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 latent multinational corporate state technocracy has gifted itself a secret tool, little discussed in electoral politics: the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS).

With its wonky, innocuous-sounding name, the ISDS framework for governing trade disputes is designed to garner as little interest (and therefore as little pushback) as possible from the public.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), as defined by Thomson Reuters:

“a procedural mechanism that allows an investor from one country to bring arbitral proceedings directly against the country in which it has invested.

ISDS provisions are contained in many international agreements including free trade agreements, bilateral investment treatiesmultilateral investment agreements, national investment laws, and investment contracts. If an investor from one country (the “home state”) invests in another country (the “host state”), both of which have agreed to ISDS, and the host state violates the rights granted to the investor under public international law (such as the right not to have property expropriated without prompt, adequate, and effective compensation), then that investor may sue the host state in neutral arbitration rather than in the domestic courts of the host state.”

In non-academic, practical language, nation-states such as the US no longer exercise ultimate authority over the economic goings-on within their own borders. In theory, foreign actors, normally well-endowed corporations, can sue the US government if it doesn’t satisfy their economic interests. In reality, the US government is sufficiently captured that it would never likely challenge the multinational corporations that wrote the ISDS into legislation themselves through the politicians they purchased. The ISDS is merely extra assurance of compliance, in case a true nationalist like Trump pretended to be in 2016 ever seized power.

Globalization (the disintegration of economic borders) drove the development of ISDS. So-called “free trade” agreements like NAFTA and GATT instantiated the concept into law. As academic Magdalena Bas explains:

“The element that differentiates the State from any other subject of International Law or any other actor in international relations is sovereignty and, as a response, States recognize each other as legally equal. Although sovereignty remains “a ticket of general admission to the international arena” ( Fowler and Bunck, 1995 ), its concept has evolved throughout history and has even come into tension with hyper-globalization ( Rodrik, 2011 ). One of the areas that illustrates this tension is Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS).”

If a state has no say in how business gets done in its territories, it’s not a state. It’s a proxy for a larger power.

As far as I can suss out, there are two main reasons that most voters have never heard of the ISDS, much less thought about its implications for their lives:

a.) it’s boring technical stuff; citizens are conditioned to get emotionally worked up about tribal culture war issues instead of focusing on the historic robbery underway by the parasitic elite class, and

b.) it’s great for multinational corporations that actually run US policy (the aforementioned parasitic elites).

Joe Biden is certainly in no condition to take a stand, and anyway didn’t have the moral fiber. Even if somehow he broke from his handlers’ script and kicked up a fuss about ISDS, he’d get the JFK treatment in a jiffy. Biden is a disposable puppet, as all presidents are.

Incrementally, methodically, and ruthlessly, the multinational corporate state, headed by the WEF, coalesces in the shadows. Once it’s fully completed, backed by legal constructs like ISDS and buttressed by the budding technetronic police state, resistance will be virtually impossible.

Ask yourself: why has my GOP Congressman, an ostensible patriot with the flag pin lapel, never mentioned ISDS? Could the answer be that he’s on the take just like his Democrat colleagues, that he is cucked to the business interests that fund his campaigns, whom he hopes to work for more explicitly once he leaves office?

*

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.

Ben Bartee is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs. Follow his stuff via Armageddon Prose and/or Substack, Patreon, Gab, and Twitter. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Silent Crow News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Globalists’ Secret Tool to Undermine National Sovereignty: The Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS)
  • Tags: ,

The US Unveils Its New Bomber but the Real Future Is Next Door

December 13th, 2022 by Miriam Pemberton

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 desert beyond the San Gabriel Mountains north of LA sits a vast air base with the unassuming name of Plant 42. It houses “black box” weapons projects by three of the Pentagon’s Big Five prime contractors — Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman. In a Hollywood-esque extravaganza last week, Northrop gave us a peek inside the box. Following soaring orchestral music and flyovers by previous bombers, the prototype B-21 Raider emerged from a haze of blue light and fog.

What followed, for substance amid this display of style, were assurances that while this model looked remarkably similar to the previous one — the B-2 — this model is wholly new and improved.

The same promises, though, were made on that same spot where in 1988, Northrop unveiled the B-2. But, unfortunately, they didn’t pan out. After a litany of problems, like a stealth coating that deteriorated in the rain, and costs that climbed to $2.2 billion a copy for a total of 20 planes, the Department of Defense gave up building B-2s.

The new bomber’s main promised improvement is an “open system architecture” that will allow Northrop to load up the plane with features, as Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said, “that haven’t even been created yet.” Its assigned missions will include dropping both nuclear and conventional bombs, as well as surveillance and coordinating other aircraft in battle.

This all-things-to-all-people, “we’ll figure this out as we go along” approach should remind us of the most expensive weapons system ever built: the F-35 fighter jet. It’s also supposed to be able to drop nuclear bombs, but it has several problems. Records show decades of discovered defects and soaring costs.   

Hyping the China Threat

The timing of the B-21 show may just have something to do with the Pentagon’s release the previous week of its annual report on China. DOD needs to hype the China nuclear threat to justify its $1 trillion-plus expenditure on modernizing its nuclear capabilities (of which the B-21 buy is a major part). Thus the report predicted that by 2035, China’s 400 nuclear warheads would have increased to as many as 1,500.

Having raised this alarm, the Pentagon needed a counter-balancing symbol of US nuclear superiority. As Austin put it at the ceremony, “We are again making it plain to any potential foe: The risks and costs of aggression far outweigh any conceivable gains.” Here was the moment to display its mega-nuclear platform, the B-21, ready or not. (After this first glimpse, the plane goes back in the box until well into 2023.)

But as William Hartung pointed out after the China report was released, even if China’s nuclear stockpile aspirations come true, they will be no match for the US 5400 warheads, more than 1,600 mounted on submarines, bombers, and long-range missiles.

The real threat to humanity comes from the increasing speeds with which these weapons can be delivered, increasingly removed from human decision-making and immediate consequences to those delivering them. These are two of the capabilities — for unmanned flight and determined by artificial intelligence — that the Pentagon required be built into the B-21. In addition, the capability to deliver hypersonic missiles is being built into the F-35 and presumably into the B-21, though this remains classified.

The Real Way Forward

The only real solutions to an unprecedentedly dangerous arms race run through a renewed commitment to arms control: for negotiated reductions in stockpiles and framework agreements to control the risks of inadvertent nuclear war from unmanned, AI-driven hypersonic weapons.

Yet, back at Plant 42, sits an unlikely bedfellow to the B-21. It is a Japanese company called Kinkisharyo that is making and repairing electric light rail cars for US cities including Los Angeles, New Jersey, Dallas, and Boston.

Without the steady funding stream that Northrop enjoys, the company has had to cobble together funds from various transit agencies and, when those dry up, to get by on repair work. The critical funding for climate change mitigation in this year’s Inflation Reduction Act should help a lot. But at a total of $37 billion a year, this fund will get less than 4% of what the Pentagon will have to distribute.

While the Pentagon promotes its symbol of nuclear superiority, Kinkisharyo quietly symbolizes where the real future of manufacturing should lie: in building the infrastructure of an economy running on clean energy and transport. The smoke and mirrors next door must not be allowed to disguise that.

*

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.

Miriam Pemberton, an Associate Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, has just published Six Stops on the National Security Tour: Rethinking Warfare Economies.  It includes a chapter featuring Plant 42.

Featured image: America’s biggest threat: The Pentagon (US Department of ‘Defense’ photo)

How to Trash a Movie in Support of a Lie

December 13th, 2022 by Philip Giraldi

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.

***

Israel’s new government is planning to give de facto operational control of the national police and heavily armed border police to Itamar Ben-Gvir, the leader of a party of right wing, racist extremists. It can perhaps be regarded as the prelude to the last phase in the uprooting and displacement of the Palestinian people. Those who resist will be killed and not a single Israeli soldier or policeman will be punished for carrying out what the Benjamin Netanyahu government will frame as a war against terrorists blessed by Yahweh in support of his “Chosen” people.

The Zionist view of what should be done to the indigenous inhabitants of a place once called Palestine has been unflinching since the founding of the state of Israel. The Zionist historic boast that a Jewish homeland would be built on “A land without a people for a people without a land” ignored the fact that Palestine already had plenty of inhabitants and a well-established economy where Jews were a distinct minority, less than 20% of the population in the 1930s.

The solution to correct the numbers was to compel the natives to leave by one means or another. Israel’s founding father David Ben Gurion early on endorsed a policy of removal by force if necessary the Christians and Muslims. The fighting that followed in 1948 after the United Nations’ partition of the country into two separate states left the mostly unarmed Palestinians helpless before the well-armed Jewish militias, which quickly expanded their zone of control well into the area that was granted on paper to the Palestinians. It is estimated that 15,000 Palestinians were killed outright by the Zionist forces while 800,000 more were driven from their homes, to which nearly all were denied any right to return. Four hundred Palestinian occupied villages were “ethnically cleansed” and in some cases physically destroyed.

