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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Undeniable fact is that Africa’s G5 Sahel (Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger) and Central African Republic (CAR) have bartered their natural resources for Soviet-era and Russian military weapons and equipment. The G5 Heads of State are currently struggling against growing terrorism in the region and needed support from external countries.

As well-known, Moscow is broadening its geography of military diplomacy covering poor African countries and especially fragile States that need Russia’s military assistance. As part of its foreign policy, the authorities have been strengthening military-technical cooperation. These often include officer training and the sale of military equipment, though the details are rarely publicly available. It has signed bilateral military-technical cooperation agreements with more than 20 African countries, according to several reports.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reported in December that Russia accounted approximately $14bn of the volume of major arms supplied to sub-Saharan Africa. These are done through the  state intermediary agency Rosoboronexport. Stockholm’s report further explains that the military deals with Africa are going strong, political ideology is not a significant factor, and the focus is partly to counter Western and European interests in Africa.

In an interview discussion, Professor Dmitri Bondarenko, Deputy Director of the African Studies Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow, said:

“With African countries, the primary aim now for Russian business is to regain a competitive edge in the global arms trade, and what’s interesting today is that the approach is not ideological but very pragmatic – you pay, we ship. It’s simply business and nothing more.”

As expected, Russia is delivering in order to achieve its aim of boosting appreciable revenue from arms sales and to halt French domination. Russia is fighting what it referred to as “anti-colonialism” and engages in fierce political confrontation against Western and European players on the continent. Several reports say Russia considers the growing colonial tendencies on the continent as a barrier and therefore sets to confront rather than cooperate in development initiatives there.

During the fourth quarter of 2022 and this January, a number top politicians from Burkina Faso, Chad, Central African Republic and Mali visited Moscow. Russian Special Presidential Envoy to the Middle East and Africa Mikhail Bogdanov said during the meeting with CAR Prime Minister Felix Moloua at the Russian Foreign Ministry that Moscow was ready to further assist in stabilizing the situation in country.

“The Russian side expressed readiness to further assist the efforts of the Central African leadership on stabilization of the situation in the country, both on the bilateral basis and as a permanent UN Security Council member,” the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement. The sides reportedly had an involved and trustful exchange of opinions on priority issues of further development of Russian-Central African relations.

On January 19, 2023, AFP reported that Mali’s military rulers received more warplanes and helicopters from Russia, the latest in a series of deliveries from its new top military and political ally. AFP said it counted eight planes and two helicopters at a ceremony attended by Russian Ambassador Igor Gromyko and the Head of Mali’s junta, Colonel Assimi Goita.

Mali’s military said the shipment included Sukhoi Su-25 attack planes designed to support ground troops; and the Czech-designed Albatros L-39. The L-39s, while initially designed for training purposes, have also been used as attack aircraft. Bamako also received Mi-8s, a Soviet-designed Russian transport helicopter that, as well as transporting troops and equipment, can be fitted with weapons to defend ground troops. The previous deliveries were made in March and August, 2022.

Ukrainskaya Pravda reported mid-January that Moscow was broadly using military-technical cooperation strategy to gain stature and influence in African countries, and that the Wagner Group, Russian private military company, the makes millions in Africa to finance war against Ukraine. It quoted from Politico which also cited a Western official and a diplomatic cable it recieved. Details: Over the past year, the Wagner Group has significantly expanded its operations in the Central African Republic, where mining profits could grow to nearly $1 billion, the news outlet’s sources said.

In June 2022, The New York Times also reported that the Wagner Group, led by oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin, was mining gold in Sudanese mines to illegally replenish Russia’s gold and foreign exchange reserves and soften the effect of Western economic sanctions on the Russian economy.

According TASS, the local Russian News Agency, the Russian embassy in the Republic of  Chad warned in communique this January that attempts to undermine Russia-Chad dialogue doomed to fail, and further emphasized the provocative nature of the statement from the Chadian rebels, aimed at casting a shadow on the successfully developing Russian-Chadian cooperation.

The embassy pointed out that this video is “part of a broader campaign, launched on the Internet, to discredit the Wagner PMC in the eyes of African governments, creating a significant obstacle to advancing political and business interests of some major players in Africa. It also noted that there are indeed insurgents on the Chadian-Central African border who pose a threat to the Chadian authorities.

“The provocative nature of the statement from the Chadian rebels, aimed at casting a shadow on the successfully developing Russian-Chadian cooperation, is also becoming evident. In this regard, the Embassy states that attempts to introduce elements of mistrust into the political dialogue between Moscow and N’Djamena will be doomed to failure, no matter who they come from,” the embassy emphasized.

Chairperson of the African Union Commission, Moussa Faki Mahamat has reiterated the necessity of creating regional forces for fighting terrorist groups, but added that the African armies are still under-equipped.

Mozambican President Filipe Nyusi was very outspoken, shared valuable experiences about the use of well-constituted regional military force for enforcing peace and security in Mozambique. Creating regional military forces to fight threats of terrorism will absolutely not require bartering the entire gold or diamond mines for the purchase of military equipment from external countries.

Now, Mozambique has relative peace and stability after the 16-member Southern African Development Community (SADC) had finally approved the deployment of joint military force with the primary responsibility of ensuring peace and stability, and for restoring normalcy in the Cabo Delgado province, northern Mozambique.

The South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA) has published a special report on Russia-Africa. The report titled – Russia’s Private Military Diplomacy in Africa: High Risk, Low Reward, Limited Impact – says that Russia’s renewed interest in Africa is driven by its quest for global power status. Few expect Russia’s security engagement to bring peace and development to countries with which it has security partnerships.

While Moscow’s opportunistic use of private military diplomacy has allowed it to gain a strategic foothold in partner countries successfully, the lack of transparency in interactions, the limited scope of impact and the high financial and diplomatic costs exposes the limitations of the partnership in addressing the peace and development challenges of African host countries, the report says.

That report was based on more than 80 media publications dealing with Russia’s military-technical cooperation in Africa. He interrogates whether fragile African states advance their security, diplomatic and economic interests through a relationship with Russia.

The report explained the dimensions of Russian power projection in Africa, new frontiers of Russian influence and provided a roadmap towards understanding how Russia is perceived in Africa. It highlighted narratives about anti-colonialism and described how these sources of solidarity are transmitted by Russian elites to their African public. For seeking long-term influence, Russian elites have oftentimes used elements of anti-colonialism as part of the current policy to control the perceptions of Africans and primarily as new tactics for power projection in Africa.

In the context of a multipolar geopolitical order, Russia’s image of cooperation could be seen as highly enticing, but it is also based on illusions. Better still, Russia’s posture is a clash between illusions and reality. “Russia, it appears, is a neo-colonial power dressed in anti-colonial clothes,” says the report.

Simply put, Moscow’s strategic incapability, inconsistency and dominating opaque relations are adversely affecting sustainable developments in Africa. Thus far, Russia looks more like a ‘virtual great power’ than a genuine challenger to European, American and Chinese influence.

Overcoming the multidimensional problems facing all the G5 Sahel countries, Libya, Sudan, Somali and the Central African Republic will require comprehensive peace and development strategies that include conflict resolution and peacebuilding, state-building, security sector reform, and profound political reforms to improve governance and the rule of law – not to mention sound economic planning critical for attracting foreign direct investment needed to spur economic growth.

The political changes, economic developments in relation to foreign players in these African countries are being observed and monitored closely by the the regional organization – the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the continental body – the African Union (AU) and the Security Council of the United Nations (UN).

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Kester Kenn Klomegah, who worked previously with Inter Press Service (IPS), is now a regular contributor to Global Research. As a versatile researcher, he believes that everyone deserves equal access to quality and trustworthy media reports.

UK Data Shows: The mRNA “Vaccine” Bioweapon Is Working

January 23rd, 2023 by Dr. Mark Trozzi

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The bioweapons are working. UK data shows dramatically accelerated dying in all age groups since the middle of 2022.

The SARS CoV2 virus pandemic agenda was rolled out in early 2020. However, despite fear mongering and propaganda, UK total death statistics in 2020 were unremarkable aside from the month of April when there was increased death in mature and older age groups.

The misrepresented and coerced injections were imposed in 2021. Around the world, increased death comes on the heels of the injections.

Despite one red alert after another, the covid machine has continued manipulating, deceiving and injecting people. Two shots, morphed into endless “boosters”.

The UK death statistics for the latter half of 2022 are devastating across all age groups. Even children and young adults have red and crimson alert levels of increased dying.

Solutions: stop the shots, prosecute the crimes, help the survivors.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from the author


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

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

 

 

 

“Watch Out!”

“There is in all of us a retrograde desire to kill, to destroy, a love of the dark. And we have a lot of forces to keep us from doing it, most of the time.

And when a leadership arises in a country that believes that it can lead by using the darkness in man, it is probably unstoppable at a certain point.

“We have seen it in more than one place. The power over others and the willingness to destroy others, is very deep in the human mind.” – Arthur Miller, Playwright (1915 – 2005)

New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, resigned on 18 January 2022, in the midst of the WEF Davos 53rd Conference.

PM Ardern is a graduate of the WEF’s Young Global Leaders (YGL) program. She is – or was? – a favored “daughter” of Klaus Schwab. About at the same level as Justin Trudeau, PM of Canada. He too has been schooled, or better, brainwashed, by Schwab’s Academy for Young Global Leaders.

They both have led among the most tyrannical covid lockdown policies worldwide. Their vaxx drive with biological killer-shots have brought death to thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of people. Not covid but the killer-injections. They have clearly followed Schwab’s, Gates’, Rockefeller’s, et al, eugenist agenda.

Ardern’s and Trudeau’s popularity has been sliding to levels that the mainstream cannot be truthful about.

Both of them belong to this privileged group that Klaus Schwab proudly refers to as “We are proud having been able to infiltrate our Young Global Leaders into Governments around the world.”

Ms. Ardern’s resignation is effective as of 7 February 2023.

Why did she choose the 2023 WEF Davos event for announcing her resignation? She officially says the pressure has been too much…. Mainstream says, her “official” popularity has plummeted to about 35%, similar to Joe Biden’s. The reality is probably much worse.

In the circus of neoliberal, covid and the lockdown crazy western leaders, 35% would be rather “good”. Hence the reality may be life-threateningly low.

Does she no longer want to deal with “what’s to come”?  She must know. Death threats?

Or, has she been forced out, perhaps by the very WEF-man who put her in the NZ PM position in the first place? The timing of her resignation and her body language could well be sending a message in his direction.

The truth may come out sooner or later.

*

The new designated PM is current Education Minister, Chris Hipkins. The final approval by his Labor Party is just a formality. It is expected to happen on Sunday, 22 January 2023. Mr. Hipkins would have just over eight months in office, until the next General Election, planned for 14 October 2023. In this short time, Hipkins has to turn voters’ interests back to Labor.

Not easy, after what Labor, in the name of Jacinda Ardern, has done to the people of NZ in the last three years.

Isn’t it interesting, how around the world, In the so-called west, or Global North, as well as Latin America, most, if not all of these so-called leaders (sic), most if not all from the WEF’s YGL-Academy, are so-called socialists or left-wingers?

Looks like this is the point, where in the extreme, left meets the extreme right and fuses into neo-fascism.

When nominated on Saturday, Hipkins said, “I’m really humbled and really proud to be taking this on. It is the biggest responsibility and the biggest privilege of my life.”

He added, “I like to think I’m pretty upfront and pretty straight with people. I’m decisive and I can get things done. People won’t die wondering what I think.”

See this for more from BNN Bloomberg.

Master Schwab has often made allegations to the effect that the future will be a “globalist socialism”. Remember the infamous ending of Schwab’s Great Reset – “You will own nothing but will be happy”. That’s kind of a neo-Nazi doctrine: You behave and we will take care of you.

It’s George Orwell’s 1984 at its best. Dystopia, so well disguised, you’ll love it. You will even believe, that war is actually to bring about Peace.

*

Mr. Hipkins has a reputation that fits exactly this profile.

He earned his reputation during the COVID pandemic, when he became the authoritarian crisis manager, Ms. Ardern often sought advice from, when confronted with difficult covid and lockdown situations.

In July 2021, Hipkins warned that the government will start tracking down individuals who haven’t “come forward” to take the COVID jab.

“I think early next year we’ll be in the phase of chasing out people who haven’t come forward to get their vaccination, or missed their bookings and so on,” Hipkins then told reporters.

“I want every New Zealander to come forward, but human behavior suggests that there will be some people that we actually have to really go out and look for, and some of that may spill into next year….”

Hipkins asserted the government will essentially hunt down unvaccinated individuals, claiming normal “human behavior” suggests many people won’t willingly take the mRNA vaccine. He added, “In fact, everyone WILL get the vaccine.”

When asked about his future covid and other “crisis” management policies – like high inflation, global climate change – the declining economy, Hipkins is careful not to make any commitments at this point. After all, his ambitions are to win the next October Genera Elections.

See this.

It is, however, fairly clear that Mr. Hipkins has to find ways to make his PM performance attractive enough for people to turn back to Labor, yet be clever enough conforming to the global narrative of total control.

NZ and Canada may be test-cases of how far global tyranny may go, before mass upheavals of resistance may put the Reset and 2030 Agenda at risk – and destroy it.

Let’s hope and work towards accelerating the downfall of the Death Cult masters, WEF and its allies of Darkness, conglomerate finance, NATO and the Deep State West.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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 is a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing. 

Featured image:  Ardern speaking during the session “Safeguarding Our Planet” at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, 22 January 2019 (Photo by Foundations World Economic Forum – Safeguarding Our Planet at the Annual Meeting 2019, licensed under CC BY 2.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on New Zealand: From Worst to Even Worse? The WEF-YGL Political Intrusion
  • Tags:

U.S. Now Considering to Invade Russia: NYT

January 23rd, 2023 by Eric Zuesse

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

An obliquely-written news-report in the New York Times on January 18th headlined “U.S. Warms to Helping Ukraine Target Crimea” and subheaded “The Biden administration is considering the argument that Kyiv needs the power to strike at the Ukrainian peninsula annexed by Russia in 2014.” It reported that,

“the Biden administration is finally starting to concede that Kyiv may need the power to strike the Russian sanctuary, even if such a move increases the risk of escalation, according to several U.S. officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive debate. Crimea, between the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, is home to tens of thousands of dug-in Russian troops and numerous Russian military bases.”


It goes on to say that this “would be one of its boldest moves yet, helping Ukraine to attack the peninsula that President Vladimir V. Putin views as an integral part of his quest to restore past Russian glory.”

This news-story omitted to mention that according to Russian law, Crimea (which was part of Russia throughout 1783-1954 when the Soviet Union’s dictator, a Ukrainian, arbitrarily transferred it to Ukraine) was restored to Russia on 16 March 2014, when a vote by Crimea’s residents supported by over 90% the return of Crimea to being a part of Russia, and Russia accepted that application by the Crimean people, for Crimea to become again a part of Russia.

None of this was mentioned in the NYT’s news-report, nor was the fact mentioned there that even U.S. polling of the residents of Crimea, both before and after the 2014 plebiscite there, found over 90% of respondents to want restoration of Crimea as being a part of Russia. All of that crucial information has been kept secret from the American people, and from the people in U.S.-allied countries — they don’t know it. The NYT’s article says only that Crimea is “the peninsula that President Vladimir V. Putin views as an integral part of his quest to restore past Russian glory.”

See this.

Furthermore, the NYT’s news-report fails to mention that on 8 June 2020, Russia published from Putin’s office, “Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence”, which presented four circumstances, lettered “a” through “d”, under which “the possibility of nuclear weapons use by the Russian Federation” would exist; and letter “a” there is: “arrival of reliable data on a launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territory of the Russian Federation and/or its allies.”

In other words: “the possibility of nuclear weapons use by the Russian Federation” would exist if America and Ukraine carry out “a launch of ballistic missiles attacking” Crimea.

According to Russian law, Crimea is, again, a part of Russia; it certainly is part of “the territory of the Russian Federation and/or its allies.” It falls under Russia’s stated nuclear umbrella, Russia’s protection up to and including the use of nuclear weapons — the four official conditions under which Russia MIGHT respond by means of nuclear weapons. (And: it falls under “circumstance” “a” — the first one that is listed.)

Russia might not employ nuclear weapons in the event of such an attack against Crimea — it might instead respond without nuclear warheads, but only with non-nuclear ones; and, since the invasion of Crimea would have been carried out by both Ukraine and America, Ukraine and/or America would be targeted. If Ukraine would be targeted, then America might defend Ukraine by further attacking Russia — perhaps only in Crimea, but perhaps not. In any case: Washington and Kiev would jointly have violated the top condition in which Russia might respond with nuclear weapons; and, so, a second attack by America and Ukraine against Russia would almost certainly result in a nuclear response by Russia; and, as Scott Ritter has already noted, any circumstance in which one or more of Russia’s red lines have already been crossed by America and/or by one of America’s alies would precipitate a launch by Russia of its entire nuclear stockpile of thousands of nuclear weapons, from land, sea, and air, which would mean, within pehaps 30 minutes to an hour, game-over for everyone, and the end of life on Earth — not by some delayed “nuclear winter,” but immediately by the direct blast-effects and the intense nuclear radiation then spread throughout the entire atmosphere of the planet.

Though the NYT hid this crucial additional information, I don’t, though perhaps the hundreds of U.S.-and-allied news-media that I am submitting this news-report to might all decide not to publish it. Anyway: they all are receiving it on January 22nd. We’ll see which ones publish it, and whether ONLY ones that Google bans do publish it, in which case this news-report still will appear here, even if that turns out to be the only place that does.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on The Duran.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from 21st Century Wire

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on U.S. Now Considering to Invade Russia: NYT

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

As the political situation becomes even more intense in the capital city of Lima in Peru and other regions of the South American country, the western-backed administration of Dina Boluarte has called for dialogue among the contending political forces.

Nonetheless, despite the Boluarte’s stance in running as vice-president with detained ousted President Pedro Castillo during 2021 on the left-wing ticket of the now fractured Peru Libre Party, the current right-wing and military-installed leader soon allied with the armed forces in attempts to consolidate a regime which was immediately recognized by the White House and the United States State Department.

In continuing the legacy of supporting military coups against progressive and socialist-oriented movements throughout Latin America, President Joe Biden has not been pressured by his political party as to why he has backed a coup against an elected leader. Castillo, a former school teacher and trade union leader, has won the allegiance of the people located largely in the rural areas of the South of the mineral-rich state.

On December 7, then President Castillo called for the dissolution of the Congress so that elections could be held in Peru. This proposal was rejected by the majority of the legislature who in turn voted to remove the president from office. As Castillo was leaving the area where some claimed he was to take refuge in the Mexican embassy, he was arrested by the security forces and detained where he remains until this day despite calls from numerous regional governments demanding his release, echoing the mass sentiment within Peru among the farmers and workers.

Over 50 people have reportedly been killed as a direct result of the uprising against the ouster and detention of Castillo. A state of emergency has been declared in six district regions of the vast country as Boluarte and the military has pledged to end the demonstrations through brute force.

During the week of January 16, thousands of people took to the streets in the capital of Lima where workers and farmers demanded the resignation of Boluarte, the release of Castillo and the immediate holding of national elections. Although Boluarte has repeatedly reimposed states of emergency, the demonstrations are growing in their participation and militancy.

In a Reuters press agency report from January 20 says that:

“Dozens of Peruvians were injured after tensions flared again on Friday (Jan. 20) night as police clashed with protesters in anti-government demonstrations that are spreading across the country. In the capital Lima, police officers used tear gas to repel demonstrators throwing glass bottles and stones, as fires burned in the streets, local TV footage showed. In the country’s southern Puno region, some 1,500 protesters attacked a police station in the town of Ilave, Interior Minister Vicente Romero said in a statement to news media. A police station in Zepita, Puno, was also on fire, Romero said. Health authorities in Ilave reported eight patients hospitalized with injuries, including broken arms and legs, eye contusions and punctured abdomens. By late afternoon, 58 people had been injured nationwide in demonstrations, according to a report from Peru’s ombudsman. The unrest followed a day of turmoil on Thursday (Jan. 19), when one of Lima’s most historic buildings burned to the ground, as President Dina Boluarte vowed to get tougher on ‘vandals.’”

In the south of the country where Castillo is greatly admired among the Indigenous and rural population, since the December 7 impeachment in the Congress, people have blocked highways and airports to demonstrate their commitment to removing the present government. The historic tourist attraction of Machu Picchu, the 15th century citadel of the ancient Inca civilization, was closed to the public on January 20 due to the escalating anti-government unrest.

Prior to the pandemic, approximately one million people would visit Machu Picchu making it a major source of revenue for the country. The site illustrates the advanced social character of South American Indigenous civilizations prior to the arrival of the European colonialists and enslavers who viciously oppressed and exploited the people.

According to another Reuters article on the situation in the south of Peru it emphasized:

“In the Cusco region, the gateway to Machu Picchu, Glencore’s (GLEN.L) major Antapaccay copper mine suspended operations on Friday (Jan. 20) after protesters attacked the premises – one of the largest in the country – for the third time this month. Airports in Arequipa, Cusco and the southern city of Juliaca were also attacked by demonstrators, delivering a fresh blow to Peru’s tourism industry. Cultural authorities in Cusco said in a statement that ‘in view of the current social situation in which our region and the country are immersed, the closure of the Inca trail network and Machu Picchu has been ordered, as of January 21 and until further notice’.”

Significance of the Demonstrations in Lima

Thousands of farmers, workers and youth from various regions of the country have poured into the capital of Peru where many have been housed by students and intellectuals at the San Marcos University. On January 21, the Peruvian National Police entered the university campus where they attacked anti-government protesters.

Untold numbers of people have been arrested while funds and other resources collected to sustain the demonstrators were seized by the security forces. Students took over the University on January 17 in solidarity with the masses of people protesting the coup regime of Boluarte.

These developments portend much for the future outcome of the struggle against the present regime and its international backers among the imperialist states and their allies in the Latin America region. The south of Peru is a center for tourism and mining while the seat of government is based in the capital of Lima.

Both the economic lifelines of the country and the center of the national government are critical in the ongoing suppression of the popular will of the majority of the people within the country. The organizations opposing the Boluarte administration are advancing the notion of a constituent assembly to serve as an interim government until national elections can be organized. Such a scenario would provide a mechanism to foster genuine democratic discussions and debates over the type of dispensation that would benefit the people of Peru.

International solidarity with the people of Peru against the coup regime have been exemplified by the following statements from governments, trade unions and mass organizations around the world published by Telesur:

“CUBA: The revolutionaries of Latin America and the rest of the world have the moral obligation to show solidarity with the Peruvian people and contribute to making visible the struggle that is being lived today in the land of Mariategui and Tupac Amaru,’ said the Red Scarves (Pañuelos Rojos).

CHILE: Paulina Cartagena, the vice president of the National Directorate of Teachers, posted on social networks images in which school teachers are seen holding signs that read, ‘The Peruvian people will not surrender.’

MEXICO: ‘The coup right wing trembles. Today the people of Peru are preparing to take back the reins of their destiny. From all corners of that sister country, thousands of women and men will try to take Lima peacefully,’ Morena Party founder Tomas Pliego.

ARGENTINA: ‘All the strength for the Peruvian people in their just fight for dignity. Total repudiation of the repressive government. Soon we will be accompanying them in a new mission of solidarity and human rights,’ Professor Juan Grabois announced.

SPAIN: ‘At Sant Jaume in Barcelona Square, we accompany our Peruvian sisters in their protest against the repression and in memory of all the injured and murdered people, stated the Catalan organization Entrepueblos Entrepobles Entrepobos Herriarte.”

These expressions of outrage against the violent repression of the Peruvian people by an obviously U.S.-supported coup are essential in building an anti-imperialist movement aimed at upholding the democratic aspirations and right to self-determination for the majority of the people. The genuine revolutionary forces throughout South America, Central America and the world acknowledge the legitimate struggles of the Peruvian people while recognizing the important role these developments are playing in the much broader transformation of the international situation.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

All images in this article are from the author / featured image: Peru San Marcos University attacked by the PNP on Jan. 21, 2023

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Thousands in the Peruvian Capital Demand the Resignation of the Military-backed Regime
  • Tags:

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

 

 

General Erich Ludendorff, the German Empire’s military ruler during the latter half of the First World War (1916-18), made a fateful attempt in the spring of 1925 to reclaim the dictatorship of Germany by participating in the presidential election. 

The election took place at that time due to the death on 28 February 1925 of president Friedrich Ebert, of the left-leaning Social Democratic Party, who had been the German leader for 6 years at the head of the Weimar government. Ebert’s health was broken, in part, because of the continuous verbal attacks he had to endure from Germany’s radical right.

There is no doubt that Ludendorff’s intention was to retake supreme power in Germany, rebuild the military, and then embark upon a war of conquest across the European continent to reassert German dominance. He held severe contempt for social democracy and the Weimar Republic. From 1919 Ludendorff said repeatedly that he “ought never to have let myself been dismissed” by Kaiser Wilhelm II at the end of World World I, and that his desire was to “get back to power”. (1)

Ludendorff’s bid to regain the dictatorship was an important event in interwar German history. Should he fail and fail spectacularly, it would eliminate him as the main rival to Adolf Hitler for the extreme right in Germany, while bolstering Hitler’s position within the Nazi Party. Hitler himself was actively encouraging Ludendorff to run for the presidency in 1925, as a candidate for the Nazi Party. Ludendorff had already been elected to the German parliament (Reichstag) in December 1924 as a Nazi member of parliament (MP) for Bavaria, Germany’s largest state in the south of the country.

In March 1925, shortly before the presidential election took place, Ludendorff said,

“I have just had an anxious discussion with Hitler” and “we have come to the conclusion that I should stand as the candidate of the National Socialists [Nazis]. Hitler is convinced that the risk must be run… Hitler knows perfectly well that although he has a great following in Bavaria, he can count on very few votes in north Germany and east of Berlin. On the other hand, the name of Ludendorff is well known and respected throughout Germany. In particular, the East Prussians and Silesians have been bound to me by gratitude and devotion ever since the war”. (2)

Unknown to Ludendorff, Hitler was playing a cunning game here, entirely for his own benefit and ultimate goal of taking the dictatorship. Hitler possessed much shrewder political instincts than the military elite, and Ludendorff was too rash and impatient to make a politician.

Alexander Clifford, a historian who focuses on interwar European history wrote, “Hitler conceived the presidential campaign from the get-go as a sure-fire method of discrediting Ludendorff as a leadership rival. Well aware of the general’s political limitations… Hitler calculated that a torrid defeat would only serve to further tarnish Ludendorff’s reputation. By pushing the general to stand as a token candidate, Hitler lost nothing, but a dismal electoral performance would serve to prise more Nazi supporters away from the idea that Ludendorff was suited to a leadership role in the party”. (3)

A dismal electoral performance it would turn out to be. Out of several candidates for the 1925 presidential election, Ludendorff ended comfortably in bottom position. He drew a measly 285,793 votes, less than 1.1% of the national total. For example the Communist Party of Germany candidate, Ernst Thälmann, attracted almost 2 million votes, over 6 times more than Ludendorff.

The humiliation for Ludendorff was deepened by the fact that his close army colleague, Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg, won the presidency as a right-wing Independent, gathering more than 14 million votes. The 77-year-old Hindenburg had pleaded with Ludendorff not to partake in the election, warning him what the outcome would be (4). Ludendorff went his own way, however.

It is ironic that Hindenburg outmatched Ludendorff in the political realm, when in the military sphere Hindenburg possessed much less military ability than the more aggressive and intelligent Ludendorff, a fact which the German public was not aware of. After the Kaiser was acquainted with Hindenburg, he said he felt him to be “wooden and unimaginative”, and he described Ludendorff as “the Sergeant-Major”. (5)

Hindenburg’s great reputation with the German people was based on myth and legend: that the field marshal had been responsible for the German victories in the war, such as at the Battles of Tannenberg and the Masurian Lakes. In reality Hindenburg, like the Kaiser, was a ceremonial figurehead during the war. Hindenburg may not have been a military genius, but he was a more stable and decent individual than Ludendorff. According to General Otto von Lossow, the overall commander of German troops in Bavaria in 1923, Ludendorff had become “a wild man” with “evil in his head”. (6)

Hitler was delighted with the outcome of the 1925 presidential election. He gloated in private that Ludendorff was “finally finished” as his political rival. Of Ludendorff, Hitler said to his loyal follower Rudolf Hess,

“I would like his name to disappear if possible from the movement [Nazi Party] because he makes it harder for me to win the workers”. Hitler believed that Ludendorff was strictly a military leader, not a political one, and he wanted “only true National Socialists” near the top of the Nazi Party. (7)

The general’s political debacle was a considerable step forward for Hitler; but Ludendorff was actually finished as a force in Germany since 1923, when he began to associate with the Nazis on the streets of Munich, Bavaria’s capital city. Doing so destroyed whatever popularity Ludendorff still enjoyed with the German public, which was reflected in the presidential vote.

Yet Ludendorff was impeded, in his campaign for the presidency, due to the Nazi Party itself having hardly any money in 1925. Some Nazi officials said that the election campaign was a method in which to discredit Ludendorff (8). Nor did the general appear very often in public, or deliver any speeches in the build-up to the voting. Ludendorff had also been losing supporters on the right, because of his condemnations of Roman Catholicism from the early 1920s, which he blamed for spreading international and pacifist thinking in Germany, and which he felt to be a factor in his country’s defeat in World War I.

The few influential Nazis who supported Ludendorff in his presidential bid, such as Ernst Röhm, shifted towards Hitler after the result of the vote. With Ludendorff not a threat, Hitler no longer had a serious rival on the far-right. (9)

Perhaps there is an underlying misfortune about Ludendorff’s political demise. For if he had reclaimed the German autocracy, it would most likely have prevented Hitler’s rise to power. By 1924 and 1925 the formerly warm relationship between Ludendorff and Hitler was growing colder; and in the event of retaking power Ludendorff, a general, might well have been unwilling to hand over the reins to Hitler, a corporal.

It seems unlikely that had Ludendorff regained power in the mid-1920s, or later, that he would have proceeded to do what Hitler did – unleash genocide against Europe’s Jewish and Gypsy populations. The younger fanatics who emerge are usually worse than their elders, a truism which has stood the passage of time.

Born in 1865, a quarter of a century before Hitler, Ludendorff belonged to an older generation of Germans whose formative years occurred during the happy and generally prosperous years of Otto von Bismarck’s chancellorship (1871-90); when Germany was the dominant nation in mainland Europe, which remained the case up to the outbreak of war in 1914. Had Ludendorff’s intentions turned out to be as bad as Hitler’s, and again it is doubtful, the general would probably have refrained in any case from committing genocide, by the continued influence of moderate figures like Hindenburg in Germany.

Ludendorff was certainly a virulent anti-Semite as shown in an article he wrote in 1922, where he lamented “the strong intrusion of the Jewish people inside our borders”, and hinted at their expulsion from Germany (10). A 1925 census outlined that the population of German Jews amounted to 564,973 (11), less than 1% of the recorded total German population that year of 62,410,619.

Though Ludendorff’s views are vicious enough, Hitler said outright in 1922 that he would commit genocide against Germany’s entire Jewish population were he to enter high office. “If I am ever really in power, the destruction of the Jews will be my first and most important job” Hitler said, and that in order to do so he would have “gallows after gallows erected… as many of them as the traffic allows” until “Germany is cleansed of the last Jew”. These words were noted by Josef Hell, a German journalist, who had asked Hitler what he would do “if he ever had full freedom of action against the Jews” (12). Hitler’s disturbing remarks, which feature in John Toland’s biography of the Nazi leader, reveal that Hitler had become a monster even as a young man in his early 30s.

Of Germany at this time the philosopher and scholar Noam Chomsky said,

“Well, Goebbels himself wrote about how he was influenced by the success of U.S. commercial propaganda. This was the 1920s, early 30s. They turned it into a highly refined system, which was very effective. Now it’s pretty remarkable to see what happened in Germany. You go back to the 1920s. Germany was the most civilized country in the world. It was at the peak of Western civilization, and the arts and sciences, it was considered a model of democracy by political scientists. That was Germany in the 1920s. Ten years later, it was the absolute depths of human history [Nazi Germany]. Go ten years later than that, you’re back to becoming a civilized society. It’s a quite astonishing illustration of the capacity of organized propaganda to totally change the population, from the most civilized in the world, to the most degraded in history”. (13)

Following Ludendorff’s resignation as Germany’s warlord in late October 1918, the only way he could have reclaimed power was at the head of a coup d’état. He participated in two coups, the Kapp Putsch of 1920 and the 1923 Nazi Beer Hall Putsch, both of which were a fiasco and that Ludendorff had not really led.

Those two putsches, which had little chance of succeeding, came too soon after the end of the war. The Western Allies, France most of all, could never have tolerated a militarist resurgence in Germany in the early or mid-1920s. The time most suitable for Ludendorff to have instigated a coup would have been around 1930, when France was weaker and the international situation more favourable to a far-right putsch, as the Great Depression was hitting Europe hard by then.

Ludendorff’s complete break with Hitler came when the Nazi leader refused, for political reasons, to join in with Ludendorff’s criticisms of the Roman Catholic Church. Ludendorff became contemptuous of Hitler and he wrote a pamphlet in 1931 with the headline, “Hitler’s Betrayal of the German People to the Roman Pope”.

By now Ludendorff had fallen out with almost everyone. He quarrelled with Crown Prince Rupprecht, a field marshal and last heir apparent to the Bavarian throne, because of the Crown Prince’s belief in Roman Catholicism and ties to the church. He quarrelled with other royal family members and with German generals who were sympathetic to the Crown Prince, and as a result 37 generals signed a manifesto excluding Ludendorff from their officers associations. He quarrelled with the prominent admiral, Alfred von Tirpitz, calling the political party (German National People’s Party) which he supported “a gang of perjured renegades”, and the admiral never spoke to Ludendorff again. He quarrelled with his wife Margarethe and ended up divorcing her in 1925.

He quarrelled too with Hindenburg. In the summer of 1925 Hindenburg, the new president, wrote to Ludendorff that he could no longer make the trip to see the latter at his home at Ludwigshöhe near Munich, because of the responsibilities he had as president. Ludendorff “foamed with rage” at the rejection and was also deeply hurt; he spoke of Hindenburg thereafter only in bitter language.

Ludendorff had previously insisted, “Come what may, in the eyes of the world Hindenburg and I must always stand together and be and remain the pattern of German loyalty and German unity” (14). Now that unity was broken, which further served Hitler’s cause.

In late August 1927, when Ludendorff attended the dedication of the Tannenberg Memorial, he created a scene by refusing to stand beside Hindenburg (15). Infuriated, Hindenburg left before Ludendorff spoke at the ceremony. After the dedication, Ludendorff was shunned by all of his former military colleagues. He ended up leaving by himself and made his way to his car. Neither did Ludendorff make an impression in Berlin as a Nazi deputy. He cut a lonely figure in parliament and his tenure as a Nazi Party MP ended silently in 1928.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

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

Notes

1 Donald J. Goodspeed, Ludendorff: Soldier: Dictator: Revolutionary (Hart-Davis, 1 January 1966) p. 280 

2 Alexander Clifford, Hindenburg, Ludendorff and Hitler: Germany’s Generals and the Rise of the Nazis (Pen and Sword Military, 14 December 2021) p. 109 

3 Ibid., p. 108 

4 Goodspeed, Ludendorff, p. 305 

5 Ibid., p. 188 

6 Ibid., p. 297 

7 Clifford, Hindenburg, Ludendorff and Hitler, p. 106 

8 Ibid., p. 109 

9 Richard J. Evans, The Coming of the Third Reich (Penguin Putnam Inc., 25 January 2005) p. 202 

10 Erich Ludendorff, “General Ludendorff, On Overcoming the Consequences of the Lost War (1922)” 

11 United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, “Jewish communities of prewar Germany”, Holocaust Encyclopedia 

12 John Toland, Adolf Hitler: The Definitive Biography (First Anchor Books Edition, January 1992) pp. 155-156 

13 Noam Chomsky, “Dr. Noam Chomsky discusses the birth of U.S. commercial propaganda and the art of manufacturing consent”, Propwatch.org, 13 July 2022 

14 Clifford, Hindenburg, Ludendorff and Hitler, p. 133 

15 Goodspeed, Ludendorff, p. 307

Featured image: General Erich Ludendorff (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

Selected Articles: The Whole of Europe Turned Into a Battlefield

January 23rd, 2023 by Global Research News

The Whole of Europe Turned Into a Battlefield

By Manlio Dinucci, January 22, 2023

The Federation of American Scientists confirms in January the news given by Grandangolo in December 2022 based on a U.S. Air Force document: the C-17A Globemaster aircraft has been authorized to carry the U.S. B61-12 nuclear bomb to Italy and other European countries.

Peru’s Natural Resources: CIA-linked US Ambassador Meets with Mining and Energy Ministers to Talk ‘Investments’

By Ben Norton, January 23, 2023

Peru has large reserves of copper, gold, zinc, silver, lead, iron, and natural gas. After a coup overthrew left-wing President Pedro Castillo, the US ambassador, CIA veteran Lisa Kenna, met with mining and energy ministers to discuss “investments”. Europe is importing Peruvian LNG to replace Russian energy.

US Expands Training of Taiwanese Military with National Guard

By Dave DeCamp, January 23, 2023

A source told Nikkei that the training began sometime before spring 2022. In May 2022, Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen announced cooperation with the National Guard while hosting Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) in Taipei.

French Unions Stage One-day General Strike Against Pension Reforms

By Abayomi Azikiwe, January 23, 2023

Over a million French workers and students participated in a general strike on January 19 demanding that the proposed pension reforms drafted by President Emmanuel Macron be halted. The bill to be voted on in the French Assembly would raise the retirement age from 62 to 64 while increasing the level of contributions into the pension system by employees.

South Korea’s Nuclear Weapons Project on Behalf of Washington

By Andrew Korybko, January 22, 2023

South Korea has no independent agency when it comes to this sensitive subject since it’s unrealistic to expect it to defy Washington’s will by going forward with a nuclear weapons program without its military patron’s permission.

Saudi Crown Prince bin Salman (MBS) Defies the US Policy Against Syria

By Steven Sahiounie, January 22, 2023

In November 2022, Saudi Arabia formally changed its stance on Syria. Saudi Arabia is the political powerhouse of the Middle East, and often shares positions on foreign policy and international issues with the UAE, which has previously re-opened their embassy in Damascus.

Ukraine War: When Good Refugees Turn Bad

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, January 22, 2023

When the first Russian forces began entering Ukrainian territory in February 2022, the instant reaction from Europe, the UK, Canada and Australia, was one of open commitment to Ukraine’s refugees.  The relentless human trains heading westwards were initially embraced by Poles, whose history with Ukraine is, at best, tense and sketchy.

Orthodox Bishop Denounces Ukrainian Crimes at UNSC

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, January 22, 2023

The Russian Orthodox Church went to the UN to denounce Ukrainian crimes. At a meeting of the Security Council on January 17, invited by the Russian diplomatic representation at the UN, an Orthodox bishop linked to the Moscow Patriarchate commented on the situation of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine in the face of the persecutions imposed by the Kiev’s neo-Nazi regime. This was the first time that a representative of the Orthodox clergy has addressed to the UNSC.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) Calls for Destruction of America’s Middle Class

By Kurt Nimmo, January 22, 2023

I have said this for a long time. The global elite hate you, they want to destroy your standard of living, and reduce you to a serf, a powerless and dispensable carbon emitter.

The New Zealand Government Reaches for Total Medical Control

By Guy Hatchard, January 21, 2023

The necessity and benefits of a broad natural diet are evident from Egyptian skeletal remains from 6000 years ago, which suggest scurvy—a disease resulting from a lack of vitamin C. In 1753 a Scottish surgeon, James Lind demonstrated that scurvy could be treated with citrus fruit. The New Zealand government seems intent on changing history.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: The Whole of Europe Turned Into a Battlefield

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Today the Environmental Protection Agency released a plan for regulating wastewater pollution, including discharges of the “forever chemicals” known as PFAS. But the plan doesn’t reflect the urgent need to tackle these discharges more quickly.

The agency’s long-awaited plan will take years to complete, delaying much-needed restrictions on PFAS discharges into waterways. The plan, the  Effluent Guidelines Program Plan 15, falls short of the EPA’s vow in its 2021 PFAS Strategic Roadmap to “get upstream” of the forever chemicals problem.

The EPA confirmed that by spring 2024 – nine months later than previously scheduled – it will release a draft regulation for manufacturers of PFAS or those that create mixtures of PFAS. The agency will do the same for metal finishers and electroplaters by the end of 2024, a delay of six months. The EPA did not announce when final rules will be available for these industries.

The agency will also begin regulating PFAS releases from landfills but did not provide a timeline for a final rule.

For all other industrial categories the EPA considered for PFAS wastewater limitation guidelines, the new plan includes more studies and monitoring, likely delaying restrictions on these sources indefinitely.

“Polluters have gotten a free pass for far too long to contaminate thousands of communities. Now they need aggressive action from the EPA to stop PFAS at the source,” said Melanie Benesh, Environmental Working Group vice president of government affairs. “But the EPA’s plan lacks the urgency those communities rightfully expect.

“We are deeply concerned that the EPA is punting on restrictions for PFAS polluting industries like electronics manufacturers, leather tanners, paint formulators and plastics molders,” said Benesh. “We are also alarmed that the EPA’s proposed restrictions on some of the most serious PFAS polluters – chemical manufacturers and metal finishers – are also getting delayed, with no timeline for when those limits will be final, if ever.

“Although it’s a good thing the EPA is committing to address PFAS discharges from landfills – a source of pollution that disproportionately affects vulnerable communities – it’s also frustratingly unclear from EPA’s plan when, if ever, those limits will materialize.

“Given the glacial pace of change in the EPA’s plan, states should not wait for the EPA to act on PFAS,” she said.

Industrial discharges of PFAS have caused significant contamination in places like the Cape Fear River Basin, in North Carolina, and Parkersburg, West Virginia. 

EWG has used EPA enforcement data to identify nearly 40,000 potential industrial dischargers.

Very low doses of PFAS in drinking water have been linked to suppression of the immune system, including reduced vaccine efficacy, and an increased risk of certain cancers. PFAS are linked with increased cholesterol, reproductive and developmental problemsand other health harms.

Some lawmakers are also trying to force the EPA to address PFAS more quickly. The Clean Water Standards for PFAS Act, introduced by Rep. Chris Pappas (D-N.H.) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) last year, would require the agency to develop PFAS wastewater limitation guidelines and water standards for PFAS in nine different industry categories by the end of 2026.

The EPA is planning to propose industry-wide regulations for certain industries, but regulators can update facility permits to address PFAS any time. The EPA released guidance for federal permit writers in April and guidance for state permit writers in December.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Wastewater Pollution, ‘Forever Chemicals’ Discharges, Industrial Pollution, Devastating Impacts on Human Health
  • Tags: , ,

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Peru has large reserves of copper, gold, zinc, silver, lead, iron, and natural gas. After a coup overthrew left-wing President Pedro Castillo, the US ambassador, CIA veteran Lisa Kenna, met with mining and energy ministers to discuss “investments”. Europe is importing Peruvian LNG to replace Russian energy.

The US ambassador in Peru, Lisa Kenna, is a CIA veteran who supported a parliamentary coup in December 2022 that overthrew the South American nation’s democratically elected left-wing president, Pedro Castillo.

Castillo was subsequently imprisoned for 18 months without due process, setting off massive protests across Peru. The unelected government responded with extreme violence, killing approximately 50 protesters in just over a month.

One day before the December 7 coup, the former CIA officer turned US ambassador met with Peru’s defense minister, who then told the country’s powerful military to turn against President Castillo.

Since then, Kenna has been quite busy, regularly meeting with top officials in Peru’s coup government, including unelected President Dina Boluarte and her ministers.

On January 18, the US ambassador sat down with Peru’s minister of energy and mining, as well as its vice minister of hydrocarbons and vice minister of mining.

Peru’s Ministry of Energy and Mines boasted that they discussed “investment” opportunities and plans to “develop” and “expand” the extractive industries.

Peru is a country rich in natural resources, especially minerals. Spanish colonialists exploited the South American nation’s substantial silver and gold reserves, and today transnational corporations see it as a very profitable resource hub.

One of Earth’s top producers of copper, lead, zinc, tin, silver, and gold, Peru’s economy relies heavily on the mining sector, which represents more than half of total national exports and over 10% of GDP.

The world’s three largest transnational mining corporations – BHP, Rio Tinto, and Glencore – are heavily invested in Peru, along with other prominent companies from Canada, Brazil, Switzerland, Britain, the US, Japan, and Australia.

Peru is the planet’s second-biggest copper producer (after its neighbor Chile), meaning it will become increasingly important in the global shift toward renewable energy technologies.

