US-NATO Wants to Drag Belarus Into War with Ukraine?

January 24th, 2023 by Ahmed Adel

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 joint exercises between the Belarusian and Russian Air Forces, which are currently being held in Belarus, are of a defensive nature and are a response to the collective threat the two countries face from NATO and neighbouring Ukraine. These exercises are being held at a time when the West is pushing Kiev to open a new front against Belarus, which is of particular importance because Poland is massing troops on its eastern border.

Western countries have significantly increased their provocations by conducting military exercises, concentrating its troops, and amassing heavy weapons near the Russian-Belarusian borders. Just as Russia was drawn into conflict with Ukraine because of the country’s unrelenting willingness to carryout Washington’s demands, even if its contrary to its own interests, the West hopes that Belarus can be drawn into the war in a much deeper way.

The joint air force exercises began on January 16 and will last until February 1. The main goal of the exercises is to increase operational compatibility in joint combat tasks, something of critical importance given the war waging in neighbouring Ukraine, and in which Kiev is being financed by the tens of billions of dollars. None-the-less, it must be noted that the deeper integration of the Russian and Belarusian militaries began long before Moscow launched its special military operation in Ukraine.

These military exercises also raise speculation on whether Belarus will enter the Ukrainian conflict. Belarus does not want to be drawn into the conflict if it can be avoided, but President Alexander Lukashenko will certainly not shy away either if it is necessary.

Kiev finds itself in a conundrum. On the one hand, Kiev hopes that a Belarusian military operation would force a direct Western intervention in the war. However, if Ukraine is to provoke Belarus, it also runs the risk of the Belarusian military pouring into Kiev, Zhitomir and Chernigov oblasts, thus forcing Ukrainian troops and resources from other fronts, and with no guarantee of a western intervention. The West is content with seeing Ukraine destroy itself in the attempt of weakening Russia, and hopes that Belarus can also be drawn into this mess.

It is recalled that Ukrainian Deputy Interior Minister Yevhen Yenin already told the BBC in December that Ukraine would be bolstering its border with Belarus by allocating further armed forces and ammunition, something which could be used more effectively on its battlefronts with Russia.

If Ukraine is to provoke Belarus into conflict in the hope that it will lead to Western intervention, and the West does not directly intervene, it would be a major disaster. It is this risk-reward factor that Kiev is still debating. Kiev already frequently complains about the West’s lacklustre support and it is highly unlikely that the West will begin directly intervening in Ukraine because Belarus also entered the conflict and in this case the main repercussion for Minsk will be more sanction packages.

At the same time, considering the deterioration of the situation on the western borders of Russia and Belarus in October last year, Lukashenko approved the deployment of a joint regional military group. With the aim of strengthening border defences, the total contingent of the Russian military in the joint group is about 9,000 soldiers. According to earlier announcements, the group will include about 170 tanks, about 200 armoured fighting vehicles, and 100 artillery pieces and mortars.

Lukashenko previously warned that the West is pushing Ukraine to open a front against Belarus. It cannot be discounted that NATO and some European countries are considering options for aggression against Belarus.

Apart from bordering Russia, Belarus (with an etymology meaning “White Rus”) is sandwiched between the Russophobic countries – Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia. Poland is amassing an army on the eastern border with Belarus, while NATO troops are stationed in the Baltic countries. The latest tanks and planes have arrived in the Baltics, suggesting that there are enough weapons to open another front against Belarus.

It is for this reason that joint air force exercises between Belarus and Russia is critical, especially as the Russian Air Force has a high-level of combat readiness and recent experience (when considering the war in Ukraine, Syria since 2015 and Georgia in 2008), something that the pilots of Ukraine, Poland and the Baltics do not have. For this reason, transferring this combat experience to the Belarusians through joint exercises will also improve the defence and security of Russia.

For now, it is unclear whether Kiev will push ahead in forcing Belarus into conflict. It is highly likely that Washington wants Belarus to be dragged into the war but at the same time it seems to be reluctant to directly intervene if Lukashenko gives the order to attack Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has been a useful puppet for the US thus far, however, even he must surely know that forcing Belarus to intervene in the war will only create more problems for the struggling Ukrainian military. At the same time, the Kiev regime since 2014 has been in the habit of serving foreign interests rather than their own, and for this reason, as Ukraine is unpredictable, Belarus must also have high combat readiness in case the Ukrainians do instigate provocations.

*

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

The CIA and the FBI Exposed. Historical Analysis

January 24th, 2023 by Prof. Arthur Noble

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 was the CIA Director. We lied. We cheated. We stole. [Laughter, applause] We had entire training courses. [Applause]. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment.”1 – Mike Pompeo, 15 April 2019    

The Democrats and their FBI Gestapo have brought Nazism to America. There is a revolution underway that is creating a situation for you that is far worse than life in the Third Reich.2 – Dr Paul Craig Roberts, 6 January 2023    

 

The CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) and the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) are the two most notorious of several acronym-named institutions which are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution of the United States of America.

The CIA was established by President Truman under the National Security Act of 1947 to assist in countering the then Soviet threat. Its main purpose was to collect, evaluate and disseminate vital information on economic, military, scientific and other developments abroad in order to safeguard national security, but it developed by stealth into what Ron Unz calls “the gangster enforcement arm of the oligarchy that rules America and its mainstream media”,3 eventually assuming a role parallel to “the secret American Army” akin to the Gestapo (Geheime Staatspolizei), Hitler’s Secret State Police.

Today the CIA is busily eviscerating the US Constitution and has criminalised peaceful public dissent and free speech.4 The Natural News website provides evidence that on the international front the CIA is running Ukraine’s war against Russia,5 that it is using the pro-vaccine corporate media as a criminal conspiracy to promote the Covid-19 scam,6 that it conducted secret torture operations and assassinations,7 and that it uses Google as its “information dominance” front.8   

The FBI was also subjected to a transformation similar to the CIA’s.

Originally known as simply the ‘Bureau of Investigation’, the FBI was created on 26 July 1908 by the then Attorney General Charles J Bonaparte, grandson of Napoleon’s brother, despite objections by some members of Congress.

It was intended to be the investigative arm of the US Department of Justice and was a fact-finding agency responsible for all Federal criminal statutes except those delegated to other Federal agencies.

It since morphed in stages into America’s domestic “Surveillance State”, which it led, together with the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the CIA, to “run roughshod over tech companies”, placing staff agents at Twitter and other key tech companies in order to influence censorship policy”.9 Like the CIA, the FBI is thus rightly accused of “Gestapo tactics”.10 As early as 12 May 1945 President Harry Truman already wrote of it: “We want no Gestapo or Secret Police. FBI is tending in that direction. […] The Courts should be strictly judicial and not dabble in policy – except interpretation of the Constitution.”11 Today the majority of Americans consider the use of the FBI as “Biden’s personal Gestapo”.12 The Russia Today website calls the FBI a “jackbooted Gestapo”, “criminal” and “rotted at its core”.13 The Natural News website put it bluntly: “The FBI overthrew America.”14   

WikiLeaks has exposed the CIA   

On 14 March 2017 WikiLeaks released thousands more documents and files revealing the “entire hacking capacity of the CIA”. Even the first one percent of the batch, known as “Vault 7”, contains over 8,000 pages and already reveals that the CIA, which fabricated stories of Russian hacking of US and EU elections with zero proof, was itself hypocritically spying on the entire world, including American politicians, businesses and individuals. It describes the CIA as “a hotbed of corruption and espionage”.

The Vault 7 documents also disclose that the CIA purchases software exploits from other intelligence agencies, including Britain’s MI5. For years the West and its subservient mainstream media, backed by the CIA, the White House, the State Department, and the sixteen other US intelligence agencies, have been doing their utmost to demonize Russian President Vladimir Putin with hysterical and emotional accusations based on absolute fiction. WikiLeaks exposed the CIA for hypocrisy in doing precisely what the CIA itself has been accusing others of doing.   

Vault 7 describes the CIA as not only “illegal”, but also “incompetent”. The CIA is legally prohibited from conducting electronic surveillance on Americans. Its activities are supposed to be subject to rigorous oversight to ensure that they comply fully with US law and the Constitution. Nevertheless, it has consistently breached its legal brief and violated the separation of powers principle embodied in the US Constitution. Itsincompetence surfaced when it actually lost its arsenal of hacking tools, resulting in a call for an immediate Congressional investigation into itshacking activities, which for obvious reasons apparently never took place.   

On 4 May 2012 former CIA Director William Casey also admitted its involvement in a campaign of deliberate lies: “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”15 

That is largely the situation today. Recent revelations also prove that the CIA was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy and illegally tapped the Trump election campaign in 2016.16   

FBI ‘weaponised against the people’   

A Global Research website article by Joseph Mercola, published on 17 January 2023, states:

“We now have proof that the FBI has been acting as the key instigator and implementer of the Government’s illegal censorship of AmericansThe FBI has also actively interfered in multiple elections – all while inventing the narrative that foreign nations were interfering. Twitter has worked hand in hand with the US Department of Defence to aid US intelligence agencies in their efforts to influence foreign governments using fake news, computerized deep-fake videos and bots.”17   

Judging by the documentation obtained through a recent lawsuit against the White House and the Twitter files released by Elon Musk it has become clear, says Musk, that

“every facet of the US Government, including its intelligence agencies, are [sic, for ‘is’] involved in illegal and unconstitutional censorship”.18 

Noting that Twitter was

“paid to censor Americans and promote US [Government] propaganda, and that Members of Congress have done likewise

Musk reminds us that (as in the case of the CIA which I mentioned above) the First Amendment bars Government from engaging in viewpoint-based censorship, and he quotes US Senator Josh Hawley’s grave warning that these kinds of activities are

“the biggest threat to our Constitutional democracy today”.   

*

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 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUAe35IunXc   

2 https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2023/01/06/the-democrats-and-their-fbi-gestapo-have-brought-nazism-to-america/   

3 https://www.unz.com/kbarrett/rogue-elephants-can-elon-tucker-and-ye-trample-the-ringmasters-and-tear-down-the-big-top/   

4 https://www.unz.com/article/the-secret-american-army/   

5 https://naturalnews.com/2022-07-04-confirmed-cia-running-ukraine-fight-against-russia.html   

6 https://naturalnews.com/2021-03-02-pro-vaccine-media-a-front-for-cia.html   

7 https://naturalnews.com/049673_torture_CIA_American_Psychological_Association.html; see also the New York Times report: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/01/us/report-says-american-psychological-association-collaborated-on-torture-justification.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=1   

8 https://naturalnews.com/2017-02-26-bombshell-investigation-google-an-information-dominance-front-for-the-cia.html   

9 https://www.globalresearch.ca/surveillance-state-what-twitter-files-mean-america-ukraine-libertarianism/5803696   

10 Read the superb in-depth analysis of FBI activity in the Global Research website’s article “The FBI’s Gestapo tactics: Hallmarks of an authoritarian regime”: https://www.globalresearch.ca/fbi-gestapo-tactics-hallmarks-authoritarian-regime/5790936   

11 https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/library/truman-papers/longhand-notes-presidential-file-1944-1953/may-12-1945   

12 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VRjE6IGgfM   

13 https://www.rt.com/news/562538-bannon-fbi-raids-trump-supporters/; https://crimereads.com/the-cias-dark-history-of-employing-former-nazis-in-postwar-europe/   

14 https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-12-21-ben-armstrong-fbi-overthrew-america-stole-elections.html   

15 https://twitter.com/drtcp/status/1389614459287752705; Italics mine for emphasis   

16 https://www.foxnews.com/video/6317311778112; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LRArfyjK1Y   

17 https://www.globalresearch.ca/every-facet-government-censorship-business/5804929; Italics mine for emphasis   

18 See Musk: “Dems freed the War Machine”: https://takecontrol.substack.com/p/twitter-files  

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The CIA and the FBI Exposed. Historical Analysis
  • Tags: ,

Egyptian Economic Crisis Has Hit Syrian-Owned Businesses

January 24th, 2023 by Steven Sahiounie

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 US-NATO attack on Syria for regime change began in 2011, many Syrians began to leave the country for safer areas. After the Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Mursi won in a US manipulated election, many Syrians who were followers of the Muslim Brotherhood, packed up and left for Egypt.

According to the 2018 Pew research center data, more than 150,000 Syrians are living in Egypt and Libya. Egypt’s economy is the second largest in Africa after Nigeria.

Many were economic migrants following a political ideology embraced by the Syrian opposition, and aligned with the Mursi government in Cairo.  They were Syrians in business who had enough finances to open a business, or perhaps a factory in Egypt. The government was offering residential visas which attracted Syrians with substantial resources to improve the Egyptian economy.  It looked like a good move at first.

Ahmad al-Homsi was a coffee merchant in the south of Homs, one of the most damaged cities in Syria.  He took his entire family to Egypt and invested $15 million in establishing a coffee bean roaster, grinding, packaging, and distribution business.  He said he would now be willing to sell everything for $5 million as the Egyptian economy hits bottom.

The first Egyptian revolution was manipulated to place the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in power, but within the first year the people went back to the streets and the second revolution threw out the American puppet, and the new leader was a military man, Abdel Fattah Al Sisi.

In 2013 Egypt’s state-run media cast Syrian refugees in the country as terrorists who had aligned themselves with the MB. Syrians had at first been welcomed, but as the government turned away from the MB as an outlawed terrorist group responsible for hundreds of murders in Egypt, the Syrians became suspect.

Sisi led in a strong authoritarian style, not surprising from a military man.  While he succeeded in keeping the MB contained, he fell short on the economy, which is now in a state of near collapse.

The Egyptian central bank had propped up the currency value, instead of allowing the market to set the value.  This started a cycle of devalued currency, high inflation, frustrated business owners, and consumers unable to purchase at the newly high prices.  The Egyptian government had favored companies owned by the military, and gave them preference over private businesses. The IMF has requested that to change and instead favor private business.

The global COVID pandemic hurt everyone, and some of what happened to Egypt’s economy is a direct result of global factors which could not be avoided.  Tourism is one of the biggest sectors of the Egyptian economy, and the pandemic saw planes being parked, and pilots and travelers sitting idle.

However, the former central bank’s governor Tarek Amer is to blame for policies which caused this crisis.

In 2016, Egypt carried out a currency devaluation to stabilize the Egyptian pound, which lost about half its value to the US dollar in the float/devaluation of 2016, which spiked inflation over 30 percent.

Consumers began cutting back on food, and coffee as the Homsi business witnessed, as Egyptians struggled to feed their families. Private businesses began to close down from lack of sales.

Many Syrians in Egypt were running restaurants, and that needs customers with extra cash for a meal out.  Customers dwindled as the inflation ate up their cash.

The central bank propped up the Egyptian pound’s value artificially using its dollars starting in June 2020 up until March 2022.  The bank created a false illusion of a stable currency, which allowed the bank to borrow billions from foreign investors, many in the Gulf.

By the end of 2021, Egypt faced over $138 billion in external debt, with $22 billion due to be paid during 2022, because of the faulty central bank strategy.

In February 2022, as the war on Ukraine began, the US dollar-denominated non-resident investors triggered a capital flight of $25 billion dollars out of Egypt.

On March 21, the central bank removed its currency peg, and the Egyptian pound fell to an exchange rate of 18.5 pounds from 15.6 pounds in just a few days.  Importers like the Homsi coffee business became panicked. Private businesses were forced to buy dollars on the black market to pay for imported cargo.

Within the week, Egypt requested another $15 billion IMF loan, marking its third in seven years.

On August 6, Tarek Amer published a letter in a state-run newspaper and blamed everything on private importers for wiping out the supply of hard currency. He had favored restricting imports, which would have closed businesses and prevented access to essential items from abroad, like coffee. Just two days later Amer resigned.

The IMF approved a new $3 billion loan to Egypt, instead of the $15 billion requested, which points to the IMF’s distrust in the Sisi led economy.

Amer had run a Pozi scheme that was profitable for foreign investors living abroad, like the Gulf, but disastrous for the Egyptians and Syrian residents.

On January 11, 30 Egyptian pounds were needed to buy $1, for a record breaking exchange rate.

The IMF recovery plan for Egypt calls for a full float of the currency value. Large infrastructure projects which Sisi had reveled in are under scrutiny. The IMF is encouraging military-owned companies to be replaced with ones from the private sector.

The Syrians didn’t come to Egypt for the sun or the pyramids.  They came to find a safe place to do business and earn money.  Now, many face bankruptcies because of the failed policies of the Egyptian central bank. Some may decide to return home after losing their life savings in Egypt. Immigrants are often blamed for economic woes, as the locals will blame them for taking the too few jobs available. Now, Syrians in Egypt face financial hardship and even violence as the suffering Egyptians lose patience.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Egyptian Economic Crisis Has Hit Syrian-Owned Businesses
  • 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.

***

Bush’s delayed actions point to failure of government response.

9/11 families are at the forefront in pressing for a new congressional investigation which could help unravel many mysteries about deadly terrorist attacks.

*

Newly released documents from the National Archives detail how President George W. Bush authorized the shootdown of hijacked airplanes at 10:00 a.m. EDT on 9/11 after Bush had learned that two had already crashed into the World Trade Center towers.

But these orders were too late to save the people who died in the Twin Towers or 183 people who died when the western side of the Pentagon was struck by American Airlines Flight 77 at 9:37 a.m. (the fourth hijacked plane, Flight 93, crashed southeast of Pittsburgh in Somerset County, Pennsylvania, at 10:03 a.m. after passengers reportedly took over the plane).

The sixty-four thousand dollar question is why Bush did not order the shootdown of the planes earlier—when it could have saved people’s lives.

Bush had been alerted just minutes after a hijacked plane crashed into the World Trade Center at 8:46 a.m., while he was on a visit to schoolchildren in Sarasota, Florida.

After an aide whispered news of the second attack on the Twin Towers, President Bush continued reading a children’s book, The Pet Goat, and then at 9:30 a.m. addressed Americans at a press conference in which he said that “terrorism against our nation will not stand,” before being whisked away and stopped at about seven locations that were reported, including Barksdale Air Force Base.

Bush’s orders authorizing the shooting down of hijacked aircraft were revealed in a meeting that he held on April 29, 2004, with members of the 9/11 Commission, which was established to investigate the 9/11 attacks.[1]

In the meeting, President Bush claimed that he wanted to convey an aura of calm in the face of the attacks and so continued with the reading to the schoolchildren in Florida.

Bush said that it was when he got aboard Air Force One and began speaking to Dick Cheney that he gave Cheney authorization to shoot down any hijacked aircraft.

Bush said that he told Cheney that, as a veteran of the Texas National Guard (during the Vietnam War), he had been trained to shoot down planes and understood how this worked—one plane woud identify the target and another would lock onto it.

But why hadn’t Bush ordered the hijacked planes to be shot down an hour earlier, when he was first informed about the World Trade Center attacks and lives could have been spared?

Fire from crashing of American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m. on September 11, 2001. [Source: history.com]

Failings of 9/11 Commission

Coinciding with the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, Ray McGinnis published an important book, Unanswered Questions: What the September Eleventh Families Asked and the 9/11 Commission Ignored (Vancouver, Canada: NorthernStar Publications, 2021), which spotlights the efforts of 9/11 families to uncover the truth about the 9/11 attacks and to demand a new government inquiry.

A Canadian who wrote a previous book on the psalms, McGinnis emphasizes the failure of the 9/11 commission, which was staffed by Bush administration insiders and yes men, and spent only $14 million investigating the 9/11 attacks when $80 million had been spent in the 1990s investigating Bill and Hillary Clinton’s involvement in assorted scandals.

A group of 9/11 families gave the commission a D-grade, stating that it “did not carry out the necessary hard-hitting questioning, cross-examination and crucial follow-up questioning all of which are critical in unearthing the truth.”

The credibility of the Commission was undercut by the fact that it published the names and photos of hijackers, eight who according to media reports were found to be alive after September 11—and so not all of these could actually have been the hijackers.[2]

40 percent of the accused hijackers were found to be alive and living in the Middle East after 9/11. [Source: history.com]

Chairman Thomas Kean, the former governor of New Jersey, and Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton, a former congressman from Indiana (1965-1999), admitted that the commission had been “set up to fail.”

Fitting the precedent of the Warren Commission investigating the JFK assassination, and Roberts Commission investigating Pearl Harbor, Max Cleland said that the 9/11 Commission [which Cleland served on] had been “compromised.”

Lee Hamilton tellingly was a firm believer in “executive privilege” who was not considered much of an investigator in Congress. He admitted that he did not “go for the jugular” and had been “gullible” in accepting official government claims during the Iran-Contra investigation.

When others wanted to issue subpoenas to North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) officers, Hamilton characteristically voted no, stating: “I’ve known Don Rumsfeld [Defense Secretary] for twenty, thirty years. When he said ‘I’m going to get that information for you,’ I took him at his word.”[3]

Philip Zelikow, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission had been on President Bush’s foreign intelligence advisory board and on the Council of Foreign Relations, and was a key contributor to a policy paper advocating preemptive war, which laid the intellectual groundwork for the invasion of Iraq in 2003.[4]

Zelikow’s bias was apparent when the 9/11 Commission solicited the testimony of Dr. Laurie Mylroie, author of the book, Study of Revenge: Saddam Hussein’s Unfinished War Against America, who claimed that Iraq had attacked the U.S. on 9/11.

Lorie Van Auken, whose husband was killed on 9/11, told New York Times reporter Philip Shenon that “it took a lot of nerve putting someone like that on the panel. Laurie Mylroie? This is supposed to be an investigation for September 11. This is not supposed to be a sales pitch for the Iraq War!” Van Auken continued: “He knew exactly what he was doing. He was selling the war.”

Unaddressed Questions

McGinnis summarizes some of the main question marks about 9/11 that families of the survivors had which the 9/11 Commission never addressed:

These questions include:

  1. How did the FBI amass complete biographies of the alleged terrorists and their accomplices in such a short time after the attacks? Did the intelligence agencies have open files on these men? Were they already under investigation and, if so, could the attacks have been prevented?
  2. How come Osama bin Laden appeared to be healthy and with a brown beard in a November 9, 2001, “confession” video, when he appeared to be frail, gaunt and pale with a white beard in other videos purportedly taken on November 3 and November 16?
  3. How come the doors to the roofs of the World Trade Center North and South Towers were locked, preventing people in the buildings from being rescued by helicopter—as they had been after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing?
  4. Why did George Tabeek of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey give orders for an announcement after the first tower was struck that people should return to their offices in World Trade Center building 2, which cost many people their lives?[5]
  5. Why did the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), American Airlines and NORAD each report different times for orders to send out fighter jets to intercept the hijacked planes and why were the planes never intercepted?
  6. Why was Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld not informed about the 9/11 attacks when they occurred? And why was the Pentagon undefended when it oversaw a trillion dollar budget for national defense?
  7. How was it possible that the passports of alleged hijackers Mohamed Atta and Satam al-Suqami were found at street level in the rubble of the World Trade Center, unsinged?
  8. Why did FBI headquarters block agent Coleen Rowley in Minneapolis, agent Robert Wright in Chicago, and the FBI offices in New York City from properly reporting evidence of terrorist plotting?
  9. Why did the FBI, who had Mohamed Atta under surveillance, do nothing to prevent him from re-entering the U.S. three times in 2001, despite his expired visa?
  10. Why were members of the bin Laden family flown from the U.S. to Saudi Arabia right after the 9/11 attacks when all commercial and private flights were officially grounded?
  11. Why did the CIA withhold information from the FBI about two of the alleged hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar?

Where Were the Eyes and Ears of North American Skies?

One of the biggest unanswered questions that the 9/11 Commission failed to address was why NORAD jets were unable to intercept the hijacked planes if they were airborne within eight minutes of notification?

Founded in 1957 as a joint command military organization between the U.S. and Canada, NORAD was the “multimillion dollar, 24-hour eyes and ears of North American skies.”

Holding an impeccable record in aviation safety, it had successfully intercepted 129 off-course flights in 2000 over U.S. air space, and carried out anti-hijack training exercises every six days.

After a 1956 mid-air crash over the Grand Canyon, the FAA had made it mandatory for all planes to have approved flight paths tracked by radar and to have their cruising altitude approved before take-off.