The de facto seizure of the remainder of historic Palestine outside the borders of the Jewish state after the June 1967 Six Day war gave Israel direct control of all key strategic areas as well as land in Syria and Lebanon. Since that time, successive Israeli governments have pursued an ethnic cleansing policy both in Israel itself and on the West Bank consisting of gradually forcing the remaining Palestinians to leave to be replaced by all-Jewish towns and settlements. The Palestinians know that the final push is indeed coming and have begun to resist, though having few weapons they are helpless against the heavily armed Israel Defense Force (IDF), which has killed 195 Palestinians, mostly teenagers, in the past eleven months.

A recent killing captured on surveillance video shows an Israeli border policeman shooting a young man dead after an encounter on the main street of a West Bank town. Far-right Otzma Yehudit Party leader and incoming National Security Minister Ben-Gvir, praised the policeman who did the shooting as a “hero,” citing his “Precise action, you really fulfilled the honor of all of us and did what was assigned to you.”

The Palestinians refer to their dispossession and killing at the hands of the Jewish soldiers in 1948 as the Nakba, meaning “catastrophe,” which has sometimes been popularized as the Arab version of the so-called holocaust. I have recently watched a controversial film called Farha, made in Jordan by a woman filmmaker of Syrian descent, which views the Nakba through the eyes of a fourteen-year-old village girl. She, the eponymous Farha that gives the film its title, was preparing to go off to advance her education, presumably in Jerusalem, when Israeli soldiers attacked her village. The Israelis used loudspeakers to announce that all residents must leave immediately. Anyone seeking to remain would be killed. In a panic, the girl’s father, the village chief, locked her into a storage shed for safety as he tried to figure out what to do, but he then disappears from the tale and it might be presumed that both he and the rest of the family were killed.

Farha has only a crack in the door to witness what is going on outside. In a particularly dreadful sequence, a Palestinian man and his family who are trying to escape but are apparently confused regarding what way to go are detained by an Israeli officer and his men. After some perfunctory questioning, the father, mother and two children are lined up against a wall and shot dead. A newborn baby was left lying on the ground, alive, crying for its mother. The officer tells one of his men to kill it, but adds “Don’t waste a bullet on it.” The soldier prepares to stomp on the baby’s head to carry out the order, but cannot bring himself to do it and walks away. The baby continues to wail until later that day it stops, presumably dead from exposure or other factors.

Eventually Farha escapes from her prison and the movie concludes with her walking away in tears to an uncertain future. The film is very powerful, with excellent acting, cinematography and direction and it is based on a true story as handed down by Director Darin J. Sallam’s mother’s best friend, but I ended up wishing that it were stronger in its depiction of the savagery exercised by the Israelis, perhaps recreating an actual major massacre of Palestinian civilians, like occurred at Deir Yassin, where 107 Arabs, including many women and children, were shot dead by Israeli militiamen from the Irgun and Lehi groups. Other massacres took place in hundreds of villages across Galilee as well as in cities like Haifa or Akka, all far worse than what is revealed by the film. For those who are interested, Israeli historian Ilan Pappe in his book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine describes, in detail, the brutality of what Israeli forces unleashed on the largely unarmed Palestinian people during the Nakba.

But even though the film deliberately avoided cliched scenes of mass violence, it has proven very powerful with supporters and critics lined up along the completely predictable political lines. The Israelis have in particular come down hard on the film and they and their many friends in the United States, have reacted in their usual tribal fashion, attacking Netflix, which is streaming Farha on its network including in the United States and Europe. The Israel firsters are advocating striking back against Netflix for its temerity by canceling the service and attacking the decision to air the film at all. Ironically though not surprisingly, Netflix has hitherto been a leader in obtaining and streaming Israeli films and even television series.

In Israel, the government has declared war on the film, also a characteristic of that nation’s circle-the- wagons paranoid response to anything that might even suggest that Jews are just as capable of evil as anyone else. Last month ultra-nationalist Israeli Finance Minister Avigdor Lieberman moved to block scheduled screenings of the film in Jaffa, saying that “Israel is a place to present Israeli and international works, but is certainly not the place to slander IDF soldiers and the security forces who are acting day and night to defend and protect all the citizens and residents living here.”

Lieberman, a Russian Jew known for his ethnocentric and essentially racist views, apparently does not believe that soldiers and security forces should actually protect Palestinians and afford them at least some measure of free speech, which is only allowed to Jews. Israel’s ironically titled Culture Minister the oddly named Chili Tropper also attacked the film for its so-called “false plots against IDF soldiers” denouncing how their actions were presented as similar to “behavior of the Nazis in the Holocaust.”

Former IDF soldier and current right wing apologist, Yoseph Haddad also tweeted, “I saw the movie ‘Farha’ and I can tell you that it is much worse than you think. The IDF soldiers are presented there as inhuman with unimaginable evil, all they care about is murdering and slaughtering without mercy (which is the exact opposite of the truth). This is a blood libel that will certainly increase antisemitism and incitement against Israel. If you haven’t canceled your Netflix subscription yet – do it now.”

In an Instagram post, Israeli model Nataly Dadon also demanded that Israelis and their supporters internationally should drop their Netflix subscriptions in an Instagram post, claiming that Farha’s “sole purpose is apparently to increase anti-Semitism against the Jewish people.” Mondoweiss also reports how “author and photographer Laura Ben-David tweeted a photo of her cancellation message with the streaming app and wrote, ‘Buh-bye Netflix! Supporting the false and anti-Israel film Farha is unacceptable.’”

So Israel, which is passionate about its rejection of the non-violent pro-Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) economic pressure movement, is united in its desire to punish Netflix’s bottom line. And the old reliable anti-Semitism tag is being liberally attached to how the argument is being framed. Former Al Jazeera reporter Ahmed Shihab-Eldin suggested to the Middle East Eye that “The pacing of [all the negative posts] reveals it was coordinated. With each passing hour, dozens and dozens of vapid and vile reviews would appear, making wild accusations trashing the film. It was clear people had not seen the film, and only wanted to damage its reputation.”

Finally, it would not be about Israel and Jews if there were not space in The New York Times to twist and spin the story. A review of the film by one Beatrice Loayza, a Peruvian-American film critic based in Brooklyn, describes the movie oddly as a “brutal coming-of-age-story.” At one point, Farha discovers an old handgun wrapped up within a sack of lentils. She eventually uses it to shoot the lock and escape the storage room. But this is how the Times reviewer describes the sequence: “She finds a gun buried inside a sack of grains — was the threat present all along? One day, a scene of great barbarity plays out before her tiny window.” Aha! So those crafty Arabs actually were potentially using the old handgun among the lentils trick to threaten the friendly Israel soldiers who just happened to drop by to shoot to death a Palestinian family, which is dismissed as a “scene of great barbarity” without any suggestion of what that might have been. In truth, the garbage being peddled by the Times as a review of a story of an atrocity committed by Jews is actually achieved without having to include any context or feature any Jews at all. “Remarkable” is all I have to say in conclusion.

*

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 Unz Review.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Unz Review

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on How to Trash a Movie in Support of a Lie

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.

***

Using smartphones and other digital devices to pacify young children can backfire and end up stifling their emotional development, a new study warns.

Researchers at Michigan Medicine say digital technology may help calm down toddlers in the short term, but it could also reduce their chances to practice emotional coping skills. Scientists add that handing a moody pre-school age child a screen may seem to offer a quick fix, yet it could also lead to more severe challenging behavior further down the line.

The findings of the study, published in JAMA Pediatrics, show that frequent use of smartphones and tablets to calm upset children between three and five years-old led to increased emotional dysregulation in kids, particularly in boys.

“Using mobile devices to settle down a young child may seem like a harmless, temporary tool to reduce stress in the household, but there may be long term consequences if it’s a regular go-to soothing strategy,” says lead author Jenny Radesky, M.D., a developmental behavioral pediatrician at University of Michigan Health C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital, in a media release.

“Particularly in early childhood, devices may displace opportunities for development of independent and alternative methods to self-regulate.”

This could backfire among boys and those with ADHD

The study involved 422 parents and 422 three to five-year-old children. The research team analyzed parent and caregiver responses to how often they used devices as a calming tool and associations to symptoms of emotional reactivity or dysregulation over a six-month period. Signs of increased dysregulation could include rapid shifts between sadness and excitement, a sudden change in mood or feelings and heightened impulsivity.

The findings suggest that the association between device-calming and emotional consequences was particularly high among boys and children who may already experience hyperactivity, impulsiveness, and a strong temperament that makes them more likely to react intensely to feelings such as anger, frustration, and sadness.

“Our findings suggest that using devices as a way to appease agitated children may especially be problematic to those who already struggle with emotional coping skills,” Radesky says.

She says that the preschool period is a stage when children may be more likely to exhibit difficult behavior, such as tantrums, defiance, and intense emotions. That may make it even more tempting to use devices as a parenting tool.

“Caregivers may experience immediate relief from using devices if they quickly and effectively reduce children’s negative and challenging behaviors,” the researcher continues. “This feels rewarding to both parents and children and can motivate them both to maintain this cycle.”

“The habit of using devices to manage difficult behavior strengthens over time as children’s media demands strengthen as well. The more often devices are used, the less practice children – and their parents – get to use other coping strategies.”

