizens. Several other states, such as the US, China, Sweden and so on are carrying out similar operations.
Violent conflict between rival military factions fighting for the control of the country erupted in the capital city Khartoum this month. Forces loyal to army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan are facing those of the RSF, led by Mohamed Hamdan Daglo, who is al-Burhan’s former deputy. RSF personnel come mostly from the Janjaweed, that is, the militia groups which former leader Omar al-Bashir sent to the Darfur region, where these militiamen took part in the massacre of Darfuri ethnic groups. Their plight is known as the first genocide of the 21st century.
Going back in time, Omar al-Bashir was the head of state of Sudan from 1989 until 2019, when he was deposed in a military coup d’état which has never brought back civil rule. He was accused of directing the aforementioned vicious campaign of mass killings in Darfur. Before the overthrow of al-Bashir, then US President Barack Obama, in one of his last acts in office, lifted a number of sanctions against the regime, supposedly due to progress in human rights issues. One of the key reasons for that policy shift was actually the CIA’s office in Khartoum, due to the regime’s cooperation with the Americans in fighting jihadist groups which were a problem to Washington. In September 2017 the US had already removed Sudan from a travel ban.
In the final years of al-Bashir, European leaders also saw him as a key ally in European struggles to restrict the number of Africans crossing the Mediterranean towards Europe. The “Khartoum Process” was part of such endeavors, as well as the 2015 Valletta Summit on Migration. European authorities described it thusly: “the number of migrants arriving to the European Union is unprecedented, and this increased flow is likely to continue. The EU, together with the member states, is taking a wide range of measures to address the challenges (…) The Valletta Summit on Migration is part of this effort, bringing the EU and African countries together to work in a spirit of partnership and find common solutions.”
In that context, the Regional Operational Centre (ROCK) was established in Khartoum, aiming at halting refugee flows and human smuggling. It marked an advancement in European-Sudanese cooperation, including the latter’s feared secret police.
The RSF forces currently involved in the ongoing conflict are a legacy from the late al-Bashir years, when, before the coup, he enjoyed some international support even while the disgraceful Darfour situation went on and on.
Even after having lost much of its territory in 2011, to the new Republic of Southern Sudan, the Republic of Sudan is still the third largest African country, and due to its strategic location, plays an important role for stability in the whole Sahel and Horn of Africa. To its north, it is connected to neighboring Egypt, by border as well as by the Nile River, whose two tributaries merge at Khartoum. To its northeast, Sudan is at the Red Sea, thus linking the North African region to Europe. This is why many international actors have their eyes on the country.
Since the November 2021 coup, which appears to have been backed by the UAE, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, a military council of generals had been running the nation. The African Union back then suspended the country’s participation in all of its activities until civil-led authority was restored – which has never taken place. The World Bank in turn freezed the nation’s aid.
Tensions between Sudan and Ethiopia over water and the disputed land of al-Fashqa have also been high for over a year. The GERD project (the Great Renaissance Dam of Ethiopia) threatens agriculture in both Egypt and Sudan, according to authorities in these two countries – that makes both Ethiopia and Egypt interested parties in Sudan, although on opposing sides.
Morocco and Algeria are also hot issues in the region. Former US President Donald Trump’s recognition of Morocco’s claim over the Western Sahara region, which is in turn controlled by the Algerian-backed Polisario Front, was a kind of “quid pro quo” after the Moroccan authorities normalized the country’s relations with American ally Israel. This US diplomatic decision however significantly increased tensions in the region, with potential bad outcomes for Europe, also, who has had its eyes in Morocco for energy and migration management reasons.
North Africa has been a ticking bomb for a while, engulfed, as it is, in a number of proxy conflicts. The current crisis in Sudan, which has the potential to greatly impact the continent and beyond, also reflects the failures of Western foreign policies.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Uriel Araujo is a researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Even though the mRNA COVID jabs are the most dangerous medical products ever to hit the market, vaccine makers and U.S. health agencies are steamrolling right ahead with a long list of mRNA-based shots, including combination shots to cover multiple viral infections
If the COVID shots are the most dangerous injections we’ve ever seen, what makes them think mRNA shots for cancer, heart disease, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), HIV or any other condition will be any safer?
Moderna is planning to offer a personalized cancer shot by the end of 2028. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has already designated it as a “breakthrough therapy,” which means the regulatory review will be expedited. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is also fast-tracking it under the European “priority medicines” (PRIME) scheme
mRNA-based influenza shots are also in the works. Pfizer and Moderna both launched mRNA flu jab trials in the fall of 2022
Moderna is also developing mRNA shots for shingles and genital herpes based on the same platform used for its COVID jab — a technology that doesn’t stop infection and can depress your immune function such that you become more prone to infections and chronic diseases of all kinds
*
Even though the mRNA COVID jabs are the most dangerous medical products ever to hit the market, vaccine makers and U.S. health agencies are steamrolling ahead with a long list of mRNA-based shots, including combination shots to cover multiple viral infections at the same time.
If the COVID shots are the most dangerous injections we’ve ever seen, what makes them think mRNA shots for cancer, heart disease, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), HIV or any other condition will be any safer?
It’s a science experiment gone completely off the rails. No one is safeguarding public health anymore. You could say our health agencies have sold out the public to the drug industry, allowing them to conduct wild population-wide genetic experimentation aimed at furthering the transhumanist agenda at breakneck speed.
Personalized Cancer Shot Is Being Fast-Tracked
As reported by The Guardian in early April 2023,1 Moderna, for example, is planning to offer a personalized cancer shot by the end of 2028. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has already designated it as a “breakthrough therapy,” which means the regulatory review will be expedited.
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is also fast-tracking it under the European “priority medicines” (PRIME) scheme.2 Here’s how Moderna’s personalized cancer gene therapy is said to work:3
A biopsy of your cancerous tumor is collected
Mutations in the genetic sequence of the tumor are identified
A machine learning algorithm determines which of the identified mutations might be driving the cancer’s growth. Abnormal proteins produced by those mutations are also identified
A synthetic mRNA molecule is created, containing instructions for your cells to make an antigen that your immune system will respond to
Once injected, the mRNA is translated into proteins that are, supposedly, “identical” to those found in your tumor. When immune cells encounter cancer cells that carry these proteins, they destroy them
It sounds good in theory, but as we’ve seen with the COVID shots, any number of things can go wrong once your cells are turned into toxic protein factories. Contrary to transhumanist belief, your body is not a “hardware platform” and your immune system is not like a piece of software that can simply be “updated” with a new set of genetic instructions.
Not even close. It’s more like a spider’s web of interconnected systems and pathways. Pull on one string and the whole network responds with cascades of activity, much of which we still do not understand. It’s beyond foolish to think you can just insert a new genetic instruction on one of the strings and not disturb or impact the rest of the web.
mRNA Flu Jabs Coming Soon
mRNA-based influenza shots are also in the works. Pfizer and Moderna both launched mRNA flu jab trials in the fall of 2022.4 We now know the COVID shot doesn’t protect you against SARS-CoV-2 infection or transmission, so will the flu shot be any different? Are they tweaking it somehow to block infection? Or will it be a repeat of COVID — all risk and no benefit?
In my view, there’s cause for additional concern when it comes to mRNA flu shots, because they’ve already admitted that the viral strains targeted can and will be updated on the fly in the middle of the flu season, should it turn out that the flu strains selected in February are a mismatch to the circulating strains that following winter.5
The industry wants you to believe that changing the antigen has no bearing on the potential side effects, but they have no evidence to support that assertion. Whenever you change the antigen, you run the risk of new side effects, because not all antigens affect your immune system the same way.
For example, the reason why no coronavirus vaccine was ever brought to market despite 20 years of research and experimentation was because they kept causing worse infection. Many vaccines against other viruses don’t have this effect.
And, even though the mRNA platform is completely different from conventional vaccine manufacturing that uses live or attenuated coronaviruses, the effect on the immune system is still clearly an adverse one. So, changing the method didn’t eliminate the problem.
Since the mRNA platform allows for endless customization without additional safety testing to make sure the antigen chosen won’t cause unsuspected problems, it poses a unique threat to public health. Millions will likely be injected before a problem is identified.
Gene Therapies Don’t Work Like Vaccines Do
It’s important to remember that mRNA-based “vaccines” aren’t vaccines. They’re gene therapies. The only reason drug companies and health agencies now insist on calling them vaccines is because they changed the definition of the word so that a vaccine no longer has to protect you from the infection in question. All it must do is stimulate your body’s immune response against the disease.
But if a vaccine doesn’t prevent you from infection, what is the point of it? Natural infection also stimulates your immune response, but you develop immunity. So, all the shot is doing is stimulating — and possibly overstimulating and contributing to autoimmune diseases — your immune system without providing immunity.
mRNA Dosing Conundrum Has yet to be Solved
Originally, modified mRNA was thought to hold the key to a new source of embryonic stem cells that researchers planned to use to treat anything from Parkinson’s disease to spinal cord injuries. Using modified synthetic mRNA, they hoped to sidestep the controversy of using stem cells from aborted fetuses.
The promise hinged on safe dosing, but in animal studies scientists ran into a now-familiar problem with the mRNA doses. The therapy triggered dangerous immune reactions, yet the lower doses were too weak to show benefit.
There’s no compelling evidence that this dosing problem was ever solved. In fact, it appears sloppy COVID jab manufacturing has resulted in varying strengths of the shots, with some batches being associated with vastly higher rates of injury and death, as detailed on HowBadIsMyBatch.com.6
Also, let’s not forget that the COVID shots appear to be massively accelerating cancer development, as “turbo-charged cancers” are now becoming more common. So, what can we expect from an improperly dosed mRNA cancer jab?
Will mRNA Shots for Herpes and Shingles Prevent Infection?
Moderna is also developing mRNA shots for shingles and genital herpes7 based on the same platform used for its COVID jab — a technology that doesn’t stop infection and can depress your immune function such that you become more prone to infections and chronic diseases of all kinds.
The mRNA COVID shots are also suspected of causing autoimmune conditions by way of molecular mimicry.8 This occurs when similarities between different antigens confuse your immune system.
So, will mRNA shots against herpes and shingles prevent infection? Or will they increase your risk, just like the COVID shots have done? We’ll have to wait and see, but I wouldn’t recommend lining up to test them.
mRNA Integrity Is Another Technical Difficulty
Another technical difficulty that is unlikely to have been solved is the mRNA integrity. As detailed in “Data Leaks Reveal Disturbing Facts About mRNA Instability,” hacked Pfizer COVID jab data show European regulators had significant concerns over the lack of intact mRNA in the commercial batches sampled.
Compared to the clinical batches, i.e., the shots used in the clinical trial, 55% to 78% of the commercial shots had “a significant difference in % RNA integrity/truncated species.”
This is important because intact mRNA is essential for efficacy. According to Daan Crommelin, a professor of biopharmaceutics, “Even a minor degradation reaction, anywhere along a mRNA strand, can severely slow or stop proper translation performance of that strand and thus result in the incomplete expression of the target antigen.”
For an effective product, mRNA integrity needs to be 100%. Considering how ineffective the jabs are, it seems fair to question whether lack of mRNA integrity might be to blame. We also do not know whether fragmented mRNA might be harmful, and to what degree.
While public health agencies claim fragmented RNA poses no health risk, just how do they know that? The leaked documents revealed they did not have an answer to that question. There’s also no evidence that manufacturing processes have been perfected to prevent the fragmentation of mRNA. Like so many other things, the ins and outs of the manufacturing process of mRNA injections are not disclosed or discussed.
The Transhumanist Race Toward Human 2.0
It’s hard to assess the recklessness with which drug companies and health agencies approach mRNA therapy as anything other than an attempt to fulfill a transhumanist dream in the quickest way possible. To perfect the genetic manipulation of human beings would under normal circumstances take many decades, perhaps close to a century, or more.
It would seem the globalist cabal driving the transhumanist agenda decided instead to launch population-wide experimentation to speed up the process. Large-scale studies are always required when you want to prove safety and effectiveness, and the global population has basically been turned into guinea pigs. They don’t care how many are injured or killed in the process. They’ve proven this much by ignoring the mounting death toll.
To the cabal, it’s probably a numbers game. Inject billions of people with gene therapies of various kinds in varying dosages, see what happens and tweak from there. Ultimately, the general population are not the intended beneficiaries of this large-scale experimentation. The globalists are. The guinea pigs are expendable.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
As the EV revolution picks up speed, electric car advocates like to emphasize that electric cars do not leave carbon dioxide emissions in their wake. Nor do they spew nitrogen oxide pollution or fine particulate matter from exhaust pipes. (Note: All tires shed some particulates as they wear and EVs, being somewhat heavier than equivalent conventional cars, may leave more tire bits behind, but the particulates most damaging to human health are the ones created when fossil fuels are burned. By definition, electric cars add none of those to the air we breathe.)
Yet as much as we welcome the EV revolution, we cannot ignore that manufacturing and the supply chains that make it possible all have environmental impacts that degrade the world we live in. In particular, mining — which gives us the raw materials we need to make aluminum, iron, copper, platinum, nickel, and manganese, among others — often involves excavating huge quantities of mineral deposits that are then processed to make the end products used in manufacturing.
Nickel & Hexavalent Chromium
We are all familiar with the reports of child labor abuse associated with mining cobalt in the DCR. Those reports are so serious that there is a major push to reduce or eliminate the use of cobalt in lithium-ion batteries. But one way to reduce the amount of cobalt is to increase the amount of nickel. Most EV drivers have no idea where the nickel in their batteries comes from. According to The Guardian, one principal source is tiny Obi Island, one of the 17,508 islands in Indonesia.
Getting there is not easy. It requires a 3 1/2 hour flight from Jakarta, followed by an overnight ferry trip, and finally a 2-hour journey by boat to arrive at Kawasi, a village of 4,000 people near one of the largest nickel mines in Indonesia. The $1 billion site where the mine is located is owned by the Indonesia-based Harita Group and China’s Lygend Mining. Chinese battery component producer GEM, which supplies battery components to many of the world’s leading battery manufacturers, has signed an agreement to purchase nickel from the company, PT Halmahera Persada Lygend.
But people in Kawasi say they are afraid because of the pollution created by the mine. The Guardian reports there were 900 reported cases of acute respiratory infections in 2020 — half of them in children age 4 and younger. According to Indonesian health officials, the incidence of such infections in Kawasi was just under 20% in 2020, compared with a national average of 9%.
“The difference [since the mining started] is enormous. The beach was still clean, the sea was not muddy like this and not red yet. People still fished in front of their houses,” says a nurse who has lived in the village since 2009, before the mine started operating. “The trend of [higher] ARI cases began at the same time as [mining] exploration also began.” A woman who lives in the village says, “I keep thinking: is there any future for the children?”
The Guardian took water samples from the source of drinking water for the village and had it tested at a government certified laboratory. The results showed the level of hexavalent chromium — Cr6 — was 60 parts per billion. The Indonesian government has set the maximum allowable at 50 ppb. Cr6 can cause liver damage, reproductive problems and developmental harm when ingested or inhaled. Long-term exposure through drinking water has also been linked to stomach cancer. It is the same carcinogen that figured prominently in the Erin Brockovich lawsuit against PG&E that resulted in one of the largest legal settlements in US history in 1996.
The Company Responds
Not surprisingly, the mining company says its own tests show an acceptable level of Cr6 in the local drinking water. It claims the carcinogen is common in tropical areas and its operations have not contributed to its presence. It says it tested the spring water near Kawasi from 2013 to 2021. Those tests showed that it met the water quality standards set by the government, with Cr6 registering in the range of 5 to 40 ppb. It said its tests had showed there was no Cr6 discharge from its system or impact on the water quality of the Kawasi springs.
Halmahera Persada Lygend said that the positive and negative impacts of its projects had been assessed in an environmental impact analysis, which has been reviewed and approved by the government. It also said provincial and district environmental offices regularly conducted site inspections to review company operations and take samples for analysis if needed.
Booming nickel prices and a “battery arms race” have seen a rush to develop mines but there are fears that regulatory oversight has failed to keep up with the pace of development. “They [the Indonesian government] are trying to remove red tape to make the industry more attractive for investment, but without proper environmental assessments, it could be risky given the way the industry is heading,” says Indonesian nickel mining expert Steven Brown.
Matthew Baird, an environmental lawyer based in southeast Asia, tells The Guardian that holding mining companies and the supply chain accountable for pollution is difficult, especially when there could be multiple sources for the contamination. “These big mining operations are very much in areas that are very inaccessible and where they are operating as a de facto local government ‘company town’,” he says. “Mining companies may blame other problems and that all may be correct, but because they are there, there is a likelihood they are contributing to the problem.”
Many readers will recall how fracking companies like to point fingers in several different directions to deflect blame from themselves for earthquakes, polluted groundwater, and exploding tap water. It’s the same playbook invented by the tobacco industry. “You can’t prove which puff of smoke or which particular cigarette caused your lung cancer, so you can’t hold us responsible.” If no one is accountable, then anything goes. For those who may be swayed by such denials, take a moment to look at the photos of the rusty red river that flows near the mining operations featured in The Guardian article and ask yourself if you would drink it or allow your children to swim in it.
The EV Revolution
Manufacturers invest a lot of time and effort making sure the companies that are part of their supply chain adhere to their environmental standards. When contacted by The Guardian, Mercedes-Benz said it took the allegations seriously and was immediately contacting its direct supplier to clarify the issues raised, even though it does not buy nickel directly.
Manufacturing is a dirty business. Factories require land to be cleared, iron, steel, and concrete to be assembled, electrical power to make all the machinery function, and often thousands of miles of transportation emission to get raw materials to the factory and finished products on to consumers.
The message for the EV Revolution is this — if we seek to hold ourselves to a higher standard, we must hold all those involved to a higher standard as well. We often talk about untaxed externalities that allow fossil fuel companies to thrive. We must ensure we do not turn a blind eye to similar untaxed externalities when they occur in EV manufacturing.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Steve Hanley writes about the interface between technology and sustainability from his home in Florida or anywhere else The Force may lead him. He is proud to be “woke” and doesn’t really give a damn why the glass broke. He believes passionately in what Socrates said 3000 years ago: “The secret to change is to focus all of your energy not on fighting the old but on building the new.”
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
BlackRock — there’s a good chance you have never heard of them.
In less than 30 years, this American financial firm has grown from nothing to becoming the world’s largest and most trusted manager of other people’s money.
The assets left in their care are worth a staggering 6.3 trillion US dollars – a figure with 12 zeroes.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Something fishy here.
First, corporate executives don’t give away $787 million of shareholders’ money without a test of the claim in court.
Second, it is not defamation to report the news. Tucker Carlson reported the claims of experts.That is news reporting.Dominion’s defamation lawsuit should have been filed against the experts.It wasn’t, because the experts had the evidence.
Third, Experts supplied evidence that the Dominion voting machines could be programmed to count votes differently from how the votes were cast; experts supplied evidence that the machines could be hacked; experts supplied evidence that the voting machines were connected to the Internet.Fox News could have called these experts as expert witnesses. By agreeing to settle, Fox News refused the evidence its day in court.Why?
A possible explanation is that Fox News, voluntarily or involuntarily, participated in an orchestration that established the precedent that reporting news different from the narrative, or news that is unfavorable to a person, company, or government institution, is defamation.Think about what this means.A prosecutor who charges a person with a crime has defamed the person.Truth becomes unreportable. Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh could be charged for defamation, and for being a Russian agent, for reporting that the US government destroyed the Nord Stream pipeline.
When we see the few truth-tellers who are the stars of their organizations jettisoned–Tucker Carlson from Fox News, Matt Taibbi from Rolling Stone, Glenn Greenwald from The Intercept, James O’Keefe from Project Veritas, President Trump charged under a non-existent law, and Wikileaks’ Julian Assange imprisoned for a decade without due process, we must face the fact that there is an organized conspiracy to suppress truth.We are experiencing the completion of The Matrix in which expressed doubt or even unspoken suspicion of official narratives are criminal offenses.
Truth-tellers receive almost nonexistent support. The inescapable conclusion is that in the Western world truth has no future.
Tyranny is upon us.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned author and academic, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy where this article was originally published. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Transcript
A new indictment from the Biden Justice Department is one of the most disturbing and extremist yet in the ongoing attempt by the U.S. government – under the guise of a domestic War on Terror – to criminalize any real dissidence and any real dissent.
In one sense, these charges are just yet another manifestation of the dreariest and most cliched Russiagate paranoia, seeing Russians under every bed. But if you look under the hood of these charges just a bit, as we’ll do along with you tonight, you’ll see that the framework being constructed is dangerous and extreme, nothing less than a tactic for empowering the federal government to transform its harshest critics into felons.
At its core, the indictment targets numerous American citizens, five of whom are part of radical black leftist groups. As such, they have very harsh words for Joe Biden and his administration, harbor contempt for U.S. foreign policy in the U.S. Security State, including the FBI, and are very vocal opponents of U.S. proxy war in Ukraine, even going so far as to argue that the provocations of the U.S. and NATO in Ukraine render the Russian invasion justifiable as a legal and ethical means for combating Western control over their border and violent anti-Russian extremism in the provinces in Eastern Ukraine. You may not agree with those views, but it’s certainly not a crime in any way to express them.
Yet those charged today, in addition to those views, often denounce many of the same police brutality cases on which more mainstream liberal and Black Lives Matter activists, such as Michael Brown and George Floyd, but from a radical black lens.
So how does an American citizen, or five of them, end up criminally charged by the Justice Department for expressing these views?
Because prosecutors, in this case, can’t claim that they were acting on behalf of the Russian government by disseminating messaging designed to, “sow discord” among Americans, all because they received trivial amounts of funding that the DOJ claims emanated from the Russian government.
None of that is a crime either. You’re allowed to receive funding from other governments the way dissidents in those countries often receive funding from the United States government. So, the indictment really amounts to a claim that these Americans failed to file the proper paperwork notifying the government that they were agents of a foreign power, which means they now face ten years in prison for that offense and another five years in prison for allegedly inducing others to do the same without their knowledge.
So why is this indictment so threatening? Because, as we will show you, the charges are so plainly motivated by the political dissent of these American citizens and not by concern that they failed to file the right forms, and much less so by the belief that these are somehow real Kremlin agents who are doing anything other than expressing the views they have long held.
Quite tellingly, the U.S. government and the media and think tank elite to serve it have frequently denounced every enemy state, starting with Russia, China and Iran, for doing exactly what the Biden administration’s Justice Department is doing in this case, namely using the laws that require, “foreign agents” to register to turn dissidents into criminals.
We’ll go through the indictments and the implications of this case and then speak with Nick Cruse of the Revolutionary Blackout Network, who has been a frequent guest on System Update, about these groups that have been indicted or the individuals who have been indicted and why this indictment is so menacing to the right to dissent.
As a reminder, System Update is available in podcast version. We post the shows 12 hours after they first appear, live, here on Rumble, they are on Spotify, Apple and every other major podcasting platform.
For now, welcome to a new episode of System Update starting right now.
One of the issues on which I focused journalistically most in the first year of the Biden administration is the fact that a top priority for Joe Biden and his leading foreign policy and domestic advisers was to create a new War on Terror in the United States. Only this one, unlike the first one, would have as its primary focus, not foreign enemies, and al-Qaida or ISIS but, instead, domestic enemies right here at home. And in fact, this priority of the Biden administration was announced well before January 6. He emphasized it during the campaign and then, when he was declared the winner of the election, in the transition, before January 6 ever happened, The riot on January 6 obviously gave the Biden administration the pretext it needed to implement what has been a real new War on Terror. Only this time, the enemies are American citizens. And they’ve done that in multiple ways.
I spent the first year of my reporting in the Biden administration probably focused on that issue more than any other. The official position of the U.S. Security State and of the Biden administration is that the greatest threat to American national security comes not from foreign terrorist groups like al-Qaida or ISIS, or from foreign adversaries like China or Iran, or Russia, but from violent domestic extremists here at home. The definition of what an extremist is is incredibly broad – it basically includes anybody who in any way is a real critic of establishment pieties.
If you’re somebody who supports the establishment wings of the Republican Party or the Democratic Party, if you’re somebody who stays within what President Obama once called “playing within the 40-yard lines,” meaning the establishment wings of all parties, about which President Obama rightly observed have far more in common with one another than differences with one another, then you have nothing to worry about. You’re not considered a dissident.
If you want to support Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney or Nikki Haley or Joe Biden or Hillary Clinton or people of that nature, you’re well within the guidelines set by the government and by their supporters of where people can safely reside without being regarded as an enemy. They don’t mind at all the power switches back and forth between those two wings because they know that the fundamental precepts will remain the same. What they really fear, especially now, is actual dissidents. And, as I said, this idea was in place long before January 6. January 6 became the pretext, just like neocons used the attack on September 11 to justify a war in Iraq, a regime-change war in Iraq, that if you go back and look before 9/11, they were long advocating war and craving. They used the 9/11 attacks as a tool for ushering in what they long had planned. That is the same with this new domestic War on Terror that the Biden administration has been craving for a long time and has successfully implemented.
This indictment today is an extension of it. It cannot be understood simply by looking at it in isolation. The context is critical.
Just to take a look at that history, we have an article from The Wall Street Journal, the headline is “Biden Administration Urged to Take Fresh Look at Domestic Terrorism.” This is an article from The Wall Street Journal on November 13, 2020. So just a few days after the 2020 election, obviously two months or so before the riot on January 6. The Wall Street Journal reported about the Biden administration, what they were thinking two months before January 6:
The first-ever White House post and more funding to combat violent extremists floated by a working group that advised [president-elect team]. President-elect Joe Biden, who has said he plans to make a priority of passing a law against domestic terrorism, has also been urged to create a White House post overseeing the fight against ideologically inspired violent extremists, increasing funding to combat them, according to people who have advised his team.
A proposal for the Biden presidency’s first 100 days, now with Mr. Biden’s transition team for consideration, also calls for passing more red flag laws, which allow authorities to temporarily take guns from people deemed dangerous, some of the people said.
While domestic terrorism spans extremist ideologies across the spectrum […]
I think that’s an important point. When they talk about domestic terrorism or domestic extremism, it usually ends up targeting the right, under the Biden administration. But it also sometimes, as this indictment today targets the left. The idea is to create a precedent or a framework to criminalize either upon any win. The Wall Street Journal says:
[…] it has been predominantly a far-right phenomenon in recent decades, according to researchers, according to researchers, who also say attacks by anti-fascist and other leftist groups rose this year.
Mr. Biden has said he decided to run for president after the 2017 Charlottesville, Va., rally, during which an avowed neo-Nazi killed a woman and injured scores of other people. According to a campaign website, Mr. Biden intends to work “for a domestic terrorism law that respects free speech and civil liberties, while making the same commitment to root out domestic terrorism as we have to stop international terrorism.”
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
China played the pivotal role in building the bridge of peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Now, China is turning its efforts to negotiating an end to the war in Yemen, which has been a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. China’s new status as a peacebuilder has side-lined the US, which had been profiting from arms sales and wars in the Middle East for decades. Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen have all been devastated by the US military and their allies since 2003, and the US military continues to occupy parts of Syria.
In Yemen, the US participated as a military partner with Saudi Arabia and made huge profits from selling arms to Riyadh. China’s efforts in peacemaking are set to effect the US arms business, and may leave the US as the big looser in Yemen’s peace.
Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Hamid Rizk, Director of political programs at the Al-Masirah channel to shed light on the ramifications of the ramifications of the Iran-Saudi peace on the war in Yemen.
*
Steven Sahiounie (SS): Saudi Arabia and Iran have restored all diplomatic relations between them after meet in Beijing. How will the return of relations affect the crisis in Yemen?
Hamid Rizk (HR): We hope that the Iranian-Saudi rapprochement will be reflected positively on the Yemeni file through the commitment of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia to the serious and real terms of peace based on addressing the humanitarian consequences, foremost of which is lifting the blockade of ports, opening airports, paying salaries to employees, compensating the affected, rebuilding what was destroyed by the war and withdrawing Saudi troops and the rest of the foreign forces from Yemeni territory.
SS: There are ongoing negotiations in Yemen to stop the armed conflict in the country. What is the current status of these negotiations?
HR: There are positive signs and ongoing meetings, the latest of which is the visit of the Saudi envoy to Sana’a for six days, and there is agreement to continue meetings and consultations until reaching a vision and understanding for a fair and just solution that stops the war once and for all and restores the rights to its people.
SS: Yemen has been subjected to an armed conflict that has lasted for years. What is the humanitarian situation in the country there, and are people getting help?
HR: The humanitarian situation in Yemen is tragic, the suffering is great, the poverty is wide, the health and social situation suffers from the results of the war, which left millions of Yemenis living under the threat of poverty, the high rate of malnutrition among children, the decline in the level of basic services, the spread of diseases and epidemics and the destruction of economic life, all of which turned into a living and economic disaster suffered by the Yemeni people in general.
SS: From your point of view, how do you see the development of the political scene in the next stage in Yemen?
HR: We are looking forward in the coming stages to alleviate the suffering of Yemenis by lifting the blockade and opening ports for the flow of basic goods, medicines and oil derivatives that are essential to people’s lives. We are also looking forward to lifting the blockade of Sana’a airport, which contributes to the departure of many patients for treatment abroad. We are looking forward, God willing, to addressing the effects of the war and we are looking forward to serious steps in comprehensive peace by the Saudi-American coalition, leading to the complete and final closure of the war file.
SS: The United States has been involved in the conflict in Yemen. During the last stage, Washington reacted negatively to the development of Saudi-Iranian relations. How do you assess the role of the United States in Yemen?
HR: The role of the United States of America is negative and there are indications that America does not want Saudi Arabia to get out of the Yemeni war, because the war benefits the Americans financially through arms deals worth billions of dollars, in addition to the fear of the United States of America losing its influence and some of its illegitimate interests. Washington is also concerned about the consequences of any Iranian-Saudi rapprochement and its positive repercussions on bilateral relations between Arab and Islamic countries. America is taking advantage of the situation of conflict, wars and crises to consolidate its survival and control over Arab and Islamic peoples and countries.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
A Constitutional Council decision in Paris on April 14 upheld the legality of the pension reform legislation which has been the spark for a series of general strikes since the beginning of the year.
The highest court in France decided that the bill was in congruence with the constitution and therefore should be enacted.
Millions of French workers and youth have taken to the streets while staying away from jobs and schools to protest the decision by President Emmanuel Macron to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64 years. As a result of the reform, the social security act has changed the age of eligibility by two years.
Now, according to French law, employees will have to provide 43 years of service in order to collect full benefits during their retirement. This is taking place amid a rise in inflation not witnessed in the capitalist states since the early 1980s.
Immediately after the decision by the Constitutional Council and Macron’s signature on the legislation, people went into the streets to demonstrate against the government. Some of the protests turned violent as police utilized excessive force in efforts to clear crowds from the commercial areas of the cities.
The leading trade unions in the country made a final appeal to Macron urging him not to sign the bill since several clauses within the legislation had been rejected by the Constitutional Council. However, the president maintained the same position claiming that if the reforms were not instituted the entire retirement system would become insolvent.
In addition, to the upholding of the legislation by the Constitutional Council, the judicial body declined to authorize a national referendum on the question. Macron himself refused to allow a final vote within the National Assembly and imposed the law by decree.