US investment banking giant Goldman Sachs stated in 2022 that “copper is the new oil”, writing: “The critical role copper will play in achieving the Paris climate goals cannot be overstated… As the most cost-effective conductive material, copper sits at the heart of capturing, storing and transporting these new sources of energy”.

Peru is also a significant producer of liquified natural gas (LNG). Its LNG exports are largely overseen by foreign corporations like Shell.

Europe became the top importer of Peruvian LNG in 2022, after the European Union boycotted Russian energy over the proxy war in Ukraine.

While natural resources are not the only reason for these coups in Latin America, they are a significant factor.

Following the violent putsch in Peru’s mineral-rich neighbor Bolivia in 2019, a critic wrote to billionaire Elon Musk on Twitter, “You know what wasn’t in the best interest of people? The US government organizing a coup against Evo Morales in Bolivia so you could obtain the lithium there”.

Musk replied, “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it”.

Elon Musk Bolivia coup whoever we want

Peru’s President Castillo: ‘We want our natural resources to directly benefit the people’

When he ran for office in 2021, left-wing presidential candidate Pedro Castillo had made one of the central themes of his campaign the need to reassert popular control over Peru’s natural resources.

Condemning foreign companies for “pillaging” the country, he called to renegotiate contracts to ensure that 70% of all proceeds from mining went to the state, to fund social programs.

A few weeks before the presidential elections, Castillo said, “Let’s be clear: these decades of betrayal, corruption, and cynicism are the symptoms of this neoliberal system dedicated exclusively to the exploitation of our people and natural resources for the benefit of a few scoundrels”.

When he entered office, Castillo was very limited in what he could do politically. The right-wing opposition had a majority in the congress, and they were hellbent on destabilizing and eventually removing him with a presidential “vacancy”. They used Peru’s legislature and the heavily politicized and corrupt judiciary to launch constant attacks against Castillo, as part of a campaign of systematic persecution and lawfare.

But Castillo did what he could. The president announced a “second agrarian reform” and declared, “We are rescuing the resources of the country for all Peruvians”. He explained his goal: “We want our natural resources to directly benefit the people“.

Castillo’s government made plans with left-wing President Gustavo Petro in neighboring Colombia to develop gas infrastructure in Peru and expand internal use.

This was part of Castillo’s progressive economic model of import substitution industrialization, which aimed to grow local industry and boost domestic consumption, so Peru would not rely exclusively on low value-added exports.

Immediately after ousting Castillo, however, Peru’s coup regime returned to the neoliberal economic model of the Washington Consensus, prioritizing foreign corporate investment over internal development.

The Ministry of Energy and Mines tweeted on January 18 that it had just conducted a “high-level institutional dialogue between Peru and the United States, which addressed themes of development of the mining sector”.

US Ambassador Kenna met with Peru’s minister of energy and mining, Óscar Vera Gargurevich; vice minister of hydrocarbons, Enrique Bisetti Solari; and vice minister of mining, Jaime Chávez Riva.

The ministry said they discussed “themes linked to the expansion of natural gas, mining investments, and the development of renewable energies in our country”.

It added that “Minister Vera was grateful for the support from the North American government in mining-energy issues, and he reiterated the will of the national government, whose priority is the expansion of natural gas, energy security, and the petrochemical development of the south of the country”.

Mining dominates Peru’s economy

The Peruvian government itself has publicly stated that its economy relies heavily on mining and exporting minerals such as copper, zinc, gold, silver, lead, iron, and molybdenum.

Peru’s top exports in 2022 included copper, gold, and liquified natural gas (LNG).

The mining sector made up 58.7% of all of Peru’s exports, 57.1% of which were metals and 1.6% of which were non-metals, according to the most recent publicly available statistics, from January to October 2022.

Copper, gold, zinc, and iron represented 88.4% of the total value of Peru’s mineral exports, and 51.9% of the value of all of the country’s exports.

Peru exports 2022 minerals

As of 2022, the largest corporate investor in Peru’s mining sector was the UK-based company Anglo American.

The second biggest investor was Compañía Minera Antamina S.A., a local firm that is majority owned by Australian and Swiss mining giants. The third was the US-Mexican Southern Copper Corporation.

Local communities in the South American country, especially those of Indigenous descent, have long protested the mining companies that devastate their environment.

These rural communities were the base of support for President Castillo. Since the coup, they have organized massive protests, demanding that he be freed, that new elections be held, and that the government convene a constituent assembly to write a new constitution, to replace the current one that was inherited from the former US-backed far-right dictatorship of Alberto Fujimori.

Europe becomes top importer of Peru’s LNG, following boycott of Russian energy

After minerals, Peru’s other top export is natural gas – and more specifically liquified natural gas (LNG).

Peru’s gas sector saw a huge boom in 2022, with LNG exports increasing by 85% in the first eight months of the year, in comparison with the same period in 2021.

One of the main reasons for this surge was Europe’s sky-high demand for gas.

Before 2022, most of Peru’s LNG had gone to Asia (primarily Japan, South Korea, and China). But as tensions between NATO and Russia escalated in late 2021 and early 2022, and the EU moved to boycott Russian energy, this drastically shifted.

The vast majority of Peru’s LNG exports went to Europe in 2022, primarily to Britain and Spain.

In months like April, May, and August, all of Peru’s LNG exports went to Europe, according to data published by the state company Perúpetro.

Peru LNG exports Europe 2022

Peru’s LNG exports are overseen by a consortium of foreign corporations including Britain’s Shell, the US Hunt Oil Company, Japan’s Marubeni Corporation, and South Korea’s SK Group.

While Peru only exports a relatively small amount of LNG when compared to the United States – which quickly established itself as the world’s top LNG exporter in 2022 – the South American nation has become an important energy partner for Europe.

In its attempt to reduce trade with Russia, Spain increased its imports of LNG from the Americas – including the US, Peru, and Trinidad and Tobago – by 77.4% in 2022. (Spain boosted its imports of US LNG specifically by 93.4% in 2022.)

Ironically, by pledging to boycott Russian oil, Spain also ended up increasing its imports of more expensive Russian LNG by 37% in 2022.

At the same time, from the beginning of 2021 to mid-2022, the price of natural gas skyrocketed by 700%.

Transnational corporations rake in profits in Peruvian mining

Foreign companies have made a killing in Peru’s mining sector.

In promotional materials urging more foreign investment, the Peruvian government boasted that the planet’s three largest mining corporations are active in the country: BHP Group, of Australia; Rio Tinto, of Britain and Australia; and Glencore, of Switzerland.

The Ministry of Energy and Mines wrote with pride in 2018: “The world’s most important companies in the mining sector are making investments in our country. Due to our mineral reserves, Peru is a market that is always taken into account by these companies when they decide their investment budgets in exploration and exploitation”.

Many local mining companies in Peru are owned by foreign corporate giants.

The second-largest investor in mining in Peru, the Compañía Minera Antamina (Antamina Mining Company in English), was 33.75% owned by BHP, another 33.75% owned by Glencore, 22.5% by Canada’s Teck Resources, and 10% by Japan’s Mitsubishi, as of 2018.

The Compañía Minera Antamina operates in Peru’s western Áncash region, and was responsible for roughly one-fifth of national copper production and 15% of national silver production in 2018.

Peru was the source of 20% of BHP’s global production of copper in 2017, as well as 50% of its global production of silver and 100% of its global production of zinc.

The British-Australian Rio Tinto corporation oversees the La Granja mining project in the northwestern Cajamarca region. Peru was the source of 15% of Rio Tinto’s global production of copper in 2017.

Other large transnational corporations active in Peru’s mining sector include the US company Freeport-McMoRan and Mexican Southern Copper Corporation, both of which are based in Phoenix, Arizona; as well as Canada’s Barrick Gold.

But this is just to mention existing mining operations. Foreign companies are also heavily invested in exploration for new projects.

The top foreign countries whose companies are investing in mining exploration in Peru are Canada, Brazil, Switzerland, Britain, the US, Japan, and Australia, according to a 2022 report from the Ministry of Energy and Mines.

Companies located in Peru are responsible for 37.8% of investment in exploration, but this figure can be misleading because many of these firms are owned by much bigger transnational corporations.

Peru mining exploration projects country

As of 2022, 43.4% of exploration investment went into looking for gold, 36.1% for copper, 11.2% for zinc, 8.3% for silver, and 1% for tin.

Peru mining exploration mineral

Mining exploration projects are taking place all across western Peru.

Many of these regions, which are underdeveloped and suffer from high rates of poverty, have seen large protests against the US-backed coup regime and in support of Castillo.

Peru mining exploration projects map

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image: CIA veteran and US ambassador in Peru, Lisa Kenna, with the country’s mining minister, on January 18, 2023

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Peru’s Natural Resources: CIA-linked US Ambassador Meets with Mining and Energy Ministers to Talk ‘Investments’
  • Tags:

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

If you’re watching the World Economic Forum’s annual ruling class confab in Davos this week, you might be surprised by the lack of disagreement among the rich and powerful there. Every panel in Davos acts as a reinforced echo chamber in which there is one problem, one objective, and only one solution. Regardless of who populates these panels and speeches, whether it’s invited corporate media, governmental officials, and/or business executives, there’s never any apparent dissent or difference of opinion expressed.

Given that the World Economic Forum is best understood as a narrative and ideas generator for the global ruling class, one might be under the impression that Davos would be a place for a healthy, robust debate. That’s why many new observers in the space have been understandably baffled by the incredible conformity expressed by speakers and attendees at the Swiss retreat.

Many noticed as former CNN host Brian Stelter, who claims to defend the importance of a free press, smiled and nodded at a co-panelist’s vicious attack on open speech.

Former New York Times editor Jill Abramson offered her own no holds barred commentary on the matter.

Author Walter Kirn tweet expressed his fascination with “how little disagreement there is.”

The truth of the matter is that the World Economic Forum and its leaders prefer conformity to debate. In fact, debate is actively discouraged, and stepping out of line — via a narrative violation — is grounds for permanent removal from Club Davos.

Klaus Schwab discusses this very topic in his book, “The Great Narrative,” which is book two of his infamous “The Great Reset” series.

Discussing the goals of the WEF, Schwab starts by claiming that his outfit is open to all ideologies and political perspectives. We quickly learn that he is not truly referring to all perspectives, but only those that he views as legitimate.

There is one specific group of people who he says are to be dismissed whole cloth. That group, of course, is individuals and groups that do not accept the World Economic Forum’s climate narrative, and its very specific “solutions” to the supposed climate problem.

“Climate action, sustainability, inclusivity, global cooperation, health, and well being” are “the most important issues to address in our times,” he writes. “Not moving right away and decisively would render our biosphere so hostile as to derail global economic growth and … further endangering political and social stability.”

In short, Schwab’s narrative insists that the world is on fire, and there is no room for debate on this issue, and the only solution is to roll back human progress.

The publicly diplomatic Schwab expresses absolute disdain for these non compliant actors, who he notes, with disgust, are largely located in the United States.

Klaus Schwab *hates* non-conformity, deciding that those who refuse to comply are conspiracy theorists who are responsible for all of the world’s ills. Schwab says that these “anti-science movements” have acted to “prolong the waning of the COVID-19 pandemic,” adding that we are “hindering both public health, and more fundamentally, our ability to move forward in unison.”

The WEF approaches all of its big ticket items as issues that already have complete and total consensus. Everything important to the WEF is categorized in one form or another as an “emergency,” so they claim there is no room for debating these issues at Davos. This “emergency” is too serious for the speakers at Davos to challenge the narrative. They already have an established problem and an agreed upon solution. The only thing that’s left to debate is how fast they can move forward on these supposed problems and solutions, and how aggressively they will attempt to trample all over our individual rights in the process.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on At Davos, Conformity Is Required, and Debate Is a Cancel-worthy Sin
  • Tags: ,

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Iraq is facing a deepening hole in its public finances because of a crackdown on corruption and dollar smuggling by the US Federal Reserve since the “theft of the century”, Iraqi officials have told Middle East Eye.

The crisis, which is expected to worsen in the next few weeks, has been caused by a collapse in the daily trade in dollars through a currency auction run by the Central Bank of Iraq.

The Iraqi government depends on the auction to convert dollars, which it earns through oil revenues, into Iraqi dinars. Last year, about $200m per day on average was being sold through the auction to private banks and companies.

But that figure dropped sharply in the final two months of the year, falling to a daily average of $56m by late December, according to data reviewed by MEE.

Now the government is facing a shortage of dinars, which has left it struggling to pay public sector salaries and meet its other monthly obligations.

A senior official at the Central Bank of Iraq, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told MEE: “The problem we are facing now in Iraq is the scarcity of the Iraqi dinar, not the dollar.”

Neighbouring countries, which depend heavily on the official foreign currency exchange markets in Iraq to obtain dollars, are also facing a liquidity crisis with Iran, Turkey and Syria all affected, according to officials in Baghdad.

The crisis has affected the wider economy, with the dollar exchange rate on unofficial markets rising from 148 dinars to 163 dinars since late November.

The price of consumer goods has increased. This week, the price of rice rose to 2,350 dinars per kilo (about $1.57), up from 1,850 dinars per kilo (about $1.25), while the cost of cooking oil has more than doubled, from 1,250 dinars per litre (about $0.85) to 3,000 dinars (about $2).

The Iraqi officials whom MEE spoke to denied any direct connection between the current crisis and the so-called “theft of the century”, in which about $2.5bn was stolen from Iraq’s tax authority through a state-owned bank between September 2021 and August 2022.

But they conceded that the US Federal Reserve had imposed more stringent checks on private banks buying dollars through the auction two months ago, just weeks after details of the theft were disclosed by the Iraqi Ministry of Finance on 10 October.

Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani said in October that most of the stolen money was believed to have been smuggled out of Iraq.

In November, Judge Haider Hanoun, head of the Federal Commission of Integrity (FCI), Iraq’s anti-corruption watchdog, said Iraq had sought help from friendly governments, international organisations and the United Nations to recover the stolen money.

One of Sudani’s advisers, who spoke to MEE on condition of anonymity, said the Federal Reserve had started checking external financial transfers in November in an attempt to trace the stolen funds.

This had caused delays in the release of transfers and led to a reduction in dollar sales through the auction, the adviser said.

The Federal Reserve also introduced checks on the source of funds held by private banks participating in the auction, prompting many of them to withdraw and increasing the unofficial exchange rate, the adviser said.

Crisis meeting

Late in December, the Coordination Framework, the largest political coalition backing the government, held a meeting in Baghdad to discuss the rising cost of the dollar and the crisis in the Iraqi markets.

The meeting was limited to senior leaders in the coalition, Sudani and Mustafa Ghaleb, the governor of the Central Bank.

Ghaleb told the meeting that the Federal Reserve had “serious indications” of dollar-smuggling operations to neighbouring countries, according to one leader who attended the meeting.

Ghaleb named two Egyptian banks based in Dubai to whom most of the dollars bought in the auction had been transferred in the period being investigated, the leader said. The dollars had then been transferred on to Amman in Jordan, and then to Iran.

Four private Iraqi banks which had transferred the bulk of the money to the two Egyptian banks had been ordered by the Central Bank of Iraq to stop dealing with them in November, following a directive from the Federal Reserve, the leader said.

According to a document seen by MEE, the Central Bank also ordered banks and other financial institutions to stop dealing in dollars with the four banks “for audit purposes” on 6 November.

This was challenged in lawsuits brought against the Central Bank by all four banks – Al-Ansari Islamic Bank for Investment and Finance, Al-Qabidh Islamic Bank for Finance and Investment, Asia Al Iraq Islamic Bank for Investment and Finance, and the Iraqi Middle East Investment Bank.

But their cases were rejected this week by the Financial Services Court, which affirmed the right of the Federal Reserve to prohibit them from dealing in dollars.

A financial adviser involved in the “theft of the century” investigation told MEE that the episode had furnished the Federal Reserve with “conclusive evidence of the theft of government funds that were taken out with government instruments.

“They could not turn a blind eye to it,” said the adviser. “It provided the required motivation for the Federal Reserve to impose its procedures on private banks and the Central Bank of Iraq.

“They [the Americans] have been looking for this opportunity since 2014 to pounce on foreign currency auction sales, but former prime ministers have always obtained exceptions under the pretext of buying electricity, fuel and other things from Iran.

“But this time the story is different.”

MEE contacted the Federal Reserve for comment but had not received a response by the time of publication.

Oil sales revenue

The Iraqi government needs at least eight trillion dinars (about $5.5bn) per month to pay the salaries of government employees, retirees, beneficiaries of social welfare, victims of terrorism and others, and this is secured largely through the currency auction.

Most of this comes from Iraq’s oil revenue, which since 2003 has been paid in dollars into an account held by the Federal Reserve Bank in New York.

The US Treasury transfers $10bn annually to the Central Bank of Iraq from the proceeds of oil sales, in order to strengthen its foreign currency balance.

This amount is delivered in cash in four instalments. All dollars are new and have serial numbers registered with the Federal Reserve for easy tracking, officials said.

The Central Bank of Iraq then sells the dollars through the foreign currency auction and other channels to obtain dinars for the Ministry of Finance.

Now the decline in dollar sales has caused a shortage of dinars for the Central Bank of Iraq. Even at its peak, the auction does not usually raise enough to meet the $275m which the government needs each day.

This shortfall is usually covered from currency stocks held by the Central Bank, through internal loans between the bank and the government, by printing more currency, or by other financial activities.

Foreign currency auction data for the past four years reviewed by MEE shows that the amount of dollars traded remained stable, at an average of about $200m per day during 2019 and 2020, despite the decline in oil prices, the Covid pandemic and a recession.

In the first three months of 2021, the amount traded in the auction dropped to historic lows, with just $3m traded on some days.

But in the second week of April, the daily amount jumped suddenly, with an average of $190m traded every day until the end of the year.

In 2022, dollar sales did not fall below an average of $200m per day for the first 10 months of the year.

Two financial advisers who spoke to MEE said the increase from April 2021 was likely linked to the “theft of the century” plot.

They said the figures aroused suspicion that the theft had started earlier than September 2021, as preliminary investigations had suggested, although they offered no further information to back up this claim.

‘Options are limited’

Since the collapse in auction revenues, the Central Bank has opened new outlets selling dollars directly to citizens through the currency auction system, in an effort to raise more dinars.

But data showing foreign currency sales for the past few weeks show that the bank is still selling an average of less than $90m a day.

Iraqi officials expect the situation to deteriorate further over the next few weeks, after the Central Bank launched a new electronic platform for the currency auction earlier this month.

The Central Bank said in a statement that it had launched the platform “in coordination with international bodies for the purpose of ruling and organising window operations for buying and selling foreign currency and ensuring effective control over it”.

The new platform links all banks with the Central Bank and requires banks to disclose information about their customers requesting financial transfers, beneficiaries, correspondent banks and other details.

“The new platform has complicated things more. The actual owners of the money do not want to reveal their identity or the source of their money, so we don’t expect the auction sales to improve soon,” one of Sudani’s advisers told MEE.

“The pressures are increasing and the situation will get worse if the government does not take decisive measures to contain the crisis. The problem is that the options available are very limited and need time,” he said.

The Iraqi parliament has not yet approved the annual budget for 2023, but the amounts allocated for salaries and compensation in the proposed budget, which must be paid in local currency, amount to about 100 trillion dinars ($68bn).

The senior official at the Central Bank told MEE that the bank currently holds about 83 trillion dinars ($56bn), and that quick solutions were needed.

“This does not bode well, and we cannot relax,” he said.

“The foreign currency auction window is our primary means to call up the Iraqi currency, so if auction sales remain low, the Central Bank will have to issue a new edition of the local currency.”

Devaluation risk

Issuing a new edition of the currency would reduce the value of the dinar and further raise the rate of inflation, officials told MEE.

During their meeting with Sudani and Ghaleb, the leaders of the Coordination Framework rejected the governor’s proposal to issue a new edition of the dinar “as it is a risk that will add new burdens on the shoulders of the government and the citizen”, one of the attendees told MEE.

Instead, they urged Sudani and Ghaleb to go to Washington to seek to negotiate a six-month grace period before new measures are brought into force, to allow the government and the Central Bank “to be prepared”.

They also called for audits imposed by the Federal Reserve to be relaxed, for procedures for external money transfers to be quicker, for an increase in the number of official dollar sale outlets, and for tighter controls on dollar smuggling through the Kurdish autonomous region of northern Iraq.

“We know that the new measures strengthen the Iraqi economy despite the great pressure it places on everyone, but this will not last for a long time and they will limit corruption in the currency auction,” the leader told MEE.

“The leaders know that private banks and the foreign currency auction represent the infrastructure of major corruption networks in Iraq, so they agreed that fighting corruption will only be achieved by addressing this issue.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from The Economic Collapse

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Iraq: US Dollar-smuggling Crackdown Leaves Baghdad Struggling to Pay Wages
  • Tags: ,

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The US has expanded its training of the Taiwanese military to include a program involving the US National Guard, Nikkei Asia reported on Thursday.

A source told Nikkei that the training began sometime before spring 2022. In May 2022, Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen announced cooperation with the National Guard while hosting Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) in Taipei.

“The US Department of Defense is now proactively planning cooperation between the US National Guard and Taiwan’s defense forces,” Tsai said. “We look forward to closer and deeper Taiwan-US cooperation on matters of regional security.”

The report said that the training already began before Tsai made the announcement during Duckworth’s visit. Since the training started, the National Guard has trained Taiwanese troops in both Taiwan and inside the US.

National Guard training overseas typically involves a unit from a single state, but the report said the training in Taiwan involves units from multiple US states, including Hawaii. The US and Taiwan rarely acknowledge their military cooperation, and a Pentagon spokesman declined to comment on the National Guard Training.

“We don’t have a comment on specific operations, engagements or training, but I would highlight that our support for, and defense relationship with, Taiwan remains aligned against the current threat posed by the People’s Republic of China,” the Pentagon told Nikkei.

In October 2021, The Wall Street Journal reported that a US special operations unit and a contingent of Marines were in Taiwan and had been training Taipei’s military for at least a year. Tsai later confirmed the report, marking the first time a Taiwanese leader acknowledged a US military presence in Taiwan since Washington severed diplomatic relations with Taipei in 1979.

The growing US-Taiwan military ties anger Beijing, which views the policies as an affront to the one-China policy. The 2023 National Defense Authorization Act President Biden recently signed into law includes measures to increase US and Taiwanese military cooperation even more.

The US is also encouraging Japan’s military buildup and is planning to expand its military facilities in the Philippines as part of its effort to counter China in the region. The top US Marine Corps general in Japan described the effort as “setting the theater” and said the US did something similar in Ukraine starting in 2014, after the US-backed coup that deposed former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.

The US launched a similar National Guard training program for Ukraine in 2014, known as Joint Multinational Training Group-Ukraine, that rotated through units from different states. US military officials said 23,000 Ukrainians were trained under the program. The US withdrew its National Guard troops from Ukraine shortly before Russia’s invasion.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

Featured image is from OneWorld

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US Expands Training of Taiwanese Military with National Guard

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

 

 

The Washington Post revealed in a bombshell Thursday evening report that CIA Director William Burns made a secret trip to Ukraine’s capital last week to give a personal briefing to President Volodymyr Zelensky on what can be expected from Russian military strategy and Putin’s likely vision for the war in the weeks and months ahead.

“Director Burns traveled to Kyiv where he met with Ukrainian intelligence counterparts as well as President Zelensky and reinforced our continued support for Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression,” one US official confirmed to thePost.

While in prior months, particularly the summer, it might have been expected that such a high level trip by the head of America’s top intelligence agency to Kiev might have had as top of the agenda discussion of ways forward for negotiated peace, increasingly Washington is talking a “win” – or at least enough clear battlefield leverage for Ukraine to come away with victory at a future negotiating table. Part of this is the current push to get heavier US and NATO weaponry to Ukraine as fast as possible.

Crucially, there’s no mention in WaPo’s coverage of the Burns trip that opening a pathway for ceasefire talks was at all a point of discussion with Zelensky. This as the bloody battle for Bakhmut reportedly is resulting in immense casualties for both sides.

Instead, “Top of mind for Zelensky and his senior intelligence officials during the meeting was how long Ukraine could expect U.S. and Western assistance to continue following Republicans’ takeover of the House and a drop-off in support of Ukraine aid among parts of the U.S. electorate, said people familiar with the meeting,” the Post writes. And importantly:

“Burns emphasized the urgency of the moment on the battlefield and acknowledged that at some point assistance would be harder to come by, the people said.”

Currently the Biden administration is finalizing another some $2.6 billion in military aid to Ukraine. Though it will include a reported 100 Stryker combat vehicles and at least 50 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, the US is expected to continue refusing to send M1 Abrams tanks.

On Wednesday the White House’s undersecretary of defense for policy Colin Kahl presented this as based on specific battlefield strategy. “What we’re trying to look at is the mix of armored and mechanized forces that make sense,” he said, explaining that “The Russians are really digging in. …They’re digging trenches, they’re putting in these dragon’s teeth, laying mines. They’re really trying to fortify that that FLOT, that forward line of troops.” Kahl continued.

“To enable the Ukrainians to break through given Russian defenses, the emphasis has been shifted to enabling them to combine fire and maneuver in a way that will prove to be more effective,” Kahl added.

Likely, Burns’ briefing to the Ukrainians emphasized this. As for the reference to Burns reportedly informing Zelensky that at some point assistance would be harder to come by, this suggests the US still doesn’t see Ukraine’s path forward as one of an outright military “win” involving the regaining of all pre-Feb.24 territory, but instead would reflect something more like what the CIA director said in a PBS interview last month…

Most conflicts end in negotiations, but that requires a seriousness on the part of the Russians in this instance that I don’t think we see,” Burns said at the time. “At least, it’s not our assessment that the Russians are serious at this point about a real negotiation.” Thus for the time being it’s all about battlefield leverage to gain the most spoils whenever that final negotiated settlement does come. But then again the ‘alternative’ is a major great power war, which the world may already be witnessing the beginnings of.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Ukrainian government will be deeply disappointed that the meeting of Western defense chiefs at Ramstein air base in Germany did not agree to give German-made Leopard 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine. The countries represented at the meeting, however, did promise to send a disparate collection of other arms. The United States has pledged an extra 59 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles and 90 Stryker light armored personnel carriers. Other countries are supplying artillery, ammunition, and anti-aircraft weapons.

Today’s announcement brings the U.S. share up to nearly $27 billion over the course of the last year.

Germany, however, continues to refuse to send the Leopard tanks or to allow other countries that have previously bought the tanks (under conditions that require German permission for re-export) to do so. The Polish government has strongly condemned Berlin’s hesitation.

The German government has said that it will not do so unless the United States sends its own Abrams tanks (though the Biden administration has denied that this is a German condition). This the Biden administration has refused to do, citing the complex nature of the Abrams, the need for intense and specialized maintenance, and the length of time it would take to train the Ukrainians in their use. The objection has also been raised that supplying Ukraine with several different kinds of tanks, in addition to its original Soviet armor, would only cause confusion and inefficiency.

Britain is sending 14 Challenger tanks to Ukraine, and France is considering whether to send its Leclerc tanks. Given the limited size of European armored forces, the numbers of these available for supply to Ukraine by each country are very limited. The point about Germany supplying Leopards and allowing other NATO states to do so is that the Leopard is used by several different NATO armies, and so, if each supplies a limited number, that would still add up to a sizeable force — even if well short of the 300 tanks that Ukraine has requested. The Polish government has threatened that it might supply Leopards to Ukraine without Berlin’s permission, but that would put at risk its own future supply of spare parts from Germany.

In the end, the U.S. and German decisions on whether or not to send the tanks is not technical, but political. The Russian government has declared that NATO’s despatch of tanks would be a drastic escalation that would trigger unspecified but “unambiguously negative” consequences. “Potentially, this is extremely dangerous,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov warned. “It will mean bringing the conflict to a whole new level which, of course, will not bode well from the point of view of global and pan-European security.”

The problem presented by this decision for NATO as an alliance, and for the U.S., German and French governments in particular, is that they do not actually know what they want in Ukraine. They have pledged to help Ukraine win, but have not decided what “victory” means. The Ukrainian, Polish, and Baltic governments know. They want the complete defeat of Russia, the reconquest of all the territory lost by Ukraine since 2014, and preferably the overthrow of the Putin regime and the break-up of the Russian state.

For cooler heads in Berlin, Paris, and Washington, this is a likely path to a NATO-Russia war and the possibility of mutual nuclear annihilation. Thus, the Biden administration is now being quoted as saying that it wishes Ukraine to be able to credibly threaten to take Crimea (which most Russians and most Crimeans regard as Russian territory that must be defended at all costs). At the same time, administration officials insist that this threat is intended to divert Russian troops, bring Russia to the negotiating table and make it willing to compromise, rather than to encourage Ukraine to actually attack Crimea. This is to put it mildly a complicated position, and a very difficult and dangerous line to negotiate — depending, as it would, on being able at a given point to persuade the Ukrainian army to stop.

As to the German government, it is caught between hostility toward Russia and respect for East European views held by many of its elites, and the deep inherited dread of European war and fear of economic depression among many ordinary Germans. In addition, generations of reliance on the United States in security issues have left Germany with neither the experience nor the will to undertake independent initiatives on critical international issues. A generous critic would say that, in its hesitation to give unconditional aid to Ukraine, the German government is simply responding to the deeply divided feelings of the German electorate. An unkind critic would quote Alexander Pope: “Willing to wound, but afraid to strike.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from The Libertarian Institute

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said that global “digital infrastructures” are needed to monitor who is vaccinated as he predicted a “slew” of new vaccines to be introduced to the world in the next few years.

Appearing at the annual World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland, Iraq War architect and former Labour Party Prime Minister Tony Blair said that even though the Chinese coronavirus has subsided in the public mind, governments must continue to develop digital tracking systems for vaccines, including for unspecified jabs for the “world’s most dangerous diseases”.

“You need the data, you need to know who has been vaccinated and who hasn’t been. Some of the vaccines that come online will be multiple shots… so you’ve got to have a proper digital infrastructure and most countries don’t have that,” the former British prime minister said.

“I think there is a huge impetus for a national digital infrastructure, digitisation in healthcare is one of the great game changers, we should be helping countries develop a national digital infrastructure, which they will need with these new vaccines,” he added, revealing that he has been lobbying the G20 nations to adopt this approach.

Mr Blair lamented that the coronavirus is largely seen as a “rearview mirror” issue in the halls of power, but he said that the focus could be kept up by relaying to politicians that “we are going to have a whole new slew of new vaccines, injectables that are going to deal with some of the worst diseases in the world that give us the opportunity to make big changes in the health of the world.”

“If you want the politicians to focus, they need to think, this is coming down the track soon, because if you tell them about a future pandemic, they will go ‘someone else’s problem’, but you tell them in the next few years you are going to have an opportunity to make a big difference in the health of your population that will focus them.”

Responding to Mr Blair’s comments during his GB News prime time news programme, Brexit’s Nigel Farage said:

“He wants us to have multiple shots and for all of it to be digitised so the state knows exactly what our status is, pure evil!”

From the early days of the Wuhan virus crisis, Mr Blair injected himself into the mix, calling for a globalist wish list to be enacted to supposedly slow the spread of Covid.

Just weeks after the first lockdown was put in place in Britain in 2020, Blair repurposed his think tank to focus on the pandemic, announcing that he has teams “embedded in governments around the world“.

Blair’s think tank would go on to call for “dramatically increased technological surveillance,” saying it would be “a price worth paying” to confront the virus.

The former prime minister has also been a keen advocate for people to take the Chinese coronavirus vaccinations, even going so far as to say that those who refuse to take the jab are acting like “idiots”.

Despite the lower risk to children for the virus, The Tony Blair Institute also drew criticism for calling for vaccines to be forced onto youngsters, including those of nursery school age.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on ‘Pure Evil’ — Tony Blair Calls for Digital Vaccine Tracking at Davos Ahead of ‘New Slew of Injectables’

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Over a million French workers and students participated in a general strike on January 19 demanding that the proposed pension reforms drafted by President Emmanuel Macron be halted.

The bill to be voted on in the French Assembly would raise the retirement age from 62 to 64 while increasing the level of contributions into the pension system by employees.

Demonstrations were held across the country with the largest taking place in Paris where hundreds of thousands marched in protest against the Macron program of neo-liberalism which is seeking to burden workers amid an inflationary spiral and energy crisis not experienced in decades. In solidarity with the trade unions, students from high schools and universities joined the strike and marches as well.

This nationwide industrial action came just three months after a strike within the oil industry where trade unions responded to the hardships resulting from the rise in the costs of living including heating and transportation costs. Macron, who won re-election during 2022, gained the votes of many workers due to the fear surrounding the campaign of far-right political leader Marine Le Pen. Nonetheless, despite the continuation of Macron’s tenure in the presidency, workers are facing the prospects of a precipitously decline in living standards.

The social situation in France resembles the crisis which has grown rapidly throughout the western capitalist states. The post-pandemic slump in economic growth threatening recession, coupled with the often unstated and negative consequences of the exponential climb in military spending to maintain the Ukraine war against the Russian Federation, has spawned a global spike in energy prices and other consumer goods.

Unions within the energy sector played an important role in the recent manifestation. The French daily Le Monde noted that:

“On January 19, employees of the electricity and gas industries responded en masse. Within the main electric company EDF, 44.5% of workers were on strike at midday, according to management. The number was 40% at the gas company Engie (formerly GDF Suez), and 52% and 41.4% according to its subsidiaries GRTgaz and GRDF. Finally, in the oil industries branch, the strike reached even higher rates: from 70% to even 100% in some refineries of the TotalEnergies group, said the CGT union.”

Public schools were impacted by the general strike with some buildings closing completely as both teachers and students responded to the call for a work stoppage. Railway lines locally and regionally were largely ground to a standstill.

Theaters and other public facilities were closed due to the strike. Public television and radio outlets went silent during large parts of the day in solidarity with the nationwide efforts against the pension reforms.

By and large the demonstrations were peaceful. However, in Paris 30 people were reported arrested in clashes with police before and during the demonstrations. Merchants boarded up their businesses and some were subject to broken windows and other forms of property damage.

Several people were injured during the demonstrations on January 19. One engineer who lives in the French-controlled island of Guadeloupe in the Caribbean, while photographing the events in Paris, was attacked by the police causing serious damage requiring surgery. His lawyer has filed a complaint against the police services which responded by saying the injury occurred within the context of violent demonstrations in the city.

The severity of the plight of French workers and youth was articulated by a number of union leaders and leftists inside the country. The one-day strike brought together a broad spectrum of organizations represented by 8 major unions and five student organizations.

Guardian correspondent Angelique Chrisafis noted in a report on January 19:

“Philippe Martinez, head of the CGT union, told the broadcaster Public Senat that the planned pension change ‘bundles together everyone’s dissatisfaction’ with the government. He said the rare united front among workers’ representatives showed the problem was very serious. He called the pension changes ‘unjust … dogmatic and ideological’. Laurent Berger, the head of France’s largest union, the moderate CFDT, told BFMTV: ‘There is a lot of anger.’ The pension changes still need to go through parliament, where Macron’s centrist grouping has lost its absolute majority. The government is hoping to pass the bill swiftly with the support of lawmakers from the rightwing Les Républicains.”

Macron has maintained that the pension reforms are necessary to maintain the solvency of the retirement system. The president claims that the reforms are part and parcel of his mandate emanating from the 2022 elections. However, the majority of workers who voted for Macron were not doing so in order for the French government to reduce their pension benefits.

The French Labor Ministry’s position is that the reforms would keep the public pension system from going deeper into debt. Labor Minister Olivier Dussopt told the LCI Television that the reforms were absolutely indispensable and fair to the workers. According to the Labor Ministry, delaying the age of retirement while at the same time extending periods for workers to pay into the system, would add 17.7 billion euros (approximately 18 billion US dollars) to the system purportedly ending its deficit by 2027.

Can the Alliance Remain United to Fight for the Interests of the Workers and Youth?

There was a debate which emerged after the January 19 actions as to the next steps in the struggle to defeat Macron’s pension reforms. On that same evening, 13 organizations representing eight unions and five student organizations met in order to map out a strategy for the coming period.

The General Confederation of Trade Union (CGT) called for daily actions between January 20 and the 31st when the draft measure is presented to the French Council of Ministers. This proposal could not get unanimity and was not adopted by the coalition.

Others called for mobilizations on January 23 as a continuation of the pressure exerted four days before. It appears as if January 31 has been agreed upon as another day of strikes and mass actions.

Nonetheless, unions are continuing to put forward other forms of industrial actions extending into early February. In addition, 600,000 people have signed an online petition opposing the pension reforms.

The coalition of forces which organized the general strike said that the turn out far exceeded their expectations. Not only did the workers and youth flood the streets of Paris, medium-sized and small cities were shaken by the mass character of the demonstrations with 3,000 marching in Dole, central France, and approximately 1,500 in Chaumont, in the eastern region of France.

Le Monde in a report on the aftermath of the general strike pointed out:

“In some sectors, the situation could even further escalate. The national federation of the CGT for the chemical industry called for a 48-hour strike, starting on January 26, and a 72-hour strike, starting on February 6. Workers could also be asked to ‘shut down refining facilities.’

‘We are fully aware that one day will not be enough to make the government back down,’ said Eric Sellini, a CGT representative at TotalEnergies, on BFM-TV last week, acknowledging that fuel supplies to petrol stations could be affected.”

International Significance of the French General Strike

These developments in France, one of the leading capitalist states in Western Europe and internationally, portends much for the worsening crisis impacting the working class and impoverished around the globe. As the United States administration of President Joe Biden pushes his militarist program for war in Ukraine against the Russian Federation combined with further hostility towards the People’s Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Iran, resources for funding pension systems and social benefits gained by the unions over the last eight decades will be diminished.

France, being a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), has become involved in the Ukraine situation due to the imposition of unprecedented sanctions against Moscow and the constant supply of resources for military purposes. As the NATO project in Ukraine requires greater commitment in regard to providing weapons to the Zelensky administration, the energy shortages and increasing inflation will undoubtedly have a disproportionate impact on working people.

The link between the economic downturn and the expanding military budgets within the imperialist states should be raised by the French workers in order to provide a clearer picture of the contemporary situation. In the 21st century, the incompatibility of high military spending and rising living standards among the workers has been fully exposed. In order to ensure the social gains of the working class and its further progress, a struggle against the capitalist system and its wars of conquest must become a central focus of the movement against austerity.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: French united front during general strike on Jan. 19, 2023 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

The Myth of Pandemic Preparedness

January 22nd, 2023 by Dr. Meryl Nass

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The entire WHO effort is based on the false assumption that pandemic preparedness would actually work. But in fact, all it has done is create new pandemics.

The history of pandemic preparedness

1. The two most recent WHO-declared Public Health Emergencies of International Concern (PHEICs), for SARS-CoV-2 and Monkeypox, were both caused by lab-created viruses, based on many careful analyses of their genomes.

2. There is no evidence that pandemic preparedness ever benefited anyone but the biodefense/ pandemic preparedness industry, and substantial evidence that it led to the creation of the COVID pandemic.

3. The House Democrat majority staff report, “Preparing for and preventing the next public health emergency” echoes the WHO’s proposed Amendments to the International Health Regulations. Which implies the US is behind the changes or is working in cahoots with the WHO to effect them.

4. The Global Preparedness Monitoring Board has also geared up to push the identical program as the WHO:  Surveillance, One Health, and Investment—”all topics that the GPMB has long recognised are crucial for the advancement of resilient pandemic preparedness mechanisms.”

5. The G20 nations agreed last April to a $50 Billion dollar price tag for global pandemic preparedness. But other estimates range as high as $200 Billion dollars to build out the infrastructure, and much more to maintain it.

6. The Globalist agenda is out in the open for all to see.

The pandemic preparedness concept is based on fantasy; it is a dangerous money grab for a new and rapacious bio-defense industry. Since 2001’s anthrax letters to Congress and the media, the US government has spent about $150 billion on pandemic preparedness. But what did it buy?

  • Many more high-containment BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs,
  • 15,000 new scientists trained to research biowarfare pathogens,
  • Poorly tested drugs, tests, ventilators and vaccines for which the manufacturers had zero liability,
  • More corruption and more pork for politicians to distribute,
  • Nathan Wolfe’s company Metabiota:  biolabs in Ukraine, squire to Ghislaine Maxwell, funding by Hunter Biden’s investment group Rosemont Seneca, hunting of lethal viruses
  • Peter Daszak’s ‘nonprofit’ EcoHealth Alliance that collected dangerous viruses from over 30 countries to bring to the US’ Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DOD’s DTRA) for further investigation
  • Extremely dangerous anthrax, smallpox/monkeypox and COVID vaccines that all had their liability waived
  • The dangerous COVID drug paxlovid, which led to relapses of COVID in President Biden, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky and NIAID Director and Presidential COVID adviser Anthony Fauci and millions of Americans, presumably prolonging their infectiousness and causing more cases of COVID
  • The dangerous COVID drug molnupiravir, which causes mutations, may cause cancer, and enhances the ability of COVID viruses to mutate
  • Expensive new federal agencies such as ASPR and BARDA in DHHS; subagencies within DHS and within DOD, including CISA, the cybersecurity infrastructure security agency in charge of censorship; and new funding streams to the NIH
  • Creating the One Health concept, which includes everything in the world (humans, livestock, wildlife, plants, ecosystems, fish and oceans) as determinants of health—all of which can be manipulated under the rubric of achieving the highest possible level of health. For instance, if your village is located near bat caves, it will have to move, as the villagers might otherwise become vectors of a bat-derived pandemic.
  • An excuse to censor alternate medical/scientific views and crank up surveillance despite legal prohibitions against doing so.

Where are we now?

Under the guise of pandemic preparedness an industry was built out, fortunes were made, and new lethal viruses and other microorganisms were discovered or created.

A panoply of pandemics and accompanying WHO pandemic declarations have rolled out, one after the other, one scarcely ending before the next appears: 2009 swine flu, 2014 Ebola, 2016 Zika, 2018 Ebola, 2020 COVID, 2022 Monkeypox.

The world has been conditioned to live in fear of contagion, and to trade freedom of movement for the hope that government, with its increasingly demanding edicts, will provide protection.

But all these epidemics, with the possible exception of Ebola, waxed and waned in the normal way they would. COVID’s initial trajectory was slowed by strict lockdown, but eventually everyone was exposed, and now virtually everyone has a degree of immunity, partial for most. Slowing it down was supposed to buy time to develop effective drugs and vaccines.

But instead, our governments rolled out useless and dangerous drugs and vaccines, and aggressively suppressed cheap, off-patent and effective early treatment drugs. Eventually, after three years of mutating, COVID’s virulence has been reduced to a mild flu or cold for most people. And essentially every pandemic policy imposed by the government was counterproductive. The resulting halt to much of the US and world’s economic activity has now ushered in the Great Inflationary Recession.

Where do we go from here?

Don’t allow the US government, other governments, and certainly not the chronically corrupt, ineffective, expensive and frankly, embarrassing parody of a health agency to run the medical care of 194 nations whenever its Director-General cares to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. He declares another one every couple of years, after all.

We must exit the WHO, defund the WHO, and get out from under all the multinational organizations that are trying to corral and control the people of the world, and all the world’s resources, through declaring pandemics and imposing solutions that never worked, weren’t meant to work, and that no thinking person wants.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Meryl Nass, M.D., ABIM, is an internist with special interests in vaccine-induced illnesses, chronic fatigue syndrome, Gulf War illness, fibromyalgia and toxicology. She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

South Korea has no independent agency when it comes to this sensitive subject since it’s unrealistic to expect it to defy Washington’s will by going forward with a nuclear weapons program without its military patron’s permission.

CNN is perhaps the most pro-Democrat Mainstream Media (MSM) outlet in the world, which is why it’s curious that one of its recent articles implied that the Biden Administration has failed to secure South Korea’s trust in the US’ mutual defense commitments to that country. In their article asking “Why are South Koreans losing faith in America’s nuclear umbrella?”, Seoul-based international correspondent Paula Hancocks claimed that her host’s society doubts that Washington would really protect it.

The Republic Of Korea Mustn’t Obtain Nuclear Weapons No Matter What” because this could trigger an uncontrollable nuclear arms race, which the writer herself admittedly also acknowledges in her article, yet Hancocks’ piece nevertheless still serves to justify that country’s nuclear ambitions. In fact, it’s arguably a very clever psychological operation intended to make it seem like this scenario is beyond the US’ control and might very well be a fait accompli even though neither are truly the case.

South Korea has no independent agency when it comes to this sensitive subject since it’s unrealistic to expect it to defy Washington’s will by going forward with a nuclear weapons program without its military patron’s permission. Rather, what appears to be happening after President Yoon Suk-yeol’s shocking declaration of this intent earlier in the month (which he subsequently walked back though his words were unconvincing) is that the MSM is now preconditioning the public to expect this scenario.