Screen time can be useful in moderation

Radesky acknowledged that there are times when parents may strategically use devicesto distract children, such as during travel or multitasking with work. While occasional use of digital devices to occupy children is expected and realistic, Dr. Radesky notes it is important for it not to become a primary or regular soothing tool.

She adds that pediatric health professionals should also initiate conversations with parents and caregivers about using devices with young children and encourage alternative methods for emotional regulation.

“In contrast, using a distractor like a mobile device doesn’t teach a skill – it just distracts the child away from how they are feeling. Kids who don’t build these skills in early childhood are more likely to struggle when stressed out in school or with peers as they get older,” Dr. Radesky concludes.

*

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.

South West News Service writer Stephen Beech contributed to this report.

Featured image is from Africa Studio – stock.adobe.com

Escalating Crisis in Kosovo

December 13th, 2022 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.

***

After months of tensions, the Western-backed “Kosovo entity” in the NATO-occupied Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohia has decided to escalate to a boiling point by attacking the Serbs who still remain there.

The autochthonous Serbian population is pushing back against this crawling attempt at ethnic cleansing by the Albanian regime. For its part, the political West continues supporting its “beacon of freedom and democracy” puppets in Pristina. While some European Union officials have previously been trying to feign a semblance of objectivity and called for de-escalation from both sides, this latest round of tensions effectively unmasked their unequivocal support for the regime in Pristina.

The escalation started on December 6, after Pristina sent its forces to occupy the premises of the election commission in the city of Kosovska Mitrovica and destroyed it, director of the Serbian government’s Office for Kosovo and Metohia Petar Petkovic wrote on Twitter at the time. Pristina wanted to impose its own election commission on the premises, causing an uproar of protests among the local Serbs. According to Petkovic, “The people are furious, but they do not intend to succumb to the provocations of [Kosovo Prime Minister Albin] Kurti!”

Kosovska Mitrovica has two parallel administrations – the one in the north of the city, mostly inhabited by Serbs and the other in the south, mostly controlled by Albanians. The Serbian authorities have been in the city since its liberation from Ottoman occupation, while the narco-terrorist entity’s institutions have been installed by NATO after the Serbian province was occupied by the belligerent imperialist alliance after its illegal aggression on Serbia in 1999. Since November 5, the Serbs in the north of Kosovo and Metohia have been refusing to participate in public institutions controlled by Pristina, which scheduled early elections in the area for December 18. The Serbs announced they would boycott the snap election.

By December 6, the self-proclaimed “Kosovo entity” announced its intention to apply for EU membership, violating its commitment to the 2020 Washington agreement which banned Pristina from attempting to join international organizations. The move failed to cause a stronger response from Serbia, as Belgrade was still trying to avoid escalation due to immense pressure from the political West. However, Pristina kept pushing, this time by sending its troops to the north, arresting and mistreating the local Serbs in the process. The tensions further escalated on December 10, when the narco-terrorist regime detained a former Serbian policeman Dejan Pantic who was accused of “terrorism”. He allegedly “carried out attacks on Kosovo police officers together with members of criminal groups.”

After the arrest (obviously based on trumped-up charges), local Serbs set up roadblocks in an attempt to prevent his transfer to Pristina. The NATO-backed puppet regime then proceeded to close the administrative border crossings with central Serbia, further restricting the local Serbs’ freedom of movement. NATO forces deployed in the Serbian province were also sent to help Pristina’s troops, although they were supposed to be neutral as per the 1999 United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244, according to which all communities in Kosovo and Metohia are to be treated equally and protected, further reinforcing the view that the political West is not to be trusted in any way or form.

The Serbian government responded by raising the combat readiness of its armed forces after it warned that further violence against local Serbs will not be tolerated. According to local media, several explosions and gunfire were also reported.

The forces of the EU law enforcement mission (EULEX) and NATO (KFOR) have also been sent to administrative border crossings in the north, where they are effectively helping Pristina in its attempts to block the local Serbs and restrict their movement. The government in Belgrade then sent a request to deploy Serbian Armed Forces to the province. According to the UNSC Resolution 1244, Serbia has the right to deploy up to a thousand soldiers in its southern province. The likelihood of NATO accepting the deployment of Serbian forces is extremely low, but the Serbian government has been left with no other options.

The narco-terrorist entity is determined to finish the ethnic cleansing campaign started against all non-Albanian communities during the 1990s. At the time, particularly in the 1998-1999 timeframe, the Al Qaeda-linked Albanian KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army) started attacking both the Serbian security forces and civilians in the province. In 1999, after NATO attacked Serbia in support of the terrorist group, Belgrade was forced to leave the province, although it was promised that the territory would remain a part of Serbia, only administered by the belligerent alliance. As per usual for the political West, the promises were never kept and the narco-terrorists proclaimed independence in 2008. Since then, Serbia has been forced to negotiate and signed several agreements with the NATO-backed puppet regime. One such treaty was the aforementioned Washington agreement, brokered by the US in 2020.

Again, Belgrade kept its end of the bargain while Pristina didn’t, violating several important points, including the clause regarding its membership in international organizations. What can be discerned from the latest escalation is that the political West continues supporting the extremists it has been using to fragment and destroy entire countries.

Even though over two decades have passed since the conflict, the case of Kosovo and Metohia is still important to the bureaucratic elites in Washington DC and Brussels, particularly in the context of securing at least some semblance of victory in Europe as the Kiev regime is highly unlikely to provide one against Russia. With the ever-growing prospect of Moscow launching an all-out winter offensive which might be the final knockout punch for the Neo-Nazi junta, NATO and the EU are desperate to stay relevant in the European geopolitical arena.

*

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

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

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

***

There’s a legitimate reason to wonder whether the Sino-American discussions over a New Détente involve India since the US wouldn’t otherwise hang Delhi out to dry by staying committed to its planned two-day talks with China despite those two having their worst clashes in two and a half years just two days prior. The tacit signal being sent by this decision is that the US is considering adopting a policy of neutrality towards the Sino-Indo border dispute in order to maximally incentivize China into agreeing to a New Détente.

The Fast-Moving Rapprochement Between The Superpowers

The Chinese Foreign Ministry revealed on Monday that their country had just concluded two days of talks with American officials covering a wide range of issues. Their side was represented by Vice Foreign Minister Xie Feng while the US one was represented by Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian & Pacific Affairs Daniel Kritenbrink and the National Security Council’s Senior Director for China Laura Rosenberger. The high level of the participants demonstrated the seriousness of their talks.

The two-day event just outside of Beijing came after the American and Chinese Defense Ministers resumed talks last month at the ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting-Plus in Cambodia despite the People’s Republic having unilaterally suspended those interactions in August following US Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s provocative trip to Taiwan. That aforementioned resumption of high-level dialogue was in turn the first tangible result of Presidents Xi Jinping and Joe Biden meeting at the G20 in mid-November.

It was also announced around that time that Secretary of State Antony Blinken will visit Beijing early next year, which is expected to advance the goal that the National Security Council’s Indo-Pacific Coordinator Kurt Campbell spoke about last week. According to him,

“[China] want(s) a degree of predictability and stability, and we seek that as well…We’re going to see some developments that I believe will be reassuring to the region as a whole.”

Towards A Sino-American New Détente

This sequence of fast-moving developments suggests that the Sino-American bi-multipolar superpower duopoly is exploring the parameters of a “New Détente”, which refers to a series of pragmatic compromises aimed at establishing a balance of influence between them as the “new normal”. The multipolar processes unleashed by Russia’s special operation threaten their premier positions in the international system, ergo the desire to cooperate in delaying this trend as explained here:

India’s Black Swan Rise As A Globally Significant Great Power

To oversimplify the analytical series above, the latest US-provoked phase of the Ukrainian Conflict had the black swan effect of unprecedentedly accelerating the global systemic transition to complex multipolarity (“multiplexity”) by turbocharging India’s rise as a globally significant Great Power. It’s beyond the scope of the present piece to explain this in detail, but the following analyses can bring the reader up to speed, with the first of them citing nearly four dozen related ones from the past year:

Changing Geostrategic Calculations

The most important point is that Russia’s special operation created the opportunity for India to perfect its balancing act in the New Cold War between the US-led West’s Golden Billion and the jointly BRICS– & SCO-led Global South of which it’s nowadays the voice via its policy of principled neutrality. The grand systemic consequence of that move was that the Sino-American bi-multipolar superpower duopoly was broken as a result of Indian-pioneered tripolarity, which in turn catalyzed the New Détente.

Their ongoing talks are conceptually aimed at restoring the bi-multipolar system or at least temporarily delaying its seemingly inevitable evolution to tripolarity en route to its final form of multiplexity. To that end, they’re seriously exploring the parameters of a series of mutual compromises intended to establish a balance of influence between them that could serve as the “new normal”, which in practice would advance the “Chimerica”/”G2” scenario of jointly leading global affairs that both hitherto balked at.

The dramatic events of the past year changed their respective strategic calculations, hence why they both realized that it’s in their best interests to pursue this scenario. China’s superpower trajectory was derailed after the Ukrainian Conflict completely destabilized the globalization processes upon which its ambitious plans depended, while India’s reaffirmation of its hard-earned strategic autonomy in the New Cold War ruined the US’ plans to manipulate it as a proxy for containing China “to the last Indian”.