An Air Traffic Control Center binder from August 1998 counseled controllers that, when a plane strayed from its approved flight path or altitude assignment, it will “likely find two [jet fighters] on their tail within 10 minutes or so.”[6]

On 9/11 these jet fighters could have been able to perform aerial maneuvers around the hijacked flights to force them off course. However, inexplicably, neither the FAA and NORAD followed its normal protocol on 9/11, and its top commanders went AWOL during the attacks.

NORAD Commander Ralph Eberhart was himself unreachable for 45 minutes between 9:30 a.m. and 10:15 a.m. while driving his car. Eberhart claimed in an interview on March 1, 2004, that he chose to be absent from the command post for 45 minutes while the attacks were unfolding because things had “quieted down,” which is ridiculous.[7]

The 9/11 Commission Report conceded that the response by NORAD was “one failure after another,” though it failed to investigate these failures in any depth or to uncover their root cause.

Lorie Van Auken, a member of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee, said that she was stunned that the 9/11 Commission Report omitted the fact that there were two fighter jets from the Atlantic City International Airport in Pomona, New Jersey, carrying out mock bombing sorties only eight minutes away from ground zero that were never called.

Paul Thompson, author of The Terror Timeline, commented that the 9/11 Commission considered a criminal investigation of NORAD and Pentagon officials who gave the inquiry seven different, and contradictory, stories regarding the military response to the hijackings.

Strangely, while two of the flight attendants from the hijacked planes contacted the airline to alert them that a hijacking was in progress and it was protocol to notify NORAD of any hijacking in progress, under NORAD’s timeline no one was in touch with them until much later.

The FAA also only received word of the hijackings at 9:34 a.m., over an hour after air traffic controllers at Boston Center began notifying the FAA that a hijacking had taken place.

Significance of War Games Exercises

Further suspicious was the unprecedented number of war games exercises that just happened to be held on September 11, which appears to have contributed to the confusion and slower response times by the FAA and NORAD—though this was never explored by the 9/11 Commission.

The scenario for one of the war games, Amalgam Virgo One, involved a suicide pilot attacking a military building, while Fertile Rice featured Osama bin Laden directing a drone filled with explosives to target Washington, D.C.

Two other games, Vigilant Guardian and Global Guardian, had a photo of bin Laden on the cover of their documents and featured a script where terrorists hijacked a plane in order to attack Manhattan.[8]

When questioned by the 9/11 Commission, NORAD Commander General Ralph Eberhart falsely claimed that the war games “cost us 30 seconds,” when it was likely far more.

Diagram, text Description automatically generated

Source: oilempire.us

How Did the World Trade Center Buildings Collapse?

9/11 families and members of the 9/11 Truth Movement have raised further questions as to why the steel from the World Trade Center was removed so quickly and sold to scrap dealers without being examined.

NYPD firefighters had entered the smoldering World Trade Center towers on 9/11 based on their collective experience that steel-framed buildings did not collapse when they were on fire.

The 9/11 Commission confirmed that none of the fire chiefs present believed that a total collapse of either tower was possible.

The 9/11 Commission, however, did not follow up on the matter or raise questions as to what caused the building’s steel beams to drip molten metal down their sides, which was observed.

It also ignored the conclusion of a study carried out by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which determined that collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707) would result in only local damage and could “not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building.”

An editorial in Fire and Engineering revealed that “numbers of members of the New York Fire Department who were first responders on 9/11 reported explosions from within both of the Twin Towers before and after the planes hit the top of the towers.”[9]

Three television networks, four cable news channels, and four local TV channels in New York City reported explosions at the World Trade Center, with Cynthia McFadden referring to Ground Zero as the “blast site” on ABC.[10]

Survivors said that, when they went down to the lobby of Building 2, they saw a woman with her face blown off, and that the lobby had been destroyed—as if by a bomb.

The first casualty to arrive at Bellevue Hospital in New York, Marlene Cruz stated that she was in an elevator that blew up from an explosion. Cruz had worked at the World Trade Center when it was bombed in 1993 and thought to herself: “Here we go again, another bomb.”[11]

The grainy footage, taken before the South Tower collapsed, appears to show an explosion. [Source: mirror.co.uk]

FDNY firefighter John Coyle, who was in the South Tower when it collapsed, told the New York Times that, when he called his father to tell him he was alive, his father asked him whether he was there when the planes hit, to which Coyle replied: “No I was there when it exploded, the building exploded.” When his father interjected: “You mean when it fell down,” Coyle said: “No, when it exploded.”[12]

Why Did World Trade Center Building 7 Collapse?

A related mystery is why World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed when it was not hit by any hijacked planes. The official explanation was that a diesel fuel oil tank caused a fire that led the building to collapse, though numerous survivors heard explosions go off that sounded like bombs or incendiaries.[13]

On March 25, 2020, the University of Alaska Fairbanks issued a four-year computer modeling study on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 which concluded that “fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11.” The collapse, rather, was caused by “near simultaneous failure of every column in the building,” which could be achieved only by a controlled demolition.

World Trade Center 7

World Trade Center Building 7 stands amid the rubble of the recently collapsed Twin Towers. [Source: popularmechanics.com]

“He Could Not Fly at All”

Another important question is how alleged hijacker Hani Hanjour performed such a complex maneuver in reportedly steering Flight 77 into the Pentagon.

The New York Times reported, in an article entitled “A Trainee Noted for Incompetence,” that Hanjour had failed a number of piloting courses in Phoenix, Arizona, at the Pan Am International Flight Academy and JetTech Flight School.

A JetTech employee said: “I am still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon. He could not fly at all.”

Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush’s Lies

The 9/11 Commission never probed the strange behavior of President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on 9/11 and the lies that they told.

1) George W. Bush: President Bush was informed by the Director of the White House Situation Room, Rear Admiral Deborah Loewer, that a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center North Tower at 8:50 a.m. EDT, though he strangely decided to continue with his visit to a second grade classroom in Sarasota. When he was told that the second plane had crashed, Bush, against protocol, kept reading The Pet Goat to the second graders, while Press Secretary Ari Fleischer held up a paper with the words: “DON’T SAY ANYTHING YET.”

On December 4, 2001, Bush claimed that, while he was waiting to enter the classroom in Sarasota, he saw an airplane hit the tower—on TV. However, The Washington Timesreported that President Bush did not have access to a television until fifteen minutes later, while the Boston Herald noted that video of the first plane hitting the World Trade Center did not surface until the next day.

2) Dick Cheney: According to numerous reports, Cheney was taken to the Presidential Emergency Operations Center beneath the White House the moment the South Tower was struck at 9:03 a.m. However, the 9/11 Commission reported that Cheney did not arrive at the bunker until 9:58 a.m.—though Cheney was seen by a Secret Service agent at 9:30 a.m. Cheney told the 9/11 Commission that he was carried away from his office by the Secret Service at 9:35 a.m. However, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta arrived at the Presidential Emergency Operations Center at 9:20 a.m. and observed that Cheney was clearly in command.

Mineta said he saw an unidentified young officer come in and report to Cheney that a plane was approaching the Pentagon, and then he asked: “Do the orders still stand,” and Cheney said “yes.” Mineta told Lee Hamilton he thought the order was a shootdown order; however, the order may have actually been not to shoot down American Airlines Flight 77.[14]

3) Donald Rumsfeld: Rumsfeld was working in the east side of the Pentagon on the morning of September 11. He claimed that he was not told that a plane was headed for the Pentagon even 15 minutes before and that he was unaware at the time that jets had crashed into the World Trade Center. After Rumsfeld felt the building shake, he claimed to have gone outside and started helping the injured into stretchers. After aiding the victims he said he then went into the war room.

Rumsfeld’s story is contradicted by testimony of Victoria Clarke, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, who says that she told Rumsfeld after 8:46 a.m. that the first tower had been hit 51 minutes before American Airlines Flight 77 struck the Pentagon.

Rumsfeld’s claim about going outside to help the victims is also implausible because each side of the Pentagon is the length of three football fields and Rumsfeld’s office was a brisk ten-minute walk to the Pentagon lawn. Rumsfeld could thus only have been at the crash site for an extremely brief period; he did not have half an hour to spend before returning to his office at the time he claimed—10:00 a.m. (American Airlines Flight 77 was reported to have hit the Pentagon at 9:37 a.m.).

Missing $2.3 Trillion

The day before 9/11, Rumsfeld admitted that $2.3 trillion of Pentagon money was missing. Auditors had audited the 1999 fiscal year of the Department of Defense and found that $2.3 trillion was missing paperwork. There was a further $1.8 trillion that the auditors were unable to review due to lack of time and proper staffing due to budgetary cuts to the audit department.

On September 11, American Airlines Flight 77 blew concentric holes through six walls and slammed into the newly renovated U.S. Army financial management and audit area, resulting in the deaths of 34 of its 65 employees.

Most of those killed were civilian accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts. This raises the question as to whether the attack on September 11 was used as an opportunity to target the auditors investigating the missing $2.3 trillion.

Did an Airplane Actually Hit the Pentagon?

An eyewitness to the crash, reporter Jamie McIntyre, stated that there was no evidence of an airplane having actually crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. There were no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse. The only debris appeared to be small pieces of an airplane, with the biggest piece being only three feet long.[15]

Speculative Bets in Money Markets

After the 9/11 attacks, there were people who made speculative bets in money markets that the price of airline stock—the same ones that were hijacked on 9/11—would fall.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported on September 29, 2001 “there is evidence that a number of the transactions in financial markets indicated specific (criminal) foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.”[16]

The firm that managed the suspicious transactions was Bankers Trust, a major U.S. investment bank with ties to CIA Executive Director Alvin “Buzzy” Krongard. He used to be Vice Chairman of the Board of Bankers Trust and had been involved in specialized banking operations identified by the U.S. Senate and other investigators as having been closely connected with the laundering of drug money.

The CIA routinely monitored evidence of irregular trading activity through its PROMIS software system that would have alerted it to the likelihood of a terrorist attack.

On the eve of 9/11, there had been insider trading and suspicious sales of shares in airlines, insurance companies and gold and oil markets that suggest they were conducted with insider knowledge. Some of these were traced to the Marsh & McLennan data center on the 95th floor of the North Tower, which was hit on 9/11.

Marsh & McLennan’s chief of risk management was Paul Bremer, who was subsequently appointed by President Bush as the administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority of Iraq.

When the North Tower was hit, a conference call was proceeding where Marsh & McLennan employees were raising concerns about mysterious transactions in the data center. But they all died when the building collapsed—though Bremer survived as he was flying back to New York.[17]

Some of the unusual stock trades involved Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch—two of the biggest occupants of the World Trade Center—in investments that originated in Germany’s Deutsche Bank, which had acquired Bankers Trust.[18]

The FBI also identified suspicious trades between September 6 and September 10, 2001, involving Stratesec Incorporated, which provided security to airports.

These traced back to Wirt Walker III, a board member of the Carlyle Group, a leading military contractor and relative of George W. Bush and business partner of one of Bush’s brothers, Marvin.

This discovery should have prompted further investigation by the 9/11 Commission, which failed to do so.[19]

Among the Truthers

During an address to the United Nations on November 10, 2001, President George W. Bush warned that he would not tolerate “outrageous conspiracy theories” about 9/11.

However, it is apparent that Bush is the one who was promoting an outrageous conspiracy theory that was contradicted by massive evidence that has come to light.

In his book, Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America’s Growing Conspiracist Underground, Canadian journalist Jonathan Kay told his readers that “people who believe in alternative views about what happened on 9/11 are among a large group of people who are afraid of vaccines and fluoride, deny the Holocaust, doubt the NASA moon landing ever took place, and don’t believe President Obama was born in America.”

Kay added that “damaged survivors are particularly effective as recruiters for conspiracist movements because the spectacle of their grief short circuits our intellectual faculties.”

But it is Kay who lacks the intellectual curiosity and faculty to process the copious evidence that contradicts the official narrative about 9/11. And it is Kay who is the one who is psychologically damaged—as he disparages a noble group of people who have worked tirelessly to expose what may be the greatest criminal conspiracy in U.S. history.

Why, after so many years, are there still so many unanswered questions about 9/11?

The answer is as obvious as it is frightening. The only barrier to full knowledge about what really happened on 9/11 has always been—our government. By which I mean every administration and every elected official—Republican or Democrat—working in collusion with the powerful network of corporate interests and private billionaires who elect them.

The popular belief is that Democrats and Republicans are always at each other’s throats, incapable of bipartisanship or cooperation, but that is a myth. On the “big” issues—like approving huge military budgets, overthrowing legally elected governments of other countries, funding imperialist wars, giving banks and corporations huge windfalls at taxpayer expense, militarizing the police, and erecting an increasingly intrusive and oppressive surveillance state—they endorse identical self-serving policies.

Nowhere has this been clearer than in the sham investigations and cover-ups, endorsed by both Republicans and Democrats, into some of the great crimes of our era, such as:

  • the assassinations of John F Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr, Robert F Kennedy and Malcolm X;
  • Israel’s 1967 “false flag” sneak attack on the U.S.S. Liberty that killed 34 American sailors;
  • the fabricated “Tonkin Gulf incident” of 1964 that embroiled America in the Vietnam War;
  • the 1995 bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City;
  • the bizarre official verdict that investigative reporter Gary Webb, who was exposing illegal CIA drug-running, had “committed suicide” [with two bullets to the head!];
  • the convenient death of left wing Senator Paul Wellstone in a mysterious plane crash [on the eve of his predicted re-election to a narrowly divided Senate];
  • the verdict that Seth Rich was murdered in a “robbery gone wrong” [right after he was accused of having leaked DNC emails that exposed the Democratic party’s illicit undermining of Bernie Sanders’s election campaign];
  • the death of MK-Ultra researcher Frank Olsen who “fell out of a window” after the CIA feared he might expose its illicit LSD and mind-control experiments on unwitting American soldiers and germ warfare operations in the Korean War.

The list is as long as it is shameful. Our (bipartisan) government has created countless investigative commissions that are set up to fail—because critical documents are withheld from them; because crucial eye witnesses are never interviewed, or mysteriously die; because legitimate citizen inquiries are stonewalled or derailed by insurmountable procedural roadblocks. And when the above fail, there always remain “No comment” or outright lying by government officials.

The status of 9/11 investigations has followed the same pattern. Clearly the need to classify or otherwise hide information is intended to obscure government sanctioned connections to these crimes and to protect high-ranking persons and organizations—in or out of government—from being brought to account. What other possible reason can there be?

Surely it is time—in fact, long past time—to conduct thorough and uncompromising investigations into all of the crimes named above, including that of 9/11, which was not only tragic in itself, but has also served as a pretext to launch tragic military conflicts around the globe, and justify the ominous aggrandizement of executive power that has so devastatingly eroded democratic norms and smothered civil liberties.

*

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.

The author wishes to thank Steve Brown and Bill Montross.

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

Notes

  1. Bush attended the meeting along with Vice President Dick Cheney, 9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, and two other Bush administration officials (Tom Monheim and Bryan Cunningham). 

  2. Ray McGinnis, Unanswered Questions: What the September Eleventh Families Asked and the 9/11 Commission Ignored (Vancouver, B.C.: Northern Star Publications, 2021), 284, 285. Information that the 9/11 commission obtained about the hijackers came from statements made by Guantanamo Bay detainees under torture, and should thus be suspect. 
  3. McGinnis, Unanswered Questions, 44. 
  4. Zelikow had written a book with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on German reunification and another on the Cuban Missile Crisis, which was called out in The Atlantic magazine for its shoddy scholarship. 
  5. McGinnis, Unanswered Questions, 157. The announcement was made by Philip T. Hayes, WTC Fire Safety Director for the South Tower (and retired New York City firefighter) based on instructions from Tabeek. Hayes strangely appealed to people’s sense of patriotism, saying “this tower has been secured. You are in America. Return to your offices.” 
  6. In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee in March 2002, NORAD Commander Ralph Eberhart explained that, once FAA suspects something is wrong with a flight over domestic airspace, “it takes about one minute” for them to notify NORAD, which could in turn scramble jets within 2.5 minutes up to an altitude of 29,000 feet “to anywhere in the U.S.” 
  7. In 2002, Eberhart was promoted to head the U.S. Northern Command. 
  8. McGinnis, Unanswered Questions, 113, 114. 
  9. Firefighters’ radio communications indicated that they were tracking numerous explosions in the Twin Towers and issued warnings about explosive devices. On July 31, 2019, ZeroHedge ran a story with the headline “NY Fire Commissioners Demand New 9/11 Probe, Citing ‘Overwhelming Evidence of Pre-Planted Explosives.’” The blog stated that the “overwhelming evidence presented in said petition demonstrates beyond any doubt that pre-planted explosives and/or incendiaries—not just airplanes and the ensuing fires—caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings, killing the vast majority of the victims who perished that day.” 
  10. NBC’s Anne Thompson reported that she had tried to leave the World Trade Center building but, “as I got outside, I heard a second explosion, and another rumble and more smoke and more dust. I ran inside the building. The chandelier shook and again black smoke filled the air. Within another five minutes, we were covered with more soot and dust. And then a fire marshal came in and said “we had to leave,” because if there was a third explosion this building might not last.” On CNBC, Wall Street Journal reporter John Bussey told network anchors: “I looked up at the south building, the second World Trade Center to be hit, and explosions were coming down the building. It looked as if the charges had been set on each floor and they were in succession going off. When I saw the floor-by-floor explosions happening, I dove out of the office where I was because the windows looked directly over the World Trade Center.” Mika Brzezinski, then of CBS, also reported on explosions at 10:05 a.m. which brought down the towers. Marcia Kramer told viewers of WCBS that CNN was “reporting a third explosion at the WTC, probably an explosion from the ground, that caused WTC 1 to collapse on top of itself. Again, there was a third explosion. It is unclear what caused it, whether it was a bomb or whether the first plane that crashed into the tower had somehow been booby trapped with a bomb that was timed to explode later after the crash had occurred.” Stephen Evans of BBC also reported on a series of explosions. 
  11. Bob McIlvaine insisted his son Bobby died from an explosion. A doctor who examined his son’s body said that Bobby had lacerations all over his chest from flying glass and that he did not have burns on him, only slight postmortem burns, meaning that a detonation killed him, and then the heat coming afterwards put some burns on him. It is believed that Bobby was killed by the force of the explosion while walking into the World Trade Center lobby and that he was taken to the morgue before the towers came down. Bob was told that he had been killed on the 106th floor, which was not consistent with the autopsy report. Doctors who were on the scene told McIlvaine that they found people who were “blown into hundreds of pieces.” He exclaimed: “How can that happen with fire and a building falling straight down. These buildings came down from explosions.” 
  12. McGinnis, Unanswered Questions, 242. Captain Karin DeShore said she saw a series of orange and red flashes coming from the North Tower. She said that concussive blasts followed immediately after these flashes. She recalled, “Initially, it was just one flash. Then this flash kept popping all the way around the building and that building started to explode…These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger, going both up and down and then all around the building.” DeShore said further that the explosion had “sucked all the oxygen out of the air. You couldn’t breathe and the feeling of suffocation…These popping sounds and the explosions were getting bigger and louder…here was another explosion…and this wave of force.” 
  13. For some unknown reason, the building’s alarm system was put into test mode and deactivated at 6:47 a.m. on September 11. 
  14. Mineta’s testimony to the 9/11 Commission was omitted from its report. The other suspicious aspect is that Cheney showed extraordinary self-containment in the face of shocking live coverage. A witness with security clearance in the bunker with Cheney told the Washington Post, there was a groan in the room when the South Tower collapsed at 9:59 a.m.—with the exception of Cheney who made no sound. Said the witness, “I remember turning my head and looking at the vice president, and his expression never changed,” suggesting foreknowledge. Another witness wrote “While others assessed casualties and the work of ‘first responders,’ Cheney began planning for a conflict that would call upon lawyers as often as soldiers and spies. 
  15. McGinnis, Unanswered Questions, 179. McIntyre later contradicted his original statement by telling CNN viewers that he saw parts of the damaged plane inside the Pentagon. 
  16. McGinnis, Unanswered Questions, 126. 
  17. On September 11, a fire raged in World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC7), floors 11 to 13, which housed Securities and Exchange Commission records relating to multi-billion dollar investigations. The Los Angeles Times reported that an estimated 3,000 to 4,000 cases were destroyed, including SEC’s major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divided up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high tech boom. The destruction of these files resulted in huge savings for the CEOs and corporations being investigated. 
  18. A German computer firm, Convar, was able to retrieve data from the computer disk drives in the rubble at Ground Zero, which suggested that some people had advance knowledge of the approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts exceeding $100 million. Convar’s data retrieval expert Richard Wagner said that “they thought the records of their transactions could not be traced after the main frames were destroyed.” McGinnis, Unanswered Questions; Erik Kirschbaum, “German Firm Probes last-minute World Trade Center Transactions,” Reuters, December 19, 2001. 
  19. Further investigation was also warranted of Larry Silverstein of Silverstein Properties who owned World Trade Center Building 7 and was awarded $4.55 billion in insurance claims while avoiding the cost of having to remove asbestos from the building. 

Featured image is from nydailynews.com

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Newly Declassified Documents Reveal that President George W. Bush Authorized Shootdown of Hijacked Airplanes on 9/11—But Only After Three Planes Had Already Crashed
  • 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.

***

In January 2023, all masks were thrown off. The Euro-Atlantic elites, motivated after their meetings in Davos, realized that there was no more need to cover their true intentions with hypocritical appeals to “save the young Ukrainian democracy for the sake of world peace.”

More and more representatives of the so-called “golden billion” from the West recognize the real goals of the bellicose policy that they have been waging against Russia for decades, namely, the destruction of the integrity of the Russian Federation as a state and the deprivation of the Russian people of statehood in order to gain control over huge resources that “for some historical injustice belong to the Russian barbarians.”

The fate of the state of Ukraine and the lives of its population are of little interest to them, because in case of victory, its fertile territory will become a pleasant bonus.

Euro-Atlantic elites have unleashed and are waging an aggressive war against the Russian Federation in their personal interests. Moreover, the ongoing development of the military conflict, the lack of political will of the West to resolve it and the strengthening of bellicose rhetoric with the recognition of the true goals of the war indicate that these elites are ready to escalate the conflict up to the third world war, and even the nuclear threat will not stop them.

On January 20, at a ceremony in Madrid, Josep Borrel recalled Russia’s great victories over Hitler and Napoleon, from which he concluded that it was necessary to continue to increase military pressure on it. With his statement, the Head of EU diplomacy put the modern collective west on a par with ”the collective West created by Hitler” and the ”collective West of Napoleon”, who were both defeated by Russia.

“Russia is a big country, it is used to fighting to the end, it is used to almost losing, and then restoring everything. They did it to Napoleon, they did it to Hitler. It would be absurd to think that Russia has lost the war or that its military is incompetent. Therefore, it is necessary to continue arming Ukraine.”

Borrel’s statements did not become a sensation. He was not the first to express such threats to Russia. However, the recent statement has become one of the  most outspoken claims. He voiced the real goal of the military company of the West which is the destruction of Russia and the seizure of its territories, as Hitler and Napoleon had previously attempted to do.

Amid the revelations of Western leaders, the words of Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Chrystia Freeland sounded particularly interesting at the forum in Davos. She also supported the position of Mr. Borrel, specifying that Russia’s defeat “would be a huge boost to the global economy.” Freeland, whose grandfather was a member of Andrei Melnik’s OUN-UPA nationalist group, hit the limelight several times over the past few years by speaking in support of Ukraine’s Nazis and by making Russophobic statements.

Ukraine winning its war against Russia this year “would be a huge boost to the global economy,” says Trudeau’s Deputy PM and WEF board member, Chrystia Freeland.

This is the 21st century war for resources, full-scaled and simple. – Spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry commented on her claims.

Amid the bellicose rhetoric of the West and the ongoing defeat of the Ukrainian Army on the battlefield, the beginning of the year 2023 was also marked by the strengthening of military support for the puppet Kiev regime.