To that end, CNN is taking the lead with its latest front page article explaining why Seoul might supposedly defy the US by independently developing up to 4,000 nuclear weapons in response to alleged public pressure generated by supposed doubts over Washington’s mutual defense commitments. This angle is meant to artificially manufacture the false narrative that South Korea’s nuclear weapons program would be aligned with so-called “democratic values”.

There are several reasons not to take CNN’s piece at face value.

First, as was earlier mentioned, it’s perhaps the most pro-Democrat MSM outlet in the world so it comes off as insincere that Hancocks claims that Biden failed to secure South Korea’s trust in his declining unipolar hegemon’s mutual defense commitments.

Second, although she attempts to strike a balance between pros and cons in her article, she’s clearly implying in her piece that Seoul’s nuclear ambitions are justified.

Third, the purpose behind this psy-op is to proactively manipulate Western perceptions on this sensitive issue, particularly with respect to making it seem like the US wouldn’t be involved in this scenario even though it’s unrealistic to expect that Washington wouldn’t have a hand in it. Fourth, this “plausible deniability” is intended to help the US “save face” in the increasingly probable event that South Korea violates the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty (NPT) by deciding to develop nuclear weapons.

And fifth, all of this is aligned with the US’ “Lead From Behind” stratagem of supporting some of its regional vassals’ aggressive ambitions in order for them to “share the burden” of containing multipolar leaders like Russia and China, exactly as it’s presently doing with Germany and Japan respectively. South Korea figures into this model since it’s the US’ top mainland outpost in Asia, hence why the sequence of destabilizing events that Washington is encouraging Seoul to catalyze should be followed very closely.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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.

***

In November 2022, Saudi Arabia formally changed its stance on Syria. Saudi Arabia is the political powerhouse of the Middle East, and often shares positions on foreign policy and international issues with the UAE, which has previously re-opened their embassy in Damascus.

“The kingdom is keen to maintain Syria’s security and stability and supports all efforts aimed at finding a political solution to the Syrian crisis,” Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan told the November Arab League summit in Algeria.

Syria was suspended from the Arab League in 2011 following the outbreak of conflict instigated by the US, and portrayed in western media as a popular uprising of pro-democracy protesters.

Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit said,

“The developments in Syria still require a pioneering Arab effort. It is necessary to show flexibility from all parties so that the economic collapse and political blockage can be dispelled. Syria must engage in its natural Arab environment.”

The next Arab League summit will be held in Saudi Arabia, and there is a possibility of Syria once again taking its seat at the round table.

On January 16, the Syrian Foreign Ministry agreed to resume imports from Saudi Arabia after over a decade of strained relations, and Syria planned to import 10,000 tons of white sugar. This development signals a new beginning between the two countries.

Saudi and the Syrian tribes

The Arab tribes in the north east of Syria have traditionally had strong ties with Saudi Arabia, and have received support from the kingdom. The tribes have opposed the ethnic cleansing and forced displacement of Arab villages which the US-led YPG militia has conducted for years. Even though Saudi Arabia has been viewed as a US ally in the past, this has changed since the US military has supported the Marxist YPG who have oppressed Syrians who are not Kurdish.

The US occupied oil wells in north east Syria may come under attack by Arab tribes who are demanding their homes, farms and businesses back from the US-supported YPG.  Some analysts foresee the US troops pulling out of Syria after the Kurds find a political solution with Damascus.

Turkey and Syria repair relationship

Turkey and Syria have begun steps to repair their relationship, which ended after Turkey supported the US-NATO attack on Syria for regime change, and hosted the CIA operations room funneling weapons and terrorists into Syria, under the Obama administration.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad demanded recently the withdrawal of Turkish troops from Syria to begin to repair the relationship.

Russia is brokering the reconciliation between Erdogan and Assad, which began with the Moscow hosted meeting of the three defense ministers, and a meeting between the three foreign ministers is upcoming.

The developments between Turkey and Syria are being watched by Iran. Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian said his country was “happy with the dialogue taking place between Syria and Turkey.” Amirabdollahian will travel to Damascus on Saturday for talks with Syrian Foreign Minister Mekdad.

Iran is looking to establish a new role in the recovery process in Syria. President Ebrahim Raisi will visit both Turkey and Syria soon, his first visit to Turkey since taking office two years ago.  While analysts see Saudi Arabia and Iran as antagonists, some feel the kingdom will ultimately realize they have to work with Iran in Syria and Lebanon.  Iran is part of the region and can’t be excluded from the geo-political sphere.

Saudi Arabian reforms 

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) said on April 27, 2021 that the country was undergoing a sweeping reform which would restructure the role of religion in Saudi politics and society.  The process began a few years before he became crown prince, but under his leadership it has accelerated. Islamic institutions in the Kingdom have seen changes in procedure, personnel, and jurisdiction.  All of these reforms are in line with the future vision of the country.

Some analysts feel the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1960s eventually gave rise to support for domestic religious institutions, and eventually led to funding of religious activities abroad, while religious leaders at home wielded power over public policy.

Vision 2030

Saudi King Salman, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, and his son, MBS have a plan for the country which is known as Vision 2030.  MBS is also Prime Minister and Chairman of the Council of Economic and Development Affairs.

The days of unlimited oil and markets are in the decline. Education, training, and employment opportunities are the stepping stones to building a thriving country and MBS is determined to plan for a long future of growth and innovation.

MBS

The Crown Prince is young and has new ideas.  He is instituting sweeping reforms to the society which have included more rights and freedoms for women. He has championed projects to place Saudi Arabia as a tourist destination, year round golf and soccer venue, and encouraged cultural arts such as musical productions. MBS is breaking the mold: no longer will Saudi Arabia be a breeding ground for Radical Islam.

Extremist preachers

Saudi Arabia had hosted many extremist preachers.  Some were featured on satellite TV channels located in Saudi Arabia, and others were local preachers, authors, or scholars.  Some had traveled abroad preaching in pulpits and exporting their hatred and sectarian bigotry.

One of the most famous preachers was Muhammed Al-Arifi, who has had an electronic surveillance device attached to him by Saudi intelligence agents, after they seized all of his social media accounts. His last tweet is said to be on May 6, 2019, when he had 20 million followers, and 24 million likes on Facebook, which ranked him as tenth in the Arab world and in the Middle East. The kingdom is shutting down clerics who are extreme.

In 2014, Great Britain banned Arifi from entering the UK following reports that was involved in radicalizing three young British citizens who went to Syria as terrorists.

A YouTube video in 2013 showed Arifi preaching in Egypt and prophesying the coming of the Islamic State.  Egyptian TV reported Arifi meeting with the former Muslim Brotherhood prime minister Hisham Qandil in his office.

Arifi is best remembered for his statement on the media Al Jazeera in which he called for jihad in Syria and supported Al Qaeda.

Adnan al-Arour is another extremist preacher who had appeared regularly on two Saudi-owned Salafist satellite channels. Arour was originally from Syria before settling in Saudi Arabia, and in the early days of the Syrian conflict he would stand up on camera, shake his finger, and called for his followers to ‘grind the flesh’ of an Islamic minority sect in Syria and ‘feed it to the dogs’.

These extremist preachers made it clear that the battles being waged in Syria had nothing to do with freedom or democracy, which the western media was pushing as the goal.  The truth was the conflict in Syria was a US-NATO attack for regime change and utilized terrorists following Radical Islam, who fought a sectarian war with the goal of establishing an Islamic State in Syria.

The previous Crown Prince

Muhammad bin Nayef Al Saud (MBN) served as the crown prince and first deputy prime minister of Saudi Arabia from 2015 to 2017.  On June 21, 2017 King Salman appointed his own son, MBS, as crown prince and relieved MBN of all positions.

MBN met with British Prime Minister David Cameron in January 2013. He then met with President Obama in Washington, on 14 January 2013. The discussion focused on the US-NATO attack on Syria and its support from Saudi Arabia.

In February 2014, MBN replaced Prince Bandar bin Sultan, then intelligence chief of Saudi Arabia, and was placed in charge of Saudi intelligence in Syria. Bandar had been in charge of supporting the US attack on Syria. Bandar had been trying to convince the US in 2012 that the Syrian government was using chemical weapons.  However, research has shown that the terrorists used chemical weapons to push Obama into a military invasion, based on his speech of ‘The Red Line’.

In March 2016, MBN was awarded Légion d’honneur by French President François Hollande, another partner in the US-NATO attack on Syria.

On February 10, 2017, the CIA granted its highest Medal to MBN and was handed to him by CIA director Mike Pompeo during a reception ceremony in Riyadh. MBN and Pompeo discussed Syria with Turkish officials, and said Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the US was “historic and strategic”.  Just months later in June MBS would depose MBN and strip him of powers, in a move considered to be “upending decades of royal custom and profoundly reordering the kingdom’s inner power structure”.

US diplomats argued that MBN was “the most pro-American minister in the Saudi Cabinet”. That is what brought MBN down. The days of blindly following the US directives are over in Saudi Arabia.  MBS has refused to bow down to Biden when he demanded an increase in oil production.  The Vision 2030 that MBS developed does not include financing failed wars in the Middle East for the benefit of the Oval Office. MBS has a strained relationship with Biden, and he wears it as a badge of honor.

Saudi role in the Syrian war

Saudi Arabia played a huge role in the large-scale supply of weapons and ammunition to various terrorist groups in Syria during the Syrian conflict.  Weapons purchased in Croatia were funneled through Jordan to the border town of Deraa, the epi-center of the Syrian conflict.

At the height of Saudi involvement in Syria, the kingdom had their own militia in Syria under the command of Zahran Alloush. The Jaysh al-Islam are remembered for parading women in cages through the Damascus countryside prior to massacring them.

In summer 2017, US President Donald Trump shut down the CIA operation ‘Timber Sycamore’ which had been arming the terrorists fighting in Syria. About the same time, Saudi Arabia cut off support to the Syrian opposition, which was the political arm of the terrorists.

Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6, expressed his view at the time that “Saudi Arabia is involved in the ISIS-led Sunni rebellion” in Syria.

Syria has been destroyed by the US and their allies who supported the attack beginning in 2011.  Now, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are looking to find a solution which will help the Syrian people to rebuild their lives.  Both Turkey and Saudi Arabia have turned away from past policies which found them supporting the conflict in Syria at the behest of the US.  There is a new Middle East emerging which makes its own policies and is not subservient US interests.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

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

Featured image is from MD

Ukraine War: When Good Refugees Turn Bad

January 22nd, 2023 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

 

When the first Russian forces began entering Ukrainian territory in February 2022, the instant reaction from Europe, the UK, Canada and Australia, was one of open commitment to Ukraine’s refugees.  The relentless human trains heading westwards were initially embraced by Poles, whose history with Ukraine is, at best, tense and sketchy.

Across Europe, walls came down in dispensation for this new type of refugee, tolerated and tolerable by the populists and the border security types, all summed up by comments from the Bulgarian Prime minister Kiril Petkov, who declared the fleeing Ukrainians “intelligent” and “educated people”.  They were certainly “Europeans” and were not like the “refugee wave we have been used to”, the sort packed with individuals with “unclear pasts [and] who could have been even terrorists.”  For a time, governments could distract attention from brutal border policies directed against swarthier irregular arrivals.

The enlarged spirit of generosity was also aided by the perpetrator of the attack: the West’s habitual bugbear, and the number of notably eastern and central European states that had anxiety aplenty about Russian territorial ambitions.  To date, estimates suggest that 7.9 million  people have fled the war, with 4.7 million registered under the European Union’s temporary-protection directive.

While such levels of generosity shown towards refugees were overflowing, clear exceptions were made towards others suffering from the conflict.  Other groups of refugees, be they of African, Indian and Middle Eastern background, found themselves facing rather different treatment at the Polish-Ukrainian border.  A number of accounts of obstructions and violence were reported, suggesting an arching attempt to aid Ukrainian refugees, and a distinct lack of enthusiasm for helping others.

The South African Department of International Relations and Cooperation, through its deputy director-general for public diplomacy, Clayson Monyela, expressed concern about how Africans “were actually, you know, put in different queues or lanes, if you want to call them that, but also at the back.  So, we had to intervene to ensure that our people are assisted to cross.”

The image of the exceptional Ukrainian refugee, to be welcomed rather than questioned and judged, has not been etched in stone.  For all the compassion and interest shown towards the millions who moved westwards, most in anticipation of returning, the effluxion of time has proved telling.

In anticipation of summer tourist arrivals, noble Bulgaria turned the tables on a number of Ukrainian refugees staying in out-of-season hotels.  In June last year, Minister of Tourism Hristo Prodanov, in noting that 56,000 refugees were being housed in such hotels, expressed his concern that these would have to be vacated for the tourist season.

The previous month, signs of irritation were evident in the Petkov government, with Deputy Prime Minister Kalina Konstantinova expressing the view that the hotels were a finite “luxurious experience”, and that the Ukrainians were getting increasingly demanding.  On June 2, Konstantinova apologised to all “Bulgarians and Ukrainians who felt offended by my words”.

The populists are showing growing discontent.  In some cases, such as the Polish nationalist Konfederacja (Confederation), which argues that Poland is being increasingly “de-Polonised”, they are dismissed as insignificant squeaks in the political landscape.  The narrative of privileged Ukrainian refugees thriving as patriots suffer is, however, one that is not going away.

The steep spike in the cost of living, helped by eye watering rises in energy prices, has aided the curdling of kindness.  In September, Friedrich Merz, Germany’s leader of the opposition centre-right Christian Democrats (CDU), told Bild TV that Ukrainians had begun specialising in a form of “welfare tourism”.  “What we’re seeing is welfare tourism on the part of these refugees to Germany, back to Ukraine, back to Germany, back to Ukraine.”

While not specifying a number of how many were actually engaged in such opportunistic practice, he could only conclude that it was “large”.  Germany’s thorough bureaucratic counters have tended to overlook such figures, whether by accident or design.

The concern from Merz was a traditional one about the uses of welfare and what motivates its grant.  It was “unfair and the population has a right to consider it unfair” that the homes for refugees and German welfare recipients be generously heated while working class Germans struggled with energy costs. While Merz subsequently apologised for his remarks, the sentiment was out of the bag and running through the ranks.

In October, thousands of Czechs gathered in the capital to protest against the centre-right government, demanding an early election and discussions with Russia regarding gas supplies for the winter ahead.  Ukrainian concerns were far from the mind of event organiser Ladislav Vrabel.  “This is a new national revival and its goal is for the Czech Republic to be independent.”

These movements do not augur well for the bleeding hearts of Ukraine’s refugees.  With some alarm, an article from Social Europe reads like a dispatch from a public relations bureau.  Anything negative regarding the refugees from Ukraine must be countered.  These are all due to “Russian disinformation”.  Populist parties must also be confronted and corrected.  “European politicians,” the authors argue, “should shape the debate around Ukrainian refugees.”

The conflict shows no promise of abating in the new year, though there are murmurings about an eventual compromise that is bound to agitate all parties.  Till then, more criticism is bound to emerge from states hosting large numbers of refugees previously admired as victims of Russian aggression in need of protection.  Not all of it will be fed by Russian misinformation, and not all will be populists hugging the fringes of lunatic inspiration.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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. Email: [email protected]

Featured image: Ukrainian refugees arriving in Przemyśl in Poland (Licensed under CC BY 2.0)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Ukraine War: When Good Refugees Turn Bad

Orthodox Bishop Denounces Ukrainian Crimes at UNSC

January 22nd, 2023 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Russian Orthodox Church went to the UN to denounce Ukrainian crimes. At a meeting of the Security Council on January 17, invited by the Russian diplomatic representation at the UN, an Orthodox bishop linked to the Moscow Patriarchate commented on the situation of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine in the face of the persecutions imposed by the Kiev’s neo-Nazi regime. This was the first time that a representative of the Orthodox clergy has addressed to the UNSC.

The bishop chosen for the interaction was Chairman of the Department of External Relations of the Church of the Patriarchate of Moscow, Metropolitan of Volokolamsk, Anthony. He made it clear to all diplomats of the UNSC that the Orthodox Church is currently experiencing serious political and religious oppression under the Ukrainian government. Metropolitan Anthony said that the Russians are “extremely concerned about the blatant violations of the universal and constitutional rights of Orthodox believers in Ukraine”.

The bishop exposed some shocking data about the Ukrainian reality. Due to the ban on Orthodoxy recently imposed by the Zelensky regime, thirteen Ukrainian bishops were actually deprived of their own Ukrainian citizenship. With this measure, the neo-Nazis intend to coerce the clergy to stop disobeying the dictatorial norms aimed at banning the Church. Currently, Ukrainian clerics are trying to resist the regime’s impositions, continuing to offer liturgical services and protecting local traditions.

However, if bishops continue to lose their nationality, they will certainly be forced into exile, which will further complicate the situation for Orthodox believers in Ukraine. The bishop also highlighted that these revocations of citizenship are decreed irregularly, without any legal procedure that legitimizes them, thus violating the country’s constitution.

Another data informed by him concerns the process of expropriation of the Russian Church. Metropolitan Anthony reported in his speech that last year alone 129 churches belonging to the Patriarchate of Moscow were captured by the Ukrainian regime’s agents. Part of these expropriated churches are then used for non-religious purposes, while others are given to the ultranationalist and non-canonical sect called “Patriarchate of Kiev”, which is widely supported by the Maidan Junta, as it adopts the anti-Russian neo-Nazi ideology of the Ukrainian state. It is important to remember that the Ukrainian Orthodox believers are canonically linked to the Patriarchate of Moscow, therefore these acts of the  Kiev regime is an attack against the religion of the Ukrainian people itself.

The head of foreign affairs of the Russian Church also emphasized the importance of understanding the current situation of the Church as a kind of mass political repression. He told the UNSC delegates that since last year the SBU (Ukrainian intelligence agency) agents constantly carry out violent operations in Orthodox churches, during which the clergy are publicly humiliated, and the temples desecrated. He compared the oppression suffered today with that of the early years of the Soviet Union.

These recent attacks have taken place officially, as the Ukrainian state has started a banning campaign against all institutions linked to Russia. However, illegally, since 2014 there has been strong persecution against the Orthodox Church in regions with an ethnic Russian majority. Neo-Nazi militias destroyed temples and killed clergy and believers in Donbass during hostilities against resistance forces. There are several photos and videos circulating on the internet showing the oppression to which the Orthodox Church has been subjected in Ukraine.

According to Metropolitan Anthony, since the Orthodox Church is the majority faith of both Russians and Ukrainians, it can serve as a basis for peaceful dialogue towards the end of hostilities. The recent Russian initiative, rejected by Kiev, to establish a temporary ceasefire during the Orthodox Christmas is an example of this. However, from the moment that one of the sides begins to deliberately oppress the Church, the possibility of dialogue ceases. Therefore, the international society must pay attention to the situation of the Church in Ukraine and demand changes in Kiev’s position.

Furthermore, the reports made by the bishop should also generate discussions in the western world, since it is unacceptable that the regime which promotes ethnic and religious persecution continues to receive money and weapons from the West. Although NATO has already made it clear several times that it has no humanitarian concern and that it is willing to do anything to “defeat” Russia, it is important that the costs of this war are known by Western public opinion.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant. You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

I have said this for a long time. The global elite hate you, they want to destroy your standard of living, and reduce you to a serf, a powerless and dispensable carbon emitter.

Freeland is safe behind a podium at the WEF. There are thousands of Swiss soldiers outside making sure outraged plebs don’t storm the castle.

This “honorable” woman (government sociopaths are always honorable), a fixture of the state, is on her tenth careerist term as deputy prime minister of Canada and “serves” as the minister of finance.

As minister of finance, there is no doubt she understands what a “pay cut” will do to the middle class.

Freeland obviously considers the American middle class useless and non-productive (unlike the factory slaves in China). Sure, their grandparents built America and toiled in factories and offices. However, Freeland and the neoliberal cartel believe it is high time to dismantle America and starve out those left in the wake of offshoring and the financial swindles that have further enriched the billionaire caste, a massive transfer (theft) of wealth that is slowly destroying the middle class.

Klaus Schwab, a student of war criminal Henry Kissinger, is a mentor to power-hungry and narcissistic sociopaths. The WEF “Great Reset” is designed to turn the world into an impoverished social concentration camp, where destitute serfs “own nothing” and this, in true Orwellian fashion, will set them free.

It’s not mentioned that the Schwab control freak system will shut down any opposition to unelected WEF apparatchiks. If you rent everything—your home, car, food, computer, etc.—that rental “privilege” can be taken away.

I challenge people to investigate the WEF’s Global Redesign Initiative. According to the Transnational Institute in the Netherlands, this “initiative” proposes

a transition away from intergovernmental decision-making towards a system of multi-stakeholder governance.   In other words, by stealth, they are marginalising a recognised model where we vote in governments who then negotiate treaties which are then ratified by our elected representatives with a model where a self-selected group of ‘stakeholders’ make decisions on our behalf. (Emphasis added.)

In other words, large transnational corporate “stakeholders” will be deciding where you live, what you eat (insects and weeds), how you reproduce (or not reproduce; children produce carbon emissions), and what you can “rent” from them, or not be allowed to rent if you complain about an unelected globalist “economic” cartel driving humanity into serfdom, worldwide poverty, and depopulation.

Chrystia Freeland is an enemy of humanity. She is a globalist misanthrope. In the above video, she revealed her utter contempt for the average man and woman. She is advocating harm, even death.

There is no other way to describe such a despicable misanthrope. No doubt her response would be entirely different if enraged serfs managed to overwhelm the Swiss military outside the luxury ski resort at Davos and rounded up the self-entitled WEF grandees and arranged a tribunal for economic crimes against humanity.

It won’t happen anytime soon.

Americans, Canadians, and Europeans are far too passive,  distracted, dumbed down, and willing to believe fictional narratives. If covid demonstrated anything, it is that indoctrinated people, fearful of death, will do whatever the government demands of them. It’s a template that will be repeated.

Well, at least the French retain some spunk. Macron wants to neoliberalize France’s pension system. This was the response to his proposal to negate a promise:

It really is too bad a million or more people are not marching up Landwasserstrasse to Davos to demonstrate opposition to the WEF cartel and its misanthropic global agenda.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Kurt Nimmo on Geopolitics.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The World Economic Forum (WEF) Calls for Destruction of America’s Middle Class

A sensationalist BBC report under the title: “Why is the Virus such a Threat” contends (quoting and misquoting “scientific opinion”) that the virus’ has a “hit and run killer evolutionary tactic” to spread the Covid-19 infection far and wide.  

Timely report published two weeks prior to the launching of the mRNA vaccine in November 2020. The objective of this BBC report was to generate fear throughout the UK as well as acceptance of the mRNA vaccine. 

The BBC Science Correspondent James Gallagher brings to the forefront the “authoritative voice” of Prof Lehner of Cambridge University, a Wellcome Trust Research Fellow and an Infectious Diseases Physician at Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge.

BBC Scientific Nonsense

A simple virus has brought life as we know it to a screeching halt. 

We have faced viral threats before, including pandemics, yet the world does not shut down for every new infection or flu season. 

So what is it about this coronavirus? What are the quirks of its biology that pose a unique threat to our bodies and our lives?

According to Lehner: In the early stages of an infection “the virus is able to deceive the body. …

It [the virus] behaves like a ‘hit and run’ killer

The amount of virus in our body begins to peak the day before we begin to get sick. …

But it takes at least a week before Covid progresses to the point where people need hospital treatment.

This is a really brilliant evolutionary tactic – you don’t go to bed, you go out and have a good time,” says Prof Lehner of Cambridge University. 

So the virus is like a dangerous driver fleeing the scenethe virus has moved on to the next victim long before we either recover or die.

In stark terms, “the virus doesn’t care” if you die, says [Cambridge] Prof Lehner, “this is a hit and run virus”.  ….

It does peculiar and unexpected things to the body (BBC, James Gallagher, October 22, 2020, emphasis added)

What rubbish! The BBC report personifies the killer virus, with a view to creating panic, quoting the incautious and irresponsible statements of a Cambridge scientist, who’s on the payroll of the Wellcome Trust.

V the Virus (rather than corrupt governments) is blamed for having “ordered the lockdown”.

Not only is this sensationalist report based on the results of the flawed PCR test which does not identify the Covid-SARS-2 virus, it also contradicts the official WHO definition of Covid-19:

“The most common symptoms of COVID-19 are fever, dry cough, and tiredness. … These symptoms are usually mild and begin gradually. Some people become infected but only have very mild symptoms. Most people (about 80%) recover from the disease without needing hospital treatment. Around 1 out of every 5 people who gets COVID-19 becomes seriously ill and develops difficulty breathing.”

From the outset, the BBC has relentlessly spread disinformation on the Covid MRNA vaccine, despite ample evidence of its devastating health impacts.


In recent developments (January 2023), in a live television appearance on the BBC, cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra 

“took the network by surprise when he made the “unprompted” suggestion that mRNA vaccines, such as the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, pose a cardiovascular risk.” (Child Health Defense)

The BBC then proceeded to Retract its TV interview with Dr. Malhotra. We’re sorry. He’s a vaccine skeptic.

“The BBC has apologized for not properly challenging the views of a vaccine skeptic, who claimed that Covid jabs cause heart damage during an interview on BBC News

Vaccine Skepticism. BBC exerts censorship regarding the official vaccine data pertaining to myocarditis, cardiovascular diseases, etc. not to mention the data of Pfizer’s confidential report on Covid vaccine related mortality and morbidity released under freedom of information in October 2021.

‘The vaccine was launched in mid-December 2020. By the end of February 2021, “Pfizer had already received more than 1,200 reports of deaths allegedly caused by the vaccine and tens of thousands of reported adverse events, including 23 cases of spontaneous abortions out of 270 pregnancies and more than 2,000 reports of cardiac disorders.”

The Personification of the Microscopic Virus

 While the BBC refuses to acknowledge the findings of Dr. Malhotra, it does not hesitate to quote or misquote a “silly” statement by a Cambridge Scientist:

Screenshot of BBC article

Video: Calls Mount to Halt COVID-19 Vaccination Drive

January 22nd, 2023 by Shabnam Mohamed

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

#eNCA speaks to Shabnam Mohamed from Transformative Health Justice.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Calls Mount to Halt COVID-19 Vaccination Drive
  • Tags:

L’Intera Europa Campo di Battaglia

January 21st, 2023 by Manlio Dinucci

La Federazione degli Scienziati Americani conferma in gennaio la notizia data da Grandangolo nel dicembre 2022 in base a un documento della US Air Force: l’aereo C-17A Globemaster è stato autorizzato a trasportare in Italia e altri paesi europei la bomba nucleare USA B61-12. Poiché funzionari dell’Amministrazione Biden avevano annunciato che l’invio delle B61-12 sarebbe stato anticipato a dicembre, noi riteniamo che le nuove bombe nucleari USA stiano già arrivando in Europa per essere schierate contro la Russia.

USA e NATO stanno riversando in Ucraina enormi quantità di munizioni per l’artiglieria pesante fornita alle forze armate di Kiev. Gli Stati Uniti – secondo i dati ufficiali – hanno finora inviato in Ucraina oltre un milione di munizioni per obici da 155 mm, più decine di migliaia di missili. Circa 300.000 proiettili provengono dai depositi militari USA in Israele. L’invio di armi è gestito da una rete internazionale, in cui svolge un ruolo centrale Camp Darby, il più grande arsenale USA fuori dalla madrepatria, collegato al porto di Livorno e all’aeroporto militare di Pisa. Gran Bretagna, Francia, Polonia e Finlandia stanno fornendo carrarmati a Kiev, e la Polonia sta acquistando dagli USA carroarmati Abrams una parte dei quali può essere destinata all’Ucraina.

Contemporaneamente USA e NATO stanno potenziando lo schieramento delle loro forze in Europa, sempre più a ridosso della Russia. In Romania la NATO ha dislocato aerei AWACS, dotati delle più sofisticate attrezzature elettroniche, tenuti costantemente in volo presso lo spazio aereo russo. Sempre in Romania il Pentagono ha schierato la 101esima Divisione Aviotrasportata, che viene dispiegata in Europa per la prima volta dalla Seconda Guerra Mondiale.

La NATO e la UE istituiscono “una task force sulla resilienza e le infrastrutture critiche”. “La NATO – dichiara il Consiglio dell’Unione Europea – rimane il fondamento della nostra difesa collettiva. Riconosciamo il valore di una Difesa europea più forte, che contribuisca alla sicurezza transatlantica e sia complementare e interoperabile con la NATO”.

Manlio Dinucci

Vidéo : https://www.byoblu.com/2023/01/20/lintera-europa-campo-di-battaglia-grandangolo-pangea/

India and NATO’s Indo-Pacific Plans

January 21st, 2023 by Andrew Korybko

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Some wrongly interpreted Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s words during Wednesday’s press conference as implying that he believes India will go along with NATO’s divide-and-rule scheme, but that’s not what he meant to convey. He as the Russian Foreign Minister knows better than anyone apart from President Vladimir Putin just how independent and sovereign India is nowadays.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov held a press conference on Wednesday reviewing the performance of his country’s diplomacy over the past year. He predictably covered a lot of topics in the process, but his warning about NATO’s Indo-Pacific plans is what understandably generated the most interest in South Asia. That’s because he raised awareness of that anti-Russian, and increasingly anti-Chinese, military bloc’s attempts to rope India into its schemes.

Here are the relevant excerpts of what he said from the official Russian Foreign Ministry transcript:

“NATO is not limited to organising life on the European continent. In June 2022, NATO’s Madrid Summit declared that the military bloc had a global commitment, specifically in relation of the Asia-Pacific region, which they call the Indo-Pacific region. It is clear that they are attempting to make overtures to India to create additional problems in its relations with China…The West is attempting to impose a bloc approach on the rest of the world, and Asia is a priority. Its ‘Indo-Pacific strategies,’ which are specially designed to drive as many wedges as possible in relations between India and China and involve India in the West’s schemes, are an obvious approach.”

Russia’s warning about NATO’s Indo-Pacific plans doesn’t mean that it thinks they’ll succeed, however.

Some wrongly interpreted Lavrov’s words as implying that he believes India will go along with this scheme, but that’s not what he meant to convey. He as the Russian Foreign Minister knows better than anyone apart from President Vladimir Putin just how independent and sovereign India is nowadays. Its multipolar leadership not only masterfully managed to resist unprecedented US pressure upon it over the past year, but also accelerated India’s rise as a globally significant Great Power during that time too.

Far from falling for NATO’s divide-and-rule Indo-Pacific plot, India valiantly resisted it.

While it’s true that ties with China remain complex, the military-strategic dynamics shaping their relations are independent of American meddling. There’s no doubt that this declining unipolar hegemon seeks to insert itself into their bilateral disputes exactly as Lavrov warned, but India continues to resist this since its leadership wisely knows that submitting to the US’ designs would inevitably result in the irreversible erosion of their Great Power’s hard-earned strategic autonomy.

That outcome is unacceptable for India, which will never sacrifice its own interests for anyone else.

India envisages itself leading the tripolar phase of the global systemic transition to multiplexity, which can’t be accomplished if it becomes a partisan player in the New Cold War. That explains why it’s so proudly flexed its strategic autonomy over the past year, which also serves to inspire its Global South peers to follow its lead with a view towards them all informally assembling a new Non-Aligned Movement (“Neo-NAM”) that can then function as the third pole of influence that India wants to build.

Taking NATO’s side against Russia and/or China would therefore doom India’s grand strategic goals.

With these calculations in mind, India virtually hosted the first-ever Global South Summit earlier this month, which reaffirmed its commitment to multipolarity. The entire world thus bore witness to the tangible progress that this rising Great Power is making in accelerating the global systemic transition after it succeeded in bringing this collection of countries together for that aforesaid tripolar purpose. NATO might still not give up trying to rope India into its schemes, but it’s obviously a waste of time.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The necessity and benefits of a broad natural diet are evident from Egyptian skeletal remains from 6000 years ago, which suggest scurvy—a disease resulting from a lack of vitamin C. In 1753 a Scottish surgeon, James Lind demonstrated that scurvy could be treated with citrus fruit. The New Zealand government seems intent on changing history.

Just before Christmas, our Government introduced the Therapeutic Products Bill for its first reading. Public consultation is being rushed through the summer holidays here in the southern hemisphere and closes on February 15th. The Bill contains 423 pages of dense provisions with countless cross references. I am not sure whether any MPs actually read it before voting for its acceptance or whether the public could stand to do so. You can view my video summary of its draconian provisions here.

You might be interested in the kind of nation we will end up inhabiting:

Reverse Patenting

If a Natural Health Product is found to benefit a serious illness (such as lemons which benefit scurvy), according to the Bill it should be classed as a medicine. Consequently, according to the letter of the new law, only doctors will be allowed to prescribe lemons. Joking apart, most foods benefit serious illness. You might think there is no need to pass a law classifying them as medicines, but according to the government you would be wrong.

80% of drugs are in fact derived from the properties of plants. For years pharmaceutical companies have been trying to patent medicinal plants and secure a monopoly of their supply and use. But this effort largely failed in the patent courts. The remedy for pharmaceutical companies is contained in the Bill being introduced by our Labour government. If a plant is used to make a medicine or the molecular structure of any of its compounds is mimicked by a medicine, then the use of the actual plant should be restricted.

For this reason, in 2016, a bevy of well-paid Ministry of Health experts (???) produced an idiotic list of common plants that they envisioned should be restricted. Natural products in this list included cinnamon, eggplant, almond, mustard, tea (yes you did read that correctly), coconut, and many many others. The present Bill (the third attempt over the years to get this past Parliament) sets up the same conditions that prompted the 2016 list of restricted plants. A sort of frenzied desire to control the minutia of individual life driven by a mad instinct that the government always knows best.

More than 50% of NZ citizens use natural products, so you might think their availability should not be controlled by the government. Wrong again. The Bill requires the appointment of a regulator who will decide for us what among what we have eaten for millennia can be sold openly and what should be restricted. The idea that one person can decide for all of us what plants that grow in the earth, can be sold, eaten, or used puts New Zealand in a unique class among tin pot kingdoms. We can imagine as we gather around the family breakfast table a swarm of well-paid government experts with pens and questionnaires hovering close by for a final check.

The situation at the border is very similar. If a herb benefits health, it will be a medicine and therefore cannot be imported except with a permit. Border officials will be very busy examining packages and if they find anything healthy, tossing it in the bin. Am I exaggerating? No. Rauwolfia Serpentina is an Indian herb that reduces blood pressure. Studies such this one published in 2015 show it is a safe and effective treatment for high blood pressure, but it is banned here in New Zealand because some hypertension drugs contain synthetic copies of one of the many alkaloids found in the whole plant—reverse patenting at its best.

Why is the Government Intending to Regulate Natural Health Products?

A rational answer to this question is hard to find. A recent EU study found that natural health products are 45,000 times safer than pharmaceutical drugs. The government, however, apparently believes they are unsafe, but where is the evidence? It doesn’t exist. An imaginary NZ doctor explains to their teenage patient:

“Years ago, before you were born, dearly beloved, a person whose name is lost in the mists of time might have felt a little off colour after taking a vitamin tablet and then recovered quickly. Ever since then, the New Zealand government has quite rightly been very suspicious of vitamins and plants grown in soil. So they are introducing a new and very honest law for us all.” or words to that effect.

There are many continuous traditions of natural approaches to health that have been followed by cultures on every continent for thousands of years and still are. There are more modern ones too that have attracted followers guided by trained practitioners. These include Indian Ayurveda, Chinese medicine, Chiropractic, Homeopathy, etc. The idea that a regulator who is unfamiliar with these traditions should control their practice and availability is inherently flawed.

This Bill represents an attempt to impose a modern medical/pharmaceutical straight jacket on the process of medical choice. A straight jacket that will no doubt be administered by people who are unfamiliar with and even opposed to natural medicine. The apparent intention is to drive people towards pharmaceutical-based medicine. It is worth noting that modern medical misadventure and misprescription is the third leading cause of death—hardly a direction that deserves a monopoly.

The logic of insisting on total government control of medical choice escapes me. It fits with a perspective that has been steadily growing throughout the pandemic: the government is seeking to control every aspect of life and impose a kind of uniformity on the nation. This originates from a distorted one size fits all view of reality. Diversity is actually a great source of progress and happiness, not something to be stamped out—a discredited communistic perspective.

It is rather curious that for two years the government has been denying there is any connection between serious illness and mRNA vaccination despite tens of thousands of instances of illness proximate to inoculation and studies showing a statistical connection, as well as plausible biomolecular mechanisms. In contrast, on account of a very, very small handful of unproven historical complaints about natural health products, despite widespread safe use, they wish to control what we eat and what health choices we can make.

Whichever side of the vaccine debate you are on, it should be clear that the government cannot have it both ways. They can’t apply different and incompatible logic as it suits their agenda. All the more curious when many vaccine injured and long Covid sufferers are relying on natural health products to help get them through conditions which many of our medical professionals deny exist.

Last night I spoke to a medical doctor who described how his comments on the benefits of Vitamin C and D have been censored by his colleagues and officials. No surprise really, doctors only spend an hour or two learning about the principles of nutrition during the entire course of their long training. One of his colleagues told him the only benefit of vitamins is to change the colour of urine. That just about says it all. James Lind, who found that lemons cure scurvy, must be turning in his grave.

There is in fact no reasonable rationale for introducing restrictions on Natural Health Products, they are not harming anyone and studies show that many of them have significant benefits for health. The introduction of the new law will cost a lot and it will be paid for by financial levies on manufacturers, importers, suppliers, practitioners, and retailers. A single company selling 300 products, each making two health claims, will be liable for as much as $3 million in government charges. Ultimately these costs will be passed onto the public making natural health products unaffordable.

What the Bill Doesn’t Do

Gradually over the last few years, synthetic flavours and additives have been turning up in processed supermarket items. If you are buying vanilla ice cream, it is now usually labelled as containing natural vanilla flavour. This is not in fact made from natural vanilla beans, it is a synthetic flavour. The use of the term “natural” is intended to disguise this fact. In 2016 our Ministry of Health approved over 3,000 synthetic ingredients, many of them without safety testing. The Therapeutic Products Bill will do nothing to correct the sleight of hand that is describing synthetic additives with an unknown safety profile as ‘natural’. I discuss many of the ways synthetic additives are affecting health in my book Your DNA Diet.

Nor will the Bill encourage the distribution of information about natural approaches to health that studies show are very beneficial in controlling common serious health conditions. Advice for example about diet, exercise, and the curbing of unhealthy habits such as smoking, excessive drinking, or ultra processed foods. Changes in lifestyle can be very influential in reducing cardiac problems as this BBC interview reports. Many other serious health condition outcomes could be improved in this way including cancer, obesity, diabetes, blood pressure, etc.

If the government wishes to encourage improvements in health and longevity, it would do well to launch a public education programme about natural health products and approaches rather than seek to limit their use.

What You Can Do

If we wish to be able to continue to freely choose natural health options, herbal medicines and supplements without government interference, we will need to speak up. Go to this link to make a submission before February 15th. Write to your MP and complain that the appointment of a regulator amounts to an open ended blank cheque to control the sale and use of products used by more than 50% of our population without fully specifying the principles he should use. Moreover, it will put many NZ businesses out of action. I could say a lot more but now is the time for all of us to have a go and hold up our hands. If we don’t, we will only have ourselves to blame. Given the short submission time available, we have to take a scattershot approach, contact as many people as you can and explain how this is going to seriously affect their health options now and down the line.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Guy Hatchard, Ph.D., was formerly a senior manager at Genetic ID, a food testing and certification company (now known as FoodChain ID).

Featured image is from Hatchard Report

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A startup claims it has launched weather balloons that may have released reflective sulfur particles in the stratosphere, potentially crossing a controversial barrier in the field of solar geoengineering.

Geoengineering refers to deliberate efforts to manipulate the climate by reflecting more sunlight back into space, mimicking a natural process that occurs in the aftermath of large volcanic eruptions. In theory, spraying sulfur and similar particles in sufficient quantities could potentially ease global warming.

It’s not technically difficult to release such compounds into the stratosphere. But scientists have mostly (though not entirely) refrained from carrying out even small-scale outdoor experiments. And it’s not clear that any have yet injected materials into that specific layer of the atmosphere in the context of geoengineering-related research.

That’s in part because it’s highly controversial. Little is known about the real-world effect of such deliberate interventions at large scales, but they could have dangerous side effects. The impacts could also be worse in some regions than others, which could provoke geopolitical conflicts.

Some researchers who have long studied the technology are deeply troubled that the company, Make Sunsets, appears to have moved forward with launches from a site in Mexico without any public engagement or scientific scrutiny. It’s already attempting to sell “cooling credits” for future balloon flights that could carry larger payloads.

Several researchers MIT Technology Review spoke with condemned the effort to commercialize geoengineering at this early stage. Some potential investors and customers who have reviewed the company’s proposals say that it’s not a serious scientific effort or a credible business but more of an attention grab designed to stir up controversy in the field.

Luke Iseman, the cofounder and CEO of Make Sunsets, acknowledges that the effort is part entrepreneurial and part provocation, an act of geoengineering activism.

He hopes that by moving ahead in the controversial space, the startup will help drive the public debate and push forward a scientific field that has faced great difficulty carrying out small-scale field experiments amid criticism.

“We joke slash not joke that this is partly a company and partly a cult,” he says.

Iseman, previously a director of hardware at Y Combinator, says he expects to be pilloried by both geoengineering critics and researchers in the field for taking such a step, and he recognizes that “making me look like the Bond villain is going to be helpful to certain groups.” But he says climate change is such a grave threat, and the world has moved so slowly to address the underlying problem, that more radical interventions are now required.

“It’s morally wrong, in my opinion, for us not to be doing this,” he says. What’s important is “to do this as quickly and safely as we can.”

Wildly premature

But dedicated experts in the field think such efforts are wildly premature and could have the opposite effect from what Iseman expects.

“The current state of science is not good enough … to either reject, or to accept, let alone implement” solar geoengineering, wrote Janos Pasztor, executive director of the Carnegie Climate Governance Initiative, in an email. The initiative is calling for oversight of geoengineering and other climate-altering technologies, whether by governments, international accords or scientific bodies. “To go ahead with implementation at this stage is a very bad idea,” he added, comparing it to Chinese scientist He Jiankui’s decision to use CRISPR to edit the DNA of embryos while the scientific community was still debating the safety and ethics of such a step.

Shuchi Talati, a scholar in residence at American University who is forming a nonprofit focused on governance and justice in solar geoengineering, says Make Sunset’s actions could set back the scientific field, reducing funding, dampening government support for trusted research, and accelerating calls to restrict studies.

The company’s behavior plays into long-held fears that a “rogue” actor with no particular knowledge of atmospheric science or the implications of the technology could unilaterally choose to geoengineer the climate, without any kind of consensus around whether it’s okay to do so—or what the appropriate global average temperature should be. That’s because it’s relatively cheap and technically simple to do, at least in a crude way.

David Victor, a political scientist at the University of California, San Diego, warned of such a scenario more than a decade ago. A “Greenfinger, self-appointed protector of the planet … could force a lot of geoengineering on his own,” he said, invoking the Goldfinger character from a 1964 James Bond movie, best remembered for murdering a woman by painting her gold.

Some observers were quick to draw parallels between Make Sunsets and a decade-old incident in which an American entrepreneur reportedly poured a hundred tons of iron sulfate into the ocean, in an effort to spawn a plankton bloom that could aid salmon populations and suck down carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Critics say it violated international restrictions on what’s known as iron fertilization, which were in part inspired by a growing number of commercial proposals to sell carbon credits for such work. Some believe it subsequently stunted research efforts in field.

Pasztor and others stressed that Make Sunset’s efforts underscore the urgent need to establish broad-based oversight and clear rules for responsible research in geoengineering and help determine whether or under what conditions there should be a social license to move forward with experiments or beyond. As MIT Technology Review first reported, the Biden administration is developing a federal research plan that would guide how scientists proceed with geoengineering studies.

Balloon launches

By Iseman’s own description, the first two balloon launches were very rudimentary. He says they occurred in April somewhere in the state of Baja California, months before Make Sunsets was incorporated in October. Iseman says he pumped a few grams of sulfur dioxide into weather balloons and added what he estimated would be the right amount of helium to carry them into the stratosphere.

He expected they would burst under pressure at that altitude and release the particles. But it’s not clear whether that happened, where the balloons ended up, or what impact the particles had, because there was no monitoring equipment on board the balloons. Iseman also acknowledges that they did not seek any approvals from government authorities or scientific agencies, in Mexico or elsewhere, before the first two launches.

“This was firmly in science project territory,” he says, adding: “Basically, it was to confirm that I could do it.”

A 2018 white paper raised the possibility that an environmental, humanitarian, or other type of group could use this simple balloon approach to carry out a distributed, do-it-yourself geoengineering scheme.