The Deal Of The Century

In response, China was compelled to consider security concessions to the US in exchange for relief from its economic pressure whereas the US was compelled to consider economic concessions to China in exchange for it accepting the reality of NATO-like AUKUS+’s entrenchment in East & Southeast Asia. This quid pro quo lies at the heart of their discussions over the New Détente, and while it’s too early to confidently predict the form that it could take, some educated inferences can still be made.

For instance, the US might delineate clear red lines in the East & South China Seas that it’ll reward China for respecting by not crossing its counterpart’s own around Taiwan. Trade tensions could gradually thaw upon both respecting the other’s aforesaid lines, thus leading to the American-Australian axis of AUKUS agreeing to scale up LNG exports to China as a mutually beneficial trust-building gesture. To maximally incentive China, the US might also hint that it’ll turn a blind eye towards the Sino-Indo border dispute.

That last-mentioned scenario might be what ultimately results in them agreeing to a series of mutual compromises aimed at restoring bi-multipolarity or at least temporarily delaying its end. Their premier positions in the international system are threatened by Indian-pioneered tripolarity/multiplexity processes, which are in both of their interests to contain. This could be advanced by the US encouraging China to redirect its military focus from the Asia-Pacific to the Himalayas as part of their New Détente.

An Indian Incentive To Sweeten The Deal

To explain, the Sino-American bi-multipolar superpower duopoly wants to punish India for breaking their hold over the international system, but neither can act unilaterally in this respect out of fear that their actions will push that globally significant Great Power into their rival’s arms in response. The only way to resolve this security dilemma is to jointly coordinate to that end, which also serves the purpose of creating a “face-saving” pretext for China’s possible security concessions to the US.

Its related interests in the East & South China Seas are extremely sensitive, especially in terms of public opinion, yet domestic attention can be redirected towards the Himalayas to preemptively avert grassroots pressure upon Beijing accepting NATO-like AUKUS+’s entrenchment in that maritime region. Escalating military tensions between China and India could also create the “face-saving” pretext for the US’ own possible security concessions regarding its respect of Beijing’s red lines around Taiwan.

These grand strategic calculations aren’t groundless speculation like critics might claim but are extended credence by the objective observation that the two-day Sino-American talks that just concluded still went ahead despite the worst clash in two and a half years along China’s disputed border with India. The second-mentioned’s Defense Ministry revealed earlier this week that these Asian neighbors had a serious skirmish in the Tawang Sector on 9 December, two days before those superpowers’ talks began.

Hanging A Fellow Democracy Out To Dry

India is the US’ first-ever and thus far only Mutual Defense Partner, a member of the Quad, key participant in the American-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, and a fellow democracy, the latter category of which is considered privileged by Washington after its “Summit for Democracy” last year. The optics of the US going through with its preplanned two-day talks with China despite its clashes with India two days prior therefore powerfully contradicts conventional wisdom in the New Cold War.

A year ago, nobody could have predicted that the US would continue with its plans to hold high-level talks with the People’s Republic outside Beijing after China’s worst clashes with India since their deadly ones over the Galwan River Valley in summer 2020. After all, the US officially regards China as its top systemic rival while considering India to be an important ally in upholding the so-called “rules-based international order” that Washington regularly accuses Beijing of attempting to unilaterally violate.

The only reason why these talks proceeded is that the US believes that it has more to gain in the grand strategic sense from China in the scenario of them ultimately clinching a New Détente, which those aforesaid talks were anticipated to advance, than in scuttling this possibility out of solidarity with India. Washington is furious with Delhi after that fellow democracy refused to voluntarily become its vassal, which resulted in unleashing systemic processes that are accelerating the decline of bi-multipolarity.

The US’ Emerging “Neutrality” Towards The Sino-Indo Border Dispute

It’s with these grand strategic calculations in mind that the US decided not to cancel its preplanned talks with China over the New Détente despite the worst Sino-Indo border clashes in two and a half years that immediately preceded this event. It’s unimportant which of those two Asian neighbors was responsible for what transpired since the fact of the matter is that Washington went against all prior expectations of its stance towards this sensitive issue, which speaks to how drastically its calculations are changing.

With this in mind, there’s a legitimate reason to wonder whether the Sino-American discussions over a New Détente involve India since the US wouldn’t otherwise hang Delhi out to dry by staying committed to its planned two-day talks with China despite those two clashing just two days prior. The tacit signal being sent by this decision is that the US is considering adopting a policy of neutrality towards the Sino-Indo border dispute in order to maximally incentivize China into agreeing to a New Détente.

The reasons for this were previously explained, but to remind the reader, these are to: encourage China’s military reorientation away from the Asia-Pacific and towards the Himalayas as part of its possible security concessions to the US; establish the pretext for the US respecting China’s red lines around Taiwan per its quid pro quo security concession for ultimately unlocking mutually beneficial economic-energy deals; and jointly punish India for breaking their bi-multipolar system.

Sacrificing India On The Altar Of The New Détente

Turning a blind eye towards the worst Sino-Indo border clashes in two and a half years was intended as a goodwill gesture on the US’ part ahead of its preplanned two-day talks with China meant to show its sincerity towards the speculative compromise of becoming neutral when it comes to their sensitive dispute. That outcome would be mutually beneficial if agreed to as part of their New Détente since it also creates the “face-saving” pretext for the superpowers to militarily de-escalate in the Asia-Pacific.

With China focused much more on the Himalayas than on the East & South China Seas, the US would have a publicly plausible reason for not crossing Beijing’s red lines around Taiwan, which could thus lead to a balance of influence between them that eventually becomes the “new normal” in their relations. The bi-multipolar system in which the superpowers have a self-interested stake could then be temporarily preserved to their benefit, thus helping to erode the security dilemma between them too.

To crudely simply the complex sequence of geostrategic insight that was shared in this analysis, the US might therefore sell India out to China in order to sweeten the deal for a Sino-American New Détente aimed at upholding the bi-multipolar system that Delhi’s tripolarity-multiplexity advances risk breaking. The mutual trust that this outcome could foster might even facilitate those two eventually agreeing to the “Chimerica”/”G2” scenario for indefinitely sustaining their restored joint leadership of global affairs.

*

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, 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 regular contributor to Global Research. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from the author

Dear Readers,

Before we leave 2022 behind, we would like to extend our sincerest gratitude to you for your unbending support.

Censorship in 2022 has left its toll. It’s ongoing. Last May it culminated into a wave of cyber attacks emanating simultaneously from five countries consisting of millions of so-called “malicious requests”, which were expediently blocked by our security specialists.

Thanks to you Global Research readers and authors, we have been able to maintain our readership Worldwide by “spreading the word” through effective referrals of our articles.

Come 2023, we wish for more people to awaken to the truth and resist further democratic backsliding.

It is our utmost goal that people worldwide stand up for peace, justice and equality and challenge the path to tyranny.

We cannot emphasize enough that Global Research is reader-supported; this essentially means that we do not receive any funding from any entity. This is the only way we can maintain our independence and pursue an objective reporting.

This holiday season, would you be our Santa and “make our wish come true”?

Help us get through the next year: send us a gift, or become our regular Santa.

Click to send us a gift:

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation


Click to become our regular Santa (receive free books!):

Click to view our membership plans


Thank you for supporting independent media!

The Global Research Team

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Dear Santa, Would You Make Our Wish Come True? Global Research Message to Our Readers

US-NATO is at War with Russia? Military Experts

December 13th, 2022 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.

***

There is no doubt among military experts that NATO is currently at war with Russia – just using Kiev as a proxy. However, the possibility of something even worse – a direct full-scale war – limits American participation in the current conflict. Internally, Washington’s political scenario is divided between parliamentarian warmongers, interested in taking assistance to Kiev to the ultimate consequences, and experienced, cautious military, interested in keeping the country’s internal stocks ready for any need.

According to a recent Foreign Policy’s article, US lawmakers are pressuring Pentagon’s officials to send more weapons to Ukraine. The objective would be to allocate the largest possible number of combat equipment in Kiev, allowing the local forces to continue to face the Russians and possibly “win the war” – since, according to the narrative of the American media, Russia would be frightened and weakened, which obviously does not correspond to the reality of the battlefield.

Pentagon’s agents, however, act more rationally, avoiding making strategic mistakes that could bring problems to national security. Unlike congressmen, whose reasons for supporting Kiev are based on ideological alignment or economic interest, the American military think based on calculations and solid data, so it seems irrational to send Kiev military aid at a level that threatens the country’s ability of defense.

The dialogue between the Pentagon and the US Congress for the production, purchase or allocation of weapons and ammunition works through the Department of Defense’s periodic reports on its war plans. These reports are called operational plans (or OPLANs). In theory, the Pentagon has an OPLAN for every situation considered a risk to American security, which includes relations with enemy countries such as Russia, China, and North Korea. After considering the evaluation of its experts, the Pentagon prepares a list of equipment considered necessary to face such countries, submitting the reports to the Congress for approval. If approved, the Pentagon purchases such weapons from private companies affiliated with the “military industrial complex” and eventually allocates them to overseas bases.