However, workers are continuing to demand the abolition of the new pension reforms. There have been militant actions on a daily basis since April 14. Anger and dissatisfaction have reached unprecedented levels against Macron and his political party which is neo-liberal in its policy orientation. Despite the labor unrest in France, the Left parties in the National Assembly are divided and in a minority.
Even though the Left is relatively weak in the legislative apparatus of the state, Macron could not risk defeat. The president felt compelled to act in a dictatorial manner while the Constitutional Council and the security apparatus provided the legal and repressive mechanisms aimed at suppressing dissent.
One news agency said of the current mood among the workers that:
“Labor unions have called for a further nationwide strike day on April 28. As of April 21, the impact of the strike is not known. Based on recent nationwide industrial action, it is likely that the SNCF national rail network and the Paris region public transport operators will run between 50 and 75 percent of trains. If air traffic control (ATC) staff join the strike, flights will likely be reduced at Paris-Orly (ORY) and some other regional airports by around 20 percent. Government servants, teachers, and healthcare workers may also join the action. Some staff at private companies will likely participate in any such labor actions, resulting in business disruptions and closures.”
Undoubtedly, the French police will be called upon to engage in brutal tactics to prevent the demonstrations from blocking streets and roads. The police have been accused of brutality since the beginning of the industrial actions in January.
Several human rights organizations including Amnesty International have criticized the law-enforcement agents for utilizing brute force. Similar police behavior was witnessed during the “Yellow Vest” protests in 2018-19 when people demonstrated for weeks over the rise in toll fees for the highways.
A report published by the Financial Times noted this phenomenon of state repression when they emphasized:
“Lawyers and human rights groups have criticized the methods used by law enforcement, such as preventive arrests to deter protesters and collect intelligence on activists and forceful crowd control methods. An official from the UN urged French police to avoid excessive force, and the EU’s human rights watchdog questioned the proportionality of the crackdown. In March alone, more than 2,100 arrests were made with only a fraction leading to charges, two people from the environmental protest at the Sainte-Soline reservoir remain in a coma, and 286 protesters have been injured, including one who lost an eye and another a thumb.”
Therefore, it appears that the French government has nothing to offer workers and youth other than more austerity, legislative indifference and brutality by the security forces. Rather than impose higher taxes on the large financial institutions and energy corporations which are making huge profits from the people, the class contradictions inherent in a decaying capitalist system are being borne by the masses.
Crisis Rooted in the Imperialist System
The rightward shift in domestic policy in France is reflective of the worsening economic conditions for workers within the European Union (EU) states. In many capitalist countries the living standards of the majority of people have declined precipitously in the last decade.
The war in Ukraine which was initiated by the United States and their NATO allies has disrupted the supply chains for energy resources causing tremendous difficulties for working families. Heating, electrical, transportation, housing and food costs have skyrocketed as the proxy war against Russia is requiring billions of dollars in taxpayer funds every month.
Macron in his desperation for energy resources and trade opportunities has travelled to Algeria and Nigeria seeking larger imports of natural gas from these African states. Recently, the French president spent three days in China holding talks with President Xi Jinping and other leading officials of the government. Even though the Chinese government opposes the war in Ukraine and is seeking a negotiated settlement to the conflict, Macron is being forced to act in ways which are contrary to Washington’s foreign policy imperatives in Asia.
In the United Kingdom, strikes within key industries and public services are ongoing as well. Unions have shut down rail lines, schools, medical services, passport offices, etc. These strike actions are scheduled to continue for the next several months.
Junior physicians have held strikes demanding an increase in pay and improved working conditions. Airport security employees are planning work stoppages along with maritime and coastguard agencies.
An Evening Standard report on the labor situation quoted Public and Commercial Services (PCS) General Secretary Mark Serwotka as saying:
“They seem to think, if they ignore our members, they’ll go away. But how can our members ignore the cost-of-living crisis when 40,000 civil servants are using food banks and 45,000 of them are claiming the benefits they administer themselves? It’s a national scandal and a stain on this Government’s reputation that so many of its own workforce are living in poverty.”
PCS is planning for 133,000 of its members to strike on April 28. This will impact the maritime industry along with coastguard agencies. Amazon employees are also striking, saying that the meager wage increase offers made by management were insulting.
Britain’s Conservative Party government of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has no intentions of relenting in their draconian economic program. As working people in the UK fall deeper into impoverishment, the administration continues to prioritize ruling class interests.
These developments in the UK and EU states portend much for the working class in the U.S. which is battling inflation and a resurgence in layoffs in the high-tech and service industries. The administration of President Joe Biden and the previous Democratic Party dominated House and Senate failed to enact long term social spending legislation to reduce the rising levels of poverty.
There are the possibilities of strikes at UPS and within the automobile manufacturing industry this year. Racial tensions remain high also with the ongoing killings by police and vigilantes of African Americans.
The crisis of capitalism and imperialism must be addressed with a political program for social transformation. This will require the organization of the workers and oppressed peoples into independent political parties and formations so they can be equipped to meet the monumental challenges ahead.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image: The protests continue across France. This in Paris on 6th April. Source: John Mullen
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
London, the Euro-Atlantic capital of war and imperialism, has at least partly become one of the centres of the movement for peace, disarmament and a multipolar world based on respect for the right of nations to self-determination and their civilisational autonomy.
All thanks to a whole series of events, co-organized by No2NATO, International Ukraine Anti-Fascist Solidarity, Stop the War and Not Our War movements, with participation of activists and independent authorities, such as ex-London mayoral candidate Piers Corbyn and former ambassador Peter Ford, as well as by guests from abroad, headed by Irish MEP Clare Daly and Sevim Dağdelen, Member of the Bundestag representing Die Linke.
Against the War from the Left and the Right
Rallies, information stalls, conferences, as well as musical performances and cultural events promoting UK disengagement in the war in Ukraine are becoming more and more part of the landscape of the British capital. Despite the growing censorship and administrative difficulties, the penultimate week of April was full of anti-imperialist and anti-system actions. On Thursday, 20th April, the International Ukraine Anti-Fascist Solidarity committee organised a picket outside the premium office in Downing Street to protest against British depleted uranium ammunition being sent to Ukraine.
“More and more people in Great Britain realize what is really happening in Ukraine and how tragic the growing military involvement of NATO countries, unfortunately led by the UK, is for its inhabitants. Britain spends billions military aid for Kiev, supporting the illegal regime there since the coup in 2014, while the people of the UK struggle with increasingly difficult living conditions, high prices and inflation,” said Theo Russell of the IUAFS during an action actively supported by the movement No2NATO.
Massive demonstrations took place on Friday, 21st April and Saturday, 22nd April, respectively in front of the US Embassy in London and opposite to the British Ministry of Defence building on Whitehall.
“We stand outside the US Embassy to testify to our understanding of the provocation we are being dragged into. They want to push us into war with Russia! Ukraine is just another in a long list of countries treated as an American military training ground, such as Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, Laos, Lebanon, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Cambodia, Grenada, Libya, Panama, Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria. Although this American dominance, built on military strength and the position of the dollar, is coming to an inevitable end. Unfortunately, people do not remember much about history, they are deceived by the media and politicians, while all historical American interventions, attacks, Washington-sponsored coups d’état were based on propaganda lies. And exactly the same happened in 2014 and again in 2022 in Kiev.” — David Clews from Not Our War, a well-known activist of pro-BREXIT, unionist and right-wing movements has spoken.
UKrainian occupation?
London authorities tried to push the demonstrators out of Trafalgar Square where the meeting was primarily planned. Mayor Sadiq Khan censorship attempt was not surprisingly supported by allegedly anti-system climate organisation Extinction Rebellion, hastily registering their own competing demonstrations there. In turn, opposite several hundred demonstrators in front of the Ministry of Defence, a group equipped with loudspeakers and flags of Ukraine and the Belarusian pro-Western opposition set up their jamming point. Despite the police protection, the participants of the counter picket were unable to break through the spontaneous hails of support for the Russian liberation of Donbass.
Meanwhile, on the anti-war scene, Peter Ford, the former British ambassador to Syria and Bahrain, recalled the “five big lies behind Western involvement in Ukraine”.
“They tell us that Ukraine is ‘fighting for freedom’ and ‘against authoritarianism’. This lie is repeated by the same politicians who here, in our country, deny us freedom of speech, do not agree to freedom of assembly, who have abandoned the principles of democracy and the rule of law, also in international relations, replacing all of that with own brutal tyranny! said Mr Ford, renowned critic of the policies of his former Foreign Office colleagues.
Ukraine is one of the most corrupt and authoritarian regimes in the World, depriving its inhabitants of linguistic, cultural and even religious rights. The authorities in Kiev have banned opposition political parties, trade unions, and recently even the Orthodox Church, and we are told that supporting these people is in the interest of freedom and democracy?!”
— Ambassador Ford
The legendary leader of the anti-system, Piers Corbyn, expressed his opposition to the pro-Kiev policy of the British government even more strongly:
“Look at those flags on the Government buildings!” he pointed out. “Out of three blue and yellow only one, shamefully, on the side with the Union Jack. We are under Ukrainian occupation! Occupied by lies and deceit to hide that this is not only the war of the West against Russia, but also the war of Western governments against their own citizens, also here in the UK!” explained Corbyn, assuring that he did not fully agree with the position of his brother, Jeremy (former leader of the Labour Party).
“We cannot hold the view that the condition of peace in Ukraine would be the withdrawal of Russian troops, quite the opposite: if the Russians retreat, then Zelensky and his corrupt Nazi regime will win, i.e. the imperialists who support Kiev will really win. And then there will be genocide, the Kiev regime will have no qualms about murdering Russian-speaking civilians, as it has already proved more than once” Mr. Corbyn stressed.
“It is a complete misunderstanding to present the war in Ukraine as a defence of the Ukrainian right to self-determination, as while recognising the right of Ukrainians to have an independent state, how could the inhabitants of Donbass be denied the same opportunity? The UK Governments pursue a policy of hypocrisy, if they recognise, for example, the Scots’ right to at least express their independence views, why did they reject the assumptions of the Minsk Agreements and the subjectivity of the people’s republics in Donetsk and Luhansk?” pointed out Stuart Richardson from the Stop the War initiative.
Take Britain out of NATO
The entire rally took place in an atmosphere over any ideological divisions.
“We come here from all sides of the UK political scene. We may have different views, for example, on the role of trade unions or immigration policy, but we are united by our opposition to the threat posed to all of us by further membership in NATO. That is why we formed a broad No2NATO coalition, and that is why our joint initiative is the Petition to the UK Government and Parliament about invoking of the Article 13 of the North Atlantic Treaty to withdraw the UK from NATO. We are collecting signatures under that here today and at all similar rallies around the Britain.” — Laureen, No2NATO and Workers Party of Britain. Activist has informed.
“The UK was a founding member of NATO, which was established to address a perceived threat from the Soviet Union. Although when hen the USSR dissolved in 1991 NATO’s initial reason to exist disappeared. Despite that, rather than winding up its operations NATO nearly doubled the number of member states. Since 1991, NATO, which claims to be a defensive military alliance, has been directly engaged in various offensive military operations. I believe that the membership of NATO is now endangering UK citizens.” — Chris Williamson, former Labour MP, and now one of the Socialist Labour Party leaders explains.
In accordance with the law, collecting 100,000 signatures on the petition will force a debate on it in the House of Commons, with a public hearing of the position of the initiative group and yet at 10,000 signatures the Government has to respond to this petition.
Bloody hands of NATO
Traditional pacifist movements’ main problem is their difficulty in understanding the dialectic nature of the war in Ukraine as a conflict between the imperialists who support the Kiev regime and the forces objectively allied to anti-imperialism and workers class struggle. The principle of the supposed “equal distance from Kiev and Moscow” expressed by some revisionist and Trotskyist parties, as well as equating “two imperialisms, from the West and from the East”, in fact only weakens efforts for peace and to overcome the last offensive of capitalism. Fortunately, the truth about the NATO-Russian war is getting more and more widely aware, so it can be welcomed that the Stop the War conference, coordinated with the pan-European Europe for Peace initiative, consisted almost entirely of speeches objectively and honestly assessing the situation in Ukraine.
The starting point of the conference was the unanimous criticism of the growing arms race and the accustoming of Western societies to the inevitability of confrontation. According to Kate Hudson, Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament,
“The instant increase in the military budget is clearly at the expense of the rest of the economy, especially the social sphere. The depleted uranium ammunition, that took such a deadly toll in the former Yugoslavia, is now supplied to Ukraine, what will have tragic effects for generations. And if the war in Ukraine was not destabilising enough, the UK is already declaring its support for a US war with China. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has not only expressed his satisfaction with the escalation that the admission of Finland leads to, but also, in an open text, announces the acceptance of Ukraine membership, which can only conduct and spread this unnecessary, tragic war. This makes the clearer what a global disaster NATO is for all of us, a Pact with blood on its hands, which should be replaced as soon as possible with a new, consensual peace architecture, which moves away from militarisation and nuclear weapons,” said Ms. Hudson, announcing further anti-war protests during the Vilnius NATO summit in July 2023.
Under the military-industrial complex occupation
Lowkey, Britain’s leading musician, performer and activist, one of the first organisers of No2NATO, focused on interests of the Western military-industrial complex active in Ukraine and on a global scale. At the same time, Ukraine remains a laboratory for testing new types of weapons, while the Ukrainians themselves, often sent to the front after several hours of training, are not prepared to use such technologies safely, even for themselves, not to mention the Ukrainian civilian population. We will not hear about anything like this from the media or from mainstream politicians, financed by armaments corporations, such as Sir Keir Starmer, the leader of the opposition. It is no coincidence that Boris Johnson, who involved the UK in this conflict, is today one of the candidates for the next NATO Secretary General. These people are paid by entities interested in continuing the war indefinitely, which is not only extremely dangerous, but also devastating for the Western economies, spending €3 billion monthly to maintain a bankrupt regime in Kiev. And yet these decisions are made by the same people, the same circles that once made solemn promises not to enlarge NATO to the East! Instead the British Army was supplying and training the Ukrainian Armed Forces in underwater terrorism just before the terrorist attack on NordStream. However Lowkey also noted that it is difficult to talk about the sovereignty of British policy in a situation where over 12,000 US Army soldiers are already stationed in the UK.
In the discussion, the artist also referred to the involvement of many people of art and culture in supporting the Kiev regime. Ignorance and a desire to please the mainstream media must be distinguished from crossing the clear line of taking the side of Nazism and genocide, as is done in particular by numerous bands from Ukraine, often enthusiastically welcomed in the West as alleged “voices of freedom”. This was the case with the recent London concert of the openly Banderite band Okean Elzy, trying to organise a public fundraiser for the purchase of armaments for the Nazi-battalions, despite of the protest of the British anti-Nazi activists and independent artists.
783,000 Germans for peace
The voice from Germany was especially expected in the discussion, as it is no coincidence that over 783,000 people have already signed the Manifesto for Peace, initiated by Alice Schwarzer and Sahra Wagenknecht. Motives for such a significant involvement of German voters were explained by Sevim Dağdelen, MP. In her opinion, we are facing a fundamental issue for democratic sovereignty in Europe, its limitation and violation by the United States. We have witnessed an American attack on German infrastructure, NordStream, and instead of demanding an international investigation under the aegis of the United Nations, Chancellor Olaf Scholz helps to cover up this act of aggression! Meanwhile, in Germany we have a fall in real wages by 5%. per year, the largest since 1945, and we know perfectly well that the war with Russia and the economic war against our own citizens are two sides of the same coin – noted Ms Dağdelen. As Lowkey rightly said, on the Western side, it is just a war of the rich for privilege, not any “defence of freedom and democracy”. On the contrary! Turkey has participated in attacks on Iraq and Syria, occupies Cyprus and persecutes its own citizens, and is accepted in NATO. In the UK it should be well remembered when Iraq was attacked under false accusations of having banned weapons, and now London itself is sending internationally prohibited ammunition to Kiev! Julian Assange is still in prison for exposing the truth about the lies of the rulers leading to war and corruption on an international scale, while these are the Western warmongers who should be prosecuted and convicted! Western countries and Poland, with their arms and equipment supplies for Kiev regime, are only sustaining this conflict, while the only solution is an early ceasefire and peace without preconditions on the Russian side, and an immediate suspension of supplies other than truly humanitarian ones. Unfortunately, such a program still lacks support among the economic and political elites, including the Greens, who have finally taken the position of the new neoconservative right. At the same time, however, according to Die Linke MP, there is still hope, because by referring to the classics, the USA, like Goethe’s Mephisto, seem to be “part of that power which eternally wills evil and eternally works good”, that is, by increasing their pressure on peripheral countries, Americans also create conditions for their emancipation, the end of neo-colonialism and imperialism due to the collapse of the dollar and the exhaustion of Washington’s military potential.
Silent majority’s voice
A less optimistic assessment of the situation was presented by Irish MEP, Clare Daly (Independents 4 Change, No2NATO). According to her, in fact,
“the current lies resemble those of Iraq, Libya and Syria, but they also occur at new levels of propaganda and persuasion. The situation of the anti-war movement is also different. At that time, 2002 discussions and dissents were allowed even in the mainstream media, and we were able to organise and attend massive public protests. Now these basic manifestations of democracy and freedom of speech are ruthlessly hindered and blocked. Strictly required unanimity applies. Instead of a difference of opinion, we have censorship in the media and a lack of access to real news. Officially it was supposed to be ‘a war for democracy and against authoritarianism’, but authoritarianism has shown itself to us in all its glory in our own countries,” Ms Daly pointed.
All is not lost, however, according to her, as very often she can hear voices of support, assurances of a community of views, which, however, cannot be openly proclaimed “Because you understand that we can’t…”. Even MEPs from other groups after the votes on war or sanctions tell Ms Daly and her colleague, Mick Wallace, that they are right, in a way: “It’s good that you say what you say, we think the same, but because of our leaders and media in our country … you know how it is …”.
“Of course, we hear even more words of support from people at meetings like this, because let’s face it: WE SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE MAJORITY!” Ms. Daly emphasised.
It is just that most people are muffled, hushed, scared. Albeit it is also the majority, which the rulers fear the most, perfectly understanding people’s power. This is why we must increase the pressure on our governments for peace, although understanding how difficult to do so, while jingoism and imperialism sell better. However, we have strong arguments. First of all, historically, because no one will deny that the current phase of the conflict is a straight consequence of 2014 and after, when 14,000 of civilians have been killed in Donbass by the Kiev offensives, and Russian-speaking population has been persecuted and terrorised. Secondly, simple logic is behind us, because if in fact the Russians were provoked by the Western arming of Ukraine and sanctions, how sending even more weapons and more sanctions would stop them? Ms Daly pointed, that in the European Parliament she often hears about understanding of Ukrainian defence needs “because they are fighting foreign occupation”, but the Irish also fought the occupation, and no one were urged to send arms to the IRA.
“I never hear them call on arming Palestinians to protect themselves! So do not say it is about “fighting for freedom”, because that is just not true. War can never be stopped by war it can only be stopped by peace was on the table a year ago. I think we should be highlighting,” pointed Ms Daly reminding that it was Boris Johnsons and Americans who prevented that to happened.
In her opinion Ukraine was and is one of the most corrupt countries in Europe, deprived of elementary civil liberties. As a result of the conflict provoked and sustained by the West, under the present regime Ukraine has become even more corrupt, even more repressive, in addition has lost even more territory and population and is economically exploited by the West. In no way is the current policy helping the Ukrainians either. It is therefore necessary to support international peace initiatives, such as those of China, and to build civic coalitions for real peace and reconstruction, summed up MEP Daly, noting that it is no coincidence that the next step in international destabilisation may be to attack China, using the Taiwanese issue analogously to the Ukrainian one.
Take to the streets across Europe!
Lindsey German, Stop the War convenor has summarised discussion: “We live in the most dangerous time I have ever experienced in my life”. This reminds the situation on the brink of the First World War, with series of regional conflicts, increasing destabilisation of the international order, formation of opposing pacts and alliances, and finally the escalation and global cataclysm. In historiography, the leaders who led to that catastrophe are sometimes called “Sleepwalkers”, but some of them consciously aimed at destruction, and to an even greater extent we are dealing with it today, perhaps at the beginning of WW3. The proxi war between NATO and Russia in Ukraine continues. The arms race speeds up. We are experiencing a revival of modern McCarthyism, hunting the opponents of war, and armaments. At the same time, the economic crisis, the internal political crises of Western states, and the international crisis cannot be separated. It is not only a matter of the fact that if we do not believe domestic politicians when they talk about finance, health care or education, then why should we assume that they are telling us the truth when talking about foreign policy? In the UK, it is a disgrace to Labour and it is a shame to the Greens who have moved to pro-NATO positions, but it is also a wider problem.
“Why do we have MPs here from other countries but none from the House of Commons?” asked Ms. German.
“What happened to the British and Western European anti-war movement? Our great task is to rebuild it. We must form an international coalition against war and the deterioration of living conditions. In July 2023, at the NATO Summit in Vilnius, we will see the warmongers in all their glory, pushing to accept Ukraine membership and continue the current strategy. We must then take to the streets all over Europe, otherwise barbarism will triumph!” Ms. German called, referring to the well-known Rosa Luxemburg’s sentence.
Actions for peace were also organised in Bristol and Brighton. More centres from England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland are expected to join soon. European peace movement, active e.g. in Germany, France, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, Austria and Italy – becomes a fact.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Konrad Rękas is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Fox News host Tucker Carlson gives his take on Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s censorship for his views on COVID and the Ukraine war on ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight.’
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
“The masses are still oblivious to the machinations of their shadowy overlords” – Jim Quinn
The idea of government “of, by and for the people” has become a sick joke.
Federal/corporate power dominates a fearful public from which it has effectively separated itself. Elected representatives consort with lobbyists flush with cash.
A collective of unelected 3-letter agencies — IRS, SEC, CDC, FDA, DHS, DEA, FCC, FBI, CIA, EPA, etc., say “Obey!”, and a conditioned public goes along.
Above it all sits a shadowy body of globalists, aka “the Cabal”, and coming down the pike is the final piece of their game plan for total control of the human family: abolishment of physical money and establishment of a programmable electronic currency dubbed CBDC for Central Bank Digital Currency.
Why CBDC entrapment would be absolute is clear — that one’s every buy/sell action, down to penny candy, would be recorded;
that CBDC is controllable as to where, when, and how it may spent; that “bail ins” (reductions in one’s account) could be done anytime government might wish;
that a time limit can force spending and make saving impossible; that should one have unwanted opinions, or refuse some governmental dictate, their CBDC account could be frozen, etc.
It would be as thorough as any high security prison. And what is most alarming is that an apparently unaware majority is being guided toward CBDC, stepwise in a process of normalization. Here is what’s going on now:
Item: Big box stores like CostCo now have automatic check out options, some “cash or card”, others “card only”. Card only options will doubtless become the norm.
Item:The attack on cash started with large bills only, the rationale, as per Harvard’s Lawrence Summers, being that criminals use them. Harvard’s Kenneth Rogoff is open in that his problem with cash is that it’s “anonymous”, and that it “handcuffs” central banks. Rogoff even wrote a book, The Curse of Cash.
Item: This issue isn’t just national, it’s global. Here is Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank, threatening citizens making payments of over 1000 Euro in physical cash, with prison.
Item:Google has a digital payment system called a “Google Pay Wallet” that allows users to “tap to pay anywhere Google Pay is accepted”. It’s being tested now in the airline industry as a price guarantee program for Google Flights.
Item:For the past year, Amazon’s “palm reading payment technology” has been used at Whole Foods stores, where a wave of the hand gets the bill paid. Now, Panera is considering this “frictionless” method. Panera’s loyalty program includes 52 million customers. As increasing numbers of companies move to “frictionless” payment, the procedure becomes ever more seen as normal and fussing with cash or cards as passé. In time, all forms of electronic exchange could be organized, bit-by-bit if necessary, into a single, integrated, global system.
Has a level of “normalization” within society been reached in order for the Establishment to move more aggressively?
Well, let’s see: On April 10, 2023, at a meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Digital Currency Monetary Authority (DCMA) [and who the hell gave them authority?] launched an International CBDC called the “Unicoin”, a “universal monetary unit [that] strengthens the monetary sovereignty of participating central banks”. And a mere 4 weeks earlier (March 6), the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), aka “the Central Bank for central banks”, concluded a multi-country study, Project Icebreaker, regarding the use of cross-currency/cross-border financial transactions using CBDCs. Both, designed to protect the stability of central banks, are moves toward a single global electronic currency.
You might argue that physical money continues to be in great supply, so where is the danger of a global CBDC when society is awash with cash?
Well, training a culture to use electronic money is requiring expanded time, even generations, for normalization to become established. However, cash can be made scarce — and then to dry up — relatively quickly. And within the past two years, a senior fellow at no less an economics and policy research group than the Brookings Institute published an oped in the NY Times, “Cash will soon be obsolete. Will America be ready?”
Will we? One can estimate the inclination of the majority, and of society’s general direction, at the marketplace — Target, Walmart, a super market, whatever — by observing fellow citizens. Speed and convenience are clearly guiding decisions in a society in which “progress” is understood primarily in terms of technology and efficiency. While some observers claim people are now “waking up” to the perils inherent in where we are being herded, such people seem still to be a small minority. If the many unrelenting and diverse steps toward CBCDs are to be stopped and reversed, that minority needs to swell by an order of magnitude, and soon.
*
Economist George Gammon clarifies how the Biden Administration’s move to raise mortgage rates for those with good credit is yet another move to CBDCs. At the moment, individuals cannot have accounts with the Federal Reserve, so the little guy can’t benefit from discount windows enjoyed by big banks. “Not fair” declares the little guy, who now is inclined to advocate for Fed accounts for everybody, unaware of the implications.
What this mortgage policy demonstrates is that credit can be issued by the Fed based not on merit but on what Gammon calls “narrative”. In this instance, the narrative is about social policy, but it could be about absolutely anything a government might want. Because the Fed creates credit out of nothing, it can offer rates all the way to zero. No bank can compete, and that favors the argument for Fed accounts for all, which, as Gammon makes clear, is a highway leading straight to the entrapment of CBDC.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Bill Willers is an emeritus professor of biology, University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh. He is founder of the Superior Wilderness Action Network and editor of Learning to Listen to the Land, and Unmanaged Landscapes, both from Island Press. He can be contacted at [email protected].
“Graeme was such a gentle soul – yet a legend in the 9/11 Truth Movement.
The vast body of solid scholarly 9/11 evidence that he developed for all of us has been deeply ingrained throughout all of my 9/11 presentations and interviews.
I always felt a sense of warmth, and awe, when I had occasion to speak with him or – even just to see him.”
— Richard Gage, AIA, Architect
*
“What a wonderful friend and colleague he has been for many of us.
He was an exemplary truther, professor, scholar and person.
There is much to celebrate about his rich and meaningful life as well as his many contributions across many fields of endeavour including the quest for 9/11 truth.
We shall miss Graeme MacQueen greatly. He has left us with a very important and diverse legacy.
There has been a tsunami of COVID-19 vaccine injuries and deaths in the US military, but there hasn’t been much attention paid to the young military cadets from highly vaccinated countries who are dying suddenly and under mysterious circumstances.
Since then, Anzac has become a militaristic prop, a promotions exercise for arms manufacturers and the publicity for war. This was best exemplified by the decision to spend almost A$500 million over nine years to redevelop the Australian War Memorial in Canberra.
The dramatic outbreak of diplomacy between Riyadh and Damascus is the by-product of Russia’s growing influence in Middle Eastern affairs and is one of the clearest signals yet of the declining role of the United States, whose military and diplomatic posture in the region has greatly diminished over the course of the past few years.
In this video, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. implicates the CIA’s involvement in the COVID pandemic through Event 201, a coronavirus pandemic simulation in New York City hosted by Bill Gates and Avril Haines, former deputy director of the CIA. They were working on ways to use the coronavirus as a pretense for clamping down totalitarian controls globally.
As the COVID crisis winds down and we all seek to make sense of what has been done to us, and how these atrocious “public health” policy decisions were made, we have the historic Third International COVID Summit, on invitation of members of the European Parliament, who are providing donations and support from their own personal budgets to help defray the travel expenses of those participants and speakers who have much to contribute but face financial hardship because they have spoken out against the narrative in their own countries.
Those who want to be informed in detail and truthfully about the rapid change in the political climate, about the rapprochement of formerly hostile states in the Middle East and Africa and the worldwide takeover of the WHO, and who want to know more about the decay of morals in the West and the legalisation of drugs, should turn to internationally accessible alternative media such as “Global Research”. He will be well advised to do so.
The United States government, in its incessant bullying of foreign nations to get them to see the world the way that the cabal that runs Washington sees it, ironically often cites such fictions as the “rule of law” that guarantees such “rights” as “free speech” and “freedom of religion” to justify its illegal actions.
Although the right to speak out against government wrongdoing is the quintessential freedom, every day in this country, those who dare to speak their truth to the powers-that-be find themselves censored, silenced or fired.
A 41-year old mother of seven young children has been in effect condemned to death by Emory Healthcare Inc. of Atlanta, an affiliate of Emory University, for refusing to take the dangerous Covid-19 shot.The mother was approved for a kidney transplant but was removed from the list when she refused the death jab.
When asked what happened to the submarine Kursk on August 12, 2000, when it ended up at the bottom of the Barents Sea with 118 crew members, I will not answer “only” it sank! For twenty years I have worked on the research of this great accident that hit the Russian Navy, and I am obliged to give my expert opinion: I am deeply convinced that it is a “man-made disaster”.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
TSA Officers Nigel Allen and Trenard Collier were reportedly in the middle of their duties at the airport, on April 11, 2023, when an airline pilot suddenly collapsed from cardiac arrest. (click here)
“I looked over just as the pilot fell to the floor.” (click here)
The pilot reportedly approached a railing, staggered and fell down over his roller bags unconscious. The two TSA officers immediately came to the pilot’s aid and Allen began performing first aid.
Police and firefighters arrived to perform CPR, but despite their efforts to resuscitate the pilot, the pilot’s heart stopped, requiring “extended medical intervention,” according to the TSA. (click here)
Allen raced down the hall to grab an automated external defibrillator, which emergency responders were able to use to restart the pilot’s heart and help revive him.
The pilot, who has not been identified, is recovering, and his family has expressed their appreciation for Allen’s help.
April 4, 2023 – United Airlines Flight 2102 landing in SFO – captain was incapacitated, first officer was only one in control of the aircraft. (click here)
March 25, 2023 – TAROM Flight RO-7673 TSR-HRG diverted to Bucharest as 30 yo pilot had chest pain, then collapsed (click here)
March 22, 2023 – Southwest Flight WN6013 LAS-CMH diverted as pilot collapsed shortly after take-off, replaced by non-Southwest pilot (click here)
March 18, 2023 – Air Transat Flight TS739 FDF-YUL first officer was incapacitated about 200NM south of Montreal (click here)
March 13, 2023 – Emirates Flight EK205 MXP-JFK diverted due to pilot illness hour and a half after take-off (click here)
March 11, 2023 – United Airlines Flight UA2007 GUA-ORD diverted due to “incapacitated pilot” who had chest pains (click here)
March 11, 2023? – British Airways (CAI-LHR) pilot collapsed in Cairo hotel and died, was scheduled to fly Airbus A321 from Cairo to London (click here)
March, 3, 2023 – Virgin Australia Flight VA-717ADL-PER Adelaide to Perth flight was forced to make an emergency landing after First Officer suffered heart attack 30 min after departure. (click here)
Epoch Times articles on pilot incapacitations
I helped Epoch Times prepare two excellent articles on pilot incidents in-flight:
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
Comments Off on Pilot Had a Cardiac Arrest and Collapsed at Richmond International Airport (Richmond, VA) on April 11, 2023, Was Saved by Two TSA Officers
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
While the world continues to come to grips with the reality — and consequences — of the Chinese-brokered rapprochement between Saudi Araba and Iran, another diplomatic coup is unfolding in the Middle East.