In future work, Make Sunsets hopes to increase the sulfur payloads, add telemetry equipment and other sensors, eventually move to reusable balloons, and publish data following the launches.

The company is already attempting to earn revenue from the cooling effects of future flights. It is offering to sell $10 “cooling credits” for releasing one gram of particles in the stratosphere—enough, it asserts, to offset the warming effect of one ton of carbon for one year.

“What I want to do is create as much cooling as quickly as I responsibly can, over the rest of my life, frankly,” Iseman says, adding later that they will deploy as much sulfur in 2023 as “we can get customers to pay us” for.

The company says it has raised $750,000 in funding from Boost VC and Pioneer Fund, among others, and that its early investors have also been purchasing cooling credits. The venture firms didn’t respond to inquiries from MIT Technology Review before press time.

‘A terrible idea’

Talati was highly critical of the company’s scientific claims, stressing that no one can credibly sell credits that purport to represent such a specific per gram outcome, given vast uncertainty at this stage of research.

“What they’re claiming to actually accomplish with such a credit is the entirety of what’s uncertain right now about geoengineering,” she says.

Kelly Wanser, executive director of SilverLining, a nonprofit that supports research efforts on climate risks and potential interventions, agreed.

“From a business perspective, reflective cooling effects and risks cannot currently be quantified in any meaningful way, making the offering a speculative form of ‘junk credit’ that is unlikely to have value to climate credit markets,” she wrote in an email.

Talati adds that it’s hypocritical for Make Sunsets to assert they’re acting on humanitarian grounds, while moving ahead without meaningfully engaging with the public, including with those who could be affected by their actions.

“They’re violating the rights of communities to dictate their own future,” she says.

David Keith, one of the world’s leading experts on solar geoengineering, says that the amount of material in question—less than 10 grams of sulfur per flight—doesn’t represent any real environmental danger; a commercial flight can emit about 100 grams per minute, he points out. Keith and his colleagues at Harvard University have worked for years to move forward on a small-scale stratospheric experiment known as SCoPEx, which has been repeatedly delayed.

But he says he’s troubled by any effort to privatize core geoengineering technologies, including patenting them or selling credits for the releases, because “commercial development cannot produce the level of transparency and trust the world needs to make sensible decisions about deployment,” as he wrote in an earlier blog post.

Keith says a private company would have financial motives to oversell the benefits, to downplay the risks, and to continue selling its services even as the planet cools to lower than preindustrial temperatures.

“Doing it as a startup is a terrible idea,” he says.

For its part, the company says it’s operating on the best modeling research available today, and that it will adjust its practices as it learns more and hopes to collaborate with nations and experts to guide these efforts as it scales up.

“We are convinced solar [geoengineeering] is the only feasible path to staying below 2 ˚C [of warming over preindustrial levels], and we will work with the scientific community to deploy this life-saving tool as safely and quickly as possible,” Iseman said in an email.

But critics stress that the time to engage with experts and the public would have been before the company began injecting material into the stratosphere and trying to sell cooling credits—and that it’s likely to face an icy reception from many of those parties now.

 

James Temple is senior editor for energy at MIT Technology Review, focussing on renewable energy and the use of technology to combat climate change. Previously, he was a senior director at the Verge, deputy managing editor at Recode, and columnist at the San Francisco Chronicle. 

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A Startup Says It’s Begun Releasing Particles Into the Atmosphere, in an Effort to Tweak the Climate
  • Tags: ,

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.

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 January 15 2023

Remember Nuremberg

A reminder to the participants (government officials, heads of state, heads of government, billionaire philanthropists, UN officials et al) of the 2023 WEF Davos Venue regarding what is best understood and described by Peter Koenig below, as

The Globalists’ Criminal agenda directed against humanity:

“The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law, acted as Head of State or responsible government official, does not relieve him [her] from responsibility under international law. (Nuremberg, Principle III)

“Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy [WEF] to commit any of the foregoing crimes [see full text] are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in execution of such plan” (Nuremberg Principle VI)

***

The World Economic Forum (WEF) – with its noble logo: “Committed to Improving the State of the World” (really?) – will be holding its 53rd Annual Meeting from 16-20 January 2023 in Davos Switzerland.

The official WEF Agenda for 2023 is known and available on WEF’s website. This year’s Conference goes under the honorable title of “Cooperation in a Fractured World”.

Attendance

About 2700 participants are expected, including over 50 heads of state, and some 380 public officials of governments around the world, plus the European Union (EU). Slightly more than in May 2022 (WEF 52) – but fewer of the important “political influencers”.

To the delight of the climate freaks, and similar to other years, the elite – government and private sector honchos – are expected to arrive in about 1000 to 1500 private jets, clogging both the Zurich and Geneva airports.

From there to Davos, most will not take a train, but a helicopter.

Davos is besieged for “security” by military and police. This year, maybe the first time, the Davos population has voiced its unhappiness about this unelected NGO’s extravagant, self-serving, life-interrupting event. After all, Davos is for the people of Davos.

It’s winter sport season. Tourists are not interested in the police and military protected WEF chaos.

Interestingly, other than Olaf Scholz, German Chancellor, none of the G7 heads of state will be present. None of the presidents or PMs of France, Italy, UK, Japan, and Canada have registered their attendance.

However, female top shots include Kristalina Georgiewa, Managing Director of the IMF; and Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank (ECB). [criminal record in France]

Likewise, none of the heads of state of what would appear to be important countries, China, Russia, US, India, Iran – and none of the re-emerging BRICS+ except for South Africa’s President, Cyril M. Ramaphosa – are going to be present. No delegates from Russia and Iran will attend.

On Russia, WEF Director, Alois Zwinggi, said that no Russian delegates will be attending. Same as last year. The Ukraine situation remains unchanged.

However, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President of Ukraine, was invited to the WEF 2023, with a big virtual embrace by Klaus Schwab.

Pretty similarly, as he was invited by the US for a “ten-hour” visit, during which he embraced Nancy Pelosi, then still Speaker of the House, and had a special fire-place chat with Joe Biden. After the 10-hour warp-speed money-weapons begging sessions in the US, he was jetted back to Kiev by the US Air Force.

The short visit was apparently due to a “security issue”. In other words, Zelenskyy, highly unpopular in his country, risked to be banned from access to Ukraine.

Probably for the same reason, he is not planning to physically attend the 2023 WEF, but rather by video, alongside NATO’s Jens Stoltenberg and CNN’s anchor, Fareed Zakaria. We can just imagine what his plea to Stoltenberg will be.

Other key figures for the WEF 2023 will include:

  • The UN Secretary General, António Guterres,
  • WHO’s Director General, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus,
  • and of course one of the WEF’s important trustees, Madame Ursula Von der Leyen, President of the European Commission (EC),
  • as well as a key trustee and simultaneously the WEF’s main sponsor, Larry Fink, CEO BlackRock, will be there with special roles to play in this “fractured” world – among them – rebuilding Ukraine.

Notice: The peaceful concept “multi-polar world” is not part of the agenda’s vocabulary. The WEF agenda may seek collaborators – instead of cooperators – to pull the “fractured” together, possibly towards a new model of “globalism”, and away from a multi-polar world vision.

See this for the full attendee list as of 10 January 2023

*

What will Cooperation with the fractured Globalism entail?

Already at the recent G20 meeting in Bali, Klaus Schwab seemed to have realized that “globalism” is dead. Already then, he talked about a fractured world, never about a multi-polar world. As if the “fractured” bits and pieces of this broken world could eventually be put together again under a Global Governance.

Actually, globalism’s demise is logical. As people start awakening – they realize what it means. Nobody wants to be “globalized” – governed by a One World Dictatorship.

Instead of the usual globalist talk, Schwab concentrated in Bali on talking about his dream of the all-digitized 4th Industrial Revolution – about AI, (5G-generated) transhumanization, robotization – and frankly, even though the attendees to his speech politely applauded, though none of them would like to be chipped for mind manipulation by electronic signals.

Agenda

Here is the WEF’s website and the official agenda – and topics that will be discussed. See this and this.

Will the elite realize that the only way for their own survival is Cooperation with the rest of the world – Cooperationas in equals with equals, not a mass reduction of the world population, as in eugenists?

– And as practiced with the fake covid “plandemic”, followed by a mass “vaccination” with experimental, non-tested and deadly mRNA jabs, that may have caused already millions, if not tens or hundreds of millions of deaths and seriously injured around the world.

None of these tragedies are covered by the bought and corrupted mainstream media. And we are only at the beginning. Mainstream doesn’t keep track of such non establishment narratives.

To a large extent the vaxxes have been coerced with blackmail (job loss, barred from social events and social places, unless vaxxed, crime against humanity – crime under the Nuremberg Codex), or through well planned mind manipulation of individuals as well as of the masses. See “Tavistock Institute – Social Engineering of the Masses”, by Daniel Estulin.

We may see what emerges from the 2023 WEF regarding the covid cum pandemic agenda.

*

On the eve of the WEF’s 53rd Summit, journalist Philipp Dahm had this to say: “The luster of WEF is fading. Basically, all has been said”.

Elon Musk doubles up with – “boring like shit”. See this in German, Swiss newspaper Tagesanzeiger.

*

Agenda – Behind the Curtain

Elon Musk may be wrong.

Every year, in addition to the official agenda with more or less open meetings, dozens of secretive clandestine meetings take place behind closed doors, not accessible to anybody who has not been personally invited.

It is in these secret meetings, where real “decisions” are taken. Mind you, these are decisions taken above the people, for top-down executions – with lies and deceptions, i.e., social engineering of the masses (see “Tavistock Institute”, mentioned above).

Top Topics with Top Secrecy to be imposed Top-Down on Populations, may include those stated below – and more. They are not listed in order of priorities. But be aware, they are all related and connected – as we are talking about total attempted control and take-over of the world population. Notice: attempted – the cabal is not there yet. People’s awakening and resistance is growing.

  • WHO – Pandemic Treaty: Both, the WHO DG Tedros and UN Secretary General, António Guterres, are present, plus key delegates of the World Health Assembly, to debate with Schwab how to best bulldoze this Treaty through. So far it has encountered serious resistance, mainly from blocks of African countries.

As stated by section 593 — (a) Decisions of the Health Assembly on important questions shall be made by a two-thirds majority of the Members present and voting. The Pandemic Treaty is considered an important question. – It would give WHO’s DG authority above all sovereign member states in all matters of health. For example, Tedros could decide that the common flu is henceforth a pandemic and vaccination is compulsory, could even be military enforced.

The world would be subject to WHO tyranny. Already now, before the Pandemic Treaty is decided on, all member countries are urged to leave WHO – to preserve their political and societal sovereignty over issues of health. To protect their people.

  • The depopulation / eugenist agendaThe eugenists – Gates, Soros, Kissinger et al – present at the WEF 2023, will most likely debate whether and rather how, to continue their depopulation drive. It’s part of Agenda 2030, of the Great Reset – will timelines be adjusted, or the target abandoned? – Legal systems throughout the world are currently paralyzed. But what if people, a critical mass, are bringing back law and order for the people by the people?
  • Pushing the Covid vaxx-drive – will despite all odds, protests and foremost scientific evidence against covid vaxxes – what is also called bioweapons which kill in the millions; and render hundreds of million men and women infertile, with vaxxes and boosters the average human immunity is reduced up to 80%, rendering them vulnerable for all kinds of diseases – leading to early death (depopulation) – will the Death Cult continue pushing this agenda? – Will it depend on the approval of the “Pandemic Treaty”? – People – force your governments to exit WHO.
  • Ukraine – “reconstruction” – sale to BlackRock – Larry Fink, CEO BlackRock and Volodymyr Zelenskyy may make their previous negotiations over BlackRock’s reconstruction of Ukraine plans “official” – sign a deal, witnessed by the unelected NGO, called WEF, possibly as much a selling what’s left of Ukraine with all its riches to BlackRock.

A third to half of Ukraine’s agricultural land has already been sold or leased to international ag-corporations, most of them planting GMO crops, for which Ukraine had to change her legislation. It would be the first official privatization of a country – a precursor for others to follow? – Understand why Zelenskyy is most unpopular with Ukrainians?

  • Continued, permanent intimidation: Climate lockdowns – Oxfordshire County; energy shortages; food shortages – famine; high inflation; job insecurity. How to continue, how to circumvent ever-growing popular resistance? – These may be topics of debate.
    • Fifteen-minute cities – may be the fate of Oxfordshire County; no further travel radius allowed, being digitally surveilled everywhere you go. A strong popular resistance is emerging – that will unlikely fall for the dictate of the planned climate lock-down; 
    • Eliminating 3000 Dutch farms, about a third of Netherland’s agriculture economy. Holland is the world’s second largest agriculture exporter, after the US. Farmers, supported by the people resisted since 2021. The Ag-Minister has recently resigned – and government is making concessions… This may be a theme for secret WEF debate – to continue with bulldozing, or letting go; and
    • Famine – leading to disease and death – is part of the depopulation agenda.

These are possible closed-door discussions with selected Death Cultists.

  • NATO – Ukraine – Russia – where is the war going? It is a war of US / NATO against Russia. The faltering US empire, made up of psychopaths and sociopaths – cannot admit to living in a multi-polar world in peace. The megalos want to control and possess the world’s largest and by far most resource richest country.

Will their dystopian minds opt for going nuclear – total annihilation of mankind? – It would certainly feed into depopulation. But there is no guarantee that the perpetrating elite would be protected and survive.
Will the WEF and those who command the WEF, give Peace a chance? Will humanity prevail over evil minds?

  • How to rigorously ban “misinformation” – censuring is in full swing. Never in remembered history has men’s free expression been curtailed to this extent – yet, the truth eventually prevails.
    Since the beginning of the covid-craze, WHO has been requesting social media platforms to delete or “shadow banning” more than 10,000 covid and vaxx-related “fake news” – censuring of the truth. Yet the truth still prevails. See this.
    Will the WEF / WHO perpetrators continue suppressing the truth despite the people’s upraising? – Or, again, will they make it dependent on the passing, or not, of the Pandemic Treaty?
  • Globalization is dead – how to cooperate / collaborate – the cultists against the world – to reassemble the fractured world? – This is certainly close to Klaus Schwab’s heart. Globalization, alias centralized tyranny – is a fascist concept, difficult to drop for somebody with Schwab’s background. – But he is not alone. His and his WEF’s sheer survival depends on the sponsorship of other megalo-psychopaths, who do not want to lose out in a possible collapse of the world economy – from mere limitless over-reach. – There is hope.
  • 4th Industrial Revolution – digitization of everything is almost certainly a key debate among the “controller-pathologists”. The tools – 5G and soon to come 6G (the latter to span the world by 2030 is the plan) – are ready for Artificial Intelligence (AI) driven transhumanization and robotization.

This may be a sick man’s – Schwab’s – dream, but who of the elite-clan wants to run the risk of being overtaken, controlled by AI that becomes – or is already – smarter than mankind? – Even megalo-sickos may come to this conclusion. – Another spark of hope that people’s resistance and the Cult’s self-preservation might help bury Schwab’s dream.

  • Universal digital ID – Digital money – QR-Coding – data collection – everything digital is in the end humanity’s demise. Accidental or deliberately caused blackouts could wipe out all vital data and money for common people – the cultists might safe themselves with alternative schemes. See this on QR-code control.

Yet, when it comes down to controlling an ever-more subdued population – a hapless society – what is there to control? Without human interaction – let me quote Elon Musk – “The world would be f***king boring”.

Let us hope the WEF comes to senses.

Simultaneously, let us resist.

Let us lobby in solidarity at home and worldwide – to exit WHO. Once a country is no longer a member, WHO has no power over this nation.

Let us create a world By the People for the People – independently of the corrupted country governments, independent of WHO, WEF and the bought UN system.

We don’t need them.

Our independence, autonomy and sovereign authority over our lives and over our newly created society – shall be our new future.

With a People for the People movement we will make it – without the WEF, WHO and the entire UN system – and certainly without our WEF and BlackRock compromised governments.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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 is a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Prelude to the 2023 WEF Davos Meetings. “Cooperation” in Triggering “Depopulation” and a “Fractured World”

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.a

a

***

“Radhika Desai’s Capitalism, Coronavirus and War explains why the dream of a neoliberal ‘end of history’ has turned out to be a dead end. Her excellent book provides a clear perspective to frame the internal contradictions of America’s neoliberal policies that are driving Western capitalism into austerity and a chronic health crisis as its New Cold War actually is a class war.” Michael Hudson [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW


Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

It has been close to three years now since a teenie-weenie little virus made its debut on the world stage and wreaked havoc on our health care system, our education system, our political gatherings, our recreation time and practically every aspect of our lives. Or so we are told anyway. [2]

Regardless, the panic generated by “V the virus” was enough to institute lock-downs, new social distancing, masking rules and all the other efforts that are all to familiar to every listener not entirely isolated from humanity even in the smallest villages. By March of 2020, for a time, it was really the dominant story to appear regularly in the mainstream news. [3]

Three years later, experts are saying this crisis is far from over. Nevertheless, we are now largely looking at the crisis through the rear view mirror and can assess how well and how poorly each country fared against this demon which we came to label SARS-CoV-2. [4]

Not surprisingly, judging by the data, some societies coped far better than others.

Professor of political studies Radhika Desai noticed that while countries like the U.S., the UK, and younger brother Canada were advanced countries compared to most, the death toll stemming (allegedly) from COVID-19 was much larger than in China and other countries around the world! She found through her research that the tendency since the 1970s to embrace neoliberal financialization, devoted to protecting what she calls “predatory” capitalist giants as opposed to more ‘people-centred’ policies was a likely culprit in turning the health-care nuisance caused by SARS-CoV-2 into a major health and economic catastrophe from which we are all still reeling.

This episode of the Global Research News hour focuses much of the program interviewing Professor Desai about her recently published book, Capitalism, Coronavirus and War: A Geopolitical Economy, which delved not only into the span of the pandemic, but also explored a history of capitalism confronting its own crises from 1914 and the Thirty Year Crisis that followed, to the age of neo-liberalism from the 70s to the present, to the now largely self-defeating NATO war against Russia in Ukraine.

This is followed by an interview with Mahdi Nazemroaya, who has done a lot of field work in China, who could add his own insights into China’s COVID-19 approach and its economic and political relationship with the United States.

Radhika Desai is  Professor in the Department of Political Studies and Director of the Geopolitical Economy Research Group (GERG) at the University of Manitoba in Canada; she edits newcoldwar.org, a project associated with GERG, and is the Convener of the International Manifesto Group. Her book is available free for download here.

Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) specializing in geopolitics and strategic issues.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 376)

LISTEN TO THE SHOW


Click to download the audio (MP3 format)

Transcription of Radhika Desai, January 10, 2023

Global Research: Capitalism, Coronavirus, and War is the latest book by Professor Radhika Desai. It makes the point that the economic crisis ultimately was a crisis at the very heart of the neoliberal financialised capitalist system. And the virus only served to accelerate the decline of the US-dominated world capitalist imperial order. And measures taken in the wars that followed only accelerates it. It accelerates the decline even further.

This model follows a history going back to the very beginnings and plots other times where capitalist power ran up against issues and used state power to help them emerge from the pressures that would lead to eradication.

What steps should the Left take today to prevent this same state rescue attempt, or possibly something even worse from succeeding. The book’s author is here with me to share a little of her understanding. Dr. Radhika Desai is a professor at the Department of Political Studies, and director of the Geopolitical Economy Research Group at the University of Manitoba in Canada. She is the author of several other books, now including “Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire.”

Radhika, thank you for joining us. It’s good to have you back on.

Radhika Desai: Always a pleasure to be on your show, Michael.

GR: Now, in your book, you contend that – and Marx and Engels contend – that capitalism runs up against internal contradictions. The capitalist trajectory takes it from competitiveness, to monarchy capitalism which, combined with pressure from the working class, ultimately results in socialism. And that, historically, it is the actions of the capitalist state that force systems to remain capitalist as opposed to going socialist.

With this pandemic situation that we are sort of coming out of, the latest crisis that pushed – you know, challenging our model, you know. This points to how the neoliberal systems put the capitalist state and particularly their strongest advocates, the US and Great Britain, at a supreme disadvantage in dealing with the situation. Especially when you compare it to socialist economies or countries where neoliberalism is not as strong a factor.

There are all kinds of factors affecting which countries go through chaos as opposed to a nuisance but manageable disease. Could you explain your claim that capitalists and neoliberal policy did indeed exacerbate these difficulties in dealing with Covid-19?

RD: Yeah, thanks Michael. So, this is really the core of the book, you know? You know, as you know, we can’t really work for all the writings and publications on the pandemic. But where this book is unique is that it demonstrates – or the main question it asks is – yes, the Covid-19 pandemic was certainly a big shock. It was a major public health emergency.

But why is it that this – what should have been ultimately just a serious public health emergency – why did it turn into such a knockdown political – knockdown economic crisis of capitalism? And I say “economic,” but of course it is an all-pervasive crisis. Because if you think about it, the very weaknesses that I identify are also associated with increasing social inequality, increasing political division and breakdown. And even to a great extent, the cultural disintegration we are facing. With the extent of dis-information coming both from the social media and from the mainstream media.

So, to get back to the main point, what I argue is that what becomes clear after 40 years of applying neoliberalism, is that neoliberalism, which was supposed to solve the problems of capitalism after capitalism entered the 1970s stagflationist period. Neoliberalism was bandied about as this thing that was going to resolve the crisis of capitalism. It would restore capitalism’s productive dynamism.

But in reality, what has happened is that neoliberal – the application of neoliberal policies – has actually weakened capitalism further. So much so, that we have now lived through 40 years of relatively low growth. Forty years in which our productive economies have become considerably weakened through very systematic processes of de-industrialization. Now, to which of course phenomena such as Trump and Brexit have been the result.

So, we have been de-industrializing. Meanwhile, the application of neoliberal policies which have dumbed down our productive economies have actually encouraged the explosion of activity in the financial sphere. And the financial sphere basically is essentially parasitic upon the productive sphere. So, we have a shrinking productive sphere, on which a growing financial sphere is increasingly parasitic.

And we also know, of course, that the financial sphere is also – the explosion of financial activity is also at the root of these intolerable levels of social inequality that we are looking at. So, my point was that the system was already very weakened when the pandemic came along. And so, the pandemic essentially hit an already weakened system.

On top of that, there is one other thing. So, there is an underlying weakness. But you know, you earlier referred to the different reactions of the capitalist classes in responding to crises. So, as we know, for example, the capitalist world went through a deep crisis in the early part of the 20th century. Some people even call it a “30-Years Crisis,” running from 1914 to 1945, including the Great Depression, the rise of fascism, and all of these. And capitalist powers at that time were forced to respond to this crisis in a relatively progressive way.

So, as we know, in the post-Second World War period what has happened. What happened was that capitalist societies, the leading capitalist societies, borrowed from the toolkit of socialism. And they instituted full-employment policies; they instituted the welfare state; they instituted an enormous amount of regulation of industry and capitalism generally.

And finally, they also adopted a very high degree of state ownership, something we tend to forget today. So, this was the policy paradigm which enabled the golden age of growth of capitalism. But, of course the system, in the Western countries remained capitalist.

So, it’s own operation, as you rightly pointed out, I argue along with Marx and Engels that capitalism is not only prone to contradiction and crises, but it is prone to contradiction and crises at many many levels in practically every area of activity. What capitalism needs and demands from society, and often gets from society, is almost impossible. Therefore, trying to achieve that end makes capitalist society get ensnarled in all sorts of contradictions.

So inevitably, this post-war arrangement which left the underlying structure of capitalism in place ran into crisis in the 1970s. And at that point, our government basically said, ‘Look, these old socialistic measures: the welfare state and full-employment policies, et cetera are no longer working. We’re going to throw them out. We are going to give capitalism all the freedom it wants, et cetera, and this is going to restore the productive dynamism of our economies.’

Now, it would have been fine, you know, the neoliberal ideology tends to assume a competitive capitalism. But you are applying a remedy that might have worked in the case of competitive capitalism. I underline “might,” we can discuss that. But they were actually applying it to a capitalism that already become a monopoly capitalism. And so, giving monopoly capital the same freedoms was not going to lead to the restoration of productive dynamism, so instead it has lead to financialization.

So, we have weakened our productive structures and we have expanded the prerogatives and freedoms of what is essentially a predatory, speculative, parasitical financial capitalism. And so, these are the people we have privileged, our governments have privileged, for 40 years. You know, year-in and year-out. Even though these policies were not restoring productive dynamism, our governments continued with them.

So, the other thing this book argues, is that if we look at what happened during the pandemic, the responses on the public health front, on the economic front in particular but practically every front, were actually designed not to address the underlying public health crisis or to restore jobs or economy. They were designed primarily to keep in place the incredible power of a small number of increasingly unproductive, speculative, predatory, and financialized corporations. And this is what has made the crisis so serious, because our governments are essentially encouraging the worst elements, the elements that suck up the results and the fruit of the productive labours of whether a small business, or workers, or what have you, instead of engaging in the investment, the investment in production that is required for us.

GR: Yeah, yeah. I think I really see the question that I want to put to you, and it concerns the whole idea of managing human health, because it is increasingly managed by private companies, known as pharmaceutical corporations, “Big Pharma.” You know, these companies which, while they deal in health, are also motivated by private profit-making. And increasingly in this world, there is a tendency to push their prescription treatments, vaccines and so on, where they make money and generic medication is sidelined. There is a whole lot of information about this subject outside of Covid. But the healthcare regulators have it, it is argued, it’s been subject to regulator capture by private companies. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and associated entities have arguably influenced the WHO. And there you’re talking about monopoly capitalism right there, it seems to me.

It is compliance with these institutions, they are heavily influenced by private profit-seekers, that determines the healthcare treatment. Whether you’re a capitalist or not, we all prescribe to it, right? So, doesn’t this faction also play a role in how we deal with and cover —

RD: Absolutely. Yes, in fact. So, one of the major chapters in the book deals with how the leading neoliberal financialized capitalism, then here I focus chiefly on the US and the UK, because they are the leading financialized neoliberal capitalisms. The same would apply to other countries with adjustments and adaptations and so on.

But anyway, if you look at the responses of these countries, undoubtedly they have been governed by the interests, not only of Big Pharma, but generally the plethora of big monopoly corporations that ring around the healthcare sectors, you know, whether it’s hospital management companies, or Big Pharma, or – and other such, you know, testing and all that. And even companies that have nothing to do with this.

So, for example, in the United Kingdom, the entire job of testing and tracing infections was given over to a company that had absolutely no experience with this. You know, merely in order that they would essentially purpote to employ largely untrained people and pay them in largely embezzlement of money, basically. So, there are numerous open questions about the way in which such governments, our governments, have addressed the pandemic.

So, definitely Big Pharma has profited. Amidst all this, the other thing that has happened, of course, is that, you know, you see that, you know, when such a big crisis happens, and so on, you would expect that the Left would be on the forefront of criticizing the horrible way in which our governments managed the crisis.

But, throughout this period of crisis and then subsequently war and so on, we have found the Left either on the backfoot, unable to respond vigorously with determination, with clarity, with purpose, et cetera. And if not on the backfoot, of course in the case of the war, they are openly allying with the imperialist and pro-financial capital actions of our government. And in the place of the Left, in fact what we have seen is something far more dangerous. It is the Right that has been in the forefront of opposing the governments, on the basis of enormous amounts of misinformation, and so on.

And I think the reason for that is also quite interesting. I mean, we can discuss the Left’s failures in a minute. But the reason why the Right has been in the ascendant in many ways, is primarily because it is very clear to a lot of people that our governments were acting – not acting entirely in good faith, and that – the problem – the incredible death rate that we have experienced, the fatalities that we have experienced, have been because of the bad faith in which our governments have dealt with us. Telling us that they are working to save our lives and livelihoods. Meanwhile, in reality, working to benefit Big Pharma, to benefit the medical industrial complex, and so on.

So, when people sense that there is bad faith, they respond to anybody who is going to say, ‘Well, you know, I know the reason for that.’ And that’s why, you know, if the Left has been in the ascendant it’s because of this bad faith on the part of our government. And of course, the failures of the Left.

 So, if I may just simply clarify, the actual contrast I make in my book between a Big Pharma and medical industrial complex-fueled response as we have seen in Western countries, particularly in the US and the UK. The main contrast should be between them and what has happened in China. That is to say, for almost three years, the Chinese government prioritized the saving of lives over anything: livelihoods and everything. And they actually managed to have a – to manage to save both, because they have actually had far greater economic growth, economic dynamism, et cetera. And at the same time, kept debts to an absolutely really, very low level. So, this is what I would – this is the contrast I would like to give. And this is the contrast I actually give in my book.

And this is also supported by all those people who have generally supported a zero-Covid policy. Zero-Covid policy doesn’t mean an unending lockdown. Nor is that what happened in China. China did not have any sort of unending lockdown. China has had a very collaborated policy of reducing and minimizing the number of infections.

The problem is that the rest of the world has not gone along with them. And China, is today changing its approach because it senses that the nature of the threat has changed. And I think this is what we have to keep our eye on. And what I would like to say is that: in China, China did not say, ‘Oh, we have to balance savings of lives versus livelihoods,’ which essentially gives you the opportunity to support the big financial capitalists, and so on, in the name of saving livelihoods. In reality, China prioritized saving lives and it managed to save both lives and actual livelihoods. Not the livelihoods of the Elon Musks and the Jeff Bezos’ of this world. But of ordinary people.

GR: So, on the title of “War,” you point to the current war in Ukraine as an example of the desperation of the US hegemonic states and their allies to maintain hegemony following the pandemic, and the negative effects on the economy. And I’m not sure, though, how it is anymore hawkish than any other time in the past, in the last 30 years. I mean, invading countries in the name of “human rights” is something that they’ve always done. But what’s noticeable —

RD: No, I agree, of course. At one level what the current war, the current conflict over Ukraine, which I see as essentially a proxy war being waged by the United States against Russia, using Ukraine as a proxy. And as many people have pointed out, in a war in which the United States seems set to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian.

Yes, this is in line with the whole post-Cold War, and even generally imperialist – long history of imperialism of fighting wars and subjugating people in the name of giving them civilization and democracy and human rights and white man’s burden, and whatnot. I totally agree there is a great continuity. At the same time, I do think that President Biden has landed the United States, and the world, in fact, into a qualitatively more dangerous situation because this is the first time that he is provoking in a very real way, and waging a war against a nuclear-armed power. A permanent member of the Security Council. And President Biden also seems set to expand the conflict beyond that, as well.

So, to China, which in many ways will prove an even more formidable enemy. And in the context – so, in this context, what we are looking at – so, to me, what’s happening is that the same problems of neoliberal capitalism are involved in the current aggression of the United States. And this is also going to accelerate a trend which we have been seeing all along, — for a long time anyway, for a decade or two, anyway – which is the increasing disillusion of the rest of the world, the non-imperialist parts of the world, the Third World, these countries are increasingly becoming disillusioned and realizing that they have much more to gain from allying with countries like China and today even Russia, than to gain from allying with the West. So essentially, these policies are creating a new bipolar division of the world.

GR: Yeah. Sort of like every, you know, every action taken by the United States is boomeranging back and it’s hitting them —

RD: Absolutely.

GR: — harder than Russia is. But —

RD: Exactly, because this is – it’s not making the West any stronger. It’s only making the West weaker and that much more desperate.

GR: Yeah. Let’s look at previous examples of capitalist crises. There were several examples from 1914 – to the period of neoliberalism since the late ‘70s. Could you examine the current crisis and compare it to the 30-Years Crisis, I mean when there was another stock market crash in 1929 leading to the Great Depression. And there were rising hordes of frustrating workers and also fascism on the rise in countries around the world. Today, we also had a stock market crash and a similar making of a recession that could turn into a depression. Could you please point out —

RD: Yeah.

GR: — similarities and also prominent differences between these two areas —

RD: Yes. Absolutely. So, first of all, let me say that, that crisis, like I said earlier, you know, there was a – it was really a pretty big 30-Years Crisis, you know, in which a whole range of – you know, there were two great imperialist wars; there was this big economic depression; and so on. And I would say that, you know, looking back from the vantage point of 2022/2023, after 40 years and more of neoliberalism, I think certain things are becoming very clear.

So, first of all, I would say that 1914 and the early part of the 20th Century generally can be regarded as sort of the peak of capitalism and capitalist imperialism. Since then, they’ve kind of been on a decline. So, you know, as I narrate in the book, towards the end of that period of crises, as the Second World War was winding to a close, many leading intellectuals actually thought that the world would turn towards socialism because capitalism had kind of exhausted it’s – whatever historical utility it may have had. And in doing so, it had demonstrated the havoc it could cause, the disasters it could cause in the form of imperialist wars, Great Depressions, and so on. So, people felt that the world would move in a socialistic direction.

And then, you had the so-called golden age of capitalism. So, a lot of people, including many Marxists began to say, ‘Ah well, capitalism is alive and well there’s nothing wrong with it,’ et cetera. But in reality, when we look back as I was saying earlier, what enabled the golden age to occur was the fact that the First World countries, the imperialist core, was forced to employ socialistic measures of, you know, full-employment, macro-economic policies, welfare states, state-ownership, great industrial regulation, et cetera, et cetera, progressive taxation and so on. Meanwhile, of course a large part of the world was already socialist and communist and growing at a relatively high rate.

And then, finally Third World countries, newly independent Third World countries were embarked on attempts at national autonomous development. So, it was a really – it was really a configuration which may not have been socialist. I mean, it’s not going to be possible to build socialism in a day. But nevertheless, the world that was leaning in that direction, even though First World countries did not become socialist, they did become social democratic and that’s what enabled the golden age. When the underlying capitalism led to crisis and we applied neoliberalism, we see the true debility of capitalism. It is not capable anymore of productive dynamism, only capable of creating a predatory parasitical financial system that sucks like, you know, a giant vampire squid the earnings based on production of ordinary people.

So, what is very clear, in retrospect, is that today capitalism has exhausted its utility. There is also a difference in the response of government, the response of government in the post-Second World War period which created the welfare, the Keynesian welfare states in Western countries, were necessary and possible. Capitalist states could not do otherwise, because working people were strongly organized.

By contrast, by today even though neoliberalism has been attacking the rights of working people right, left, and centre. In most Western countries, working class organizations and parties are on the backfoot. They are not on the ascendant. They should be, but they are not. And in my book, I have a very long discussion of how to understand this inability of the Western Left.

And I do make a couple of points, but maybe I should just summarize that by saying that basically, what it amounts to is that both intellectually and politically, the Left in the Western imperialist core has kind of made a Faustian bargain with their own governments, in which they support their governments imperialist ventures in return for a few crumbs from the capitalist table.

But today, even the capitalist table doesn’t have much to give. So, working class people are being attacked anyway. They are not able to respond. Large parts of the Left are still engaged in supporting imperialist ventures by claiming to stand up for democracy and for human rights against this or that dictator and authoritarian ruler, and so on.

And the big opportunity, which is to create a Left which unites working people and all the institutions that support them, which may include many socialist states, that unites all these forces against the forces of capitalism which are creating economic crisis, war, et cetera. This opportunity is being missed.

GR: Well Radhika, you know, your book has been praised by the likes of Michael Hudson, as well as Arnold August and other people who have been on the show before. So, it’s really been quite an honour to be able to provide it for our readers. And you can get a free copy, you know, go to —

RD: Yes. Let me emphasize that, you know. I would like to emphasize that this book is available free because a foundation called “Knowledge Unlatched” shows this book to make – one of the few that they will make available free for anybody who wants them. So, you can download a PDF copy for free at the link that Michael is going to give to his show.

GR: Thanks a lot, Radhika. It’s been a pleasure having you on.

RD: Thank you very much, Michael.


The Global Research News Hour airs every Friday at 1pm CT on CKUW 95.9FM out of the University of Winnipeg. The programme is also podcast at globalresearch.ca .

Other stations airing the show:

CIXX 106.9 FM, broadcasting from Fanshawe College in London, Ontario. It airs Sundays at 6am.

WZBC 90.3 FM in Newton Massachusetts is Boston College Radio and broadcasts to the greater Boston area. The Global Research News Hour airs during Truth and Justice Radio which starts Sunday at 6am.

Campus and community radio CFMH 107.3fm in  Saint John, N.B. airs the Global Research News Hour Fridays at 7pm.

CJMP 90.1 FM, Powell River Community Radio, airs the Global Research News Hour every Saturday at 8am. 

Caper Radio CJBU 107.3FM in Sydney, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia airs the Global Research News Hour starting Wednesday afternoon from 3-4pm.

Cowichan Valley Community Radio CICV 98.7 FM serving the Cowichan Lake area of Vancouver Island, BC airs the program Thursdays at 9am pacific time.

Notes:

  1. https://www.routledge.com/Capitalism-Coronavirus-and-War-A-Geopolitical-Economy/Desai/p/book/9781032059501
  2. https://www.globalresearch.ca/new-pdf-ebook-the-worldwide-corona-crisis-global-coup-detat-against-humanity-by-michel-chossudovsky/5791054
  3. https://www.infoplease.com/march-2020-current-events-world-news
  4. Royston Sim (January 20, 2023), ‘Covid-19 pandemic far from over, says public health expert on Davos panel’, The Straits Times; https://www.straitstimes.com/world/covid-19-pandemic-far-from-over-says-public-health-expert-on-davos-panel

 

WHO Fraud. There Never Was A Pandemic!

January 21st, 2023 by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

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.

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 December 29, 2022

***

At a press conference in Geneva, on the afternoon of February 20th, 2020 (CET),  The Director General of the WHO Dr. Tedros intimated that the COVID-19 pandemic was imminent.

The WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that he was

“concerned that the chance to contain the coronavirus outbreak was “closing””

“I believe the window of opportunity is still there, but that the window is narrowing.”

“Window is narrowing? A rapidly expanding Worldwide epidemic?

According to the PCR test, the recorded number of so-called “confirmed Covid cases” (by the WHO) on that same day (outside China) was 1,073 of which 621 were passengers and crew on the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship (stranded in Japanese territorial waters).

The above numbers do not under any circumstances confirm an unfolding global health crisis.

Examine the WHO graph below. The blue indicates the confirmed cases on the Diamond Princess (international conveyance which arrived in Yokohama on February 3, 2020), many of whom were sick, confined to their rooms for more than two weeks (quarantine imposed by Japan). All passengers and crew took the illustrious RT-PCR test (which does not detect or identify SARS-CoV-2).

Needless to say, this so-called data was used to spearhead the fear campaign not to mention the collapse of financial markets in the course of the month of February 2020.

 

page27image1663839840

page28image1737639824

Source: WHO, February 2020

The official story is as follows:

-A Hong Kong-based passenger who had disembarked from the Diamond Princess in Hong Kong on January 25 developed pneumonia and was tested positive for the novel coronavirus on January 30.

-The Diamond Princess arrived in Yokohama on February 3. A quarantine was imposed on the cruiser, Many passengers fell sick due to the confinement on the boat. All the passengers and crew on the Diamond Princess undertook the PCR test. The number of confirmed cases increased to 691 on February 23

Read carefully: From the standpoint of assessing worldwide trends of a “deadly disease”, the official WHO data doesn’t add up.

Without the Diamond Princess data, the so-called number of confirmed cases worldwide outside China on February 20, 2020 was of the order of

452 cumulative confirmed cases, out of a population of 6.4 billion.

Did Tedros’ Statements Serve to Trigger the Financial Crash?

452 cases. These “shock and awe” statements contributed to triggering panic, despite the fact that the number of confirmed cases outside China was exceedingly low.

The statement by Dr. Tedros (based on flawed concepts and statistics) set the stage for the February 2020 financial collapse triggered by inside information, foreknowledge, derivative trade, short-selling and a galore of hedge fund operations.

452 cases were sufficient to destabilize stock-markets all over the World?

The Virus was narrowly identified as the catalyst of the financial crash. Who was behind this catalyst?

Who was behind the fear campaign which contributed to triggering chaos and uncertainty on financial markets?

The small number of “COVID-19 confirmed cases” outside China (1,073) did not in any way point to an unfolding worldwide epidemic. But this did not prevent the markets from plummeting.

The markets had been manipulated. Whoever had foreknowledge (“inside information”) of the WHO Director-General’s February 20, 2020 statement (at the opening of the New York Stock Exchange on Thursday morning, early afternoon at WHO Headquarters in Geneva) would have reaped significant monetary gains.

Was there a conflict of interest (as defined by the WHO)? The WHO is partly funded by the Gates Foundation. Bill Gates has “60% of his assets invested in equities [including stocks and index funds]”, according to a September 2019 CNBC report.

The stock market crash initiated on February 20th referred to as the 2020 Coronavirus Crash (February 20-April 7, 2020) was categorized as:

“The fastest fall in global stock markets in financial history, and the most devastating crash since the Wall Street Crash of 1929.”

The alleged cause of the financial crash was “The Virus”, (according to prominent “analysts”) namely, the “massive spread” of the epidemic outside China. But that was an outright lie, refuted by official WHO data. Media disinformation played a key role in spearheading the fear campaign.

“Blaming the Virus”: The Most Corrupt and Fraudulent Financial Crash in World History

The possibility of financial fraud and “insider trading” (which is illegal) was casually dispelled by financial analysts and media reports.

Without the human hand, there is no causal relationship between a microscopic virus and the complex gamut of financial variables.

The “killer virus” fear campaign coupled with Dr. Tedros’s timely “warnings” of the need to implement a worldwide pandemic indelibly served the interests of Wall Street’s institutional speculators and hedge funds.

The financial crash led to a major shift in the global distribution of money wealth.


For a more detailed and comprehensive analysis (Book released in August 2022)

The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’État Against Humanity

Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression

By Michel Chossudovsky

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, Product Type: PDF File, Pages: 164 (15 Chapters)

Translations in several languages are envisaged. The book is available in print form in Japanese. 仕組まれたコロナ危機:「世界の初期化」を目論む者たち

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.

You are welcome to forward it to family and friends.

***

Price: $11.50. FREE COPY Click here to download.

Solving the Debt Crisis the American Way

January 20th, 2023 by Ellen Brown

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On Friday, Jan. 13, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen wrote to Congress that the U.S. government will hit its borrowing limit on Jan. 19, forcing the new Congress into negotiations over the debt limit much sooner than expected. She said she will use accounting maneuvers she called “extraordinary measures” to keep U.S. finances running for a few months, pushing the potential date for default to sometime in the summer. But she urged Congress to get to work on raising the debt ceiling.

Lifting it above its current $31.385 trillion limit won’t be easy with a highly divided and gridlocked Congress. As former Republican politician David Stockman crowed in a Jan. 11 article:

15 [House] votes and the slings and arrows of MSM opprobrium were well worth it. That’s because the GOP’s anti-McCarthy insurrection obtained concessions which just might slow America’s headlong rush to fiscal armageddon. And just in the nick of time!

We are referring, of course, to the Speaker elect’s promise that there will be no more debt ceiling increases without off-setting spending cuts; and that in the event of a double-cross a single Member of the House may table a motion to vacate the Speaker’s chair.

Even if Congress succeeds in raising the debt ceiling, the Federal Reserve’s aggressive interest rate hikes are likely to push interest on the federal debt to unsustainable levels. The problem was detailed by the House Republican Policy Committee like this:

As of December 8, 2022, the U.S. gross national debt stood at nearly $31.5 trillion, $8.5 trillion higher than it was just three years before and the highest level in our nation’s history. Last year [in March 2021], the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected the federal government would spend $282 billion servicing our debt in 2022, but that projection ballooned to nearly $400 billion as the Federal Reserve tightens monetary policy and the debt continues to grow.

… While interest rates have been low by historical standards, if interest rates rose to 5 percent, where they were as recently as 2007, net interest payments on the current debt level held by the public would be over $1 trillion, more than the federal government spends annually on everything but Social Security [emphasis added; endnotes omitted].

San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly said during a live-streamed interview with The Wall Street Journal that she expects policymakers to raise interest rates to somewhere above 5%, and JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said it “may very well” raise rates to 6%.

The global debt cycle has reached the stage where, historically, a major “monetary reset” has been required. In 1913, it was done by instituting the Federal Reserve to backstop a banking system unable to meet withdrawals in gold. In 1933, it was done by taking the dollar off the gold standard domestically; in 1969, by taking the dollar off the gold standard internationally; and in 2008-09, by bailing out the banks with quantitative easing.

Resetting the Game Board in Line with the Constitution

What about today? In a Jan. 11 article in Forbes, after discussing the limitations of the “extraordinary measures” to which the Treasury can resort, investment advisor Simon Moore wrote:

Some have also argued that the government could go further, perhaps invoking the 14th Amendment, or minting an enormously high-​value coin as further strategies to sidestep debt ceiling issues. However, these ideas are untested …

The 14th Amendment says the validity of the government’s debt shall not be questioned. Fixing the budget deficit by minting some trillion dollar coins would be a radical monetary “reset,” but the approach is not actually untested. Abraham Lincoln did something similar to avoid a usurious national debt at 24 to 36% interest during the Civil War, and he was drawing from the playbook of the American colonists a century earlier.