In principle, military assistance to Kiev was supposed to be restricted to an exclusive OPLAN for the Ukrainian conflict, but congressmen want to change that. For politicians, who do not think strategically, this is a “mistake” and more weapons to Kiev are needed. Congressmen consider it appropriate to invest all available resources in Ukraine, as Kiev is the state that is currently actually fighting Russia. For them, betting on sending weapons on a large scale is the right attitude, even if the stock reserved for other OPLANs is running out – which is already happening.

As a response to the stock supply crisis, parliamentarians suggest thinking about measures to speed up production and replenishing. According to them, the problem is not the transfer of weapons to Ukraine, but the fact that there is a difficulty in filling stocks quickly, as they are dwindling with assistance to Kiev.

However, this narrative does not seem consistent with reality. As previously reported, the American military industry is entering a vicious cycle, where there is no modernization of its arsenal, only a race by military companies to replace weapons which are wasted by the systematic transfer to Ukraine. In this sense, expanding aid and violating the stocks of other OPLANs would only worsen this critical scenario.

In its decisions, the government oscillates between supporting realism and warmongering. For example, a new aid package was recently announced, valued at 275 million dollars – one of the smallest since February. Warmongers criticize this attitude and say that it is time to increase assistance as much as possible, taking advantage of the opportunities of the supposed “Ukrainian counteroffensive” and “imminent victory”. Apparently, many politicians in the US believe the lies created by the American media itself and actually plan strategies based on these fallacies.

Experts, however, know that this rhetoric is unsubstantiated. Ukraine is suffering significant losses day after day. The great victory of Russian forces in Bakhmut makes this absolutely clear. There is no chance of victory for Kiev and, given the defeat in this proxy conflict, the most rational thing to do would be to reduce support and encourage peace negotiations, while replenishing internal stocks for an eventual situation of direct war.

In fact, the case illustrates the US internal scenario well: the dispute between those who want to prepare for a future war with Russia and those who want to do it now, through Ukraine. To solve this problem, the most appropriate thing would be to avoid any possibility of war, taking the simple attitude of interrupting support for Kiev and talking to Russia about a policy of non-expansion of NATO in Eurasia.

*

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.

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.

***

Coca-Cola is directly influencing public health conferences and events via sponsorships — sometimes undisclosed — that could give the multinational company say in speaker selections and conference agendas, according to a new study.

The study, published in the Public Health Nutrition Journal, uncovered previously unknown collaborations between Coco-Cola and major health institutions including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the Institute for Excellence in Pediatrics, the Obesity Society and the American Academy of Family Physicians. It builds upon a 2020 study that showed the company helped shape the International Congress on Physical Activity and Public Health, an international effort to promote physical activity.

The findings, based on documents uncovered by 22 Freedom of Information requests by the U.S. Right to Know organization, suggest that Coca-Cola’s influence could suppress research and viewpoints unfavorable to the company and its suite of unhealthy products, advance messaging that physical inactivity is the key cause of obesity and bolster its image as science-friendly.

“The effect of this industry involvement is to expose professionals to the brands and marketing of certain products, including ultra-processed foods and sugar-sweetened beverages, while also allowing the brands to build their image by affiliating with scientific and research communities,” the authors wrote.

Conflicts of interest

The study found Coca-Cola gave three types of support: funding conference organizers, non-profit organizations or conference speakers. These contributions gave the company perks such as proposing topics, suggesting speakers, marketing opportunities or lunchtime seating with conference VIPs.

The study points out that some of the funding came through third-party organizations so researchers may not know they’re sponsored by Coca-Cola.

Researchers and events that fail to declare conflicts of interest and clearly state their funding sources, “obscures corporate influence over what is said and to whom it is stated” in these events and conferences, the authors said.

Direct and indirect funding

The study looked at 239 public and private events. Coca-Cola provided some funding, directly or indirectly, to 158 — including 98 conferences, 21 symposia, 10 lectures, 14 private meetings, one workshop, three webinars, three seminars, three forums and three panels.

Of the 158 events partially funded by the company, Coca-Cola gave money directly to 28 of them. Meanwhile, 70 were funded via third parties that received Coca-Cola money and the company funded speakers for the remaining 60.

Payments for organizers ranged from $2,500 to $100,000 per event.

The emails showed Coca-Cola would occasionally encourage researchers favorable to its interests to also talk to the media, as well as promoting researchers, programs and events that stressed a lack of physical activity, instead of sugary beverages, as a major cause of obesity.

“We are concerned about several connection of funding to media coverage,” the authors of the study wrote. “By pushing speakers towards the media, a company’s influence over science communication may be significant, and therefore should be fully disclosed.”

The study recommends “robust financial and conflict-of-interest disclosures for public health conferences, not only for the conference organizers, but also for speakers.”

See the full study at the Public Health Nutrition journal.

*

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 by mac morrison/flickr

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on New Study Details Coca-Cola’s Big Influence on Public Health Organizations, Conferences and Events
  • 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.

***

To this day some US Colleges are mandating COVID-19 vaccination with the bivalent boosters for Omicron BA4/BA5 which are now obsolete since the predominant strains are BQ1 and BQ1.1.

To make matters worse, the bivalent boosters failed to stop Omicron in animal studies despite having an antibody rise—thus showing antibodies are invalid surrogates of vaccine efficacy.

Parents and students are becoming increasingly leery of additional COVID-19 vaccination based on the results of Bardosh et al.

Bardosh K, Krug A, Jamrozik E, et al


COVID-19 vaccine boosters for young adults: a risk benefit assessment and ethical analysis of mandate policies at universities
Journal of Medical Ethics Published Online First: 05 December 2022. doi: 10.1136/jme-2022-108449


This group found the risks of COVID-19 vaccination including serious adverse events (life threatening, hospitalization, and death) and myocarditis far outweigh any theoretical benefits. If Bardosh would have considered the two prospective cohort studies by Mansanguan and Le Pessec, the myocarditis rates would have been sharply adjusted up to 25,000 cases per million.

Additionally, since no prospective randomized placebo controlled trial has demonstrated reductions in COVID-19 hospitalization and death as a primary or secondary endpoint, that theoretic benefit of vaccination could have been dropped to zero. Most of the colleges and universities mandating COVID-19 vaccination have platitudes in their mission statement like that of Yale University: “Yale is committed to improving the world today and for future generations through outstanding research and scholarship, education, preservation, and practice.”

This leaves the world wondering about the ineptitude of Yale leadership on the application of scholarship to their policies. Next time you are in a discussion about college mandates, please feel free to share this Substack.

*

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 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.

***

Yesterday’s drone attack on an airfield in Kursk marks a major escalation in NATO’s war against Russia. It comes just one day after Russia accused Kiev of launching drone attacks on two military airfields deep inside its territory.

There were no casualties from the attack, 62 miles from the Ukrainian border. But a major fire erupted after oil tankers thought to have been hit burned for 10 hours and covered almost 5,500 square feet.

The location of the attacks and their implementation points once again to the direct involvement of the United States.

Russian officials had already blamed Kiev for Monday’s attacks on two airbases at Ryazan and Saratov in south-central Russia, believed to have involved modified Soviet-era Russian Strizh drones launched by Ukraine. Three service men were killed and four were wounded, with two aircraft damaged. The bombers hit at the Engels-2 airfield and Dyagilevo airbase were both nuclear-capable. Images from Dyagilevo show a nuclear-capable Tu-22M3 bomber with a damaged tail with a Kh-22 missile suspended under its wing.

Russia’s defence ministry said that Monday’s attacks were acts of terrorism and launched a bombardment of Ukraine’s key infrastructure in response.

Suspected Ukrainian drones also attacked the Belbek military airport in Sevastopol, but were downed by air defences, while drones also unsuccessfully targeted a fuel store in Bryansk region according to Russian sources.

Bryansk, Kursk and Belgorod, which immediately border Ukraine, have all been hit multiple times. But the latest attacks and the targets chosen clearly involved extensive intelligence gathering and high-level collusion.

Ukrainian military analyst Serhiy Zgurets noted on the website of Espreso TV that the air force bases hit were the only facilities in Russia that could fully service bombers used to launch attacks on Ukraine. Ukraine’s government declined to publicly acknowledge the strikes, but a senior Ukrainian official confirmed to the New York Times that at least one of the drones was launched from Ukraine and that one of the strikes was made with the help of special forces close to the Russian base.

These targets are the furthest in Russia ever hit during the entire conflict. One of the airbases, Ryazan, is just 115 miles southwest of Moscow, while Saratov is around 400 miles from the Ukrainian border. Russian military commentators stressed that if Ukraine could strike that far inside Russia, it may also be capable of hitting Moscow. Sky News Moscow correspondent Diana Magnay said there “are a lot of questions now about how exactly Ukraine managed it,” before suggesting a “counter-intelligence failure within Russia that allowed a drone from within Russia, perhaps with the help of Ukrainian collaborators.”