This one is orchestrated by the Russians. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan flew to Damascus last week, where he met Syrian President Bashar Assad. This visit followed that of Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mikdad earlier this month to Riyadh.
The two countries severed diplomatic relations in 2012 at the beginning of a Syrian civil conflict that saw Saudi Arabia throwing its money behind anti-regime fighters seeking to remove Assad from power.
The startling diplomatic about face is part of a new Saudi Arabian foreign policy, embodied in its historic new relationship with Iran, which seeks to engender regional stability through conflict resolution instead of military-brokered containment.
As the Saudi Foreign Ministry noted on bin Farhan’s visit to Damascus, the Saudi goal is “to reach a political solution to the Syrian crisis that would end all its repercussions and preserve Syria’s unity, security, stability, and Arab identity and restore it to its Arab surroundings.”
Dramatic Outbreak of Diplomacy
The dramatic outbreak of diplomacy between Riyadh and Damascus is the by-product of Russia’s growing influence in Middle Eastern affairs and is one of the clearest signals yet of the declining role of the United States, whose military and diplomatic posture in the region has greatly diminished over the course of the past few years.
Russia has long-standing ties with the Syrian government. In 2015, its intervention during Syria’s civil conflict upheld the Assad government, allowing it to regain the initiative against the U.S.-and Saudi-backed opposition.
Russia’s relationship with Saudi Arabia, however, was more complex, with the Saudis having strategically aligned themselves with U.S. foreign and national security objectives in the Middle East and in global energy policies.
But that dynamic changed after October 2018, when Saudi security agents, alleged to have been working under the direct orders of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, murdered Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Jamal Khashoggi, second from left, during a June 4, 2009, roundtable with U.S. President Barack Obama, at far left. (The White House, Wikimedia Commons)
The Saudis took umbrage at the U.S. outcry at the crime, especially when then-presidential candidate Joe Biden threatened the crown prince, popularly known as MbS, with isolation and punishment.
“We were going to in fact make them pay the price, and make them in fact the pariah that they are,” Biden said during a televised debate in November 2019, adding that there is “very little social redeeming value in the present government in Saudi Arabia.”
Biden was later to regret those words when, in July 2022, he was compelled to fly to Saudi Arabia and ask MbS to increase oil production to lower energy costs that had skyrocketed because of the consequences of U.S.-led efforts to sanction Russian oil and gas in the aftermath of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
While MbS received Biden, the U.S. did not get the results it wanted from the meeting for reasons that went beyond poor personal chemistry between MbS and Biden. By then, both Saudi Arabia and Russia recognized that, as major oil producers, their interests were not well served by competing in a market dominated by U.S.-driven angst.
Russian state visit to Saudi Arabia, Oct. 14, 2019. (Kremlin)
This realization matured in the spring of 2020 in the aftermath of an “oil war” between the two nations which saw Saudi Arabia precipitously lower the price of oil by overproducing, only to be matched by Russia.
The Saudi-Russian oil war ended because of negotiations brokered by then-President Donald Trumpand for a while the world was compelled to live in an environment where the top three oil producers — the U.S., Russia and Saudi Arabia — openly colluded on global production quotas.
But then came the Russian invasion of Ukraine, U.S.-led energy sanctions and the recognition by both Russia and Saudi Arabia that the U.S. was not a stable partner when it came to managing the most important economic resource of their nations — energy.
US-Saudi Relations Strained
As Russia-Saudi bonds grew stronger based upon shared goals and objectives, the strain between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. likewise grew, driven by the total disconnect that existed between the Biden administration and MbS over Middle East policy.
Saudi Arabia has embarked on an ambitious project, Vision 2030, which seeks to transition the oil-rich kingdom away from its current over-reliance on energy production to a more diversified economy based upon modern technologies and non-energy economic initiatives.
A key prerequisite for this vision is for Saudi Arabia to become a force of connectivity in the region and the world — something that U.S.-driven policies promoting regional instability and war made impossible. The Biden administration had doubled down on a policy in which Saudi Arabia served as the keystone in confronting Iran along an arc of crisis stretching from Lebanon, through Syria and Iraq; and into Yemen.
Saudi Arabia confronted the reality that it could not win its war in Yemen (ongoing since 2014), and that the U.S.-led destabilization efforts in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq were floundering. With its own economic diversification goal in mind, it opted to work with Russia to engender the kind of stability needed for energy-driven economies to flourish.
Russia quietly organized talks with both Saudi and Syrian officials and diplomats, culminating with the March 2023 visit of President Assad to Moscow, where the issue of a rapprochement with Saudi Arabia was finalized.
Work remains to be done, however, as Saudi Arabia’s effort to bring Syria back into the ranks of the Arab League faces resistance from staunch U.S. allies Jordan, Kuwait and Qatar. But the fact is that, thanks to Russian and Chinese diplomacy, peace, not war, is breaking out all over in the Middle East. Bringing Syria in from the cold is simply the most recent manifestation of the phenomena.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Scott Ritter is a former U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. His most recent book is Disarmament in the Time of Perestroika, published by Clarity Press.
Featured image: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on March 15. (Vladimir Gerdo, TASS)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Atlanta, GA – US Marine Corps recruit Noah Evans, age 21, died suddenly during training on April 19, 2023 – 4th young Marine death in 2 years (click here)
US Marine Cadet, age 18, Gabriel Puchalla died suddenly of an aortic rupture on March 10, 2023 while on base in Camp Lejeune North Carolina. (click here)
Colorado – US Air Force Academy Cadet, age 22, Cole Kilty died on March 6, 2023, cause of death not released – 2nd US Air Force cadet death in 2023 (click here)
Wellington, NZ – 18 year old cadet Sacha Piper died of a brain aneurysm while on an international Navy cadet exchange in India, Feb. 2, 2023 (click here)
Two Canadian Military Cadets died suddenly in Feb. 2023
(left) Kalan Alexander Mahoney (age 18, Brampton, Ontario) died suddenly on Feb. 1, 2023 (click here). Kalan was a cadet of the Royal Canadian Army Cadet Corps.
(right) Wyatt Adrian, age 18, of Airdrie, AB, died suddenly on February 5, 2023. (click here). Wyatt was a cadet of the Royal Canadian Air Cadets from 2017-2022.
US Air Force Academy Cadet, 21 year old Hunter Brown died suddenly on Jan. 9, 2023. He had blood clots in his lungs (click here)
Naples, Italy – 19 year old Greek female navy cadet Talia who was on board the Prometheus ship died 48hr after feeling unwell on Aug. 23, 2022 (click here)
Upon arrival in the Italian city, the cadet was taken to the hospital, where she developed a hemorrhagic rash, and then sepsis. The patient’s clinical picture worsened “right before our eyes”, as a result, she ended up in intensive care. Doctors from Greece also went to Italy, but the girl died on Aug.25, 2022.
US Marine Recruit Brandon Barnish, age 26, of Evans, Ga., was found dead at the base on Parris Island on Sept. 29, 2021. (click here)
US Marines recruit, Anthony Muñoz, age 21, of Lawrence, Mass, died on Sep. 16, 2021 after falling from a balcony. MCRD Parris Island officials said his death appeared to be a suicide. (click here)
US Marines recruit, 19 year old Dalton Beals of Pennsville, N.J., died during the end of the “The Crucible,” a grueling 54-hour training exercise, on June 4, 2021 (click here)
My Take…
There has been a tsunami of COVID-19 vaccine injuries and deaths in the US military, but there hasn’t been much attention paid to the young military cadets from highly vaccinated countries who are dying suddenly and under mysterious circumstances.
Each of these cadets were 18-22 years old (one was 26). Sudden deaths shouldn’t be happening in this age group and every death should be thoroughly investigated.
South Korea had a 22 year old military recruit collapse 5 days after taking his first Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. He was found unresponsive at 8am hunched beside the bed, was taken to ER, had ventricular fibrillation, CPR was performed for 2 hours and he died (click here).
A very thorough autopsy by the Korean military proved his death was caused by the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. The Korean CDC acknowledged this case as a post Pfizer vaccine myocarditis death.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
Featured image: Pfc. Shaniah Edwards, Medical Detachment, prepares to administer the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine to soldiers and airmen at the Joint Force Headquarters, February 12, 2021. (U.S. Army National Guard photo by Sgt. Leona C. Hendrickson – Source.)
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Total global military expenditure increased by 3.7 per cent in real terms in 2022, to reach a new high of $2240 billion. Military expenditure in Europe saw its steepest year-on-year increase in at least 30 years. The three largest spenders in 2022—the United States, China and Russia—accounted for 56 per cent of the world total, according to new data on global military spending published today by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
Invasion of Ukraine and tensions in East Asia drive increased spending
World military spending grew for the eighth consecutive year in 2022 to an all-time high of $2240 billion. By far the sharpest rise in spending (+13 per cent) was seen in Europe and was largely accounted for by Russian and Ukrainian spending. However, military aid to Ukraine and concerns about a heightened threat from Russia strongly influenced many other states’ spending decisions, as did tensions in East Asia.
‘The continuous rise in global military expenditure in recent years is a sign that we are living in an increasingly insecure world,’ said Dr Nan Tian, Senior Researcher with SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. ‘States are bolstering military strength in response to a deteriorating security environment, which they do not foresee improving in the near future.’
Cold war levels of military expenditure return to Central and Western Europe
Military expenditure by states in Central and Western Europe totalled $345 billion in 2022. In real terms, spending by these states for the first time surpassed that in 1989, as the cold war was ending, and was 30 per cent higher than in 2013. Several states significantly increased their military spending following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, while others announced plans to raise spending levels over periods of up to a decade.
‘The invasion of Ukraine had an immediate impact on military spending decisions in Central and Western Europe. This included multi-year plans to boost spending from several governments,’ said Dr Diego Lopes da Silva, Senior Researcher with SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. ‘As a result, we can reasonably expect military expenditure in Central and Western Europe to keep rising in the years ahead.’
Some of the sharpest increases were seen in Finland (+36 per cent), Lithuania (+27 per cent), Sweden (+12 per cent) and Poland (+11 per cent).
‘While the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 certainly affected military spending decisions in 2022, concerns about Russian aggression have been building for much longer,’ said Lorenzo Scarazzato, Researcher with SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. ‘Many former Eastern bloc states have more than doubled their military spending since 2014, the year when Russia annexed Crimea.’
Russia and Ukraine raise military spending as war rages on
Russian military spending grew by an estimated 9.2 per cent in 2022, to around $86.4 billion. This was equivalent to 4.1 per cent of Russia’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2022, up from 3.7 per cent of GDP in 2021.
Figures released by Russia in late 2022 show that spending on national defence, the largest component of Russian military expenditure, was already 34 per cent higher, in nominal terms, than in budgetary plans drawn up in 2021.
‘The difference between Russia’s budgetary plans and its actual military spending in 2022 suggests the invasion of Ukraine has cost Russia far more than it anticipated,’ said Dr Lucie Béraud-Sudreau, Director of SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme.
Ukraine’s military spending reached $44.0 billion in 2022. At 640 per cent, this was the highest single-year increase in a country’s military expenditure ever recorded in SIPRI data. As a result of the increase and the war-related damage to Ukraine’s economy, the military burden (military spending as a share of GDP) shot up to 34 per cent of GDP in 2022, from 3.2 per cent in 2021.
US spending rises despite high inflation
The United States remains by far the world’s biggest military spender. US military spending reached $877 billion in 2022, which was 39 per cent of total global military spending and three times more than the amount spent by China, the world’s second largest spender. The 0.7 per cent real-terms increase in US spending in 2022 would have been even greater had it not been for the highest levels of inflation since 1981.
‘The increase in the USA’s military spending in 2022 was largely accounted for by the unprecedented level of financial military aid it provided to Ukraine,’ said Dr Nan Tian, SIPRI Senior Researcher. ‘Given the scale of US spending, even a minor increase in percentage terms has a significant impact on the level of global military expenditure.’
US financial military aid to Ukraine totalled $19.9 billion in 2022. Although this was the largest amount of military aid given by any country to a single beneficiary in any year since the cold war, it represented only 2.3 per cent of total US military spending. In 2022 the USA allocated $295 billion to military operations and maintenance, $264 billion to procurement and research and development, and $167 billion to military personnel.
China and Japan lead continued spending increase in Asia and Oceania
The combined military expenditure of countries in Asia and Oceania was $575 billion. This was 2.7 per cent more than in 2021 and 45 per cent more than in 2013, continuing an uninterrupted upward trend dating back to at least 1989.
China remained the world’s second largest military spender, allocating an estimated $292 billion in 2022. This was 4.2 per cent more than in 2021 and 63 per cent more than in 2013. China’s military expenditure has increased for 28 consecutive years.
Japan’s military spending increased by 5.9 per cent between 2021 and 2022, reaching $46.0 billion, or 1.1 per cent of GDP. This was the highest level of Japanese military spending since 1960. A new national security strategy published in 2022 sets out ambitious plans to increase Japan’s military capability over the coming decade in response to perceived growing threats from China, North Korea and Russia.
‘Japan is undergoing a profound shift in its military policy,’ said Xiao Liang, Researcher with SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. ‘The post-war restraints Japan imposed on its military spending and military capabilities seem to be loosening.’
Other notable developments
The real-terms increase in world military spending in 2022 was slowed by the effects of inflation, which in many countries soared to levels not seen for decades. In nominal terms (i.e. in current prices without adjusting for inflation), the global total increased by 6.5 per cent.
India’s military spending of $81.4 billion was the fourth highest in the world. It was 6.0 per cent more than in 2021.
In 2022 military spending by Saudi Arabia, the fifth biggest military spender, rose by 16 per cent to reach an estimated $75.0 billion, its first increase since 2018.
Nigeria’s military spending fell by 38 per cent to $3.1 billion, after a 56 per cent increase in spending in 2021.
Military spending by NATO members totalled $1232 billion in 2022, which was 0.9 per cent higher than in 2021.
The United Kingdom had the highest military spending in Central and Western Europe at $68.5 billion, of which an estimated $2.5 billion (3.6 per cent) was financial military aid to Ukraine.
In 2022 Türkiye’s military spending fell for the third year in a row, reaching $10.6 billion—a decrease of 26 per cent from 2021.
Ethiopia’s military spending rose by 88 per cent in 2022, to reach $1.0 billion. The increase coincided with a renewed government offensive against the Tigray People’s Liberation Front in the north of the country.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
On the 75th anniversary of the Nuremberg Doctor’s Trial, holocaust survivor Vera Sharav warned of the myriad parallels between our world today and the one she barely escaped. Here is our illustrated version of her historic speech.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s speech starts at 00:10 and ends at 02:21.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Сви чланци Глобалног истраживања могу се читати на 51 језику тако што ћете активирати дугме Преведи веб локацију испод имена аутора.
Да бисте добили дневни билтен Глобал Ресеарцх-а (изабрани чланци), кликните овде.
Кликните на дугме за дељење изнад да бисте е-поштом/проследили овај чланак својим пријатељима и колегама. Пратите нас на Инстаграму и Твиттеру и претплатите се на наш Телеграм канал. Слободно поново постављајте и делите чланке Глобалног истраживања.
***
Београдски форум за свет равноправних основан је пре 23 године као добровољно, независно, непрофитно удружење грађана, као извор слободне, независне мисли о националним и државним интересима, унутрашњој и спољној политици и међународним односима.
Данас је то организација која баштини богато искуство у истраживачком раду, издаваштву, међународној сарадњи, медијском деловању, организовању националних и међународних конференција, јачању веза матице и расејања, хуманитарном раду и другим областима. Форум је издавач преко 150 књига и публикација објављених на српском и више страних језика. Анализе чланова Форума о регионалним, европским и глобалним кретањима прате се објављују у престижним међународним публикацијама и медијима.
На међународном плану Београдски форум сарађује са Светским саветом за мир са седиштем у Атини, Удружењем «Храброст за морал», из Швајцарске (Mut zur Ethic), Шилер Институтом, из Немачке, Шангајским форумом, Ренмин универзитетом, ЦНИЕ-ом и низом других тинк-танк организација из Кине, Русије, Индије, Бразила, Мексика, САД и других земаља.
Заједно са српским расејањем и више удружења, Форум је покренуо оснивање Српског дома у Београду као места свеобухватног сусретања матице и расејања; библиотеке српског расејања као јединствене културне институције; Документационог центра о агресији НАТО као тачке преокрета у светским односима; подизање Меморијала жртвама геноцида над српским народом у 20. веку; обнављање рада Фондације за стипендирање студената математике и техничких наука «Сања Миленковић» која је основана 1999. а чији је рад прекинут узурпацијом средстава 2000. године.
Београдски форум, Клуб генерала и адмирала Србије, СУБНОР Србије, Друштво српских домаћина и друга удружења су обновили иницијативу да се настви рад скупштинских и владиних тела за утврђивање последица употребе пројектила са осиромашеним уранијумом, да се до идуће 25. годишњице агресије НАТО утврди и објави листа цивилних жртава агресије и да се направи анализа како је теме агресије НАТО обрађена у уџбеницима за све нивое образовања.
Форум је засновн на идејама мира, равноправности, слободе, независности и поштовања међународног права, на вредностима које су дубоко усађене у историју, национални, културни и морални идентитет нашег народа. Вођен тиме, Форум је од оснивања недвосмислено осуђивао агресију НАТО као злочин против мира и човечности, акт експанзије на Исток и преседн за глобализацију интервенционизма. Истину и оцене о агресији НАТО засноване на чињеницама, морамо још одлучније бранити и понављати, утолико упорније уколико носиоци агресије, хегемонизма и експанзије данас настоје да поврате униполарност и спрече демократизацију међународних односа, да ултиматумима принуде Србију да призна распарчавање њене државне територије, да етнички очисти, раздроби и понизи српски народ до његове националне, културне и духовне непрепознатљивости.
Финансијска помоћ, инвестиције, обећања чланства и пропаганда ЕУ не би смели да нас заведу и удаље од истине: водеће силе Запада безиобзирно потцењују и понижавају српски народ, не признају његове животне интересе на Балкану. Оне Србију не третирају као равноправног партнера већ као монету за поткусуривање у својој геополитице ширења, доминације, конфронтације и припрема за геополитичку трговину. Било би упутно да се бар повремено присетимо, да је штета од западних санкција 90-их година прошлог века износила око 150 милијарди а ратна штета од агресије НАТО око 100 милијарди долара. Такође, само по основу продаје (!) финансијског тржишта, из Србије је «одливено» на Запад око 50 милијарди евра профита.
На делу су огољени притисци Запада да се Србија одрекне своје Покрајине Косово и Метохија, да се одрекне подршке Републици Српској, да прекине стратешко партнерство и сарадњу са Русијом и Кином, да уведе санкције Русији. То говори да Запад настоји да одвоји Србију од стратешких савезника, да је изолује и принуди да напусти војну неутралност и прикључи се НАТО-у.
Разуме се да питање статуса Косова и Метохије треба решавати мирним путем, дијалогом. Спорно је, међутим, што САД/ЕУ/НАТО, док су им препуна уста о обавези других да поштују право и правила, истовремено уцењују Србију да за Косово и Метохију прихвати решење уз кршење свих права и правила, укључујући Повељу УН, резолуцију СБ УН 1244! Док не желе ни да чују за решење у складу са Уставом Србије, истовремено лицемерно бране назови устав сецесионистичке творевине и концепт ЗСО као добровољне НВО. Шта више, ЕУ крши мандат ГС УН о улози «олакшивача дијалога страна». Најпре, не обазирући се на мандат ГС УН, уводи САД у дијалог, а затим, без ичијег овлашћења, Србији уручује Шолц-Макронов ултиматум игноришући СБ УН и његове императивне одлуке.
Тзв. Основни споразум о путу нормализације и тзв. Имплементациони споразум нису резултат преговора, нису уравнотежени, нису засновани на Повељи УН и резолуцији СБ УН 1244 и нису потписани. У суштини то је ултиматум који ни једна независна и суверена земља која држи до своје слободе, независности и достојанства не би прихватила.
У тим условима, Србија треба да наступи принципијелно: остаје привржена дијалогу и мирном решењу, али недвосмислено захтева поштовање Повеље УН и резолуције СБ УН 1244 као трајно важеће основе и оквира за праведан компромис. На тој основи, треба да настави мобилисање најшире дипломатске подршке пријатељских земаља глобалне већине.
Србија има право и обавезу да постави недвосмислен захтев за слободан безбедан и достојанствен повратак 250.000 протераних Срба и других неалбанаца на своја имања и у своје домове у Покрајини. Треба изнети једнако јасан стаав да Заједница српских општина, када и ако се спроведе, неће нити може бити замена за права Србије као суверене државе, чланице ОУН и ОЕБС, на Косово и Метохију као своју аутономну покрајину.
Независно од свега, Србија треба да настави са активном дипломатијом, укључујући и активности на отпризнавању. Није довољно рећи да се Србија не сложе, или да не подржава пријем тзв. «Републике Косово» УН. Ако бранимо суверенитет и територијални интегритет неопходан ја одлучан и доследан став да ће Србија свим дипломатским и политичким капацитетима спречавати учлањења илегалне творевине «Република Косово» у било коју међународну организацију, глобалног или регионалног карактера, укључујући ту и СЕ, НАТО, па чак и ОИК. Изјаве о томе да Србија нека учлањења не може спречити, да нека чланства не зависе од ње, да је неко, ту и тамо, већ осигурао већину у прилог сепаратиста и сличне, нису добре ни јасне поруке пријатељима, али зато годе противницима. Иточна Rека (УН) јесте најважнији део фронта дипломатске одбране, али његова чврстина и издржљивост у великој мери зависе од стабилности и стања на другим, условно речено, споредним фронтовима. Нигде не смемо дизати руке у вис!
Назови избори у општинама на Северу Покрајине (23. априла 2023.) представљају нови покушај понижавања Србије и српског народа и опасно поигравање Запада. Уместо да отклоне узроке угрожавања безбедности, систематског кршења основних права Срба у Покрајини и кршења раније постигнутих договора, водеће силе Запада користе Куртија да настави застрашивање и етничко чишкћење Срба, да изазива ескалацију напетости, милитаризацију Севера Покрајине са непредвидивим последицама.
Сви смо, углавном, сагласни да су глобални односи у процесу најдубље трансформације, да ништа није како је било, да се уместо униполарног, конституише нови мултипполарни светски поредак. И ту, углавном, застајемо, поготову, не улазимо у прогнозе и анализе како се све то одражава на Србију, на услове за ефикасну одбрану њених животних интереса, пре свега, њеног суверенитета и територијалног интегритета. Прогнозе су, разузме се, ризичне, поготову њихово изношење у јавност, али су неизбежне. Није ризик рећи да мултиполарност искључује глобалну доминацију и хегемонизам једног центра, или једне групације земаља. Није ризик да искључимо, или бар проредимо, коришћење појма «међународна заједница» који је скривалица за ЕУ и НАТО. Време је за анализе у категоријама глобалне већине и мањине коју чине земље тзв. међународне заједнице. Глобална већина је већ клонституисана по важним параметрима – по броју земаља чланица УН (3/4), по броју становника, по учешћу у светској трговини, светском ГДП, расту ГДП, по природним ресурсима, отпору хегемонији, санкцијама, интервенционизму и многим другим критеријумима.
Глобална већина у себи обухвата већину оних чланица УН које подржавају суверенитет и територијални интегритет Србије, које не признају илегално отцепљење Приштине. Она је уједно извор и за многа нова отпризнавања. У истом смеру, убрзано се мењају и односи у модерним технологијама (Г5), финансијској и војној моћи. Мултиполаризација као незадржив процес отвара нове просторе за демократизацију међународних односа чија ширина и дубина нису унапред дати, већ зависе од тога колико ће се земље глобалне већине ангажовати у изградњи демократског светског поретка. Ово питање, разуме се, не заобилази ни Србију као војно неутралну земљу.
Форум се залаже за мирно решење сукоба у Украјини, уз елиминисање његових узрока и успостављање система недељиве, једнаке безбедности чему је посвећена и мировна иницијатива кинеског председника Си Ђинпинга.
Уравнотежена, војно неутрална спољна политика и сарадња са свим земљама које Србију прихватају као равноправног партнера и које недвосмислено подржавају њен суверенитет и територијални интегритет су једина исправна опција у новим глобалним престројавањима. Национално јединство и консенсус су могући и реални уколико су стратешка опредељења принципијелна и јасна.
*
Напомена за читаоце: кликните на дугме за дељење изнад. Пратите нас на Инстаграму и Твиттеру и претплатите се на наш Телеграм канал. Слободно поново постављајте и делите чланке Глобалног истраживања.
Живадин Йованович является президентом Белградского форума “За мир равных”. Он является постоянным автором Global Research.
Alle Artikel von Global Research können in 51 Sprachen gelesen werden, indem Sie die Schaltfläche Website übersetzen unterhalb des Namens des Autors aktivieren.
Um den täglichen Newsletter von Global Research (ausgewählte Artikel) zu erhalten, klicken Sie hier.
Klicken Sie auf die Schaltfläche “Teilen”, um diesen Artikel per E-Mail an Ihre Freunde und Kollegen weiterzuleiten. Folgen Sie uns auf Instagram und Twitter und abonnieren Sie unseren Telegram-Kanal. Sie können die Artikel von Global Research gerne weiterveröffentlichen und mit anderen teilen.
***
Einleitung
Die lateinische Redensart “O (was für) Zeiten, o (was für) Sitten!” beklagt auch heute noch den Wandel der Zeiten und den Verfall der Sitten.
Derjenige, der über den rasanten Wandel der politischen Großwetterlage, über die Annäherung ehemals verfeindeter Staaten im Nahen Osten und in Afrika sowie die weltweite Machtübernahme der WHO ausführlich und wahrheitsgemäß aufgeklärt werden will und Näheres über den Verfall der Sitten im Westen und die Legalisierung von Drogen wissen möchte, der wende sich an international zugängliche alternative Medien wie „Global Research“. Er ist damit gut beraten.
Deshalb sollen die folgenden Gedanken vor allem der Versuch sein, die Frage zu beantworten, welche Möglichkeiten wache Bürger (noch) haben, dieser beunruhigenden Entwicklung Einhalt zu gebieten und entschieden gegenzusteuern.
Eine Möglichkeit besteht meines Erachtens darin, dass wir Bürger den Humanismus erproben und den Beweis erbringen, dass die Menschheit sozial ist, gut und fähig, ohne Waffen und Kriege zusammenzuleben.
Humanismus erproben
Der Humanismus geht als philosophische Strömung und menschliche Lebenspraxis von dem optimistischen Menschenbild aus, dass die Menschheit zu einer positiven Entwicklung und zur Verbesserung der menschlichen Existenz fähig ist. Wesentliche Bedingungen hierfür sind die Achtung der menschlichen Würde jedes Individuums, die Freiheit im Denken und Handeln, die freie Meinungsäußerung und die Abwesenheit von Gewalt und Zwang. Ein positives gesellschaftliches Umfeld und Bildung fördern das humanistische Ideal freier Persönlichkeitsentfaltung (1).
Obwohl die zivilisatorische Entwicklung der Menschheit über die Jahrtausende hinweg stetig fortgeschritten ist, scheinen wir uns hinsichtlich der Bändigung der Gewalt noch gänzlich an den Anfängen der Humanisierung zu befinden. Doch da die Gewalttätigkeit nicht Ausdruck der menschlichen Natur ist, sondern Produkt geschichtlicher und kultureller Bedingungen, ist es möglich, der Gewalt Herr zu werden und sie aus den Beziehungen der Einzelnen und der Gemeinschaften auszuschalten.
Vor allem Kinder können sich unter Gewalt und Zwang nicht zu gesunden, aufrechten Persönlichkeiten entwickeln. Deshalb sollte die Erziehung in Elternhaus und Schule auf jegliche Gewaltanwendung und Angst auslösendes Autoritätsgebaren verzichten und sich mit wahrem Verständnis dem kindlichen Seelenleben zuwenden.
Das menschliche Gefühlsleben ist jedoch nicht allein als Ergebnis der Eltern-Kind-Beziehung zu verstehen. Entscheidend sind auch die in einer Kultur vorherrschenden Werte und die mit ihnen korrespondierenden Gefühle, als deren Vermittler Eltern, Lehrer und Erzieher täglich an das Kind herantreten. Ein positives gesellschaftliches Umfeld kann nur dann entstehen, wenn wir Bürger uns für eine bewusste ethisch-moralische Werteerziehung sowie für eine Erziehung zu Gemeinsinn und Frieden engagieren.
Von Bedeutung ist auch die Frage der Bildung. Sie sollte dem Menschen vorrangig vermitteln, wie er seine Probleme lösen soll und kann. Zu den wichtigsten Problemen zählen sein Lebensgefühl, seine Meinung über sich selbst, seinen Partner, seine Haltung gegenüber den Kindern, seine Meinung über den Nachbarn, die Gemeinde und den Staat. Wenn das gelingt, wird er eine realistischere Sichtweise über sich selbst und auch den Anderen bekommen (2).
Beweis erbringen, dass Menschen sozial sind
Der Begriff „sozial“ bedeutet umgangssprachlich die positive Beziehung einer Person zu einer anderen oder auch mehreren anderen Personen, was heißt, ein Gefühl für die Allgemeinheit, ein Gemeinschaftsgefühl zu besitzen. Das schließt die Fähigkeiten ein, sich für andere zu interessieren, sich in sie einzufühlen, ihnen zu helfen, den Schwächeren zu schützen und dabei eventuell eigene Interessen zurückzustellen (3).
Bereits vor über 100 Jahren schrieb der russische Politikwissenschaftler, Human-Geograph und Philosoph FürstPeter Kropotkin (1842-1921) in seinem Buch „Die gegenseitige Hilfe in der Tier- und Menschenwelt“, dass in Natur und Gesellschaft keineswegs nur ein Kampf ums Überleben, ein Kampf aller gegen alle (Sozialdarwinismus) stattfindet, sondern dass auch das Prinzip der „gegenseitigen Hilfe“ vorherrscht. Diejenigen Lebewesen, die dieses Prinzip umsetzen, würden erfolgreicher überleben.
Kropotkin beobachtete sowohl die Natur als auch die Naturwesen und bezog seine Erkenntnisse auf den Menschen. Die naturwissenschaftliche Tiefen-Psychologie basiert auf diesen Erkenntnissen. Demnach ist der Mensch ein naturgegeben soziales Wesen, das auf die Gemeinschaft seiner Mitmenschen ausgerichtet ist und eine Neigung zum Guten besitzt (4).
Aus der Einsicht um das Zusammengehörigkeitsgefühl aller, die Menschenantlitz tragen, erwuchsen die Lehrern der sittlichen Führer der Menschheit, die Weisheit des Laotse, das Gebot der Nächstenliebe und die unzähligen Formen des gesellschaftlichen Lebens und Verhaltens. Die Mahnrufe des menschlichen Gemeinschaftsgefühls können nie ausgemerzt werden, denn das Geschenk der Evolution besteht im sittlichen Bewusstsein des Einzelnen, in der Einsicht in die Verantwortung aller gegenüber allen.