Article 1, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution says, “The Congress shall have Power … To coin Money [and] regulate the Value thereof …“ When the Constitution was ratified, coins were the only officially recognized legal tender. By 1860, coins made up only about half the currency; and today, they make up only about $1.19 billion of a $21.352 trillion circulating money supply (M2). These coins, along with about $239 million in U.S. Notes or Greenbacks originally issued during the Civil War, are all that are left of the Treasury’s money-creating power.

The vast majority of the money supply today is created privately by banks as deposits when they make loans, usurping the power to issue the national money supply from the people to whom it constitutionally belongs. Lincoln avoided a massive debt to private British-backed banks by restoring the government-issued money of the American colonists. In the 1860s, these newly-issued U.S. Notes or Greenbacks constituted 40% of the national currency. Today, 40% of the circulating money supply would be $8.5 trillion. Yet, this massive money-printing during the Civil War did not lead to hyperinflation. Greenbacks suffered a drop in value as against gold, but according to Milton Friedman and Anna Schwarz in A Monetary History of the United States, 1867-1960, this was not due to “printing money.” Rather, it was caused by trade imbalances with foreign trading partners on the gold standard.

The Greenbacks aided the Union not only in winning the war but in funding a period of unprecedented economic expansion. Lincoln’s government created the greatest industrial giant the world had yet seen. The steel industry was launched, a continental railroad system was created, a new era of farm machinery and cheap tools was promoted, free higher education was established, government support was provided to all branches of science, the Bureau of Mines was organized, and labor productivity was increased by 50 to 75 percent.

Congress could avoid its debt crisis today by calling for a new issue of debt-free U.S. Notes. That, however, would require legislation, probably a greater uphill battle in the current Congress, even than getting the debt ceiling lifted.

Reducing the Federal Debt

Another way to alleviate the debt crisis with government-issued money was proposed by Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul and endorsed by Democratic Representative Alan Grayson during the last debt ceiling crisis: the Federal Reserve could be ordered to transfer to the Treasury the federal securities it has purchased with accounting entries through “quantitative easing.” The Treasury could then just void this part of the debt, which stood at $6.097 trillion as of Dec. 2, 2022. That alternative would be legal, but it would require persuading not just Congress but the Federal Reserve to act.

A third alternative, which could be done very quickly by executive order, would be for the federal government to exercise its constitutional power to “coin money and regulate the value thereof” by minting one or more trillion dollar platinum coins.

The idea of minting large denomination coins to solve economic problems was first suggested in the early 1980s by a chairman of the Coinage Subcommittee of the House of Representatives. Not only does the Constitution give Congress the power to coin money and regulate its value, he said, but no limit is put on the value of the coins it creates.

In 1982, Congress chose to choke off this remaining vestige of its money-creating power by imposing limits on the amounts and denominations of most coins. But it left one exception, the platinum coin, which a special provision allowed to be minted in any amount for commemorative purposes (31 U.S. Code § 5112). When Congress was gridlocked over the debt ceiling in 2013, attorney Carlos Mucha proposed issuing a platinum coin to capitalize on this loophole; and the proposal the proposal got picked up by Paul Krugman and some other economists as a way to move forward.

Philip Diehl, former head of the U.S. Mint and co-author of the platinum coin law, confirmed that the coin would be legal tender. He said:

In minting the $1 trillion platinum coin, the Treasury Secretary would be exercising authority which Congress has granted routinely for more than 220 years . . . under power expressly granted to Congress in the Constitution (Article 1, Section 8).

What about Inflation?

Prof. Randall Wray explained that the coins would not circulate but would be deposited in the government’s account at the Fed, so they would not inflate the circulating money supply. The budget would still need Congressional approval. To keep a lid on spending, Congress would just need to abide by some basic rules of economics. It could spend on goods and services up to full employment without creating price inflation (since supply and demand would rise together). After that, it would need to tax — not to fund the budget, but to shrink the circulating money supply and avoid driving up prices with excess demand.

An alternative for stabilizing the money supply and avoiding inflation without resorting to taxes was developed by the Pennsylvania colonists in Benjamin Franklin’s day. The American colonies were then printing paper scrip, following the innovative lead of Massachusetts in 1691. This paper money was considered an advance against taxes, but it was easier to issue the scrip than to collect it back in taxes; and the result was to inflate and devalue the currency.

The Pennsylvania colonists avoided price inflation by forming a “land bank.” The colonial government issued paper scrip in return for goods and services, and it lent scrip to the farmers at a reasonable rate. The interest returned to the colonial treasury, balancing the budget.

Today we could do the same: we could offset the money issued for government expenses with interest instead of taxes. But that would effectively mean nationalizing the banking system, again not something that is likely or even desirable in a major economy with many competing economic interests. As U.K. Prof. Richard Werner observes, nationalizing the banking system in Soviet Russia did not work out well. But the Chinese approach, involving many small local public banks, proved to be very efficient and effective; and German local bankers developed such a system long before the Chinese, with their network of local public Sparkassen banks. We could follow suit with a network of public banks spreading to local needs, thus turning banking into a public utility while keeping credit under local management and distribution.

We Could Go Further…

As the chairman of the Coinage Subcommittee observed in the 1980s, the entire federal debt could actually be paid with some large denomination coins. Again, the concern will be that it will inflate the money supply and devalue the currency;  but the Federal Reserve showed after the “Great Recession” that it could issue trillions of dollars in accounting-entry quantitative easing without triggering hyperinflation. Indeed, the exercise did not trigger even the modest inflation for which it was designed.

Japan has gone further. As of May 2022, 43.3% of its national debt was held by the Bank of Japan; yet its consumer price index (the annual percentage change in the cost of consumer goods and services) was at negative 0.2%. And China increased its money supply by nearly 1800% over 24 years (from 1996 to 2020) without driving up price inflation. It did that by increasing GDP in step with the money supply.

As with QE, paying off the federal debt with trillion coins deposited in the Treasury’s account would just be an asset swap, replacing an interest-bearing obligation (bonds) with a non-interest-bearing one (bank deposits paid to the bond sellers). The market for goods and services would not be flooded with “new” money that would inflate the prices of consumer goods, because the bond holders would not consider themselves any richer than before.Joseph Wang, a former senior trader on the Fed’s open market desk, explained the difference between QE and direct payment of stimulus checks in a Jan. 9, 2023 article. He wrote:

The enormous fiscal stimulus in 2020 created a few trillion out of thin air and just gave it away to the public – predictably supercharging growth and inflation.  Note that fiscal stimulus is very different from QE, which merely exchanges Treasuries for cash. QE changes the composition of liquid assets held by non-banks (fewer Treasuries, more cash), but not their purchasing power. In contrast, stimmy checks and forgivable loans are essentially free “helicopter money” that increase potential demand.

QE changes the composition of liquid assets held by non-banks (fewer Treasuries, more cash), but not their purchasing power.” The non-bank holders of Treasuries could have sold their securities at any time if they had wanted cash. They had their money in government securities in the first place because they wanted to save it rather than spend it. If they were cashed out, they would presumably continue to save the money, probably by investing it in other interest-generating securities.

Something to Think About at Least

Granted, those proposals are unlikely to pass now, and it would take unusual courage just to introduce them; but we are living in unusual times. The time will soon come for bold leaders to take the reins and do something radical. The alternative that is barreling down on us is the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset,” in which “you will own nothing and eat bugs” (basically neo-feudalism).

The status quo is clearly unsustainable, and the Fed’s current tools cannot set it right. The inflation problem has been thrust in its lap, although fiscal spending and supply shortages are key drivers of today’s price hikes; and the Fed’s traditional tools won’t fix those problems. The higher that interest rates are raised, the harder it will be for people and businesses to pay their credit card debts. That means businesses will go bankrupt, people will get laid off, and tax receipts will go down, further driving up the budget deficit.

We need a new approach, at least one that is new in modern times. We would do well to return to the solution of our forefathers – a monetary system backed by “the full faith and credit of the United States,” a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” as Lincoln intoned. That may not be the government we have now, but it could be and should be. Before we can have a trustworthy national currency, we need a transparent and accountable government that is responsive to the will of the people. When the old system finally breaks and we are primed for a new one, those are the principles that should guide us in its development.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was first posted on ScheerPost.

Ellen Brown is an attorney, chair of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of DebtThe Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “It’s Our Money.” Her 400+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com. She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

The U.S. Is Already Preparing for the Next War

January 20th, 2023 by Danny Haiphong

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Russia’s military operation in Ukraine is approaching its first birthday. Top military brass in Russia have long declared that the conflict is not between Russia and Ukraine, but rather Russia and NATO. Simply put, Ukraine is a pawn in another U.S. war. Europe’s economy and military have been sacrificed on the altar of U.S. warmongering toward Russia. Winter is here and Ukraine’s prospects for getting out of the conflict with anything resembling “victory” have dissipated, if they ever really existed at all.

Such has been admitted by two of the foreign policy establishment’s most criminal members: Condoleezza Rice and Robert Gates. In an op-ed with the Washington Post, Rice and Gates argue that time is not on Ukraine’s side. The U.S. must act fast or watch Ukraine suffer eventual defeat. Of course, for neocon hawks like Rice and Gates, a negotiated settlement is simply out of the question. The only option for the U.S. political and military establishment is to fortify Ukraine with the heaviest military equipment such as armored tanks to ensure victory on the battlefield.

As geopolitical analyst Brian Berletic notes, a major problem stands in the way of Rice and Gates’s demand: NATO is running out of weapons. The U.S. produces about 30,000 rounds per year for its 155 mm Howitzer long-range systems, a number that Ukraine uses in just two weeks of fighting Russia on the front lines. Russian missile strikes have made quick work of heavier equipment such as the vaunted HIMARS systems. Only larger NATO states like the U.S. and Germany have anything left to provide. So when Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky came to Congress begging for more weapons, he was likely disappointed in Joe Biden’s remark that the U.S. was not going to make promises to arm Ukraine with anything that could possibly lead to a World War III scenario between NATO and Russia.

Russia’s critical victory in Soledar has only intensified concerns among a major faction in the foreign policy establishment that Ukraine is depleting the U.S.’s capacity to wage war elsewhere. In this regard, no other matter of U.S. “national security” is more important than China. The RAND Corporation, a research arm of the Pentagon, has called China a “peer” competitor and the U.S.’s greatest long-term threat. Joe Biden’s Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin has also called China the greatest threat to the U.S.’s “security.” NATO labeled China a “malicious actor” in the alliance’s latest Strategic Concept document and pledged to play a larger role in curbing the so-called “threats” presented by its rise.

An article penned just after the New Year in Foreign Policy, however, has blown the lid off of any subtleties to the U.S.’s preparations for a war with China. The article features twelve essays from all corners of the U.S. foreign policy establishment. Contributors include former Obama-era CIA director and US army commander David Petraeus, former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, and former Under Secretary of State and Trump-era NATO Secretary General Rose Gottemoeller. Also included are representatives from a litany of think-tanks such as the US government funded Center for a New American Security (CNAS) and the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

Their essays cover twelve areas of economic, cyber, military, diplomatic and propaganda warfare. An important thread runs through each contribution: Russia has failed in Ukraine (a fabrication mixed with imperial hubris), making the present moment a perfect opportunity to prepare for an upcoming war in Taiwan against China. Foreign Policy’s chief editor Stefan Theil makes the aim of the article quite clear,

“Drawing the right lessons from the first 10 months of the Russian invasion, then, not only matters for the survival of Ukraine. It is also vital for deterring and preventing a future conflict—and, if necessary, fighting one (emphasis my own). The most obvious potential hot spot and one that involves even greater stakes is, of course, Taiwan.”

Beyond repetitive lip-service to “deterrence,” contributors make concrete suggestions on the best means to wage war with China. David Petraeus’s co-authored piece asserts that:

Ukraine points to the imperative for the United States and its Indo-Pacific allies to prioritize the near-term ability to field large numbers of relatively inexpensive, highly mobile anti-ship and anti-air missiles that can be dispersed and maneuvered throughout the first and second island chains against Beijing’s increasingly formidable naval and air forces. Large quantities of unmanned air, sea, and ground systems can amplify these missiles in the U.S. order of battle.

In other words, the U.S.’s $858 billion military budget needs to grow even larger to meet the challenge of China. Petraeus was directly responsible for targeting weddings and civilian areas during his time leading U.S. forces in Afghanistan, giving him first-hand knowledge of the capabilities of the U.S.’s military arsenal. Former Obama-era NATO Secretary Anders Fogh Rasmussen backs up Petraeus’s emphasis on pumping weapons into Taiwan, stating “weapons are what counts . . . With the help of its partners [Taiwan] must become a porcupine bristling with armaments to deter any possible attempt to take it by force. China must calculate that the cost of an invasion is simply too high to bear.”

However, Foreign Policy’s war stenographers clarify that preparing for war with China is about much more than weapons. Maria Shagina, research fellow on sanctions at the weapons industry and State Department-funded International Institute for Strategic Studies, argues that the U.S. and its allies should devise a coherent plan of “economic statecraft” against China as soon as possible. Elisabeth Braw of the Carlyle Group-funded American Enterprise Institute proposes that the U.S. and its allies secure control over the information airwaves to ensure citizens “know exactly what to look for” from so-called “subversive” state and non-state actors that counter U.S. and NATO talking points. Of course, these so-called “preparations” are already underway. The U.S. spends hundreds of millions in its information war against China and has recently banned Chinese semiconductor exports to compliment an already wide-ranging economic war on China.

Foreign Policy’s article was part of a flurry indications that the U.S. foreign policy establishment is preparing for war with China. Two days following Foreign Policy’s article, top U.S. General in Japan James Bierman made the stunning admission in the Financial Times that U.S. is “setting the theater of war” by goading China into a Ukraine-style war over Taiwan. The next day, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) released a war simulation between the U.S. and China over Taiwan. Predictably, the U.S. government concluded that Chinese efforts to invade the island would fail at a great cost to the militaries of all parties. Back in May 2022, The Center for New American Security (CNAS), which is principally funded by military contractors, showcased its own war simulation on NBC’s Meet the Press.

It’s important to note that U.S. war preparations with China have little do with Taiwan specifically. They’re a response to imperial decline and the rise of China and Russia. China and Russia both present their own specific challenges to U.S. hegemony. Russia’s growing sovereignty and political independence from the U.S.-led West has undermined the Wolfowitz Doctrine of full-spectrum dominance over all territory of the former Soviet Union. China’s massive socialist-led market economy is set to surpass the U.S.’s stagnant finance capitalist system in GDP terms by 2035.

Worse for the U.S. is that Russia and China have grown closer together. In economic terms, the Russia-China comprehensive strategic partnership has grown by leaps and bounds since the Treaty of Good-Neighborliness and Friendly Cooperation was established in 2001. Bilateral trade is expected to increase by 25 percent and reach a total volume of $200 billion ahead of the 2024 target date. Surging economic ties with China have given Russia further protection from U.S.-E.U. sanctions, with agricultural and energy exports to China increasing by the month. Russia and China have also increased coordination on matters of military coordination, color revolutions, and diplomacy in the face of a common threat: U.S. imperialism.

But perhaps the biggest threat to U.S. hegemony resides in China and Russia’s leadership in the global movement for integration and de-dollarization. China and Russia are the principle leaders of multilateral institutions such as BRICS+ mechanism and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. These multilateral institutions set out to strengthen investment in all sectors of economic and social development between participating countries, especially in the realm of finance. In response to starvation U.S.-E.U. sanctions and predatory loans from Western financial institutions, BRICS+ has united the largest Global South economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa in an effort to develop an alternative to the U.S. petrodollar-dominated neoliberal economy.

The strength of BRICS+ grew immensely in 2022. Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Iran, Argentina, and several other countries expressed interest in or applied to join BRICS+. BRICS+ is complimented by China and Russia’s own integration projects which aim to develop the infrastructure necessary to break free from the petrodollar. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) sports major cooperation agreements with more than 140 countries and consists of at least 2,000 development initiatives, many of which are completed or under construction. Talks of possibly merging Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the BRI are already underway between the two countries.

BRICS leaders take virtual group photo at 14th summit - CGTN

Virtual picture taken of BRICS 2022 Summit hosted by China. Photo credit: CGTN

The same forces preparing for war with China have expressed deep concern about the future of the dollar amid growing Eurasian integration. Foreign Policy admitted in its marathon 12-essay piece that U.S. sanctions have led China to pursue alternatives to the dollar with its trading partners. Zolton Pozsar, an economist and former strategist at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, recently sounded the alarm about what he termed “BRICSpansion” and the potential of China, Russia, Iran, and the Global South uniting around a new currency system backed by the wealth of commodities in their possession. Pozsar warns of “commodity encumbrance” or the growing possibility that resource-rich nations like Russia will use their commodities as collateral to increase reserves of credit and financing. China and Saudi Arabia’s interest in trading oil in Chinese yuan, Russia’s pursuit of an international reserve currency, and the idea of “BRICS coin” are presented as major threats to Western financial dominance.

The U.S.’s answer to fading imperial hegemony is war, and more of it. War is an inherent feature of predatory neoliberalism where corporations seek favorable conditions to exploit and plunder the planet’s laboring classes and resources. War is also a permanent, and very profitable, industry dominated by a tiny few military contractors. The ruling elite has calculated that U.S. imperialism cannot compete with China and Russia, making the rise of both an existential threat to the future of U.S.-led neoliberalism and imperialism. This sentiment has been expressed by NATO’s Atlantic Council think-tank and in the U.S.’s successive national security strategies of “Great Power” and “Strategic” Competition.

That U.S. foreign policy strategists and experts are planning for the next war should come as no surprise. U.S. imperialism has does not target singular “enemies.” It targets alternative development models and the nations attempting to build them. The Ukraine proxy war is thus a testing ground for the larger U.S. agenda of imperial expansion. A common condition of peace and prosperity for humanity will depend in large part on undermining of this agenda, particularly within the citadel of imperialism: the United States.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image: Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin in Moscow, 2019. Photo credit: Xinhua

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

There has been much coverage over the resurfacing of former CNN host Brian Stelter as the host for a panel at the World Economic Forum on alleged disinformation and “hate speech.” Stelter previously called for censorship under a “harm reduction model” and led a panel at a conference where Democrats discussed how to shape the news. He was confronted over his own dissemination for false stories targeting Republicans on CNN. Yet, I was most struck by a statement from New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger who described “disinformation” as the “most existential” problem the world is facing today. Sulzberger insisted that disinformation is the reason why there is a loss of “trust” today. He ignores his own history in eroding that trust in the media through flagrantly biased decisions at the New York Times.

Former  NYT editor Jill Abramson also slammed the participation of Sulzberger and the New York Times at Davos, denouncing it as a “corrupt circle-jerk” between media and business. She said that “the coverage was a sweetener to flatter the CEOs by seeing their names in the NYT.”

The panel was titled, “Clear & Present Danger of Disinformation” included panelists: New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger, Vice-President of the European Commission Vera Jourová, CEO of Internews Jeanne Bourgault, and Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass. The entire conference was notable in its omission of free speech advocates while inviting long advocates for censorship like Stelter.

Stelter asked his panel, “How does this discussion of disinformation relate to everything else happening today in Davos?”

Sulzberger responded:

“Well, first, thanks for having me is as part of this conversation. As you can imagine, this is something I really care deeply about. So, I think if you look at this question of disinformation, I think it maps basically to every other major challenge that we are grappling with as a society, and particularly the most existential among them. So, disinformation and in the broader set of misinformation, conspiracy, propaganda, clickbait, you know, the broader mix of bad information that’s corrupting information ecosystem, what it attacks is trust. And once you see, trust decline, what you then see is a society start to fracture, and so you see people fracture along tribal lines and, you know, that immediately undermines pluralism. And the undermining of pluralism is probably the most dangerous thing that can happen to a democracy. So I really — I think if if you’re spending this week thinking about the health of democracies and democratic erosion, I think it’s really import to work your way back up to where this starts.”

It was a telling statement. Sulzberger suggested that allowing some opposing views undermines “trust.” Indeed, allowing opposing views on Covid or election or global warming does erode trust in the media and the government. Society would be so less “fractured” if information is controlled and consistent.

There is a perfectly Orwellian element to Sulzberger’s words. Democracy is being threatened because there is too much “disinformation,” “misinformation,” “bad information,” and other harmful views being expressed.  After all, without such views, there was be less “fracture” and more “trust.”

That was precisely the point of the earlier conference.

What is most notable about the comment, however, was the date. This is after many of those censored and blacklisted in the media and social media have been seemingly vindicated in raising questions over masks or vaccines.

Among the suspended were the doctors who co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration,which advocated for a more focused Covid response that targeted the most vulnerable population rather than widespread lockdowns and mandates. Many are now questioning the efficacy and cost of the massive lockdowns as well as the real value of masks or the rejection of natural immunities as an alternative to vaccination.  Yet, these experts and others were attacked for such views just a year ago. Some found themselves censored on social media for challenging claims of Dr. Fauci and others.

Likewise, the New York Times was one of those newspapers suppressing stories like the Hunter Biden laptop. It only admitted that the laptop was authentic roughly two years after the election.

Some of us have been raising concerns over the emergence of a “shadow state” where corporations carry out censorship the Constitution bars the government from doing. Leading Democrats have been open about precisely this type of corporate manipulation of political speech on social media. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called upon these companies to use enlightened algorithms to protect users from their own bad reading choices.

Even President Joe Biden called for such regulation of speech and discussions by wise editors. Without such censorship and manipulation, Biden asked, “How do people know the truth?

The last year has shown how media censorship resisted scientific debate and buried legitimate stories. Yet, Sulzberger is still unrepentant and views disinformation rather than censorship to be the problem…Indeed the world’s most existential problem.

Sulzberger’s position is nothing if not consistent. He was involved in one of the lowest moments in modern media when the newspaper turned not only on a U.S. senator but its own editor to yield to the mob.

Former New York Times editorial page editor James Bennet recently said Sulzberger “set me on fire and threw me in the garbage” in the Cotton column controversy.

The treatment of the Cotton column shocked many of us. It was one of the lowest points in the history of modern American journalism. During the week of June 6, 2020, the Times forced out Bennet and apologized for publishing Cotton’s column calling for the use of the troops to restore order in Washington after days of rioting around the White House.

While Congress would “call in the troops” six months later to quell the rioting at the Capitol on January 6th, New York Times reporters and columnists denounced the column as historically inaccurate and politically inciteful. The column was in fact historically accurate, even if you disagreed with the underlying proposal (as I did).

Reporters insisted that Cotton was endangering them by suggesting the use of troops and insisted that the newspaper should not feature people who advocate political violence. Writers Taylor Lorenz, Caity Weaver, Sheera Frankel, Jacey Fortin, and others also said that such columns put black reporters in danger and condemned publishing Cotton’s viewpoint.

Critics never explained what was historically false (or outside the range of permissible interpretation) in the column.

In a breathtaking surrender, the newspaper apologized and not only promised an investigation into how such an opposing view could find itself on its pages but promised to reduce the number of editorials in the future:

“We’ve examined the piece and the process leading up to its publication. This review made clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our standards. As a result, we’re planning to examine both short term and long term changes, to include expanding our fact-checking operation and reduction the number of op-eds we publish.”

Bennet reportedly made an apology to the staff.  That however was not enough. He was later compelled to resign for publishing a column that advocates an option used previously in history with rioting.

Bennet recently told the new media outlet Semafor that Sulzberger

“blew the opportunity to make clear that the New York Times doesn’t exist just to tell progressives how progressives should view reality. That was a huge mistake and a missed opportunity for him to show real strength. He still could have fired me…I actually knew what it meant to have a target on your back when you’re reporting for the New York Times.

None of that mattered, and none of it mattered to AG. When push came to shove at the end, he set me on fire and threw me in the garbage and used my reverence for the institution against me,. This is why I was so bewildered for so long after I had what felt like all my colleagues treating me like an incompetent fascist.”

These controversies are the reason why trust in the media is at an all-time low. However, figures like Sulzberger still blame too much free speech as opposed to his own role in biased coverage that has undermined that trust.

That is why, in 2023, it is so glaring to see Sulzberger is being interviewed by Stelter on how disinformation is the greatest existential threat to the planet. Not nuclear proliferation, over-population, war, famine. It is the danger of allowing too much free speech that undermines “trust.”

The key however is that there was no “fracturing” at the World Economic Forum. It was the same figures voicing the same criticism of free speech as the scourge of our time. The problem is the vast global unwashed who fail to put their trust in the right people and sources. Fortunately, all the right people are gathered at Davos to show the way.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Davos “Debate” on “Disinformation”: The “Most Existential Problem” Facing the Planet Today
  • Tags:

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Many Syrians may have left as refugees, but the country seems very crowded.  The US-NATO attack on Syria for regime change began in 2011 and brought in outside actors: Iran, Israel, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the US.

The foreign ministers of Turkey, Russia and Syria are expected to meet soon to discuss the solution to the conflict.  Russia has shown it can challenge US influence in Syria and the Middle East, where old US allies are now acting independently of Washington.

Turkey is working to rebuild diplomatic, security and trade ties with Syria.  Arab states such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia are supportive of bring peace to Syria.

The YPG is a totalitarian Marxist militia and the Syrian wing of the Kurdish terrorist group PKK, which operates under the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

With so many issues at stake in Syria today, Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Dr. Ahmad Alderzi, the noted microbiologist and political activist, to gain more insight.

*

Steven Sahiounie (SS):  The Russian Center for Negotiation in Daraa, Syria was active in concluding a security agreement in Daraa. But, we have seen continuing violence against the Syrian Arab Army (SAA), even recently. In your opinion, will we witness a military operation in southern Syria to secure Daraa?

Ahmad Alderzi (AA):  The story of reconciliation in Daraa differs from the rest of the stories that took place in the rest of the regions, due to the nature of the interfering forces in southern Syria from the rest of the forces in other regions, and due to the post-war changes with NATO in Ukraine, especially the “Israeli” factor who is afraid of transforming the Syrian southern region into an area similar to southern Lebanon and Gaza, and would allow the repetition of Hezbollah’s experience.

In the Golan region, launching a resistance that disturbs the “Israeli” security supported by Iran and Hezbollah, in addition to the Jordanian and Saudi factor, who do not want Iran and Hezbollah to be present on these borders with the Golan and Jordan.  The fragile reconciliation was just for appearance, and to keep the armed groups under Russian auspices under the name of “the Eighth Brigade”, and turned a blind eye to the survival of the other groups with their individual and medium- weapons, which made these factors have a major role in southern Syria.

To maintain the state of security chaos to constitute a barrier against fears of the expansion of Iranian influence, in addition to the Russian factor, which is working to formulate a new regional order for contradictory and conflicting regional powers, including “Israel” that allows Russia to be a guarantor reference for all.

However, the Russian position began to shift after the war in Ukraine, and its relations developed rapidly with Iran to something like a security, military, and economic partnership, and its reflection on the relationship between them in Syria, which prompted those factors. The United States moved in the southern Syrian region and started working on connecting the Al-Tanf region with the regions of Al-Suwayda, Daraa, and Quneitra in a way that can isolate these areas from the partial control of Damascus over it. Therefore, a major military operation in southern Syria is linked to the level of progress of what the US is planning to do, although it is more likely to focus on the regions of northern Syria after the tripartite meeting in Tehran on July 19 of last year.

SS: Recently the defense ministers of Russia, Turkey, and Syria meet in Moscow. In your opinion will that meeting have concrete results?

AA: If we look at the nature of the historical and geographical relationship between what remains of Syria, the Levant, and Turkey, the Anatolian plateau importance of geography, history, and the nature of the successive crises in the two countries, the options available between them will force them to walk towards the middle of the road, and push them towards thinking outside the box. Here comes the importance of the meeting between the three defense ministers of Russia, Syria and Turkey, and it comes within the framework of the great international conflict, and the reshaping of the West Asian region, which pushes the Americans to get out of northeastern Syria. We only have to look at the event as a result of the tripartite meeting in Tehran, the sponsor of countries meeting.

Astana which is the other side of the Eurasian project which is based on its three pillars, which are the three countries. This imposes itself on Syria and Turkey with issues that push towards a political solution to the ongoing war in Syria, which is about to enter its thirteenth year in a few months.  The results will begin at the security and military levels, and proceed to political and economic levels.

SS:  The Russian president has a good reputation with both Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. In your opinion, will Russia encourage the reform of the relationship between Damascus and Riyadh?

AA:  Since 2013, President Putin has moved to work to persuade Saudi Arabia to get out of the war in Syria. Foreign Minister Lavrov’s visit to Saudi Arabia was to clarify the security risks to the region due to the possibility of the collapse of the Syrian state, and its repercussions on the geographical maps of the entire region.

The situation was different after the advent of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to the center of Saudi decision-making, who invested in the American retreat in West Asia, expanding the margin of freedom of movement for Saudi Arabia, especially after Donald Trump lost the US presidential elections, and the Democrats returned to gripping the joints of American political decision-making.

The data confirms that the Saudis want to return to the relationship with Syria.

This is what prompted the Bahrainis to open their embassy in Damascus, but the obstacles to their return are still continuing until now, as they demand the exit of Iran from Syria which they consider a threat to their regional role through their support for the resistance movements in Palestine, Lebanon, and Yemen. They also suffer from a dilemma: their war in Yemen, which constitutes a security threat to them especially with regard to the Saudi Plan 2030, which needs security stability that allows for this transformation and therefore, the return of relations with Syria is possible if they reach a basic conclusion that Iran is an essential part of the fabric of the region, and its exclusion is not possible. By virtue of its geopolitical weight and that the relationship with Israel cannot serve Saudi Arabia with anything, especially at the level of balancing the Iranian role.

Israel with its new extremist face after Netanyahu’s victory, and his alliance with Ben Gvir, constitutes a burden on the Saudi bets, and the last good thing is their conviction that has begun to form of their inability to win in Yemen, and defeat is close, and this is what prompted them to search for a way out, to withdraw in exchange for Yemeni security guarantees.

SS:   Syria and Turkey have a common interest in returning northeastern Syria to the Syrian government. In your opinion, can Russia play a role in this?

AA:  The matter for Russia is very vital as there are a group of factors pushing Russia to return northeastern Syria to the Syrian government, as it needs to prove that its foreign policies depend on fulfilling its legal and moral obligations towards states not dismantling states, but rather restoring the sovereignty of their governments over all of their lands, and this is what it expressed. By answering to the Syrian government’s call for military intervention in Syria, and on the other hand it seeks to secure the YPG, the Kurdish militia.

Those who supported them before the collapse of the Soviet Union by abandoning the protection of the Americans and providing a safe environment for their continuation. It has an interest in achieving national security for Turkey because it is certain that what the United States is working on is dismantling the region more than Britain and France did after the First World War and therefore, it is making great efforts on the level of the Syrian and Turkish states on the one hand, and on the YPG in particular, and the Syrian Kurds in general.

Russia seeks to find a political solution that gives the Syrian state the restoration of control over the region, the removal of Turkish national security concerns, and making the Kurds partners in the political solution, in exchange for their giving up arms, and breaking their alliance with the Americans.  This will play a key role in restoring the regions of northeastern Syria.

SS:  Recent reports indicate that there will be an imminent combined military operation between Russia, Syria and Turkey. What can you tell us about this upcoming military operation?

AA:  One of the outcomes of the tripartite meeting of the Tehran Summit, which I mentioned earlier, is related to the common threat to the survival of the American forces in northeastern Syria against the three countries, in addition to Syria, and depriving it of its lands and wealth.  It was agreed that the American forces should leave it, and the matter requires a Syrian-Turkish reconciliation.  It also requires the YPG to disengage from their association with the Americans, and the second option is the passage of the SAA, and its allies, to the areas east of the Euphrates.

Reaching the alignment of the Americans, by neutralizing the SDF, by imposing a fait accompli, without a clash. If it understands its risks, but if it does not accept, then a clash with it will be inevitable, and with the support of the Russian aviation.  I believe that this process is postponed because of two factors: the first is, the necessity of quick action on the Syrian-Turkish reconciliation, on and the second, is to continue the attempts with the YPG to return to the Syrian state with gains, which will be determined through negotiations between them and Damascus, which if successful will push the Americans out of the region.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

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

Featured image is from MD


Order Mark Taliano’s Book “Voices from Syria” directly from Global Research.

**Voices from Syria**

Author: Mark Taliano

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-9-1

Year: 2017

Product Type: PDF File

List Price: $6.50

Special Offer: $5.00 

Click to order.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “The US will leave Syria once the YPG reconcile with Damascus.” Interview with Dr. Ahmad Alderzi
  • Tags:

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

According to a study conducted by the World Population Review statistical organization, the population of India has surpassed that of China. The United Nations has not confirmed the announcement and instead expects India to reach the milestone later this year. None-the-less, what is universally agreed is that India’s population will surpass China’s this year. What does this mean?

India’s population was 1.417 billion at the end 2022, five million more than the 1.412 billion reported by China’s National Bureau of Statistics. The bureau announced on January 17 a decrease of 850,000 people compared to the previous year, the first decline in China’s population since 1961.

Chinese leaders identified in the 1960s and 1970s that because population growth was outpacing food production capabilities, poverty was a constant factor in hindering the development of the People’s Republic of China. At first, ideological campaigns were launched to limit births, and then in 1980 the one-child policy was announced, accompanied by abortion and mass sterilisation. As a result, the birth rate plummeted, a trend that experts anticipate will continue.

Declining birth rates and increasing life expectancy will mean a reduction in the number of young workers in China. Currently, 62% of the working-age population in China is between 16 and 59 years old, but their share is inexplicably declining. That means that it will be necessary to allocate more money to pensioners from the state budget.

Meanwhile, although there has been no official confirmation from New Delhi, experts believe that India’s population will certainly overtake China this year. The population difference is only a matter of a few million, miniscule when discussing two countries with well over a billion people.

For India, this is an important moral and psychological milestone. By becoming the world’s most populated country, India strengthens its quest to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, a distinction only held by China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

It also ensures that India maintains a young and vibrant population which will contribute to the country’s rapid development and treasury. With quick development and enriched coffers, India can continue building its military capabilities, an especially important matter considering its border issues and tense relations with China and Pakistan.

Just as importantly, Indian soft power is growing as expatriate communities around the world continue to expand. It cannot be overlooked that US Vice President Kamala Harris and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak are of Indian descent. Although Harris and Sunak are undoubtedly servants of their countries of birth, it does signify that Indians can sit at the highest level of any democratic government. This will inevitably lead to these countries having friendlier relations with India, as seen now in the US, UK and Canada.

As for the military, the general consensus is that a war in the 21st century is not just won because of troop numbers, but also because of modern technology and weapons. Compared to China, the process of modernising the Indian military is much slower. For example, while the Indians are assembling their second aircraft carrier, China already has four.

According to the Global Fire Power (GFP) 2023 Military Strength Ranking, China and India maintain third and fourth spot respectively, and in consecutive years. However, the GFP index indicates that it is more likely for China to take second spot from Russia than it is for India to move into third place. In this way, India’s population explosion will have little impact on its military capabilities, and rather the effects will be felt as secondary outcomes because of the country’s brain gain and continuing technological advancements.

A Morning Consult poll, published on January 17, revealed that Indians see China as their country’s “greatest military threat.” Forty-three percent of respondents named China as India’s greatest military threat, while only 13% cited Pakistan. Surprisingly though, 22% of respondents said that the US was India’s greatest threat, a massive nine percentage points difference with historic rival Pakistan. Therefore, Indians do not only view neighbouring and global power China as a major threat, but even the far-off US.

What is seemingly apparent though is that India’s global importance and stature is growing. Although one would traditionally view a large population as being synonymous with poverty and underdevelopment, China broke that stereotype and India too is quickly providing another example. India is now exhuming more confidence in its own development, progress and power, and this will contribute to a greater division of global power away from complete US hegemony. None-the-less, issues with China remain unresolved and will continue being a plight in bilateral relations in the foreseeable future.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on India’s Population Has Surpassed China’s. What Now?
  • Tags:

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Virtually every day in the news we hear about a young person, perfectly healthy, with no antecedent illness drop dead without explanation. As the cases roll in it has been my general observation that if the cardiac arrest is witnessed and there is prompt defibrillation, as in the case with Demar Hamlin, then neurologic and overall survival is possible.

Out of guilt, remorse, shame and in the stupor of a COVID-19 vaccination trance, the victim and the family usually make no statement about vaccination status—something that would have been a proud point of a selfie or a tweet a few years ago. In a recent paper by Li et al, the cellular basis for the wide range of mechanisms the lead to cardiac arrest in a COVID-19 vaccinated person are described. I was alarmed that the authors considered cardiac arrest and death “common” as listed in Table 2.

Li YE, Wang S, Reiter RJ, Ren J. Clinical cardiovascular emergencies and the cellular basis of COVID-19 vaccination: from dream to reality? Int J Infect Dis. 2022 Nov;124:1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.08.026. Epub 2022 Sep 6. PMID: 36075372; PMCID: PMC9444584.

Of note, the authors point out that Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, coronary ischemia, and myocarditis as underlying conditions have been found as the cause of cardiac arrest as reported in safety databases. A surge in adrenalin with the injection, during the later hours of sleep, and with athletics appears to play a role in the precipitation of the lethal arrhythmia. The authors also raise the issue of Kounis syndrome, or histamine and inflammatory factors triggering a heart attack. In the title, Li and coworkers imply that mass vaccination was a “dream” and now the cardiovascular complications including large-scale death represent the “reality” we are facing with this public health debacle.

Papers such as this are important as they may lead to more applied research on therapies to prevent arrythmias and help navigate patients through high risk periods after ill-advised COVID-19 vaccination. On a population level, the best strategy to save lives is to remove all the vaccines off the market and start cardiovascular screening programs for high risk individuals.

If you find “Courageous Discourse” enjoyable and useful to your endeavors, please subscribe as a paying or founder member to support our efforts in helping you engage in these discussions with family, friends, and your extended circles.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Source

Li YE, Wang S, Reiter RJ, Ren J. Clinical cardiovascular emergencies and the cellular basis of COVID-19 vaccination: from dream to reality? Int J Infect Dis. 2022 Nov;124:1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2022.08.026. Epub 2022 Sep 6. PMID: 36075372; PMCID: PMC9444584.

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

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

 

 

 

The American narrative – and other stories

Most of the world in which there is a decent educational system knows the foundational myths of the United States.  Essentially a bunch of oppressed settlers could no longer tolerate the weight of the taxes imposed on them by the King of England, they threw a tea party in Boston as a demonstration against too high taxes – and the revolution was on.  It was a revolution for freedom from the tyranny of a governing system that took too much wealth from the colonies when it should remain within the colonies.

That narrative is more truthful in the latter aspect of the loss of wealth to the King.  A more cynical narrative describes the elite of the colonies wanting to guard their own wealth and power and fomented rebellion among the masses – many of whom were not interested in rebelling – in order to capture their own markets, one of the principal factors being ownership of land and the need for an expanding market into the ‘uncivilized’ areas of North America.  The leaders of the revolution were all large landowners looking out for their own interests and property.

That narrative carries even more truth with the recognition of what they considered to be property.  Not only were land and ‘things’ property, but people were property as well, and could be bought and sold like any other commodity – except that other commodities did not rebel and fight back from time to time.  This third narrative establishes the basis of the common thread of racism, inequality, militarism, inequality, and general violence against persons from the inception of the U.S. to its current condition.   The tea party has little consideration in this narrative, which is based more on the value of black slaves and their forced contribution to the economic wealth of the new territories – and as property their potential to be taxed .  The original ‘Fathers of Confederation’ were mainly enslavers from the prime slave state of Virginia not from the elites of Boston.

1619 and all that

The roots of the slave holdings of the U.S. revolution is examined in the recent work “The 1619 Project – A New Origins Story” originally published in the New York Times in 2019 and formed into a book in 2021.

NYT Magazine, 2019

It demonstrates how King’s concerns originated with the founding of the country, and as witnessed by current events, still plagues the U.S. system.  The U.S. has 40 million and growing living in poverty, ranking 33rd out of 36 OECD countries for inequality [1], has by far the largest military and military budget in the world with over 800 military bases overseas and a similar number domestically , and incarcerates over 3 million of its own people within a largely privatized profit seeking prison system.

1619 marks the year the first slaves were sold into the new British colonies of North America.  Marked as property, it was their value as enslaved labour that helped build the wealth of the new colonies, and in this argument, were the principal factor in growing the wealth of the establishment, the enslavers, the large landowners, who harvested the wealth of their slaves.  As property, bought and sold, they had absolutely no rights and no way to gain their freedom unless otherwise having it given to them by their owners.

Along with that was the racism rampant within the Christianized world of Europe, stemming in part from the Papal Bull of 1452 (Doctrine of Discovery) declaring all lands open to be christianized and the savages dealt with as best befitting a colonial-settler people – as savages, to be killed or controlled for the ‘discoverers’ benefit.  The indigenous people were subject more to genocide; the imported slaves were subject to the laws of property – combined with the self righteous racism of the colonists.

Sugar and Cotton

Sugar was the original wealth creator throughout Latin America and in Louisiana, “None of this growth was possible without trafficking in human lives….The domestic terrorism that ended Reconstruction and destroyed so many black lives was particularly vicious in the sugar region.”  But the larger culprit was cotton, the economic power of the southern states from its harvesting, the economic power of they northern states from their manufacturing, and finally the demand for cotton products throughout the British empire and beyond:

“Cotton grown and picked by enslaved workers was the nation’s most valuable export.  The combined value of enslaved people exceeded that of all the railroads and factories in the nation….’American slavery is necessarily imprinted on the DNA of American capitalism.’

The importance of this specific kind of property – enslaved people – was both enshrined in the Constitution itself and affirmed by the Supreme Court’s interpretations….After the Civil War, legal provisions originally developed to protect slavery were extended to strengthen corporate interests and prompt laissez-faire capitalism….fundamentally shap[ing]the nation’s economy and the political institutions that governed it.”

In spite of the Civil War, the Emancipation Proclamation, the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (with its declaration of citizenship by birthright), and the series of Civil Rights Acts in the LBJ presidency, black citizens still face the unequal application of laws and regulations governing the U.S.

From highways destroying and bisecting black neighbourhoods,  criminal laws and resulting court convictions favouring whites, rights of self defense, and poor medical care,  the fear of blacks as seen by many current police actions and the presumed guilt in white neighbourhoods of blacks working or passing through – discrimination against blacks has escaped the confines of “We the people” “indivisible with justice and liberty for all.”

Music and Guns

Two items highlight the racism endemic to the U.S. in different ways: the less violent actions concerning black musicians and their music; and the much more violent actions surrounding the Second Amendment for gun rights.

The discussion on music is interesting in showing the strength of black history and its cultural influences on U.S. music and society in general.  From an outside perspective there is no music sourced in the U.S. that does not have its roots or is not strongly influenced by black musicians, artists, and producers.   Current white pop culture quickly adopts many of the creations and adaptations made by black artists.

While music operates mainly in a non-violent manner, the rules and regulations on gun rights have a dark and violent past within the Constitution and the manner in which it was formed.  The right to own guns is accorded to all citizens in the Second Amendment; however the amendment was enacted when neither slaves nor freedmen were considered citizens.  Arguments were made and are considered throughout the foundation mythology that its purpose was to prevent an uppity government from over-taxing, over regulating, or creating whatever transgressions an aggrieved people might feel towards their government.

The position present in 1619 argues that the amendment had a larger purpose.

“Though it did not explicitly say so, the Second Amendment was motivated in large part by a need for the new federal government to assure white people in the South that they would be able to defend themselves against Black people.”

Foreign Affairs

The U.S.’ contemporary record domestically and in foreign affairs carries forward their history of violence and racism.  The Christian Doctrine of Discovery (see Papal Bull, above) turned most of western Europe’s empires into oppressive regimes creating global empires by militarily dominating other regions of the world, creating major problems in all indigenous areas they tried to control.  The British set the stage for future U.S. tendencies, establishing colonial settler colonies around the world, militarily subjugating many other people, and joining freely into the slave trade.  The legacy the British left behind in the U.S. is seriously contaminated with the racism and fear of its slavery colonization.

The newly formed U.S. carried the fear, the racism, and the violence forward.  Becoming the global hegemon after World War II only seemed to increase their desire for more power and more wealth, from the U.S. dominated global financial institutions to the series of CIA instigated coups beginning with Guatemala and Iran in 1953.   Through Haiti, Korea, Vietnam, Brazil, Argentina, Philippines, Cuba, Venezuela and others the U.S. exported its racist fear and violence around the world in order to harvest the wealth for its corporate elite.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, the path was cleared for total dominance, the “full spectrum dominance” advocated by many neocon warhawks in the U.S. establishment.   Most of it continued through its violent racism against more of the world, focussed on the Middle East and Africa: Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and others have and are suffering the depredations of the U.S. military in the name of “freedom” – freedom for U.S. and global corporations to harvest the land and reduce the people to poor labourers suffering the abuse of a neocolonized people.