The channel reported off-the-record comments by senior Western officials boasting that such attacks inside Russia will have struck a powerful psychological blow that “does show” Ukrainian forces “can operate in Russia at will.” Britain’s Ministry of Defence said Russia was likely to consider the attacks to be “some of the most strategically significant failures of force protection since its invasion of Ukraine.”

The New York Times gloated that the attacks “add to signs that Kyiv is willing to bring the war closer to Moscow and to President Vladimir V. Putin,” had “altered the geography of the war, shown failures in Moscow’s air defense systems and signaled Kyiv’s determination that Russia pay a heavier price for its unrelenting assault on Ukraine’s infrastructure.”

The ability of Ukraine to carry out such attacks would only be a mystery if Kiev were not able to rely on Washington’s spy network and its extensive contact within Russia built up over decades. This places the latest attacks among a growing number of Ukrainian “successes” and more covert provocations collectively designed to both prolong and escalate the war.

These include:

  • The bombing of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, ending the transit of Russian natural gas under the Baltic Sea to Germany.
  • The explosions in Sevastopol’s naval harbour on October 29, also apparently involving drones that partially destroyed a strategic bridge.
  • The November 15 explosions in a Polish farming village that killed two civilians.

Every one of these actions reeks of covert US and NATO involvement, each more reckless and potentially dangerous than the last.

The Nord Stream bombings denied Russia vital revenues and confirmed its isolation from European markets after months of denunciations of Germany by the White House. The implications of Ukraine’s efforts to blame Russia for its own rocket attack on Poland, involving demands by Kiev to NATO to invoke Article 5 committing member states to mutual defence, were so grave that US President Joe Biden intervened to oppose what would have meant an immediate move to direct war with Russia for which the US was not yet prepared.

The latest attacks deep inside Russian territory could have been orchestrated by sections of the US military, intelligence and political elite pushing for such an outcome—no matter how potentially disastrous the outcome of such brinksmanship might be.

Commenting on the attacks, The New York Times wrote that there is “little room for Russia to escalate” in response. It quoted Mick Ryan, a retired Australian Army officer, who said of Ukraine’s attacks, “It is not, as some are sure to claim, an escalation. But it is a necessary political and military measure for Ukraine to limit the humanitarian harm of Russia’s brutal drone and missile attacks.”

This statement is absurd. Ukraine’s attacks, coordinated with the United States, are a major escalation of the war. The United States, having instigated and provoked a war that has killed tens of thousands of Ukrainians, has crossed not only Russia’s “red lines,” but its own.

Every time the United States has claimed it would not do something in Ukraine, it has then gone ahead and done it.

In May, Biden published an op-ed in the New York Times entitled “What America Will and Will Not Do in Ukraine,” in which he stated that “We are not encouraging or enabling Ukraine to strike beyond its borders.” But Washington has done precisely that, giving targeting information, weapons, and logistics support that have allowed Ukraine to attack deep inside Russian territory.

A pattern is emerging—one in which the US and NATO keep pushing against Russia in order to test how far they can go without provoking a response from the Putin regime.

There is clearly a calculation that putting ever greater economic, military and political pressure on Russia will exacerbate divisions among the oligarchs and open up the possibility of internal regime change through some form of palace coup. The assassination of Russian fascist ideologue Daria Dugina was a clear warning to Russia’s oligarchs that the penalty for supporting Putin potentially goes beyond sanctions and seizure of assets. The intelligence used by Ukraine in its latest offensive could ultimately have originated from highly-placed Russian supporters with already existing connections to Washington, who are pushing for a settlement of the conflict at any price.

At the same time, there are forces within Russia’s oligarchy that are pushing for a far more aggressive response by the Russian military.

The relentless and reckless escalation of the war by the United States carries with it the risk of the Russian government responding with a major escalation of its own, with potentially catastrophic consequences.

This Saturday, December 10, the International Youth and Students for Social Equality is holding an online meeting, “For a mass movement of youth and students to stop the war in Ukraine!

The call for this meeting explains:

“The interaction of NATO’s imperialist militarism, recklessly pursuing its global geopolitical agenda whatever the consequences, and the increasing desperation of Russia’s oligarchic capitalist regime threatens to escalate into a nuclear conflagration.

“The hope that ‘reason will prevail’ and the war will soon be brought to a negotiated conclusion is a politically paralyzing and dangerous delusion. NATO does not want ‘peace.’ It wants war…

“War will be stopped not by appeals and protests directed to the ruling class and its governments, but through the political mobilization of the international working class.”

All readers of the World Socialist Web Site should make plans to attend the December 10 rally.

*

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 Drone Attacks on Russian Airbases: A Major Escalation in the War Authored in Washington
  • 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.

***

Oncologists everywhere are reporting that cancers attacking reproductive organs are skyrocketing ever since the “vaccines” for covid were unleashed via Operation Warp Speed.

Dr. Ryan Cole, an Idaho-based frontline physician who is seeing it all firsthand, says oncologists and other colleagues in the medical field are observing unusually high rates of cancer. They are also seeing unusual cancers, including those of the vaginal tract and uterus – and especially leiomyosarcoma in particular.

In addition to the extremely high rates of miscarriage and fetal mortality he has been seeing, Cole says that human fertility is clearly on the decline as the after-effects of the jabs become increasingly more apparent. (Related: Last year, Cole warned that cancer rates among the jabbed had increased 20-fold.)

“People are sending me placentas,” Cole told Dr. Drew Pinsky on his radio program. “These placentas are the wrong size for their gestational age; these placentas are calcified; these placentas have antibodies in them; these placentas have spike protein in them; these placentas have induced excess inflammation.”

You can watch a video clip of Cole’s interview on Dr. Drew’s show at the RAIR Foundation website.

Cole is urging his medical colleagues to do the pathology and look for unusual signs such as these in their patients. He issued a plea on the program for those in the medical field to “start looking at tissues of the deceased; start looking at those fetuses that didn’t make it to full term; start looking at the placentas.”

“Start taking your surgical cases in specimens that are unusual in multiple-jabbed individuals and start looking for what could be causing it,” Cole added. “Obviously, I have my suspicions.”

A pregnant nurse forced to get jabbed to remain employed lost her baby in utero

One specific example Cole shared is the case of a nurse, eight months pregnant, who was forced to get injected in order to keep her job. That nurse’s baby ended up dying in utero.

There are many such cases like this, though they often never get reported due to fears within the medical industry about bucking the narrative. To suggest anything other than “safe and effective” for these injections often means getting let go and losing one’s professional clout.

“I think this is the problem we are having with this group think of the ‘safe and effective,’ no problems attitude,” Cole said. “But my counterargument is, ‘look, read – it’s hiding in plain sight. We need to do the science.”

Cole’s observations are shared by Dr. Ute Kruger, a Swedish physician who has similarly seen an explosion of cancer, oftentimes of rare varieties, among previously healthy young people who got injected for the Fauci Flu.

Since Tony Fauci, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Economic Forum (WEF), and many other globalist entities have declared themselves to be the science, Cole’s suggestion that “we need to do the science” will probably not get very far apart from a massive upheaval of the current power structure.

“But the science is settled, we no longer need science because all the science is settled,” joked one commenter, illustrating that point. “There, now the matter is safely and effectively settled.”

Another called for these so-called “vaccines” to be pulled off the market immediately – which is a nice thought if there was actually some way to accomplish that.

Another wrote the following prayer:

“St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly host, by the power of God, cast into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.”

*

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 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

UN: More Than 11,000 Children Killed or Maimed in Yemen War

December 13th, 2022 by Middle East Monitor

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 11,000 children have been killed or maimed in the war in Yemen, according to a new report by the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), an average of four children hurt a day since fighting escalated following the 2015 Saudi-led intervention in the conflict.

However the figures are thought to be much higher, UNICEF warned, with only UN-verified incidents recorded.

“Thousands of children have lost their lives, hundreds of thousands more remain at risk of death from preventable disease or starvation,” said UNICEF Executive Director Catherine Russell.

Russell was in the war-torn country last week where she launched UNICEF’s $10.3 billion Humanitarian Action for Children Appeal, which aims to provide water, sanitation, nutrition, education, health and protection services to children across the world, affected by conflict and disasters.

The agency chief also called on the warring sides to renew the UN-brokered truce, which was announced in April and expired on 2 October without an agreement to extend it. While both sides have blamed the other for failure of a lasting ceasefire, the spokesperson for the Houthi movement, Mohammed Abdul-Salam said that “Peace in Yemen is not possible unless the invading countries abandon their arrogant mentality.”

“The urgent renewal of the truce would be a positive first step that would allow critical humanitarian access,” Russell said.

“Ultimately, only a sustained peace will allow families to rebuild their shattered lives and begin to plan for the future.”

UNICEF estimates that 2.2 million youngsters are acutely malnourished, including close to 540,000 under-fives who are suffering from severe acute malnutrition. Described as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis by the UN, nearly three-quarters of Yemen’s population is said to be in need of humanitarian aid and protection.

UNICEF is seeking nearly $484.5 million to respond to the crisis in Yemen over the next year and has warned that lack of predictable funding puts children’s lives and well-being at further risk.