Ein praktisches Beispiel aus der Schule soll die soziale Natur des Menschen bestätigen. Es wird Lehrer wie Eltern, die wegen der mangelhaften Unterrichtung und Betreuung ihrer Kinder seit langem mit dem gegenwärtigen Schulsystem hadern, gleichermaßen interessieren und bewegen.
Es ist die Geschichte eines Lehrer-Kollegen, dem es mit einem gut überlegten Handgriff gelang, sich mit einem irritierten Jungen, der im Unterricht sogar die Beine auf die Schulbank legte, zu versöhnen. Er schloss Frieden mit ihm und beendete den Kriegszustand, der die ganze Klasse beeinflusste.
Als er begann, selbst zu unterrichten, fühlte er sich eher als Dompteur einer unwilligen Horde als ein geachteter Pädagoge. Aber Druck und Gewalt – so sein Vorsatz – sollten im Unterricht nicht die Oberhand gewinnen und er wollte verstehen, warum er auf das störende Verhalten von Schülern so stark reagieren würde. In der Klasse saß nämlich ein lebendiges Bürschchen von 13 Jahren, der das Gespräch mit dem Nachbarn viel interessanter fand als den Unterricht.
Da er sich mit seinen persönlichen Sorgen und Nöten von den Lehrern nicht verstanden fühlte, konnte er sich auch nicht auf den Unterricht konzentrieren. Die Eltern waren getrennt und der ältere Bruder besuchte im Gegensatz zu ihm das Gymnasium.
Wenn sich der Kollege ärgerte und Konsequenzen androhte, nahm das Störverhalten des Schülers zu. Nur allmählich ist dem Kollegen bewusst geworden, dass er vom Schüler in einen Machtkampf um die Oberhand in der Klasse hineingezogen worden ist. Deshalb begegnete er ihm mit Groll, Unwillen und beleidigter Mine. Der Schüler reagierte darauf mit neuen Provokationen und legte schließlich seine Beine auf die Schulbank.
Obwohl der Kollege den starken Wunsch verspürte, seinen Willen durchzusetzen und ihn zum Gehorsam zu zwingen, ging er nach der Mittagspause klopfenden Herzens auf den Schüler zu und machte einen Versöhnungsversuch. Er sagte zu ihm: „Ich kann zwar dein Verhalten, das du in der letzten Stunde gezeigt hast, nicht akzeptieren, aber vielleicht liegt es auch ein wenig an mir. Ich hoffe, wir finden zusammen einen Weg, uns zu einigen.“
Diese Versöhnung war nur möglich, weil dem Kollegen die schwierige familiäre Situation des Schülers und der Kriegszustand in der Klasse bewusst geworden ist. Indem er sich gefühlsmäßig in die Situation des Schülers hineinversetzte, entschied er sich für einen anderen Weg als den der Gewalt. Er machte Frieden mit dem Kind und beendete den Kriegszustand.
Die Wirkung war unglaublich. Der Schüler folgte nun völlig erstaunt und aufmerksam dem Unterricht und verteidigte schließlich den Lehrer-Kollegen vor der gesamten Klasse, weil andere Schüler ihn kritisierten. Er kam in eine andere Stimmung, weil er sich vom Lehrer verstanden gefühlt hat.
Die gesamte Episode beweist nicht nur, dass der Mensch sozial ist, sie weist für alle Erzieher auch den Weg zu einer friedlichen Welt.
Der Mensch ist gut, aber irritiert
Wenn wir uns in der Welt umsehen, stellen wir fest, dass die Menschen zwar gut sind, jedoch psychisch irritiert. Kein Mensch kann seine Probleme in der Ehe, mit den Kindern oder im gesellschaftlichen Leben lösen. Wir schlagen die Kinder und führen mörderische Kriege. Doch all dies ist auf eine unsachgemäße Erziehung zurückzuführen. Deshalb muss allen Menschen psychologisches Wissen vermittelt werden, damit sie ihre persönlichen Probleme lösen können und beginnen, die Welt in eine friedliche Bahn zu lenken.
Der Mensch ist nicht von vornherein bestimmt, Wolf oder Lamm zu sein. Seine Freiheit besteht darin, dass er sich selber zu dem machen kann, was er in Zukunft sein soll. Wenn der Mensch das Böse tut, so hat er sich zuvor dafür entschieden; er hat es zuvor gewollt. Der Ursprung des Bösen liegt nicht in der menschlichen Natur.
Beweis erbringen, dass Menschen fähig sind, ohne Waffen und Kriege zusammenzuleben.
Das verallgemeinerte „Bild“ vom „Kampf ums Dasein“ soll rechtfertigen, dass der Krieg in der Welt nicht überwunden ist – und nicht überwunden werden kann. Diese Auffassung vom „homo homini lupus“ (Der Mensch ist dem Menschen ein Wolf) ist aber grundfalsch. Sie beruht auf einer Oberflächlichkeit, die bei genauerem Hinsehen sofort offenkundig wird.
Eine unvoreingenommene Betrachtung historischer Kriege lehrt uns, dass die Willkür der herrschenden Klassen eine der ersten Kriegsursachen ist. Streitigkeiten unter Königen, Eroberungslust eines Herrschers oder seiner Kriegerkaste, das heißt, die Machtgier der Mächtigen hat die Völker in die Kriege geführt, in denen sie für die Interessen ihrer Potentaten verbluteten. Der Konkurrenzkampf zwischen den Religionen, von denen jede sich im Besitz der absoluten Wahrheit wähnte, gab weiteren Anlass zu kriegerischen Verwicklungen, in welchen die Menschen für die Macht ihrer Kirche starben.
Die Neuzeit, die den Vorrang der Wirtschaft gegenüber den anderen Bereichen des öffentlichen Lebens realisierte, schuf dann den Typus des Wirtschaftskrieges, in dem die Herren des Handels und der Industrie die Völker zu einem Ringen um Rohstoffquellen und Absatzmärkte antreten ließen. In fast allen Kriegen der letzten Jahrhunderte spielt der ökonomische Faktor eine dominierende Rolle, wenngleich er sich mitunter hinter anderen Motivationen verbirgt.
Die Ursachen der Kriege waren also mannigfaltig, aber jeder Krieg ist im Interesse einer kleinen Oberschicht geführt worden, der allein der Sieg und der damit verbundene Gewinn an Land und Reichtümern zugutekam. Die Völker selbst, die für ihre weltlichen oder geistlichen Herrscher in den Kampf zogen, durften nur wenig oder gar nicht an der Nutznießung ihrer Eroberung teilhaben. Sie sind nicht gefragt worden, ob sie in den Krieg ziehen wollen oder nicht; gezwungenermaßen nahmen sie die Waffe in die Hand.
Es ist deshalb nicht recht, die „Völker“ für ihre Kriege verantwortlich zu machen; es waren immer nur ihre herrschenden Schichten, die sich befehdeten und versuchten, sich wechselseitig zu unterjochen. Darum ist es falsch, den Krieg auf die menschliche Natur zurückzuführen. Die Natur des Menschen ist friedlich.
Ein Großteil der Menschen liebt es, seiner Arbeit nachzugehen, den Acker zu bestellen und mit den Nachbarn in Freundschaft zu leben. Der Gesichtskreis der meisten Menschen reicht nicht so weit, um nach anderen Ländern oder gar Kontinenten aufzubrechen und dorthin die verheerende Flamme des Krieges zu tragen. Nur die Machtgier derer, die innerhalb der Völker als Obrigkeit fungieren und durch ihre soziale Stellung vom Geist der Gewalt durchdrungen sind, treibt immer wieder zu kriegerischen Auseinandersetzungen, in denen die Völker zugunsten ihrer Herren und Ausbeuter verbluten.
*
Hinweis an die Leser: Bitte klicken Sie auf die obigen Schaltflächen zum Teilen. Folgen Sie uns auf Instagram und Twitter und abonnieren Sie unseren Telegram-Kanal. Fühlen Sie sich frei, Artikel von Global Research erneut zu veröffentlichen und zu teilen.
Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel ist Schul-Rektor, Erziehungswissenschaftler und Diplom-Psychologe. Nach seinen Universitätsstudien wurde er wissenschaftlicher Lehrer in der Erwachsenenbildung. Als Pensionär arbeitete er als Psychotherapeut in eigener Praxis. In seinen Büchern und Fachartikeln fordert er eine bewusste ethisch-moralische Werteerziehung sowie eine Erziehung zu Gemeinsinn und Frieden. Für seine Verdienste um Serbien bekam er 2021 von den Universitäten Belgrad und Novi Sad den Republik-Preis „Kapitän Misa Anastasijevic“ verliehen.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
First published on April 15, 2023
***
As has been carefully documented, under cover of the ‘virus’/‘vaccine’ narrative, the Global Elite is implementing long-planned and profound changes to 200 areas of human life.
Needless to say, with some people already resisting and more people likely to perceive the truth of what is happening and join the resistance with the passage of time, policing the imposition of this program will be a critical factor in ensuring its success.
As indicated then, just one area in which profound change will take place is policing.
Future policing will be done by a smaller number of militarily-equipped police, transhuman police and technocratic police supported by corporate private security technology.
In this article, I will briefly outline the key changes to policing, in these three distinct categories, and also explain why these changes must be resisted and how we can do this most effectively.
Fewer and Militarized Police
Reflecting a longer term trend, in 2019 the International Association of Chiefs of Police reported that ‘Law enforcement agencies across the United States are struggling to recruit and hire police officers.’ While police killings of innocent civilians – see ‘Mapping Police Violence’ and ‘Not just “a few bad apples”: U.S. police kill civilians at much higher rates than other countries’ – failed to rate a mention in the report, it did at least acknowledge ‘Scrutiny of the police, cellphone recordings of interactions between the police and public, media coverage, and popular entertainment portrayals of police have led many young people to view police differently than their parents may have.’ See ‘The State of Recruitment: A Crisis for Law Enforcement’.
In late 2021, two years into policing the pandemic, US police reported a substantially increased rate of retirement and resignation among police officers, with more than five times as many police leaving the New York Police Department in 2021 as left in 2020. According to the report: ‘In the wake of a spasmodic year of protests and pandemic, plus an aftermath of violent crime, the profession may be fast approaching a generational and possibly historic reckoning.’ See ‘Law enforcement faces unprecedented challenges in hiring and keeping recruits’.
But on top of long-standing issues in relation to police numbers exacerbated by political direction of policing behaviour while enforcing ‘pandemic’ lockdown measures, it is clear that the number of serving police has been reduced throughout the past three years by using two additional mechanisms: In many places, forcing those who resisted the ‘kill shot’ to resign from service – see, for example, ‘Victoria Police facing exodus due to draconian Covid rules’ – and, everywhere, by killing off a proportion of the police who were mandated to take the shot (which will continue to have impact in the years ahead).
Apart from this, the damaged reputation police suffered as a result of their role in enforcing the Elite program against those people willing to nonviolently protest the violation of their constitutional and human rights, has meant that the conscience-based resignation rate of police has risen – see, for example, ‘Conscientious Resignation of Police Officer in Australia’ – while recruitment has suffered in many places.
In any case, two critical questions to ask are these: Were government policies that led to police violence during the pandemic designed to provoke public anger and induce police retirements and resignations as ways of reducing police numbers easily? And was official interference in police decisions about whether or not to investigate injection deaths partly designed to disenchant conscientious officers and induce further resignation/retirements?
Why would governments do this? Could it be part of a plan to facilitate the transformation of how policing is conducted? After all, the World Economic Forum has been clear about the Elite intention to robotize the workforce, with more than half of human workers projected to be replaced by robots within a few years.
So why should we expect police to be forced out of the workforce, one way or another, at a lesser rate than elsewhere?
Moreover, there is an additional problem: Any human police officer with a reasonably ‘normal’ psychological profile has a conscience. And these will not serve well in enforcing the coming technocratic order.
Separately from the numbers issue, the ongoing militarization of police forces around the world has been noted by many scholars. For a summary of some issues in relation to policing in the USA, see this article written in 2017: ‘Why are Police in the USA so Terrified?’
But it is clear that the trend to militarize policing has been accelerating for some years. In a recent article US constitutional attorney John Whitehead succinctly elaborates this trend as just one of the features to be expected from the US government in 2023:
‘Militarized police. Having transformed local law enforcement into extensions of the military, the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department and the FBI are moving into the next phase of the transformation, turning the nation’s police officers into techno-warriors, complete with iris scanners, body scanners, thermal imaging Doppler radar devices, facial recognition programs, license plate readers, cell phone extraction software, Stingray devices and so much more.’ See ‘What to Expect from the Government in 2023? More of the Same’ and ‘Stingray Tracking Devices: Who’s Got Them?’
So police numbers are being reduced and police are being militarized. But that is not all.
Transhuman Police
A critical component of the Elite program is to turn those not killed into transhuman slaves.
What is transhumanism?
In essence: Transhumanism is a set of beliefs based on the premise that human beings can be improved by genetic manipulation and/or implanting technologies into the brain and body to achieve enhanced capacities.
While many people involved in this field are concerned with treating disabilities to improve the life experience of those afflicted, and some are engaged in ongoing discussions to consider the ethical issues this raises, it is clear that this is the sanitized version of a program that has far more hideous implications. For a sanitized version, watch this video of a World Economic Forum discussion held on 24 January 2020: ‘When Humans Become Cyborgs’.
But, for the Elite, there is little point deploying these technologies unless they can be controlled by Elite agents. After all, as the World Economic Forum made clear in 2016, by 2030 ‘You’ll Own Nothing. And You’ll Be Happy.’
Obviously, if you are to own nothing and be happy about it, either you have reached some exalted state of human consciousness in which possessions no longer matter or someone is messing with your mind so that you believe what is not true.
And the best way to mess with someone’s mind is to implant a microchip into their body that enables control of that mind by someone else.
After all, altering what people think, feel, believe and do – through genetic manipulation and implanting technologies – is the very essence of transhumanism. So, to reiterate, transhumanists don’t want individuals with free will, they want individuals whose thoughts, feelings and behaviour can be controlled; that is, they want slaves. While this is explained at some length in the article ‘Beware the Transhumanists’ above, it is also made emphatically clear by World Economic Forum spokesperson, Professor Yuval Noah Harrari, in a 3-minute video which includes these words:
COVID is critical because this is what convinces people to accept, to legitimize, total biometric surveillance.
We now see mass surveillance systems established, even in democratic countries which previously rejected them, and we also see a change in the nature of surveillance. Previously, surveillance was mainly above the skin, now it’s going under the skin….
In summary then, the technology now available after decades of effort enables receiver nanochips to be sprayed, injected or otherwise implanted into human bodies. With the ongoing deployment of 5G (which includes extensive space and ground-based technologies: see ‘Deadly Rainbow: Will 5G Precipitate the Extinction of All Life on Earth?’), just one outcome of these combined technologies is that it will be possible to direct the individual behaviour of each person so implanted with directions from an external source.
You can watch a description of how the Covid-19 shots have been used to inject nanotechnology into the bodies of people which, under the direction of other individuals via EMF signals, can be assembled to establish a permanent communication and control link between the transhuman and those responsible for controlling it. Watch Maria Zeee’s interview of Dr. David Nixon who shows real time video footage of the nanotechnology inside the Covid-19 injections assembling robotic arms that guide the nanotechnology development:
There is another excellent video interview by Dr. Faiez Kirsten of Dr. Ana Mihalcea discussing the transhumanist agenda. This includes consideration of how geoengineering – by spraying metal particulates (such as aluminium, barium and strontium) and synthetic biology into the atmosphere – is being used to modify all life on this planet (‘to modify every cell, every microbe, to digitize it and then to fuse it in its natural state with synthetic biology’), the role of electromagnetic frequencies (EMF) such as 5G in this scheme, and the purpose of nanotechnology ingredients in the injections. In essence, they conclude, besides killing vast numbers of people, they want to control the minds of those left alive. In summarizing, Mihalcea emphasised that her research demonstrates that the unvaccinated are not safe and they must take further action to defend their health from the synthetic biology attacks through atmospheric geoengineering and contaminated food.
‘We are running out of time as the human species and our planet is being destroyed via synthetic biology. If you want to survive and you want your children and grandchildren to have a chance of survival you must rise now and you must fight.’ Watch ‘A Discussion with Dr Ana Mihalcea on Transhumanism and EDTA Chelation’.
Moreover, given that the control technology of its transhuman slaves will be owned by corporate executives, this means that the Elite will be able to control everything from the launch of nuclear weapons (by using remote control to direct the chosen individual in a particular chain of command to order [or execute] the launch of one or more nuclear weapons at the target[s] nominated at the time[s] specified), deploy ‘cyborg soldiers’, ‘cyborg workers’ and ‘cyborg consumers’ to do as directed and, of course, ‘cyborg police’ to carry out the orders issued by those controlling the command technology.
In the case of transhuman police, this could range from duties resembling those now performed by police to any other task whatsoever to which they are assigned. And because the implanted chip will override free will, the transhuman individual will have no awareness of choice and will simply robotically perform the tasks delivered by an artificial intelligence program to the technological implants in its body and brain.
So whether programmed to issue a fine, kill a noncompliant individual, forcibly relocate one or more people from a rural area to the nearest ‘smart city’ or simply go home, the cyborg police officer will do as directed without thought or feeling of its own.
Technocratic Police and Corporate Private Security
In 2016, the World Bank published a report considering some of the consequences of robotization, including the problems that would be caused and how these might, theoretically, be addressed.
Despite one highly sanitized World Economic Forum account of robots leading to an increased workforce – see ‘Here’s why robots are actually going to increase human employment’ – another World Economic Forum report candidly noted that inequality would worsen as ‘robots will do half of all work tasks by 2025’. See
And this is clearly evident in relation to police work where, beyond even the measures outlined above, a substantial range of new technologies will robotize policing, particularly in relation to primary functions: surveillance and control.
In essence, an increasing number of policing functions are being technologized to make policing more ruthlessly efficient. This involves use of a range of technologies such as 5G, the Internet of Things (IoT), the Internet of Bodies (IoB), the Internet of Places (IoP), artificial intelligence (AI), geofencing, digital identity, surveillance and facial recognition (3D) cameras, smart street poles and lights (which gather data via facial recognition cameras and environmental sensors, display digital signage and use speakers to instruct the immediate population how to behave), license plate readers and vehicle kill switches as well as autonomous and electromagnetic weapons.
But how these technologies are combined and deployed varies. To illustrate this, consider the Israeli private security company Gabriel Protects which offers a suite of surveillance and control services: ‘Preempt and contain physical threats in real time with smart technology. Billions are spent monitoring and recording security incidents. Gabriel detects and responds to them. Gabriel’s next generation security technology instantly detects and automates the response to violent threats, saving precious time and lives.’
As Whitney Webb explains: ‘much of the company’s future vision coincides with the vision of the intelligence agencies backing it – pre-crime, robotic policing and biometric surveillance.’ Hence, under the guise of stopping mass shootings ‘a surveillance system backed by top Mossad, CIA and FBI officials is being installed in schools, houses of worship, and other civilian locations’ throughout the USA. The Gabriel system includes the company’s ‘threat detection’ technology, which involves the use of ‘smart cameras’ that use AI as well as facial recognition and related technologies to detect weapons, ‘fights’ and ‘abnormal behavior’ in a particular area. The cameras throughout a facility, along with ‘smart shield’ panic buttons which can be activated both manually and remotely, are meant to act as ‘activation triggers’, with the triggering largely automated and managed by AI. When a trigger is set off, the Gabriel system enters the appropriate ‘alert mode’, which includes emergency, panic, silent panic and yellow (for minor incidents). Once activated, the panic button offers two-way communication, a live video feed and gunshot detection by acoustic means.
As one would expect, given the company is providing technologies that enable implementation of the Elite program to lock us all into their ‘smart cities’, Gabriel intends to expand far beyond schools and houses of worship to retail stores, warehouses, data centers and banks and is already heavily reliant on AI and machine learning while using drones and robots as security tools. Beyond this, it intends to develop predictive policing (‘pre-crime’) capabilities. See ‘Incident Response Solutions’ and ‘Disrupting Legacy Security’.
Gabriel is not the only corporation researching and providing technologies in these fields. Another prominent corporation is Palantir Technologies. There are others.
Needless to say, these corporations have close ties to the academy, the military and the intelligence community as well, all of which are also playing key roles in imposing the Elite program.
Obviously, these surveillance and control technologies are being widely deployed around the world with countries like China, Israel (including in Palestine) and the United States leading the way.
But to highlight precisely where this is headed, technocratic policing will include drones (used as aerial police) and robots equipped with electromagnetic weapons, such as those that tech guru Aman Jabbi calls ‘puke guns’ (to make the target individual vomit).
But ‘explosive ordnance disposal robots’ have been used offensively since 1993 when a one-metre tall, 218-kilogram remote-controlled robot was sent into an apartment, used a television camera to locate a suspect hidden in a cupboard and then, under the remote-control direction of a technician, used a high-pressure water gun to knock the shotgun out of the suspected gunman’s hands, enabling the county police department’s version of a SWAT team to arrest him.
More dramatically, a police ‘killer robot’ has already been used to kill a suspected gunman. In 2016, police in Dallas in the USA crudely attached a bomb to a robot originally designed to investigate and safely discharge explosives and then deployed it near a suspect where it was detonated remotely.
But the San Francisco Police Department has already developed a protocol for its use of robots to kill people: ‘Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers are imminent and outweigh any other force option available to SFPD.’
The fundamental point is that human police officers are being replaced by a series of technologies guided by artificial intelligence and ending with the use of autonomous weapons systems (AWS).
And these technologies are already being widely deployed and used as part of the ongoing Elite program to build a technocratic state that will subvert human identity, privacy, dignity, volition and freedom.
How Can We Resist this Technocratic Policing Model Effectively?
A long-planned, vast range and parallel sequence of measures is being rapidly implemented to capture political, social, economic, medical and technological control of the human population. The intention is to kill off a substantial proportion of humanity and imprison those left alive as transhuman slaves in the Elite’s technocratic (surveillance and control) ‘smart’ cities, which will be policed by a range of current and emerging technologies.
And, as I have explained previously – see ‘We Are Being Smashed Politically, Economically, Medically and Technologically by the Elite’s ‘Great Reset’: Why? How Do We Fight Back Effectively?’ – because the Global Elite controls conventional political, economic, financial, technological, medical, educational, media and other important levers of society, the Elite has control of how events unfold while simultaneously giving it control of the narrative about what is taking place. As a result, the truth about the Elite plan is easily concealed. Consequently, effective resistance to this complex and sophisticated program requires a response based on a full understanding of the Elite’s deeper agenda and that is equally sophisticated.
This means that we cannot rely on any conventional channel, political, legal or otherwise.
Hence, the most effective defence against any aspect, including the technocratic policing model, of the full program that Elite agents in the World Economic Forum and elsewhere are imposing on us is to take action now that prevents foundational components of their program from being put into place.
Obviously, this requires us to clearly identify the foundations on which the Elite program is being built and to then mobilize as many people as possible, in as many countries as possible, to nonviolently noncooperate with the building of these foundations or, to the extent they exist already, to disrupt them so that they cannot function effectively.
And the time to do this is now.
If we do this effectively, the technologies – including 5G, Artificial Intelligence (AI), digital ID, Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), geofencing, a plethora of ‘Smart’ devices, and the surveillance and facial recognition cameras – that will make the technocratic policing model possible will be stopped before they are fully deployed.
So if you are interested in being strategic in your resistance to the ‘Great Reset’ and its related agendas, you are welcome to participate in the ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ campaign which identifies a list of 30 strategic goals for doing so.
One of these strategic goals reads as follows:
‘To cause the police and security personnel to resist the introduction and use of those surveillance and control technologies – including (among many others) 5G, 6G, the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), geofencing, smart street poles and lights (which gather data via facial recognition cameras and environmental sensors, display digital signage and use speakers to instruct the immediate population how to behave), digital identity, surveillance and facial recognition cameras, license plate readers, vehicle kill switches, drones (used as aerial police), robots (including as a ‘deadly force option’), autonomous and electromagnetic weapons – that are being used to transform policing to collect your data and control your behaviour as part of the ongoing Elite program to build a technocratic prison that will subvert human identity, human dignity, human volition, human privacy and/or human freedom.’
So one vital role that you can play is to talk to individual police officers that you know personally, inform them of the role they are slated to play in the coming technocratic order, and invite them to consider the implications of this for them and their loved ones, and then listen to them as they talk about it.
And you can visit your local police station or write them a letter to raise awareness of what is happening and ask them to consider whether this is a future they wish for themselves or their family.
In addition, you can download the ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ one-page flyer that identifies a short series of crucial nonviolent actions that anyone can take. This flyer, now available in 23 languages (Chinese, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Malay, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Spanish, Slovak and Turkish) with several more languages in the pipeline, can be downloaded from here: ‘One-page Flyer’.
Moreover, if this strategic resistance to the ‘Great Reset’ (and related agendas) appeals to you, consider joining the ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ Telegram group (with a link accessible from the website).
And if you want to organize a mass mobilization, such as a rally, at least make sure that one or more of any team of organizers and/or speakers is responsible for inviting people to participate in this campaign and that some people at the event are designated to hand out the one-page flyer about the campaign.
Ideally, prior to any such event, a liaison team should visit the police responsible for policing the event to discuss it but also raise awareness of how police are being used by the Elite in this context. See ‘Nonviolent Activism and the Police’and ‘How To Do Police Liaison’.
At this point too, it is worth keeping in mind that in virtually all contexts, including when dealing with police, it is invaluable to listen, deeply. This should help you understand the other person better and might help open a door to greater awareness on their part in the future. In any case, it is a great gift, whatever its immediate outcome. See ‘Nisteling: The Art of Deep Listening’.
If you like, you can also watch, share and/or organize to show, a short video about the campaign here: ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ video.
In parallel with our resistance, we must create the political, economic and social structures that serve our needs, not those of the Elite. That is why long-standing efforts to encourage and support people to grow their own biodynamic/organic food – see ‘23 Reasons You Should Start a Garden in 2023’ – participate in local trading schemes (involving the exchange of knowledge, skills, services and products with or without a local medium of exchange), such as Local Exchange Trading Systems and Community Exchange Systems, as well as develop structures for cooperation, governance, nonviolent defence and networking with other communities are so important.
Conclusion
To summarize very simply: human police officers are being militarily-equipped in the short term, to be rapidly replaced by transhuman police as well as ‘technocratic police’: artificial intelligence (AI) that will direct policing and involve transhuman police, drones, robots and autonomous & electromagnetic weapons systems (AWS). This is one small but vital part of the comprehensive Elite program to kill off most of us, enslave those left alive, enclose the Commons forever and capture all wealth.
Hence, one valuable function we can perform is to inform police of this and invite them to resist it.
Of course, it is not a message that will resonate with every police officer or every member of the community, for that matter. As you already know.
But it is crucial that we keep telling the truth and giving people chances to perceive the deeper Elite program and what it portends for humanity. Because it is not a future any human being, including police officer, should want to embrace if they value human identity, privacy, dignity, volition and freedom for themselves or their children.
Hence, our persistence in presenting the information, while listening well when appropriate, is crucial to mobilizing the resistance we need to succeed.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of ‘Why Violence?’ His email address is [email protected] and his website is here. He is a regular contributor to ‘Global Research’.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Dear Readers,
Global Research Publishers has launched the new PDF edition of Michel Chossudovsky’s eBook, consisting of 15 chapters.
As a means to reaching out to millions of people worldwide whose lives have been affected by the corona crisis, we have decided to distribute the eBook for FREE.
We also invite you to become a member of Global Research.
All new membership subscriptions and renewals will automatically receive a free copy of the eBook, click here to become a member. (NOTE: Indicate New Member)
We will shortly be opening a readers’ comment page on the eBook.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’État Against Humanity
by
Michel Chossudovsky
From the very outset in January 2020, people worldwide were led to believe and accept the existence of a rapidly progressing and dangerous epidemic. Media disinformation and the fear campaign were instrumental in sustaining the COVID-19 narrative. Scientific lies and falsehoods have been used to sustain the legitimacy of the COVID-19 policy mandates including lockdowns, the imposition of the face mask, social distancing and the suppression of fundamental human rights.
People worldwide were led to believe that Big Pharma’s COVID-19 vaccine injections were the “solution”.
A structure of “Global Governance” dominated by powerful financial interests is unfolding which undermines democracy and the institutions of civil society. More than 7 billion people worldwide are directly or indirectly affected by the corona crisis and the destructive mandates implemented by morally depraved national governments. The entire planet is in state of economic and social chaos.
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
***
As a means to reaching out to millions of people worldwide whose lives have been affected by the corona crisis, we have decided in the course of the next few weeks to distribute the eBook for FREE.
We also invite you to become a member of Global Research.
All new membership subscriptions and renewals will automatically receive a free copy of the eBook, click here to become a member. (NOTE: Indicate New Member)
We will shortly be opening a readers’ comment page on the eBook.
Spread the word worldwide.
Reviews
This is an in-depth resource of great interest if it is the wider perspective you are motivated to understand a little better, the author is very knowledgeable about geopolitics and this comes out in the way Covid is contextualized, Dr. Mike Yeadon
In this war against humanity in which we find ourselves, in this singular, irregular and massive assault against liberty and the goodness of people, Chossudovsky’s book is a rock upon which to sustain our fight. –Dr. Emanuel Garcia
In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists. -Peter Koenig
Professor Chossudovsky exposes the truth that “there is no causal relationship between the virus and economic variables.” In other words, it was not COVID-19 but, rather, the deliberate implementation of the illogical, scientifically baseless lockdowns that caused the shutdown of the global economy.–David Skripac
A reading of Chossudovsky’s book provides a comprehensive lesson in how there is a global coup d’état under way called “The Great Reset” that if not resisted and defeated by freedom loving people everywhere will result in a dystopian future not yet imagined. Pass on this free gift from Professor Chossudovsky before it’s too late. You will not find so much valuable information and analysis in one place. –Edward Curtin
“It’s a great book that I want people all over Japan to read. When I read this book, the various events explained in chronological order all fall into place and context, and they came close with a sense of reality. It’s terrifying. My heart became pounding and painful as I read on. We must carefully determine the reverse side of the goodwill of the people who organized the COVID-19 pandemic. What can we do as a grassroots person? It’s a tough question.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
After months of planning, the Third International COVID Summit will be starting soon.
The first of these summits was held in the Italian Senate in Rome Italy, at a time when there were lockdowns and mandates across Europe, Australia, Canada, the United States, and much of Latin America. That summit was the first time that physicians and medical scientists came together from across the world to share information about the early treatment treatment plans and repurposed drug strategies that they had developed and tested in their home countries and clinical practices.
We came together over three days to share information (and great Italian food!), and friendships, bonds, collaborations and alliances were forged which have lasted throughout the COVID crisis. This event was live-streamed and it reported that it reached almost 100 million people throughout the world! A personal highlight for me was traveling to the Vatican and discussing COVID policy, vaccines and early treatment with Cardinal Peter Turkson, then considered #2 in the Vatican.
However, we had one requirement which the authorities insisted we abide by – we were not allowed to discuss the vaccines in the public sessions! Despite adhering to the plan, Italian and international press attacked us for spreading mis- and dis-information, and labeled ten of us as “the dirty dozen” spreaders of vaccine and early treatment heresy.