While Europe is looking for tanks for Ukrainian soldiers in warehouses, Washington has already announced a new $2.5 billion military aid package. LINK

NATO and Washington no longer hide that they not only maintain the Ukrainian army, but also provide the necessary intelligence information, command Ukrainian troops on the battlefield and have taken control of the military decision-making process. Leading US media are often reporting that “the US recommended the Ukrainian military to withdraw from Bakhmut” or that “the US is helping to plan counter-offensive operations in Ukraine.” According to reports, the United States will help Ukraine plan counter-offensives to take back the “occupied territories, including Crimea.”

“Russia did not seek to escalate the conflict, but Western countries, driven by the United States, crossed red lines and began to pose a threat to our national interests. Now the United States is talking about supporting Ukrainian aggression against Crimea and new Russian territories. But the Kiev regime must realize that the support of Western countries will backfire it and Ukraine. The more Western countries interfere in the affairs of Ukraine, the further the border of our special operation will move in order to create a buffer zone and protect our country from the enemy neighbors.” Deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation from the Crimean region Mikhail Sheremet commented on the issue.

The actions of the United States and its European allies are leading the world to a global catastrophe. If Washington and NATO countries supply weapons that will be used to attack peaceful cities and attempt to seize Russian territories, this will lead to retaliatory measures by the Russian military using more powerful weapons.

By their decisions, Washington and Brussels are leading the world to war which will be completely different from the hostilities that are ongoing today, when strikes are carried out exclusively on military and strategic infrastructure facilities used by the Kiev regime.

The arguments that there is no nuclear threat as the nuclear powers have not previously used weapons of mass destruction in local conflicts are untenable because these states have never faced a threat to the security of their citizens and the territorial integrity, which NATO threatens Russia with today.

The sharp tightening of the West’s rhetoric, up to outright threats of war and destruction of the Russian state, was clearly heard in Moscow.

The Russian political leadership, who until recently tried to maintain a dialogue with “Western partners” based on the principles of real politic or at least basic international law, seem to have changed their position.

After a year of hostilities in Ukraine, it became clear that the current conflict was orchestrated by the collective West not even in the last 8 years but decades ago, when already in 2004 it became obvious that Russia was trying to break out of the neocolonial shackles of the post-Soviet period. As a result, Moscow has finally accepted the rules of the game imposed by the West and makes it clear that for its part, it no longer sees ways to peacefully resolve accumulated contradictions with NATO countries and is ready to enter into a full-scale war.

The recent press conference of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, which summed up the results of Russian diplomacy in 2022, was a clear example. The Russian Minister described the current situation extremely harshly LINK:

What is happening in Ukraine now is the result of preparations by the US and its satellites for the start of a global hybrid war against the Russian Federation. Nobody is hiding this fact. This is clear from statements by unbiased Western politologists, scientists and politicians. In his recent article, Ian Bremmer, political science professor at Columbia University, wrote: “We are not in a cold war with Russia. We are in a hot war with Russia. Now it’s a proxy war. And NATO is not fighting it directly. We are fighting it through Ukraine.” This admission is frank and this conclusion is on the surface. It is strange that some people try to refute it. Recently, President of Croatia Zoran Milanovic said that this is a NATO war. An open and honest statement. Several weeks ago, Henry Kissinger (before he urged NATO to accept Ukraine in his recent article) wrote in clear terms that the events in Ukraine were a clash, a rivalry of two nuclear powers for control over that territory. It is clear enough what he meant.

Our Western partners are cunning while vehemently trying to prove that they are not fighting Russia but are only helping Ukraine respond to an “aggression” and restore its territorial integrity. The scale of their support makes it clear that the West has staked a great deal on its war against Russia; this is obvious.

The events surrounding Ukraine have brought to light the implicit push by the United States to drop attempts to reinforce its global position with legitimate means and to adopt illegitimate methods to ensure its dominance. Anything goes. Once revered mechanisms and institutions that were created by the US-led West have been discarded (and not because of what we are seeing in Ukraine). Free market, fair competition, free enterprise, the inviolability of property, and the presumption of innocence, in a word, everything the Western globalisation model relied on collapsed overnight. Sanctions have been imposed on Russia and other objectionable countries that do not comply with these tenets and mechanisms. Clearly, sanctions can be imposed any time on any country, which, in one way or another, refuses to mindlessly follow American orders.

The European Union has been completely subsumed by this US dictatorship (there’s no point in discussing this at length) …

Like Napoleon, who mobilised nearly all of Europe against the Russian Empire, and Hitler, who occupied the majority of European countries and hurled them at the Soviet Union, the United States has created a coalition of nearly all European member states of NATO and the EU and is using Ukraine to wage a proxy war against Russia with the old aim of finally solving the “Russian question,” like Hitler, who sought a final solution to the “Jewish question.” …

Recently, there were reports about some changes in the Russian political and military leadership. In particular, some officials in top positions in key political bodies such as the Presidential Administration, the Security Council, special services, etc were changed. Inspections have been initiated to clarify the compliance of several high-ranking officials to their positions, their ties with foreign countries and the any possible corruption actions are being checked.

Changes have also taken place in the Russian Ministry of Defense. Army General Valery Gerasimov was appointed commander of the Russian group of troops in the zone of a special military operation (SVO) in Ukraine. He fought Chechen militants at the head of the army, organized an operation in Syria, and has been heading the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces since November 2012. The changes in the Russian military command may indicate the new stage of hostilities in Ukraine. Also, new generals were appointed to a number of other key positions in the Ministry of Defense.

All Masks Thrown Off

In January, the Russian military began to defiantly strengthen the air defense system in the capital. In recent days, footage of new air defense systems deployed near the decision-making centers, like the Moscow Kremlin and the building of the Ministry of Defense, were widely shared online.

All this reflects a change in the Kremlin’s vision of the ongoing processes and its readiness to address the challenge from the West.

Perseverance of the Euro-Atlantic elites was finally appreciated by Russia and received a worthy response. Unfortunately, the position of the West means that the world can no longer hope for an early end to the war in Europe. Moreover, the conflict is likely to escalate.

*

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.

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT WORK :

MONERO (XMR):
86yfEHs6pkoDEKCxc6MAnQX8cVHmzhYxMVrNuwKgNmqpWK8dDxjgGnK8PtUNJMACbn6xEGxmRauNTHJhUJpg9Mwz8htBBND

BITCOIN (BTC): bc1qgu58lfszcpqu6fd8l98m378wgzugyg9y93lcym

BITCOIN CASH (BCH): qr28d80s5juzv2793k5jrq59xrl5fxd8qg9h3zlkk2

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on All Masks Thrown Off. The Euro-Atlantic Elites Meeting in Davos, Profit Driven War on Ukraine

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 of America is a term that contains in it all the hope and all the contradictions of our country, and of the Americas. That hope dates far back in the past, to the inspiring words of the Declaration of Independence that articulated a form of governance that was, at least in terms of its potential, unprecedented.

The enslavement of Africans and the attacks on the native nations belied those powerful words “that all men are created equal.” But the power of those words transcended the limitations of the men who wrote them and echoed around the world.

America’s contradictions, which we have buried out of shame, continue to hold us back from realizing our potential to be great in word and deed.

If we were at last “united” as “states” we could achieve our destiny and find strength in unity. But that would require us to recognize not only the shadows that have accompanied the bright light of hope, but also the tremendous wisdom left to us by the original peoples of the Americas, men and women who wove intricate tapestries of life and spirit that were completely invisible to the dull men who drafted maps far away, who sold off mountains, rivers and forests as a dry and exchangeable thing called “real estate.”

The sad legacy of those past sins is that politics and economics in the United States have been reduced to a game of division.

  • People are divided using symbols and motifs that appeal to unconscious associations;
  • nations are divided using misperceptions and false generalizations;
  • land is divided using alien concepts like real estate, national borders and property rights.
  • Security for one’s family and for one’s home has been distorted into a right to destroy nature and community in the pursuit of profit.

The “United States of America” ends today in a militarized wall, a DMZ of the South that defines in a precise manner, to the inch, where one nation state ends and where another nation state begins. But for all the precision of this division, it has no basis in human experience, in the natural world and it certainly means nothing to the sun and the moon that have offered their light to the diverse nations of the Americas for hundreds of thousands of years.

When the sun and the moon look down from above they see a long stretch of land between the two poles that narrows to a delicate isthmus in the middle, forming an exquisite whole, balancing the mountains that rise up above the ground with those that lie beneath the ocean.

Unbroken bands of culture and natural chains of plants and animals link together the Americas from South to North. From the concentric stone circles that form Moray, the agricultural laboratory developed by the Incas to assure a sustainable future for all, and the soaring temples of Tenochtitlan, erected by the Aztecs to reflect the unity of Heaven and Earth, to the delicate communities of the Karitiana people deep in the pristine jungles, and the Mesa Verde city carved into the face of a cliff by the elders of the Pueblo Nation, the human achievements of the Americas are diverse and exquisite.

From the soaring peaks of the Aconcagua Mountains, and the surface of Lake Titicaca that reflects the skies so perfectly, to the waves of sand constantly reshaped in fantastic patterns by the winds of the Mohave Desert, the surface of the Americas forms an inspiring mosaic.

Those climates and habitats are inhabited by the golden lion tamarin that swings gracefully through the lush Amazon trees, by the magnificent Magellanic penguin standing watch confidently on the shores of Patagonia, by the indefatigable armadillo that has roamed over the grasses between Big Bend Ranch and Canon de Santa Elena ―from long before humans gave those formations names.

Moreover, the working people in the cities of the Americas, whether they speak Spanish or English, or other tongues, have so much more in common with each other than they could possibly know. There is a great unity of experience, whether it is the pleasures of being with our children in the mornings, or the frustrations of work, or the sorrows of communities torn apart by hidden forces.

Yet, there are hidden powers and subterranean currents that are not blocked by borders. No, those powers make the borders, enforce the borders, so as to keep the little people, the honest people, North and South, penned up like cattle, so as to deny them the freedom of the eagle or of the taruca.

There is the flow of money and currency, a flow of agricultural goods, finished products and components, a flow of information and data controlled by the powerful, and used for their own selfish ends. That flow is unimpeded by borders.

The powerful drink deeply from that flow of money. They want us to be separated from each other, and they will do anything to encourage us to think that it is the hard-working families from the South, struggling to feed themselves, and not the multinational corporations that are responsible for the pain we feel.

Powerful politicians, Democrat and Republican, promote borders, enforce borders, and militarize borders. They have built a horrific DMZ between the United States and Mexico. They make fortunes for their friends pouring concrete where there were once cactuses and wildflowers.

Who are those borders for?

Those borders pin us up inside and make us prisoners. They are also building walls in our neighborhoods, walls around their mansions and their exclusive communities, and walls around private prisons and camps where they detain us and abuse us.

Sadly, many in the United States think that what is being done to Hispanics has nothing to do with them. They could not be more wrong.

What has been done to immigrants in the camps over the past few years is but a trial run for what will be done to all working Americans. The time has come for all Americans to realize that they have much more in common with the immigrant family locked up in a camp than they do with the billionaires.

The peoples of the South do not travel to the North because they like the cold weather, or because they like the wretched taste of processed foods like hamburgers. They would rather live in their villages, farm their fields ― the fields where their ancestors farmed for decades before they too lay beneath them.

They are forced to move, compelled to leave behind family, friends and familiar landscapes because of the hidden flow of money over borders that powers the takeover of farms by corporations for wasteful and destructive production. Corporations force farmers to use one-use seeds and pesticides and herbicides that poison our sacred land. They drive the butchery of the majestic jungles and encourage the drilling for natural resources underground at any human cost.

That oil and metal should stay underground where it is. Those soaring trees must be left alone.

We are subject to a psychotic pursuit of profit powered by forces far from the jungles and rivers of the Americas. Investment banks in London, in Hong Kong or in Dallas that seek quick profits for their wealthy clients are driving this suicide march. They care nothing about nature or about people.

Americans do not know about the horrors unfolding in the South because such truths are kept secret from them by a corrupt and decadent media, a media that is a tool for control, a weapon of deception.

Americans see those forced to immigrate, forced to work for almost nothing to survive and they feel threatened. They would feel solidarity with those people if they could see how much they have in common.

Instead, they are told by the dark powers that these people are the enemy. The newspapers, the public opinion leaders and church ministers repeat those lies.

Those newspapers and those churches have been bought off by the billionaires.

It was those billionaires who manufactured this disaster.

We can certainly understand why some Americans respond emotionally to what seems like an invasion of foreigners. Their emotions are not unlike the emotions felt by those in the Amazon when they see tractors destroy their jungles in search of oil, minerals and timber.

The shooting at the Walmart in El Paso, Texas, on August 3, 2019, represented a terrible evil that is invisible even as it stalks the streets in daylight.

August 3 is not just any day. It was on August 3 of 1492 that Christopher Columbus set off from Spain to “discover” this land and set up, unknowingly, a process that would unleash tremendous evil. It was on August 3 of 1914 that Germany invaded Belgium and started the First World War. It was on August 3 of 1934 when Adolf Hitler declared himself as “Fuhrer” (leader) and ended the rule of law in Germany.

The El Paso attack left 23 dead and 23 injured. It was an obvious bid to turn fear and loathing into outright war.

Who knows what happened in El Paso? We know that people died there and that a terrible evil was unleashed that slouches now toward a murky horizon.

The Bible teaches us that evil is colorless, that evil is invisible, and that evil is seductive. This evil is not the obvious evil encountered by superheroes.

No. It is a far more pernicious, more subtle and more enticing evil ― an evil that demands that we be prepared for an epic battle over the soul of humanity.

We do not need a “United States” of finance, of manufacturing and of distribution. We need a “United States” of teachers, of doctors, of social workers, of students, and of farmers.

We need a “United States” of mothers and fathers. When we have that, then we will discover how much we have in common. Our universal concerns cross over borders, languages and habits of the mind.

We must go back to the original sin, to the manner in which the Conquistadores took over the Americas, doing such terrible damage, and bringing with them a new culture that remains with us today, a culture that offers us great depths, but also savage cruelty camouflaged as piety. The sins of this day are but the latest variation on that original sin.

Remember that it was Jesus on the cross that gave authority to the Conquistadores. It makes no sense, but it is the truth. Jesus, who lived among the poor, among the homeless, the beggars,  Jesus who refused to possess anything, Jesus who died on the cross for his spiritual resistance to the decadent power of the Roman Empire, that Jesus was invoked as a cause for the destruction of the cultures of the Mayans, of the Incas, of the Aztecs and of many, many other peoples.

And now, we witness a similar erasure of cultures and of peoples across the Americas.

At the heart of this transformation we find the concept of ownership, specially the ownership of land.

Consider the famous case of the island of Manhattan.

The story we learned as children in school is that Peter Minuit of the Dutch West India Company met Lenape Nation representatives in May 1626 and that he purchased for his company the island of Manhattan for 60 guilders.

We assumed that the Lenape People were simply naive, that they did not understand the value of Manhattan. They were too ignorant, or too foolish, to see how these rocks and forests would become a great center for global finance that would rise up in the form of skyscrapers where once there were trees.

Now we know that the truth was the complete opposite. The Lenape people were wise and the Dutch West India Company was foolish.

The Lenape Nation did not see the exchange of currency (coins, or beads or trinkets) as anything more than an agreement for cooperation. The very idea that the soil, the rivers, the forests and the wildlife that filled that sacred island of Manhattan could belong to any one person, let alone to a soulless corporation, made no sense to them.

The concept of real estate and of assets embraced by the Dutch West India Company was an irrational, and in a sense a psychotic, misperception of the relationship between people and nature. Perhaps a five-year-old child may have such a self-centered concept of the world, but for adults to be so indulgent suggests it was a spiritual sickness.

The conflict that followed was, at its core, not a conflict between peoples, between interests, or between nations, but rather a conflict between means of perception, between basic values.

A terrible blindness seized the souls of those who trampled on the cultures of the Incas, the Mayans, the Aztecs, and those of their brothers and sisters. Many of those involved in this original sin were not aware of what they were doing.

And now, the environmental and cultural crisis is so great that we are forced to recognize that a sustainable society must be integrated with nature and that there will be no future otherwise. That is what Lenape people and the Mayan people knew all along. The myth of development and growth that we believed in for so long was a falsehood.

The scars created in the violence of the past are like the bluffs along a river. They are aged, but the fractures are still clear.

The harm resulting from the violence of today in the detention camps, and in the prisons, in places where children are locked up alone and families are torn apart, that harm remains a gaping wound.

The scars and the wounds are a part of who we are.

In some cases, the scars make us stronger; in other cases, they hold us back. We can be sure, however, that any progress forward must also involve a return to that painful past.

In some cases, money can help. In some cases compensation can ease the pain of the past.

But if compensation to the native peoples of the Americas and of Africa is only seen in terms of money, the results will be limited. If we assume that everything can be solved by money, that assumption will reinforce the horrid centrality of money in our society, in how we perceive land and water, plants and animals, people and cultures.

Memory and history are critical. They are more critical than money because if people remember what existed before, then they will value the past.

If there is no memory, there will be no political will. No political will means no money.

First, before we talk about anything else, we must tell the painful tale of how native cultures were destroyed, recognizing that we are talking about that potential for evil that rests within all of us. There is no border between North and South America when it comes to those past sins, or to current sins.

One possible first step is to establish two new Holocaust museums in Washington, D.C.

A Holocaust museum stands on the Mall in Washington, D.C., that faithfully records the horrific killing of Jews in Europe in the 1940s. It is a source of information of tremendous value to us as we strive to understand the nature of evil. I recommend that you take your children to the Holocaust museum.

Yet, we must remember that the Holocaust documented at that museum happened in Europe, and not in the Americas.

There were, however, two terrible holocausts that took place in North and South America, two holocausts that cry out from the grave for a fit and proper memorial on the Mall. My administration will fight tooth and nail to build both Holocaust museums.

The first Holocaust museum will be dedicated to memory of the hundreds of millions of native peoples in the Americas who were slaughtered, or left to die of starvation, or of disease, in the brutal process of colonization and development that took place over four long and cruel centuries.

We need a Holocaust museum that documents the history of the peoples of the Americas, and records their cultures and their arts. We need this museum so that all of our children learn about that tragedy, about what humans are capable of doing in their blindness.

We need another Holocaust museum on the Mall. We need a Holocaust museum that documents the sufferings and the losses of the hundreds of millions captured in Africa and shipped to the Americas for slave labor over 400 years. Millions of men, women and children died on the slave ships, millions more were worked to death, or grew old and died miserably in slavery. Their cultures, their families and their very souls were trampled into the mud. All schoolchildren should visit this Holocaust museum as well and learn what was lost, what was affirmed, and what hope remains for the United States if we look back on our past with honesty.

Because these two memorials will make no distinction between North and South America, they will draw the attention of Americans to the common sufferings and the common tragedies of the Americas. The term “American” itself will expand to include both North and South and the artificial divisions created will start to fade away.

Part of that healing process must involve the introduction of the best of the cultures, the medicines, the spiritual practices, the clothing and designs, the architecture and the history of our native peoples into all aspects of contemporary American society. Our fashions should draw on the patterns of the Navahos and the Incas, our hospitals should use the herbs employed by the Hopi and the Cari, and the legends of all the original nations should be integrated into our contemporary dramas, movies and songs.

Only then will their true value be made manifest. Only then will their living spirit, after being buried for centuries, be brought back to life, be rekindled for a new age.

When I imagine the relationship of the United States with our southern neighbors, with our southern partners, with our southern brothers, I keep coming back to the inspiring work of Henry Wallace, the remarkable politician who implemented President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “Good Neighbor Policy” toward Latin America. Vice President Wallace fought for an equal relationship with all nations in the Americas, a balanced dialogue on education, on agriculture, on science and on society that created an inspiring consensus on what was possible. His tour of Latin America in 1943 created excitement about true unity, and ardent opposition to Fascism, that has not been matched since.

It did not stop there for Wallace. He was passionate about the spiritualism of the native Americans and he believed wholeheartedly in the depth to be found in the original cultures. He grasped a potential for growth, not merely in terms of money and products, but in terms of civilization itself.

The policy of my administration toward the Americas will assume the same potential for harmony and unity in the pursuit of a true “new deal.” It will be a harmony with all peoples that is respectful, and a harmony with nature that is sustainable.

We will assert that small is beautiful and that the greatest wisdom can be found in the subtle thinking of ancient people, in the cultures of those who left only the slightest traces on the natural environment.

We will shy away from the gaudy rituals of politicians.

We will step back and promote a dialogue between people that dissolves away borders much as a swift current cuts a beautiful canyon through the hardest of stone.

Click here to view the video

*

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 Creating a Sacred Unity of Peoples, Cultures and Nature for the Americas

Idee des Sozialismus kann nur in Frieden und Freiheit gedeihen

January 24th, 2023 by Dr. Rudolf Hänsel

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.

***

Einführung

In der Neuzeit, der Zeit Aufklärung, haben die Menschen neue Ideen entwickelt. Doch der sozialistische Gedanke, der antimilitaristische Gedanke des Friedens, der Freiheit, der Gleichheit, der Gerechtigkeit und der Solidarität hat Schiffbruch erlitten. Er war die Hoffnung der Proletarier der ganzen Welt. Wir alle haben diese schönen Gedanken vernachlässigt und sie dadurch zunichte gemacht. Es gibt eben keine Politik, keine Erklärung der menschlichen Belange ohne Kenntnisse der Psychologie.

Der rumänische Schriftseller Panait Istrati war nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg in der Sowjetunion und hat seine Beobachtungen in drei Bänden niedergeschrieben. Über die Volksrepublik China schrieb vor kurzem Ökonomieprofessor Michel Chossudovsky „Es ist kein Sozialismus“. Gut zu wissen in heutiger Zeit. Bleibt die Frage: Wird der sozialistische Gedanke des Friedens und der Freiheit eines Tages nochmals Triumphe feiern?

Sowjetisches Experiment misslungen

In der ehemaligen Sowjetunion ist das Experiment völlig misslungen. Sie haben den Menschen nicht erfasst. Sie haben die Menschen nicht richtig eingeschätzt, sich nicht mit ihnen assoziiert. Die Kommissare stellten sich über die Arbeiter. Überall fehlte die Psychologie.

Das Volk wäre zu haben gewesen, es ist solidarisch. Der russische Bauer hat im Mir gelebt, einer russischen Dorfgemeinschaft. Ihr gehörten alle Bauern eines Dorfes an. Der von ihnen genutzte Grund und Boden wurde periodisch unter ihnen umverteilt. Jeder Bauer bekam soviel Land zur Nutzung, dass er sich selbst erhalten und seinen Verpflichtungen gegenüber Staat und Grundeigentümer nachkommen konnte. Jeder Haushalt konnte entsprechend der Anzahl seiner erwachsenen Mitglieder einen oder mehrere Landstreifen beanspruchen (1).

Wo hat die bäuerliche russische Bevölkerung jemals Richter oder Spitzel gesehen? Es gab keine. An den Türen haben sie keine Schlösser gehabt, weil sie sie nicht zugesperrt hatten. Bis zur Revolution bearbeiteten sie ihre Felder gemeinsam. Das bisschen Leben, das sie gehabt haben, verbrachten sie in Ruhe und Frieden und ohne Krieg.

Auf einmal sind die dummen „Roten“ gekommen und haben noch schlechter gewirtschaftet als der Zarismus. Kommissare, die nichts verstanden, sind auf das Land geschickt worden und haben den Bauern gesagt, was sie anbauen sollen. Sie haben den Staat aufrechterhalten und schließlich die Bauern und Arbeiter auf das „Feld der Ehre“ gejagt.

Im sehr armen Jugoslawien war das Prinzip menschlicher als in Russland. Wenn der Mensch Arbeit hatte, konnte er nicht gekündigt werden. Dort ist das Prinzip der Selbstverwaltung, der Arbeiterräte verwirklicht worden. Russland ist diesen Weg nicht gegangen und war deshalb gegen Jugoslawien.