Israel is the U.S’ militarized outpost in the Middle East, although at this conjuncture in time it is difficult to tell as to who is directing the relationship – it is a symbiotic match of racial hatred and militarized control of ‘other’ people.  The Palestinians suffer from this relationship as do other people in the region either through violent conflict, sanctions, or occupation – or combinations of them all.

China and Russia are now challenging U.S. dominance economically and militarily.  The world is now multipolar without clear divisions as to which countries are on one side or another, having to balance the current financial power of the U.S. to its gradual (so far) economic decline.

The NATO-Russia war in Ukraine is currently a slow grinding affair threatening the power of the U.S. to maintain its dominance in opposition to the rising power of Russia’s industrialized  military warfare along with China’s creation of alternate trading paradigms evading and avoiding as much as possible the use of the US$ for its trade currency.

Unfortunately the U.S. has a history of overseas violence, overtly and covertly.  That should not surprise anyone as its entire history is one of violence over land, over people, all to maintain the supremacy of its self appointed exceptionalist mythology.   Reading “The 1619 Project – A New Origin Story” provides a set of perspectives that everyone interested in U.S. history should read and absorb for understanding its foundational narrative, and its ongoing actions domestically and abroad.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Jim Miles is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Goodreads

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “The 1619 Project – A New Origins Story”. The Onslaught of the Slave Economy in North America

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The year 2022 that became a turning point in the history of Ukraine is coming to an end. Thirty one years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, military conflict continues to rage in a number of Ukraine’s former regions while new hotbeds are smoldering. The military conflict in Ukraine has become the world’s largest, as measured by its impact on the global economy and by the ever-present danger that it could escalate into a new world war. Even the Pope in December identified the conflict in Ukraine as a “world war” which won’t see an “end” anytime soon.

Background to the conflict

Evidence that the Russian special military operation in Ukraine was inevitable and that all parties were preparing for it is shown by the continued shelling of Donbass towns and cities by Kyiv. This has been continuous during the past eight years. Donetsk city and region remains even now under intense fire by the artillery and mortars of the Kyiv regime, generously supplied by Western countries.

The Russian operation in Ukraine is actually the continuation of this long civil war in the Donbass region. Kyiv and its Western backers have refused to comply with the ‘Minsk 2’ peace agreement of February 2015. This envisioned a semi-autonomous status for the two Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk within a new, power-sharing federal structure for Ukraine. But the Western countries involved wished to maintain a subjugated status for the two republics and to use that as a point of conflict aimed at weakening the Russian Federation.

 

For eight long years, the Russian Federation sought a diplomatic solution to the conflict using ‘Minsk 2’ as a political framework. By late 2021, it was clear that Kyiv and its NATO backers would continue to reject this and would continue their war. Failure to act was no longer an option for Moscow, not least because it would be discredited at home.

When Russia did intervene in February 2022, harsh sanctions by the West followed. The purpose of these was to bring down the Russian economy, stir popular discontent among the Russian people, and discredit the Russian leadership. In other words, the goal of the conflict in Ukraine since 2014 has not been change or improvement in Ukraine, but regime change in the Russian Federation. In the minds of the architects of that policy, regime change would open up free access by Western corporations to Russia’s huge energy resources.

A weakening of Russia would also see Western threats heightened against Russia’s neighbour in Asia, the People’s Republic of China. It is facing its own economic and ‘regime change’ threats, centered on the ‘weak link’ of Taiwan, the island province of China that has been courted and armed by the West to be used as a wedge to divide and weaken the People’s Republic.

Concerning ‘what happened’ to Minsk 2, former German chancellor Angela Merkel let the cat out of the bag in several interviews in early December (Die Zeit, and Der Spiegel) of this year discussing the fate of that agreement. She admitted that Minsk 2 was used by her government to buy time for Ukraine to build up its military strength and continue striking against Donbass. In Russia, Merkel’s revelations were met with astonishment, for they meant that the words of Western leaders mean nothing and they can no longer be trusted.

Vladimir Putin had always maintained cordial relations with Merkel. When Merkel’s revelation hit the news, he told Russian journalists, “It is disappointing. I did not expect to hear something like that from the ex-Chancellor. I always hoped that the German leadership was genuine. Yes, she was on Ukraine’s side, supporting it. But nevertheless, I genuinely hoped that German leadership expected a settlement based on the principles achieved… during the Minsk negotiations.”

He continued,

“It appears to me that nobody planned to live up to these Minsk agreements… They lied to us, and the only reason for these processes was to pump Ukraine up with weapons and get it ready for military action. Well, we can see that. Maybe we were too late to realise what was happening. Maybe this [Russian military intervention] should have been started earlier.”

Since the Ukraine coup of 2014, pressure on the Russian government to act in defense of Donbass has come from the millions of Ukrainians who have moved to Russia for safety as well as large part of the Russian population as a whole.

Social versus neoliberal government policy

The basis for pro-Russian sympathies and influence in Ukraine comes not so much from any ethnic feelings (notwithstanding the fierce, right-wing and anti-Russia ethnic nationalism promoted by the governments of Ukraine) as the desire for greater social equality for the poorest in society. A significant role is played here by the social and economic conditions in Russia, which are far superior to those in Ukraine.

The Russian Federation has much higher social assistance, pensions and salaries as well as low prices for electricity and heating. Ukraine, on the other hand, has been stubbornly following the recommendations of the IMF in recent years to subsidize and enrich local and foreign capitalist investors through the privatizations of state industries while cutting social spending.

Even a few Western journalists have reported on this. Russian troops withdrew from Kherson city and surrounding region in November. A report in France’s Le Monde on December 19 was headlined,

‘Through propaganda based on nostalgia for the USSR and generous pension payments, Russian occupation authorities found support among the elderly in Kherson’.

In a random encounter with the Le Monde’s visiting correspondent, an elder resident of the city explains, “When the Russians were here, we had everything we needed and we were not afraid to walk in the street. Now we are just trying to survive!” Another says, “The Ukrainian soldiers are good for nothing, they don’t help us and only attract more shells.”

Pro-Western sentiments in Ukraine (as well as ‘pro-Ukrainian’ sentiments in the West) are mostly a result of large-scale media manipulations. In the Ukrainian conflict, the media component has sometimes been even more important than the economic or military campaigns. In this regard, Western media are far ahead of their Russian counterparts.

Ukrainian left-wing journalist Oleg Yasinsky, who lives in Chile, has written recently,

“Ukraine has become not only a flashpoint between the forces of neoliberalism and humanity but also the largest media clash of our time. It is a country with a hologram state. Using the latest media technologies, it is trying to convince the world of reality as it sees it in order to generate the ‘public opinion’ that planetary elites need.”

Yasinsky says  Ukraine has become a model that is being tested for use in Western countries themselves. Social discussion and debate at the top levels of government and civil society are suppressed, while police, economic and cultural repression is waged against all dissenters. He writes that representatives of yesterday’s leading European democracies can no longer criticize the neo-Nazi/neoliberal dictatorship in Ukraine because with each passing day, they differ from it less and less.

In this war, the Ukraine regime (or rather, its Western sponsors) pay little attention to the views and needs of Ukrainian soldiers. Instead, those who matter are the bloggers and ‘influencers’ who are trying to convince Western audiences to send more food and other humanitarian aid as well as weapons to the Kyiv regime.

War and humanitarian aid as massive money laundering

Much of the humanitarian aid provided to Ukraine by the United Nations other international organizations ends up stolen. According to local journalists and aid volunteers, on average, about half of humanitarian aid arriving in Ukraine immediately ‘disappears’.

The Ukrainian news journal Strana.ua published a story on December 15 showing photos by journalist Konstantin Ryzhenko of bread from the UN food mission being sold in a street market. The clear plastic packaging reads, ‘International Food Program of the United Nations’, implying, of course, that it was intended for free distribution to those in need.

“The information people are sending to me is shocking,” Ryzhenko tells Strana. “Quantity, quality… Where do hundreds of tons of humanitarian aid go? Wherever you go, 40-100-200 tons of humanitarian aid arrived but people have nothing. And if they do receive something, then it is bullshit [of poor quality]”, he explains. He calls the humanitarian aid that reaches people ‘bullshit’ because it often consists of date-expired food products that may no longer be edible.

While humanitarian aid from abroad is being stolen and resold, many people are receiving ‘aid’ in the form of expired products from Ukrainian supermarkets. On December 21, there was an attempted assassination of Konstantin Ryzhenko near his home in Kiev.

With such concerns of theft and reselling of humanitarian food aid, one can only imagine what is happening with the billions of dollars being spent on weapons aid. That information is strictly classified by the Ukraine regime. What was supplied to its military and by what company, how much profit was earned – only future generations may eventually unearth such information.

Suppression of free speech to fight the Russian threat

More than a dozen opposition parties have been banned and most media outlets have been closed in Ukraine this year. But that hasn’t stopped the outcries locally and abroad to ‘defend democracy in Ukraine’. What little free media remains in Ukraine is constantly obliged to simply reproduce the statements and information issued by the Office of the President of Ukraine, under threat of losing its licenses.

In December, Ukraine’s parliament passed a controversial media law allowing Kyiv authorities to shut down or block any media outlet without explanation and without a court decision. It prohibits any criticism of the actions of the Ukrainian government (excepting that media which receives Western grants). Months ago, the European Federation of Journalists called the proposed law “worthy of the worst of authoritarian regimes”.

Ukrainians as human shields

Ukraine initially appeared to adopt tactics of urban street fighting, on the advice of British military instructors. Evacuations of civilian populations were not necessarily carried out, or were not done so in a timely way. This is already something of a war crime. By contrast, defense lines built by self-defence forces for Donetsk city were situated well outside the city. Hundreds of thousands of Donbass residents were evacuated to safety and comfort in Russia in advance of it launching its military intervention.

According to Reuters, citing Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, more than one million Ukrainians evacuated to Russia by the end of April 2022, including some 120,000 from the Donbass republics. Lavrov said Russia was expecting several million more. And indeed, Statistica reports that as of early October 2022, nearly three million Ukrainians have moved to Russia. (The pre-war population of Ukraine is estimated at 42 million.)

In November, President Zelensky bluntly explained why he had abandoned plans to evacuate Kyiv and other major cities after Russia began to strike electricity transmission stations located there. “If there are no people in the city, then the missiles will be everywhere,” Zelensky said, thereby contradicting claims by his own government that Russia was targeting the civilian population and confirming the accusations by critics that Kyiv is using civilians as human shields. Imagine for a moment the uproar in Western media if such a statement were made by the leader of a country in conflict with the West.

Instigation of religious wars

In December, Ukrainian intelligence agencies launched a campaign to ban the traditional Ukrainian Orthodox Church, accusing it of links to its ‘sister’ Russian Orthodox Church.

Searches and arrests have taken place in many monasteries throughout the country, despite the formal existence in Ukraine of ‘freedom of religion’. According to photographic ‘evidence’ provided to media by the SBU (Ukraine’s federal secret police agency), searches of monasteries have turned up such ‘incriminating evidence’ as a bust of the Russian poet Alexander Pushkin, a map of the Moscow Metro, prayer books published in the Russian Federation, and several Russian 10-ruble coins (worth about 14 US cents each).

In Lviv, one priest detained by police had correspondence on his phone in which he blamed NATO for the current conflict in Ukraine and wrote that Western countries intended to fight to the last Ukrainian. In Ternopil, the SBU reported a suspicion of treason against the rector of the Pochaev Theological Seminary. His accused “anti-Ukrainian activities” included the dissemination of “Russian narratives” in an anonymous Facebook profile.

Some of the arrested Orthodox monks and priests have been exchanged for Ukrainian prisoners of war. One of the reasons for the persecution of the church is precisely for the purpose of prisoner exchanges, since Russia is holding many times more prisoners of war than Ukraine. Thus has an already-inflated religious conflict between the Russian Orthodox Church and its breakaway Ukrainian counterpart intensified. In history, religious conflicts have always been very difficult to extinguish.

The search by the Kyiv regime, targeting Ukrainians, for “collaborators and Russian agents”  has been significantly expanded and strengthened of late. In addition, under this pretext, personal vendettas are being waged. Businesses with alleged ‘Russian links’ are being squeezed out in the Kherson/Kharkov region. Extortion is demanded to ‘remove’ criminal accusations against individuals for ‘collaboration’ with Russia. Arrests are even made for correspondence with relatives deemed to be suspect. The Ukrainian Telegram channel ‘Resident’ writes that the SBU has arrested some 4,000 civilians for the purpose of prisoner exchanges with Russia.

The war loans funded by Western taxpayers

On December 6, the Day of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal stated that absolutely all taxes paid by citizens and enterprises are being directed to meeting military needs. The total military costs to Ukraine have amounted to more than $US 30 billion, of which two-thirds has gone to pay the salaries of the military. The remainder of military expenses, according to Shmyhal, are being borne by Ukraine’s Western allies. Earlier, the minister of finance of Ukraine, Serhiy Marchenko, argued that Ukraine finances only one third of its budget expenditures from its own revenues; the remaining two-thirds are provided by foreign sponsors and creditors.

In other words, Kyiv is conducting hostilities clearly beyond its means, and the functioning of the Ukrainian state is now dependent on the generosity of Western partners. This amounts to a loss of sovereignty, making all of Ukraine into a sort-of private military company.

Most of the funds allocated to Kyiv are in the form of loans, classified according to interest rate and repayment schedules. By the beginning of 2022, Ukraine’s external debt was already some 65% of the country’s GDP; by November 2022, the foreign debt had surpassed the country’s annual GDP.

In total, every Ukrainian, including children and babies, already owes some US$7,000 to Western creditors. But this figure is based on an estimated population of 42 million in 2014 (including the population of Donbass at the time). If we take into account that many millions of Ukrainians have left the country and a number of regions have seceded from Ukraine, then the remaining population will bear a double burden, perhaps in the order of $14,000 per capita. The average Ukrainian does not earn such an amount in a year. Simply put, the growing debt is unpayable. Ukrainians are repaying such loans with their lives, for the interests of foreign creditors.

Billions of dollars have been shelled out by Western taxpayers to assist the Kyiv regime’s war, but Ukrainians will be left indebted for generations to come. Funds that could otherwise serve to make social improvements and lessen the assaults on the planet’s natural environment, in Ukraine and in the West, are being wasted. This fraudulent scheme is very beneficial for Ukrainian and Western leaders and arms manufacturers. For them it is desirable that this war go on forever. For the rest of the world, this is a tragedy.

Anticipation of conflict in 2023

In 2023, both sides in the conflict are likely to continue and even escalate active hostilities. We do not know the military plans of the Russian, Ukrainian and NATO military leaders, but so far, all sides are talking about the need to defeat the enemy. The “peace initiatives” recently put forward by Zelensky require a surrender of the Russian Federation and the payment of reparations. This is quite unrealistic, to say the least. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said in an interview with Magyar Nemzet at the end of December:

“Ukraine can continue to fight only as long as the United States supports it with money and weapons. If the Americans want peace, then there will be peace.”

In other words, even the leader of NATO member Hungary recognizes who the prospects for peace in Ukraine depend upon.

In military terms, terrible fighting in and around the small city of Bakhmut (population 75,000)  is taking place. (In Donetsk, the city is called Artyomovsk, named after the famous Bolshevik Party leader Fyodor Andreyevich Sergeyev (1883-1921) whose code name was ‘Comrade Artyom’.) The fighting there has been going on for four months and the city has become a graveyard for thousands of Ukrainian servicemen. They talk on social media that fighting in Bakhmut means a quick death, or in the “best” case, a serious injury.

Russian military expert Vasily Dandykin claims that the armed forces of the Russian Federation are holding down Ukrainian troops near Bakhmut and thus giving time to prepare a large-scale offensive operation in the remainder of the Donetsk republic still in Ukrainian hands.

“The Russian Federation is building up forces. Indeed, there is an opportunity to correct some of the mistakes of the past and start moving forward again in the Zaporozhye and the Kherson regions.We need to liberate these regions. But first, you need to be well prepared. The choice of the season, by the way, is also important. Winter is ahead and the help of ‘General Frost’ will be useful,” says the Russian expert.

At the same time, Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Mikhail Galuzin says that any forecasts regarding the end of the Ukrainian crisis may turn out to be irrelevant if the military confrontation  becomes protracted. The interests of the military-industrial complex of NATO countries, primarily the United States, also indicate that the conflict may take on a protracted character.

Ukraine is  reportedly expending 14,000 shells every two days, yet the US military-industrial complex only produces such a quantity in one month.

Continued US military assistance to Kyiv will require a ramp-up of mass production of armaments and the construction of new military factories. Large investors will only invest in such military enterprises if they are confident that the war will not end quickly.

In other words, the more money American investors invest in long-term arms production programs, the longer Ukrainians will continue to die.

Indeed, this is what the Hungarian prime minister was talking about in the earlier citation from him. As the human resources of the Ukrainian armed forces are depleted, mercenary fighters from other countries may enter hostilities in larger numbers (as was the case in Syria). Thousands are already fighting on the side of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

The World Bank predicts that by the end of 2023, 55% of the population of Ukraine will live below the poverty line. The official poverty line in Ukraine is a mere 2,589 UAH per month ($70). That is about the daily cost of a loaf of bread and a liter of milk. How are electricity, heating and so many other costs of daily living to be covered?

The only area where Ukrainians now consistently receive a respectable salary is the armed forces, some 20,000 to 30,000 UAH per month (US$500 to $750). But the risk of death is very high. Despite the risk, amidst conditions of mass unemployment and impoverishment, this remains the only realistic source of income for many in the country.

Western countries may rightly fear that in the event of an end to the military conflict in Ukraine, some one million unemployed male Ukrainians with experience in military operations will seek to emigrate to the West, looking for work. Many will be suffering the psychological disorders associated with war, and in the West they will find radical, right-wing Ukrainian paramilitary groups urging them to join.

All these factors will contribute to prolonging the conflict in Ukraine.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is licensed under Creative Commons

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on End of Year Report: Corruption and Repression to Save a Neoliberal Regime in Ukraine
  • Tags:

Venezuela’s Seed Law Should be a Global Model

January 20th, 2023 by Owen Schalk

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Seeds are an often-overlooked political battleground in industrialized countries like those of North America and Europe, but for peasant farmers in the Global South, the battle over seed rights is critical to their livelihoods.

Locally shared seeds are crucial for many rural communities—“genetic keys to biodiversity and climate change resilience,” as researcher Afsar Jafri states, as well as “records of cultural knowledge” and “the ultimate symbol of food security.” However, farmers’ ability to continue sharing and planting these seeds is under constant threat by multinational corporations and the states that back them.

In 2015, the six largest agribusiness corporations—BASF, Bayer AG, Dow, DuPont, Monsanto, and Syngenta—controlled 63 percent of the commercial seed market. In 2018, Bayer acquired Monsanto for $66 billion. The resulting corporate entity controls nearly 60 percent of the world’s proprietary seed supply.

Patented seeds against farmer livelihoods

The imposition of patented transgenic seeds onto rural communities has had a catastrophic impact on human livelihoods and biodiversity protection. In many countries, seeds have traditionally been the collective property of farmers—however, these farmers’ right to control their own seed supply is being attacked by corporate forces which have captured capitalist states around the world.

In 2010, the government of Colombia adopted Law 970 as part of a free trade agreement (FTA) with the United States government. Under the terms of the FTA, Bogotá gave legal monopoly to seeds produced by US and European corporations and forced Colombian farmers to only use certified seeds manufactured by these companies. Farmers who were caught saving seeds or planting unregistered seeds were subject to fines or jail time. These laws were a condition for Washington to agree to the FTA.

Law 970 not only precipitated a rise in food production prices, since farmers were forced to purchase seeds from companies like Monsanto rather than use communally shared seeds; it also caused the Colombian state to destroy food products grown from saved seeds. This occurred in 2011 in towns like Campo Alegre, where Colombian authorities raided the warehouse and trucks of rice farmers and destroyed 70 tonnes of rice that was not produced in accordance with Law 970.

The state’s violent criminalization of seed saving and localized food production in Campo Alegre and other towns provoked a nationwide farmers’ protest, which succeeded in having the law suspended for two years and rewritten. However, these changes did not represent a policy reversal, as attacks on peasant livelihoods and targeted assassinations of peasant leaders continue to plague the countryside at a terrifying rate.

Seed monopolies and globalized capitalism

In India, the government’s imposition of the kind of industrial capitalist agriculture promoted by the IMF and World Bank has led to tremendous rates of dispossession and pollution—and, of course, mass resistance as demonstrated by the farmers’ protests of 2020-2021. Such policies also take aim at farmers’ ability to save and share seeds locally. One statistic claims that of the roughly 100,000 varieties of paddy seeds that existed in pre-independence India, there are only around 5,000 left today.

As Jafri writes:

The forced replacement of traditional seeds by chemical responsive hybrid seeds…is eroding the rich genetic diversity that India’s farmers have evolved over centuries, increasing farmers’ vulnerability to climate change, floods, droughts and other environmental disasters. At the breakneck speed which the traditional seeds are already being replaced with company seeds, [the] day is not far when Indian farmers will be forced to become completely dependent for seed supply from [transnational companies].

The corporatization of seeds and the criminalization of seed saving is a key feature of the post-Cold War push for capitalist globalization of the type embodied by the neoliberal structural adjustment programs (SAPs) advocated by the IMF, the World Bank, and the Washington Consensus. These austerity reforms and the aggressive push by Western countries for FTAs in the Global South have put tremendous pressure on rural livelihoods in many ways, including by attacking small farmers’ production and distribution of the local seed varieties. The planting of these seeds is ecologically, economically, and socially regenerative, but they earn no profits for the transnational companies whose interests are paramount in FTA negotiations.

The “colonial project” of genebanks

Seed saving is a key element of sustainable agricultural production because, as Canadian researcher Patrick Chassé writes, “this incremental selection process created unique landraces, or varieties of plants that are well adapted to their environment.” However, the national and international pressures exerted on seed-saving farmers are immense:

Some farmers still diligently save their seeds, but most have abandoned this tradition because they face financial pressure to produce large volumes of uniform crops that can be sold in grocery stores. Around the world, farmers have become dependent on large companies that sell specialized seeds that, by design, cannot be saved… Many heirloom varieties that were well adapted to specific eco-regions have been lost in this chase for maximum yields.

Seeds are still saved in Western countries like Canada, but they tend to be treated as artifacts, isolated in research centres called “genebanks” which are designed to preserve the seeds for decades. While genebanks may save the seeds from extinction, they are generally not concerned with reintegrating the seeds into their natural environment, a move which would threaten the profit margins of the large agribusiness corporations with which the Canadian state has historically allied itself. As Chassé writes: “This means that the naturally democratic act of seed saving has been replaced by a reliance on large research centres that store seeds far from the communities and landscapes that created the plant.”

After visiting Plant Gene Resources of Canada (PGRC), a genebank on the University of Saskatchewan campus, Chassé was unable to shake the impression that the facility and others like it are a “colonial project.”

Genebanks store thousands of plant varieties, but most of these were created by anonymous farmers and peasants. This crop diversity now often benefits industry. Around the world, small producers have struggled to remain competitive against industrial farms that invest heavily in increasing production and minimizing costs. These monolithic operations are always searching for new crop variants, hybrids that produce more while resisting the spectrum of diseases that are created by relentless monocropping. These desirable traits that favour commerce are often extracted from the ‘heritage’ varieties that were created by centuries of small farmers. As Michael Taussig acerbically observed, “seeds banks are booty, relics of despoliation.”

Agriculture in Chávez’s Venezuela

Venezuelans have decided to take an entirely different approach to seed politics. With the election of Hugo Chávez in 1999, rural development and self-government were foregrounded through laws focused on agrarian reform and land redistribution. Additionally, the new constitution, approved by popular referendum in December 1999, emphasized the importance of food security “through the promotion of sustainable agriculture as a strategic basis for integrated rural development.”

Chávez himself railed against transgenic foods on many occasions, highlighting the ways in which this model of agriculture dismantles a nation’s food sovereignty. In 2004, for example, he terminated a contract with Monsanto to plant 500,000 acres of transgenic soybeans on Venezuelan soil, announcing instead that the land would be used to grow yuca, an indigenous crop.

The Venezuelan government promoted local organization via participatory measures like the Organic Law of Communal Councils, placing more democratic control of production in the hands of both rural and urban communes and thus eroding the central role of national and multinational agricultural companies.

In addition to supporting grassroots production in urban centres, Chávez sought to engineer a rural renaissance by encouraging migration out of cities and into agricultural careers. He stressed the need to attain national food sovereignty by moving away from imports toward self-sustaining networks producing indigenous crops in ecological ways. He explained that people in Venezuela were drawn to the cities by a “centripetal force,” and that his policies aimed to reverse the trend in order to “occupy the geographic space of the country in a more harmonious and balanced way.”

One of the most progressive steps toward protecting small-scale agriculture in the country came after Chávez’s death, with the National Assembly’s passage of a new Seed Law in 2015. But while the Seed Law was approved after his death, its roots can be found in the agricultural philosophy and doctrine of popular participation espoused by his government from 1999 to 2013.

Former Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez recording a TV show in Hacienda Bolívar in the southwest region of Colón. Photo by Prensa Miraflores/Flickr.

The 2015 Seed Law

Telesur contributor Quincy Saul referred to the passage of the 2015 Seed Law as “arguably the biggest thing to happen in Venezuela since the death of Hugo Chavez,” an occurrence in which “a movement of small farmers took on one of the largest corporations in the world [Monsanto], and won.”

Following the Seed Law’s approval,

imported seeds (especially of garden vegetables) have practically disappeared, entering into the illegal economy. Meanwhile, seeds for more traditional crops, which have always been under popular control, have become more important in campesino production…In that sense, the law is more than a law: it is a plan for action to gain seed sovereignty.

While the radical land reform measures pursued under Chávez have stalled under Maduro, the passage of the Seed Law at a time of increasing political and economic crisis represented a major win for the scientists, small farmers’ movements, and local organizations who had been pushing the state to enact such legislation for years.

The Seed Law was the result of years of consultation with social movements and peasant organizations in the country. In addition to prohibiting transgenics and the privatization of seed varieties, the law promises governmental support for the protection and expansion of farmer-run seed systems. The stated objectives of the law as outlined by the Association for Plant Breeding for the Benefit of Society (APBREBES) are to:

support a transition from industrial agriculture to agroecology and an eco-socialist agriculture; promote the production of seeds at national level and ensure self-sufficiency; protect agrobiodiversity; promote the traditional and local knowledge and practices of peasants, afro-descendant and indigenous peoples, and other local communities; prohibit patents and plant breeders’ rights on seeds; prohibit transgenic seeds; and guide public policies so that differentiated standards and policies are applied according to the scale of production…the law prohibits seeds that endanger ecosystems, biodiversity, human health and food sovereignty. Violation of these prohibitions may be penalized with 5 to 10 years of prison.

The Seed Law created a National Seed Commission, comprised of four governmental representatives and three representatives from social movements, as well as a Popular Council for the Protection of the Local, Peasant, Afro-descendant and Indigenous Peoples’ Seeds. As APBREBES explains, “The Council’s role is to promote peasant seeds systems, including the conservation, use and exchange of seeds, local seed banks, community seed production enterprises, collaborative breeding and participative certification mechanisms; as well as to participate in policy making and provide inputs to the National Seed Commission.”

Implementing the Seed Law from below

As political confrontation intensified in Venezuela, the oppositional-controlled National Assembly passed a different seed law that called for the return of imported transgenic seeds and seed patents. At the same time, opposition demonstrations against the state sometimes vandalized government-run food research and distribution centres, including the National Institute of Nutrition and laboratories for the production of ecological farming inputs. Meanwhile, US-led sanctions precipitated a collapse of government revenues, meaning the state had few resources to support the implementation of the Seed Law.

Nevertheless, local organizations and communities began to implement the Seed Law from below. Plan Pueblo a Plan, a peasant-created initiative to push back against Venezuelans’ reduced access to food as a result of sanctions, joined with Proinpa (Integral Producers of the Páramo) to establish five centres for the local production and distribution of native potato seeds. Pueblo a Pueblo producers also began efforts to recover corn, legume and tuber seed varieties that had largely vanished under the pre-Chávez industrial agriculture model.

And it isn’t only Pueblo a Pueblo and Proinpa. Seed production centres were built throughout the country after the passing of the Seed Law – but, at the same time, the Bolivarian Revolution’s precarious position resulted in the re-emergence of more market-centred forces in the state and the increased power of interest groups such as agribusiness. As a result, the gains made after 2015 are in a dangerous position.

The Seed Law in danger

Despite the fact that the Seed Law prohibits the use of transgenic seeds, there have been reports of companies using genetically modified seeds on Venezuelan land. In November 2022, Esquisa Omaña of the organization Venezuela Free from GMOs stated: “Campesinos have denounced the presence of GMO seeds in different parts of the country. This violates the 2015 Seed Law.” The organization called on the National Seed Commission to look into the complaints but apparently found “no capacity or interest” from state institutions to investigate.

Ricardo Vaz blames the increased influence of private companies since 2015 for the state’s lack of interest in investigating allegations of Seed Law violations. “[T]here is a reconfiguration process going on that surrenders protagonism to the private sector and multinational corporations,” he argues. “In what concerns food production, agribusinesses have become the main actors, with the government openly calling for foreign investment in the sector and offering all possible advantages.”

In 2022, several Venezuelan officials floated the idea of revising the Seed Law in order to drum up international investment in the country, while elements of the press have condemned seeds traded between farmers as “pirate seeds.” Venezuelan agribusinesses have organized events around the reintroduction and promotion of transgenic seeds, including an April event in the city of Maracay titled “Future of the Technology of Genetically Modified Organisms.” One of the groups behind such events, the Venezuelan Association of Seed Companies (AVESEM), is associated with multinational giants Bayer and Syngenta.

Pablo Alvarado, representative of the state of Guárico for the Pátria Para Todos (PPT) party, has called for a revision of the Seed Law in order to generate more foreign investment. “Intellectual property must be protected,” he stated, “because we need to adapt to globalization, to new investors, we have to protect ideas, technology.”

While Alvarado asserts that he is not calling for the reversal of the Seed Law, peasant organizations and agroecologists in Venezuela find such statements worrisome. Activist and biologist Giselle Perdomo has said that there are clear economic interests behind such calls to alter the Seed Law:

The interests are clearly economic, with a desire to bring transgenic seeds to the country, particularly corn, and thus develop this type of industrial agriculture with pesticides, which on the one hand promises productivity, and on the other hand contaminates rivers, soils and affects food sovereignty… The Seed Law also reinforces the viability of the peasant seed trade. We see in different press articles a desire to criminalize the trade of what they call “pirate seeds.”

The Seed Law as a global model

Despite the pushback the Seed Law continues to face, it remains a model for how countries around the world can safeguard their biodiversity, ecology, social and economic fabrics, and food production systems from national and transnational agribusiness.

Other social movements in the region have clearly taken notice. For example, the Colombian House of Representatives has been presented multiple times with draft legislation “to prohibit the entry, production, commercialization and export of genetically modified seeds.” These proposals were rejected under former President Iván Duque, but current leader Gustavo Petro, who criticizes genetically modified crops and used the language of food sovereignty to promote sustainable agricultural practices, may revisit the question in the future.

While Venezuela has often been discussed in the media, usually as a simplistic cudgel against the left, the realities of political struggle in the country have produced numerous gains that can and should inspire others, foremost among them being the 2015 Seed Law. The law provides a model for how the knowledge and traditions of small-scale farming can be defended against corporate dispossession—but ongoing debates about its revision also highlight the precarity of such changes and the need to continue defending gains even after they have apparently been secured.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Owen Schalk is a writer based in Winnipeg. He is primarily interested in applying theories of imperialism, neocolonialism, and underdevelopment to global capitalism and Canada’s role therein. Visit his website at www.owenschalk.com.

Featured image: A farm worker holds bell peppers during a harvest in Cubiro, Venezuela. Photo from Shutterstock.

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Russian officials on Thursday reacted to a report from The New York Times that said the US was warming to the idea of helping Ukraine strike Crimea despite the risk of a Russian escalation.

When asked about the report on Wednesday, State Department spokesman Ned Price didn’t deny its contents and said, “Crimea is Ukraine,” as the US hasn’t recognized Crimea as Russian since Russia took control of it in 2014.

Anatoly Antonov, Russia’s ambassador to the US, responded to Price’s comments and the reports, likening the plans to potential “terrorist attacks” and warning of escalation.

“The State Department, through out-of-touch assertions that ‘Crimea is Ukraine’ and that the Armed Forces of Ukraine can use American weapons to protect their territory, is essentially pushing the Kiev regime to carry out terrorist attacks in Russia,” Antonov said, according to a press release from the Russian Embassy in the US.

“Hearing such remarks from Washington, the criminals in Kiev will once again feel complete permissiveness. The risks of conflict escalation will only increase,” he added.

Over in Moscow, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the US delivering weapons for attacks on “Russian soil” was “extremely dangerous.” The Times report said that the Biden administration previously avoided supporting strikes on Crimea due to the risk of escalation, but that concern of Russia resorting to nuclear weapons has waned in Washington even though the risk clearly still exists.

“Naturally, the very discussion of the acceptability of supplying Ukraine with arms which would allow strikes to be delivered on Russian soil … is potentially extremely dangerous,” Peskov said. “This will mean taking the conflict to a whole new level which certainly will not bode well in terms of global European security.”

The US reasoning for being less concerned about escalation is based on the fact that Russia hasn’t used a nuclear weapon up to this point. But Moscow has shown a willingness to massively escalate the war in response to attacks on Crimea.

Russia didn’t start large-scale missile strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure until October, after the truck bombing of the Kerch Bridge, which connects Crimea to the Russian mainland. Since then, the bombardments have become routine, and millions of Ukrainians are struggling to power and heat their homes.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

Featured image is from New Eastern Outlook

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Ringing in the New Year with price rises on more than 350 drugs they market in the United States, senior pharma industry executives will have been busy rehearsing their well-worn claim that such increases are necessary to support research and development costs. Lowering drug prices, they argue, would reduce profits and stifle product innovation. If we examine the evidence, however, the truth turns out to be rather different. A recent study shows that between 2012 and 2021, major pharma companies in the United States spent more money on stock buybacks and shareholder dividends than they did on research and development.

Authored by economists William Lazonick, professor emeritus of economics at the University of Massachusetts, and Öner Tulum, a researcher at Brown University on Rhode Island, the study describes how evidence strongly contradicts the pharma industry’s assertion that it is necessary for drug prices to be unregulated in order to generate profits for reinvestment in innovative new medicines. In reality, rather than using profits to increase investment, pharma companies focus instead on maintaining high drug prices so that, by making massive distributions to shareholders, they can boost the yields on their publicly traded shares.

The study reveals that between 2012 and 2021, the 14 largest publicly-traded pharma companies in the United States spent $747 billion on stock buybacks and shareholder dividends – an amount that exceeds the $660 billion they spent on drug research and development. Stock buybacks are increasingly being used by firms as a means of manipulating their share prices. By repurchasing shares of their own stock, they reduce the number of shares available and increase the value of those that remain. As such, the value of a company can be artificially inflated irrespective of the efficacy or safety of its products. While this practice has been legal in the United States since 1982 and has since become widespread, the study authors argue that it should be banned.

The need for radical reform of the global healthcare system

The findings of this study clearly demonstrate that at its core, the pharma industry isn’t really a health industry; it is an investment industry whose primary purpose is enriching the bank balances of its shareholders. To the senior executives heading the world’s pharma companies, the needs of human health come a very poor second behind the generation of stupendous wealth and profit. As perverse as it might seem, it isn’t even in the interests of the pharma industry to prevent diseases. To the contrary, in fact; the continued existence and expansion of human health problems is a precondition for the industry’s financial growth.

With even the British Medical Journal now openly admitting that the pharma industry has corrupted medicine, the need for radical reform of the global healthcare system has never been more urgent. An alternative model – focusing on disease prevention and the use of science-based natural health approaches – already exists. Implementing it in a not-for-profit form and providing free health education to people of all ages will be vital towards ensuring its long-term success and survival. Meantime, as Lazonick and Tulum’s study essentially proves beyond doubt, the pharma industry’s financialized business model is terminally sick and incapable of reform.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on Dr. Rath Health Foundation.

Executive Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and one of the coauthors of our explosive book, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, Paul is also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings. You can find Paul on Twitter at @paulanthtaylor

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from DRHF

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Pharma Spends More Money Increasing Shareholder Wealth Than It Does on Research and Development
  • Tags:

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The US on Thursday announced a new massive $2.5 billion arms package for Ukraine that includes Stryker armored combat vehicles for the first time.

The tranche of weapons includes 90 Strykers and 55 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, which the US first pledged to send to Ukraine as part of an over $3 billion arms package that was announced earlier this month.

The package also includes munitions for the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS), Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAPs), and other equipment.

The Strykers are made by General Dynamics and are designed to transport troops with extra protection, similar to the Bradleys. The Stryker is lighter and faster than the Bradleys and is on wheels as opposed to tracks.

Both vehicles can be used to go on the offense, and that’s what US officials have in mind for the new transfer. Germany and France have also pledged to send similar armored vehicles.

The UK said it would send 14 of its main battle tanks, the Challenger 2, but it’s not clear if Kyiv will get more Western-made heavy tanks. Berlin is hesitant to sign off on deliveries of its Leopard 2, and US officials signaled this week that they wouldn’t be sending the M1 Abrams.

While Ukraine is receiving a significant amount of new armor, Valery Zaluchny, the commander of the Ukrainian armed forces, said in Decemberthat he needs at least 300 heavy tanks and 600-700 fighting vehicles if he is to stand a chance to drive Russia out of the territory it’s captured.

According to the Pentagon, the full $2.5 billion arms package includes the following:

  • Additional munitions for NASAMS
  • Eight Avenger air defense systems
  • 59 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFVs) with 590 TOW anti-tank missiles and 295,000 rounds of 25mm ammunition
  • 90 Stryker Armored Personnel Carriers (APCs) with 20 mine rollers
  • 53 MRAPS
  • 350 High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs)
  • 20,000 155mm artillery rounds
  • Approximately 600 precision-guided 155mm artillery rounds
  • 95,000 105mm artillery rounds
  • Approximately 11,800 120mm mortar rounds
  • Additional ammunition for HIMARS
  • 12 ammunition support vehicles
  • 6 command post vehicles
  • 22 tactical vehicles to tow weapons
  • High-speed Anti-radiation missiles (HARMs)
  • Approximately 2,000 anti-armor rockets
  • Over 3,000,000 rounds of small arms ammunition
  • Demolition equipment for obstacle clearing
  • Claymore anti-personnel munitions
  • Night vision devices
  • Spare parts and other field equipment

US military aid for Ukraine is being pulled from funds that have already been authorized by Congress and signed into law by President Biden, which at this point amounts to about $113 billion.

Several other NATO members pledged more military aid for Ukraine on Thursday as their defense ministers met in Brussels. The UK announced it would send 600 Brimstone missiles, and Poland said it would provide S-60 anti-aircraft guns with 70,000 rounds of ammunition.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

Featured image: A US Army Stryker armored vehicle (Source: Antiwar.com)

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.

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.

***

Vor kurzem äußerte Ihr Außenminister Sergey Lavrov laut RTD: „USA wollen Russenfrage lösen wie Hitlerdeutschland die Judenfrage“ (1). Diese Aussage hat mich als Nachkriegs-Deutschen, der seit einigen Jahre nicht mehr in seinem Heimatland lebt, äußerst betroffen gemacht. Wir „normalen, gesunden“ deutschen Bürger wollten weder die „Judenfrage lösen“, noch wie Hitler die Sowjetunion überfallen. Noch heute sagen wir Europäer NEIN zu einem Krieg gegen Russland! Diese Erklärung habe ich am 8./9. Mai 2018 zusammen mit einem Freund verfasst. Sie ist von vielen Mitbürgern mitunterzeichnet worden (2).

Nach wie vor bin ich gegen jeden Krieg, weil Krieg die Verherrlichung roher Gewalt ist und der Weg zwischen den Großmächten eine „friedliche Koexistenz“ sein sollte (Evgeny Chossudovsky).

Persönlich habe ich bereits mehrmals ihr wunderschönes Land bereist, war unter anderem in Moskau, in St. Petersburg sowie auf der Krim und habe mich jeweils wie Zuhause gefühlt. Beeindruckt war ich vor allem von der großen Gastfreundschaft, die mir, meiner Ehefrau und den Freund entgegengebracht worden ist. Das werde ich nicht vergessen. Seitdem haben wir viele Freunde in Ihrem Land.

Russland ist leider ein Dorn im Auge des kapitalistischen Systems. Tatsache ist, dass das heutige kapitalistische System ohne Krieg nicht existieren kann. Der Westen kämpft mit allen erlaubten und unerlaubten Mitteln gegen den Osten. Und die Herrschenden sind so krank, dass mit ihnen ein Verhandeln in der Regel fast nicht möglich ist.

Hitler ist groß geworden, weil er den Kriegstreibern im Westen in „Mein Kampf“ versprochen hatte, dass er gegen die Sowjetunion in den Krieg ziehen werde. Darum hat man Hitler sozusagen „aufgepäppelt“; man hat ihm geholfen, sich aufzurichten, damit er diesen Krieg beginnen kann. In Wirklichkeit weiß doch jeder politisch Orientierte, dass die Sowjetunion damals in arger Bedrängnis war. Die ganze Arbeit Hitlers war gegen den Osten gerichtet. Doch die Sowjetunion konnte sich gegen ihn nicht erwehren. Die Sowjetunion war wohl bereit, gegen Hitler zu marschieren, doch die Machthaber im Westen haben abgelehnt.

Hitler war ihnen recht. Er hat in Deutschland die Arbeiterbewegung zerschlagen und die Gewerkschaftsführer umgebracht. Für die Kriegsdienstgegner und alle links Orientierten hat man die ersten Konzentrationslager geschaffen. Die ganze sogenannte kapitalistische Welt war mit Hitler einverstanden.

Das Prinzip in der Sowjetunion war – trotz einiger Fehler – das Gerechtigkeitsprinzip; man wollte die Ungerechtigkeit abschaffen. Wie würde Russland heute dastehen, wenn es sich hätte ruhig entwickeln können und nicht ständig boykottiert worden wäre. Russland fühlt sich vom Westen bedroht – mit gutem Recht. Noch heute könnte von Russland Frieden ausgehen – Russland benötigt keinen Krieg.

*

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 (Dr. paed.) und Psychologe (Dipl.-Psych.). Nach seinen Universitätsstudien wurde er wissenschaftlicher Lehrer (Professor) in der Erwachsenenbildung: unter anderem Leiter eines freien Schul-Modell-Versuchs und Fortbildner bayerischer Beratungslehrkräfte und Schulpsychologen. Als Pensionär arbeitete er als Psychotherapeut in eigener Praxis. Bei einer Öffentlichen Anhörung zur Jugendkriminalität im Europa-Parlament war er Berichterstatter für Deutschland. 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.

Noten

1. https://de.rt.com/international/131481-liveticker-ukraine-krieg-lawrow-usa-wollen-russenfrage-losen-hitlerdeutschland-judenfrage/

2. http://www.nrhz.de/flyerbeitrag.php?id=24807&css

Das Bild stammt aus The Unz Review

  • Posted in Deutsch
  • Comments Off on Geschätzte russische Mitbürgerinnen und Mitbürger! Wir Europäer sagen NEIN zu einem Krieg gegen Russland!

Dear Fellow Russians! We Europeans Say No to War Against Russia!

January 20th, 2023 by Dr. Rudolf Hänsel

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Recently, according to RTD, your Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said:

“The USA wants to solve the Russian question like Hitler’s Germany solved the “Jewish question”” (1).

As a post-war German who has not lived in his home country for several years, this statement made me extremely concerned. We “normal, healthy” German citizens did not want to “solve the Jewish question”, nor did we want to invade the Soviet Union like Hitler. Even today, we Europeans say NO to a war against Russia! I wrote this statement on 8/9 May 2018 together with a friend. It has been co-signed by many fellow citizens (2).

I am still against any war because war is the glorification of brute force and the way between great powers should be “peaceful coexistence” (Evgeny Chossudovsky).

Personally, I have already visited their beautiful country several times, among others in Moscow, St. Petersburg and the Crimea, and felt at home in each case. I was particularly impressed by the great hospitality shown to me, my wife and my friends. I will never forget that. Since then, we have many friends in your country.