Time passed, and the Second International COVID Summit was held in France at two locations – Massy (outside of Paris) and Marseilles. France was chosen for the second summit largely because it was planned around the anticipated attendance of Nobel Laureate Professor Luc Montagnier, who unfortunately passed away prior to the meeting. Personal highlights for me with that summit was the opportunity to speak in private with Professor Didier Raoult, who pioneered the use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin for treating COVID (among many other lifetime achievements), and learning about the role of his family in the French resistance to the Nazi occupation of France. The Massy rally was particularly powerful because of the participation of so many resistance leaders from across Europe, and in particular the many medical professionals who had lost their jobs and careers for not accepting the COVID vaccines.
And now, as the COVID crisis winds down and we all seek to make sense of what has been done to us, and how these atrocious “public health” policy decisions were made, we have the historic Third International COVID Summit, on invitation of members of the European Parliament, who are providing donations and support from their own personal budgets to help defray the travel expenses of those participants and speakers who have much to contribute but face financial hardship because they have spoken out against the narrative in their own countries.
This multi-day summit will begin to provide the professional and scientific analysis desperately needed to help create a new vision for public health in the future.
I hope you can join us, physically or virtually (the event will be streamed), and ask that you consider donating to the organizers who have worked so hard to make this happen, now for the third time.
Donations to support the travel costs of international speakers who otherwise cannot afford to participate, and to support venue costs, can be made at www. Internationalcovidsummit.com/donate
Co-Hosting Members of the European Parliament:
FRANCESCA DONATO, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament
IVAN VILIBOR SINČIĆ, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament
CHRISTINE ANDERSON, Identity and Democracy
MISLAV KOLAKUŠIĆ, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament
CRISTIAN TERHEȘ, European Conservatives and Reformists
Co-Hosting Organization: THE GRASSROOTS ASSOCIATION
*
Background
The last three years took us all by surprise. We were separated from each other, isolated and afraid.
Now that that it seems to be coming to an end, we want to unite and combine all that we have learned from all over the world to start healing and make sure that this never happens again.
We are organizing an International COVID Summit in the European Parliament in Brussels on May 3, 2023.
This event is aimed to comprehensively and objectively look at important details surrounding COVID-19 and the pandemic.
We are planning to bring world renowned and highly revered professionals from all around the globe to Brussels in order to discuss the scientific, social, medical and legal statistics and findings of the last three years. By taking an in-depth look at this important information, these professionals can give comprehensive and positive strategies and suggestions to help us all move forward from this pandemic constructively, proactively and productively.
THIS IS THE STAGE. THIS IS OUR TIME. BRUSSELS, 2023.
They have stripped us of our rights under the guise of emergencies. They have tried to coerce us into compliance and frighten us into submission. They have punished us for asking questions and censored us for speaking truth. They have terminated us, delicensed us, discredited us, banned us and segregated us. They have tried to divide and conquer us in hopes of weakening our union. They have tried everything in their power to break us. Yet, here we still stand. A little battered and bruised but still whole, strong and, above all, united in our fight for truth and freedom.
This is the sign of true warriors. No matter what they take from us, they can never take the freedom out of our soul. They could not intimidate us into compliance. They could not scare us into silence. They could not extinguish our spirit. No matter what they tried to do, we continued to tell our truth. We did not go away.
In the most challenging moments, all we had to do was look at the quality of people standing with us on this quest to know that we could not be defeated. Standing united with us are the best and strongest warriors who live their life with the highest level of integrity and who would do it all again, no matter what it cost them. This grit and tireless pursuit for truth and freedom has now paid off.
After successfully organizing the International COVID Summit I in the Senate in Rome, Italy and the International COVID Summit II in Massy, France, we are honored to announce that The ICS Group has been invited to organize the International COVID Summit III in Brussels, Belgium.
This will be a three-day event from May 2 – May 4, 2023:
May 2, 2023 will be a closed-door medical conference
May 3, 2023 will be a full day of testimony in the European Parliament
May 4, 2023 will be a public event
After years of being censored, we now have the opportunity to speak openly about true research and data on one of the biggest stages in the world. The same information that got us censored, de-platformed, delicensed, suspended and fired is now being sought. We finally have an incredible opportunity to share these facts and research as well as effective ways to move forward productively and positively. We finally have an opportunity to start healing.
Unfortunately, in order to weaken the strongest warriors, they hit us hard by aiming at our financial stability. While the warriors in us are still strong and we are still ready to fight for truth and freedom, we need some help getting to that stage.
We are asking for donations to help unite the best professionals from around the world in Brussels for this historical event. This three-day event will be focused on presenting true data and research, moving out of this pandemic stronger than before and implementing ways to make sure that this never happens again.
If you are in a position to help please donate.
All proceeds will go towards travel, venues and accommodations for these world-renowned professionals to participate in this historical event. If you are in Brussels, Belgium we welcome you to join us for the Public Event on May 4, 2023.
9:00 – 9:10 WELCOMING REMARKS FROM MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
MR. CRISTIAN TERHEȘ, European Conservatives and Reformists – ROMANIA
MR. IVAN VILIBOR SINČIĆ, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament – CROATIA
9:10 – 9:15 WELCOME ADDRESS FROM THE ICS ORGANIZATIONAL TEAM
DR. STEPHEN MALTHOUSE – MODERATOR – CANADA
9:15 – 10:30 COVID-19: THE WHOLE TRUTH FROM THE BEGINNING
DR. DAVID MARTIN – USA, the gathering storm – the cost of silenced questions
NICK HUDSON – SOUTH AFRICA, mandates and lockdowns without data or science
PROFESSOR CIRO ISIDORO – ITALY, COVID-19: a novel disease that resembles an old disease
PROFESSOR GIOVANNI MELEDANDRI – ITALY, interdisciplinary insights from the Sars-Cov-2 and COVID-19
DR. ANDREA STRAMEZZI – ITALY, early responses: boots on the ground in Italy
10:30 – 11:30 EFFECTS OF MANDATES, EARLY TREATMENT AND MEDIA
DR. LOUIS FOUCHE – FRANCE, effects of mandates – masks and lockdowns
DR. PIERRE KORY – USA, ivermectin and suppression of early treatment
PROFESSOR DIDIER RAOULT – FRANCE, early treatment: hydroxychloroquine and the IHU
PROFESSOR PHILIPPE BROUQUI – FRANCE, early treatment: hydroxychloroquine and the IHU
JASON CHRISTOFF – CANADA, media over medicine: the power of media
11:30 – 12:00 THE COVID-19 VACCINE: TRIAL DATA AND THE EFFICACY
DR. BYRAM BRIDLE – CANADA, the COVID-19 Vaccine Trials
DR. HARVEY RISCH – USA, the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines
12:00 – 12:10 DISCUSSION SESSION: MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
12:10 – 13:00 LUNCH AND NETWORKING
13:00 – 13:35 THE COVID-19 VACCINE: EFFECTS ON REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM
PROFESSOR GIUSEPPE TRITTO – ITALY, effects of vaccine on male fertility
DR. NATALIA PREGO – SPAIN, effects of vaccine on female fertility
PROFESSOR GIOVANNI FRAJESE-ITALY, effects of vaccine on pregnancy and reproduction
13:35 – 14:05 THEN THEY CAME FOR THE CHILDREN
DR. KIRK MILHOAN – USA, effects of COVID-19 virus in children
DR. ALEJANDRO DIAZ VILLALOBO – MEXICO, effects of COVID-19 vaccine in children
EMMANUELLE DARLES – FRANCE, effects of mandates on children
14:05 – 14:50 THE COVID-19 VACCINE: TRIAL DATA, INJURIES AND SIDE EFFECTS
PROFESSOR ARNE BURKHARTD – GERMANY, COVID-19 vaccine damage to heart and lungs
DR. RYAN COLE – USA, COVID-19 vaccine and cancer
DR. ROSANNA CHIFARI – ITALY, neurological damage of COVID-19 vaccine
14:50 – 15:00 Coffee Break
15:00 – 15:40 STATISTICS FOR ALL-CAUSE MORTALITY AND VAERS
VINCENT PAVAN – FRANCE, statistics for all-cause mortality in France
PROFESSOR THEO SCHETTERS – NETHERLANDS, statistics for all-cause mortality in Netherlands
PROFESSOR HERVE SELIGMANN- GERMANY, statistics for all-cause mortality in Europe
DR. JESSICA ROSE – CANADA, vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS)
15:40 – 17:00 LEGALITIES AND FREEDOMS SURROUNDING THE PANDEMIC
MARIA GUTSCHI – CANADA, what they did not tell us: approval process of the vaccines
DAVID WISEMAN – UK, what they did not tell us: approval process of the vaccines
EVA VLAARDINGERBROEK- NETHERLANDS, effects on land, food, energy and travel
PROFESSOR CHRISTIAN PERRONNE – FRANCE, medical suppressions
DR. AMIN UMLIL – FRANCE, medical freedom
RENATE HOLZEISEN – ITALY, the legalities surrounding the pandemic
DR. MERYL NASS – USA, W.H.O., I.H.R. – treaty and the pandemic accord
DR. KATARINA LINDLEY – CROATIA, W.H.O., I.H.R. – treaty and the pandemic accord
17:00 – 17:15 THE BIG PICTURE AND MOVING FORWARD
DR. ROBERT MALONE – USA
17:15 – 18:00 CONCLUSIONS FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
MR. IVAN VILIBOR SINČIĆ, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament – CROATIA
MRS. FRANCESCA DONATO, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament – ITALY
MR. MISLAV KOLAKUŠIĆ, Non-attached Member of the European Parliament – CROATIA
MRS. CHRISTINE ANDERSON, Identity and Democracy – GERMANY
MR. CRISTIAN TERHEȘ, European Conservatives and Reformists – ROMANIA
A networking cocktail will start at 19:00, in SPAAK 12 venue.
Team
The International COVID Summit team is made up of Medical Specialists and Lawyers from the following countries:
USA
Canada
Italy
Peru
Argentina
UK
France
Paraguay
Brazil
Chile
Mexico
Dominican Republic
Columbia
Bolivia
Poland
India
Slovenia
South Africa
Germany
Puerto Rico
Croatia
Spain
Greece
Portugal
Czech Republic
Australia
Bulgaria
Slovakia
Romania
El Salvador
Guatemala
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
**
Introduction
The Latin saying “O (what) times, O (what) mores!” still laments the changing times and the decay of mores.
Those who want to be informed in detail and truthfully about the rapid change in the political climate, about the rapprochement of formerly hostile states in the Middle East and Africa and the worldwide takeover of the WHO, and who want to know more about the decay of morals in the West and the legalisation of drugs, should turn to internationally accessible alternative media such as “Global Research”. He will be well advised to do so.
Therefore, the following thoughts are primarily an attempt to answer the question of what possibilities awake citizens (still) have to put a stop to this disturbing development and to take decisive countermeasures.
One possibility, in my opinion, is for us citizens to try out humanism and prove that humanity is social, good and capable of living together without weapons and wars.
Trying out humanism
Humanism, as a philosophical current and human life practice, is based on the optimistic image of mankind as capable of positive development and the improvement of human existence. Essential conditions for this are respect for the human dignity of each individual, freedom of thought and action, freedom of expression and the absence of violence and coercion. A positive social environment and education promote the humanistic ideal of free personality development (1).
Although the civilisational development of humanity has progressed steadily over the millennia, we still seem to be entirely at the beginnings of humanisation in terms of taming violence. But since violence is not an expression of human nature but a product of historical and cultural conditions, it is possible to master violence and eliminate it from individual and community relations.
Children in particular cannot develop into healthy, upright personalities under violence and coercion. Therefore, education at home and school should refrain from any use of violence and fear-inducing authority and turn to the child’s soul life with true understanding.
However, human emotional life is not to be understood solely as the result of the parent-child relationship. The values prevailing in a culture and the feelings corresponding to them, as whose mediators parents, teachers and educators approach the child on a daily basis, are also decisive. A positive social environment can only be created if we citizens are committed to a conscious ethical-moral values education and to an education for public spirit and peace.
The question of education is also important. It should primarily teach people how they should and can solve their problems. Among the most important problems are his attitude towards life, his opinion about himself, his partner, his attitude towards children, his opinion about his neighbour, the community and the state. If he succeeds in this, he will get a more realistic view about himself and also the other person (2).
Present evidence that people are social
The term “social” colloquially means the positive relationship of one person to another or even several other persons, which means having a feeling for the community, a sense of community. This includes the abilities to take an interest in others, to empathise with them, to help them, to protect the weaker and possibly to put one’s own interests aside in the process (3).
More than 100 years ago, the Russian political scientist, human geographer and philosopher Prince Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921) wrote in his book “Mutual Aid in the Animal and Human World” that in nature and society there is by no means only a struggle for survival, a struggle of all against all (social Darwinism), but that the principle of “mutual aid” also prevails. Those living beings who implement this principle would survive more successfully.
Kropotkin observed both nature and natural beings and related his findings to human beings. The natural scientific depth psychology is based on these findings. According to this, man is a naturally social being who is oriented towards the community of his fellow human beings and has a tendency towards good (4).
From this insight into the feeling of belonging together of all those who bear human traits, the teachers of the moral leaders of humanity, the wisdom of Lao Tzu, the commandment of love for one’s neighbour and the innumerable forms of social life and behaviour grew. The exhortations of the human sense of community can never be eradicated, for the gift of evolution consists in the moral consciousness of the individual, in the insight into the responsibility of all towards all.
A practical example from school will confirm the social nature of man. It will interest and move teachers and parents alike, who have long been struggling with the present school system because of the inadequate teaching and care of their children.
It is the story of a fellow teacher who, with a well-considered move, managed to reconcile with an irritated boy who even put his legs up on the school desk in class. He made peace with him and ended the state of war that was affecting the whole class.
When he began teaching himself, he felt more like a tamer of an unwilling horde than a respected educator. But pressure and violence – that was his resolution – were not to gain the upper hand in the classroom and he wanted to understand why he would react so strongly to the disruptive behaviour of pupils. After all, there was a lively little boy of 13 sitting in the class who found talking to his neighbour much more interesting than the lessons.
Since he did not feel understood by the teachers with his personal worries and needs, he could not concentrate on the lessons either. His parents were separated and his older brother, unlike him, attended grammar school.
When the colleague got angry and threatened consequences, the student’s disruptive behaviour increased. Only gradually did the colleague become aware that he had been drawn into a power struggle for the upper hand in the class by the pupil. Therefore, he met him with resentment, displeasure and an insulted expression. The pupil reacted to this with new provocations and finally put his legs on the school bench.
Although the colleague felt a strong desire to impose his will and force him to obey, he approached the student after the lunch break with a beating heart and made an attempt at reconciliation. He said to him: “While I cannot accept the behaviour you have shown in the last lesson, maybe it is a little bit up to me. I hope we can find a way to reconcile together.”
This reconciliation was only possible because the colleague became aware of the student’s difficult family situation and the state of war in the class. By putting himself emotionally in the pupil’s situation, he chose a different path from violence. He made peace with the child and ended the state of war.
The effect was incredible. The student now followed the lesson completely amazed and attentive and finally defended the teacher-colleague in front of the whole class because other students criticised him. He got into a different mood because he felt understood by the teacher.
The whole episode not only proves that man is social, it also points the way to a peaceful world for all educators.
Man is good, but irritated
When we look around the world, we find that human beings are good but irritated psychologically. No human being can solve his problems in marriage, with children or in social life. We beat the children and wage murderous wars. But all this is due to improper education. Therefore, psychological knowledge must be imparted to all people so that they can solve their personal problems and begin to steer the world on a peaceful course.
Man is not destined from the outset to be a wolf or a lamb. His freedom consists in the fact that he can make himself what he is to be in the future. When man does evil, he has chosen it beforehand; he has willed it beforehand. The origin of evil does not lie in human nature.
Present evidence that human beings are capable of living together without weapons and wars.
The generalised “image” of the “struggle for existence” is meant to justify that war in the world has not been overcome – and cannot be overcome. However, this view of “homo homini lupus” (man is a wolf to man) is fundamentally wrong. It is based on a superficiality that becomes immediately obvious on closer inspection.
An unbiased examination of historical wars teaches us that the arbitrariness of the ruling classes is one of the first causes of war. Disputes among kings, the lust for conquest of a ruler or his warrior caste, in other words, the lust for power of the powerful has led peoples into wars in which they bled to death for the interests of their potentates. The competition between the religions, each of which believed itself to be in possession of the absolute truth, gave further cause for warlike entanglements in which people died for the power of their church.
The modern era, which realised the primacy of the economy over the other spheres of public life, then created the type of economic warfare in which the masters of commerce and industry engaged the peoples in a struggle for sources of raw materials and markets. In almost all wars of the last centuries, the economic factor plays a dominant role, although it is sometimes hidden behind other motivations.
The causes of wars were thus manifold, but every war was fought in the interest of a small upper class, which alone benefited from victory and the associated gain in land and riches. The peoples themselves, who went into battle for their secular or ecclesiastical rulers, were allowed little or no share in the benefits of their conquest. They were not asked whether they wanted to go to war or not; they were forced to take up arms.
It is therefore not right to hold the “peoples” responsible for their wars; it was always only their ruling classes that feuded and tried to subjugate each other. That is why it is wrong to attribute war to human nature. Human nature is peaceful.
The majority of people love to go about their work, cultivate the fields and live in friendship with their neighbours. The range of vision of most people does not extend so far as to set out for other countries or even continents and carry there the devastating flame of war. Only the lust for power of those who function as authorities within the peoples and are imbued by their social position with the spirit of violence, drives time and again to warlike conflicts in which the peoples bleed to death for the benefit of their masters and exploiters.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a school rector, educational scientist and qualified psychologist. After his university studies, he became an academic teacher in adult education. As a retiree he worked as a psychotherapist in his own practice. In his books and professional articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral education in values as well as an education for public spirit and peace. For his services to Serbia, he was awarded the Republic Prize “Captain Misa Anastasijevic” by the Universities of Belgrade and Novi Sad in 2021.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The “case“ Credit Suisse (CS), referring to the Swiss Government’s forced merger of UBS and CS on 18/19 March 2023 the Dark Banking Weekend, has by no means reached an end, and much less a happy end.
According to Swissinfo, as of 3 April 2023, the takeover has been agreed but not yet carried out. Some hesitation and reservation may have grown within the Swiss Government, receiving top-expert-advice from many corners, but especially from within Switzerland, mostly regarding the legality of the deal.
Professor Arturo Bris, teaching finance at the IMD Business school in Lausanne, who has examined 1,000 deals between 2002 and 2022 says
“Mergers between established banks like UBS and CS, which are no longer growing rapidly and are less profitable than their competitors, almost never work.”
The CEO of the Swiss Julius Bär Bank, Philipp Rickenbacher, sees a long road ahead before the takeover can be deemed a success.
“An integration of that order of magnitude in Switzerland is going to take a lot of resources and effort, and a lot of complexity,” he told the Financial Times.
Julius Bär has seen inflows of client assets from both Credit Suisse and UBS in magnitudes of above CHF 60 billion in recent weeks. And the private banking group has been contacted by many Credit Suisse staff asking for job opportunities.
Both Professor Bris and CEO Rickenbacher believe that states should not have to intervene to save banks from collapsing. Rickenbacher adds, “My gut feeling and moral compass says that a private institution should be able to fail.”
According to a recent poll, many Swiss economists found that the takeover of Credit Suisse is not the best solution and warned that the situation has dented Switzerland’s reputation as an international banking center.
*
This is the on-the-surface visible critique of the government-forced take-over. Underneath remains a myriad of questions, mostly of a legal nature, which are yet to be answered. A Big One is over the validity of the deal.
The government prompted takeover was carried out under a legally shady “emergency” measure. This emergency measure is being questioned by lawyers and legal experts in Switzerland and around the world.
It is also questioned by major shareholders of CS, as well as AT1 Bondholders. AT1 stands for Additional Tier 1 Bonds. They were created after the 2008 financial crisis, and are a type of hybrid debt issued by banks. They are a kind of quasi-capital and are supposed to protect a bank from tax-payer bailouts.
AT1 bonds can offer high returns, but they are riskier than regular bonds.
In the case of CS, neither the shareholders or the AT1 bondholders were consulted before the compulsory takeover. This is particularly problematic, because on Friday before the “emergency merger”, the Swiss Central Bank granted CS a “bail-out” line of credit of CHF 50 billion, which, according to CS inside and outside analysts, as well as FINMA, the Swiss Financial Market Regulator, would have been sufficient to bring back CS to normal banking within less than a year.
CS had apparently no serious liquidity problem. It had a trust problem growing out of rumors that the bank may fail. And rumors can be planted. A case in point is the Californian Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). Banking experts say, the trust issue could have been resolved with this Government bailout line of credit which would also have helped CS to get rid of old skeletons.
Under the emergency merger, CS shares dropped by more than 50% on Monday, 20 March, from what they were on Friday, 17 March, i.e. on March 15, they were CHF 1.76 and rose to CHF 2.05 on Friday, with the prospect of the bailout credit, dropping to CHF 0.91 on Monday, March 20.
Shareholders were not at all happy.
AT1 bondholders were even unhappier, not to say angry, when they learned on Monday, 20 March, that under the government-enforced deal, all AT1 bonds of CHF 16 billion ($17.24 billion) were written down to zero.
According to the Financial Times, the Swiss Tages-Anzeiger and the NZZ, three class-action suits by AT1 bondholders against the Swiss Government are being prepared by attorneys in the US and Singapore. It is likely that shareholders will either join them or launch their own class action suit.
Major shareholders include:
Saudi National Bank 10%
Olayan Group, Saudi Arabia 5%
Qatar Holding LLC 5%
Black Rock 5%
The Saudi National Bank has already announced they will sue the Swiss government. It is likely that the Saudi Olayan Group and Qatar Holding will join the lawsuit. That makes 20% of Arabian shareholders suing the Swiss government for its hardly justified emergency measure, that supposedly prevents the Swiss government from having to consult with shareholders. After all, the Swiss Central Bank had granted CS a CHF 50 billion “bail-out” line of credit, just on Friday 17 March, before the dark, “Black Box” weekend of 18/19 March.
It is well possible that other shareholders may join the Class Action “club”. For example, the Pension Fund of the largest Swiss retailer, MIGROS, which lost CHF 100 million in the AT1 write-off, has told the Swiss Tages-Anzeiger they will join a Class Action suit.
Will these legal procedures be successful? Depends whom you ask. Standard & Poor’s predicts the law suits will unlikely succeed. On the other hand, Goldman Sachs believes these lawsuits may thrive to the point where GS is ready to purchasing CS AT1 bonds, to make money if the plaintiffs win their case, and the AT1 bonds have to be revalued.
The forced UBS / CS merger is far from finished for Switzerland. It is possible that it may cost the government or UBS another CHF 30 billion (about US$ 34 billion, at current exchange rates). That would be ten times more than UBS agreed to pay under this emergency action, namely only CHF 3 billion.
Among the four major shareholders listed above is BlackRock (5%). They have been watching from the sidelines. There are rumors that initially they advanced the possibility of taking over CS. But the rumors were quickly dispelled, as the Swiss government expressed concern that CS should stay in Switzerland.
The combined UBS / CS would have some US$ 5 trillion of managed assets.
The former head of the Swiss Central Bank, Philipp Hildebrand, joined BlackRock in 2012 as Vice-Chairman in charge of investments. He knows the ropes and wheeling and dealing of Switzerland inside-out.
It is quite possible that for now Hildebrand watches from the sidelines how this “CS case” evolves. If the plaintiffs win with a claim of say CHF 20 to CHF 30 billion against the Swiss Government, Switzerland could not simply absorb the debt with taxpayers money. So, they would pass it on to UBS. Yet, UBS was already reluctant to accept the take-over precisely because such mergers are complex and require lengthy processes before they may succeed, as per Philipp Rickenbacher, CEO of the Julius Bär Bank.
UBS would unlikely be able to absorb such a debt. In which case, a scenario where BlackRock jumps in from the sideline to help and take over UBS, is not to be excluded. That would add another US$ 5 trillion to BlackRock’s already at least US$ 10 trillion of managed assets and make the giant financial rock even more powerful.
Just a thought. Not to be discarded.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The United States government, in its incessant bullying of foreign nations to get them to see the world the way that the cabal that runs Washington sees it, ironically often cites such fictions as the “rule of law” that guarantees such “rights” as “free speech” and “freedom of religion” to justify its illegal actions. Right at the moment, the United States maintains garrisons illegally in both Iraq, where the country’s parliament has as it to depart, and also in neighboring Syria where the government is fighting an insurgency that seeks regime change and is supported by both the US and Israel.
The US invasion of Iraq in 2003 is analogous to what Russia has done in Ukraine though Moscow certainly had stronger compelling national security reasons for doing what it did while the United States had to construct a series of lies to provide as an excuse to topple Saddam Hussein, an objective strongly supported by Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, who added his own fabrications to the exchanges.
One has to look to the media to discern the reasons why some developments are wrapped in “religious freedom” or “democracy promotion” while other actions are ignored or even covered-up. Currently the right-wing Jewish extremists who have gained control of Israel’s government are engaging in something like genocide directed against the Palestinian population, many of whom are actually Israeli citizens though possessing second class rights when they are enforced at all. Israel regards itself legally as a Jewish state, so what is the “rule of law” for those who are not Jews and how does it perceive “religious freedom?” Considerable government pressure is being exerted to force the “terrorists,” as the Arab residents are frequently called, to emigrate or face the consequences if they choose not to. It is directed most particularly against those Palestinians who are leaders in their community and it has therefore focused on the major Arab religious groups, both the Christians and the Muslims.
Ironically, though one can read in the US media almost daily accounts of alleged surging anti-semitism and the myth of perpetual Jewish victimhood, the ongoing brutality against the Palestinians, including their religious foundations and practices, is hardly noticed. That is the fundamental problem as the silence or perhaps the willful connivance of the American media and entertainment industry, firmly in the grip of the Jewish community and its “standards,” has shaped the narrative and limited any propagation of contrary opinion. It is a process that is similar to what has taken place with any discussion of the Ukraine war in the mainstream media, where there is also a heavy Jewish footprint.
There have been two major incidents involving Jewish assertion of its occupation of and control over all of Jerusalem that have recently impacted on the country’s religious minorities during their holy seasons, Easter and Ramadan. The first consisted of two consecutive middle-of- the-night attacks by Israeli police and soldiers in full riot gear armed with stun grenades and clubs on Palestinians spending the night at the al-Aqsa mosque on Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the third holiest site for Muslims. The Palestinian men were there in part to protect the building from Jewish settlers who have been threatening to destroy it. The Palestinians inside were beaten by police, who had broken into the mosque, and as many as 350 mostly young men were later arrested for resisting.
The second incident was an order by Israeli police limiting the regular Christian gathering on Holy Saturday, referred to as the “Holy Fire” celebration, at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, which normally attracts 10,000 worshippers, to no more than 1,800 attendees. On the day of the ceremony, Israeli police reacted with heavy-handed tactics to block hundreds of Orthodox Christians from gathering at the church, which is at the center of the old Christian quarter of the city. Several Coptic Orthodox priests were particularly targeted in front of the church and beaten with batons. Israeli forces closed off access to the site with roadblocks and barriers at the gates of the Old City, permitting only small numbers of Christians and those with government permits to enter.
Both steps restricting freedom of religion were taken without any consultation with the respective communities and without any evidence that there would be disorder or violence without the police interventions. The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the Israeli action as a “blatant attack on the freedom of worship” and a “flagrant attack on the existing political, historical and legal status quo in occupied Jerusalem and on Israel’s obligations as an occupying regime in Jerusalem” that
“violate international law, international humanitarian law and signed agreements.” The Christian churches’ leadership also separately objected to no avail and responded to the threat by observing that Palestinian Christians are themselves under increasing pressure from the Israeli government to force them to emigrate. Christians constituted 20% of the Israeli population in 1947 but now are fewer than 2%.
Indeed, since the rise this year of Israel’s most far-right government in history, Palestinian Christians frequently experience Jewish Israeli discrimination at all levels. They directly observe how their 2,000-year-old community in the Holy Land has come under increasing attack. In March, two Israeli men assaulted and beat a priest in the church sited at the Tomb of the Virgin Mary. In February, a statue of Jesus was vandalized by an American Jewish tourist at the Church of the Condemnation, where Jesus was flogged and sentenced to death while a month earlier, dozens of Christian graves were desecrated by two Jewish teenagers at the Anglican cemetery on Mount Zion, where Jesus’s Last Supper took place. In November, two soldiers from the Israeli army’s Givati Brigade spit at the Armenian archbishop and other pilgrims during a procession in the Old City. Christian clerics living in Jerusalem claim that they are frequently physically assaulted and spat on by settlers and other Jewish Israelis when they are walking in the streets. The Israeli government has also been increasingly confiscating church properties for various projects that benefit only the Jewish community. When Christians seek redress from the Israeli courts they are almost always denied justice.
Now one would think that the United States, with its dedication to “rule of law” and religious freedom would at a minimum condemn the Israeli actions, particularly the unprovoked violent attack on peaceful Muslims during their high holy days at al-Aqsa. But no, and this is how a State Department spokesman Vedant Patel described it: “We are concerned by the scenes out of Jerusalem. And it is our viewpoint that it is absolutely vital that the sanctity of holy sites be preserved. We emphasize the importance of upholding the historic status quo at the holy sites in Jerusalem and any unilateral action that jeopardizes the status quo to us is unacceptable. We call for restraint, coordination and calm during the holiday season.”
So the State Department believes that Israel did not initiate the violence, which is, of course, false. And Patel felt compelled to add an additional comment on recent home-made rocket attacks coming from Lebanon in the wake of the police and army actions: “We condemn the launch of rockets from Lebanon and Gaza at Israel. Our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad and we recognize that Israel has the legitimate right to defend itself against all forms of aggression.” Don’t you love the frequent assertion of the claim that Israel has a “right to defend itself?” Patel was in fact wrong about Gaza firing missiles – that was a fiction invented by the Israeli government to explain why it had responded with a bombardment of its own directed against the long-suffering Gazans. The hostile rockets, which did little damage and injured no one, actually came from a Palestinian group in Lebanon. Apparently, the Palestinians and Israel’s neighbors do not have the right to defend themselves or to respond to Jewish violence. Rule of law and religious freedom appear to depend on who is attempting to exercise those rights and under what circumstances.
Interestingly, the New York Times had its own bizarre description of what took place at al-Aqsa. Their correspondent wrote how the crisis started when Palestinians “barricaded themselves” overnight inside the building before being “cleared” by police from the mosque in the middle of the night, to “protect Jewish worshippers” who were reportedly observing the Passover holiday in the vicinity. In other words, the violence was initiated by the Israelis but it was to prevent any threat against Jews, even though there is no evidence that anything like that was intended and why Jews were present at close quarters to a Muslim holy site is not clear. By one report, extremist Jews may have been preparing to sacrifice a goat.
On April 14th, to honor International Holocaust Remembrance Day, President Joe Biden demonstrated the he is not as brain dead as is often claimed. He knows exactly who owns him and knows how to pile it on. His proclamation reads: “During Yom Hashoah and throughout these days of remembrance, we mourn the 6 million Jews who were murdered during the horror of the Holocaust—as well as the millions of Roma and Sinti, Slavs, disabled persons, LGBTQI+ individuals, and political dissidents who were murdered at the hands of the Nazis and their collaborators. Together with courageous survivors, descendants of victims and people around the world, we renew our solemn vow: ‘never again.’”