*

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: Children are seen at Al-Jamhuri Hospital in Sanaa as the humanitarian crisis in the country getting deeper, where civil war has been ongoing for many years in Yemen, on November 20, 2022. [Mohammed Hamoud – Anadolu Agency]

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on UN: More Than 11,000 Children Killed or Maimed in Yemen War
  • 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.

***

A scholarly study found that British colonialism caused approximately 165 million deaths in India from 1880 to 1920, while stealing trillions of dollars of wealth. The global capitalist system was founded on European imperial genocides, which inspired Adolf Hitler and led to fascism.

British colonialism caused at least 100 million deaths in India in roughly 40 years, according to an academic study.

And during nearly 200 years of colonialism, the British empire stole at least $45 trillion in wealth from India, a prominent economist has calculated.

The genocidal crimes committed by European empires outside of their borders inspired Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, leading to the rise of fascist regimes that carried out similar genocidal crimes within their borders.

Economic anthropologist Jason Hickel and his co-author Dylan Sullivan published an article in the respected academic journal World Development titled “Capitalism and extreme poverty: A global analysis of real wages, human height, and mortality since the long 16th century.”

In the report, the scholars estimated that India suffered 165 million excess deaths due to British colonialism between 1880 and 1920.

“This figure is larger than the combined number of deaths from both World Wars, including the Nazi holocaust,” they noted.

They added, “Indian life expectancy did not reach the level of early modern England (35.8 years) until 1950, after decolonization.”

India 165 million deaths British colonialism

Hickel and Sullivan summarized their research in an article in Al Jazeera, titled “How British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years.”

They explained:

According to research by the economic historian Robert C Allen, extreme poverty in India increased under British rule, from 23 percent in 1810 to more than 50 percent in the mid-20th century. Real wages declined during the British colonial period, reaching a nadir in the 19th century, while famines became more frequent and more deadly. Far from benefitting the Indian people, colonialism was a human tragedy with few parallels in recorded history.

Experts agree that the period from 1880 to 1920 – the height of Britain’s imperial power – was particularly devastating for India. Comprehensive population censuses carried out by the colonial regime beginning in the 1880s reveal that the death rate increased considerably during this period, from 37.2 deaths per 1,000 people in the 1880s to 44.2 in the 1910sLife expectancy declined from 26.7 years to 21.9 years.

In a recent paper in the journal World Development, we used census data to estimate the number of people killed by British imperial policies during these four brutal decades. Robust data on mortality rates in India only exists from the 1880s. If we use this as the baseline for “normal” mortality, we find that some 50 million excess deaths occurred under the aegis of British colonialism during the period from 1891 to 1920.

Fifty million deaths is a staggering figure, and yet this is a conservative estimate. Data on real wages indicates that by 1880, living standards in colonial India had already declined dramatically from their previous levels. Allen and other scholars argue that prior to colonialism, Indian living standards may have been “on a par with the developing parts of Western Europe.” We do not know for sure what India’s pre-colonial mortality rate was, but if we assume it was similar to that of England in the 16th and 17th centuries (27.18 deaths per 1,000 people), we find that 165 million excess deaths occurred in India during the period from 1881 to 1920.

While the precise number of deaths is sensitive to the assumptions we make about baseline mortality, it is clear that somewhere in the vicinity of 100 million people died prematurely at the height of British colonialismThis is among the largest policy-induced mortality crises in human history. It is larger than the combined number of deaths that occurred during all famines in the Soviet Union, Maoist China, North Korea, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and Mengistu’s Ethiopia.

This staggering figure does not include the tens of millions more Indians who died in human-made famines that were caused by the British empire.

In the notorious Bengal famine in 1943, an estimated 3 million Indians starved to death, while the British government exported food and banned grain imports.

Academic studies by scientists found that the 1943 Bengal famine was not a result of natural causes; it was the product of the policies of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

Churchill himself was a notorious racist who stated, “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion.”

In the early 1930s, Churchill also admired Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and the Italian dictator who founded fascism, Benito Mussolini.

Churchill’s own scholarly supporters admitted that he “expressed admiration for Mussolini” and, “if forced to choose between Italian fascism and Italian communism, Churchill unhesitatingly would choose the former.”

Indian politician Shashi Tharoor, who served as an under-secretary general of the United Nations, has exhaustively documented the crimes of the British empire, particularly under Churchill.

Churchill has as much blood on his hands as Hitler does,” Tharoor stressed. He pointed to “the decisions that he [Churchill] personally signed off during the Bengal famine, when 4.3 million people died because of the decisions he took or endorsed.”

Award-winning Indian economist Utsa Patnaik has estimated that the British empire drained $45 trillion of wealth from the Indian subcontinent.

In a 2018 interview with the Indian news website Mint, she explained:

Between 1765 and 1938, the drain amounted to £9.2 trillion (equal to $45 trillion), taking India’s export surplus earnings as the measure, and compounding it at a 5% rate of interest. Indians were never credited with their own gold and forex earnings. Instead, the local producers here were ‘paid’ the rupee equivalent out of the budget—something you’d never find in any independent country. The ‘drain’ varied between 26-36% of the central government budget. It would obviously have made an enormous difference if India’s huge international earnings had been retained within the country. India would have been far more developed, with much better health and social welfare indicators. There was virtually no increase in per capita income between 1900 and 1946, even though India registered the second largest export surplus earnings in the world for three decades before 1929.

Since all the earnings were taken by Britain, such stagnation is not surprising. Ordinary people died like flies owing to under-nutrition and disease. It is shocking that Indian expectation of life at birth was just 22 years in 1911. The most telling index, however, is food grain availability. Because the purchasing power of ordinary Indians was being squeezed by high taxes, the per capita annual consumption of food grains went down from 200kg in 1900 to 157kg on the eve of World War II, and further plummeted to 137kg by 1946. No country in the world today, not even the least developed, is anywhere near the position India was in 1946.

Patnaik emphasized:

The modern capitalist world would not exist without colonialism and the drain. During Britain’s industrial transition, 1780 to 1820, the drain from Asia and the West Indies combined was about 6 percent of Britain’s GDP, nearly the same as its own savings rate. After the mid-19th century, Britain was running current account deficits with Continental Europe and North America, and at the same time, it was investing massively in these regions, which meant running capital account deficits too. The two deficits summed to large and rising balance of payments (BoP) deficits with these regions.

How was it possible for Britain to export so much capital—which went into building railways, roads and factories in the U.S. and continental Europe? Its BoP deficits with these regions were being settled by appropriating the financial gold and forex earned by the colonies, especially India. Every unusual expense like war was also put on the Indian budget, and whatever India was not able to meet through its annual exchange earnings was shown as its indebtedness, on which interest accumulated.

*

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 Multipolarista

The Mother of All Economic Crises

December 13th, 2022 by Rep. Ron Paul

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.

***

Nouriel Roubini, a former advisor to the International Monetary Fund and member of President Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisors, was one of the few “mainstream” economists to predict the collapse of the housing bubble. Now Roubini is warning that the staggering amounts of debt held by individuals, businesses, and the government will soon lead to the “mother of all economic crises.”

Roubini properly blames the creation of a debt-based economy on the near-or-at-zero interest rate and quantitative easing policies pursued by the Federal Reserve and other central banks. The inevitable result of the zero-interest and quantitative easing policies is price inflation wreaking havoc on the American people.

The Fed has been trying to eliminate price inflation with a series of interest rate increases. So far, these rate increases have not significantly reduced price inflation. This is because rates remain at historic lows. Yet the rate increases have had negative economic effects, including a decline in the demand for new homes. Increasing interest rates make it impossible for many middle- and working-class Americans to afford a monthly mortgage payment for even a relatively inexpensive home.

The main reason the Fed cannot raise rates to anywhere near what they would be in a free market is the effect it would have on the federal government’s ability to manage its debt. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), interest on the national debt is already on track to consume 40 percent of the federal budget by 2052 and will surpass defense spending by 2029! A small interest rate increase can raise yearly federal debt interest rate payments by many billions of dollars, increasing the amount of the federal budget devoted solely to servicing the debt.

The federal government’s fiscal picture is made worse by the fact that the Social Security “Trust Fund” will begin to run deficits by 2035 while the Medicare Trust Fund will run deficits by 2028. The looming bankruptcy of the two major entitlement programs, combined with the unwillingness of most in Congress to reduce either welfare or warfare spending, puts the Fed in a bind. If it raises rates to the levels needed to really combat price inflation, the increase in interest payments will impose hardships on individuals and businesses, as well as raise federal interest payments to unsustainable levels. This will cause a major economic crisis including a government default on its debt causing a rejection of the dollar’s world reserve currency status. Also, if the Fed continues to facilitate federal deficits by monetizing the debt, the result will be an economic crisis caused by a collapse in the dollar’s value and rejection of the dollar’s world reserve status.

The crisis will lead to social unrest and violence, as well as increased popularity of authoritarian movements on both the left and the right. This will lead to government crackdowns on civil liberties and increased government control of our economy. The only bright spot is this crisis will also fuel interest in the ideas of liberty and could even help bring about a return to limited, constitutional government, free markets, individual liberty, and a foreign policy of peaceful trade with all. Those of us who know the truth have two responsibilities. The first is to make the necessary plans to ensure our families can survive the forthcoming turmoil. The second is to do all we can to introduce as many people as possible to the ideas of liberty.