Russia is unfortunately a thorn in the eye of the capitalist system. The fact is that today’s capitalist system cannot exist without war. The West is fighting the East with all permissible and impermissible methods. And the rulers are so sick that it is almost impossible to negotiate with them as a rule.

Hitler became great because he promised the warmongers in the West in “Mein Kampf” that he would go to war against the Soviet Union.

That is why Hitler was “nurtured”, so to speak; he was helped to build himself up so that he could start this war. In reality, everyone with a political orientation knows that the Soviet Union was in dire straits at the time. All Hitler’s work was directed against the East. But the Soviet Union could not defend itself against him. The Soviet Union was probably ready to march against Hitler, but those in power in the West refused.

Hitler was fine with them. He crushed the workers’ movement in Germany and killed the trade union leaders. The first concentration camps were created for the opponents of war and all those with a left-wing orientation. The whole so-called capitalist world agreed with Hitler.

The principle in the Soviet Union – despite some mistakes – was the principle of justice; they wanted to abolish injustice. How would Russia be today if it had been able to develop calmly and had not been constantly boycotted. Russia feels threatened by the West – with good reason. Even today, peace could emanate from Russia – Russia does not need war.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a school rector, educationalist (Dr. paed.) and psychologist (Dipl.-Psych.). After his university studies, he became an academic teacher (professor) in adult education: among other things, he was head of an independent school model experiment and in-service trainer of Bavarian guidance counsellors and school psychologists. As a retiree, he worked as a psychotherapist in private practice. He was rapporteur for Germany at a public hearing on juvenile delinquency in the European Parliament. In his books and articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral education and 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.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

(1) https://de.rt.com/international/131481-liveticker-ukraine-krieg-lawrow-usa-wollen-russenfrage-losen-hitlerdeutschland-judenfrage/

(2) http://www.nrhz.de/flyerbeitrag.php?id=24807&css

Featured image is from The Unz Review

Could Golden Ruble 3.0 Knock Out the U.S. Dollar?

January 20th, 2023 by Jon Forrest Little

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.

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 has had the privilege of dominating the global monetary system since 1944’s Bretton Woods agreement.

It’s often presented to the public like it’s the natural order of things, such as the law of gravity.

Or that it’s a given… like oxygen will always be there to breathe.

This assumption-based narrative leads people to think that the rest of the World is happy with the U.S. being the global reserve currency.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The U.S. must vigilantly maintain U.S. dollar hegemony. And the playbook looks like this:

  • The U.S. can devalue the Federal Reserve note “dollar” to oblivion while other countries receive it in exchange for their tangible goods and hold it in reserve.
  • The U.S. can confiscate other countries’ assets and currency reserves because of our military advantage. That is what just happened with Russia.
  • The U.S. can also block other countries from using the global financial system (SWIFT) it set up and controls.

Naturally, many countries are look for ways to exit this type of system.

The de-dollarization process is well underway and now involves far more countries than the U.S. expected. Even Saudi Arabia, the key country in the petrodollar, is beginning to trade outside the dollar and accept the Chinese yuan.

Golden Ruble 3.0 – Courtesy of Russian Economist Sergey Glazyev

Russia believes the “gold-pegged ruble” is part of the strategy to topple the U.S. dollar on the World stage. Here is how it came into existence…

Russian economic advisor to Putin, Sergey Glazyev, was one of the first people the U.S. sanctioned during its prior round of sanctions in 2014.

This was quite mysterious because Glazyev isn’t an oligarch or military general. He is an economist and the architect of Russia’s new monetary system, aka the Golden Ruble 3.0.

“The more aggressive the Americans are the sooner they will see the final collapse of the dollar as the only way for the victims of American aggression to stop this aggression is to get rid of the dollar.

“As soon as we and China are through with the dollar, it will be the end of the United States’ military might,” Sergey Glazyev said in 2017.

Glazyev has more recently stated, “In the face of sanctions, Russia’s task is not to learn to play by the crooked rules of the West but to build transparent and mutually beneficial rules of trade with friendly countries, to create their own pricing systems, exchange trading, and investment.”

Glazyev continued, “Gold will be a unique tool in the fight against Western sanctions inclusive of all major international commodities (oil and gas, food and fertilizer, metals and solid minerals).”

After newsanctions in 2022 from the West, including kicking Russia out of the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA), Moscow began launching its own bullion exchange to trade in physical gold with its allies.

The Challenge of Trade Deals with “Soft” Currencies

Many members of BRICS countries are beginning new trade agreements with one another outside the U.S. dollar system using “soft” currencies like rupees and rubles.

But the use of “soft” currencies can be tenuous. For example, Russia may tell India, “you can buy our oil, and we will accept your rupees.” India may agree to accept Russian rubles.

This system is flimsy because as more countries participate, nations begin collecting a lot of currencies they don’t need and will have to unload in the forex markets.

Also, nations don’t trust each other (counterparty risk), so gold is the perfect medium of exchange and is a measure to limit the abuse by the world reserve currency issuer.

Sergey Glazyev and his eastern and southern partners are seizing this unique chance to “jump off” the sinking ship of the dollar-centric debt economy.

Glazyev stated, “The sanctions imposed on Russia have boomeranged the Western economy. In 2023, all these circumstances will objectively affect the change in the stereotypes of investment policy in the World — from risky investments in complex financial instruments to investing in traditional assets, primarily gold.”

Glazyev continued, “Large gold reserves allow a country to pursue a sovereign financial policy and minimize dependence on external creditors. The amount of reserves affects the country’s reputation, credit rating, and investment attractiveness. Moreover, large reserves make it possible to plan the state budget for a long time, stopping many economic and political risks.”

Gold Scoreboard

  • Gold’s estimated market cap is $12.1 trillion (by multiplying the current gold price by the world’s above-ground gold reserves.)
  • BRICS are estimated to hold over 80% of this $12.1 trillion in gold.
  • India (the citizens, not the government) are the largest collective owners of gold, with more than 50,000 tons of gold.
  • China’s government is likely to have over 20,000 tons of gold.

Unanswered Questions

  • Has gold remained in the vaults of Western Central Banks? Has it been encumbered through swaps and leasing?
  • Will Fort Knox be credibly audited?

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Jon Forrest Little graduated from the University of New Mexico and attended Georgetown University’s Institute for Comparative Political and Economic Systems. Jon began his career in mining industry and now publishes “The PickAxe” which covers topics surrounding precious metals, energy, history, and politics.

Featured image is from Shutterstock

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

DNA coding in your digital ID – soon to come to your home? If you don’t like it, the military may inject it into your digital ID chip, somewhere under your skin.

The DNA is the most intimate part of our life’s identity.

Is the idea far-fetched?

Not so far.

If WHO gets its ways with the “Pandemic Treaty” overruling this planet’s every country’s health sovereignty, you may soon be forced to get your most intimate ID, your DNA, “branded” onto your digital ID.

Imagine! Klaus Schwab’s (World Economic Forum) joy!

A step closer to absolute and total control.

Don’t sweat it. Neither the Pandemic Treaty nor the Digital ID has been “worldwide approved”. It’s so far just talk. Scare-talk. And you know, fearful people submit much easier to tyrannical rules, than self-assured men and women – who know who they are, and who are self-assured, despite the 24/7 “social engineering of the masses”.

That’s the name of the game. And we can resist it. We are many, they are few.

But very importantly, we need to wake up from our comfort slumber, look reality in the eyes and say NO, in unison and solidarity.

According to a press release on 18 January 2023, Veridos GmbH, headquartered in Berlin with operating facility in Munich, just announced Innovatrics” as Strategic Partner for Advanced DNA ID Verification.

Veridos calls itself “A world-leading provider of integrated identity solutions. Governments and public authorities in more than 100 countries trust the company’s uniquely comprehensive product portfolio.

“The company creates end-to-end solutions and services perfectly tailored to meet every government’s identity need. These range from paper to security printing, electrical chip components, enrollment, identity management systems, personalization and issuance, mobile ID solutions, and border control solutions including eGates.

“Governments can acquire best-in-class passports, ID cards, driver’s licenses, and more, or even the facilities to manufacture their own.”

Innovatrics is based in the European Union (EU), with Headquarters in Bratislava, Slovakia.

The company calls itself “an independent EU-based provider of trusted biometric solutions for governments and enterprises.”

It boasts that “our algorithms consistently rank among the fastest and most accurate in fingerprints and face recognition. For over 16 years, we have partnered with all types of organizations to build trusted and flexible biometric identification solutions. Our products are being used in more than 80 countries, benefiting more than a billion people worldwide.

Biometrics is this “thing” that you don’t know where it begins and where it ends – and you have no clue what’s “in it”.

The pair calls it a Strategic Partnership for Advanced DNA ID Identification. The Veridos – Innovatrics joint venture name their invention a “holistic VeriDNA solution elevating civilian use of DNA IDs to the next level. This marks a turning point in the DNA-based identification and verification of individuals which has long been used only in the field of forensics.” 

Innovatrics has a long experience in ABIS (Automated Biometric Identification System) technology which allows government agencies to store biometric data of all types, such as fingerprints, iris scans and facial geometrics, and compare them with biometrics from checkpoints at lightning speed.

Wow! That’s precisely number one on Klaus Schwab’s wish list to tag every one of the surviving humans. “Surviving” because after the massive population reduction, part of the WEF’s Great Reset and UN Agenda 2030, also according to Schwab’s, Soros’, Gates’, Rockefeller’s et al, the production and implantation of DNA IDs may be faster and more efficient, then “stamping” today’s 8 billion people.

The Veridos’ and Innovatrics’ dream would allow VeriDNA generated DNA-IDs taking verification of individuals to a new dimension – offering benefits in sensitive areas such as border crossing, behavior control, as well as monitoring people’s cashflow, food intake and – listen well – controlling individuals environmental and climate footprints.

See this for the full press release.

If there is any serious message coming out of the currently ongoing 2023 WEF in Davos, it is a “climate tyranny”. If you don’t believe it, just listen to John Kerry, Biden’s climate envoy to Davos, speaking like an Avatar from a different planet.

Kerry’s words,

“When you start to think about it, it’s pretty extraordinary that we – a select group of human beings, because of whatever touched us at some point in our lives – are able to sit in a room and come together and actually talk about saving the planet.”

Unfortunately, during the past several decades people’s minds have been so radically geoengineered through organizations like the little-known UK-based “Tavistock Institute” and the Pentagon-linked DARPA, and possibly others, to have them fully believe the totally anti-science climate hoax.

A DNA-tracing tool is perfect for the globalist elite’s goals. In warp speed you identify the misbehaviors, creating a permanent ambiance of fear, a subdued society under permanent climate lockdown and glanced upon from the high-above cruising private jets of the super-billionaires.

Let’s hope it will just remain a dream – a fading dream – of the wannabe tyrants because We, the People, will not let it happen.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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 is a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

Featured image is from NaturalNews.com

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

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

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Chairman of the Russian State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin, posted a statement to his Telegram account calling for an international military tribunal of Angela Merkel and François Hollande.

“Such confessions made by the representative of the Kyiv regime and former leaders of Germany and France should be used as an evidence base for an international military tribunal,” Volodin said.

Here is Vasily Nebenzya, the Permanent Representative of Russia to the United Nations, weighing in on duplicity.

Merkel and Hollande conspired to undermine the 2015 Minsk agreement. France and Germany deceptively agreed to the Minsk deal that would have halted the persecution and murder of ethnic Russians in Donbas, and also require Ukrainian neutrality.

Merkel and Hollande conspired with the USG and NATO to exploit the agreement. The peace deal was ignored in order to build up Ukraine’s nazified military and make way for NATO and its missiles and tanks to be placed on Russia’s doorstep.

In the West, this plot to start a world war barely made the news.

I’m not surprised. Here in America, the loud, persistent, and manipulative lies of the state insist Ukraine is winning the war, which is obviously untrue.

Information contrary to Big Lies cranked out on a daily basis by the USG and its script-reading media will be ignored. Reality is at odds with the war narrative.

More than ever, the words of George Orwell are prescient.

In his novel “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” Orwell wrote, “War is Peace” and “Ignorance is Strength.” Both are applicable when sociopaths such as Merkel and Hollande are allowed to subvert peace and encourage ethnic-inspired animus, cruelty, sadism, torture, rape, and mass murder.

Volodin will be ignored. His demand for justice will not be honored, let alone acknowledged by the USG and its dissembling corporate propaganda appendage masquerading as a “free press.”

Merkel revealed the truth about the betrayal of Minsk. She will not be held to account, as most western “leaders” are above the law, even if a violation of the law results in the murder of countless innocent victims.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, Kurt Nimmo on Geopolitics.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia Demands Tribunal for Merkel and Hollande, Who Conspired to Undermine the 2015 Minsk Agreement

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Let’s start with three interconnected multipolar-driven facts.

First: One of the key take aways from the World Economic Forum annual shindig in Davos, Switzerland is when Saudi Finance Minister Mohammed al-Jadaan, on a panel on “Saudi Arabia’s Transformation,” made it clear that Riyadh “will consider trading in currencies other than the US dollar.”

So is the petroyuan finally at hand? Possibly, but Al-Jadaan wisely opted for careful hedging: “We enjoy a very strategic relationship with China and we enjoy that same strategic relationship with other nations including the US and we want to develop that with Europe and other countries.”

Second: The Central Banks of Iran and Russia are studying the adoption of a “stable coin” for foreign trade settlements, replacing the US dollar, the ruble and the rial. The crypto crowd is already up in arms, mulling the pros and cons of a gold-backed central bank digital currency (CBDC) for trade that will be in fact impervious to the weaponized US dollar.

A gold-backed digital currency

The really attractive issue here is that this gold-backed digital currency would be particularly effective in the Special Economic Zone (SEZ) of Astrakhan, in the Caspian Sea.

Astrakhan is the key Russian port participating in the International North South Transportation Corridor (INTSC), with Russia processing cargo travelling across Iran in merchant ships all the way to West Asia, Africa, the Indian Ocean and South Asia.

The success of the INSTC – progressively tied to a gold-backed CBDC – will largely hinge on whether scores of Asian, West Asian and African nations refuse to apply US-dictated sanctions on both Russia and Iran.

As it stands, exports are mostly energy and agricultural products; Iranian companies are the third largest importer of Russian grain. Next will be turbines, polymers, medical equipment, and car parts. Only the Russia-Iran section of the INSTC represents a $25 billion business.

And then there’s the crucial energy angle of INSTC – whose main players are the Russia-Iran-India triad.

India’s purchases of Russian crude have increased year-by-year by a whopping factor of 33. India is the world’s third largest importer of oil; in December, it received 1.2 million barrels from Russia, which for several months now is positioned ahead of Iraq and Saudi Arabia as Delhi’s top supplier.

‘A fairer payment system’

Third: South Africa holds this year’s rotating BRICS presidency. And this year will mark the start of BRICS+ expansion, with candidates ranging from Algeria, Iran and Argentina to Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor has just confirmed that the BRICS do want to find a way to bypass the US dollar and thus create “a fairer payment system not skewed toward wealthier countries.”

For years now, Yaroslav Lissovolik, head of the analytical department of Russian Sberbank’s corporate and investment business has been a proponent of closer BRICS integration and the adoption of a BRICS reserve currency.

Lissovolik reminds us that the first proposal “to create a new reserve currency based on a basket of currencies of BRICS countries was formulated by the Valdai Club back in 2018.”

Are you ready for the R5?

The original idea revolved around a currency basket similar to the Special Drawing Rights (SDR) model, composed of the national currencies of BRICS members – and then, further on down the road, other currencies of the expanded BRICS+ circle.

Lissovolik explains that choosing BRICS national currencies made sense because “these were among the most liquid currencies across emerging markets. The name for the new reserve currency — R5 or R5+ — was based on the first letters of the BRICS currencies all of which begin with the letter R (real, ruble, rupee, renminbi, rand).”

So BRICS already have a platform for their in-depth deliberations in 2023. As Lissovolik notes, “in the longer run, the R5 BRICS currency could start to perform the role of settlements/payments as well as the store of value/reserves for the central banks of emerging market economies.”

It is virtually certain that the Chinese yuan will be prominent right from the start, taking advantage of its “already advanced reserve status.”

Potential candidates that could become part of the R5+ currency basket include the Singapore dollar and the UAE’s dirham.

Quite diplomatically, Lissovolik maintains that, “the R5 project can thus become one of the most important contributions of emerging markets to building a more secure international financial system.”

The R5, or R5+ project does intersect with what is being designed at the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), led by the Macro-Economics Minister of the Eurasia Economic Commission, Sergey Glazyev.

A new gold standard

In Golden Ruble 3.0 , his most recent paper, Glazyev makes a direct reference to two by now notorious reports by Credit Suisse strategist Zoltan Pozsar, formerly of the IMF, US Department of Treasury, and New York Federal Reserve: War and Commodity Encumbrance (December 27) and War and Currency Statecraft (December 29).

Pozsar is a staunch supporter of a Bretton Woods III – an idea that has been getting enormous traction among the Fed-skeptical crowd.

What’s quite intriguing is that the American Pozsar now directly quotes Russia’s Glazyev, and vice-versa, implying a fascinating convergence of their ideas.

Let’s start with Glazyev’s emphasis on the importance of gold. He notes the current accumulation of multibillion-dollar cash balances on the accounts of Russian exporters in “soft” currencies in the banks of Russia’s main foreign economic partners: EAEU nations, China, India, Iran, Turkey, and the UAE.

He then proceeds to explain how gold can be a unique tool to fight western sanctions if prices of oil and gas, food and fertilizers, metals and solid minerals are recalculated:

“Fixing the price of oil in gold at the level of 2 barrels per 1g will give a second increase in the price of gold in dollars, calculated Credit Suisse strategist Zoltan Pozsar. This would be an adequate response to the ‘price ceilings’ introduced by the west – a kind of ‘floor,’ a solid foundation. And India and China can take the place of global commodity traders instead of Glencore or Trafigura.”

So here we see Glazyev and Pozsar converging. Quite a few major players in New York will be amazed.

Glazyev then lays down the road toward Gold Ruble 3.0. The first gold standard was lobbied by the Rothschilds in the 19th century, which “gave them the opportunity to subordinate continental Europe to the British financial system through gold loans.” Golden Ruble 1.0, writes Glazyev, “provided the process of capitalist accumulation.”

Golden Ruble 2.0, after Bretton Woods, “ensured a rapid economic recovery after the war.” But then the “reformer Khrushchev canceled the peg of the ruble to gold, carrying out monetary reform in 1961 with the actual devaluation of the ruble by 2.5 times, forming conditions for the subsequent transformation of the country [Russia] into a “raw material appendage of the Western financial system.”

What Glazyev proposes now is for Russia to boost gold mining to as much as 3 percent of GDP: the basis for fast growth of the entire commodity sector (30 percent of Russian GDP). With the country becoming a world leader in gold production, it gets “a strong ruble, a strong budget and a strong economy.”

All Global South eggs in one basket

Meanwhile, at the heart of the EAEU discussions, Glazyev seems to be designing a new currency not only based on gold, but partly based on the oil and natural gas reserves of participating countries.

Pozsar seems to consider this potentially inflationary: it could be if it results in some excesses, considering the new currency would be linked to such a large base.

Off the record, New York banking sources admit the US dollar would be “wiped out, since it is a valueless fiat currency, should Sergey Glazyev link the new currency to gold. The reason is that the Bretton Woods system no longer has a gold base and has no intrinsic value, like the FTX crypto currency. Sergey’s plan also linking the currency to oil and natural gas seems to be a winner.”

So in fact Glazyev may be creating the whole currency structure for what Pozsar called, half in jest, the “G7 of the East”: the current 5 BRICS plus the next 2 which will be the first new members of BRICS+.

Both Glazyev and Pozsar know better than anyone that when Bretton Woods was created the US possessed most of Central Bank gold and controlled half the world’s GDP. This was the basis for the US to take over the whole global financial system.

Now vast swathes of the non-western world are paying close attention to Glazyev and the drive towards a new non-US dollar currency, complete with a new gold standard which would in time totally replace the US dollar.

Pozsar completely understood how Glazyev is pursuing a formula featuring a basket of currencies (as Lissovolik suggested). As much as he understood the groundbreaking drive towards the petroyuan. He describes the industrial ramifications thus:

“Since as we have just said Russia, Iran, and Venezuela account for about 40 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves, and each of them are currently selling oil to China for renminbi at a steep discount, we find BASF’s decision to permanently downsize its operations at its main plant in Ludwigshafen and instead shift its chemical operations to China was motivated by the fact that China is securing energy at discounts, not markups like Europe.”

The race to replace the dollar

One key takeaway is that energy-intensive major industries are going to be moving to China. Beijing has become a big exporter of Russian liquified natural gas (LNG) to Europe, while India has become a big exporter of Russian oil and refined products such as diesel – also to Europe. Both China and India – BRICS members – buy below market price from fellow BRICS member Russia and resell to Europe with a hefty profit. Sanctions? What sanctions?

Meanwhile, the race to constitute the new currency basket for a new monetary unit is on. This long-distance dialogue between Glazyev and Pozsar will become even more fascinating, as Glazyev will be trying to find a solution to what Pozsar has stated: tapping of natural resources for the creation of the new currency could be inflationary if money supply is increased too quickly.

All that is happening as Ukraine – a huge chasm at a critical junction of the New Silk Road blocking off Europe from Russia/China – slowly but surely disappears into a black void. The Empire may have gobbled up Europe for now, but what really matters geoeconomically, is how the absolute majority of the Global South is deciding to commit to the Russia/China-led block.

Economic dominance of BRICS+ may be no more than 7 years away – whatever toxicities may be concocted by that large, dysfunctional nuclear rogue state on the other side of the Atlantic. But first, let’s get that new currency going.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on The Cradle.

Pepe Escobar, born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok. 

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Cradle

Washington Has Resurrected the Threat of Nuclear Armageddon

January 20th, 2023 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

As a participant in the 20th century Cold War, I can tell you that the Cuban Missile Crisis had the effect of convincing the leaders of the US and the USSR that trust had to be created between the two nuclear superpowers in order resolve differences and prevent a reoccurrence of tensions at the level of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

President John F. Kennedy and Soviet leader Nikita S. Khrushchev worked together independently of their military/security bureaucracies to resolve the issue. Both paid a price.  President Kennedy was murdered by the CIA and Joint Chiefs of Staff who were determined not to lose the Soviet enemy that justified their power and budgets.  Khrushchev was removed from power by Communist Party hardliners suspicious of accommodation to the capitalist enemy.

PX 96-33:12 03 June 1961 President Kennedy meets with Chairman Khrushchev at the U. S. Embassy residence, Vienna. U. S. Dept. of State photograph in the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Library, Boston.

 

After President Johnson destroyed himself in the military/security complex’s Vietnam War, President Nixon renewed the tension reducing policy of President Kennedy.  The Strategic Arms Limitations Talks (SALT) and arms limitations agreements followed.  President Nixon topped them off by opening to China and replacing that tense relationship with the “one China” policy.  This was again too much for the US military/security complex, and they orchestrated with the Washington Post the “Watergate” scandal to remove him from office. 

President Carter tried to continue building bridges. He signed the SALT II agreement that Nixon had initiated,  but Carter had his hands full with Israel and Palestine.  The situation awaited President Reagan to bring about the end of the Cold War. 

President Reagan was a cold warrior who wanted to end it.  He hated what he called “those godawful nuclear weapons.”  He thought it was terrible that the world continued to live under the threat that they might be used.

President Reagan was convinced that the Soviet economy was broken and could not be fixed, whereas the right policy could fix the US economy. Once the US economy was fixed, he could put pressure on the Soviet leadership to come to the negotiating table by threatening an arms race that the broken Soviet economy could not meet.

The problem was stagflation, and the fix was the Kemp-Roth bill which I had drafted and explained to the House and Senate. The Republican minority on the House Budget Committee supported it. Democrat Senator Russell Long, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee supported it as did Democrat Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee Lloyd Bentsen and Democrat Senator on the Senate Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn.  Energetic new Republican senators such as Orrin Hatch and S.I. Hayakawa  supported it.  Reagan accepted it, campaigned on it, and appointed me to the US Treasury to get the bill out of his administration so that Congress could vote on it.  

Faced with yet another president determined to wind down the Cold War, the CIA told President Reagan that he must not renew the arms race, because the Soviets would win. The agency’s reasoning was that the Soviet economy was planned, and thereby the Soviet leadership could put a far greater percentage of the society’s resources into the military than could Reagan.

To deal with the CIA, Reagan established a secret committee to examine the CIA’s case.  He put me on it.  The committee’s conclusion was that the CIA’s position was based on its power and stratus that a continuation of the Cold War ensured.  

The Reagan/Gorbachev rapprochement held together in the George H.W. Bush administration.  President Bush (senior) and Secretary of State James Baker promised Gorbachev that there would be no movement of NATO east if he agreed to the reunification of Germany.  

Some American conservatives misinterpret President Reagan’s policy as a hostile one against Russia designed to win the Cold War.  Reagan told us the goal was not to win the Cold War but to end it.  The Soviet collapse was the result of hardline Communist Party members, disturbed at Gorbachev’s rapid release of Eastern Europe, placing him under house arrest, thus setting in motion the events that led to the collapse of the Soviet government.  This was as much a surprise to Washington as it was to Moscow.

The point of this brief history is to contrast  the efforts of American presidents to reduce tensions during the 20th century Cold War with Washington’s efforts in the 21st century to undo this accomplishment and to elevate tensions to their current high peak.

We owe this disaster to the neoconservatives.  The neoconservatives were responsible for Iran-Contra and were fired and prosecuted by President Reagan.  They were pardoned by Reagan’s successor, President George H.W. Bush and wormed their way into conservative  ranks and into policy positions in government. When the Soviet Union collapsed, they came up with the Wolfowitz Doctrine, a declaration of US hegemony over the world as the principal goal of US foreign policy.

An early manifestation of neoconservative treachery was on March 12, 1999 when the Clinton regime expanded NATO eastward to incorporate the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland in NATO in violation of the promise giving to Gorbachev by President George H.W. Bush and Secretary of State James Baker.   This was the fledgeling Russian state’s first indication that the word of the US government means nothing.

A false argument was made that no such pledge had been made or if it had, it didn’t count because it wasn’t in writing.  I know for a fact that the promise was made, and not only by Washington but also by NATO itself.  See this. 

The 1999 NATO enlargement was followed in 2004 by Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.  In 2009 Albania and Croatia were added, and in 2017 Montenegro and in 2020 North Macedonia. 

Readers need to understand what this means.  The US government took what was formerly the Soviet Empire and transformed it into Washington’s empire.  Washington proved that the Soviet Communist hardliners were correct that it is a mistake to trust the West.

Twelve days after putting the Czechs, Hungarians, and Poles in NATO, without UN approval NATO began a three month bombing campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, leading to the breakup of the country. 

In 2001 the neoconservative regime of President George W. Bush pulled the US out of the ABM Treaty, the cornerstone of the arms control and reduction agreements achieved in the 20th century.  Washington’s withdrawal also had the effect of cancelling START II, because Russia’s agreement to START II was conditional on the US remaining in the ABM treaty.

This was followed by the further additions to NATO described above.

In 2007 the US government announced that nuclear capable missiles would be placed in Poland on Russia’s borders. The blatantly false claim was made that these were a defense system agains an Iranian attack on Europe.  Such a claim must have amused the Kremlin in addition to worrying them.

In 2008 a US trained and equipped Georgian army (a province of the former Soviet Union) invaded South Ossetia and killed Russian peacekeepers.  The Russian Army entered the conflict, quickly defeated the Georgian Army and withdrew, disproving the claim that Putin intended to restore the Soviet empire.  Washington and its whore media misrepresented the conflict, as they have done the Ukrainian one, as a Russian invasion of Georgia.

In 2014 Washington overthrew the government of Ukraine and established a puppet regime.  The regime began attacking the Russian population of Donbass. For the next 8 years thousands of Russians were murdered by neo-Nazi militias and Ukrainian armed forces while President Putin tried to obtain to no avail Western compliance with the Minsk Agreement. The French and German leaders who signed the Minsk Agreement have recently acknowledged that it was a trick to deceive Putin while the US and NATO built and equipped a large Ukrainian army.  In February, 2022, this army was poised to invade the Donbass region and to do away with the two independent republics, thus provoking the Russian intervention.

2014 also brought the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines flight 17 which, falsely blamed on Russia, served to initiate a propaganda campaign against Russia and justify the initiation of economic sanctions against Russia.

In 2018 President Trump, beat up by the false “Russiagate” narrative, withdrew the US from the INF treaty to prove he was tough on Russia and not a Russian agent.

Also in 2018 there was the concocted case of alleged poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in the UK with Russian nerve gas which they somehow survived.  The alleged event was blamed on Putin.  The Skripals mysteriously disappeared and have not been seen or heard from since.

In 2020 Washington withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty.  

In December 2021 and January 2022 the Kremlin made strenuous efforts to reach a mutual security treaty with the US and NATO and was coldly rebuffed by the US Secretary of State and the NATO Secretary General.  Instead, a large Ukrainian army was poised on the Donbass border and heavy shelling began, bringing in the Russians in February 2022.

In 2022 more sanctions were applied to Russia, and Russia’s foreign reserves were seized.  Massive arms shipments from the US and NATO began arriving in Ukraine.  In September 2022 the US and UK blew up the Nordstream gas pipelines. Washington accused Russia of sabotaging its own pipelines.

The efforts of 20th century American presidents to end the Cold War, restrain armaments, and reduce the possibility of nuclear war have been completely overturned by neoconservative-dominated governments in the 21st century.  The tensions today are far greater than at any time during the 20th century Cold War.  Today the Kremlin openly states that the Russian government has zero trust in the West and believes that the West intends to destroy Russia.  This is extremely dangerous.  During the Cold War there were numerous incidences of false alarms of incoming ICBMs, but neither side believed them because the ongoing negotiations had created a framework of mutual trust.  This achievement has been squandered by America’s 21st century leadership which in pursuit of the neoconservative goal of US hegemony has left the door wide open to Nuclear Armageddon.

The situation is even worse than the Atomic Scientists’ Doomsday Clock indicates.  The correct time is one nano-second to Midnight.

And there is no one in the West to take this into account.  There are no more Presidents such as Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan or experts such as Steven Cohen.  America’s foreign policy “experts” are a collection of whores on military/security grants and consultancies, and the presstitutes support rather than investigate official narratives.  As I have previously reported, David Johnson at George Washington University provides a daily list of media and academic comment on US/Russia relations.  The unreality of almost all of it is beyond belief.  It is difficult to believe that the foreign policy community that got us through the Cold War has been replaced by Russophobic emotions incapable of objective reasoning and unaware of the dangerous situation that they have created. 

Instead we have neoconservatives blabbering about how we can win a nuclear war.

Here we are a superpower made dangerous to ourselves and to the entire world by the total absence of any awareness and any leadership whatsoever.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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. 


Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute   

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Washington Has Resurrected the Threat of Nuclear Armageddon
  • Tags:

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

January 20th, 2023 by Global Research News

The WEF and WHO – Are They Running a Death Cult? A WHO / Pharma controlled Worldwide Tyrannical “health system”

Peter Koenig, January 10, 2023

All Quiet (Panic) on the Western Front. The Davos Freak Show.

Pepe Escobar, January 17, 2023

Is Biden Being Blackmailed to Send US Combat Troops to Ukraine?

Mike Whitney, January 15, 2023

Davos 2023: Fragmenting the World

Rick Thomas, January 15, 2023

Ten Inconvenient Truths About Ukraine Largely Ignored by the Media

Dan Fournier, January 17, 2023

Prelude to the 2023 WEF Davos Meetings. “Cooperation” in Triggering “Depopulation” and a “Fractured World”

Peter Koenig, January 15, 2023

Bomb Cyclones and Atmospheric Rivers: Is Someone Messing with the Weather?

F. William Engdahl, January 17, 2023

Video: Pfizer’s “Secret” Report on the Covid Vaccine. Beyond Manslaughter. The Evidence is Overwhelming. The Vaccine Should Be Immediately Withdrawn Worldwide

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, January 18, 2023

Look Up! Wake Up, People! You Are Being “Suicided in Warp Speed”.

Peter Koenig, January 12, 2023

“Orders to Kill” Dr. Martin Luther King: The Government that Honors MLK with a National Holiday Killed Him

Edward Curtin, January 16, 2023

Nazis’ Children at the World Economic Forum

Rodney Atkinson, January 18, 2023

The Covid “Killer Vaccine”. People Are Dying All Over the World. It’s A Criminal Undertaking

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, January 7, 2023

The US Meat Supply May Soon be Widely Contaminated with mRNA Proteins From Biotech “Vaccines”

Mike Adams, January 18, 2023

Video: The Key to Ending COVID-19 Is Buried in the WTC Wreckage

Emanuel Pastreich, January 17, 2023

Are Athletes Dropping Dead from the COVID Jab?

Dr. Joseph Mercola, January 16, 2023

After COVID Vaccine Roll Out, the FAA Tacitly Admitted that Pilots Electrocardiogram (EKG) Are No Longer Normal.

Steve Kirsch, January 18, 2023

Beyond Vietnam to Ukraine

Rick Sterling, January 16, 2023

2023 Outlook for Ukraine. Scott Ritter

Scott Ritter, January 16, 2023

FDA Advisers Are Angry at Moderna for Hiding Data

Igor Chudov, January 16, 2023

Video: Canada Persecution of Ethical Doctors

Dr. Mark Trozzi, January 12, 2023

Transcending the Climate Change Deception – Toward Real Sustainability

By Mark Keenan, January 19, 2023

As a former scientist at the UK government, Dept. of Energy and Climate Change, and at the UN, I know that climate change is a political scam, and that the production of electric cars causes a lot of ‘real’ pollution. Thousands of other diligent, honest scientists also know this. 

Four Studies Add to Evidence of Wireless Technology-Related Electromagnetic Radiation in Humans

By Dr. Suzanne Burdick, January 19, 2023

New studies from Sweden, China, Australia and the U.K. shed light on human exposure to electromagnetic radiation from wireless technologies, but the authors of one study alleged industry tried to censor their research, and in another case, critics accused researchers of having conflicts of interest with the telecom industry.

Fear Is Pfizer’s Financial Fertilizer

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, January 19, 2023

By now, you’ve probably heard there’s a new COVID variant making the rounds, and it’s said to be “the most transmissible” variant to date. To hit the proper emotional note where propaganda becomes effective, the new variant, XBB.1.5, was quickly dubbed the “Kraken,” which is a moniker referring to a legendary sea beast that could not be defeated.

Officially Approved by the EU: Four Insects Hiding in Your Food

By Free West Media, January 19, 2023

The most recent approval was on January 5: From now on, after mealworms, grasshoppers and crickets, the grain mold beetle can also be used as an ingredient in foods such as bread, soups, pasta, snacks, peanut butter and chocolate products.

George Soros Tied to at Least 54 Influential Media Figures Through Groups Funded by Liberal Billionaire: Study

By Brian Flood, January 19, 2023

Liberal billionaire George Soros is tied to some of the most influential media figures in the United States and abroad through cash he provides to groups affiliated with them, according to a new study conducted by MRC Business.

Netanyahu’s Claim of Jewish Exclusivity in Palestine Must be Challenged

By Iqbal Jassat, January 19, 2023

The defiant declaration by Benjamin Netanyahu that he is going to press ahead and complete Israel’s colonial project in Palestine must be challenged by the world. Regardless of international law and conventions, his government is going to continue to defy them.

Video: End Governance by Secrecy. How to Take Down the Billionaires

By Emanuel Pastreich, January 19, 2023

The takeover of our society by the billionaires and their lackeys cannot be understood unless we grasp how a veil of secrecy has been spread over most of the government and over corporations for the last twenty years that makes it impossible for people to even speak about the horrific crimes that are destroying our nation.

End of Juan Guaidó: US-appointed Venezuelan Coup Leader Ousted by Ex Allies

By Ben Norton, January 19, 2023

The US claimed unelected coup leader Juan Guaidó was “interim president” of Venezuela from January 2019 to December 2022, when his former allies in the right-wing opposition removed him from the position. Washington however still refuses to recognize elected President Nicolás Maduro.

“Sick and Tired” of Lies, Wars and Tyranny? And What’s the Way Out?

By Peter Koenig, January 19, 2023

Any reform of the corrupted and rotten system would undoubtedly again be carried out by those corrupted cultists that have rotten humanity and our values in the first place. The same that have fractured the world. They have the power to fake a reform of the People for the People, while fracturing the world to bits and pieces, then pull the broken pieces together and reign over a new globalist world with a tyrannical fist.

Crocodiles Then and Now

By Dr. Emanuel Garcia, January 19, 2023

Winston Churchill defined an appeaser as ‘one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last’. Let’s keep this in mind as the World Economic Forum meets in Davos. Because our real pandemic is willful naiveté, and our greatest danger cowardice.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Transcending the Climate Change Deception – Toward Real Sustainability

Proof: Strokes Are Caused by the COVID Vaccines

January 19th, 2023 by Steve Kirsch

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

I bet $1M that the vax causes strokes. Any takers? They knew this at the very start of the vaccination campaign if they were paying attention to the adverse event reports. I’ll show you how they knew.

Executive summary 

The COVID vaccines cause strokes. There is no doubt about it.

In fact, I’m so sure of this, I will bet anyone $1M that I got it right and the CDC got it wrong by dismissing the signal.

I’m willing to put my money where my mouth is. Are any of the drug companies willing to do that? If they don’t, you should be worried. Very worried.

Surely there is someone at the CDC or FDA who will take my bet? If not, then why not admit the truth: that they have absolutely no confidence at all when they claim that the COVID vaccines don’t cause strokes and there is nothing to worry about.

Will anyone in the entire world take my bet? Of course not. You have to ask yourself, why not? Don’t you believe the CDC? Apparently, NOBODY IN THE ENTIRE WORLD believes them.

In this article, I’m going to prove to you I’m right.

But, hey, if you think I’m wrong, accept my bet please! Because I could always use an extra $1M.

Introduction

Thanks to the heroic work of Dr. Naomi Wolf and Amy Kelly in investigating the Pfizer documents, it was recently brought to my attention that Pfizer knew about 300 stroke-related events that happened in the first 3 months after the vaccine was released.

Check out this document which summarizes the stroke data from the new unredacted Pfizer 5.3.6 document. There were a total of 42,086 adverse events, but it was initially a secret as to how many people that represents (the denominator).

We can estimate it though because they told us that there were 611 anaphylaxis events. We know from the Blumenthal paper that there are 2.4 cases of anaphylaxis per 10,000 shots. This implies 2.5M shots were given which means 1.25M people reported events here. This is an estimate of the “denominator” that Pfizer didn’t disclose.

The reason for redacting the denominator is simple: if anyone knew how small that number was, they’d have stopped the vaccine immediately. If the denominator was large, Pfizer would be willfully supplying the denominator. The fact that they redacted the denominator is a sign that they knew that the adverse event rate was unacceptably high. But maybe not. This isn’t the crux of my argument.

What’s interesting is that the disclosed the recently disclosed denominator: 126,212,580 which is 63M people. OBVIOUSLY THE EVENTS WERE SEVERELY UNDERREPORTED as we can see from the anaphylaxis data. We know from the calculation above that the minimum underreporting factor (for serious events) is 50.4 (63/1.25). This is quite comparable to the minimum underreporting factor of 41X for VAERS! That’s a good sanity test.

The Pfizer document says:

  1. The reporting is for a 90 day period starting Dec 1, 2020
  2. Within the stroke data set, there are 275 patients with 300 different events reported; and 20% of the stroke events were fatal.
  3. Half the events happened within 2 days of the shot.

Is the temporal proximity to the shot a smoking gun? Sort of…

OK. When I read that my first reaction was, “Wow, half the events happened in 48 hours after the shot. That’s not normal at all…it should be spread out evenly over time if there is no causality.”

However, upon further investigation, many of the AEs reported by Pfizer have relatively short median time frames so there is a bias to report things that happened in close proximity to the shot and to not report things that happened a week or more after the shot.

Even with all that, a 48 hour median is short compared to the other AEs and suggests there might be causality here since otherwise it would be more spread out like some other AEs are.

The rate of stroke events vs COVID events is 1:4… that’s way too high 

Let’s look at the rate of stroke events to COVID events reported in the trial.

We’ll limit ourselves to the first two days since that is when we get the most accurate rate.

So we have 150 stroke events in the first two days as noted above.

We have 3067 COVID events with a median of 5 days, so basically 613 events in the first two days.

That means that during the first two days after the shot (which is the only period where we get reliable reports), you were 4 times more likely to get COVID than get a stroke.

Whoa! That’s way too high for a safe vaccine that doesn’t cause stroke, don’t you think?

The absolute number of stroke events is 10X normal

150 stroke events in 2 days for 1.25M people reporting is a rate of stroke 21,900 strokes per million per year.

The normal rate of stroke is 800,000 strokes/yr. But there are 340M people. So the rate is 2353 strokes/M-yr.

This means that the observed rate of stroke is 10X normal after the shot.

That sounds pretty darn causal to me.

But let’s do another check just to make sure.

After all, we wouldn’t want to leave any stone unturned for Dr. Susan Oliver and her dog Cindy, to use to make a video criticizing these calculations. Confidentially, I’m not that worried about Dr. Oliver; it’s her dog Cindy I worry about.

The VAERS data makes it OBVIOUS

Here’s a simple search that took me all of 30 seconds to do. I searched ALL vaccines for ischaemic stroke and look what I found. A signal. A big signal! It jumps off the page. You can’t miss it if you are looking!

INSTRUCTIONS: View the chart above. Can you spot the unsafe vaccine? Hint: It causes strokes at a much higher rate than all the other vaccines combined. Can you guess which one it is?

If you guess the COVID vaccine, you’re right!

If you didn’t guess the COVID vaccine, you should immediately apply for a job with the CDC in the safety monitoring department. They are looking for people with your analytical skills.

The 1,549 death reports

The surveys of dead people show (I limited the records to US only, sanity checked, and deaths from 2021 onwards):

  • 10/170 unvaccinated died of neurological causes: 5.8%
  • 75/666 vaccinated died of neurological causes: 11.2%
  • The percentages should the the same. They aren’t.
  • The result is statistically significant with p=.0455.

However, there can be age confounding.

Let’s look at <50 year olds

  • 1/18 unvaxxed=.055
    5/78 vaxxed = .064

So these are closer as we’d expect, but the numbers are too small here to get a good signal. Too noisy.

Let’s look at those over 65:

  • unvaxxed 7/104=.067
    vaxxed 53/400=.1323

Big difference.

We have a very dangerous vaccine here. Too bad the CDC doesn’t do their own survey of dead people by vaccination status, isn’t it? They’d have found this out 2 years ago.

Oddly, to this day, they don’t want to look at this. It’s so easy. It took about an hour of my time to do this. Why don’t they want to know.

Personal anecdotes

There is nothing like personal experience to make sure we got it right. I hear these stories of young people dying of strokes or bleeding in the brain. Horrible. You don’t forget these.

People who have seen multiple black swans

Have you ever heard of a healthy 23 year old who has 8 strokes after getting vaccinated? I got this note from Marc on Jan 18, 2023:

Dear Steve,

I had a dear friend who had been in remission for some sort of cancer and was doing week then he died suddenly from stroke IN HIS SUKKAH in Sept 2021.

Not long after his 2nd vaxx as I understand it.  His name was Harry.  We drank coffee together and I miss him.  He used to pick up my daughter from school or work if my wife had our car.  We learned torah together and were a bit late starters with our Judaism.  We both have a daughter.

We know of another beautiful 22 yr old – friend of our daughter – from South Africa, was living near TelAviv and had something like 8 strokes after her 2nd vaccination (Pfizer).  She finally went back to South Africa and had open heart surgery.  I hear she is thank G’d doing well.  We pray for her every day.  I met her finally last year at a wedding.  Beautiful person – inside and out.

It is a tragedy beyond comprehension what has gone on here and how there is STILL no accountability.

Keep going.

Mechanism of action

The PEG enables the LNP to cross the blood brain barrier. There, the vaccine causes both clotting and inflammation. This is well know.

The safety signal in VAERS and VSD: The final nail in the coffin

And finally, we have official CDC safety signals that were triggered in both VAERS and VSD.

That’s the final nail in the coffin.

Poll

Click here to vote

Note

I originally wrote this as a $10M dollar bet but realized that would work against me (even though it would be more profitable).

The $1M is a much lower bar… it shows that they wouldn’t even bet $1M that the CDC is right.

If there are no takers, maybe I should lower the bet until I get a taker. This will quantify in dollars just how much people believe the CDC. Wouldn’t that be cool? I think the number will be vanishingly small.

Click here to vote

For more information on the Pfizer data

I want to acknowledge the work of Dr. Naomi Wolf, Amy Kelly, and the rest of the dailyclout.io for their excellent work in surfacing the data and bringing it to people’s attention.