Clearly Joe had not gotten the message that in America every day is de facto holocaust remembrance day as measured by the frequent appearance of that expression in the media. But he makes sure of the trans gay vote by including the LGBTQI+ folks as victims of the Nazis. Perhaps Joe should pay some attention to the Americans murdered by the Israelis, to include the 34 crewmen of the USS Liberty killed by the Israeli military in 1967, activist Rachel Corrie crushed by a bulldozer in 2003 and most recently Palestinian American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh killed by the Israeli army last May. Israel has not been held accountable for any of those deaths and it knows it can get away with anything, including targeting and killing US citizens.
Next week, the GOP will be doubling down on the message as Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy leads a delegation of twenty bipartisan fawning congress critters to Israel. He has carefully billed it as his first foreign trip as speaker, underlining what an important ally Israel is. He will address the Knesset on May 1st and there will no doubt be a lot of kissing and hugging with Bibi and many pledges of undying commitment to the Jewish state. The Israeli government is already describing it as “Speaker McCarthy’s speech in the Knesset will be a sign for the strong and unbreakable bond between Israel and the US.” And no doubt lots of money will appear in the pipeline so Israel can defend itself. Just don’t mention Israel’s recent premeditated murder of Shireen Abu Akleh back or “religious freedom.” And to hell with the Palestinian Christians. They have been hanging around for 2,000 years but are on their way out.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
This article was originally published on The Unz Review.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected]. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
27 year old Austrian pianist Sabine Wukovnig is permanently disabled after taking three COVID-19 vaccines (video source).
This is a sad story of a young woman whose life has been destroyed after she took her COVID-19 booster shot in early 2022.
Interestingly, in Europe she was diagnosed with a “Post-Vaccine Syndrome”.
She is suffering from multiple injuries: neurological injuries of central nervous system (spike protein in the brain – brain fog, ME), POTS (injury of autonomous nervous system) due to an autoimmune process involving spike protein, and MCAS which is like having a severe allergic syndrome.
UK Piano Teacher Julianna Bransden suffered catastrophic injuries starting Jan. 1, 2023 (click here)
Julianna was a dedicated and popular teacher and musician. Since becoming a teacher 19 years ago in Aylesbury, Julianna devoted the last 10 years to the rural school of Llanmiloe in South Wales.
Julianna was fully COVID-19 vaccinated. On Dec. 23, 2022 she developed flu like symptoms and on Jan. 1, 2023 she had two cardiac arrests, went into septic shock, multiple systemic organ failure, needing full life support.
She was diagnosed with sepsis resulting from an aggressive form of pneumonia.
After weeks of fighting, she had to undergo surgery to amputate both of her legs below the knee and will lose most of her fingers.
“The pneumonia was caused by a combination of both invasive Strep A and Influenza, resulting in a level of sickness that several experienced ICU nurses said they had never seen anyone manage to recover from before.”
I have seen this situation before. I believe she experienced severe COVID-19 vaccine induced immune dysfunction and damage which predisposed her to catastrophic infections such as the Influenza/Strep A combination that has killed several COVID-19 vaccinated kids in Canada, and dozens around the world including 30+ kids in the UK. (click here)
Celine Dion Diagnosed with Neurological disease Dec. 15, 2022
Singer Céline Dion revealed Dec. 15, 2022 in a tearful Instagram video that she’s been diagnosed with Stiff-Person Syndrome, sharing that the condition would force her to postpone and cancel a series of upcoming concert dates. (click here)
Stiff Person Syndrome is a rare and incurable neurological disease that affects the central nervous system, specifically the brain and spinal cord, causing symptoms like “hyper-rigidity, debilitating pain, chronic anxiety,” and muscle spasms “so violent they can dislocate joints and even break bones”.
Only one of every one million people have been diagnosed with the condition.
Justin Bieber reveals facial paralysis in June 2022
The 28-year-old said in an Instagram video that the condition is due to a diagnosis of Ramsay Hunt syndrome, when a shingles outbreak affects the facial nerve near someone’s ears, say medical experts. (click here)
Other stories of injured musicians:
Bogota, Colombia – 50 year old drummer for the Foo Fighters died suddenly on March 25, 2022 – he complained of chest pain before collapsing in his hotel room (click here)
Shanghai – 43 year old violin teacher Patrick Sabberton at a British International school died of a hemorrhagic stroke Feb. 9, 2022 (click here)
1st UK COVID-19 vaccine damage compensation was awarded to dead rock musician Lord Zion’s wife (click here)
The 1st UK COVID-19 Vaccine damage compensation was awarded for the death of rock singer Lord Zion, who died of a brain hemorrhage 14 days after taking AstraZeneca, on May 19, 2021. His wife received government compensation of 120,000 pounds.
Jessica Sutta (Pussycat Dolls Singer/Dancer) & Eric Clapton
I’ve previously written substacks on COVID-19 vaccine injuries in musicians who have come forward:
Mar. 24, 2023, Jessica Sutta had neurological injuries including peripheral neuropathy after Moderna mRNA vaccine. (click here)
Feb. 10, 2023, Eric Clapton had neurological injuries after AstraZeneca, mainly peripheral neuropathy (click here)
My Take…
As a Royal Conservatory of Music trained musician myself, I feel deeply for these musicians who have suffered horrific COVID-19 vaccine injuries or have died following vaccination.
COVID-19 vaccine induced neurological injuries are catastrophic and usually career ending for any musician. Eric Clapton can’t play the guitar or piano anymore, Jessica Sutta can’t dance anymore.
Then there are the usual post COVID-19 vaccination cardiac arrests, strokes, and blood clots to contend with as well.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. William Makis is a Canadian physician with expertise in Radiology, Oncology and Immunology. Governor General’s Medal, University of Toronto Scholar. Author of 100+ peer-reviewed medical publications.
Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
To be more accurate, however, the war on free speech is really a war on the right to criticize the government.
Although the right to speak out against government wrongdoing is the quintessential freedom, every day in this country, those who dare to speak their truth to the powers-that-be find themselves censored, silenced or fired.
Indeed, those who run the government don’t take kindly to individuals who speak truth to power.
In fact, the government has become increasingly intolerant of speech that challenges its power, reveals its corruption, exposes its lies, and encourages the citizenry to push back against the government’s many injustices.
This is nothing new, nor is it unique to any particular presidential administration.
For instance, as part of its campaign to eradicate so-called “disinformation,” the Biden Administration likened those who share “false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of mis- dis- and mal-information” to terrorists. This government salvo against consumers and spreaders of “mis- dis- and mal-information” widens the net to potentially include anyone who is exposed to ideas that run counter to the official government narrative.
Then again, Trump was not alone in his presidential disregard for the rights of the citizenry, especially as it pertains to the right of the people to criticize those in power.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the FBI to censor all news and control communications in and out of the country in the wake of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt also signed into law the Smith Act, which made it a crime to advocate by way of speech for the overthrow of the U.S. government by force or violence.
This idea of “dangerous” speech, on the other hand, is peculiarly authoritarian in nature. What it amounts to is speech that the government fears could challenge its chokehold on power.
The kinds of speech the government considers dangerous enough to red flag and subject to censorship, surveillance, investigation, prosecution and outright elimination include: hate speech, bullying speech, intolerant speech, conspiratorial speech, treasonous speech, threatening speech, incendiary speech, inflammatory speech, radical speech, anti-government speech, right-wing speech, left-wing speech, extremist speech, politically incorrect speech, etc.
Conduct your own experiment into the government’s tolerance of speech that challenges its authority, and see for yourself.
Stand on a street corner—or in a courtroom, at a city council meeting or on a university campus—and recite some of the rhetoric used by the likes of Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John Adams and Thomas Paine without referencing them as the authors.
For that matter, just try reciting the Declaration of Independence, which rejects tyranny, establishes Americans as sovereign beings, recognizes God (not the government) as the Supreme power, portrays the government as evil, and provides a detailed laundry list of abuses that are as relevant today as they were 240-plus years ago.
My guess is that you won’t last long before you get thrown out, shut up, threatened with arrest or at the very least accused of being a radical, a troublemaker, a sovereign citizen, a conspiratorialist or an extremist.
Try suggesting, as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin did, that Americans should not only take up arms but be prepared to shed blood in order to protect their liberties, and you might find yourself placed on a terrorist watch list and vulnerable to being rounded up by government agents.
“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms,” declared Jefferson. He also concluded that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Observed Franklin: “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”
Better yet, try suggesting as Thomas Paine, Marquis De Lafayette, John Adams and Patrick Henry did that Americans should, if necessary, defend themselves against the government if it violates their rights, and you will be labeled a domestic extremist.
“It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government,” insisted Paine. “When the government violates the people’s rights,” Lafayette warned, “insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of the rights and the most indispensable of duties.” Adams cautioned, “A settled plan to deprive the people of all the benefits, blessings and ends of the contract, to subvert the fundamentals of the constitution, to deprive them of all share in making and executing laws, will justify a revolution.” And who could forget Patrick Henry with his ultimatum: “Give me liberty or give me death!”
Then again, perhaps you don’t need to test the limits of free speech for yourself.
One such test is playing out before our very eyes on the national stage led by those who seem to believe that only individuals who agree with the government are entitled to the protections of the First Amendment.
To the contrary, James Madison, the father of the Constitution, was very clear about the fact that the First Amendment was established to protect the minority against the majority.
I’ll take that one step further: the First Amendment was intended to protect the citizenry from the government’s tendency to censor, silence and control what people say and think.
Having lost our tolerance for free speech in its most provocative, irritating and offensive forms, the American people have become easy prey for a police state where only government speech is allowed.
You see, the powers-that-be understand that if the government can control speech, it controls thought and, in turn, it can control the minds of the citizenry.
This is how freedom rises or falls.
Americans of all stripes would do well to remember that those who question the motives of government provide a necessary counterpoint to those who would blindly follow where politicians choose to lead.
We don’t have to agree with every criticism of the government, but we must defend the rights of allindividuals to speak freely without fear of punishment or threat of banishment.
Never forget: what the architects of the police state want are submissive, compliant, cooperative, obedient, meek citizens who don’t talk back, don’t challenge government authority, don’t speak out against government misconduct, and don’t step out of line.
What the First Amendment protects—and a healthy constitutional republic requires—are citizens who routinely exercise their right to speak truth to power.
Tolerance for dissent is vital if we are to survive as a free nation.
While there are all kinds of labels being put on so-called “unacceptable” speech today, the real message being conveyed by those in power is that Americans don’t have a right to express themselves if what they are saying is unpopular, controversial or at odds with what the government determines to be acceptable.
By suppressing free speech, the government is contributing to a growing underclass of Americans who are being told that they can’t take part in American public life unless they “fit in.”
Mind you, it won’t be long before anyone who believes in holding the government accountable to respecting our rights and abiding by the rule of law is labeled an “extremist,” is relegated to an underclass that doesn’t fit in, must be watched all the time, and is rounded up when the government deems it necessary.
It doesn’t matter how much money you make, what politics you subscribe to, or what God you worship: as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, we are all potential suspects, terrorists and lawbreakers in the eyes of the government.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
What has America learned from the colossal failure of the Iraq War? Not what it should have learned, notes historian (and retired U.S. Army colonel) Greg Daddis at War on the Rocks. Daddis recently attended a 20-year retrospective symposium on the Iraq War, where he heard two distinctive narratives. As he put it:
Most, if not all, veterans of “Iraqi Freedom” told an inward-facing story focusing on tactical and operational “lessons” largely devoid of political context. Meanwhile, Iraqi scholars and civilians shared a vastly different tale of political and social upheaval that concentrated far more on the costs of war than on the supposed benefits of U.S. interventionism.
In short, the U.S. view of the Iraq War remains insular and narcissistic. The focus is on what U.S. troops may have gotten wrong, and how the military could perform better in the future. It’s about tactical and operational lessons. In this approach, Iraq and the Iraqi people remain a backdrop to American action on the grand stage. Put differently, the Iraqis are treated much like clay for Americans to mould or discard should they refuse to behave themselves under our hands.
So the “lessons” for America focus on how to become better, more skilled, manipulators of the “clay” at hand. Issues of right and wrong aren’t addressed. The morality or legality of war isn’t questioned. And Iraqis themselves, their suffering, their plight, even their say in determining their own futures within their country, is pretty much dismissed as irrelevant. And the same is largely true when considering the Vietnam War or the Afghan War; we matter, they don’t, even when we’re fighting in their country and spreading enormous destruction in undeclared and illegal wars.
As Mike Murry, a Vietnam veteran who comments frequently at this site, has said: you can’t do a wrong thing the right way. America’s Vietnam War was wrong; the Iraq War was wrong. There was no “right” way to do these wars. Yet, far too often, U.S. military officers and veterans, joined by far too many Americans who lack military experience, want to focus on how to wage a wrong war in a better, smarter, often more ruthless, way
Indeed, the narrative at times is reduced to “We lost because we weren’t ruthless enough, or we were about to win until the U.S. military was betrayed.” I wrote about this back in 2007 after I heard Senator John McCain speak on PBS. Basically, his point was that if America lost the Iraq War (which we already had), it wouldn’t be the U.S. military’s fault. It would be the fault of anyone who questioned the war. McCain, in other words, was spouting yet another exculpatory stab-in-the-back myth.
What can we learn from the Iraq War, then? Let’s start with these basic lessons: Don’t fight a war based on governmental lies and unfounded fears. Don’t fight illegal and immoral wars. Don’t fight undeclared wars. Don’t meddle in the societies of other people where you are seen as invaders and about which you are ignorant. Don’t wage war, period, unless the domestic security of the U.S. is truly threatened.
Those seem like the right lessons to me, not lessons about how to recognize insurgencies or how to respond more quickly to asymmetries like IEDs and ambushes.
In sum, learn this lesson: Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, were and are countries with rich pasts and proud peoples who were not about to submit to American invaders and agendas, no matter how well-intentioned those invaders believed or advertised themselves to be.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Nationwide protests took place in Sweden to reject the country’s decision to host a large international military exercise – dubbed Aurora 2023 – and its aspirations to join NATO, China Daily reported on Sunday.
“NATO is nothing but the war machine of the United States,” Nellie Puig, a Swede protesting his country’s potential accession to the military coalition, told the newspaper.
“It is not a defensive alliance as they claim. It is an organization that runs the errands of the United States,” he added.
A number of organizations, political parties, and NGOs took part in the demonstrations, including the Arbitration Society, the Swedish Peace, No NATO, and No to Nuclear Weapons, the news outlet said.
Sweden’s capital Stockholm alone saw hundreds of anti-NATO protesters in its streets.
The demonstrators held banners saying: “No to NATO,” “NATO’s war will get our children killed for a dollar,” and “Stop Aurora 23,” as they marched the streets of the capital.
“Aurora 23 and similar previous exercises prove that Sweden has become increasingly integrated with NATO and Sweden also sells arms to NATO,” said Puig.
Earlier this month, Sweden launched Aurora-23, the largest military drill the country has witnessed in 25 years, involving 14 countries and around 26,000 servicemembers.
Members from the US, UK, Germany, France, Ukraine, Finland, Poland, Norway, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Denmark, and Austria will take part in the training that ends on May 11.
“The purpose of Aurora 23 is to enhance the Swedish Armed Forces’ collected capability to counter an armed attack on Sweden, and also to exercise the entire chain of raised readiness to mobilisation to receive a third party for HNS, as well as a way to prepare us to be a member of Nato,” said Lieutenant Colonel Henrik Larsson, the planning director of the drills.
Last February, Swedish Defense Minister Pal Jonson said Stockholm aims to further integrate its military relations with NATO as the country’s accession into the coalition is facing obstacles after talks with Turkey have been put to a halt.
Last year, the start of the Ukraine war prompted Sweden and its neighbor Finland to drop decades of military non-alignment. Finland became the 31st member of NATO earlier this month, while Stockholm’s provocative actions toward Ankara – including rallies attacking the Turkish leadership in Stockholm and the burning of the holy Quran outside Turkey’s embassy – led the latter to block its accession to the coalition.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: Swedish demonstrators protesting the country’s decision to submit a NATO bid in March 2022 (Swedish state TT)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Flyers were dropped over the town of Hader in Quneitra province, close to a UN armistice line separating Syria from the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.
The leaflets warned the Syrian regime against cooperating with Lebanon’s powerful Iran-backed Shia Hezbollah militant group, which has a strong presence in Syria.
📌ألقت طائرات إسرائيلية منشورات ورقية بالقرب من بلدة حضر بريف #القنيطرة الشمالي، القريبة من الحدود مع فلسطين المحتلة. 📌المنشورات حذرت قادة وعناصر قوات النظام من التعامل مع حزب الله اللبناني في المنطقة. 📌تضمنت المنشورات صوراً للقاء ضابط الاستخبارات السوري "سامر الدانا" مع مسؤول… pic.twitter.com/wZDgEl5mhb
“We are closely monitoring and aware of the ongoing intelligence cooperation with Hezbollah within the Syrian army’s positions in the region, including near the Israeli border strip,” the text on the leaflets read.
“Your cooperation with Hezbollah has turned you into a sacrificial lamb and brought you more harm than good. Cooperation with Hezbollah leads to damage!”
The leaflets included images of what Israel said was the Syrian regime’s head of military intelligence, Maj Gen. Samer al-Dana, alongside commander of Hezbollah’s intelligence apparatus in Syria, Tareq Maher.
Early on Monday, Israeli ground forces bombarded a location on the outskirts of Quneitra where fighters from the Syrian Resistance to Liberate the Golan are located, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported.
Syrian state media did not report the bombardment and no casualties were reported, but two local media outlets close to the regime reported an “Israeli aggression” that targeted the outskirts of Quneitra, a city which was laregely abandoned in 1967, when Israel captured parts of the occupied Syrian Golan Heights.
#متابعة 📌الأنباء الأولية تفيد بسقوط عدد من القتلى والجرحى في صفوف عصابات الأسد والميليشيات الإيرانية نتيجة استهداف الجيش الإسرائيلي موقع تلة قرص النفل بالقرب من بلدة #حضر بريف القنيطرة الشمالي pic.twitter.com/zC3XoJZ6M4
The shelling came days after a similar attack on 18 April, when Israeli forces bombed positions in the Quneitra countryside targeting areas where Iran-linked groups are present.
The Syrian Resistance to Liberate the Golan – a Hezbollah-linked group – was formed to launch attacks in the Golan Heights, which Israeli seized during the Six Day war in 1967.
Israel has repeatedly warned against the growing number of Iran-backed militants along its frontier with Syria, saying it will not allow its arch-foe to extend its footprint in the war-torn country.
It has launched hundreds of airstrikes on Syria during the latter’s 12-year conflict, primarily targeting Iran-backed forces, Hezbollah fighters, and Syrian regime positions.
The Syrian regime has relied on Hezbollah and Iranian militias to battle Syrian rebels during the war.
Iran is believed to have flown thousands of fighters into Syria during the war, while Hezbollah has played a key role in regime offensives to regain rebel-controlled territories.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Robert Francis Kennedy, Jr., near the very beginning of his April 19 announcement to run for President in the Democratic Party spoke these words:
“Fifty-five years ago last month, I sat as a 14-year-old boy behind my father as he now announced in a Senate caucus room in Washington, DC, his campaign for President of the United States. And my father at time was in the same, in many ways, the same position that I’m in today. He was running against a President of his own party. He was running against a war. He was running against – he was running at a time of unprecedented polarization in our country.”
In this way the son tells us right away that he is “running against a war,” Joe Biden’s cruel US proxy war against Russia using Ukrainians as cannon fodder.
He reminded us that his father was given very little chance of winning and felt he would likely lose. But on the day of his assassination, RFK had won the California primary, an urban state, and South Dakota, a rural state. The son is telling us that his is a candidacy not to be written off lightly. RFKJr was polling at 14% among Biden voters even before he announced. And nearly 44% of Democrats want anybody but Biden, with only 25% wishing him to run in 2024.
A video of the entire two hour long speech, impressive in many ways, is to be found here and a transcript here. Kennedy did not read from a prepared text although the speech appeared to be carefully outlined. It had a refreshing air of informality. And it deserves a careful listen.
Many of the points in the speech are summed up in the section on “Peace” in RFKJr’s campaign website, Kennedy2024.com, as follows:
“Annual defense-related spending is close to one trillion dollars. We maintain 800 military bases around the world. The peace dividend that was supposed to come after the Berlin Wall fell was never redeemed. Now we have another chance.
“As President, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. will start the process of unwinding empire. We will bring the troops home. We will stop racking up unpayable debt to fight one war after another. The military will return to its proper role of defending our country. We will end the proxy wars, bombing campaigns, covert operations, coups, paramilitaries, and everything else that has become so normal most people don’t know it’s happening. But it is happening, a constant drain on our strength. It’s time to come home and restore this country.”
“When a warlike imperial nation disarms of its own accord, it sets a template for peace everywhere. It is not too late for us to voluntarily let go of empire and serve peace instead, as a strong and healthy nation.”
And on Ukraine:
“In Ukraine, the most important priority is to end the suffering of the Ukrainian people, victims of a brutal Russian invasion, and also victims of American geopolitical machinations going back at least to 2014. We must first get clear: Is our mission to help the brave Ukrainians defend their sovereignty? Or is it to use Ukraine as a pawn to weaken Russia? Robert F. Kennedy will choose the first. He will find a diplomatic solution that brings peace to Ukraine and brings our resources back where they belong. We will offer to withdraw our troops and nuclear-capable missiles from Russia’s borders. Russia will withdraw its troops from Ukraine and guarantee its freedom and independence. UN peacekeepers will guarantee peace to the Russian-speaking eastern regions. We will put an end to this war. We will put an end to the suffering of the Ukranian people. That will be the start of a broader program of demilitarization of all countries.
“We have to stop seeing the world in terms of enemies and adversaries. As John Quincy Adams wrote, ‘Americans go not abroad in search of monsters to destroy.’”
Those are strong words and realistic categories like “empire,” “proxy wars,” “coups,” “geopolitical machinations going back to 2014,” all ugly imperial facts alluded to euphemistically or not at all in the mainstream media.
This is a candidacy that cannot be ignored or reduced solely to the pros and cons of mRNA vaccines or Kennedy family squabbles over the candidacy as the mainstream media has done. For example, in its brief back page coverage, the New York Times, the foremost mouthpiece of the imperial Establishment, there is nary a mention of war with another nuclear power now hanging over our heads!
This is not to say that we should accept all of RFKJr’s words at face value. But given the present enthusiasm for war in every corner of the Democratic Party’s political establishment and among much of its base, it is difficult to see RFKJr’s candidacy as opportunistic. His candidacy deserves to be treated skeptically like all candidacies but not cynically. The speech should be listened to carefully in that spirit.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
John V. Walsh, until recently a Professor of Physiology and Neuroscience at a Medical School in Massachusetts, has written on issues of peace and health care for the San Francisco Chronicle, EastBayTimes/San Jose Mercury News, Asia Times, LA Progressive, Antiwar.com, Consortium News, CounterPunch and others.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
A groundbreaking study published in the Journal of Internal Medicine has revealed something absolutely amazing about the role of the Sun in human health: a deficiency of sunlight could be as harmful to human health as smoking cigarettes
The study titled, “Avoidance of sun exposure as a risk factor for major causes of death: a competing risk analysis of the Melanoma in Southern Sweden cohort,” was conducted by Swedish researchers on a population of almost 30,000 women. They assessed the differences in sun exposure as a risk factor for all-cause mortality, within a prospective 20-year follow up of the Melanoma in Southern Sweden (MISS) cohort. The women were aged 25-64 years at the start of the study and recruited from 1990 to 1992. When their sun exposure habits were analyzed using modern survival statistics they discovered several things.
First:
“Women with active sun exposure habits were mainly at a lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and noncancer/non-CVD death as compared to those who avoided sun exposure.”
Second:
“As a result of their increased survival, the relative contribution of cancer death increased in these women.”
This finding may be a bit tricky to understand, so let’s look at it a little closer.
Because cancer risk increases along with biological age, the longer you live, the higher your cancer risk will be. Therefore, because increased sunlight exposure actually increases your longevity, it will also appear to increase your risk of cancer. But this does not necessarily mean that sunlight is intrinsically “carcinogenic,” which is commonly assumed.
Because heart disease is #1 killer in the developed world, and since sunlight reduces this most common cause of premature death, even if it increases the risk of the #2 most common cause of death (cancer), the net effect of sunlight exposure is that you will still live longer, which helps to contextualize and neutralize the “increased cancer risk” often observed. Keep in mind, as well, that a huge number of cancers are overdiagnosed and overtreated, without sufficient acknowledgement by the medical establishment, whose culpability is rarely addressed. These “cancers” greatly inflate the statistics. With millions of so-called early stage cancers like these — especially breast, prostate, thyroid, lung, and ovarian — being wrongly diagnosed and treated, the complexity of the topic makes determining the role of sunlight exposure and cancer risk all the more difficult to ascertain.
Moving on, the point about the longevity promoting properties of sunlight are driven home strongly by the third major observation:
“Nonsmokers who avoided sun exposure had a life expectancy similar to smokers in the highest sun exposure group, indicating that avoidance of sun exposure is a risk factor for death of a similar magnitude as smoking.”
This is a powerful finding with profound implications. To say that “avoidance of sun exposure is a risk factor for death of a similar magnitude as smoking,” is to point out that sunlight exposure, rather than being the constant lethal threat it is perceived to be, warranting the slathering on all over the body of synthetic sunscreens virtually guaranteed to cause harm from toxicant exposure, is essential to our health. In fact, according to the CDC, smoking is responsible for 6 million unnecessary deaths a year, and the “overall mortality among both male and female smokers in the United States is about three times higher than that among similar people who never smoked.” And so, sunlight exposure may be so powerful an essential and necessary ingredient in human health that it might be considered medically unethical not to provide access to it, or to advise more routine exposure to it.
The fourth and final observation of the study was that:
“Compared to the highest sun exposure group, life expectancy of avoiders of sun exposure was reduced by 0.6-2.1 years.”
Sunlight Attains Its Former Status As An Indispensable Component of Health
While we can say that sunlight deficiency may contribute to lethal outcomes on par with smoking, we can rephrase the information positively by affirming that the Sun and its light may be as important to human health as is clean food or water. In fact, compelling research suggests that energy from the Sun drives the cellular bioenergetics of the biomachinery of our bodies through non-ATP dependent processes. Consider the work of Gerald Pollack, PhD, author of the “The 4th Phase of Water” (see video below), who explains how infrared energy of the Sun charges up the water molecules within our body (99% of the molecules in our bodies in number are water) like trillions of molecular batteries.
When pertaining to cardiovascular health, sunlight energy in the form of infrared charged water molecules supports the heart’s job of pumping the blood throughout the blood vessels by producing a form of highly structured and energized water known as Exclusion Zone water, or EZ water, and which may actually provide over 99.9% of the biomechanical energy needed to push the 1.2-1.5 gallons of blood in the average adult body through the literally thousands of miles of blood vessels. Provocative research also suggests the body contains a variety of photoacceptors/chromophores (e.g. cytochrome C oxidase) capable of accepting and utilizing sunlight to generate so-called “extra synthesis” of ATP. Additionally, melanin may absorb a wide range of the Sun’s electromagnetic spectrum, converting it into useful energy and perhaps also biologically important information, even perhaps taking harmful gamma radiation and turning it into biologically useful energy. Even something as commonplace in the human diet as chlorophyll has recently been found to act as a means to enhanced the light-harvesting properties of animal cells. In fact, we reported recently on a study that found enhanced ATP production (without the expected concomitant uptick in reactive oxygen species production) through intermediary of chlorophyll metabolites that end up in the mitochondria of our cells following microbiome-mediated digestive processes.
Natural health advocates have sung the praises of sunlight for health since time immemorial. While in modern times, sunlight-phobia is omnipresent, with parents of especially lighter skinned ethnicities forcing their children to don space-suit level all body protective gear, along with spraying or slathering them with extremely toxic petrochemical derivatives and nanoparticle metals with potentially cancer-promoting properties, there is a growing appreciation that we need the Sun as both a form of food, energy and information.
It’s, of course, not all about vitamin D. To reduce the perceived health benefits of sunlight to this hormone like compound is as reductionistic as saying a orange’s health benefits are solely dependent on and reducible to the molecular scaffolding of atoms that comprise the chemical skeleton of the ascorbic acid molecule. We are beginning to learn that certain wavelengths of sunlight activate a wide range of ancient, hard-wired genetic and epigenetic programs, relevant to all of our body’s systems. The wavelengths of light that occur at sunset, for instance, may have been so important to our evolution as a species that our very hairlessness, and our massive brains may not have evolved without daily exposure to them, for hundreds of thousands and even millions of years. This phenomena, also known as biophotomodulation, opens up a radically new perspective on the role of the sun in human health and disease. If sunlight deficiency is really as deadly as actively smoking cigarettes, it could be said that those who do not experience regular natural light exposure are no longer truly human, or capable of experiencing the optimal expression of their biological, mental, and spiritual blueprint. A fundamental right, and health practice, would be daily outdoors exposure. How many of us have considered the state of office workers, institutionalized educational systems without windows, night shift work, and prisons? Sunlight depravation, in light of these new findings, could be considered a significant violation of human health rights.
This study may pave the way for a deeper understanding of what humans need to be truly healthy, with sunlight deficiency being a prime example of what is most wrong about our modern incarnation as a primarily indoors focused creature, leading to our physical and psychospiritual degeneration. As new models of cellular bioenergetics emerge, taking into account the ability of the body to directly or indirectly harvest the various light wavelengths of the Sun, direct daily exposure to sunlight may be looked upon as at least as an important step as “taking your vitamins,” or exercising, for maintaining our health. Conversely, sunlight deficiency and/or depravation will be likely be viewed to be as dangerous or lethal as smoking.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Move over Watergate. On or around Oct. 17, 2020, then-senior Biden campaign official Antony Blinken called up former acting CIA director Mike Morell to ask a favor: he needed high-ranking former US intelligence community officials to lie to the American people to save Biden’s lagging campaign from a massive brewing scandal.
The problem was that Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, had abandoned his laptop at a repair shop and the explosive contents of the computer were leaking out. The details of the Biden family’s apparent corruption and the debauchery of the former vice-president’s son were being reported by the New York Post, and with the election less than a month away, the Biden campaign needed to kill the story.
So, according to newly-released transcripts of Morell’s testimony before the House judiciary Committee, Blinken “triggered” Morell to put together a letter for some 50 senior intelligence officials to sign – using their high-level government titles – to claim that the laptop story “had all the hallmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.”
In short, at the Biden campaign’s direction Morell launched a covert operation against the American people to undermine the integrity of the 2020 election. A letter signed by dozens of the highest-ranking former CIA, DIA, and NSA officials would surely carry enough weight to bury the Biden laptop story. It worked. Social media outlets prevented any reporting on the laptop from being posted and the mainstream media could easily ignore the story as it was merely “Russian propaganda.”
Asked recently by Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) why he agreed to draft the false sign-on letter, Morell testified that he wanted to “help Vice President Biden … because I wanted him to win the election.” Morell also likely expected to be named by President Biden to head up the CIA when it came time to call in favors.