Panait Istrati: “Vers l’autre flamme“ („Auf falscher Bahn“)

Panait Istrati (1884 bis 1935) war ein französisch- und rumänischsprachiger Schriftsteller rumänischer Herkunft. Nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg ist er nach Russland gereist und hat nach seiner Rückkehr nach Frankreich seine Beobachtungen in drei Büchern niedergeschrieben. Dieser politische Reisebericht „Vers l‘autre flamme“ ist 1929 in französischer Sprache erschienen und lautet in deutscher Übersetzung „Auf falscher Bahn. 16 Monate in der Sowjetunion. Bekenntnisse eines Besiegten.“ (2)

Sein Bericht war ein leidenschaftlicher politischer Appell an seine Genossen, deren autoritäre stalinistische Organisationsformen, Linientreue und Obrigkeitsgläubigkeit er scharf anprangerte. Bis dahin waren im Westen ausschließlich Berichte über die Sowjetunion erscheinen, die des Lobes voll waren. Doch daraufhin wurde er sehr verleumdet:

„Istratis Buch bricht mit einem Tabu und wagt öffentliche Kritik an ihr. Schlagartig distanzierten sich alle seine bisherigen Freunde von ihm, allen voran sein bisheriger Mentor Romain Rolland. Er wird verleumdet und eine Hetzkampagne gegen ihn setzt ein. Von den Trotzkisten, denen er ansonsten fernstand, wurde Istrati hingegen vereinnahmt.“

(…).

„Auf falscher Bahn“ beeindruckt durch die Leidenschaftlichkeit und Wahrheitsliebe Istratis, letztlich aber auch durch seine Schonungslosigkeit sich selbst gegenüber. Am Ende bleibt ein ‚Besiegter‘ zurück, wie er es selbst ausgedrückt hat, ein einsamer Kämpfer jenseits der Ideologien, ein kranker und gebrochener Mensch.“ (3)

Michel Chossudovsky: „Die VR China ist kein sozialistisches Land.“

Zur gegenwärtigen Situation der Volksrepublik China schrieb der langjährige Forscher an der Universität Hongkong, Ökonomie-Professor Michel Chossudovsky den aufklärenden und vielbeachteten Artikel: „Es ist kein Sozialismus“: China ist eine kapitalistische Billiglohnwirtschaft, basierend auf extrem niedrigen Löhnen. Menschen auf der Linken behaupten, die VR China sei ein sozialistisches Land.“ (4)

In der Einleitung heißt es:

„Den meisten Analysten und Historikern ist nicht klar, dass sich China nach den frühen 1980er Jahren zu einem vollwertigen kapitalistischen Land entwickelt hat. Es gibt mächtige US-Geschäftsinteressen, darunter Big Pharma, große Hi-Tech-Unternehmen und Bankinstitute, die in China fest verwurzelt sind.

Die Vereinigten Staaten haben treuer Verbündete in Chinas Geschäftswelt sowie unter Akademikern, Wissenschaftlern und Ärzten, die tendenziell ‚pro-amerikanisch‘ sind.“ (5)

Der Artikel schließt mit einer persönlichen Anmerkung: Prof. Chossudovsky konnte das Manuskript seines 1984 verfassten Buches mit dem Titel „Towards Capitalist Restoration? Chinese Socialism after Mao“ erst zwei Jahre später veröffentlichen, weil es von den Linken „salopp abgelehnt“ worden war. Man kann es von seiner Homepage als PDF kostenlos herunterladen (6).

Wird Sozialismus nochmals Triumphe feiern?

Bei aller Genugtuung darüber, dass sich die Welt politisch ganz langsam Richtung Osten bewegt, ist es wichtig, Chossudovskys aufklärenden Beitrag zur Kenntnis zu nehmen, um sich keinerlei Illusionen hinzugeben. Ob die Idee des Sozialismus im kommunistischen Systems Russlands eine Chance hat, bleibt damit noch unbeantwortet.

Sollten die Menschen der Welt irgendwann zur Vernunft kommen und sich selbst erkennen, wird der sozialistische Gedanke, der Gedanke des Friedens und der Freiheit vielleicht seine Triumphe feiern.

*

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

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_(Dorfgemeinschaft)

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vers_l’autre_flamme/

3 a. O.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/its-not-socialism-china-is-a-capitalist-cheep-labour-economy-based-on-exceedingly-low-wages/5804938/

5 a. O.

6 a. O.

Gekennzeichnetes Bild: Sozialisten auf dem Union Square in New York City am 1. Mai 1912 (gemeinfrei lizenziert)

 

  • Posted in Deutsch
  • Comments Off on Idee des Sozialismus kann nur in Frieden und Freiheit gedeihen

Restore Scientific Integrity. Declaration by 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists

January 24th, 2023 by Physicians and Medical Scientists

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.

***

17,000 physicians and medical scientists declare that the state of medical emergency must be lifted, scientific integrity restored, and crimes against humanity addressed.

We, the physicians and medical scientists of the world, united through our loyalty to the Hippocratic Oath, recognize that the disastrous COVID-19 public health policies imposed on doctors and our patients are the culmination of a corrupt medical alliance of pharmaceutical, insurance, and healthcare institutions, along with the financial trusts which control them. They have infiltrated our medical system at every level, and are protected and supported by a parallel alliance of big tech, media, academics and government agencies who profited from this orchestrated catastrophe.

This corrupt alliance has compromised the integrity of our most prestigious medical societies to which we belong, generating an illusion of scientific consensus by substituting truth with propaganda. This alliance continues to advance unscientific claims by censoring data, and intimidating and firing doctors and scientists for simply publishing actual clinical results or treating their patients with proven, life-saving medicine. These catastrophic decisions came at the expense of the innocent, who are forced to suffer health damage and death caused by intentionally withholding critical and time-sensitive treatments, or as a result of coerced genetic therapy injections, which are neither safe nor effective.

The medical community has denied patients the fundamental human right to provide true informed consent for the experimental COVID-19 injections. Our patients are also blocked from obtaining the information necessary to understand risks and benefits of vaccines, and their alternatives, due to widespread censorship and propaganda spread by governments, public health officials and media. Patients continue to be subjected to forced lock-downs which harm their health, careers and children’s education, and damage social and family bonds critical to civil society. This is not a coincidence. In the book entitled “COVID-19: The Great Reset”, leadership of this alliance has clearly stated their intention is to leverage COVID-19 as an “opportunity” to reset our entire global society, culture, political structures, and economy.

Our 17,000 Global COVID Summit physicians and medical scientists represent a much larger, enlightened global medical community who refuse to be compromised, and are united and willing to risk the wrath of the corrupt medical alliance to defend the health of their patients.

The mission of the Global COVID Summit is to end this orchestrated crisis, which has been illegitimately imposed on the world, and to formally declare that the actions of this corrupt alliance constitute nothing less than crimes against humanity.

We must restore the people’s trust in medicine, which begins with free and open dialogue between physicians and medical scientists. We must restore medical rights and patient autonomy. This includes the foundational principle of the sacred doctor-patient relationship. The social need for this is decades overdue, and therefore, we the physicians of the world are compelled to take action.

After two years of scientific research, millions of patients treated, hundreds of clinical trials performed and scientific data shared, we have demonstrated and documented our success in understanding and combating COVID-19. In considering the risks versus benefits of major policy decisions, our Global COVID Summit of 17,000 physicians and medical scientists from all over the world have reached consensus on the following foundational principles:

  1. We declare and the data confirm that the COVID-19 experimental genetic therapy injections must end.
  2. We declare doctors should not be blocked from providing life-saving medical treatment.
  3. We declare the state of national emergency, which facilitates corruption and extends the pandemic, should be immediately terminated.
  4. We declare medical privacy should never again be violated, and all travel and social restrictions must cease.
  5. We declare masks are not and have never been effective protection against an airborne respiratory virus in the community setting.
  6. We declare funding and research must be established for vaccination damage, death and suffering.
  7. We declare no opportunity should be denied, including education, career, military service or medical treatment, over unwillingness to take an injection.
  8. We declare that first amendment violations and medical censorship by government, technology and media companies should cease, and the Bill of Rights be upheld.
  9. We declare that Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, Janssen, Astra Zeneca, and their enablers, withheld and willfully omitted safety and effectiveness information from patients and physicians, and should be immediately indicted for fraud.
  10. We declare government and medical agencies must be held accountable.

Watch the full video below and DISCUSS with doctors and supporters here.

*

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 Global COVID Summit


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 Restore Scientific Integrity. Declaration by 17,000 Physicians and Medical Scientists
  • Tags:

Russia Preparing New Plan to End War

January 24th, 2023 by Drago Bosnic

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 the last several months, the Russian military has been conducting intensive training for approximately 300,000 newly mobilized soldiers, in addition to other preparations that would enable it to deliver a final knockout punch and end hostilities in Ukraine. The stakes are now being raised even higher with Army General Valery Gerasimov, the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, assuming the overall command of Russia’s counteroffensive against NATO’s “quasi-Barbarossa”. The move clearly implies that the Russian military is intent on achieving greater coordination and that it’s focusing much of its conventional capabilities to put the final nail in the coffin of the Neo-Nazi project in Ukraine.

Expectedly, the political West’s mainstream propaganda machine is presenting this change as the supposed failure of General Sergei Surovikin, resulting in his apparent replacement due to perceiving battlefield setbacks. However, quite conveniently, they are withholding critically important information, such as the fact that the Russian special military operation in Ukraine is now expanding in scope and magnitude, making it virtually impossible for Surovikin to coordinate the entire endeavor all by himself. For that reason, Moscow has decided to employ four of its top commanders and give them command of various operational sectors, with General Gerasimov at the helm of this expanded operation.

Apart from Russia’s Chief of the General Staff, three other top-ranking Russian military officers are directly taking part in commanding Moscow’s troops engaged in Ukraine — Army General Oleg Salyukov and Colonel General Alexei Kim, in addition to General Surovikin himself, now assuming the positions of General Gerasimov’s deputies, with special tasks within the enlarged scope of the special military operation. With a force of well over half a million men, supported by the Russian Aerospace Forces and Navy firing hundreds of long-range cruise missiles and swarms of drones, the Kiev regime is faced with an offensive the scale of which is incomparable to anything seen in decades.

Naturally, the Russian military’s plan for the new offensive in Ukraine is a secret, but the information provided by several sources allows a reasonable estimate as to how it might play out. Head of the Kiev regime’s State Property Fund Rustem Umerov claims that the upcoming offensive will come from three directions. “The attack will come from the north, [from] across the Belarusian border, from Russian strongholds in eastern Ukraine and from the south,” Umerov stated, without citing any sources or intelligence. The claim comes approximately a week after CIA chief William Burns visited Kiev and apparently warned Volodymyr Zelensky about Russia’s “impending offensive”.

The possibility of an all-out Russian offensive from three directions certainly shouldn’t be excluded. However, it’s also in the interest of the Russian military to maintain at least some element of surprise and deny the Kiev regime forces the ability to accurately predict its course of action. It’s a strong possibility that the Eurasian giant might decide to take control of the entire left-bank Ukraine, which would require offensive operations in at least three sectors, the northeast (toward Chernigov), east (toward Kharkov) and south (toward Zaporozhye and Dnepropetrovsk). All the while, troops deployed in the Donbass are expected to maintain pressure and tie in as many Kiev regime forces as possible, which eventually could result in the encirclement and final elimination of these units.

The success of such an operation would result in irrecoverable losses for the Neo-Nazi junta and possibly even end the conflict or at least wipe out Kiev’s overall fighting capability, limiting it to militia troops incapable of any maneuvers or large-scale movement necessary to stop further Russian advance. Meanwhile, many of the regime’s forces would be tied in expecting Russian advance from the north, which may or may not happen. And while it’s impossible to say how likely this scenario is, such shaping up of the battlefield can certainly be expected from the Russian military, as this would enable it to take key areas and further exacerbate the Neo-Nazi junta’s position, forcing it to negotiate on terms favorable to Moscow or even surrender if the battlefield losses become completely unbearable.

Although the mainstream propaganda machine is spinning the narrative about General Surovikin’s alleged “failures”, the Kiev regime’s high command doesn’t share the same blind optimism. Kiev’s chief commander General Valery Zaluzhny is well aware of Gerasimov’s competence, as he himself once described Russia’s top military officer as “the smartest of men”. Realizing the impending consequences of Gerasimov’s appointment as the overall commander of the Russian forces engaged in Ukraine, the Neo-Nazi junta is fuming at its NATO sponsors for not providing more weapons. The political West is now divided on delivering heavy tanks, with Washington DC and Berlin trying to toss the hot potato to each other.

Despite its refusal to commit more advanced heavy armor and repeated insistence that its European allies and vassals do this, the US wants the hostilities to last for as long as possible. During a meeting at the Ramstein airbase in Germany, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley said: “From a military standpoint I still maintain that for this year it would be very, very difficult to militarily eject the Russian forces from all, every inch of… Russian-occupied Ukraine.” While NATO pledged more weapons for the Kiev regime, the aforementioned question of delivering heavy tanks was left unanswered. And although it still hasn’t even been a full month this year, the US wants the hostilities to last “well into 2024”, obviously hoping to see at least another year of stalemate, despite mounting casualties of its favorite puppet regime.

*

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.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia Preparing New Plan to End War

The Idea of Socialism Can Only Flourish in Peace and Freedom

January 24th, 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.

***

Introduction

In modern times, the Age of Enlightenment, people developed new ideas. But the socialist idea, the anti-militarist idea of peace, freedom, equality, justice and solidarity was shipwrecked. It was the hope of the proletarians of the whole world. We have all neglected these beautiful thoughts and thus destroyed them. There is no politics, no explanation of human concerns without knowledge of psychology.

The Romanian writer Panait Istrati was in the Soviet Union after the First World War and wrote down his observations in three volumes. About the People’s Republic of China, economics professor Michel Chossudovsky recently wrote “It’s Not Socialism”. Good to know in this day and age. The question remains: will the socialist idea of peace and freedom one day celebrate triumphs once again?

Soviet experiment failed

In the former Soviet Union, the experiment was a complete failure. They did not grasp the people. They did not assess people correctly, did not associate with them. The commissars put themselves above the workers. Psychology was missing everywhere.

The people could have been had, they are in solidarity. The Russian peasant lived in the Mir, a Russian village community. All the peasants of a village belonged to it. The land they used was periodically redistributed among them. Each peasant was given enough land to use to maintain himself and to meet his obligations to the state and the landowner. Each household could claim one or more strips of land according to the number of its adult members (1).

Where did the peasant Russian population ever see judges or informers? There were none. They had no locks on their doors because they did not lock them. Until the revolution they worked their fields together. What little life they had, they spent in peace and quiet and without war.

Suddenly the stupid “Reds” came and managed even worse than Tsarism. Commissars who understood nothing were sent to the countryside and told the peasants what to grow. They maintained the state and finally chased the peasants and workers to the “field of honour”.

In very poor Yugoslavia the principle was more humane than in Russia. If a person had work, he could not be dismissed. There the principle of self-management, of workers’ councils was realised. Russia did not go this way and was therefore against Yugoslavia.

Panait Istrati: “Vers l’autre flamme” (“On the wrong track”)

Panait Istrati (1884 – 1935) was a French- and Romanian-language writer of Romanian origin. He travelled to Russia after the First World War and wrote down his observations in three books after his return to France. This political travelogue “Vers l’autre flamme” was published in French in 1929 and its German translation is “Auf falscher Bahn. 16 Months in the Soviet Union. Confessions of a Defeated Man.” (2)

His report was a passionate political appeal to his comrades, whose authoritarian Stalinist forms of organisation, loyalty to the line and faith in authority he sharply denounced. Until then, only reports about the Soviet Union had appeared in the West, full of praise. But as a result he was much maligned:

“Istrati’s book breaks a taboo and dares to criticise it publicly. Suddenly all his previous friends distanced themselves from him, above all his previous mentor Romain Rolland. He was slandered and a smear campaign against him began. On the other hand, Istrati was taken over by the Trotskyists, from whom he otherwise stood aloof.”

(…).

“On the Wrong Track” impresses with Istrati’s passion and love of truth, but ultimately also with his ruthlessness towards himself. In the end, we are left with a ‘defeated man’, as he himself put it, a lonely fighter beyond ideologies, a sick and broken man.” (3)

Michel Chossudovsky: “The PRC is not a socialist country.”

On the current situation in the People’s Republic of China, long-time researcher at the University of Hong Kong, economics professor Michel Chossudovsky wrote the enlightening and well-received article: It’s Not Socialism”: China Is a Capitalist Cheap Labour Economy, Based on Exceedingly Low Wages. People on the Left Claim the PRC is a Socialist Country.” (4)

The introduction states:

“Most analysts and historians do not realise that China developed into a full-fledged capitalist country after the early 1980s. There are powerful US business interests, including Big Pharma, large hi-tech companies and banking institutions, that are firmly entrenched in China.

The United States has faithful allies in China’s business community as well as among academics, scientists and doctors who tend to be ‘pro-American’.” (5)

The article concludes on a personal note: Prof. Chossudovsky was unable to publish the manuscript of his 1984 book entitled “Towards Capitalist Restoration? Chinese Socialism after Mao” only two years later because it had been “casually rejected” by the left. It can be downloaded free of charge as a PDF from his homepage (6).

Will socialism celebrate triumphs once more?

Despite all the satisfaction that the world is slowly moving eastwards politically, it is important to take note of Chossudovsky’s enlightening contribution in order to avoid any illusions. Whether the idea of socialism has a chance in Russia’s communist system thus remains unanswered.

Should the people of the world eventually come to their senses and realise themselves, the socialist idea, the idea of peace and freedom, will perhaps celebrate its triumphs.

*

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 further training instructor for Bavarian counselling teachers 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.

Notes

(1) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_(village-community)

(2) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vers_l’autre_flamme/

(3) op. cit.

(4) https://www.globalresearch.ca/its-not-socialism-china-is-a-capitalist-cheep-labour-economy-based-on-exceedingly-low-wages/5804938/

(5) op. cit.

(6) op. cit.

Featured image: Socialists in Union Square, New York City on May Day 1912 (Licensed under the Public Domain)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Idea of Socialism Can Only Flourish in Peace and Freedom
  • Tags:

New Zealand: From Worst to Even Worse? The WEF-YGL Political Intrusion

By Peter Koenig, January 23, 2023

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.

A Pandemic of Lies: MHRA Confirms COVID Is Man-Made & the Vaccines Are Not Based on the “Virus” But Instead on Computer-Generated DNA

By The Expose, January 23, 2023

The DNA template used does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person. The DNA template (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 GenBank 908947.3), was generated via a combination of gene synthesis and recombinant DNA technology.

CDC Aware of Hundreds of Safety Signals for COVID Jab. “CDC Has Ignored Clear ‘Death’ Signal”

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, January 23, 2023

In September 2022, The Epoch Times asked the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to release its Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) data mining results. PRR measures how common an adverse event is for a specific drug compared to all the other drugs in the database.

Situation for Kiev Is “Very, Very Difficult”. US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, January 23, 2023

While Western journalists insist that Ukraine is “winning” the conflict, experienced military and analysts continue to point to the evident fact that Russia cannot be defeated so easily. In a recent interview, a top US general commented that the situation is very complicated for the Ukrainians, who will have many difficulties to fulfill their promise to “expel” Russian forces from territories already reintegrated into Moscow’s sovereign space.

When Journalists Act as State Propagandists

By Peter Oborne, January 23, 2023

In advance of the invasion of Iraq 20 years ago, the UK media parroted government lies and fabrications uncritically and became an enthusiastic part of the state’s propaganda machine. An inquiry into British reporting of the Iraq war is well past due.

Russia Targets Africa to Boost Military Arms Sales. Russia’s Strategic Foothold?

By Kester Kenn Klomegah, January 23, 2023

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.

U.S. Now Considering to Invade Russia: NYT

By Eric Zuesse, January 23, 2023

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.

Thousands in the Peruvian Capital Demand the Resignation of the Military-backed Regime

By Abayomi Azikiwe, January 23, 2023

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.

Rise of Nazism in Interwar Germany: Hitler’s Political Rivalry with Ludendorff

By Shane Quinn, January 23, 2023

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.

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

By Dr. Mark Trozzi, January 23, 2023

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.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: New Zealand: From Worst to Even Worse? The WEF-YGL Political Intrusion

Doltish Ways: Biden’s Documents Problem

January 24th, 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.

***

Through the course of his political life, the current US president has often been injudicious. He has stumbled, bungled and miscalculated.  His electoral victory was fortuitous, aided by a number of factors, not least the conduct of his opponent and the murderous gift of a global pandemic.  Along with his fellow Democrats, he has made the issue of Donald Trump a matter of pathology rather than politics.

It is precisely that pathological approach that has come back to haunt his administration.  While Trump continues to be characterised as the proto-authoritarian in waiting, squirreling off classified documents that should have been deposited in the national archives, Biden claimed to be above such behaviour.

His own Attorney General, Merrick Garland, has now appointed two prosecutors as special counsels responsible for investigating how Biden and Trump handled classified documents, with the latter also facing an investigation on his role in the January 6 storming of the Capitol.  Former federal prosecutor in Maryland Robert K. Hur has been tasked with dealing with Biden and any relevant staff in their alleged mishandling of classified material.  Veteran Department of Justice investigator Jack Smith is conducting two criminal investigations into the conduct of Trump.

Biden’s imbroglio centres on what happened to official documents after the conclusion of his Vice-Presidency during the Obama administration, though the problem is promising to be wider than that.  The circumstance of their uncovering is significant and bruising for a president extolling the merits of transparency.

Last November, one of Biden’s personal attorneys, Pat Moore, uncovered relevant documents in the private office and home of Biden.  These were then turned over to the National Archives.  The timing was relevant: the discovery took place less than a week before the midterm elections.  The following month, another tranche of classified documents were found in Biden’s garage in his Wilmington home.  In January, a third set of documents were found at the Delaware home.

On January 20, the Justice Department made what it claimed to be thorough combing of the president’s Wilmington home.  The search revealed a number of additional classified documents, some dating from Biden’s time as Senator, and more during his vice-presidential tenure.  According to Bob Bauer, the president’s personal attorney, the seizure of six items involved “documents with classification markings and surrounding materials.”  Handwritten notes from the vice-presidential period were also taken.

Such revelations have thrown the administration off its stroke.  For one thing, the White House initially made no mention of the garage discovery.  A few days later, the tune was tinkered and adjusted.  There was little mention about what additional things would come out this month.

Neil Eggleston, White House counsel in the final two and half years of Obama’s presidency, is keen to diminish the significance of such discoveries.  Speaking to the New Yorker, he claimed there was no reason to think that a crime had been committed.  “It appears that, as the Vice-President’s office was being dismantled [at the end of the Obama presidency], some classified information got commingled with other material, and as soon as it was located it was turned over to the National Archives.”

Eggleston does, at the very least, admit that the White House could have handled matters “differently” and not just assume that the National Archives had the responsibility to alert the Justice Department.  But he does much to leave room open for the fool’s defence, which is hardly admirable for the US Commander-in-chief.

Biden’s spin doctors are breaking into a sweat in pushing the already devastated and withered line that the president is not only cooperative, but transparent.  That this whole search took place with his permission showed eagerness and willingness to resolve the matter, unlike the recalcitrant Trump, who made the FBI seek a court-approved search of Mar-a-Lago.  “In the interest of moving the process forward as expeditiously as possible, we offered to provide prompt access to his home,” explained Baur.

Biden, for his part, is trying to play the role of receptive statesman, keen to follow advice and good counsel, thereby showing how one leads less from the front than from the cushioned middle.  “I have no regrets in following what the lawyers have told me what they want me to do – it’s exactly what we’re doing.”  With such un-presidential words, he was also confident that there was “nothing there” in terms of what documents had been found.

Only the most fervent of Trump supporters would claim that the doddery Biden would have actively sought to funnel and conceal classified documents, though the question will never go away.  But from the throne of judgment, the current president has shown himself to be fallible and prone to habitual error.

As a result, the opposing Republican Party, which has been publicly cannibalising itself over such matters as the election of the House speaker, is receiving drip-feed sustenance.  For one, they can argue that the Democrats can hardly make the purer-than-pure case about their own executive handling of classified documents.  “It makes Biden look like a giant hypocrite,” opines Republican strategist and former spokesman for President George W. Bush, Alex Conant.  “Clearly Trump’s handling of classified materials was a lingering problem that Republicans had not had a good answer for until this week.”