Here are a couple of links you can follow to learn more.

The birth rates are dropping all over the world. In some countries, the drop is more than they’ve seen in the last 150 years. AFAIK, we have never seen a simultaneous drop in birth rates worldwide like we are seeing today.

I asked one of the fact checkers about what is causing this and he said, “it could be lots of things such as nervousness about the economy.” I asked for the evidentiary basis for that hypothesis but it was not provided. That’s just the way science works. If things don’t go your way, just make something up.

Remember: if someone tries to bamboozle you like that, always ask for the data behind their hypothesis. It’s rarely there.

In this video, Dr. Naomi Wolf talks about all the evidence Pfizer knew very early in the rollout that this was not a safe vaccine.

Summary 

We looked at the evidence eight different ways and all the evidence is consistent: the COVID vaccines cause strokes.

Furthermore, it isn’t just correlation; we have causality because all five Bradford Hill criteria are met.

Finally, this is so obvious to everyone that I am certain that NOBODY IN THE ENTIRE WORLD BELIEVES OTHERWISE.

If anyone believed I was wrong, they’d be rushing to take my $1M.

I predict no takers. I’d be delighted to be proven wrong.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

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

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

New studies from Sweden, China, Australia and the U.K. shed light on human exposure to electromagnetic radiation from wireless technologies, but the authors of one study alleged industry tried to censor their research, and in another case, critics accused researchers of having conflicts of interest with the telecom industry.

In the first example, an international peer-reviewed journal — Annals of Case Reports — on Jan. 10 published a Swedish case report showing 5G radiation causes symptoms indicative of “microwave syndrome.”

The report initially was censored by the telecom industry, the study authors said.

Dr. Lennart Hardell, Ph.D, retired professor of oncology at the Örebro University Hospital in Sweden, and Mona Nilsson, managing director of the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation, co-authored the report.

Nilsson told The Defender, “The telecom companies tried to censor the article” in spring 2022 after the study initially appeared in a Swedish medical magazine.

“A representative of the Ericsson company — the world leading 5G infrastructure provider — and the umbrella organization for 1,200 tech companies, all the major telecom companies in Sweden, wrote to the editor of the Swedish magazine and asked him to withdraw the article,” she explained.

“This is the first case report of the microwave syndrome caused by 5G,” Hardell told The Defender, adding that “historically, many risk factors for human health have first been identified by clinical observations.”

According to Nilsson, the study — which examined the change in physical symptoms experienced by a 63-year-old man and a 62-year-old woman when a 5G cellular tower was installed on the top of their apartment building — “confirms the concerns raised for several years by hundreds of scientists and physicians about the dangers of the 5G rollout.”

Nilsson pointed out that 5G was rolled out “without any previous studies showing that 5G is safe for humans or the environment.”

Nilsson continued:

“It is a scandal that this industry, in spite of the complete lack of evidence showing that 5G is safe, has obtained the right to expose people without their consent, in their own homes to massively increasing levels of pulsed microwave radiation that have the capacity to rapidly destroy their health.”

“The telecom industry knows about the effects on people’s health, but are doing all they can to cover up the harms.”

Numerous people, she said, contacted the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation with reports of their health being destroyed by 5G equipment installed in their neighborhoods.

“Based on the measurements of massively increased radiation from 5G and what we know this far,” Nilsson said, “we can conclude that 5G is very dangerous and must be halted.”

Cellphone use linked to brain cancer, Chinese study concludes 

Meanwhile, a peer-reviewed study by the Faculty of Medicine of the Chinese University of Hong Kong reported that the incidence of primary brain cancer in 2020 was associated with cellphone use, The Epoch Times reported on Jan. 10.

The brain cancer research, carried out by the Chinese University of Hong Kong in conjunction with the Association of Pacific Rim Universities, was published on Sept. 1, 2022, in Neuro-Oncology.

“Our study provides the most up-to-date evidence on the global distribution and risk factors of and trends in primary brain cancer,” said Dr. Martin Chi-sang Wong, senior corresponding author of the study, and professor from The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, in a Jan. 5 press release.

According to the researchers, the rate of brain cancer was higher in high-income jurisdictions, and was closely related to the per capita gross domestic product, the human development index and the prevalence of traumatic brain injuries, occupational carcinogen exposure and mobile phone use.

“Policymakers in different regions should implement evidence-based, targeted prevention strategies to control relevant risk factors,” Wong added.

Australian researchers: Wireless technologies ‘an environmental stressor’ for humans

Another recent peer-reviewed study — published Dec. 20, 2022, in Frontiers in Public Health — further underscored the potential impact of the electromagnetic signals from wireless technologies such as cellphones.

According to researchers with the Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association (ORSAA) in Brisbane, Australia, and the Centre for Environment and Population Health at the School of Medicine and Dentistry at Griffith University in Brisbane, there is an “extensive evidence base revealing that significant stress to human biological systems is being imposed by exposure to everyday wireless communication devices and supporting infrastructure.”

“This evidence is compelling enough to warrant an update in medical education and practice,” they added.

In their report, the researchers reviewed the methods and findings of 1,106 experimental and epidemiological studies collated within the ORSAA database that were focused on the biological and health effects of electromagnetic fields and radiation.

The results showed that two-thirds of the experimental and epidemiological papers found significant biological effects, the researchers said, adding:

“The breadth of biological and health categories where effects have been found was subsequently explored, revealing hundreds of papers showing fundamental biological processes that are impacted, such as protein damage, biochemical changes and oxidative stress.”

The researchers also suggested a set of “best practice guidelines” for treating patients affected by electromagnetic exposures and for using technology safely in healthcare settings.

U.K. study finds 32% increase in cellphone-related RF-EMF in teens’ brains, but researchers ignore biological implications

Additionally, a peer-reviewed article accepted for publication in Environmental Internationalmeasured levels of electromagnetic radiation in adolescents in the U.K. — but, according to critics of the study, researchers failed to measure the potential biological effects of that radiation.

The U.K. researchers conducted what they said is the first longitudinal study to estimate daily dosages of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) in the bodies of more than 6,000 adolescents.

They found that RF-EMF doses to the brain increased 32% over a two-year period. The main contributor? Talking on a cellphone.

The study is part of the Study of Cognition, Adolescents and Mobile Phones, or SCAMP, the authors said.

In the study, the team of 11 researchers — including Martin Röösli, Ph.D., associate professor of environmental epidemiology at the University of Basel in Switzerland, and head of the environmental exposures and health unit at Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute — estimated the daily “dose” of RF-EMF that adolescents received from their daily activities, such as using a phone, laptop, tablet or sitting near a Wi-Fi router.

Using reports from the participants and statistical analyses, the researchers estimated the adolescents’ daily RF-EMF dose — by measuring the specific absorption rate (SAR) in millijoules per kilogram per day (mJ/kg/day) — for eight tissue areas of the participants’ bodies at two different times.

First, they made a “baseline” assessment between November 2014 and July 2016, when the adolescents were roughly 12 years old. About two years later, they completed a “follow-up” assessment.

The researchers then compared the baseline and follow-up numbers to get an estimate of the change in daily RF-EMF dose the adolescents received — both in their body overall and in specific areas of the body — over the two-year period.

They noted, however, that while initially there were 6,605 adolescents in the study, they were able to get both baseline and follow-up data only for 3,384 of the teens, mostly due to attrition.

The researchers noted that the RF-EMF dose was highest in the right temporal lobe of the brain, at the beginning of the study and again two years later.

Moreover, they noted that while the whole-body dose was similar at the two time points, they saw a 32% increase in RF-EMF dose for the temporal lobe of the brain at the two-year follow-up.

Making and receiving phone calls were the main activities contributing to participants’ daily RF-EMF dosage, the researchers said, both at baseline and two years later. The teens were for the most part making calls on the 2G network, before the 5G rollout.

U.K. study is ‘industry-friendly,’ critics say

Commenting on the U.K. study, Alasdair Philips, scientific director of Powerwatch, a forum for “knowledgeable engineers, scientists and medical researchers who are concerned about the consequences of irradiated ‘blue world’ we are creating,” told The Defender he had “problems with the approach and understanding of the authors.”

“In my view, it is industry and government’s way of finding no cognitive, behavioral or health problems related to wireless device use, ” Philips, an electrical and agricultural engineer who worked in industry and academic research for more than 50 years, said.

Philips is not alone in pointing to collusion between the telecom industry and the study’s authors, including Röösli.

In July 2020, Hardell wrote a letter — endorsed by seven additional researchers — to the president of the Swiss Federation alerting her that Röösli, who chaired the Swiss advisory expert group on electromagnetic fields and non-ionizing radiation, had verifiable “conflict of interest” and a “history of misrepresentation of science.”

Additionally, Eileen O’Connor, co-founder and director of the EM Radiation Research Trust in the U.K. and board member of the International EMF Alliance, also characterized the study as “industry-friendly” and noted that its authors made “no mention of non-thermal biological effectsassociated with pulsed microwave radiation.”

“The keywords for the paper are ‘estimate and assumed’ with the focus placed on the specific absorption rate (SAR), which only refers to emissions from mobile phones that can heat biological tissue,” she said.

Indeed, in 2013, a team of researchers evaluated SAR as a method for quantifying the possible biological effects from electromagnetic fields and concluded that “SAR actually refers to thermal effects, while the vast majority of the recorded biological effects from man-made non-ionizing environmental radiation are non-thermal.”

“Even if SAR could be accurately estimated for a whole tissue, organ, or body, the biological/health effect is determined by tiny amounts of energy/power absorbed by specific biomolecules, which cannot be calculated,” they added.

Similarly, Philips questioned the researchers’ choice of methodology. “Are 24-hr. whole-body SAR totals (assuming they are realistic which is dubious) a relevant exposure metric for exposures under ICNIRP [International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection] levels?” he asked.

“I think not,” Philips added.

Commenting on the researcher’s finding of increased radiation in the temporal lobe of the brain, Philips noted, “The temporal and frontal lobes are where most GBM [glioblastoma] tumors arise.”

The researchers did not discuss the risk of tumors in their study.

Philips also pointed out that the researchers did not take into consideration RF-EMF exposure during the night. “Many have their handset on standby under the pillow or next to them overnight so that they don’t miss messages from friends,” he said.

According to O’Connor, the study also fails to address and reference official U.K. guidance for children on reducing RF-EMF exposure from cellphones.

O’Connor said, “The time has come and as a matter of urgency to demand the inclusion of truly independent scientists.”

She added:

“It is not acceptable to exclude scientific research that exposes the inconvenient truth when making critical and important decisions while accepting flawed industry-funded poor quality papers to support the short-term economic interests of today.

“Delay and denial may hold enormous ramifications beyond imaginable proportions for public health and the environment.

“It is not just the citizens at risk today, but future generations due to the epigenetic properties this agent carries. Ignoring this situation today will lead to a false economy and a public health crisis due to the impact this technology is having on public health and the environment.

“The public may have no alternative but to make a criminal complaint against decision makers and seek prosecution and claims for compensation. Decision makers who fail to protect public health should be held personally responsible for this serious breach of duty and put on notice for betraying the public trust by ignoring the overwhelming evidence on the hazards of RF-EMF.”

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.

Featured image is from CHD

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Four Studies Add to Evidence of Wireless Technology-Related Electromagnetic Radiation in Humans
  • Tags:

Fear Is Pfizer’s Financial Fertilizer

January 19th, 2023 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

There’s a new COVID variant making the rounds, and it’s said to be “the most transmissible” variant to date. The new variant, XBB.1.5, was quickly dubbed the “Kraken,” which is a moniker referring to a legendary sea beast that could not be defeated

But there’s nothing particularly noteworthy, and certainly nothing scary, about this new variant. It’s more transmissible but causes milder disease than previous Omicron variants. Most experience only mild cold symptoms

Behavioral scientists have long known that fear of contagion makes people both intolerant toward others and compliant with authority. As such, fear is an indispensable social engineering tool, and we know The Great Reset pushers need the pandemic to keep chugging or else their plans will get seriously hampered. Big Pharma also need people to remain in fear in order to keep sales of their useless COVID shots going

A large Cleveland Clinic study found that, compared to the unvaccinated, workers who had received one COVID jab were 1.7 times more likely to test positive for COVID. Those with two doses were 2.63 times more likely to test positive, those with three doses had 3.1 times the risk, and those with four or more doses were 3.8 times more likely to get infected

In the same quarter that president Biden introduced COVID jab mandates to corporate America, excess mortality was 78% for the 25 to 34 age group and 100% for the 35 to 44 age group

*

By now, you’ve probably heard there’s a new COVID variant making the rounds, and it’s said to be “the most transmissible” variant to date. To hit the proper emotional note where propaganda becomes effective, the new variant, XBB.1.5, was quickly dubbed the “Kraken,” which is a moniker referring to a legendary sea beast that could not be defeated. As reported by NBC Chicago:1

“A highly contagious ‘recombinant’ variant composed of two different BA.2 strains, the ‘kraken’ variant has quickly become the dominant form of COVID in the U.S. and is continuing to spread nationwide. Also known as XBB.1.5, the variant quickly rose to prominence as experts say it is more contagious than many of its predecessors.

‘It went from 4% of sequences to 40% in just a few weeks,’ Dr. Ashish Jha, White House COVID czar, tweeted last week. ‘That’s a stunning increase.’ Jha said the variant is likely more immune evasive, even ‘more than other omicron variants.'”

There’s nothing particularly noteworthy, and certainly nothing scary, about this new variant. Despite the hype at the beginning of the article, NBC actually makes this plain in a later paragraph where they quote the Chicago Department of Public Health commissioner Dr. Allison Arwady:2

“Arwady noted symptoms haven’t changed with the new variant, though she noted that symptoms similar to the flu are less common … ‘COVID is showing up very much like it already has. I think, if anything, we are seeing it a little bit less likely to have the more severe symptoms,’ Arwady said.

‘Definitely people get the severe symptoms still … But more often now we are seeing people … just have cold-like symptoms, less likely to have those flu-like, really feeling very sick, the high fevers.'”

‘Rise of the Kraken’ Is a Baseless Fear Campaign

In other words, this is an entirely baseless fear campaign. The primary “novelty” about the scary-sounding Kraken is that it causes MILDER symptoms than the already mild symptoms of Omicron and its sublineages.

This is entirely logical, as XBB.1.5 is a recombination of two Omicron strains, and as Dr. Dennis Cunningham, medical director of infection control and prevention at Henry Ford Health in Detroit told NBC Chicago:3

“The omicron symptoms have been pretty consistent. There’s less incidence of people losing their sense of taste and smell. In a lot of ways, it’s a bad cold, a lot of respiratory symptoms, stuffy nose, coughing, body aches and fatigue … I haven’t seen anything suggesting that this new subvariant [XBB.1.5] is clearly making people sicker.”

A runny nose was the most common symptom of the BA.2 (Omicron) subvariants that the “Kraken” is made up of. So, this is more ado about nothing. But could we expect anything less? Behavioral scientists have long known that fear of contagion make people both intolerant toward others and compliant with authority.

As such, fear is an indispensable social engineering tool, and we already know The Great Resetpushers need the pandemic to keep chugging or else their plans will get seriously hampered.

Big Pharma also needs people to remain in fear in order to keep sales of their useless COVID shots going. Ironically (although perhaps it was planned this way), the more COVID shots you get, the greater your risk for infection.4 So, the shots have quite literally become the foundational drivers of the pandemic.

More Shots Result in More Infections

In the video above, posted January 4, 2023, former nurse educator John Campbell, Ph.D., reviews some of the latest evidence showing that the more mRNA COVID shots you get, the more likely you are to get infected. The study5,6 in question was done by the Cleveland Clinic, which assessed outcomes among its 51,011 employees.

In summary, they found that, compared to the unvaccinated, workers who had received one dose were 1.7 times more likely to test positive for COVID during the three-month study. Those with two doses were 2.63 times more likely to test positive, those with three doses had 3.1 times the risk, and those with four or more doses were 3.8 times more likely to get infected.

So, it’s not hyperbole to say that these shots are “useless.” They’re actually less than useless, seeing how they have negative effectiveness. The graph below, from the study, clearly illustrates how the risk of infection rises in tandem with each additional dose.

The bottom black line represents the background risk (the risk among the unvaccinated population), and the colored lines above it show the number of infections that occurred depending on the number of doses received.

bivalent covid-19 booster

Boosters Only 30% Effective Despite Strain Match

Overall, the Cleveland Clinic study7 concluded the bivalent booster shots were only 30% effective in protecting against SARS-CoV-2 infection. For reference, 89% of employees received the Pfizer jab and the rest received Moderna. No other brands were used.

Perhaps the most important detail here is that the mRNA in the bivalent boosters matched the Omicron strains in circulation, so the shots were not mismatched (as often happens with the flu vaccine). Yet, despite being perfectly matched to the strains that were actually causing the infections, the boosters were only 30% effective.

By extension, that means their effectiveness is likely to be even lower once the circulating strains change, which has already happened. By the end of December 2022, XBB.1.5 already accounted for 40.5% of all new infections, followed by BQ.1.1, responsible for 26.9% of new infections, and variant BQ.1 at 18.3%.8 Considering the increased transmissibility of XBB.1.5, it’s unlikely that the now unmatched booster shots will offer much protection at all.

As noted by Campbell, at the beginning of the pandemic the World Health Organization required any qualifying “vaccine” to be at least 50% effective, yet now everyone is perfectly content to settle for boosters that are only 30% effective — and that’s in addition to increasing the risk of infection with each dose given.

Natural Infection Still Offers Best Protection

What does offer protection? Natural infection. The Cleveland Clinic did find that natural immunity lessens over time, as new, more immune-evading variants become prominent, but recent natural infection offered good protection. The graph below shows the likelihood of getting infected depending on if or when you were infected with COVID previously.

bivalent covid infection

Those with no previous history of COVID infection had the highest risk of infection during the study period. Day zero was September 12, 2022, which was when the bivalent booster began being offered to Cleveland Clinic employees.

Those who had previously been infected during the pre-Delta and Delta phases of the pandemic had the next-highest risk. Those with the lowest risk of infection (meaning they had the greatest protection) were those who had previously been infected during the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 wave (the most recent wave), followed by those who’d been sick during the earlier BA.1/BA.2 wave.

Excess Deaths and the COVID Jab

In related news, Sally Beck, writing for the British website The Conservative Woman (TCW), recently highlighted Edward Dowd’s work on excess deaths statistics, collated and published in the book “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022.” Beck writes:9

“Former Wall Street executive Edward Dowd … has been dissecting excess mortality statistics recorded since the COVID pandemic began three years ago. He has analyzed and reanalyzed the numbers and has concluded that excess death rates, in those aged 26-41, are closely related to the administration of COVID vaccinations.

‘From February 2021 to March 2022, millennials experienced the equivalent of a Vietnam war, with more than 60,000 excess deaths,’ he said. ‘The Vietnam war took 12 years to kill the same number of healthy young people we’ve just seen die in 12 months.’

This 12-month period covers the COVID vaccination rollout for that age group so in theory we would have expected to see a decrease in excess mortality, not an increase …

Comparisons with normal years was key. All-cause mortality remains relatively constant, and in 2017, 2018 and 2019 around 2.8 million Americans died. Figures spiked in 2020 (COVID), although less than you might imagine, but in 2021 the stats were off the charts.”

Young Americans Are Dying in Record Numbers

In a January 2022 press conference, Scott Davidson, CEO of the mutual life insurance company OneAmerica, shocked the world with his announcement that the death rate among working-age Americans was 40% higher during the third quarter of 2021 than prepandemic levels, and that these deaths were not due to COVID infection.10

Dowd described it as “an earth-shaking statistic,” as a 10% increase would be a 1 in a 200-year event. Davidson, too, stressed the unprecedented nature of the increase, stating that “40% is just unheard of.”11 From there, matters have only worsened.

Dowd’s research shows excess mortality among Millennials was 84% above baseline in the second half of 2021.12 Teens are even dying in their sleep nowadays, and at least two such deaths have been confirmed as being due to COVID jab-induced myocarditis,13 and, as reported by Conservative Woman:14

“The Society of Actuaries Research Institute (SOA) published their COVID-19 mortality survey report on 17 August 2022. It represented approximately 80% of the group life US revenues.

One of their tables showed clearly that excess mortality was 78% for the 25-34 age group and 100% for the 35-44 age group in the same quarter that Biden introduced vaccine mandates and corporate America complied.

Another independent source showed the same disturbing data. The Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Centre (CRC) and the Johns Hopkins Centre for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) tracked and analyzed COVID data worldwide.

They said that 68% of the world’s population was vaccinated and 13 billion doses administered. If they had been safe and effective, how could they explain that the highest death rate occurred after mass vaccination?”

Deaths Among Athletes Up Nearly 1,700%

While death comes to all, the most tragic part of this trend is that it’s young and healthy people who are being prematurely killed, including high-performance athletes.

Approximately 1,65015,16,17,18,19,20 professional and amateur athletes collapsed due to cardiac events in 2021 and 2022. Of those, 1,14821 were fatal. That gives us an annual average death rate of 574 for 2021/2022. For comparison, the historical annual average has been between 2822 and 29.23

How can an increase in athlete deaths of nearly 1,700%24 be explained? Is there another global environmental change that can account for this other than the sudden introduction and widespread uptake of experimental gene therapy? I can’t think of any.

Pfizer Pressured Twitter to Censor Critiques

Despite all the evidence showing the COVID shots are decimating populations around the world, Pfizer is hell-bent on keeping the booster train running. As previously reported, Pfizer quadrupled the price of its COVID jab in the wake of it being added to the U.S. childhood, adolescent and adult vaccine schedules.

Pfizer had forecasted expected revenues, and when demand for never-ending boosters started to drop off, they simply jacked up the unit price to make up the difference. The COVID shots are the company’s most profitable product to date, and it apparently doesn’t matter that they’re killing the user base. That should tell you something.

No criticism of any kind is permissible, as it might impact Pfizer’s bottom line. To protect its interests, Pfizer has even pressured social media companies to censor views on its behalf, including science-based opinions shared by actual scientists, researchers and even a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration chief. Evidence of this is found in the Twitter files released by Elon Musk. As reported by investigative journalist Alex Berenson:25

“August 27, 2021, Dr. Scott Gottlieb — a Pfizer director with over 550,000 Twitter followers — saw a tweet he didn’t like, a tweet that might hurt sales of Pfizer’s mRNA vaccines.

The tweet explained correctly that natural immunity after COVID infection was superior to vaccine protection. It called on the White House to ‘follow the science’ and exempt people with natural immunity from upcoming vaccine mandates.

It came not from an ‘anti-vaxxer’ like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but from Dr. Brett Giroir, a physician who had briefly followed Gottlieb as the head of the Food and Drug Administration. Further, the tweet actually encouraged people who did not have natural immunity to ‘Get vaccinated!’ No matter …

Gottlieb was a senior board member at Pfizer, which depended on mRNA jabs for almost half its $81 billion in sales in 2021. Pfizer paid Gottlieb $365,000 for his work that year. Gottlieb stepped in, emailing Todd O’Boyle, a top lobbyist in Twitter’s Washington office who was also Twitter’s point of contact with the White House.

The post was ‘corrosive,’ Gottlieb wrote. He worried it would ‘end up going viral and driving news coverage’ … Through Jira, an internal system Twitter used for managing complaints, O’Boyle forwarded Gottlieb’s email to the Twitter ‘Strategic Response’ team …

‘Please see this report from the former FDA commissioner,’ O’Boyle wrote — failing to mention that Gottlieb was a Pfizer board member with a financial interest in pushing mRNA shots. A Strategic Response analyst quickly found the tweet did not violate any of the company’s misinformation rules.

Yet Twitter wound up flagging Giroir’s tweet anyway, putting a misleading tag on it and preventing almost anyone from seeing it. It remains tagged even though several large studies26,27 have confirmed the truth of Giroir’s words.”

When in Doubt, Blame ‘Dangerous’ Ideas

Gottlieb also asked Twitter to remove a post by Justin Hart that said “Sticks and stones may break my bones but a viral pathogen with a child mortality rate of <>0% has cost our children nearly three years of schooling.”

That time, to their credit, Twitter’s Strategic Response Team couldn’t identify a “crime” for which they might justify its removal. Gottlieb was also a central instigator for Twitter’s banning of Berenson. According to Berenson:28

“Gottlieb’s action was part of a larger conspiracy that included the Biden White House and Andrew Slavitt, working publicly and privately to pressure Twitter until it had no choice but to ban me. I will have more to say about my own case and will be suing the White House, Slavitt, Gottlieb, and Pfizer shortly.”

When confronted about his behind-the-scenes correspondence with Twitter during an interview with CNBC host Joe Kernan, Gottlieb claimed he only asked Twitter to censor certain posts because he was concerned they might result in “physical threats” against vaccine advocates. He actually welcomes “respectful debate and dialogue,” he claimed.

Yet as Berenson notes, there was no insinuation of threat in Giroir’s tweet, or Hart’s for that matter. What’s more, in his email about Giroir’s tweet to O’Boyle, the only concern he raised was that it might drive news coverage in an unwanted direction.

The Truth Is Scarier Than Any Fiction

If we’ve learned anything these past three years, it’s that we’re in a propaganda war. It’s a war for our mind, and if the globalist cabal wins that war, all freedom will be lost too. This is why it’s so important to understand how we’re being manipulated.

Fear is a primary tool, and as demonstrated in the NBC Chicago piece quoted from at the beginning of this article, they know how to make something completely innocuous sound scary.

In this case, the mildest variant to date is simply given a scary-sounding name (the Kraken), the World Health Organization warns it’s the “most transmissible” to date, and anyone with even the minutest amount of worry about COVID will be off and running.

The fact that experts say it causes nothing more than a mild cold won’t even register at that point. Nor will data showing the “vaccine” is dramatically increasing their risk of the very thing they fear — infection — and killing loads of people to boot.

That’s what’s so crazy about it, but it just goes to show how effective this kind of fear propaganda is, and the actual danger of falling for it. Believing the propaganda — that the shots are “safe and effective” — can literally kill you. The sooner a majority of people realize this, the safer we will all be.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Notes

1, 2, 3 NBC Chicago January 9, 2023

4, 6 Trial Site News December 29, 2022

5, 7 MedRxiv December 19, 2022

8 Contagion Live January 4, 2023

9, 12, 13, 14 Conservative Woman January 3, 2023

10, 11 The Center Square January 1, 2022

15 Journal of Scandinavian Immunology Letter to the Editor December 17, 2022

16 Twitter Liz Wheeler January 3, 2023

17 Twitter Liz Wheeler January 3, 2023, Archived

18 The Expose List of Athlete Deaths, April 2022

19 Epoch Times January 4, 2023 (Archived)

20, 21 Good Sciencing Athlete Deaths List

22, 24 The Expose November 23, 2022

23 Rumble Peter McCullough Interview January 4, 2023

25, 28 Alex Berenson Substack January 9, 2023

26 The Lancet Microbe December 1, 2022; 3(12):E944-E955

27 AJPH January 2023

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

Price: $11.50 Get yours for FREE! Click here to download.

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

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The most recent approval was on January 5: From now on, after mealworms, grasshoppers and crickets, the grain mold beetle can also be used as an ingredient in foods such as bread, soups, pasta, snacks, peanut butter and chocolate products.

The mealworm received the first approval for a so-called “edible insect” in June 2021: The EU Commission’s Implementing Regulation 2021/822 approved the placing on the market of dried larvae of Tenebrio molitor (meal beetle) as a “novel food”.

The SAS EAP Group from France has submitted the application and is allowed to market the mealworm in the Union. It may be sold individually or with a maximum content of 10 grams in protein products, cookies, dishes made from legumes and pasta products.

If insects are used, there must be a note on the packaging of the food that consumption may cause allergic reactions in people with known allergies to crustaceans and molluscs and their products and to house dust mites.

In November 2021, the second “edible insect” was approved by Implementing Regulation 2021/1975 : “Fair Insects BV” from the Netherlands has since been allowed to market frozen, dried and powdered Locusta migratoria (migratory locusts) in the EU.

Depending on the form of processing, the locusts may be used as ingredients in different maximum levels in the products such as processed potato products; dishes made from legumes and products made from pasta, meat substitution, soups and soup concentrates, legumes and vegetables in cans/jars, salads, beer-like beverages, alcoholic beverage mixes, chocolate products, frozen milk-based fermented products, cured meats.

Since 2022 and 2023 respectively, the domestic cricket (Acheta domesticus)  has been permitted in various forms of processing. Implementing regulation 2022/188 allows  the use in frozen, dried and powdered form. The application came again from “Fair Insects BV”. The house cricket, just as locusts, may be used in similar foods.

Since January 3, the Vietnamese company “Cricket One Co. Ltd” has also been allowed to sell “partially defatted powder from Acheta domesticus” in the EU by implementing regulation 2023/5 . Potentially affected foods are multigrain bread and rolls; crackers and breadsticks, cereal bars, dry bakery premixes, cookies, pasta products and many more.

The executive order 2023/58 of January 5 allows “Ynsect NL BV” from the Netherlands to bring larvae of Alphitobius diaperinus (grain mold beetle) in frozen, paste, dried and powdered form as a new food to EU citizens. The list of food categories in which the larvae can be used as an ingredient in most processed foods.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image: Mealworms. Photo credit: Robert Gunnarsson

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Officially Approved by the EU: Four Insects Hiding in Your Food

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Liberal billionaire George Soros is tied to some of the most influential media figures in the United States and abroad through cash he provides to groups affiliated with them, according to a new study conducted by MRC Business.

“The over $32 billion that leftist billionaire George Soros poured into his organizations to spread his radical ‘open society’ agenda on abortion, Marxist economics, anti-Americanism, defunding the police, environmental extremism and LGBT fanaticism around the globe has paid dividends,” MRC Business analysts Joseph Vazquez and Daniel Schneider wrote.

“In fact, his funding has helped him establish ties with some of the biggest name media personalities in the United States and abroad which help indoctrinate millions with his views on a day-to-day basis. MRC Business found at least prominent 54 media figures … who are tied to Soros through their connections to organizations that he funds,” Vazquez and Schneider continued. “These include personalities like ‘NBC Nightly News’ anchor Lester Holt and The Washington Post executive editor Sally Buzbee.”

MRC Business, part of the conservative Media Research Center, unveiled the final report of a three-part series exploring the extent of Soros’ influence over the international media. The study previously revealed that Soros shelled out at least $131 million between 2016 and 2020 to influence 253 media groups.

“This network of media ties allows Soros to hold sizable influence over the stories that the media covers, how they cover those stories, and what stories they don’t cover,” Vazquez and Schneider wrote.

The study found at least 54 media figures linked to Soros’ cash, with Bloomberg News co-founder Matthew Winkler and CNN’s Christiane Amanpour also among them.

Click here to read the full article on Fox News.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from New Eastern Outlook

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on George Soros Tied to at Least 54 Influential Media Figures Through Groups Funded by Liberal Billionaire: Study
  • Tags:

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The defiant declaration by Benjamin Netanyahu that he is going to press ahead and complete Israel’s colonial project in Palestine must be challenged by the world. Regardless of international law and conventions, his government is going to continue to defy them.

Knowing full well that Israel has America’s backing, and that western capitals are far too scared to call him out, Netanyahu made the following brazen statement:

“These are the basic lines of the national government headed by me: The Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will promote and develop settlement in all parts of the Land of Israel — in the Galilee, the Negev, the Golan, Judea and Samaria.”

This leaves no room for ambiguity. He has set out the outcome of his pact agreed with the small far-right parties in what has been described as the “most extreme” right-wing regime in Israeli history. The implications of this for the Palestinians are dire; Netanyahu and his ghastly regime intend to ethnically cleanse them.

His categoric statement implies that Palestinians either do not exist or, if they do, they have no right to continue living in Palestine, to which “the Jewish people have an exclusive and unquestionable right to all areas”. Netanyahu, of course, uses the term “the Land of Israel”, but in case some apologists for apartheid Israel try to play down the enormity of Netanyahu’s declaration by suggesting that he is referring to the 1949 Armistice (“Green”) Line, do not be misled.

By spelling out and identifying the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) in Zionist terms as “Galilee, Negev, Golan, Judea and Samaria”, all of which are, he says, “parts of the Land of Israel” earmarked for development with more illegal Jewish settlements, he has expressed the unambiguous intention to expand and entrench the settler-colonial state across all of occupied Palestine. And perhaps even beyond. Israel, remember, has never declared where its borders are; it’s the only UN member state not to do so.

Such unilateral expansionism is not unique to the current regime because all previous Israeli governments since 1948 have conducted similar illegal and immoral projects including land grabs, forced evictions and the creation of “facts on the ground”. This enforced Judaisation of Palestine has been at the core of Zionism’s colonial project. Now Netanyahu has reiterated his regime’s commitment to complete it. Moreover, he has made that commitment in public, in full view of the world’s media; he is both brazen and unrepentant about it.

In doing so, he has exposed for all to see that the whole “peace process” and so-called “diplomatic” moves have been and remain shameless charades. He has thus pulled the rug from under the feet of the UN. The question now arises as to whether this international institution will react and, if so, what its response will be.

The same can be asked of Israel’s Western allies. Will they continue to behave like proverbial ostriches and stick their collective heads into the ground? After all, the US and Western Europe are complicit in Israel’s war crimes against the Palestinians.

Ever since the British colonial era, which implanted Israel in the heart of the Muslim world, the Zionist regime has been a major source of destabilisation, terror and wars in the region and beyond. Indeed, as an integral part of the West’s military industrial complex, Israel has amassed a massive arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, making it extremely dangerous. It is a rogue state totally out of control; its recklessness is evident in Netanyahu’s bravado.

However, instead of a comprehensive review and assessment by the US to realign its policy on Israel in line with global conventions on human rights, true to form the Biden administration has opted to reward it. Writing in Mondoweiss, Mitchell Plitnick reminds us of Biden’s recent elevation of Israel to a “full military partner” that, apart from setting a “dangerous precedent”, actually works against US interests.

South Africa (Mandela) stands with Palestine - Cartoon [Sabaaneh/MiddleEastMonitor]

South Africa stands with Palestine – Cartoon [Sabaaneh/MiddleEastMonitor]

Plitnick’s warning is backed up by analyst Paul Pillar, who correctly points out that:

“The risks of a closer military relationship with Israel centre on Israel’s tendency to get involved in deadly scrapes. Israel is the Middle Eastern state that has thrown its military weight around, with multiple attacks on other nations, more than any other state in the region. Israel has repeatedly initiated wars, including the big one in 1967, which began with an Israeli attack on Egypt. Later came repeated Israeli invasions of Lebanon, multiple devastating military attacks on the Palestinian-inhabited Gaza Strip, an attack on an Iraqi nuclear reactor (an attack that revived and accelerated a covert Iraqi nuclear weapons programme), and a later similar attack in Syria.”

These warnings should not be treated lightly, especially by countries such as South Africa, whose foreign policy in respect of Israel needs to undergo radical transformation. That the ANC-led government has recalled its ambassador and campaigns vigorously on various platforms, including the African Union, falls far short of the expectations that Palestinians very rightly have of post-Apartheid South Africa.

In the Middle East, apartheid Israel has by far outstripped the evils of South Africa’s racist regime, yet retains a proud presence in Pretoria with its flag fluttering in the skies of a democratic country. It is shameful that Israelis are able to travel freely from Tel Aviv to Johannesburg and Cape Town without any hurdles, while Palestinians are burdened with severe visa restrictions.

It is equally deplorable that many South African Jewish citizens serve in Israel’s occupation army, an army of terrorists that’s known to be engaged in horrific crimes against Palestinians in a daily ritual of slaughter. These include war crimes and crimes against humanity.

These facts scream at us in news reports, television broadcasts and social media platforms. And while President Cyril Ramaphosa routinely expresses the South African government’s dismay at all of this, such words are hopelessly inadequate. If apartheid South Africa was subjected to sanctions by the UN and isolated by the community of nations, surely consistency in enforcing the same against the apartheid state of Israel is a reasonable expectation?

Netanyahu’s declaration is not only a reminder that Israel is a serial violator of international law, but also dares the world to take punitive measures by subjecting his regime to sanctions and isolation. Will South Africa step up to take on this challenge? Does it have any other option?

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is from IMEMC

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The takeover of our society by the billionaires and their lackeys cannot be understood unless we grasp how a veil of secrecy has been spread over most of the government and over corporations for the last twenty years that makes it impossible for people to even speak about the horrific crimes that are destroying our nation. It has become common sense for most people in the upper middle class to simply assume that there is a set of issues which are simply taboo, which cannot be brought up in any context, ever.

President John F. Kennedy addressed this crisis of governance by secrecy at the beginning in a brave speech he delivered in April of 1961.

President Kennedy spoke,

“The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings.

We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it.

Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment.”

A massive increase in secrecy in the United States started after President Kennedy’s assassination in1963, a blatant attempt by global finance to intimate all politicians that was complemented by the expansion of classified status to cover any document that revealed criminality in government. This move was combined with a purging of committed and responsible individuals from the Department of Defense and from intelligence.

That trend towards secrecy went into an exponential upwards curve after the 9/11 attacks. Those attacks involved massive conspiracies to destroy the functionality of government, to mislead the public about fundamental policy decisions, and to threaten, or suppress, opposition while launching endless foreign wars. Laws were set in place, many of which remain illegal to even mention, that set stiff punishments for the disclosure of the truth in any format, for any reason.

To this day, although the contours of the fraudulent attacks on the World Trade Center are known to many, the actual internal process by which it was planned, coordinated, and implemented remains obscure.

There are three main approaches to making secret the corruption and criminality that has spread across government and corporations, and to punishing anyone so foolish as to search for the truth: 1) the use of classifications (secret and top secret), 2) the use of secret law, and 3) the use of non-disclosure agreements.

Rendering corporate and government documents detailing institutional criminality as “secret” and “top secret” and punishing anyone who refers to the criminal actions with massive fines and jail terms for violating the conditions for security clearance, is an old trick that has been radically expanded over the last decade. Numerous whistle blowers have gone to jail and have been driven into bankruptcy, for simply speaking the truth for the good of the nation. Many are subject to courts agreements, to keep them out of jail, that bar them from even discussing what was done to them illegally.

These days, whistleblowers are few and far between because in the current reign of secrecy, those who violate the rules will be punished without anyone ever knowing what happened to them. There seems little point in the growing darkness of risking one’s life and livelihood.

Just about anything that might get someone in trouble for corruption is immediately stamped as classified and thereby rendered off limits. This practice is what has allowed for the theft of hundreds of billions of dollars by investment banks and multinational corporations from the Department of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency (and elsewhere) over the last two decades—without a trace. It is also the means that permitted investment banks to steal trillions of dollars from the Federal Reserve in 2020, an act that fundamentally transformed American society by creating such a concentration of wealth as to establish an untouchable all-powerful ruling class.

That could not have been done if most pertinent documents in the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve had not been classified as top secret (in an egregious act without precedent).

These days, documents are classified by the FBI, the Treasury Department, the Coast Guard, the Department of Commerce, and yes, of course, the Center for Disease Control, on a daily basis to protect the interests of investment banks and the billionaires who run them.

This new culture has rendered a government that was already fatally wounded by 9/11 into an undead, zombie criminal syndicate that does the bidding of the very few.

Secret law, as opposed to classification, is a law, or laws, passed by the Congress which has the full impact of Federal Law, but that remains secret and for which you can be punished for discussing the existence of.

 

 

Click here to view the video

 

The very concept of secret law is so blatantly unconstitutional that you would have thought people would be screaming from the rooftops about it. But, in our sad age, decadent intellectuals are too compromised, too caught up in their own little worlds, to worried about their retirement funds, to care about such matters.

I cannot describe here all of the ways in which secret law is employed in the United States to support a shadow government that makes decisions long before any institution described in the Constitution can take action. Secret law is employed to block people from running for public office, or to make sure their ideas are never covered in the media—no matter how relevant their arguments may be.

Secret Law renders topics taboo in debates on policy in government, think tanks, universities and the media, debates on many important issues. It is not simply that the media does not want to cover the truth because of its corporate interests. It legally is not permitted to do so.

Those who violate the regulations of secret law in their pursuit of truth are brutally punished, but their punishments remain unknown to the public, or even to friends.

Finally, there are non-disclosure agreements which people in business and government are forced to sign from the start if they want to have a job at all. These agreements include enormous fines, and other punishments, for any disclosure of the criminal actions of the organizations that demand the use of these agreements.

In addition, there are non-disclosure agreements that are forced upon citizens by courts whereby, in order to avoid jail and fines for speaking the truth, citizens must sign agreements that prohibit them, forever, from relating the details of the criminal actions by corporations or governments that led to their misfortunes.

The implications of this sweeping institutional secrecy in the United States, at all levels in the Congress, and in the Federal Government, and extending to corporations, banks, and privatized intelligence and law enforcement, are grave.

More and more critical issues in the United States are becoming taboo, more and more criminal conspiracies are off limits for the media, for academics, and even for the man in the street.

This empire of secrecy is the primary driver, not the foibles of any particular politician, that is behind the catastrophic institutional collapse taking place in the United States today—a collapse that is starting to resemble, under the COVID19 regime, the end of the Roman Empire.

We cannot make any progress in stemming the flow of the lifeblood of our nation until we take on the unconstitutional walls of secrecy that have shut citizens out of the policy process, shut down the fundamental functions of government, and made possible the current totalitarian governance system.

At this point, all classified materials must be made public with only exceptions for ongoing discussions on treaties and agreements. All secret law must be deemed to be illegal and unconstitutional by its nature and made public, and the criminal enforcement of non-disclosure agreements must end.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

This article was originally published on Fear No Evil.

Emanuel Pastreich served as the president of the Asia Institute, a think tank with offices in Washington DC, Seoul, Tokyo and Hanoi. Pastreich also serves as director general of the Institute for Future Urban Environments. Pastreich declared his candidacy for president of the United States as an independent in February, 2020.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: End Governance by Secrecy. How to Take Down the Billionaires

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.

Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

 

 

 

 

Aryeh Deri, Israel’s interior and health minister, has been disqualified from holding his office by the High Court in a bombshell judgement that has implications for the future of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government and the judiciary itself.

Deri is one of Netanyahu’s most experienced allies and head of the ultra-Orthodox Shas party.

Ahead of the judgement, his Shas ally Yaakov Margi, who is welfare minister, told an Israeli radio station if Deri is disqualified then “there will be no government”.

“If the court disqualifies him, the prime minister will have to decide what to do,” Margi said. “We have said all along that there is no reason for Aryeh Deri not to serve as a senior minister in Israel.”

Deri was convicted of tax crimes in 2022 and submitted his resignation from the Israeli parliament.

He struck a plea bargain with the courts, in which he said he would quit parliament and political life, only to return to it nine months later and take the position of interior and health minister.

The Israeli high court was deliberating whether Deri’s appointment contravenes his plea bargain.

Deri has a controversial legal history. In 2000, he was sentenced to three years in prison for taking $155,000 in bribes while serving as interior minister.

He served 22 months in prison, and though remaining an influential figure didn’t rejoin public life until 2011. He was re-elected to parliament in 2013.

Shas won 11 of the Israeli parliament’s 120 seats in November’s elections, making it the fifth-largest party. With the Netanyahu-led coalition governing with a majority of three seats, the withdrawal of Shas would collapse his new government.

Publicly, Deri has said that he will not step down and intimated that Netanyahu would have to fire him.

Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara has told the High Court that she also opposed the appointment of Deri.

Baharav-Miara said Deri’s appointment as minister, despite repeated convictions, does severe damage to the public’s trust in the ethical conduct of elected officials.

High court under pressure

The ruling comes amid unprecedented pressure on the Israeli justice system.

Last week almost all the prosecutors and state attorneys that have served in Israel in the last half century jointly warned that planned reforms to the country’s justice system would “destroy” judicial independence.

“We call on the government to withdraw the proposed plan and prevent the serious harm to the justice system and the rule of law,” they said in the letter, referring to a new plan that would expand the government’s power to appoint judges and impede the High Court’s power to restrain parliament.

Currently, the High Court can disqualify government legislation if it contradicts Israel’s 13 basic laws, particularly the Human Dignity and Liberty Basic Law. Israel’s basic laws are intended to be part of the future constitution, which does not exist yet.

The reform plan, however, proposes an “override clause”, which will allow parliament members to reenact a law disqualified by the High Court with a simple majority of 61 MPs.

Netanyahu, who is backing the changes, would also personally benefit from the weakening of the courts.

The prime minister is on trial for corruption, and the law could enable him to evade conviction or make see his case dismissed. Since being indicted in 2019, Netanyahu has railed publicly against the justice system, calling it biased against him.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Featured image is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Israel High Court Disqualifies Interior Minister Deri From Holding Office
  • Tags: ,