The Democrats and the mainstream media have relentlessly pushed the lie that the ruckus inside the US Capitol on Jan. 6th 2021 was a move by President Trump to overthrow the election results. Hundreds of “trespassers” were arrested and held in solitary confinement without trial to bolster the false narrative that a conspiracy to steal the election was taking place.
It turns out that there really was a conspiracy to steal the election, but it was opposite of what was reported. Just as the Steele Dossier was a Democratic Party covert action to plant the lie that the Russians were pulling strings for Trump, the “Russian disinformation campaign” letter was a lie to deflect scrutiny of the Biden family’s possible corruption in the final days of the campaign.
Did the Biden campaign’s disinformation campaign help rig the election in his favor? Polls suggest that Biden would not have been elected had the American electorate been informed about what was on Hunter Biden’s laptop. So yes, they cheated in the election.
The Democrats and the mainstream media are still at it, however. Now they are trying to kill the story of how they killed the story of the Biden laptop. This is a scandal that would once upon a time have ended in resignation, impeachment, and/or plenty of jail time. If they successfully bury this story, I hate to say it but there is no more rule of law in what has become the American banana republic.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
It was always inevitable that the Pentagon’s and the CIA’s “war on terrorism” would begin fizzling out, especially as the number of foreigners they were killing significantly diminished. When U.S. forces got booted out of Afghanistan and began killing significantly less people in Iraq, the rage that motivates terrorists to strike began going down.
That’s undoubtedly why the Pentagon hedged its bets and began expanding NATO eastward after the ostensible end of the Cold War, moving inexorably closer to Russia’s border. Pentagon officials figured that if their “war on terrorism” began fizzling out, they could still gin up their old Cold War racket, one that had proven to be highly lucrative for the national-security establishment and its army of voracious “defense” contractors who depend on feeding at the public trough.
With its interventionist antics, the Pentagon succeeded in provoking Russia into invading Ukraine, which has turned into an enormous bonanza for the Pentagon, the CIA, and theNSA, one comparable to the one that came after the 9/11 attacks. The Pentagon’s interventionist strategy got a large number of Americans imbued with a ferocious anti-Russia mentality, one that has been supportive of whatever quantity of tax-funded largess that Congress has been willing to heap onto the national-security establishment.
An unintended consequence of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, however, has been the destruction of the Pentagon’s and CIA’s portrayal of the Russians as an all-powerful military nation that was coming to get us here in the United States. Prior to the invasion, Pentagon and CIA officials were saying that it was clear that Russia planned to reconstitute theSoviet Union, invade and conquer Eastern and Western Europe, cross the EnglishChannel and take England, and then cross the Atlantic Ocean and conquer the United States. They were using that fear to justify the continuation and expansion of their tax-funded largess.
Really? Why, Russia hasn’t even been able to conquer Ukraine! If it can’t conquer Ukraine, how is it suppose to conquer the world? So much for that scary Russian boogeyman who was coming to get us.
It was really no different during the Cold War racket. At the end of World War II, U.S. officials imbued the American people with a deep fear that the commies were coming to get them. The notion was that there was an international communist conspiracy that was based in Moscow whose aim was to invade and conquer Europe, Latin America, the United States, and the rest of the world.
The irony is that the Soviets had been America’s partner and ally during the war. But those who were advocating that the federal government be converted to a national-security state knew that America would need a new official enemy to justify the conversion. Enter the Reds. As someone told President Truman, who was the president who presided over the conversion, he needed to scare the hell out of the American people so that they wouldn’t object to the conversion.
Truman did that. “The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!” There was even an American movie with that title. Everyone was scared to death that the Reds were going to take control of America and teach Marxism in America’s public (i.e., government) schools.
The biggest fear-mongers were American conservatives. They lived in deep fear of the Reds during the entire 45 years of the Cold War racket. In fact, they were convinced that the communist invasion had already started. That’s why they went after Martin Luther King.They were convinced that he was a Red agent. The same holds true for leftists working in Hollywood. They went after them with a vengeance. Some right-wingers even believed that President Eisenhower was an agent of the Reds as well.
There was actually a humorous dimension to this deep right-wing fear. Throughout the ColdWar, conservatives argued that socialism was doomed to fail. It was an inherently defective economic system, they pointed out. Socialism would inevitably impoverish countries that embraced this philosophy, such as Russia. Right-wingers would quote free-market economists like Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and Milton Friedman to make their case.
Yet, despite that insight about socialism, conservatives continued to maintain that Russia was an all-powerful nation that was going to take down America. To this day, I don’t think right-wingers are able to recognize their internal contradiction.
The worst mistake America has ever made was to convert the federal government from a limited-government republic to a national-security state, which is a type of governmental system in which officials wield omnipotent powers. Genuine advocates of liberty fight communism and socialism with freedom and free markets, not with communism and socialism. With their deeply seated fear of the Reds, conservatives led our nation in a very bad direction, one that, for sure, has enriched and empowered the national-security establishment but, at the same time, has led to the destruction of our rights, liberties, security, and well-being here at home.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation. He was born and raised in Laredo, Texas, and received his B.A. in economics from Virginia Military Institute and his law degree from the University of Texas. He was a trial attorney for twelve years in Texas. He also was an adjunct professor at the University of Dallas, where he taught law and economics. In 1987, Mr. Hornberger left the practice of law to become director of programs at the Foundation for Economic Education. He has advanced freedom and free markets on talk-radio stations all across the country as well as on Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and Greta van Susteren shows and he appeared as a regular commentator on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s show Freedom Watch. View these interviews at LewRockwell.com and from Full Context. Send him email.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
A 41-year old mother of seven young children has been in effect condemned to death by Emory Healthcare Inc. of Atlanta, an affiliate of Emory University, for refusing to take the dangerous Covid-19 shot.The mother was approved for a kidney transplant but was removed from the list when she refused the death jab.The woman has had Covid and is protected by natural immunity.Moreover, there are many medical scientists who believe the adverse effect of the Covid mRNA “vaccine” would attack her kidney and kill her.
Only about one-third of America’s transplant centers are still so medically ignorant of the mRNA “vaccine” danger, or corrupted by Big Pharma payments, as to continue to require patients to submit to Covid “vaccination” in order to receive health care.Emory Healthcare is in this minority that requires patients to take enormous risks in order to receive treatment.
It seems clear enough that Emory Healthcare is committing willful murder. But prosecutors are too busy putting Trump supporters in prison for attending a rally to pay attention to real crimes.Little doubt Emory graduates and the Robert W. Woodruff Foundation will continue to pour money into a heartless facility that has no qualms about murdering a mother of 7 kids.
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned author and academic, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy where this article was originally published. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
FROM 2018: There is in fact a Middle Eastern nation that is in fact in control of a vast, undeclared stockpile of nuclear weapons. This nation does have the capability of deploying those weapons anywhere in the region. It is not a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and its arsenal has never been inspected by any international agency. But this nation is not Iran. It’s Israel.
Transcript
DONALD TRUMP: I am announcing today that the United States will withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal. In a few moments, I will sign a presidential memorandum to begin reinstating US nuclear sanctions on the Iranian regime. We will be instituting the highest level of economic sanction.
When President Trump announced that the US was going to de-certify the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, better known as the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, and reinstitute sanctions on that country, one of the reasons he cited for that move was the presentation of “new” evidence from Israeli intelligence showing that the Iranians had lied about its nuclear program during the negotiation of that deal.
TRUMP: Last week Israel published intelligence documents long concealed by Iran conclusively showing the Iranians regime and its history of pursuing nuclear weapons.
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: A few weeks ago, in a great intelligence achievement, Israel obtained half a ton of the material inside these vaults. And here’s what we got: 55,000 pages; another 55,000 files on 183 CDs. Everything you’re about to see is an exact copy of the original Iranian material.
Theatrical props and dramatic rhetoric aside, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent presentation on the “Iranian nuclear deal” in fact contained no new information.
That Iran had explored a nuclear weapons program prior to 2003 has been known and admitted for years. That they have an archive of this information is not a violation of the Iranian nuclear deal completed in 2015. In fact, if anything, Netanyahu’s presentation actually proved the exact opposite of what was intended: Namely, that Iran is abiding by the terms of that treaty and is not covertly pursuing any nuclear weapons activity. That’s why they had to go back to 15-year-old information and present it as if it was something new and revelatory.
But here’s the real head-scratcher in this new round of propaganda over the Iranian nuclear non-threat: There is in fact a Middle Eastern nation that is in fact in control of a vast, undeclared stockpile of nuclear weapons. This nation does have the capability of deploying those weapons anywhere in the region. It is not a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and its arsenal has never been inspected by any international agency. But this nation is not Iran. It’s Israel.
This is the story of the real Middle East Nuclear Threat. You’re watching The Corbett Report.
Hand-wringing over Iran’s nuclear program is nothing new. It became a mainstay of Western political discourse after an Iranian dissident revealed the Iranian government’s plans for a uranium enrichment facility in Natanz in August 2002. But the surprising fact for Americans and others around the world who get their information from the corporate mainstream media, is that Iran’s pre-2003 nuclear weapons program has long been known and admitted. Since 2003, when the program was scrapped, not a single piece of evidence has been presented (not even by Netanyahu or the Israeli government) that the Iranian government ever pursued anything other than what it said it was pursuing: a nuclear energy program.
Not that that fact has ever stopped Netanyahu from using any opportunity to use cartoon-level propaganda tactics to convince the world otherwise:
NETANYAHU: In the case of Iran’s nuclear plans to build a bomb, this bomb has to be filled with enough enriched uranium. And Iran has to go through three stages.
The first stage: They have to enrich enough of low enriched uranium. The second stage: They have to enrich enough medium enriched uranium. And the third stage and final stage: They have to enrich enough high enriched uranium for the first bomb.
Where’s Iran? Iran’s completed the first stage. It took them many years, but they completed it, and they’re 70% of the way there.
Now they are well into the second stage. By next spring, at most by next summer at current enrichment rates, they will have finished the medium enrichment and move on to the final stage. From there, it’s only a few months, possibly a few weeks, before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb.
Ladies and gentlemen, what I told you now is not based on secret information. It’s not based on military intelligence. It’s based on the public reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Anybody can read them. They’re online.
So if these are the facts, and they are, where should a red line be drawn?
A red line should be drawn right here. Before Iran completes the second stage of nuclear enrichment necessary to make a bomb. Before Iran gets to a point where it’s a few months away or a few weeks away from amassing enough enriched uranium to make a nuclear weapon.
Now each day, that point is getting closer. That’s why I speak today with such a sense of urgency.
Of course, Iran was not pursuing nuclear weapons, and Netanyahu’s Wile E. Coyote bomb and red-line warnings bore no greater semblance to reality than the cartoon propaganda surrounding Saddam’s “weapons of mass destruction.” Not only did the IAEA repeatedly confirm that Iran never diverted any nuclear material into any military program, but even the US intelligence community itself conceded that Iran was not trying to build a nuclear bomb. Most remarkable of all was Mossad’s own assessment that Iran was “not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.”
As I detailed earlier this year in “We Need to Talk About the Iran Protests,” fearmongering over Iran’s non-existent nuclear weapons program was the basis for an extraordinary series of measures against the country in recent decades. These measures include “NITRO ZEUS,” a full-scale military cyberattack against Iran, the best-known element of which was Stuxnet, the military-grade cyberweapon co-developed by the United States and Israel that specifically targeted Iran’s nuclear enrichment facility at Natanz.
Iran’s non-existent nuclear program also provided the pretext for sanctions aimed at crippling the country’s economy, including the de-listing of Iranian banks from the Swift Network connecting the world’s financial institutions.
But the great irony is that there really is a nuclear armed nation in the Middle East. It is not a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. It does not allow inspections of its arsenal. It does not even officially acknowledge its stockpile of nuclear weapons. It has even resisted the push for an international treaty recognizing a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East. And that country is Israel.
Sometimes ranked as the world’s sixth largest nuclear superpower, Israel actively pursued a nuclear program from the time of its inception as a state in 1948. By the late 1950s, they had begun building a reactor and reprocessing plant at Dimona with British and French aid. And by 1967, a classified CIA report estimated that Israel would be capable of producing a nuclear warhead in “six to eight weeks.” Shortly thereafter, it is believed, Israel began producing and stockpiling a nuclear arsenal.
OLENKA FRENKIEL: It was the young Shimon Peres, back in the ’50s who negotiated a secret deal with the French to buy a nuclear weapons reactor like theirs. But while Dimona was going up, intelligence reports reached Washington that Israel was building an atom bomb.
Despite claims that Dimona was for peaceful purposes only, Israel’s leader, Ben Gurion, was summoned to Washington. President Kennedy feared an arms race in the Middle East and demanded inspections. But when inspectors finally entered the plant in May 1961, they were tricked. They were shown a fake control room on the ground floor. They were unaware of the six floors below where the plutonium was made.
PETER HOUNAM, freelance journalist: Well, this was something of great pride and almost a legendary story in Dimona, according to Vanunu. When the Americans came they were completely hoodwinked. All the entrances, including the lift shafts, were bricked up and plastered over, so it was impossible for anyone to find their way down to the lower floors.
FRENKIEL: After Kennedy’s assassination, the pressure on Israel was off. His successor, Lyndon Johnson, turned a blind eye. Then, in 1969, Israel’s Golda Meir and President Richard Nixon struck a deal, renewed by every President to this day. Israel’s nuclear programme could continue as long as it was never made public. It’s called “nuclear ambiguity.”
The term “nuclear ambiguity,” in some ways it sounds very grand. But isn’t it just a euphemism for deception?
SHIMON PERES, former Prime Minister of Israel: If somebody wants to kill you, and you use a deception to save your life, it is not immoral. If we wouldn’t have enemies, we wouldn’t need deceptions. We wouldn’t need deterrent.
FRENKIEL: Was this the justification for concealing the floors of the plutonium reprocessing areas from the Americans, the inspectors, when they came?
PERES: You are having a dialogue with yourself, not with me.
FRENKIEL: But that’s been documented in a number of books.
PERES: Ask the question to yourself, not to me.
FRENKIEL: But, I mean, is it not true?
PERES: I don’t have to answer your questions, even. I don’t see any reason why.
FRENKIEL: Ambiguity is a luxury unique to Israel. Today the country’s an inspection-free zone, protected from scrutiny by America and her allies.
Although estimates vary, it is now believed that Israel has somewhere between 75 and 400 nuclear warheads and that it possesses the capability to deliver these warheads to Iran.
The existence of this stockpile, while known to governments around the world for decades, was only revealed to the public in 1986, when The Sunday Times published photographic proof and a detailed account of Israel’s secret nuclear weapons program. That story was provided by Mordechai Vanunu, a technician at the Dimona facility, who spent decades behind bars for his part in revealing this truth to the world.
NARRATOR: On October the 5th, 1986, The Sunday Times announced they had evidence to prove that Israel had become the world’s sixth biggest nuclear power, having developed their arsenal beneath the Negev desert at Dimona. Photographs like this were given to The Sunday Times by a former technician at Dimona, Mordechai Vanunu.
[. . .]
Mordechai Vanunu’s family, Moroccan Jews, settled in the Negev in the early ’60s, inspired by the idea of being a part of Israel. Vanunu did national service in the army. Then, while he worked at Dimona, he began studying philosophy. He became active in student politics. He opposed Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. Vanunu came to believe that Israel’s nuclear development program was immoral. He left Dimona and, eventually, Israel itself.
Vanunu arrived in Sydney armed with photographs he’d taken inside Dimona. Here, he turned his back on Judaism and became a Christian. He met Oscar Guerrero, a Colombian journalist who urged him to sell his secrets to The Sunday Times. His evidence was processed at a local photo shop. Vanunu talked openly about what he’d done.
It’s said that by the time Vanunu arrived in London on September the 12th, 1986, Australian intelligence had already alerted MI6 and the CIA, and Mossad—Israeli intelligence—had already begun questioning his family in Israel. The Sunday Times disguised their informant and moved him from place to place for protection. But in Leicester Square one day, Vanunu met a blonde who called herself “Cindy,” a beautician from Florida. Meanwhile, Oscar Guerrero, eager to profit from what he knew, turned to The Sunday Mirror. Vanunu’s photograph appeared on page one. Vanunu began to despair. At this point, Cindy was able to lure him to Rome to spend the weekend with her at her sister’s apartment. Not once did Vanunu suspect that Cindy was a Mossad agent and that this was the beginning of a plot to kidnap him.
In Rome, the tactics of the Mossad agents changed dramatically.
MEIR VANUNU: In the apartment, two Israeli agents attacked him and bit him and strangled him really hard. And then chained him, injected drugs [in]to his body. And later on he woke up in a small cell on a boat. The boat went to Israel for a few days and he arrived to Israel on the 7th of October, 1986.
NARRATOR: Vanunu was assumed dead until he turned up weeks later in Tel Aviv. Vanunu himself, on his way to court, gave the first clue of what had happened to him. Scrawled on his hand was the message “Vanunu was hijacked from Rome, Italy. 30.9.86. BA 504.”
But a key element of this story is missing from the handful of documentaries that do acknowledge Israel’s nuclear stockpile. Namely, that these weapons were not merely developed by Israeli scientists working in isolation, but with the aid of a nuclear smuggling ring that helped develop and advance Israel’s arsenal by stealing important nuclear technologies from their “ally,” the United States. These smuggling rings and their activities have been known about and even investigated by the FBI for decades, but largely kept secret from the public.
GRANT F. SMITH: In terms of the FBI uncovering a multi-node network, this one happened to be centered in California. MILCO was a company that was incorporated in 1972 by a man named Richard Kelly Smyth. He was discovered sending 800 krytrons, which are dual-use items that could be used to trigger nuclear weapons. When he was discovered doing that, he skipped bail in the mid-1980s and disappeared until he was picked up by Interpol in the early part of 2000.
And so the story is interesting and explosive, because after multiple attempts and denials, we had a document release in which the key contact, or one of the key contacts, that Smyth was meeting with to set up sales in Israel was none other than Benjamin Netanyahu. And so the document—which I’m kind of holding up right here for the people who are on video—actually names Benjamin Netanyahu as being an employee of Heli Trading Company, which was the node in Israel that would receive Ministry of Defense requisitions that they would pass on to MILCO.
And so the interesting thing about this, of course, is the high-profile nature of Benjamin Netanyahu [and] the fact that the smuggling ring ringleader has been identified as Arnon Milchan, a person any American knows for his movie productions, such as Pretty Woman and other favorites, who is running this and who a recent book has named as being a top economic espionage spy for LAKAM, who worked under Benjamin Bloomberg and Rafi Eitan. But the FBI document that we published on July 4 related to an antiwar.com story, which was really short and direct. And its core focus was on the fact that in a period when Netanyahu was building himself up as a leader in the terrorism industry—hosting major conferences, having just returned from his studies in the United States, hosting major conferences in the Jonathan Netanyahu Terrorism Institute, named after his brother who was killed on the raid on Entebbe.
Here’s a person who was supposed to be working as a furniture company executive, and yet these documents, which are very credible because of what they were, which is testimony from Richard Kelly Smyth after he was returned from his exile overseas and finally forced serve a prison sentence. These were the statements he made to an FBI agent in a district attorney office when they debriefed and wanted to know what the extent of the nuclear technology smuggling network was, and—boom!—there’s Benjamin Netanyahu.
Benjamin Netanyahu. And now this unindicted nuclear smuggler is lecturing Iran about a 15-year-old, long-acknowledged nuclear weapons program that never produced a single nuclear weapon.
Even more worryingly, Israel’s nuclear knowledge has not only helped to arm its own nation, but actually helped to proliferate nuclear weapons to Pakistan through the so-called Khan network. One of the men who helped to transfer the nuclear triggers used in the construction of the Pakistani bomb was Asher Karni, an orthodox Jew living in South Africa who had been a major in the Israeli army prior to emigrating to Cape Town. Upon his arrival there in 1985, he began teaching the Torah at the local synagogue and educating Jewish youth, encouraging them to relocate to Israel.
In 2004, U.S. authorities arrested Karni for his role in supplying the nuclear triggers, and in 2005 he was sentenced to three years in prison. It has never been officially explained why this Israeli citizen and former Israeli military officer was interested in helping proliferate nuclear technologies to Pakistan.
But perhaps the greatest irony of all is that it is Iran who has been arguing for decades that the Middle East should be a nuclear-free zone. The idea was first floated by the Shah in 1969 and was first formally proposed by Iran in a joint UN General Assembly resolution, but the idea failed to garner any support. The idea was again raised by then-Iranian President Ahmedinejad in 2006 and yet again by then-Iranian Foreign Minister Mottaki in 2008, but these calls to banish nuclear weapons from the Middle East have not even been acknowledged by the West, let alone seriously considered.
Now more than ever, the prospect of a nuclear-free Middle East seems the only way to prevent a nuclear conflagration that threatens to draw in the world’s superpowers, and yet this idea is being ignored by Israel and its staunchest ally, the United States.
Why does Israel refuse to declare its nuclear weapons stockpile?
Why do they refuse to sign on to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty?
Why do they refuse IAEA inspections of their nuclear facility?
Why did they kidnap and imprison Mordechai Vanunu for 18 years for providing the proof of this nuclear program?
And perhaps most importantly, why does the United States, the only country who could single-handedly force NPT compliance from Israel, still refuse to even admit the openly-acknowledged status of Israel as a nuclear power?
Don’t hold your breath waiting for these questions to be answered by the teleprompter readers on the nightly news.
Still, as even many in the mainstream are now admitting, Netanyahu’s presentation on Iran’s nuclear non-secrets is a cheap display of political theatrics. The only thing he ended up doing is underlining the point that Iran, unlike Israel, fully cooperated with the IAEA, lived up to its obligations as a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and, pointedly, has not violated the 2015 nuclear deal.
And now that the United States has allowed the Israeli tail to wag the American dog once again by de-certifying that Iranian deal without valid cause, negotiators in North Korea and elsewhere will be watching, reminded yet again that a promise from the American empire isn’t worth the signed agreement it’s written on.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivers a speech on Iran’s nuclear programme at the defence ministry in Tel Aviv on 30 April 2018 (Source: MEE)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
When asked what happened to the submarine Kursk on August 12, 2000, when it ended up at the bottom of the Barents Sea with 118 crew members, I will not answer “only” it sank! For twenty years I have worked on the research of this great accident that hit the Russian Navy, and I am obliged to give my expert opinion: I am deeply convinced that it is a “man-made disaster”.
This is the essence of the investigation and the book that was written on the basis of 20 years of work on the expert examination of the sinking of the pride of the Russian Navy by the Navy captain Igor Kirilovich Kurdin, a legend of Russian submarines.
*
Dragan Vujicic (DV): Please explain?
Igor Kirilovich Kurdin (IKK): Things went bad one after another. It was a poorly made torpedo, and the preparation for firing was also bad. The crew had never handled this weapon before and it was the first time they had to launch a “whale” torpedo. During the preparation for firing, there was a combination/mixing of kerosene and hydrogen peroxide, which caused the explosion of one torpedo after another.
*
The elite Russian commander from the town of Polari is the son of submarine commander Kirill Borisovich Kurdin and Nadezhda Yevgenievna Kurdin (Kolesnikov), a participant in polar convoys in the Great Patriotic War. He served on nuclear submarines for 20 years and one day and was commander of three nuclear submarine cruisers K-241 “Murena”, K-84 “Yekaterinburg” and K-407 “Novomoskovsk”. He retired in 1995, and after the sinking of the Kursk in 2000, he agreed to investigate all aspects of the tragedy on behalf of the families of the injured colleagues. He also presented his findings in Belgrade to his colleagues from the Association of Submarines of Serbia, whose guest he was at the end of April.
Kurdin was genuinely shaken as he said: “The investigation into the sinking of the Kursk submarine was my most difficult and emotional professional and life task.” The Kursk submarine was the pride of Russian engineering. This underwater colossus is designated in NATO codification as Oscar 2 (or Project 949A Antej). When designed in the USSR, the submarine was intended to track NATO aircraft carrier groups and eventually destroy them. Antej submarines are designed to have a double hull divided into 10 different spaces. The vessel has a reinforced double hull designed to break through the Arctic ice cap. It is 154 meters long and eleven such buildings were built between 1985 and 1999, eight of which are still in use. Such underwater giants were considered unsinkable, and the tragedy in the Barents Sea in 2000 was the biggest blow to Russian military power. – Of course it was a big blow to the prestige of the Russian Fleet and that is why the investigation has been going on all these years, slowly, thoroughly and checking all possible aspects of the accident – explains Captain Kurdin at the beginning of the interview for newsmagazine “Seal”.
He adds: Everything that preceded the explosion was also investigated, how and when the explosion occurred. Hull and mechanism designers, admirals and lifeguards as well as weapons specialists were interviewed. Everyone told and wrote down what they knew, and I, as the commander of the submarine, just arranged the facts.
*
DV: There are two basic versions?
IKK: One is the one that I believe is a man-made disaster, as I have already explained. Another version is that the Kursk was sunk by an American or English submarine. And these facts were taken into account because they were really nearby in the Barents Sea!
DV: There are also versions that there was a collision with the Americans?
IKK: To say that the American submarine allegedly accidentally hit the Kursk, which activated one torpedo after another. But if that had happened, that submarine would have ended up at the bottom. She couldn’t just lie down on the bottom and crawl on it to hide somewhere. Submarines don’t go on the bottom!
DV:What’s the weirdest version you’ve worked on during a submarine recovery and expertise?
IKK: That it was an accidental torpedo attack. Allegedly, “someone else’s” computer made a mistake, but that only happens in science fiction. According to the sound, you can hear the firing of a torpedo, and no one in the vicinity of Kursk has heard anything like that, and it was not recorded on hydro acoustic devices
DV: It was also said that this powerful submarine was at the minimum depth when the accident happened.
IKK: According to the scenario of that exercise, the Kursk had a zone of influence, and it is true that the accident of the 154-meter ship occurred at a depth of 108 meters, which is really low for this type of submarine. But, it could only be a mitigating circumstance for the crew because at that depth they could have taken it out more easily. However, during that exercise in 2000, when 12 submarines went out to sea, the only rescue ship in the war port was not working and could not even set sail.
DV: So there was no salvation for them?
IKK: According to the navigation regulations of the Russian Navy, when an accident like this happens and in the next eight hours help does not come and let’s say the entire crew dies – no one is to blame but fate. When 23 people wait two days for help at the bottom and there is none, then there is professional responsibility for not providing help to the victims.
DV: Has anyone been held accountable for that?
IKK: Unfortunately no. After a year, 30 admirals and generals were dismissed from service with the explanation: Poor combat readiness. We all knew it was because of Kursk, but it was never emphasized.
DV: So part of the crew was waiting for rescuers?
IKK: It is believed that twenty-three (23) of them could have been helped with the devices from the rescue ship. After the explosion, they barricaded themselves in the compartment (space) of the submarine that was flooded no more than five by five meters and if they kept quiet they could clearly hear the ships going above them. I talked to the people who were the first to enter the sunken submarine and they testify that everything was ready for evacuation. They prepared life suits, buoys and other rescue equipment and waited in the dark for the rescuers. A submariner can really imagine what it’s like to be at the bottom of a wrecked submarine in the dark at a temperature around zero and the percentage of carbon dioxide is rising.
DV: These people still didn’t surrender for two days?
IKK: They could not leave the submarine themselves, but waited for help to come from the rescue ship. They had food and water. They also had special hand-held air purifiers because the central purification system was not working. They regularly removed the air regeneration panels that bind CO2 (carbon dioxide) and release oxygen for about two days from the moment of the accident.
DV: What happened?
IKK: The autopsy findings of the doctor say that 20 of them were killed in section no. 9 suffocated with carbon dioxide and three were burned. A fire broke out in the space where they were grouped as a result of the chemical reaction of this regeneration system and water. In that darkness, water somehow broke into the regenerative cabinet/apparatus, the board came into contact with the water and burst into flames, so that the three female officers could hardly be recognized.
DV: Explain that afterburner?
IKK: This is due to the sensitivity of those devices for air purification in submarines. It was invented by the Germans during the Second World War, and in the boxes of regenerative mass type V-64 there are air purification plates used by submariners when they dive for a long time. The handling of these plates must be extremely careful because they are aggressive on the human mucous membrane, and in contact with water, a violent reaction like an explosion and a fire occurs. It was simply not possible to be careful after two days at the bottom, in the cold and in the dark…
K-407 “Novomoskovsk” submarine
DV: The Kursk tragedy was the biggest blow to the Russian Navy?
IKK: It is true. Previously, Russian submariners were stunned by the decision of their commander-in-chief Boris Yeltsin to give up tactical nuclear warheads on their submarines as well. Let’s say that this class of Antej submarines was designed to deal with the biggest threat to Russia on the seas of the world, which during the Cold War were aircraft carriers primarily from the USA. The Antej submarines were intended to use a bouquet of small tactical nuclear bombs to put to sleep a group of aircraft carriers on the ocean and sink them or a series of explosions would cause a tsunami. However, our president decided that the Americans were not a threat to him, which was, as it turned out later, a big mistake.
DV: Russian Navy – Black Sea Fleet had significant losses in this conflict as well?
IKK: The command ship “Moscow” was lost. What happened there? My personal opinion is that it was a reckless naval operation to leave the cruiser in range of the enemy’s missiles. Moscow was a great ship, it had excellent anti-aircraft protection but not the necessary protection of other ships of its Navy. I am sure that it was a bad calculation by our commanders.
DV: What hit Moscow?
IKK: Two rocket missiles, one of which exploded. The ship suffered such damage that it sank and 20 people died. It was a blow to our prestige in the Black Sea while the Ukrainians shouted: We sunk “Moscow”! Let’s face it, the loss of the landing ship “Saratov” is a blow, and we were also left without some smaller boats.
DV: Have the Americans ever lost their nuclear submarines?
IKK: Yes, they sank the submarines “Thresher” (SSN-593) in 1963 and “Scorpion” (SSN-589) in 1968, and they probably had more such losses. They had the last incident in November 2021, when their submarine “Connecticut” hit a reef while diving in the South China Sea and was then towed to a base in Guam. As they reported themselves, the repair will cost them a whopping 650 million dollars.
DV: It has been in the history of the rivalry between the USA and Russia and the collision of underwater objects.
IKK: Yeah, right. I personally know Captain Igor Lokot, who with his nuclear submarine B-276 Kostroma had a collision with the American rival “Baton Rouge”. That contact is known among us sailors as an “Elbow” strike (after the captain’s last name). I also know the submarine commander Andrei Bulgakov who collided with the American submarine “Grayling”.
DV: Were those collisions accidental or intentional?
IKK: There were no intentions. Submarines are not kamikazes, but in the game of hiding and tracking ships, anything happens, including the situation of colliding in the vast ocean.
DV: Many submariners also testified about strange underwater unknown UFO-like objects?
IKK: There is no submarine commander in the world’s seas who has not witnessed the strangest events under water. I was commander of the submarine on one of the cruises when an unknown force gripped us and tilted the ship pushing us forward and to the bottom. We trimmed the submarine (corrected) but it was in vain. We measured the temperature of the water, the speed and direction of the sea current, but all the devices showed that everything was fine with us, but it wasn’t. Suddenly, that force disappeared and the submarine continued as normal. There are many such stories!
DV: They say that with the advent of hypersonic weapons, the era of aircraft carriers has ended?