With each new discovery and unveiling, President Biden is also being shown to be a monumental, unreliable dolt.  His commitment to, in the words of his special counsel Richard Sauber, “handling this responsibly because he takes this seriously” is proving increasingly risible.

*

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 and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

Featured image is from Countercurrents.org

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Doltish Ways: Biden’s Documents Problem

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 informational iron curtain is coming down across the West, and its architects are determined to make examples out of those who refuse to pick a side.

Our Democracy™ has adopted a zero-tolerance policy for pollution of the information ecosystem, and the Thought Police are standing by to halt rogue infodemics in their tracks, lest the people lose trust in their institutions.

Dr. Tim Coles, a freelance writer and postdoctoral researcher until recently at the University of Plymouth didn’t realize he was in their crosshairs until he found himself locked out of his university email account in October. Tech support was no help; department staff refused to talk to him, closing ranks and sending him a threatening email demanding he cease contact. Clearly, he had violated some unwritten law. But what?

The chain of emails that had culminated in his removal only raised further questions about why an apparent stranger whom Plymouth has refused to name – a university employee, he suspects – had complained about his writing for Australian magazine Nexus to his old PhD examiner.

In a Kafkaesque turn, the complaint lacked a single concrete accusation of wrongdoing that Coles could defend himself against, instead equivocating around familiar “conspiracy theorist” tropes. At any rate, no one had thought to consult Coles, perhaps believing him to be a disgruntled ex-student trading on his old university email rather than a researcher whose work at the university was funded by an outside trust and had nothing to do with his political writing. Rather than pause for clarification, his PhD examiner appeared to jump in with both feet, urging tech staff to help get Coles “off [the university’s] books.”

While a prolific writer on many controversial topics – US funding and training of neo-Nazis in Ukraine, the West’s neocolonial plunder of Africa under the guise of fighting terrorism, and Big Pharma’s giant power-grab under cover of Covid-19 unholy alliance of Big Pharma and Big Tech amid the coronavirus outbreak are just a few – Coles believes he ran afoul of the university censors with a series of articles about intelligence agencies blackmailing people with child sexual abuse that ran in Nexus not long before the cancellation effort began. That particular subject has a tendency to get journalists killed, and Coles wonders if his ejection from Plymouth might be a warning shot from groups displeased with his inquiries. He acknowledges, however, that the timing may be a coincidence – Hope Not Hate and other intelligence-controlled censorship advocates were apparently trying to have Nexus banned in the UK around the same time for its publication of unorthodox views on Covid-19.

While he believes the evidence in the email chain is enough to prove wrongdoing by the university, Coles couldn’t even file a complaint through the normal channels, as his inquisitors had roped the complaints department into their conspiracy by including them in the email chain. He has considered releasing the messages publicly as a last resort, but first plans to employ an outside arbitrator and give the System one last chance – more than he was given, at any rate.

Lessons from The Lobby

Coles is far from the first to be booted from a British university campus for thought crime. He sees parallels between his case and that of David Miller, the University of Bristol sociology professor who was subjected to a ferocious academic inquisition and ultimately drummed out of his post in late 2021 after the Board of Deputies of British Jews deliberately misinterpreted comments he had made about Israel weaponizing Jewish students abroad. The university’s Union of Jewish Students had been attacking him for years before seizing upon the supposedly discriminatory comment, which they only heard because they had sent in an activist ’spy’ to monitor one of his classes  – ironically validating the professor’s claims better than his own arguments could have.

Like Coles, Miller was never directly confronted by his accuser, who opted for mealy-mouthed pseudo-accusations (“conspiracy theorist,” “inciting hatred”) over potentially-disprovable crimes. Like Plymouth, Bristol took the side of the accuser against its employee almost reflexively. Former Labour MP Chris Williamson, himself a victim of the Israeli lobby’s devastating smear machine, joined the Support David Miller campaign in warning that the university’s failure to stand up for the professor would only encourage “bad faith actors” to pursue further censorship.

Shortly before the lobby finally convinced Miller’s university to mount an investigation into his supposed bigotry, he observed that such pressure tactics were imported from the Israel lobby in the US and pointed out that if any other foreign lobby attempted to wage such total war on its critics, they would be “laughed out of the room.” But Coles’ experience suggests other groups have taken lessons from the Israelis – and that Williamson’s warning was prescient.

Academic “cancel culture” is a well-known scourge of American campuses, where careless tweeting costs lives and professors can be axed for using the wrong pronouns. But while most discussion of the phenomenon centers on the targeting of conservative professors, it has targeted left-wing heterodoxy with equal fury, as tenured New York University media studies professor Mark Crispin Miller discovered when a student demanded his firing via Twitter after taking offense to a discussion questioning the utility of masks in his 2020 class on Propaganda.

Like Coles and the other Miller across the pond, Miller was attacked by university colleagues with vague allegations of “attacks on students and others in our community,” “aggressions and microaggressions,” and “explicit hate speech” and an investigation was launched behind his back even in the absence of any specific forbidden act. Administrators went one step further and contacted all his students to remind them of the CDC’s mask guidance, lest their fragile minds have been corrupted by the conspiracy theorist in the classroom. They couldn’t fire him – he was tenured, after all – but they did their best to make his life so miserable that he would leave, forbidding him from teaching his beloved Propaganda class, and he has been on sabbatical since.

Even Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, was recently denied a fellowship at the Carr Center for Human Rights, part of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, on the basis of wrongthink – what its dean described as his “anti-Israel bias.” Roth has toed the line on foreign policy groupthink elsewhere, dutifully demonizing Putin, Assad, Trump, and so on as the needs of Empire demanded. But his refusal to ignore Israel’s increasingly bold apartheid policies got him the David Miller treatment despite years of faithful service. If Roth isn’t safe, many academics have begun to wonder, what the hell are they going to do to me?!

Will Censor for Food

While Coles questions if universities were ever really the freethinkers’ utopia so many academic misfits yearn for, there is no denying groupthink has tightened its hold in recent years. While an academic might once have been left alone to research controversial subjects on his own time so long as he didn’t embarrass his employer, this laissez-faire approach has been replaced by an administrative panopticon that is both hyper-responsive and reflexively condemnatory – a “cottage industry of shutting people down,” in the words of its recent target. Censorship has been outsourced from the state and its corporate minions to “academics and think tanks who are given a well-funded government hammer so they see everything as a nail of disinformation,” Coles explains. Not simply salaried, they are financially incentivized to bag-and-tag as many pieces of “disinformation” as they can, essentially bounty hunters for inconvenient truths, enabling a much tighter, more granular control of information than was ever possible under a traditional totalitarian model.

These programs and campaigns – with names like Integrity Initiative, Center for Countering Digital Hate, Trusted News Initiative – initially appear to be independent nonprofits that just happen to share a common devotion to fighting fake news.

However, their cooperation is more than superficial, with many of the same entities ultimately directing their actions as they work together to artificially muscle the discourse in the desired direction, choking off competing narratives while maintaining plausible deniability regarding their connections to the state.

In this model of soft totalitarianism, the dissident is not so much ordered to cease publishing objectionable ideas, or even threatened with execution or creative torture. He is merely subjected to mounting insults, ‘nudged’ in certain directions, and gradually stripped of resources, especially any public platform he may have had in accordance with his refusal to follow the rules. Amid this complex ballet of carrot and stick, he is constantly reminded that these are his decisions, making him (in his own mind, at least) a willing participant in his own spiritual suffocation.

Fact-checkers, once mere newsroom employees tasked with verifying the details of major stories, have been artificially elevated into a caste of gatekeepers, deemed impartial arbiters of truth even as their donor lists burst with conflicts of interest from Pierre Omidyar to Bill Gates to George Soros. This veneer of independence allows them much greater latitude than any equivalent government body, as the ignominious collapse of the US’ Disinformation Governance Board last year proved. This official Ministry of Truth, which would have operated out of the Department of Homeland Security, was a bridge too far even for the American media establishment, which had long since embraced its unofficial equivalent censoring tweets and Facebook posts to keep the world safe for democracy.

All it took to get English-speaking countries to accept the need for these newly-minted (the International Fact Checking Network was only launched in 2015) cognitive babysitters was for a few pathological liars to blame Trump’s 2016 electoral victory and Brexit on Russian disinformation.

Never mind that neither hypothesis was ever substantiated, or that both have since been thoroughly discredited – unfiltered access to information has joined the lengthy list of threats to social harmony, and the fact-checkers, having tasted power, are unlikely to return to the newsroom. Given that a free press is integral to a functioning democracy, it goes without saying that any regime looking to dismantle the latter would want to get the former out of the way.

New Dawn in Old Bottles

No sooner had Coles been chased out of his university for his writing in one Australian alt-media magazine then he was engulfed in a censorship firestorm over another. An article appeared earlier this month in New Zealand news outlet Stuff excoriating bookstore chain Whitcoulls for carrying the latest edition of New Dawn, a publication which proudly bills itself as a “forum for alternative, non-mainstream ideas that question consensus reality.” Stuff’s coverage berated the bookstore for exposing unsuspecting customers to the jungle of “conspiracy theories” barely restrained within its pages (full disclosure: I have also contributed writing to New Dawn), focusing its rage on Coles’ “The curious case of Brenton Tarrant,” about the Christchurch mosque shooter.

When Whitcoulls did not immediately capitulate, “disinformation expert” Kate Hannah was called in to warn Kiwis who picked up the magazine that they were enabling “dark agendas” seeking to “destabilize liberal democracy.” Reading Coles’ article wasn’t just engaging in wrongthink, but actually committing a crime, she explained, because the article included information on how to access the illegal-in-New-Zealand helmet-cam video Tarrant recorded while shooting his way through the mosque. Just reading about where to find the video might run afoul of hate speech laws, she mused in a radio interview.

Of course, the article includes no such instructions, nor does it – as Hannah claimed – claim Tarrant didn’t shoot anyone. Coles is baffled by the disinfo expert’s disinfo, but suspects the reason they didn’t include his name (standard practice in establishment hit-pieces) in the pressure campaign is that he could justifiably sue for libel. But the mere threat of legal repercussions was sufficient to keep 99.9% of Kiwis away from the forbidden magazine, and perhaps sensing no sales in its future, Whitcoulls finally pulled the issue from its shelves.

New Zealand’s size and isolation make it a perfect experimental laboratory, and the other Four Eyes haven’t hesitated to use it as such. Nor have the Israelis, whose operation was exposed during the 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The 2019 shooting that launched the current touchless torture regime was preceded as such events often are by a series of odd ‘coincidences’ and foreshadowings. Just a few months before the massacre, a group of American survivors of the Parkland, Florida high school shooting visited the city to discuss “living through a tragedy” with their Kiwi counterparts; two Parkland survivors and a Sandy Hook survivor allegedly committed suicide in the months following the mosque killings. A police drill just happened to be taking place near the fleeing gunman, allowing participants to “heroically” capture him in what media dutifully described as a “hell of a coincidence.”

The speedy gun-grab that followed the tragedy left citizens helpless in the claws of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, and the subsequent clampdown on the internet was unprecedented in any other western “democracy,” with prison sentences meted out for merely sharing a link. Ostensibly to prevent anyone from reading Tarrant’s manifesto or watching the curiously videogame-like footage of the killings, the rules had the effect of banning access to entire video archives, international forums, and other information resources that might have helped the country’s residents make sense of what had just been done to them, and they were designed to be copied by the other four Eyes – or any other country that should want them.

While all five Eyes adopted unprecedented controls on social media during Covid-19, New Zealand went much further than its peers in controlling the actual publication of news. In March 2020, facing rumors that lockdown was imminent, Ardern warned upstanding citizens to avoid all unauthorized sources of information, urging them to stick with the government’s official site as “your single source of truth.”

The message didn’t age well – New Zealand was locked down within the week – but her point had gotten across loud and clear. Arrested while protesting Auckland’s return to lockdown in 2021 over just three “cases,” popular radio host and pandemic dissident Vinny Eastwood was only released on the conditions that he remain under house arrest 24/7 and stay off the internet – draconian requirements for a man who made his living live-streaming. He was later permitted back online, but only on the condition that he not advocate against Covid-19 restrictions – a deliberately subjective line in the sand meant to encourage self-censorship above all.

While the media establishment overflowed with praise for Ardern over her iron-fisted suppression of the population – er, pandemic – no one has thought to ask why, if the West questions all Covid-19 stats coming out of China due to government control of all information sources, they believed the numbers coming out of New Zealand. Even news sites like Stuff, which describes itself as “fiercely independent,” are actually public-private partnerships – in this case funded by the New Zealand government and the Google News Initiative, powered by the bonanza of helicopter money that was dumped on the news media in 2020 to fight the “infodemic” of Covid-19 “disinformation.”

That the campaign against New Dawn was no organic outrage was clear – Coles’ article is the last in the issue, and the likelihood of an indignant civilian pawing through 70 pages of conspiracy contraband just to find something they can claim is illegal approaches zero. Its favorable result means it will likely become the blueprint for future book-burning campaigns.

But why go after a couple of obscure Australian conspiracy magazines?

Especially in New Zealand, but increasingly in the US and Europe, Big Tech no longer allows the average user to stumble upon the kind of content published by New Dawn or Nexus.

Even non-Google search results from once-reliable alternatives like DuckDuckGo and Brave have been scrubbed clean of all deviations from the establishment line on topics like Covid-19 or the war in Ukraine, let alone the Christchurch shooting, and as Coles remarked, the censorship is even creeping through time into the Wayback Machine, the internet researcher’s go-to that once contained archives of much of the internet dating back decades – but now increasingly turns up error pages or sloppily retconned fact-checks. However, Kiwis browsing at Whitcoulls had at their fingertips a powderkeg of new information, rendered all the more volatile by three years spent in informational quarantine. Just as a person locked down for months will see her immune system suffer for lack of outside stimulation, any novel pathogens hitting her much harder when she finally goes outside, the Good Citizen who imbibed only Ardern-approved data for three years will likely be unable to muster even the slightest argument against whatever outrageous claims she finds in New Dawn and perhaps become lost to the weak grasp of establishment propaganda forever.

There’s an easy solution to this problem, should New Zealand want to solve it. Teach children to think critically, instead of the dumbed-down “media literacy” programs being promoted by every self-proclaimed “disinfo expert” this side of PropOrNot. Thought-stopping “information hygiene” techniques (Google it! Look it up on Wikipedia!) and reflexive appeals to authority (only a scientist can interpret  that study for you!) do not help an individual resist persuasion. But a population armed with the ability to recognize an official lie and dismantle it would not allow themselves to be locked down over a few cases of a disease they were almost 100% certain to survive anyway – so of course New Dawn couldn’t be permitted to question Christchurch. It is the (shaky) foundation on which Ardern’s hastily-constructed police state was built. As rumors fly about her surprise resignation on Thursday and the media establishment rends its garments over how “unfairly” this “icon of many” was treated by “far-right extremists,” it seems clear her departure will be weaponized to further crack down on the increasingly nebulous specter of “hate speech.”

Replacing Replacement Theory       

Americans who believe the New Dawn affair could only have happened in an unarmed, isolated nation like New Zealand should pay attention to what their Congress is up to. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) earlier this month introduced a bill that would criminalize the publication of “antagonism based on ‘replacement theory’” and “hate speech that vilifies or is otherwise directed against any non-White person or group” on social media if it can be said that the perpetrator of a “white supremacy inspired hate crime” had encountered the material before committing the crime – or that if they had encountered the material, it could conceivably have motivated them to take such actions.

Without bothering to define such critical terms as “hate speech” or even “replacement theory,” often trotted out for effect when the speaker needs to strike an emotional chord, the bill leapfrogs pre-crime to a total reversal of cause and effect. A content creator can be charged with conspiracy to commit a white supremacy motivated hate crime so long as the actual criminal can be shown to have engaged with their content before committing the crime. In fact, they don’t even need to engage with it – so long as the content could theoretically motivate a “person predisposed to engaging in a white supremacy inspired hate crime” to, well, you know. It’s completely subjective, based on what a “reasonable person” would do when no “reasonable person” would be caught dead in the same room as this bill. This means if someone reads the nursery rhyme “Baa baa black sheep” – declared ‘problematic’ nearly a decade ago for its racial overtones – then picks up an AR-15 and shoots a black family at church, the nursery rhyme writers could be charged with conspiracy to commit a white supremacy-motivated hate crime. Jackson Lee herself cited the example of “someone making a post online that catches the attention of someone who then drives to North Texas and kills 20 Mexican Americans” to make clear precisely how unhinged she is.

It’s doubtful that such a case would make it to court, or lead to a conviction if it did, but public opinion – a product of think tank fellows rather than crowds – can turn on a dime. What sorority girl getting sloshed on margaritas in an oversized Cinco de Mayo sombrero in 2012 would have thought she’d be sentenced to remedial readings of “White Fragility” in 2022? The aim is not to create more work for the official censors but to spook the target into silence with fear of what could happen. Leaving the definition of “white supremacy” open-ended allows an ever-larger spectrum of opinion to be cordoned off as toxic, banned from university campuses and social media, and finally memory-holed as unthinkable. At the same time, actual racists like Ukraine’s neo-Nazi Azov Battalion are invited with open arms to travel the US speaking on university campuses, swastika tattoos and all. While the Anti-Defamation League is quick to tar and feather anyone who points out Israeli war crimes, the censorship-loving Jewish organization has issued what amounts to an official indulgence for Ukraine’s biggest Third Reich fanboys.

Given the FBI’s penchant for crafting terrorism plots out of whole cloth, it would be a simple matter to take out all online wrongthinkers in one fell swoop under the white supremacy conspiracy law – just set up the usual militia honeypot for disaffected white boys, hand them the gear and point them at the minority in question, and make sure a manifesto is found nearby conspicuously listing the websites of every influential dissident in America. While last year’s Missouri v. Biden lawsuit proved – and the Twitter Files confirmed – that social media platforms were being used by a dozen or more government agencies to circumvent First Amendment prohibitions on state censorship, this new arrangement would eliminate even the need for that end-run, requiring only the fig leaf of Unacceptable White Supremacist Beliefs™ to justify the most egregious constitutional abuses.

“Replacement theory” – the idea that white Americans and/or Europeans are being deliberately supplanted in “their” nations by swarthy foreign hordes to suit nefarious ruling class purposes – first entered the mainstream discourse when Tarrant, who titled his manifesto “The Great Replacement,” supposedly set out to kill as many Muslims as possible because they were out-breeding Europeans. Tarrant’s manifesto would have gotten quite a few people in trouble as white-supremacy conspirators, many of them dead – it includes poems from Dylan Thomas and Rudyard Kipling, memes, Wikipedia articles, and an infamous passage explicitly citing black conservative commentator Candace Owens as his ideological inspiration. Tarrant and copycats like Payton Gendron (the Buffalo supermarket shooter and friend of the FBI whose manifesto borrowed liberally from Tarrant and others) have helped transform the epithet “conspiracy theory” from CIA-sponsored smear to precursor of violent extremism, though they couldn’t have done it without UNESCO, the World Jewish Congress, and the Council of Europe, who recently joined forces to remind humanity that “conspiracy theories cause real harm to people, to their health, and also to their physical safety.”

Europe has taken the legal lead in equating conspiracy theory to terrorism, banning author David Icke from the entire Schengen Area last year because his scheduled speech at a peace rally in the Netherlands posed a potential “threat to public order.” Rather than stand up to the police state, the media eagerly flew to its side, quoting “experts” who sagely opined that the “danger” posed by Icke’s “conspiracy ideology” was both clear and present and could inflict “lasting harm” upon the country.

This is in keeping with the refrain the WHO has kept up all alongside Covid-19 – that a deadly “infodemic” is spreading through sharing unapproved information about the virus, and that good citizens refrain from posting conspiracy theories online because words are equivalent to violence. This is a central part of children’s “media literacy” classes, aimed at building the perfect content filter directly into the child – because Big Brother can’t be everywhere. The idea is to graduate a generation for whom privacy is alien, dissent is criminal, obedience is a competitive sport, and turning in your parents for wrongthink is second-nature, all justified by the vague nonspecific crisis that has been looming in the background since they were born.

The censorship of New Dawn, the university witch-hunts against Dr. Coles and both Millers, the absurd white supremacy conspiracy bill, are all symptoms of the same totalitarian virus gradually sucking the will to resist out of humanity. Just as viruses need host cells to multiply, so does this one require an army of facilitators – “fake news” bounty hunters, “disinformation experts,” and the like – to smooth out humanity’s rough edges into blissful obedience. A pandemic – even an artificially-inflated synthetic one like Covid-19 – has to end, but an infodemic is forever, and this one has proven 100% fatal to human rights.

*

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.

Helen Buyniski is a journalist and photographer based in New York City. Her work has appeared on RT, Global Research, Ghion Journal, Progressive Radio Network, and Veterans Today. Helen has a BA in Journalism from New School University and also studied at Columbia University and New York University. Find more of her work at http://helenofdestroy.com and http://medium.com/@helen.buyniski or follow her on Twitter at @velocirapture23.

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

T.J Coles articles on Global Research

Featured image is from TruePublica / All other images in this article are from the author 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Incentivizing Censorship: A Snitch in Every Skull. “The Totalitarian Virus”
  • 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.

***

I recently came across a fantastic email exchange between Francis Leader and the UK Medicine Regulator, the MHRA –  

In this exchange, the MHRA admits that as regards the Covid-19 vaccines –

1. The DNA template used does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person
2. The DNA template (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 GenBank 908947.3), was generated via a combination of gene synthesis and recombinant DNA technology.

Source

*

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 Expose


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 A Pandemic of Lies: MHRA Confirms COVID Is Man-Made & the Vaccines Are Not Based on the “Virus” But Instead on Computer-Generated DNA
  • Tags: , ,

US ‘Secretly Supports’ Armed Groups in Afghanistan?

January 23rd, 2023 by Farshad Daryosh

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 special envoy for Afghanistan, Zamir Kabulov, accuses Washington of attempting to build ties with armed opponents of the current Afghan government.

In an interview with Russia 24 TV, Kabulov added that the United States is seeking blackmail by freezing Afghan assets.

“They really want to avenge their shameful military-political defeat in Afghanistan and, in retaliation, they do everything so that peace is not established in this long-suffering land, but even worse is that, in addition to contacts with the armed opposition in Afghanistan, they secretly sponsor Daesh,” Kabulov said.

“Americans are using this tool as a pretext for blackmail. I promise to clear the never-ending case. To be frank, the authorities are currently using the humanitarian help that has been allotted to Afghanistan as a tool of pressure,” he said.

In reaction to the Russian special envoy’s remarks, the Islamic Emirate’s spokesperson, Zabiullah Mujahid, said that the current government will not allow any country to interfere in Afghanistan. He reiterated that the Islamic Emirate seeks good ties with all countries.

“Afghanistan is an independent country. We do not want any country’s interference here and we work to maintain good ties with all countries,” Mujahid said.

Kabulov said that there will be a number of meetings regarding Afghanistan with participation from regional nations in the next months. He added that assisting the Afghan people will be on the agenda of these events.

“The US uses the blocking of the Afghan people’s assets as a tool for political pressure and the most important negative impact of this pressure from the US is placing the Afghan people in a dire situation in terms of their economy and livelihood,” said Abdul Latif Nazari, the deputy minister of economy.

“The Islamic Emirate should strengthen its ties with all countries, including those in the region so that the US would no longer be able to interfere in Afghanistan,” said Abdul Jamil Shirani, a political analyst.