IKK: The Americans are the strongest with 12 aircraft carriers and played a major role in the Cold War. Churchill interpreted that power: “The Navy exists and a lot of things don’t actually happen”!Even during the Cold War, we did not build carriers, and we had several smaller cruisers that had airplanes on board. A few years ago we started talking about it again, but although it is true that it is good, for one carrier you have to have three zones of security ships only in anti-submarine defense. Then a special system of basing and maintenance and general overhaul. All in all expensive and unnecessary.
DV: Yet the Chinese and Indians make their own carriers?
IKK: The Chinese are the smartest here. Let’s say they bought the old Soviet aircraft carrier “Varyag” from the Ukrainians as scrap metal to initially make it into a Cultural Center in the port. Then, when they studied it well, they turned that Cultural Center into a modern aircraft carrier, and it’s one of the three they have. Indians buy from us but also from the Americans, combining what they need. Russia has one carrier and our profession says that in the future war they will not be of much use.
DV: What is the standard of Russian naval officers today?
IKK: I will answer as my colleague today’s nuclear submarine commander answered me – I can’t tell you the salary because my wife will hear. Otherwise, during the service, they must get an apartment, a decent income and many other privileges.
DV: Are you one of the most decorated Russian submariners?
IKK: I have 14 medals on my chest, and my favorite is the “Ruby” medal – for raising the sunken AK “KURSK”, which I received at the request of the relatives of the crew who died. Namely, when I finished the expertise on the sinking of the Kursk, I met the families of the victims with her. I also informed general constructor Admiral Mihail Kuznetsov, the commander of the submarine division to which Kursk belonged, Irina Zeljovna, the wife of the submarine’s commander. Nothing is hidden or hushed up.
DV: Have a legendary career?
IKK: Since I finished the Senior Officer Specialist Course “Submarine Commander” in 1983, and then the Higher Naval Academy of the USSR, I have not been on land or in any headquarters in Leningrad for a single day. I participated in 15 long-term (90 days) underwater cruises, five of which in the role of submarine commander. When we asked the famous Russian commander of nuclear submarines, Igor Kurdin, about the new Russian underwater weapon – unmanned underwater vessel “Poseidon”, which has become a “scarecrow” for NATO countries, he first answered “no comment” and then told a moral story:
In short, “Poseidon” is a Russian drone submarine that is capable of blowing up entire cities and creating tsunamis of enormous proportions, and it dates back to the fifties of the last century. The idea of doomsday weapons dates back to when the first Soviet atomic submarine was being constructed. –
When our designers constructed the first Soviet atomic submarine in the fifties, Academician Sakharov, the father of the Russian nuclear program, had the idea to put a 20-meter long super torpedo on the submarine, which would stand on the bow and occupy three sections of the submarine in length. That super torpedo with a thermo-nuclear warhead, according to the project, was supposed to have a range of several tens of kilometers, and the plan of use was for the submarine to reach the shores of America and launch, for example, in the direction of New York.The city would be destroyed, and the tsunami that would be created by the detonation, for example, in front of the city, would sweep away everything in its path. And when the designers, together with Sakharov, came to the Soviet admirals with the idea of such a weapon, they received the answer: We are not at war with civilians. The project was then abandoned – reveals Kurdin.
DV: So even in the most terrible time of the cold war, civilians were taken care of?
IKK: Of course. Now we see how politicians from the West are speculating that the use of tactical nuclear weapons could also be considered in the war in Ukraine. I, as the man who commanded the atomic missile submarines K-241 “Murena”, K-84 “Yekaterinburg” and K-407 “Novomoskovsk”, claim that after the first detonation, a second and then a third would occur and that would be the end of the world.
“Belgorod“ submarine
DV: Back to “Poseidon”?
IKK: I saw that underwater weapon only on “paper” and it is being installed in the “Belgorod” submarine project – the basis of which is the hull of the Kursk (that is, “Antej”). Right now, “Poseidon” are entering the fleet list as part of the “Belgorod” project. It is a doomsday weapon and Russia’s enemies must know that.
DV: You called this vessel (submarine) – killer “Belgorod”. Does it have anything to do with the Serbian capital?
IKK: Maybe there is! (Smiled).
DV: How do you rate today’s Russian Fleet?
IKK: It is heaven and earth as it was in the nineties and in the first decade of this century, when the Americans and the English ruled the world’s seas. Since the nineties, especially during Yeltsin’s time, we neither built nor designed new ships/submarines. The situation has now changed and parity with the Western strongest fleets has been achieved. The most famous Russian project is the atomic missile submarine cruiser “Borei” and another project is “Jasen”. The submarine “Jasen” is multi-purpose and is armed not only with torpedoes but also with missiles and has been used successfully in Syria. The submarine Borei with intercontinental missiles “Bulava” replaces my submarine and soon it will be the basic composition of the Strategic Naval Forces of Russia.
DV: What can Russian submarines do that Western ones can’t?
IKK: We can launch from a dock, from the open sea or when we break through the ice crust in the Arctic or Antarctic. For example, compasses do not work at the poles, and the Russians are the only ones in the world who have target coordinates at the “poles”. We break through the ice, open the lids on the missile silos and shoot up to 12,000 kilometers away.
DV: American submarines can’t do that?
IKK: They can break through the ice but not aim and shoot.
DV: While you were in the service, what was that combat life like?
IKK: Since I finished the Senior Officer Specialist Course “Submarine Commander” in 1983, and then the Higher Naval Academy of the USSR in Leningrad, I have not been on land or in any headquarters for a single day. I participated in 15 long-term (90 days) underwater cruises, five of them in the role of submarine commander. One of my cruising areas was the mid-Atlantic because we had 2,500 kilometer missiles. What can I say – we didn’t know the goals, it was all encrypted and in the computer. Therefore, if there was a need, they would fire projectiles without knowing where they would end up.
DV: A 90-day underwater cruise is a very special experience?
IKK: Of course. There is a preparation before every cruise that is very serious and rigorous. Let’s say it is interesting that Russian sailors are entitled to 50 grams of vodka a day even under water.Admittedly, the principle was that the sailor gives up his portion to his colleague for six days, and then when it’s his turn and his 350 grams, he “has the right” to rest for 24 hours. We managed. Everything is there.
DV: How are submarines used in the Black Sea?
IKK: I can’t comment on that. Just 20 years ago, Russia had one old submarine in the Black Sea, while Turkey had 12 new German ones. Today, our fleet has six underwater objects marked 636.3.which we call Warsaw-women and which have proven to be ideal for conflicts in the regional seas.They are armed with “caliber” missiles and they “work” perfectly. Diesel electric submarines, it turns out, are indispensable for these kinds of conflicts.
DV: You call her a Warsaw-woman?
IKK: Its name remains from the USSR, but of course it is now a completely different combat system.For example, the Americans gave up on diesel electrics and it turned out that they were wrong.The Poles, who had one such vessel, scrapped it as unnecessary, and then when they realized their mistake, they bought submarines from Norway and later complained to us that they had bought “debris” from submarines. The Ukrainians had one that they did not want to service in Russia, but bought the batteries from the French. It turned out that the batteries did not fit, and then they literally gave us that submarine.
DV: There is a lot of talk about some new Russian Shkval torpedo that moves through the water at enormous speeds?
IKK: It is not a completely new weapon, it is more than 20 years old. The bow part of this torpedo has its own generator that runs on a mixture of gas and is actually an underwater rocket. Around herself, while sailing, she produces a shell that allows her super speeds. The squall actually functions as a gun and cannot be guided due to its speed. The advantage is that a surface ship cannot escape it.
DV: They say that the advent of hypersonic weapons ended the era of aircraft carriers?
IKK: The Americans are the strongest with 12 aircraft carriers and played a major role in the Cold War. Churchill interpreted that power: “The Navy exists and a lot of things don’t actually happen”!Even during the Cold War, we did not build carriers, and we had several smaller cruisers that had airplanes on board. A few years ago we started talking about it again, but the truth is that it is good, but for one carrier you have to have three zones of anti-submarine defense only. Then a special system of basing and overhaul. All in all expensive and unnecessary.
DV: What was Russia’s strategy against carriers?
IKK: Let’s say stop them with a bouquet of tactical nuclear bombs and you don’t have to hit the ship – you will sink the whole fleet. With hypersonic, it’s even easier.
DV: The five Pacific countries, led by the USA, created the AUKUS-Pacific NATO with a powerful fleet?
IKK: I have no information about what they are doing. Our surprise check of the Pacific Fleet, which is now being carried out by our submarines and ships, is an opportunity to show the Americans what we mean. It is certain that they would not perform the exercise if we had nothing to show them.
“Borei“ class submarine
*
The best person who knows what happened to the Kursk submarine Navy Captain Igor Kirillovich Kurdin was born in 1953 in the city of Polari, in the family of submarine commander Kirill Borisovich Kurdin and Nadezhda Yevgenievna Kurdin (Kolesnikov), a participant in polar convoys in the Great Patriotic War. In 1975, he graduated with honors from the Submarine Military Academy, majoring in “Submarine missile weapons”. He served on the strategic nuclear submarine missile cruisers of the Northern Fleet. He commanded and sailed for exactly 20 years and one day.
Today, he is the head of the association “St. Petersburg Club of submariners and Navy veterans”. He was awarded the Order “For Service to the Homeland and the Armed Forces of the USSR” and has 14 decorations on his chest. One is the “Rubin” commemorative medal – for raising the sunken APK KURSK – handed over at the request of the relatives of the fallen crew.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Featured image is licensed under Fair Use; all other images in this article are from the author
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
“By itself no human activity has – yet – altered or substantially affected the climate of the world as a whole.” – Sir Crispin Tickell, 1977 (1)
Sir Crispin Charles Cervantes Tickell, descendant of Thomas Huxley and of paleontologist Mary Anning, was born in 1930. Crispin’s father, Jarred Tickell, penned dozens of novels and screenplays; including bestsellers. Crispin’s mother also wrote professionally.
Crispin graduated atop the Class of ‘52, Christ Church, Oxford. Two years with the Cold Stream Guards readied him for a Foreign Office career traversing the British Antarctic Territories, The Hague, Mexico City, and Paris.
The Duchy of Lancaster’s selection of Crispin as Private Secretary lifted him to the Royal circle. (Elizabeth knighted Crispin as the two sailed aboard Britannia.) In 1977 he became Chef de Cabinet to the President of the European Community. From 1984 to 1987 he ran Britain’s Overseas Development Administration. From 1987 to 1990 he was Britain’s UN Ambassador; and, exofficio, Britain’s Security Council rep.
During ‘retirement’ Tickell served as:
Warden of Green College, Oxford, 1990-7
President of Royal Geographical Society, 1990-3
President of Marine Biological Society, 1990-2007
Chair of the UK Government’s Sustainable Development Panel, 1994-2000
Chancellor of Kent University, 1996-2006
A lifelong conservationist Tickell prompted PM Major to launch the Darwin Initiative – a state-funded quango missioned to protect wilderness in poor locales. Crispin presided over the African tree-planting NGO, Tree Aid.
A population control hawk, Tickell patronized and publicized Optimum Population Trust (Population Matters). In 2007 he told the BBC he wanted Britain’s population slashed from 60 to 20 million.
Tickell facilitated the Tory’s weaponizing of Climate Change in their war with coal-miners; a project culminating in a total coal phase-out. Tickell met privately with Thatcher in 1984 to discuss “global warming.” From that moment Thatcher became the climate campaign’s most effective agent. Tickell is oft described as her Climate Envoy.
In 1986, alongside Republican Party supremo John Topping (and the American Gas Association), Tickell co-founded the Washington DC-based Climate Institute – the first NGO with “climate” in its name; and the first dedicated exclusively to Climate Change. Tickell chaired this NGO from 1990 to 2002, and from 2012 until his 2022 death. The seminal Climate Institute, now buried beneath the jungle it sowed, hosted a three-day “Preparing for Climate Change” confab in October 1987 that attracted 300 well-healed participants. A similarly themed March 1988 symposium drew reps from 40 embassies.
*
Tickell wrote Climatic Change and World Affairs while a Fellow at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs (1975-6). The Center (est. 1958) fostered analysis of the world system by worldly scholars and officials.
The first book written under Center auspices was Brzezinski’s Soviet Bloc (1960). Their second, Kissinger’s Necessity for Choice (1961), proved the first of several by that author. Morton Halperin, Seymour Lipset and Samuel Huntington also contributed. Harvard University Press published most of the Center’s oeuvre while some tomes bore Oxford, Princeton, Yale and Stanford imprints. These books became must-read university texts across the Anglosphere. Center interests encompassed: the Cold War, higher education (especially student rebellions), land reform and military governance (especially in Latin America). Around the time of Tickell’s Fellowship the Center issued:
Big Business in the State (1974), Organizing the Transnational (1974), Multinational Corporations and the Politics of Dependence (1974), Politics of International Monetary Reform (1976), International Politics of Natural Resources (1976), Oil Crisis (1976), Raw Materials Investments and American Foreign Policy (1977), Bankers and Borders (1977), and Storm Over Multinationals (1977). (2)
Tickell’s manifesto was their 119th publication; their first on climate. Appearing simultaneously, albeit not under Center auspices, was the Central Intelligence Agency’s The Weather Conspiracy: the Coming of the New Ice Age. Tickell notes:
“Vulnerability to climatic change is increasingly recognized as a crucial element both in economic management within states and in relationships between them. In the United States the Central Intelligence Agency was one of the first to try and assess the political and economic implications for the shifting balance of world power.” (3)
Further evidence of a trend can be culled from Tickell’s SuggestedReading:
Inadvertent Climate Change (1971), MIT
Calder’s The Weather Machine (1974), BBC
Weather and Climate Change; Food Production and Interstate Conflict (1974), Rockefeller Foundation
Understanding Climate Change (1975) US National Academy of Sciences (4)
Said books were part and parcel of government-led initiatives involving the World Meteorological Organization and International Council for Scientific Unions. These entities created the Global Atmospheric Research Program (GARP) to sponsor conferences on climate physics, climate modelling, and paleoclimatology. GARP’s US subsidiary found lodgings at MIT, NASA and Colorado’s National Center for Climate Research. Across the pond:
“In Britain the Climate Research Institute at the University of East Anglia and the Meteorological Office have done pioneer work across the whole field.” (5)
*
Weather warfare worries walked climatology to the fore. According to Tickell:
“Beginning in 1963 and continuing until 1972 the United States experimented with various means of environmental warfare…” (6)
Examples:
“…attempts over five years to intensify normal monsoon rainfall so as to wash out North Vietnamese supply trails.” (7)
“…the Central Intelligence Agency tried to dry out the Cuban sugar crop by seeding clouds which could otherwise have brought rain to Cuba.” (8)
Tickell brandishes: the creation of floods, droughts and hailstorms; inducing lightning strikes; and blowing holes in the ozone layer.
“News of the existence of this Pandora’s Box of horrors focussed international attention on the need to keep the lid as tightly shut as possible.” (9)
In December 1974, the UN resolved to prohibit influencing climate for military purposes. In August 1975, Americans and Soviets co-proposed banning weather warfare to the Conference on Disarmament. As Tickell’s manuscript went to press, many rallied behind this proposal. (10)
*
Tickell’s “CALL FOR ACTION” chapter recommends consolidating climate and weather institutes (Tickell thought there were too many) into one omnibus “World Climate and Meteorological Organization” capable of cataloging climate research; convening climate conferences; and counselling governments. (11) The treaty chartering this organization must stipulate:
“…mandatory obligations in some parts of the agreement and voluntary adherence to a code of good behaviour.” (12)
And:
“…develop a framework which could be strengthened and enlarged as circumstances later required.” (13)
Moreover:
“International acceptance of even a few mandatory obligations would only be a beginning.” (14)
“We can even imagine the institution of a kind of international thermostat for the management of the world’s climate.” (15)
Although utilizing UN imprimatur the organization shouldn’t be UN-controlled:
“However disagreeable it may sound, the countries or group of countries able to exercise leverage in this respect in the possible circumstances of the future are those who grow and export a surplus of foodstuffs, in particular grain. At present, this group includes Canada, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand, and could include members of the European Community. It would be much easier and more generally acceptable if they were to exercise leverage to support provisions of an international agreement than for motives which could be interpreted as selfish….” (16)
Tickell wrote as Anglospheric and European states withheld foreign aid from countries resisting birth control programs. Tickell advocated withholding grain from countries resisting the climate agenda.
One ulterior motive was surveillance. Tickell envisioned regular “climaticcensuses” to which all “governments should provide full and honest information” with data gaps filled by satellites and other meteorological instruments (balloons, buoys etc). There would be climate truants, namely:
“China, whose statistics are suspect, and the Soviet Union, for whom secrecy is a disease…” (17)
Efforts to woo Russians went unrequited.
*
Tickell’s list of activities this climate authority might suppress deviously mixes absurdly dangerous ideas with benign proposals only environmentalists oppose. In the first category, along with weather weapons, we find:
Hurricane dispersal
Towing Antarctic icebergs
Permanent diversion of ocean currents
Spraying sea ice with soot to warm the planet
Burning sulphur in the upper atmosphere to cool the planet
Amidst these wild cards Tickell shuffles:
Oil drilling in the Arctic
Diverting rivers for irrigation
Supersonic commercial air travel
Deforestation to expand farmland
*
Deemed the brightest mind available, Harvard tapped Tickell to survey the state of climate science. The saliant takeaway is Tickell’s acknowledgement of the uncertainty pervading the field. Passages reflecting humanities’ climate benightedness abound:
“…of all the aspects of the earth’s environment, the climate and its variations, natural and otherwise, remain one of the least understood. It is an area where vital information is still lacking, where scientists can both passionately and plausibly disagree…” (18)
“What conclusions can be drawn from this summary description of the processes of climatic change? Perhaps the first is to underline the fragmentary nature of our knowledge and the immense difficulty in assigning causes to effects… there are many factors in this complex system of which we know little and there are probably others of which we know nothing.” (19)
Fast-forward 15 years and climate scientists, sans interim eurekas, express pathological confidence that CO2 emissions cause catastrophic global warming!
*
Tickell equivocates between warmers and coolers; listing to the latter. He signs-off:
“The pleasantly warm moment we now enjoy… will not last forever.” (20)
He earlier warns those basking in clement weather:
“…in a time span of 500 years or longer, this warmth was distinctly abnormal. It was cooler before, and between 1945 and 1970 it became cooler again. Indeed the period between 1900 and 1945 may have been the warmest in a thousand years.” (21)
Tickell leans heavily on Nigel Calder, a scientist convinced “the trend is clearly towards glacial conditions.” (22). (Calder died a vociferous critic of anthropogenic global warming.) Nature, not humanity, causes cooling. Tickell thrice summons the Little Ice Age (1645-1715) when fairs adorned a frozen Thames; and he links this cooling to dips in solar radiance.
He presents the standard cooler case:
“…dust, which is rapidly blown high and wide, casts a veil over the atmosphere, and, depending on the size, color and shape of the particles, shuts out more solar radiation from outside than it shuts in terrestrial radiation from below.” (23)
Then adds: “most authorities doubt it…” (24)
Regarding “man-made aerosol particles” he opines:
“…here even the best authorities can arrive at opposite conclusions. One believes that aerosol particles should have recently cooled the northern hemisphere by about 0.5 C., thus counteracting the rise in temperature caused by carbon dioxide; while another does not rule out the possibility that they have recently had a warming effect at the surface in same area.” (25)
He pours ink on the long-abandoned hypothesis that “urban heat domes” warm the entire atmosphere. (Alarmists forsook this because it implies warming bias at weather stations engulfed by urban sprawl.)
Of human-induced warming culprits Tickell considers CO2 most significant, cautioning:
“How much the observed increase in carbon dioxide has in fact warmed the lower atmosphere is in dispute. Some calculations show it should have warmed it by 0.2 C. to 0.3 C., but if so, other factors must have been operating the other way. (26)
*
“If men will breed like rabbits they must be allowed to die like rabbits.” (27)
Tickell approvingly relays this quip from A. V. Hill while deeming the “present dizzying expansion of human numbers” as “the biggest threat we face.” (28) Population phobia spawns many passages:
“…maximum exploitation of land and other resources for the production of food can prove hazardous if not dangerous to present as well as future generations if it is based on the notion of a stable environment and ignores the climatic dimension…” (29)
“What place should climate factors have in this depressing equation? Perhaps the single most important one is that overpopulation, with all that it implies, greatly diminishes our ability to respond to change.” (30)
Democracy and the insatiable mob undergird this crisis:
“No responsible, still less, elected government could lightly sacrifice a short-term and direct advantage in terms of wealth and employment for its people to avoid a long-term, indirect and uncertain disadvantage for the human race of life as a whole.” (31)
“…as populations and demands on resources continue to increase, governments will be under mounting domestic pressure to put national requirements first to ensure their own survival….” (32)
*
Tickell disgorges stock Malthusian-conservationist tropes about: Nature’s balance; the frontier’s end; tipping points; and, precautionary principles. The Great Dread is population pressure prompting rushes to the hinterland that undermine land values within, and the political reach of, metropolitan states. Tickell wrote just after Ehrlich’sPopulation Bomb and the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth broke records for sales and impact. Pre-1980s policy wonks pitched restricting: population growth, land development and energy usage, without recourse to climate scares. Tickell’s favorite scientist, Stephen Schneider, coined “climatic limits to growth” so climatologists could join the fray.
Prescient as he appears, the climate campaign isn’t what Tickell envisioned. The “Energy Transition” (hydrocarbon fuel phase-out) is now center and motor of climate politics. Tickell’s CO2 concerns were bycatch of his trawling for larger climatic pretexts that might enable the under-development agenda. Although eclipsed by geo-politically orientated energy independence aspirations, uber-green motivations remain explicit, important drivers of the climate crusade.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
William Walter Kay is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Notes
Tickell, Crispin. Climactic Change and World Affairs; Harvard University Press, 1977, p 26
Ibid p 71-5
Ibid p 11-2
Ibid p 65
Ibid p 51
Ibid p 60
Ibid p 60
Ibid p 60
Ibid p 60-1
Ibid p 61
Ibid p 57
Ibid p 58
Ibid p 54
Ibid p 58
Ibid p 43
Ibid p 59
Ibid p 52
Ibid p 12
Ibid p 35
Ibid p 61
Ibid p 13
Ibid p 39
Ibid p 40
Ibid p 23
Ibid p 29
Ibid p 29
Ibid p 36
Ibid p 36
Ibid p 44-5
Ibid p 37
Ibid p 37
Ibid p 53
Featured image: Crispin Tickell in 2011. (Licensed under OGL v1.0)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
In commemoration of ANZAC Day, first published by GR on April 25, 2015.
The 25th of April 2015 will mark the centenary of an Australian and New Zealand attack on the Ottoman Empire at Gallipoli (present day Turkey), a failed operation carried out on behalf of the British Empire. The ‘ANZAC spirit’ has since been presented as a founding element of Australian national identity.
However the significance of the ANZAC myth lies not so much in its assertion of youthful sacrifice, bravery and mateship, as in a loyal and unthinking obedience to the military adventures of a great power. We have generated a sense of dependent obligation to participate in the next imperial war, seemingly blind to the slaughter and misery that brings other peoples.
It is no accident that, one hundred years after the disastrous Gallipoli operation, Australian troops are again being sent to the Middle East. While in 1915 the ‘First Australian Imperial Force’ was used by the British Empire to attack the Ottoman Empire, in 2015 the ‘Australian Defence Forces’ are being used as part of an extended North American operation to control the entire Middle East.
Australian armed forces have rarely been used to defend Australia, but frequently to assist imperial operations. There were not independent decisions to deploy the First and Second Australian Imperial Forces, during the great wars of the 20th Century. In 1939 Prime Minister Robert Menzies said:
‘Fellow Australians, it is my melancholy duty to inform you officially that … Great Britain has declared war upon [Germany], and that, as a result, Australia is also at war.’
That is, Great Britain made the decision and Australia followed.
In 1942, after Imperial Japan evicted Imperial Britain from Singapore, we exchanged the British dummy for a North American suppository. From this time on there was barely a single aggression by Washington which Australia did not celebrate if not directly support.
In the case of the terrible American war in Vietnam, which stole more than 2 million lives, Washington fabricated a pretext for escalation (the Gulf of Tonkin incident) and Menzies (again PM, 25 years later) wrote South Vietnam’s ‘invitation’ for Australia to participate.
Fragmentation of command was an enduring feature of a military that engaged almost exclusively in ‘joint’ operations. Only in the 1970s did Australia create a unified command of its own defence forces.
Every nation has its own creation myth, often some deft mixture of fact and fantasy. In the case of the USA an ‘empire of freedom’ was born in a republic which deployed the largest system of slavery in human history, with an economy dependent on human slavery. Washington, Jefferson and many other founders of that republic were slave owners to the day they died.
Australia’s own creation myth, using the ANZAC disaster, is a ‘White Australia’ construction, as Marilyn Lake and Henry Reynolds wrote in their 2010 book What’s wrong with ANZAC? It denies indigenous culture and affirms a cult of imperial dependence, celebrating nihilistic sacrifices for the great power.
The military traditions of many countries recognise sacrifices made in defence of independence nations. The ANZAC myth is something quite different.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Even after three years of mass demonstrations and urban rebellions in the United States, law-enforcement agencies and the entire legal system are still “justifying” the shooting deaths of African Americans and other oppressed peoples.
Jayland Walker, 25, was killed on June 27, 2022, after being chased outside his vehicle by the Akron, Ohio police. Walker was shot 46 times by eight different officers. All together the eight police officers fired 96 shots within 6.7 seconds. Walker had no criminal record and was employed as a delivery driver for DoorDash.
These police officers involved in the killing said they felt threatened by Walker who was running away after leaving his vehicle. The law-enforcement agents said that Walker had fired a shot at them during the chase.
At the time of his shooting death, Walker did not have any firearms on his person. A weapon was retrieved from his vehicle which he had abandoned in an effort to save his own life. It would take another ten months for a special grand jury to decide on April 17 that the killing of Walker did not warrant indictments against the officers.
The official story provided by the Akron police indicated that a state investigation collected evidence since the killing of Walker. The evidence from this state-directed inquiry was turned over to the grand jury appointed by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost which voted not to charge the police with any crimes.
People have been demonstrating in Akron since last June. Several high-profile activists were arrested while protesting the conduct of the Akron police in the weeks following Walker’s death.
In the aftermath of the grand jury decision not to indict the police, there have been daily demonstrations in Akron. Hundreds took to the streets hours after the grand jury decision and the days that have followed.
Many drove their vehicles through the streets, stopping at strategic locations resulting in traffic being halted. Later on April 19, the Akron police and Summit County sheriff deputies fired pepper spray and tear gas in an attempt to disperse the crowds.
Nonetheless, activists regrouped and continued to protest in the city. The city administration has blocked off the area around the municipal headquarters downtown designating several blocks as a so-called protest zone.
In the immediate aftermath of the grand jury decision, the family of Walker announced that they would file a civil wrongful death lawsuit against the City of Akron. Community activists have made statements to the media saying that the culpability of the police officers in the killing of Walker was unquestionable.
In response to the firing of chemical irritants on the crowds demonstrating against the grand jury decision, one organization called the Akron Bail Fund announced it would file a civil lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order against law-enforcement agencies preventing them from utilizing excessive force. Later in the week on April 21, the City of Akron announced that the police would refrain from using chemical irritants on peaceful protesters.
Akron police chief Steve Mylett was quoted by the Beacon Journal saying he would reserve judgment on his law-enforcement personnel until an investigation was carried out. Mylett emphasized that:
“I am waiting on video footage from a few of our partner law enforcement agencies to help clarify some confusion. Before I explain what happened, I need to be sure of the timeline of events. If information is released prematurely and without the facts, that misinformation could cause irrevocable damage. As soon as I can confidently determine the exact circumstances of how [Wednesday] evening unfolded, I will make that information available to the public. If we made mistakes, we would improve upon them, and if the officers’ actions were reasonable, we would share that information as well.”
Some local elected officials criticized the police for the attacks against protesters on April 19. Ward 5 City Councilwoman Tara Mosley refuted the police version of events which declared the demonstration as an unlawful assembly.
Mosley issued a statement on April 20 saying:
“There are no reports of any injuries or property damage before the officers declared the assembly to be unlawful. What, then, was unlawful about this assembly? The city claims that the officers issued orders to disperse because ‘officers were having bottles thrown at them from marchers.’ But, from the available evidence — and there is much of it online — the protests were peaceful before the officers ordered the people to disperse. The people were calling for accountability. Nothing more, nothing less. The people were protesting the Jayland Walker decision. They were crying out for healing. They were standing up for their neighbors and community and families and children. This assembly was not unlawful; it was demanding to be heard.”
The officers involved in the killing of Walker remain on administrative leave. The police department is now saying that since the grand jury investigation has concluded they will conduct their own internal probe into the circumstances surrounding the death of Walker.
African American Youth Shot Outside Kansas City Home
Ralph Yarl, 16, an honor student and member of the Missouri State Band, was trying to pick up his twin younger brothers in north Kansas City, Missouri on April 13 when he walked up to the porch of a home which was the wrong address. After ringing the bell and waiting, an 84-year-old white man, Andrew D. Lester, fired a shot through the exterior door striking Yarl in the head.
After Yarl was already down, the assailant then shot the youth again in the shoulder. Yarl stumbled away from the house seeking assistance from the neighbors. His family members reported that the youth was turned away from three homes before someone brought a towel out of a house and called the emergency medical services and the police.
Miraculously, Yarl did not suffer fatal injuries. The bullet fragments from a .32 caliber handgun failed to lodge into the critical areas of his brain which could have caused sudden death. Yarl was released after several days in the hospital and is recovering at home.
The Yarl family are originally from the West African state of Liberia. They immigrated to the U.S. several years ago.
This recent act of racist violence further fueled mistrust and fear throughout African American communities across the U.S. Yarl’s family and their attorney demanded the arrest and indictment of the shooter.
Lester was initially brought to a police station on April 14 for questioning and was released without being charged in the shooting. Outrage over the incident, in all likelihood, prompted the filing of charges against Lester on April 18 although he has been released on $200,000 bond. It was not immediately clear if Lester was represented by an attorney.
The 16-year-old’s father, Paul Yarl, told the media that his son spent three days in the hospital and was able to walk out of the facility on April 16. The father, who lives in Indianapolis, after hearing of the shooting from Ralph’s mother, drove immediately to Kansas City.
In an interview with CBS television on April 18, Cleo Nagbe, Ralph Yarl’s mother, discussed the traumatic impact of the shooting of her son. According to an Associated Press report:
“During an interview Tuesday (April 18) with ‘CBS Mornings,’ Yarl’s mother, Cleo Nagbe, said her son is in good spirits but that the trauma remains evident. She said he is ‘able to communicate mostly when he feels like it, but mostly he just sits there and stares, and the buckets of tears just roll down his eyes.’ ‘You can see that he is just replaying the situation over and over again, and that just doesn’t stop my tears either,’ she said.”
The U.S. continues to be a place of danger for people of African descent. In fact, historically, the U.S. was built on the forced removal and genocide of the Indigenous peoples and the enslavement of Africans over a period of 250 years.
Consequently, in order for racism and national oppression to be eliminated, the entire system of oppression and exploitation must be transformed. Countless local, state and federal investigations of similar incidents involving law-enforcement and vigilantes have failed miserably to end the violence and create a peaceful atmosphere for African Americans and the oppressed peoples living in North America.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’État Against Humanity 