*

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 TOLOnews

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 September 2022, The Epoch Times asked the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to release its Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) data mining results. The CDC refused. A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request has now forced the release of these data, and they are stunning

The CDC’s PRR monitoring has identified several hundred safety signals, including for Bell’s palsy, blood clots, pulmonary embolism and death. In individuals aged 18 and older, there are 770 safety signals for different adverse events, and more than 500 of them have a stronger safety signal than myocarditis and pericarditis

In the 12- to 17-year-old age group there are 96 safety signals, and in the 5- to 11-year-old group there are 66, including myocarditis, pericarditis, ventricular dysfunction, cardiac valve incompetency, pericardial and pleural effusion, chest pain, appendicitis and appendectomies, Kawasaki’s disease and vitiligo

The proportions of deaths, which were only provided for the 18-plus age group, was 14% for the COVID jabs compared to 4.7% for all other vaccines

The FDA is also required to perform safety monitoring, using empirical Bayesian data mining. The Epoch Times asked the FDA to release its monitoring results in July 2022 but, like the CDC, the FDA refused, only to admit in December 2022 they’d confirmed the Pfizer shot was linked to pulmonary embolism

*

In September 2022, The Epoch Times asked the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to release its Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR) data mining results. PRR1 measures how common an adverse event is for a specific drug compared to all the other drugs in the database.

According to the standard operating procedures2,3 for the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is run jointly by the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the CDC is required to perform these data mining analyses.

Not only did the CDC refuse to release the data, but it also provided false information — twice — in response to The Epoch Times’ questions about the monitoring being performed. As reported by The Epoch Times back in September 2022,4 the CDC initially claimed PRR analyses were “outside the agency’s purview” and that no monitoring was being done by them.

Eventually, the agency admitted it was doing PRRs, starting in February 2021, only to later claim they didn’t perform any PRRs until March 2022. The Epoch Times also cited several papers in which the FDA and/or CDC claimed their data mining efforts had come up empty handed.5 Now, we find that was all a pack of lies.

CDC Monitoring Reveals Hundreds of Safety Signals

In reality, the CDC’s PRR monitoring reveals HUNDREDS of safety signals, including Bell’s palsy, blood clots, pulmonary embolism and death — all of which, according to the rules, require thorough investigation to either confirm or rule out a possible link to the shots. As reported by The Epoch Times in early January 2023:6

“The CDC analysis was conducted on adverse events reported from Dec. 14, 2020, to July 29, 2022. The Epoch Times obtained the results through a Freedom of Information Act request after the CDC refused to make the results public …

PRR involves comparing the incidence of a specific adverse event after a specific vaccine to the incidence after all other vaccines. A signal is triggered when three thresholds are met, according to the CDC: a PRR of at least 2, a chi-squared statistic of at least 4, and three or more cases of the event following receipt of the vaccine being analyzed. Chi-squared tests are a form of statistical analysis used to examine data.

The results obtained by The Epoch Times show that there are hundreds of adverse events (AEs) that meet the definition, including serious conditions such as blood clotting in the lungs, intermenstrual bleeding, a lack of oxygen to the heart, and even death. The high numbers, particularly the chi-squared figures, concerned experts.

For many of the events, ‘the chi-squared is so high that, from a Bayesian perspective, the probability that the true rate of the AE of the COVID vaccines is not higher than that of the non-COVID vaccines is essentially zero,’ Norman Fenton, a professor of risk management at Queen Mary University of London, told The Epoch Times in an email after running the numbers through a Bayesian model that provides probabilities based on available information.”

Myopericarditis Is Far From the Only Problem

One of the few side effects of the COVID jabs that the CDC has actually acknowledged is myocarditis (heart inflammation), and a related condition called pericarditis (inflammation of the heart sack). Alas, the PRR monitoring results reveal there are more than 500 other adverse events that have stronger warning signals than either of those conditions.

Josh Guetzkow, an Israeli professor trained in statistics at Princeton University told The Epoch Times:7

“We know that the signal for myocarditis is associated with something that is caused by the mRNA vaccines, so it’s more than reasonable to say that anything with a signal larger than myocarditis/pericarditis should be taken seriously and investigated.”

Guetzkow expanded on his commentary in a January 4, 2023, Substack article.8 Below is a summary list of some of the key findings from the CDC’s PRR analysis. Guetzkow goes deeper in his article, so for more details, I suggest reading it in its entirety.

For even more analyses and commentary, see Fenton’s Substack article, “The CDC’s Data on COVID Vaccine Safety Signals.”9 If you want to investigate the PRR data for yourself, you can download them from The Epoch Times’ January 3, 2023, article.10 You can also find them here.11

It’s worth noting that the CDC didn’t perform its first safety signal analysis until March 25, 2022 — 15 months after the shots were rolled out. Why the long wait — especially since the CDC had announced it would begin monitoring in early 2021? Just consider, for a moment, how many lives have been lost because the CDC failed to properly monitor safety, and still drags its feet when it comes to warning people about the risks involved.

FDA Still Refuses to Share Safety Data

The FDA is also required to perform safety monitoring using another technique called Empirical Bayesian data mining. The Epoch Times first asked the FDA to release its monitoring results back in July 2022,13,14 but like the CDC, the FDA refused and insisted the data showed no evidence of serious adverse effects. In other words, “Just trust us. We’re experts.”

According to the FDA, the only potential signal they’d found through April 16, 2021, was for raised body temperature.15 Then, in mid-December 2022 — just four months after The Epoch Times tried to get these data — the FDA announced that pulmonary embolism (blood clots that block blood flow in the lungs) had met the threshold for a statistical signal, and continued to meet the criteria after in-depth evaluation, but it was only linked to the Pfizer jab.16

As noted by The Epoch Times,17 pulmonary embolism is also identified as a signal in the CDC’s PRR analysis for individuals as young as 12, which really ought to strengthen concerns.

The FDA also admitted it had already evaluated three other warning signals: lack of oxygen to the heart, immune thrombocytopenia (a blood platelet disorder) and intravascular coagulation (a type of blood clotting), but none of these continued to meet the threshold after analysis.

If the FDA was evaluating four warning signals, why did they tell The Epoch Times there was no evidence of ill effects, and why did they claim the only potential signal they’d found was slight fever? Are we to believe they discovered these signals after The Epoch Times asked for the monitoring results and then completed four in-depth investigations in four months?

Whatever the truth, it’s clear that both the CDC and FDA are not being transparent. Worse, they’ve hidden data, knowing it could mean the difference between life and death for hundreds of thousands of people.

CDC Has Ignored Clear ‘Death’ Signal

The CDC ignoring a clear signal for death is probably the most egregious example of its failures as a public health institution. As early as July 2021, Matthew Crawford published a three-part series18,19,20 detailing how the CDC was hiding safety signals by using a flawed formula. In August that year, Steve Kirsch informed the agency of these problems, but was ignored.

Then, in an October 3, 2022, article,21 Kirsch went on to show how “death” should have triggered a signal even when using the CDC’s flawed formula (which is described in its VAERS standard operating procedures manual22). Here’s an excerpt:23

“The formula the CDC uses for generating safety signals is fundamentally flawed; a ‘bad’ vaccine with lots of adverse events will ‘mask’ large numbers of important safety signals … Let me summarize the key points for you in a nutshell: PRR [proportional reporting ratio] is defined on page 16 in the CDC document24 as follows …

proportional reporting ratio calculation

A ‘safety signal’ is defined on page 16 in the CDC document as a PRR of at least 2, chi-squared statistic of at least 4, and 3 or more cases of the AE [adverse event] following receipt of the specific vaccine of interest. This is the famous ‘and clause.’ Here it is from the document:

proportional reporting ratio

Only someone who is incompetent or is deliberately trying to make the vaccines look safe would use the word ‘and’ in the definition of a safety signal.

Using ‘and’ means that if any one of the conditions isn’t satisfied, no safety signal will be generated. As noted below, the PRR will rarely trigger which virtually guarantees that most events generated by an unsafe vaccine will never get flagged.

The PRR value for the COVID vaccines will rarely exceed 1 because there are so many adverse events from the COVID vaccine because it is so dangerous (i.e., B in the formula is a huge number) so the numerator is always near zero. Hence, the ‘safety signal’ is rarely triggered because the vaccine is so dangerous.”

A Fictitious Example

Using a fictitious vaccine as the example, Kirsch explained how an exceptionally dangerous vaccine will fly under the radar and not get flagged, thanks to this flawed formula:25

“Suppose we have the world’s most dangerous vaccine that causes adverse events in everyone who gets it and generates 25,000 different adverse events, and each adverse event has 1,000 instances.

That means that the numerator is 1,000/25,000,000 which is just 40 events per million reported events. Now let’s look at actuals for something like deaths. For all other vaccines, there are 6,200 deaths and 1 million adverse events total.

Since 40 per million is less than 6,200 deaths per million, we are not even close to generating a safety signal for deaths from our hypothetical vaccine which killed 1,000 people in a year … The point is that a dangerous vaccine can look very ‘safe’ using the PRR formula.”

Calculating Death Signal for the COVID Jab

Next, Kirsch calculates the PRR for death for the COVID jab — using VAERS data and the CDC’s definitions and formula. As of December 31, 2019, there were 6,157 deaths and 918,717 adverse events total for all vaccines other than the COVID shot. As of September 23, 2022, there were 31,214 deaths and 1.4 million adverse events total for the COVID jabs. Here’s the formula as explained by Kirsch:26

“PRR = (31,214/1.4e6) / (6,157/918,717) = 3.32, which exceeds the required threshold of 2. In other words, the COVID vaccine is so deadly that even with all the adverse events generated by the vaccine, the death signal did not get drowned out!

But there is still the chi-square test. Chi-square test results were 18,549 for ‘death,’ which greatly exceeds the required threshold of 4. The CDC chi-square test is clearly satisfied for the COVID vaccine. Because the death signal is so huge, it even survived the PRR test.

This means that even using the CDCs own erroneous … formula, all three criteria were satisfied:

1. PRR>2 [PRR greater than 2]: It was 3.32

2. Chi-square>2 [Chi-square greater than 2]: It was 18,549

3. 3 or more reports: There were over 31,214 death reports received by VAERS … which is more than 3

A safety signal should have been generated but wasn’t. Why not? … Hundreds of thousands of American lives have been lost due to the inability of the CDC to deploy their own flawed safety signal analysis … It’s been known since at least 2004 that using reporting odds ratio (ROR) is a better estimate of relative risk than PRR.27 I don’t know why the CDC doesn’t use it.”

The CDC is also hiding the severity of side effects in other ways. As explained by Fenton,28 the way side effects are categorized by the CDC help obfuscate the scale of certain problems. For example, “cardiac failure acute,” “cardiac failure,” “infarction,” “myocardial strain” and “myocardial fibrosis” are listed as separate categories, even though in real life they’re all potential effects of myocarditis.

By separating them, you end up with fewer frequency counts per category, thereby giving you an underpowered chi-square test so that a warning signal is not triggered. If related categories were merged, far stronger safety signals would likely emerge.

CDC Has No Reasonable Defense

The CDC is responsible for monitoring both VAERS and V-Safe, and between these two databases, there’s no possible way they could ever say they didn’t know the shots were harming and killing millions of Americans.

The CDC also has access to other databases, including the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), which (before it was intentionally altered29) showed massive increases in debilitating and lethal conditions, including a tripling of cancer cases.30

The findings in these databases have never been brought forward during any of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meetings or the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meetings, at which members have repeatedly voted to authorize the jabs to people of all ages, including infants and pregnant women.

They even added these toxic shots to the childhood vaccine schedule — which allows states to mandate them for school attendance — without addressing any of the 66 safety signals found in the CDC’s PRR analysis. The fact of the matter is that the CDC has known about these risks all along, and there’s no excuse for not sharing and acting on these data.

Help Spread the Word

Mainstream media are ignoring all of this, so help spread the word. Everyone needs to know what the CDC’s safety data reveal. To that end, here are a few suggestions for how you can help:

  • Write or call your members of Congress and ask them to investigate the CDC’s safety monitoring — We cannot have a public safety agency that is incapable of monitoring safety and taking appropriate action when problems are found, be it correcting a flawed formula or announcing that a safety signal has been detected. Of course, they must also publish their findings once an investigation has been made.
  • Contact your local newspaper and urge them to investigate and report on the CDC’s failure to act on safety signals.
  • Share the data on social media and ask why no one in the media, Congress, academia or medical community is investigating these matters.
  • Share this information with your doctor and members of the medical community.
  • Also share it with university administrators, and ask them to explain how and why, in light of these data, they are still mandating COVID shots.

*

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 All About Pharmacovigilance PRR

2 VAERS Standard Operating Procedures January 2021

3 VAERS Standard Operating Procedures February 2022

4, 5, 13, 15 Epoch Times September 10, 2022

6, 7, 10, 17 Epoch Times January 3, 2023 (Archived)

8 Josh Guetzkow Substack January 4, 2023

9, 12, 28 Where Are the Numbers? Substack January 4, 2023

11 Public Tableau PRR VAERS Data Summary 12/14/2020-7/29/2022

14 Josh Guetzkow Substack September 14, 2022

16 Epoch Times December 17, 2022 (Archived)

18 Rounding the Earth Newsletter Part 1

19 Rounding the Earth Newsletter Part 2

20 Rounding the Earth Newsletter Part 3

21, 23, 25, 26 Steve Kirsch Substack October 3, 2022

22, 24 CDC VAERS Standard Operating Procedures January 29, 2021

27 Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safety August 2004; 13(8): 519-523

29 WISPolitics February 10, 2022

30 Steve Kirsch Substack February 5, 2022 DMED

Featured image is from NaturalNews.com


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.

***

Arab citizens across the Middle East and North Africa continue to view Israel and the United States as the primary threats to their country’s security, and opposition to normalization with the Jewish state remains high, according to the 2022 Arab Opinion Index released Thursday by the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies in Qatar.

Approximately 80 percent of respondents said that U.S. and Israeli policies “threaten the security and stability of the region.” By contrast, 57 percent said the same about Iran and Russia, an almost 15-point improvement for both countries since 2016. Turkey and China were the only countries that earned a positive approval rating for their policies in the Arab world.

“There is a general sense of American hypocrisy on Middle East policy,” argued Dana El Kurd, a professor at the University of Richmond, at a press briefing about the findings. “There is a sense that there is a Middle East exception to this administration’s pro-democracy position.”

Respondents had a particularly dim view of U.S. policy on Palestine, with only 11 percent saying they approve of Washington’s positions. By comparison, 31 percent of those polled approved of Iranian policy toward the Palestinians, and 43 percent approved of Turkish policy.

The Arab Opinion Index survey includes data from largely in-person interviews with 33,000 respondents across 14 Arab countries. (Interviews with Saudi respondents took place over the phone.) The 2022 poll is the eighth since 2011, when the Arab Center launched the project. Interviewers posed a wide range of questions on democracy, politics, and the economy.

While the detailed poll results are only available in Arabic, Arab Center Washington DC published an executive summary of the survey in English. Countries polled included Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Tunisia.

When it comes to foreign policy, the results highlight the sharp disconnect between the citizens of Arab countries and their leaders, many of whom have begun to seek détente with Israel. While the poll found a significant shift in favor of normalization in Morocco and Sudan — both of which, along with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, have already established ties with Israel — the vast majority (84 percent) of all respondents opposed any form of diplomatic relations with Tel Aviv.

In Saudi Arabia, which Israel has considered the most important target for mutual recognition, only five percent of respondents said they favored normalization, while 38 percent said they were opposed, and 57 percent said they either didn’t know or declined to answer. Opposition was strongest in Algeria, Mauritania, Libya, Palestine, Jordan, and Tunisia where from 90 to 99 percent of respondents said they opposed normalization with the Jewish state.

U.S. policymakers should take this divide into consideration when they formulate policy for the region, argued Khalil Jahshan, the executive director of the Arab Center Washington DC.

“For countries that pride themselves on support for democracy, it behooves them to look at public opinion… to look at what the public really wants,” Jahshan said.

The vast majority of respondents expressed support for democratic governance, though 47 percent expressed concern that their country is “unprepared for democracy.”

While 80 percent of those polled viewed the Arab people as a single nation, the survey revealed sharp divides between Gulf states and the rest of the Arab world over economic issues.

Over 90 percent of Gulf citizens described their family’s economic situation as good or very good, as compared to 66 percent in North Africa and 50 percent in the Levant. Eighty-six percent of Gulf natives said their household income was enough to get by or save money, while nearly half of Levant citizens — including respondents from Jordan, Palestine, and Lebanon — said their income is not enough to cover daily costs.

Nearly three out of four (73 percent) respondents said their home country suffered from widespread corruption. In Lebanon, Tunisia, and Iraq, more than 90 percent of respondents reported extensive corruption, while in Qatar and Saudi Arabia less than 30 percent said the same.

Notably, the survey also found that 36 percent of respondents rely on online news as their primary source of information, a 31-point jump from 2011, when the question was first asked. Despite the interest in online news, 57 percent said they do not trust information circulated on social media.

*

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 a White House photo

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.

***

Auditors say the Pentagon cannot account for $220 billion worth of government-owned gear provided to military contractors—and the actual total is likely much higher.

In a report released Tuesday, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) slammed the Pentagon’s handling of so-called “government-furnished property” (GFP) that has been passed off to contractors with little oversight. The GAO notes that auditors have asked for decades that the Pentagon develop a plan to account for that gear and equipment—which can include “ammunition, missiles, torpedoes,” and component parts for those items—to little avail. In 2001, the Pentagon said it would address the issue by 2005. In 2020, it said the process would be complete by 2026.

Perhaps someday we’ll know how much taxpayer-funded military gear has been handed out to contractors. For now, the GAO notes that the $220 billion estimate is “likely significantly understated.” That figure is based on a 2014 report, but in 2016 the Army told auditors that the actual figure is “unknown and that actual quantities may be greatly different than the Army’s documented property records reflect.”

The Pentagon failed a fifth consecutive audit in November, when it could only account for 39 percent of its $3.5 trillion in assets. Nevertheless, the military received $858 billion—a 10 percent budget increase—in the omnibus bill passed late last year.

The amount of taxpayer-funded military gear that’s been handed out to contractors is a relatively small sum compared to the Pentagon’s astronomical budget and gordian accounting issues. Even so, it serves as an illustrative example of the broader accountability problems within the most expensive portion of the federal discretionary budget.

“DOD’s lack of accountability over government property in the possession of contractors has been reported by auditors as far back as 1981,” the new GAO report states. “These long-standing issues affect the accounting for and reporting of GFP and are one of the reasons DOD is unable to produce auditable financial statements.”

It can also serve as a litmus test for the seriousness of would-be fiscal conservatives who are calling for spending cuts.

The new Republican majority in the House of Representatives has vowed to roll back discretionary spending to 2022 levels—effectively undoing the omnibus bill passed in December. But some are already indicating that they would like to exempt the Pentagon from that belt-tightening.

“During negotiations, cuts to defense were never discussed,” Rep. Chip Roy (R–Texas) said in a statement posted to his office’s Twitter account last week. “Spending cuts should focus on non-defense discretionary spending.”

That’s a bunch of nonsense. If the Department of Education couldn’t account for more than 39 percent of its assets, conservatives would rightly be outraged about the rampant waste. If the Department of Transportation had misplaced more than $220 billion of equipment, they would likely haul Secretary Pete Buttigieg before a committee to answer for the mess. The Pentagon should be treated no differently—in fact, given the long-standing accountability issues there, it should arguably be subjected to even tighter scrutiny.

A bipartisan group of senators including included Chuck Grassley (R–Iowa), Mike Lee (R–Utah), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), and Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), proposed a possible solution last year. Their bill would automatically cut 1 percent from the budget of any part of the Pentagon that fails an annual audit. If that had passed, 20 of the Pentagon’s 27 agencies would have faced budget cuts this year.

As it stands, there is little incentive for the military bureaucracy to get its act together because lawmakers from both parties will vote to shower more money on the Pentagon even when it can’t account for most of what it’s already been given. That won’t change until Congress’ approach to the Pentagon budget 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.

Eric Boehm is a reporter at Reason.

Featured image is a US Department of Defense photo

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Pentagon Can’t Account for $220 Billion of Gear Given to Contractors
  • 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.

***

While Western journalists insist that Ukraine is “winning” the conflict, experienced military and analysts continue to point to the evident fact that Russia cannot be defeated so easily. In a recent interview, a top US general commented that the situation is very complicated for the Ukrainians, who will have many difficulties to fulfill their promise to “expel” Russian forces from territories already reintegrated into Moscow’s sovereign space.

According to the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley, Ukraine will face many problems in order to achieve its military objectives in the current conflict against Russia. He points out that most Western leaders, and even the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, despite the bellicose speech, believe that the resolution of the conflict will be done through diplomatic negotiations instead of by force. Milley seems skeptical of any possibility of Ukrainian success through the military dispute.

Milley also commented on the time it would take to end hostilities. Although some Ukrainian and Western politicians claim that they plan to expel the Russians as soon as possible, he does not believe in the possibility of this process being completed by 2023. The solid positions maintained by the Russian forces in the regions newly integrated into the Federation make it difficult to believe in the possibility of a rapid military reversal strong enough to guarantee Kiev the control of these territories.

“President Biden, President Zelensky, and most of the leaders of Europe have said this war is likely to end in a negotiation (…) From a military standpoint, this is a very, very difficult fight (…) I still maintain that for this year, it would be very, very difficult to militarily eject the Russian forces from every inch of Russian-occupied Ukraine (…) That doesn’t mean it can’t happen, doesn’t mean it won’t happen. But it’d be very, very difficult”, he said during the interview.

Milley’s views sound realistic. He makes it clear that Ukraine’s weaknesses will not be overcome so easily, despite Western help. The US alone has already sent over 110 billion dollars in military aid to Kiev, providing packages that include heavy weapons, combat vehicles, anti-aircraft systems and over a million artillery shells. Europe and NATO allied nations are also providing everything they can to the Ukrainian neo-Nazi regime. However, Russian military superiority sounds evident, as Moscow celebrates more and more important victories, such as the recent seizures of Soledar and Klescheevka.

There are many factors that explain Russia’s success despite Western aid to Ukraine. Moscow’s focus is on avoiding a war of attrition that needlessly kills Russian soldiers and civilians. For this, there is a strategic direction of the fighting forces to key regions, where the military victory makes viable the cutting of the supply lines of the Ukrainian forces. Also, Russian artillery focuses on big military zones and infrastructure facilities, while parallel troops, such as the private military company “Wagner Group” play the role of infantry force, mainly in urban areas.

On the other hand, Kiev seems to have difficulties in strategically managing the conflict. Despite NATO’s support, the Ukrainian forces, as already reported by several on the ground informants, are marked by disorganization and corruption. Most Western weapons are absolutely new to the Ukrainian soldiers, who do not know how to operate them correctly, often causing damages against their own side.

Furthermore, Ukrainians seem to prioritize territory over human lives, unlike Russians. While Moscow constantly promotes strategic retreats to save lives, Kiev keeps troops in the trenches even when the battles are virtually lost. The result is the death of thousands of soldiers in unnecessary combat. These soldiers are replaced by new fighters, with not enough training and no military experience, resulting in strategic errors and more deaths.

In addition, it is important to mention that since 2014 Kiev deliberately attacks civilians and this has been getting worse as heavy weapons from the West arrive in the country. Much of the equipment imported by Ukraine has been used in demilitarized areas in Donbass for the sole purpose of murdering ethnic Russian civilians, without any military gain, which makes it even more complicated for this Western aid to have any real impact in the conflict.

In fact, Milley’s words just confirm what has already become a constant conclusion among military experts: Kiev is not able to defeat Russia – both because Moscow is militarily stronger and because of the lack of organizational and administrative capacity on the part of the Ukrainians. The possibility of a real military reversal would only happen in a scenario of more direct NATO’s intervention, but in this case the war would certainly escalate to the nuclear level and end without winners.

On the near horizon, only the Russian victory looks like a real scenario. The best to do is to resume the talks, with Kiev fully accepting Russian ceasefire terms. As Milley suggested, Western politicians themselves believe this, but they prefer to continue funding the conflict just to try to destabilize Russia’s strategic environment as much as possible, even if it costs the lives of Ukrainian citizens.

*

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.

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on Situation for Kiev Is “Very, Very Difficult”. US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mark Milley
  • Tags:

Europe Has Enemies Within, Enemies Without

January 23rd, 2023 by M. K. Bhadrakumar

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 internal balances of the European Union are significantly transforming as a consequence of the US’ proxy war with Russia in Ukraine. The countries that are close neighbours of the conflict zone — countries of Eastern Europe and the Baltic States — have a greater sense of involvement in the conflict in comparison with the countries of Old Europe. These New Europeans have had a difficult history that puts them on a pronouncedly ‘anti-Russian’ trajectory. 

Their Manichean fears of Russia brought them closer to the US and post-Brexit Britain than to their natural allies in western Europe. Poland, the mightiest entity of New Europe, is investing massively in defence, which may catapult it as the leading military power in Europe. 

In 2022, Poland concluded a huge arms purchase contract with South Korea: heavy combat tanks (four times more than France), artillery, fighter jets, for 15 billion euros. Warsaw also signed a contract last month to purchase two observation satellites from France for 500 million euros. Poland is determined to be ever more consequential in European affairs. 

On the other hand, for Germany, Europe’s powerhouse, the war is a particularly sensitive issue and it is caught up in a certain constant questioning of itself. Germany’s Nazi legacy, its chosen dependence on Russian gas and the reluctance to deliver the first weapons to Ukraine put it in agony today over the issue of heavy tank deliveries. 

Nonetheless, Germany promptly seized the Russian special military operation in Ukraine to announce on February 27 a sharp increase in its military spending to more than 2% of its economic output in one of a series of policy shifts. The government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz decided to supply 100 billion euros for military investments from its 2022 budget. (Germany’s entire defence budget by comparison was 47 billion euros in 2021.)

Not to be left behind, President Emmanuel Macron said in June that Russia’s operation in Ukraine had sent France into “a war economy” that he expected to last a long time. He announced in the weekend he would ask parliament to approve a new budget of €400 billion for the period 2024-2030, up from €295 billion for 2019-2025.

The new budget is intended to modernise France’s military in the face of multiple potential new threats, Macron said on Friday, adding,  “After repairing the armed forces, we are going to transform them. We need to do better and do it differently.”

To be sure, the geopolitical earthquake in Ukraine caused tremors all over Europe and every country is evaluating its position and role. Although no country is questioning its European commitment, there is a palpable sense of disorientation. Scholz wrote in an essay two months ago in Foreign Affairs magazine that it was time for a Zeitenwende, or historic “turning point,” on Germany taking responsibility. 

Again, on Friday, Macron and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez signed a new treaty of joint cooperation, described as a historic friendship treaty to achieve common strategic objectives. They have  decided to put behind the tensions over the proposed MidCat gas pipeline through the Pyrenees (which was blocked by France due to environmental reasons.) 

But both countries have different motivations. France may be shoring up European support as it prepares to dispute with the US over the billions of dollars in subsidies for American companies as part of President Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which aims to fund a green transition. And Spain probably aims to become a more prominent player in the nucleus of European power, and is estimating that a tighter alliance with France will help.

However, by Sunday, Macron is celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Franco-German reconciliation of 1961 at a summit in Paris with Scholz, coupled with a joint Council of Ministers, with focus on recapturing the verve of the Paris-Berlin axis which used to preside over the EU until the conflict in Ukraine erupted. Whether that swagger can be recaptured remains to be seen. 

France and Germany were not ready for this war in Ukraine, while the countries of the Eastern front were more vigilant vis-à-vis Moscow and immediately perceived the stakes. The political cost of this discrepancy is not quantifiable yet. Meanwhile, the balance of power in Europe has changed, and it is unclear whether France and Germany will succeed in forging a new balance. 

For the present, Scholz has come under increasing pressure from allies to send German-made Leopard battle tanks to Ukraine, or to allow other countries to re-export from their own stocks. The US is leading this pantomime from the rear. 

Washington is determined to put the final nails on the coffin of German-Russian rapprochement and disrupt the revival of the Franco-German axis to address jointly a European response to Biden’s predatory subsidy law and map out pathways to protect European industry. The economic stakes are very high as, lured by US subsidy, a migration of European industry to America is likely. 

France and Germany are deeply skeptical that Washington will make meaningful changes to the green investment plan. At issue is “the ideal of a Europe that is united and in full control of its destiny,” as Macron said at the ceremony at Sorbonne in Paris today with Scholz by his side. Scholz in turn said, “Today we strive side by side to strengthen the sovereignty of Europe.” They affirmed amitié indestructible (indestructible friendship.)

Indeed, Poland chose precisely today to train its guns on Germany, while Macron and Scholz were celebrating the 60 years of Elysee Treaty in Paris to shore up their alliance with a day of ceremonies and talks on Europe’s security, energy and other challenges. 

Polish Prime Minister Morawiecki tore into Scholz in extremely harsh language threatening to build a “smaller coalition” of European countries if Germany does not agree to the transfer of Leopard 2 tanks. Morawiecki thundered: “Ukraine and Europe will win this war — with or without Germany.”

He accused Scholz of not “acting up to the potential of the German state” and of undermining or sabotaging “the actions of other countries.” Morawiecki raged in uncontrollable anger: “They (German politicians) hoped to pawn off the Russian bear with generous contracts. That policy bankrupted them, and to this day Germany finds it difficult to admit its mistake. Wandel durch Handel has become synonymous with epochal error.” 

It is still 36 hours to go for the first anniversary of the Russian operation in Ukraine. But the war has spilled over to Europe. As Russia steadily gains the upper hand militarily and the spectre of defeat haunts the US and NATO, Poland is getting frantic. A tipping point is coming for it to recover its “lost territory” in western Ukraine  if and when that country collapses — although Stalin had compensated Poland with more than 40,000 square miles of east German lands. 

Europe is unlikely to be party to Polish revanchism, especially Germany. These sweeping political maneuvers can be seen as an attempt to adapt to the new world of war and, perhaps, as well to prepare Europe for the one that comes after. 

*

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: France’s President Emmanuel Macron (R) with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz as they arrive to attend a ceremony marking the 60th anniversary of the Elysee Treaty, Sorbonne university’s Grand Amphitheatre, Paris, Jan. 22, 2023

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Europe Has Enemies Within, Enemies Without

The War in Ukraine Will End with a Bang. Soon.

January 23rd, 2023 by Philip Kraske

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.

***

Amidst indignant reactions to ex-Chancellor Angela Merkel’s revelations about the Minsk accords, worry about Americans “advising” Ukrainians en situ, and the back-and-forth of battle lines, it’s easy to forget what the Ukraine War is all about: the struggle of the United States to maintain its status as the world’s only superpower. More exactly, America’s attempt to suppress China as a rival superpower is the center of this tragedy.

China, allied with its back-door gas station Russia, is a nearly unbeatable foe. China’s seaports can easily be cut off if container ships are threatened against docking there. Its back door is another matter. So those hard-eyed folks in Washington, obsessed with the Wolfowitz Doctrine, need to eliminate or take over Russia. That is the sine qua non of the American strategy. Without this step, the strategy falls apart.

And the step needs to be taken quickly; already the confrontation with China is picking up momentum.

Hence the Ukraine War. As President Biden ad-libbed himself, “[Putin] cannot remain in power.” He later walked back the comment, but the slip obviously reflects thinking in the Oval Office. The nice way to remove him is to cause a Russian defeat in Ukraine and the resignation — or worse — of its president, replaced (neocons hope) by a pliable drunk like Boris Yeltsin. I would imagine that foreign-policy blobbers long ago convinced themselves that they would really, actually, in their heart-of-hearts prefer to do things this way. Because the other way is not nice.

Not nice at all: the other option is a nuclear attack. Invasion of Russia won’t do the trick. Russians would see it coming a mile off. And they wouldn’t stand for a conventional war on their territory because they know they would lose. Nor would they stand for another Yeltsin, nor a foreign ruler that broke the country into ten pieces. Long before the Yankees got to within a HIMARS-throw of Moscow, Russia would resort to nuclear weapons.

The savants of Washington know this, as they have always known that Russia could not possibly lose a conventional war against Ukraine: a table-flat country, on its border, with a third the population, and no real war-making resources other than an actor-president who — credit where credit is due — could sell sand in the Sahara. I would give him his bust in the halls of Congress just for sheer chutzpah.

A conventional attack being impossible, Washington needs a war right on Russia’s border to use as cover, as an excuse, for a nuclear attack. If you doubt that their determination, remember that this reckless gambit in international affairs has been built through four administrations of neocons, who: 1) scrapped the relevant arms-control treaties; 2) overthrew a democratically-elected regime on Russia’s border; 3) pulled Europe apart from Russia, wrecking the European economy; and 4) literally destroyed the NordStream pipeline to make sure that the wreck stayed wrecked. I would imagine that even among older practitioners of U.S. foreign policy — Kissinger, Baker and their lot — those measures must have raised a few eyebrows. Biden’s crew is like fifteen-year-olds let loose in the foreign-policy candy store.

There are two ways, as I see it, of the war provoking a nuclear crisis: if the United States and/or Nato enter the war, or if, somehow, the Ukrainians mount a chemical- or biological-weapon attack against Russia, perhaps a dirty bomb. In either case, a crisis explodes, threats are made, and the U.S. has an excuse to unleash a nuclear attack on Russia — maybe with just a minimum of tactical nukes to impose a surrender, for only God and the CIA know what the Americans can actually do.

The point is to have a credible excuse for a first strike; without the Ukraine War, credibility would have been problematic — or at least more problematic; I have no doubt that, in a pinch, the same agile novelists who gave us the Kennedy Assassination and 9-11 could come up with a vivid tale. Whatever it is, the public will accept it, for they have been carefully cultivated by media stories about Russia: how Putin has turned into a dictator, how the LGBT community is persecuted, how Russian men fled the country to avoid conscription, and especially, repeatedly, poundingly like the drumming on a heavy-metal tune, that Vladimir Putin is a madman, a megalomaniac.

When the first images of blasted-out Moscow appear, President Biden will explain to a frightened world his heart-wrenching decision to strike first: the covers of Siberian rocket silos had been removed, the radio traffic was unmistakable, humint and e-lint confirmed suspicions, the Russian military brass had all suddenly slipped away to command centers around the country, and the crowning touch: President Putin’s recent mental state was “extremely concerning.” His statement need be but the merest window-dressing; the public, though appalled, will breathe a sigh of relief to know that this madman is no more.

President Biden would never do such a thing? This foggy-headed grandfather might be fully against World War III, but his foreign-policy team has by now taken the measure of him and knows exactly what to say in order to panic him into acting.

The foreign-policy crew fears a nuclear response from Putin? Hardly. They seem to have taken the Russian’s measure as well, and come away satisfied. Putin didn’t react when: 1) Nato expanded again and again; 2) Washington staged the coup d’etat in Kiev; 3) Washington (the only real suspect, either hands-on or not) sabotaged the NordStream 2 pipeline; and 4) when Washington assisted the Ukrainian government’s attack on the Donbass. Indeed, Putin waited through eight years of this violence to finally invade, having exhausted every other possibility to avoid war, and even then launched not a war but a lame “special military operation.”

Add all of this to the neocons’ wishful thinking that once Russia is out of the way, China will be a piece of cake that they will eat deliciously smacking their lips; and a nuclear first strike easily crosses into their realm of the feasible. Hitler and Napoleon would understand.

How strange that the drive to conquer Russia returns again and again in history; it is the West’s recurring nightmare, and it will be this time as well — though this aspect of the Ukraine story is strictly ignored by our slovenly mainstream media. So I leave the last word to Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, who said, “The past is indestructible; sooner or later everything comes back around, and one of the things that come back around is the project to abolish the past.”

*

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 via TUR

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The War in Ukraine Will End with a Bang. Soon.

Withdraw from Artyomovsk!

January 23rd, 2023 by Dr. Gilbert Doctorow

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.

***

 

 

 

This is the advice which social media say the U.S. Government is today giving to the Zelensky regime in Kiev. It follows by a day or two the public release by German intelligence operatives of their own assessment of the latest course of the war, saying that the stubborn resistance of the Ukrainian Armed Forces to advancing Russian ground units in Artyomovsk (Bakhmut), just as the defense of Soledar (lost to the Russians a week ago) was and is a death trap set by the Russians for the Ukrainians. As the U.S. overlords understand today, continued losses of Ukrainian forces in these hopeless PR stunts are compromising any chances of their making a spring counteroffensive when the advanced military gear now being shipped to them arrives and is put into the field.

What conclusion can we reach from “withdraw from Artyomovsk”?  Very simply that the notion of 1:1 death and ingured rates that the Anglosaxon news disseminators have been shouting for weeks to slant the news towards some “stalemate” between the opposing sides is pure nonsense.  It would be safer to follow the figures put out by the Russian military, which indicate a 10:1 imbalance in casualties on the Ukrainian side.

Meanwhile, the big news in the past 24 hours was the meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group in the German army base at Ramstein. This was most notable for the failure of the defense ministers of the 50 participating countries to reach any agreement over delivery of tanks to the Ukrainians. Tanks are allegedly needed to support Ukraine’s spring counter offensive, with the objective not merely to push back the Russians to the line of demarcation in Donbas prior to the start of the Special Military Operation, but even to recapture the Crimea.

The central issue at Ramstein was German Chancellor Scholz’s refusal to send in German Leopard heavy tanks or to allow the many NATO countries where Leopards are held in the inventory to send any of their tanks to Kiev.  Scholz is said to insist the Americans first ship their own Abrams tanks to Kiev before Germany will lift a finger.  And why is he being so stubborn in resisting all the jackal states in NATO on this very issue? Western reports say he is fearful of leading the pack on delivery of tanks and incurring special Russian wrath.

Let us decode this message:  the German chancellor is not some indecisive imbecile, as our newspapers hint.  No, he is a cunning fox who is unwilling to allow Washington to send him and Europe to hell in what could easily become a Russia-NATO hot war if the Russian red lines forbidding heavy armaments deliveries are crossed.

So all the Ukrainians will get by way of new weapon systems as per the decisions announced yesterday in Ramstein are token deliveries of armored personnel carriers and armored machine gun and cannon vehicles that one might just call light tanks.   That and a lot more howitzers of every variety coming from several different NATO countries.

But in terms of the big picture, what difference would tanks make?   The vision of big tank warfare across the Ukrainian steppes that underlies the Washington war scenario is fallacious.  As I have pointed out repeatedly, despite the lies and PR blasts from Washington and London, the war is being fought according to the Russian scheme, not the U.S. scheme.

We have heard how poorly the Russians coordinate air and ground.  We have heard how they just cannot put together any good shock and awe. But this is beside the point.  The Russians are waging an artillery war for good reasons:  they have the world’s largest manufacturing industry of cannon, multi-rocket field launchers and munitions and they are waging a war of attrition on the ground which can only favor their armies.

If the slaughter of Ukrainians continues at its present rate, if the United States and its allies cannot ramp up munitions production, if the destruction of the Ukrainian energy infrastructure continues, if the logistics for conveying Western military supplies to the front are further impaired, then the Russians will find themselves against a disarmed Ukrainian army some time in the early spring, and they may get the capitulation they seek without shock and awe heroics.

In saying this, I acknowledge my own misreading of the Russian war plans, since I expected them to deliver the death blow to Kiev some time ago.  But then I am joined in this misreading by many others who actually have military expertise guiding their assessments, such as Col. Douglas MacGregor.

Who laughs last, laughs best.  And that may well explain the sardonic smile we see from time to time in President Putin’s public statements about the course of the war effort.

That is not to say that we can sleep calmly in the belief that the end of the war is nigh.  There are risks arising as the inevitability of a Russian victory sinks into thick skulls at the Pentagon.  The latest risks come from those saying publicly in Washington that the Ukrainians must be given longer range missiles so that they can strike directly at Russian military installations in Crimea if not in Central Russia.   Such extravagant plans for the conquest of Russia can lead only to a nuclear response from Moscow and…the end of civilization as we know it.

*

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.

Gilbert Doctorow is an independent political analyst based in Brussels.

Featured image: Ukrainian trench during the battle, November 2022 (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

US to Transfer Seized Russian Assets to Ukraine

January 23rd, 2023 by Will Porter

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 government is preparing to hand Ukraine assets confiscated from Russian businessmen under a scheme proposed by the Biden administration last year, which aims to target the wealth of “oligarchs” and pass it on to Kiev.

Andrew Adams – the head of ‘KleptoCapture,’ a Department of Justice sanctions task force created last March – detailed the progress made on the asset seizure plan during a talk at the Hudson Institute on Thursday.

“In the future, we’re also poised to begin the transfer of forfeited assets for the benefit of Ukraine,” he said. “In the closing days of 2022, Congress passed, and the president signed, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, and among its provisions is a law that newly empowers the Justice Department to direct forfeited funds to the State Department for the purpose of providing aid to Ukraine.”

Adams noted that the law does not allow for all frozen Russian assets to be transferred to Kiev, namely those seized due to export control violations, and said the amounts involved are “minuscule” compared to the costs of Moscow’s invasion.

“It’s not a silver bullet, but it is nevertheless something that makes me hopeful that we will start to see the first transfers from Justice to the State Department occurring in the coming weeks and months,” he continued.

The White House first floated the asset scheme last April, pushing to confiscate any wealth thought to be “linked to Russian kleptocracy” and use it to “support Ukraine.” The proposal required Congress to change some existing laws, alterations that were included in the massive $1.7 trillion spending package for 2023.

According to the Atlantic Council’s Russia Sanctions Database, more than 1,300 Russian nationals and some 1,100 entities are under US sanctions. While the overall worth of Russian assets currently frozen by the US Treasury has not been publicized, Washington has also targeted wealth owned by Moscow’s central bank totaling around $300 billion. Those funds cannot be seized, however, and will remain frozen barring any change in US law.

A number of Western allies have followed suit on the sanctions and asset seizures, among them Canada, Switzerland, Britain, Australia and the European Union itself, all aiming to isolate Russia’s economy in retaliation for invading its neighbor last February.

Moscow responded harshly to Adams’ comments regarding Russian assets, saying plans to send the captured funds to Ukraine were a “breach of fundamental American values” and marked an “obvious disregard of generally accepted legal norms.”

“Such dangerous precedents only serve to discredit the United States as a ‘bastion’ of free enterprise,” the Russian Embassy in the US said in a statement on Thursday night. “Washington, with its own hands, is undermining confidence in both the American and international financial system, as well as the security of the dollar jurisdiction.”

*

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.

Will Porter is assistant news editor at the Libertarian Institute and a staff writer at RT. Find more of his work at Antiwar.com and Consortium News.

Featured image: FILE PHOTO: A stack of Russian currency. (Credit: Stockvault)

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 small Nordic country of Norway may not be particularly notable on the global crypto map. With its 22 blockchain solution providers, the nation doesn’t stand out even at the regional level

However, as the race to test and implement central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) accelerates every day, the Scandinavian nation is taking an active stance on its own national digital currency. In fact, it was among the first countries to begin the work on a CBDC back in 2016.

Dropping cash

In recent years, amid a rise in cashless payment methods and concern over cash-enabled illicit transactions, some Norwegian banks have moved to remove cash options altogether.

In 2016, Trond Bentestuen, then an executive at major Norwegian bank DNB, proposed to stop using cash as a means of payment in the country:

“Today, there is approximately 50 billion kroner in circulation and [the country’s central bank] Norges Bank can only account for 40 percent of its use. That means that 60 percent of money usage is outside of any control.”

A year before that, another large Norwegian bank, Nordea, also refused to accept cash, leaving only one branch in Oslo Central Station to continue handling cash.

This sentiment came in parallel with Bitcoin enthusiasm, as DNB enabled its customers to buy BTC via its mobile app, local courts demanded that convicted drug dealers pay their fines in crypto, and local newspapers widely discussed investments in digital assets.

Last year Torbjørn Hægeland, executive director for financial stability at Norway’s central bank, Norges Bank, outlined to the project’s goal of replacing cash use in the country:

“With this background, the decline in cash use and other structural changes in the payment system are key drivers for the project.”

The experimental phase of the Norwegian CBDC will last until June 2023 and end with recommendations from the central bank on whether the implementation of a prototype is necessary.

Ethereum is the key 

In September 2022, Norges Bank released the open-source code for the Ethereum-backed digital currency sandbox. Available on GitHub, the sandbox is designed to offer an interface for interacting with the test network, enabling functions like minting, burning and transferring ERC-20 tokens.

However, the second part of the source code, announced to go public by mid-September, has yet to be revealed. As specified in a blog post, the initial use of open-source code was not a “signal that the technology will be based on open-source code,” but a “good starting point for learning as much as possible in collaboration with developers and alliance partners.”

Earlier, the bank revealed its principal partner in building the infrastructure for the project — Nahmii, a Norway-based developer of a layer-2 scaling solution for Ethereum of the same name. The company has been working on this scaling technology for Ethereum for several years and has its own network and tokens. At this point, the test network for the Norwegian CBDC uses not the public Ethereum ecosystem, but a private version of the enterprise blockchain Hyperledger Besu.

In late 2022, Norway became part of Project Icebreaker, a joint exploration with the central banks of Israel, Norway and Sweden on how CBDCs can be used for cross-border payments. Within its framework, the three central banks will connect their domestic proof-of-concept CBDC systems. The final report for the project is scheduled for the first quarter of 2023.

Local specifics, universal problems

In terms of hopes and fears, what defines the Norwegian CBDC project among others is the national regulatory context. Like its geographical neighbors, Norway is known for its cautious approach to the digital assets market, with high taxes and the relatively small scale of its domestic crypto ecosystem — a recent study by EU Blockchain Observatory estimated its total equity funding at a modest $26.9 million.

Norwegian serial entrepreneur Sander Andersen, who has recently moved his fintech company to Switzerland, doubts that the upcoming project will co-exist peacefully with the crypto industry. There are already more than enough problems for tech entrepreneurs in the country, he said in a chat with Cointelegraph:

“Despite the country’s strong infrastructure for entrepreneurs in other industries, such as low energy costs and free education, these benefits do not extend to the digital realm. The tax burden faced by digital companies makes it nearly impossible to compete with businesses based in more business-friendly jurisdictions.”

As central bank digital currencies have the potential to compete with private cryptocurrencies, and the goal of any government is to control financial transactions as tightly as possible, Andersen doesn’t see Norway among the exceptions:

“The Norwegian central bank’s CBDC project can also pose a threat to the legal status of private stablecoins in the country. The introduction of a CBDC may prompt increased regulation and oversight of private stablecoins, making it harder for these companies to operate.”

Speaking to Cointelegraph, Michael Lewellen, head of solutions architecture at OpenZeppelin, a company contributing its contracts library to the Norges Bank project, doesn’t sound so pessimistic. From a technical perspective, he emphasized, there is nothing stopping private stablecoins from trading and operating alongside CBDCs on both public and private Ethereum networks, especially if they use common, compatible token standards such as ERC-20.

However, from a policy perspective, there’s nothing that can stop central banks from performing financial gatekeeping and enforcing the Know Your Customer (KYC) standards, and this is where the CBDC looks like a natural development. Banks will not sit idly by as the blockchain ecosystem grows, as there is a lot of shadow-banking activity happening on-chain, Lewellen specified, adding:

“CBDCs offer central banks the ability to better perform gatekeeping and enforce KYC rules on CBDC holders, whereas enforcing the same standards against entities using non-governmental stablecoins is far more challenging.”

Could Norway’s CBDC offer anything reassuring in terms of users’ privacy? It’s hardly possible from both technological and strategic points of view, Lewellen said. Today, a mature solution doesn’t exist that would allow privacy in a compliant manner regarding the use of CBDCs.

Any national digital currency would almost certainly require every address to be linked to an identity, using KYC and other means we see in banks today. In fact, if done on the private ledger, like the one that Norges Bank is testing right now, the CBDC will offer not only less privacy for a single customer, but at the same time less public transparency with regard to blockchains.

*

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 Cointelegraph

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 Golden Rule anti-nuclear sailboat, crewed by US veterans and friends, has successfully completed an historic voyage to Cuba. The 34-foot wooden ketch, which in 1958 was sailed toward the Marshall Islands to interfere with US nuclear testing, is owned by Veterans For Peace, and carries out an important part of its mission, “to end the arms race and to reduce and eventually eliminate nuclear weapons.”

Five crew, including several members of Veterans For Peace, sailed the Golden Rule from Key West, Florida and, after 22 hours at sea, arrived at Havana’s Marina Hemingway on December 31, just in time to celebrate New Years and the 62nd anniversary of the Cuban Revolution.

The Golden Rule was sailed to Havana under a General License issued by the US Treasury Dept. that allows US residents to travel to Cuba for educational and people-to-people purposes.

The Golden Rule crew was joined by seven others who flew into Havana to participate in a week-long educational program. The Proximity Cuba tour agency organized an Arts & Culture program that highlighted many facets of the rich and diverse Cuban culture, including Afro-Cuban music and dance. The Golden Rule delegation also held a well-attended press conference that was featured on the top of the Cuban TV news and in other Latin American media.

“We are on an educational mission,” says Golden Rule Project Manager Helen Jaccard. “We are four months into a 15-month, 11,000 mile voyage around the “Great Loop” of the midwestern, southern and northeastern United States.

“When we saw we would be in Key West at the end of December, we said, ‘Hey, Cuba is only 90 miles away, and the world almost had a nuclear war over Cuba,’” said Helen Jaccard.

Sixty years ago, in 1962, the world came perilously close to a civilization-ending nuclear war during what became known as the “Cuban Missile Crisis.” How did that happen? Many of us will remember that the Kennedy administration discovered that the Soviet Union had placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, within easy striking distance of U.S. cities. This was of course unacceptable, but it was a response to the US placing nuclear missiles in Turkey near the USSR. And the CIA had recently organized the “Bay of Pigs” invasion, a failed attempt to overthrow the government of Fidel Castro. President Kennedy ordered a naval blockade of Cuba, leading to a nuclear standoff with the USSR. Kennedy and Soviet premier Nikita Krushchev then successfully negotiated to avoid a nuclear war that neither man wanted.

Without US hostility to an independent, socialist Cuba, we would not have come so close to nuclear war in 1962. There are a lot of lessons to learn from the Cuban Missile Crisis. But have they been learned? Some people think that the US prevailed because of Kennedy’s get-tough policy. They do not know of the secret deal Kennedy made with Kruschchev – Kennedy quietly had US missiles removed from Turkey several months later.

The US seems to be making the same mistakes in Ukraine today. This time it is the US and NATO that have moved hostile military forces, including nuclear weapons systems, close to Russia’s borders.” Veterans For Peace is part of the Peace In Ukraine Coalition, which is calling for Diplomacy to End the War in Ukraine, Not Weapons to Prolong It.

Veterans For Peace has been calling for an end to the US blockade of Cuba for many years. Now some in the US are calling for at least a temporary suspension of the blockade, to allow Cuba to rebuild after Hurricane Ian, which destroyed as many as 10,000 homes in the western province of Pinar del Rio.

“We carried humanitarian aid and delivered it to Pinar del Rio,” said Anthony Donovan, a member of New York City Veterans For Peace, who flew to Cuba to greet the Golden Rule.“We also witnessed the economic suffering that is being caused by the cruel 60-year US blockade of Cuba. We will be telling people about this wherever the Golden Rule sails. When people learn about the suffering that the US government is causing normal Cuban citizens, they will join Veterans For Peace in calling for the US blockade to finally end.”

The primary message of the Golden Rule is the urgency of stepping Back from the Brink of nuclear war, and of abolishing nuclear weapons altogether. The VFP Golden Rule Project encourages local communities to pass resolutions calling on the US to sign the historic Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which was approved by the General Assembly in July 2017 by a vote of 122-1.

Veterans For Peace has produced its own VFP Nuclear Posture Review, which concludes in part:

It is hard to imagine the US taking serious steps toward nuclear disarmament without a sea change in the thinking among its political elites and real change in its posture toward the rest of the world. Activist efforts to restrain US militarism and intervention around the globe, to cut the military budget, and to encourage mutual respect and diplomacy among nations must therefore go hand-in-hand with efforts to reduce and eliminate all nuclear weapons.

This is why the VFP Golden Rule Project will now be calling for an end to the US blockade of Cuba. Nuclear disarmament will only be achieved in tandem with a peaceful US foreign policy, and we must organize simultaneously for both.

On December 9, the beautiful wooden boat, her red sails emblazoned with a white peace sign and Veterans For Peace logo, sailed along the famed Malecon sea wall of Havana, and were later greeted by members of Cuba’s Quaker community. On the following day, the Golden Rule and her intrepid crew sailed out of Marina Hemingway and made a 43-hour transit to Miami, arriving on the morning of January 12.

On Sunday, January 22, the second anniversary of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons going into effect, the Golden Rule anti-nuclear sailboat will set sail for Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach and Jacksonville, among other Florida stops, before continuing further north on its “Great Loop” educational voyage – another year to go. See schedule here.

*

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.

Gerry Condon is a Vietnam-era veteran and former president of Veterans For Peace.

Featured image: VFP Board Member Enya Anderson steers the Golden Rule into Havana’s Marina Hemingway (Photo: Courtesy of Gerry Condon/Veterans for Peace)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US Veterans Sail Historic Peace Boat to Cuba, Demand End of US Blockade
  • 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.

***

“Ingsoc. The sacred principles of ingsoc. Newspeak, double-speak, the mutability of the past.” – George Orwell, 1984

As today dawned, I was looking out the window into the cold grayness with small patches of snow littering the frozen ground.  As light snow began to fall, I felt a deep mourning in my soul as a memory came to me of another snowy day in 1972 when I awoke to news of Richard Nixon’s savage Christmas bombing of North Vietnam with more than a hundred B-52 bombers, in wave after wave, dropping death and destruction on Hanoi and other parts of North Vietnam.  I thought of the war the United States is now waging against Russia via Ukraine and how, as during the U.S. war against Vietnam, few Americans seem to care until it becomes too late.  It depressed me.

Soon after I was greeted by an editorial from The New York Times’ Editorial Board, “A Brutal New Phase of the War in Ukraine.”  It is a piece of propaganda so obvious that only those desperate to believe blatant lies would not fall down laughing.  Yet it is no laughing matter, for The N.Y. Times is advocating for a wider war, more lethal weapons for Ukraine, and escalation of the fighting that risks nuclear war.  So their title is apt because they are promoting the brutality.  This angered me.

The Times’ Editorial Board tells us that President Putin, like Hitler, is mad.

“Like the last European war, this one is mostly one man’s madness.”  Russia and Putin are “cruel”; are conducting a “regular horror” with missile strikes against civilian targets; are “desperate”; are pursuing Putin’s “delusions”; are waging a “terrible and useless war”; are “committing atrocities”; are responsible for “murder, rape and pillaging,” etc.

On the other hand, “a heroic Ukraine” “has won repeated and decisive victories against Russian forces” who have lost “well over 100,000 Russian soldiers killed and wounded,” according to the “reliable” source, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chief of Staff, Gen. Mark A. Milley.  To add to this rosy report, the Ukrainians seem to have suffered no casualities since none are mentioned by the cozy Times’ Editorial Board members from their keyboards on Eighth Avenue.  When you support a U.S. war, as has always been The Times’ modus operandi as a stenographer for the government, mentioning the dead pawns used to accomplish the imperialists’ dreams is bad manners.  So are the atrocities committed by those forces, so they too have been omitted.  Neo-Nazis, the Azov Battalion?  They too must never have  existed since they are not mentioned.

But then, according to the esteemed editorial writers, this is not a U.S. proxy war waged via Ukraine by U.S./NATO “to strip Russia of its destiny and greatness.”  No, it is simply Russian aggression, supported by “the Kremlin’s propaganda machinery” that has churned “out false narratives about a heroic Russian struggle against forces of fascism and debauchery.”  U.S./NATO were “horrified by the crude violation of the postwar order,” so we are laughingly told, and so came to Ukraine’s defense as “Mr. Putin’s response has been to throw ever more lives, resources and cruelty at Ukraine.”

Nowhere in this diatribe by the Times’ Board of propagandists – and here the whole game is given away for anyone with a bit of an historical sense – is there any mention of the U.S. engineered coup d’état in Ukraine in 2014.  It just didn’t happen.  Never happened.  Magic by omission.  The U.S., together with the Ukrainian government “led” by the puppet-actor “President Volodymyr Zelensky,” are completely innocence parties, according to the Times.  (Note also, that nowhere in this four page diatribe is President Putin addressed by his title, as if to say that “Mr. Putin” is illegitimate and Zelensky is the real thing.)

All the problems stem from when “Mr. Putin seized Crimea and stirred up a secessionist conflict in eastern Ukraine n 2014.”

Nowhere is it mentioned that for years on end:

that U.S./NATO has been moving troops and weapons right up to Russia’s borders,

that George W. Bush pulled the U.S. out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and that

Trump did the same with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty,

that the U.S. has set up so-called anti-ballistic missile sites in Poland and Rumania and asserted its right to a nuclear first-strike,

that more and more countries have been added to NATO’s eastern expansion despite promises to Russia to the contrary,

that 15,000 plus mostly Russian-speaking people in eastern Ukraine have been killed by Ukrainian forces for years before February 2022,

that the Minsk agreements were part of a scheme to give time for the arming of Ukraine, that the U.S. has rejected all calls from Russia to respect its borders and its integrity, that the U.S./NATO has surrounded Russia with military bases,

that there was a vote in Crimea after the coup,

that the U.S. has been for years waging economic war on Russia via sanctions, etc.

In short, all of the reasons that Russia felt that it was under attack for decades and that the U.S. was stone deaf to its appeals to negotiate these threats to its existence.

It doesn’t take a genius to realize that if all were reversed and Russia had put troops and weapons in Mexico and Canada that the United States would respond forcefully.

This editorial is propaganda by omission and strident stupidity by commission.

The editorial has all its facts “wrong,” and not by accident.  The paper may say that its opinion journalists’ claims are separate from those of its newsroom, yet their claims echo the daily barrage of falsehoods from its front pages, such as:

  • Ukraine is winning on the battlefield.
  • “Russia faces decades of economic stagnation and regression even if the war ends soon.”
  • That on Jan.14, as part of its cruel attacks on civilian targets, a Russian missile struck an apartment building in Dnipro, killing many.
  • Only one man can stop this war – Vladimir Putin – because he started it.
  • Until now, the U.S. and its allies were reluctant to deploy heavy weapons to Ukraine “for fear of escalating this conflict into an all-in East-West war.”
  • Russia is desperate as Putin pursues “his delusions.”
  • Putin is “isolated from anyone who would dare to speak truth to his power.”
  • Putin began trying to change Ukraine’s borders by force in 2014.
  • During the last 11 months Ukraine has won repeated and decisive victories against Russian forces …. The war is at a stalemate.”
  • The Russian people are being subjected to the Kremlin’s propagandamachinery “churning out false narratives.”

This is expert opinion for dummies.  A vast tapestry of lies, as Harold Pinter said in his Nobel Prize address.  The war escalation the editorial writers are promoting is in their words, “this time pitting Western arms against a desperate Russia,” as if the U.S./NATO does not have CIA and special forces in Ukraine, just weapons, and as if “this time” means it wasn’t so for the past nine years at least as the U.S. was building Ukraine’s military and arms for this very fight.

It is a fight they will lose in the days to come.  Russia was, is, and will triumph.

Everything in the editorial is disingenuous.  Simple propaganda: the good guys against the bad guys.  Putin another Hitler.  The good guys are winning, just as they did in Vietnam, until reality dawned and it had to be admitted they weren’t (and didn’t).  History is repeating itself.

Little has changed and so my morning sense of mourning when I remembered Nixon and Kissinger’s savagery at Christmas 1972 was appropriate.  As then, so today, we are being subjected to a vast tapestry of lies told by the corporate media for their bosses, as the U.S. continues its doomed efforts to control the world.  It is not Russia that is desperate now, but propagandists such as the writers of this strident and stupid editorial.  It is not the Russian people who need to wake up, as they claim, but the American people and those who still cling to the myth that The New York Times Corporation is an organ of truth.  It is the Ministry of Truth with its newspeak, double-speak, and its efforts to change the past.

Let Harold Pinter have the last words:

The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It’s a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.

*

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 the author’s blog site, Behind the Curtain.

Edward Curtin is a prominent author, researcher and sociologist based in Western Massachusetts.

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

When Journalists Act as State Propagandists

January 23rd, 2023 by Peter Oborne

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 advance of the invasion of Iraq 20 years ago, the UK media parroted government lies and fabrications uncritically and became an enthusiastic part of the state’s propaganda machine. An inquiry into British reporting of the Iraq war is well past due.

Twenty years ago, Tony Blair provided the British public with false information about Saddam Hussein’s possession of weapons of mass destruction in order to make the case for the illegal invasion of Iraq.

Sir Tony has never gone on trial. He has suffered no personal consequences. Nor have his spy chiefs and advisers. He was recently awarded the Order of the Garter, the highest honour in British public life.

Not one of the British journalists who published Sir Tony’s lies and falsehoods about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction has suffered professionally. Many have gone on to greater things.

Meanwhile, those who revealed the illegality and barbarism of the war have suffered. Julian Assange, who revealed so many of the war crimes committed by US forces, now languishes in jail.

In the United States there have been agonised inquests into the misreporting of Iraq. Not so in Britain, where much of the press and broadcasting media became an enthusiastic part of the state propaganda machine.

Britain’s most senior and respected journalists passed on government lies uncritically, very often adding fresh fabrications of their own.

Guardians of the establishment

Take the Guardian. It swallowed the Blair government’s false claim that Saddam Hussein’s agents were scouring Africa for uranium to buy a nuclear bomb – and went much further.

Under the headline: ‘Iraq dossier: African gangs offer route to Uranium – Nuclear suspicion falls on Congo and South Africa’, the paper claimed to have seen secret documents proving contacts between African militia groups and Baghdad.

The Observer was ever more agile and creative in the pro-war cause, seeking ever more sensational angles to demonstrate Saddam Hussein’s actual or alleged malevolence, such as a 1,560 word interview with a woman claiming to be a former lover of Saddam Hussein.

She claimed to have been with Osama Bin Laden as a guest at one of Saddam’s palaces, and that Hussein had funded Osama.

Meanwhile the newspaper echoed false claims made by Tony Blair as a post-facto justification for war. “Thousands have died in this war”, thundered the paper’s political columnist Andrew Rawnsley, “millions have died at the hands of Saddam.”

The Sunday Telegraph, meanwhile, pumped out oceans of state propaganda, floating sensational but insubstantial reports which inflamed the mood of public alarm on the eve of war.

On 19 January 2003 it claimed that United Nations weapons inspectors “have uncovered evidence that proves Saddam Hussein is trying to develop an arsenal of nuclear weapons.” In fact when the weapons inspectors produced their verdict a few days later, they concluded nothing of the sort.

The Sun splashed ‘Brits 45 minutes from doom’ – nonsense. It later told readers that chemical weapons were being “handed to Iraqis on front line” [sic] in an article headlined ‘Fiend to unleash poisons’, warning readers that “Saddam’s vile cousin” Chemical Ali was in charge of the operation.

Blair the hero

Meanwhile, critics of the war were marginalised or smeared. Scott Ritter, the United Nations weapons inspector repeatedly questioned British and United States claims about Saddam’s WMD. His well-informed interventions, amply justified as it turned out, were downplayed, while attack stories were boosted.

After Saddam was toppled, No.10 milked the apparent success of the war for political gain. The prime minister authorised carefully selected personal friends to give special interviews with the Financial Times’ political editor casting light on his state of mind as the decision was made to go to war.

The prime minister was duly portrayed as an heroic figure driven by religious conviction, all accompanied by a series of rare posed photographs portraying Tony Blair as a wizened international statesman who had been to hell and back.

The Sun did something similar. Meanwhile it emerged that the Times editor, Sir Peter Stothard, had been embedded in Downing Street for the duration of the war writing a narrative of events, Thirty Days: An Inside Account of Tony Blair at War, later published by Rupert Murdoch-owned Harper Collins.

Andrew Marr, political editor of the BBC, joined in, telling TV viewers that Tony Blair “stands as a larger man and a stronger prime minister” as a consequence of the war. In this way he gave the imprimatur of objective comment to Downing Street’s reinvention of Blair in the aftermath of the war.

There were exceptions, above all the Daily Mirror under the editorship of Piers Morgan. In general there is no denying that the great majority of British media became an enthusiastic part of the state propaganda machine.

Cultivated by MI6

One journalist, David Rose, has written with integrity and considerable moral courage about his role in placing false stories into the public domain. As far as I know he is the only journalist to have done so.

In an article for the New Statesman published four years after the invasion, Rose wrote in detail about how he (and other newspaper journalists) had long been cultivated by MI6. In an article which pays revisiting, he wrote:

“To my everlasting regret, I strongly supported the Iraq invasion, in person and in print. I had become a recipient of what we now know to have been sheer disinformation about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction and his purported ‘links’ with al-Qaeda – claims put out by [opposition figure] Ahmad Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress. I took these stories seriously because they were corroborated by ‘off-the-record’ intelligence sources on both sides of the Atlantic.”

He added: “I am certain that those to whom I spoke at MI6 acted then in good faith,” giving as proof his conversation with an intelligence source shortly after the war who reassured him about the existence of Iraqi WMDs in the aftermath of the invasion.

“Don’t worry,” my source said soothingly. “We’ll find them. We’re certain they’re there. It’s just taking longer than we expected. Keep your nerve.”

Share of the blame

The Rose article is suggestive that the role of the intelligence services in disseminating false information about Saddam Hussein’s Iraq went much wider than the discredited September 2002 dossier of Sir John Scarlett, the then head of the Joint Intelligence Committee.

This factor never emerged in either the Hutton Enquiry shortly after the invasion or the Chilcot Report into the war.

To be fair to the late Sir John Chilcot, he did a scrupulous (if too long delayed) job in holding British politicians to account for the conduct of the Iraq invasion. No similar examination has been carried out of British journalists, though independent organisations, above all Media Lens, forensically exposed the complicity of mainstream media with the state machine right from the start.

Few paid attention. There is an unspoken understanding in the mainstream British press that we do not hold each other to account. Yet journalists and newspaper editors banged the drum for war and thus mobilised public opinion.

We must bear our share of the blame, alongside politicians and intelligence bosses, for the calamity that followed. Twenty years on, we need a Chilcot report into British reporting of the Iraq 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.

Peter Oborne is a journalist and author. His latest book is The Fate of Abraham: Why the West is Wrong about Islam.

Featured image is from OneWorld

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.

***

We often remember events from our childhood that came from physical experiences such as a broken arm or falling into a stream. Most patients from yesteryear remember childhood rheumatic or scarlet fever. Parents bringing their children age 5-11 years for COVID-19 vaccination may be creating adverse childhood experiences based on the most recent CDC safety data published by Hause et al in MMWR.

Hause AM, Marquez P, Zhang B, Su JR, Myers TR, Gee J, Panchanathan SS, Thompson D, Shimabukuro TT, Shay DK. Safety Monitoring of Bivalent COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Booster Doses Among Children Aged 5-11 Years – United States, October 12-January 1, 2023. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023 Jan 13;72(2):39-43. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7202a5. PMID: 36634021.

Moderna, which had greater frequency of adverse events than Pfizer, for example, caused 30% of children to have fever and vomit. Combined, 22% reported that boosters had a negative health impact, 14% could not perform daily activities to return to school, and 2% were so sick they required acute medical care. Adverse childhood experiences can have lasting social and psychological ramifications later in life, particularly if they are repeated. No vaccine, no matter how theoretically compelling, should be in public use with these symptomatic side effects. Vaccines should have acceptable safety profiles with <5% having any significant short-term symptoms, be safe over the long term, provide at least 50% protection against a disease, inhibit transmission, and last at least a year. Faulty vaccines that underperform or make our kids sick should be rejected by parents and removed from the market to protect public safety.

*

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.

Sources

Hause AM, Marquez P, Zhang B, Su JR, Myers TR, Gee J, Panchanathan SS, Thompson D, Shimabukuro TT, Shay DK. Safety Monitoring of Bivalent COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Booster Doses Among Children Aged 5-11 Years – United States, October 12-January 1, 2023. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023 Jan 13;72(2):39-43. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7202a5. PMID: 36634021.

O’Shea BQ, Demakakos P, Cadar D, Kobayashi LC. Adverse Childhood Experiences and Rate of Memory Decline From Mid to Later Life: Evidence From the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Am J Epidemiol. 2021 Jul 1;190(7):1294-1305. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwab019. PMID: 33534903; PMCID: PMC8484774.

Featured image is from Mercola


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.

***

PressTV: The UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres skewered oil firms on Wednesday (19 January) for having “peddled the big lie” about their role in global warming, telling the World Economic Forum that they should be held accountable. Addressing a room full of the world’s business and political elite, Guterres drew a parallel between the actions of oil companies and those of tobacco companies that have been hit by huge lawsuits over the adverse effects of cigarettes.

“We learned last week that certain fossil fuel producers were fully aware in the 1970s that their core product was baking our planet,” Guterres said.

He was referring to a study published in the journal Science that said ExxonMobil had dismissed the findings of its own scientists on the role of fossil fuels in climate change.

Could you please comment on this?

Peter KoenigSorry, for not being available at the time of the live-interview. Your audience may want to know about the UN Secretary General’s Guterres’ lies about fossil fuels causing climate change. Mind you, Guterres got the UN job only because he is gullible and corruptible, and a puppet to the rulers of the West, foremost the US.

He is drumming the drums of the ruling elite’s narratives – be it covid, or climate or energy crisis; or whatever else may hit the crisis-board.

Fossil fuel causing climate change is a scientifically proven lie. No trillion dollars can undo it.

Just We, the People, by standing up in masses for the truth.

For now and for at least the next 50 or more years the world can unlikely live without fossil fuels. Unless there is a major breakthrough on capturing for example solar energy on a different dimension than through highly polluting solar panels, for example via photo-synthesis, what the plants do.

Research on this has been going on for decades. And maybe the “solution” has been found, patented, and the patent possibly bought or blocked by the oil magnates. It wouldn’t be a first.

Today, 30 years after the first Environmental Conference in Rio, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED – June 1992), still about 85% of all energy used on the planet stems from fossil fuel. Thirty years ago, hydrocarbons accounted for about 90% of all energy consumed.

This proportion has hardly changed in the last 20 to 30 years. And it won’t drastically change for quite some time.

Unless they succeed in massively decimating the 8 billion world population.

That’s what the genocidal eugenists Bill Gates, Rockefeller, Soros et al, have in mind.

The climate changes all the time, as the universe is not static.

What by far most influences the climate on earth, is the sun. Solar activities are to more than 95% responsible for climate variations on Mother Earth.

Humanity contributes less than 0.5% to CO2 gases.

And of these less than 0.5 %, about two thirds or more stems from the military, from wars. By far most of the ongoing wars and armed conflicts comes from the WEF Davos war-monger masters, i.e., the US and NATO, and the NATO-embedded European Union (EU) nations.

Western media are paid not to talk about the military CO2 emissions.

Plus, a final and maybe most important point. Without CO2 there would be no life on earth. Trees, plants – hence, our food production, needs CO2 to grow. CO2 is good for the world, for our lives.

Plants feed on CO2, then emit oxygen which humans and animals, all sentient beings, need to breathe for life. Without CO2, no oxygen.

The oceans of our planet are sponges for excess CO2. They are responsible for the CO2 equilibrium. If there is too much CO2 in the air, the oceans absorb it, and in turn they release it when it is needed.

A lot of this balancing act has to do with “seasons”… depending on when the plants and trees absorb more or less CO2…

Mother Earth is perfect. We don’t need a WEF and fake elite “science”, a bought and corrupted science. Or as John Kerry, former US Vice-President, and Joe Bidens Environmental Envoy to the WEF claims, that the “WEF Davos Elite are like ‘Extraterrestrials’…” intending to save the planet. See this.
Hilarious.

Please don’t save our planet, Mr. Kerry.

The world does not need a puppet Guterres, to command the ignorant around and to scare the world with apocalyptic predictions.

We don’t need a UN system, compromised to the western billionaires and financial giants.

What they want, what the WEF is all about, is a One World Order, with total control over every soul of this planet, plus total control of all the globe’s resources.

They won’t achieve it. We will resist.

*

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.

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.