*

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.

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.

***

Last week’s drone attacks on Russian military bases represent a serious escalation in Washington’s proxy war on Russia. One of the attacks involved an airfield that is located less than 200 miles from Moscow.

Naturally, the incident rankled Russian President Vladimir Putin who convened an emergency meeting of his Security Council to explore the options for retaliatory strikes. We have no doubt that Russia’s Top Brass recommended tit-for-tat missile strikes beyond Ukraine’s borders as a form of equal payback. Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed and the military stuck with its current strategy of obliterating critical infrastructure in cities across the country. The attacks on Ukraine’s fragile electrical grid are the essential preparation for the launching of a widely-anticipated winter offensive. Here’s more from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:

Yesterday’s drone attack on an airfield in Kursk marks a major escalation in NATO’s war against Russia….The location of the attacks and their implementation points once again to the direct involvement of the United States….The bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines…The explosions in Sevastopol’s naval harbour on October 29 (and) The November 15 explosions in a Polish farming village that killed two civilians….Every one of these actions reeks of covert US and NATO involvement, each more reckless and potentially dangerous than the last….A pattern is emerging—one in which the US and NATO keep pushing against Russia in order to test how far they can go without provoking a response from the Putin regime….The relentless and reckless escalation of the war by the United States carries with it the risk of the Russian government responding with a major escalation of its own, with potentially catastrophic consequences.” (“Drone attacks on Russian airbases: A major escalation in the war authored in Washington“, Chris Marsden, World Socialist Web Site)

Just hours after the third attack, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken delivered a statement denying any responsibility for the incident. He said:

“We have neither encouraged nor enabled the Ukrainians to strike inside of Russia.” Not surprisingly, Blinken’s denial fell well-short of a formal repudiation of the attack itself which one might have expected. More to the point, it appears that the US was directly involved given that “Both NATO and Russian observers (claim) US satellite involvement in attacks on Russian bases.” Here’s what they found:

Multiple military sources in NATO countries as well as Russia …..report that the reconditioned Russian Tu-141 drones that Ukraine launched at Russian air bases downlinked US satellite GPS data to hit their targets.

The 1970s-vintage Russian recon drones were converted into cruise missiles, fitted with new guidance systems and directed by American satellites, the sources said. Ukraine does not have the capability to guide missiles on its own, they added.

Russia’s Defense Ministry identified one of the weapons as the Tu-141 in a December 6 statement. According to Russian military sources, the Russians identified the Tu-141 from fragments recovered after the missiles struck Russia’s Dyagilevo and Engels air force bases.

If, contrary to Blinken’s denial, the United States provided guidance for the missile attack, then Washington must be well aware that this brings NATO forces to the brink of direct involvement in the Ukraine war and the Biden administration must be prepared to run that risk.” (“Military sources: Ukraine missiles used US guidance“, Asia Times)

So, what does this new incitement mean and how will it affect the conduct of the war?

We think Washington has adopted a new tactical approach that could be called “calculated recklessness”, that is, the US is launching meticulously planned attacks that are made to look like impulsive acts of aggression by their proxy, Ukraine. The objective of these attacks is to provoke Moscow into an overreaction, that is, retaliatory strikes on targets outside of Ukraine.That, in turn, could be used as a justification for NATO’s entrance into the conflict which, ostensibly, is Washington’s goal.

It appears, however, that Putin and his advisors have resisted the temptation to expand the war beyond the current battlespace. This is from an article at Southfront:

In response to Kiev’s attempts to disrupt the work of Russian aviation, Russian forces launched another massive strike at military and energy facilities throughout Ukraine. The Russian Ministry of Defense claimed that all 17 targets in Ukraine were hit. Explosions were reported in more than 10 regions of the country.

Strikes on infrastructure facilities led to another collapse of the entire energy system of Ukraine. Due to the imbalance in the system, a wave of emergency power outages is still rolling across the country, accompanied by massive accidents in the power grid...

The lack of electricity, water and communications throughout the country is accompanied by loud statements from Kiev that the Ukrainian Air Defense allegedly successfully intercepted almost all Russian missiles.” (“Kiev plays dangerous games with Russian long-range aviation”, Southfront)

In other words, Putin has not been baited into the escalation that Washington seeks, but that doesn’t mean he won’t call up additional reservists to form territorial defense units in multiple areas along Russia’s western flank. We think he will. Moscow can no longer ignore the threat of future attacks or incursions on its own soil. It must bulk up its manpower and prepare for the worst. Gradually, Russia is moving towards a full wartime mobilization.

What is particularly interesting about this new escalation is that contradicts the administration’s original commitment to prevent the conflict from spreading beyond Ukraine’s borders. This is from the WSWS:

The United States, having instigated and provoked a war that has killed tens of thousands of Ukrainians, has crossed not only Russia’s “red lines,” but its own…. In May, Biden published an op-ed in the New York Times entitled “What America Will and Will Not Do in Ukraine,” in which he stated that “We are not encouraging or enabling Ukraine to strike beyond its borders.” But Washington has done precisely that, giving targeting information, weapons, and logistics support that have allowed Ukraine to attack deep inside Russian territory.”(WSWS)

Washington’s promises means nothing. US actions are guided by self interest alone and by an insatiable thirst for power. That means we should expect to see similar provocations in the future as Washington pushes the envelope in its effort draw Russia into a wider war that will likely engulf the region. Here’s more from the WSWS:

The bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines… The explosions in Sevastopol’s naval harbour on October 29 (and) The November 15 explosions in a Polish farming village that killed two civilians…. Every one of these actions reeks of covert US and NATO involvement, each more reckless and potentially dangerous than the last…. The latest attacks deep inside Russian territory could have been orchestrated by sections of the US military, intelligence and political elite.. no matter how potentially disastrous the outcome of such brinksmanship might be.” (World Socialist Web Site)

The analysts at the WSWS have never accepted the fiction that the US is merely assisting Ukraine in its struggle against the Russian boogieman. From the very beginning, they have grasped that the conflict was largely a US concoction aimed at using proxies to weaken Russia in order to achieve its broader geopolitical goals. These latest attacks confirm that the United States is committed to resolving this crisis through the use of military force. That means a negotiated settlement is not only out-of-the-question, but is seen as anathema to Washington’s strategic objectives. As foreign policy analyst John Mearsheimer points out in a recent interview, there are no longer any “realistic options” for how the war can be brought to an end. The differences are irreconcilable, there is no willingness to compromise, and the US sees military confrontation as the solution. Bottom line: Escalation is inevitable.

Here’s part of a recent interview with Mearsheimer that I transcribed to underscore the hopelessness of the current situation in Ukraine which is bound to get worse before it gets better. I apologize for any mistakes in transcribing their comments.

Freddie Sayers– What are the realistic options now? (In other words, how can the war in Ukraine be brought to an end?)

John Mearsheimer– (19:40 minutes) There are no realistic options. We’re screwed… The conflict will grind-on and both sides will escalate. They have been escalating and where it leads is very hard to say. There’s no deal on the table that can be worked out here. There’s all this talk about the need for diplomacy…. but the question you have to ask yourself in this particular case is: If you do diplomacy can you work out a deal? And, in my opinion, there’s no deal to be worked out, and both sides are going to fight this one out…..

There are two big issues here: “One” is a “neutral Ukraine” and the other is the ‘territorial one‘ The Russians now have annexed 4 oblasts. That’s a big chunk of Ukrainian territory and the Russians now believe that territory belongs to them. Do you think the Russians will be willing to abandon that territory along with Crimea? I don’t see that happening. I don’t think the Russians have any intention of abandoning that territory…

The Ukrainians for their part, insist on getting that territory back, and the Americans, will not be willing to concede that territory to the Russians because it would appear that would a defeat for the West. The United States and its allies are ‘in this one’ to win. We are deeply committed. For us to back-off and give the Russians any major concessions is just unacceptable at this point….

That’s the territorial issue. Then there’s the question of whether or not Ukraine will be neutral. The Russians insist that Ukraine be neutral.The Ukrainians are saying, we are willing to be neutral but we need a guarantee for our security from someone. Well, the only one who can guarantee Ukrainian security is NATO and specifically, the United States…. but that would make Ukraine a de facto member of NATO and that’s unacceptable to the Russians. So, there’s no way you’re going to get a truly neutral Ukraine that is not affiliated with the west. That’s not going to happen and the Russians are not going to accept that.

So, what the Russians are going to do instead is create a dysfunctional rump state. and that’s what they’re doing now. That’s why they’ve taken all that territory, and that’s why they’re wrecking Ukraine…..

The two outcomes that we have to worry greatly about are, 1–where the Russians use nuclear weapons and, 2– where the United States comes into the fight … Because then, you have a great power war where the United States and Russia are actually fighting each other. And as Avril Haines, the Director of National Intelligence told the senate this past spring, the most likely scenario for the Russians to use nuclear weapons is if the NATO comes into the war. So, this is very dangerous….

There is a non-trivial chance that nuclear weapons will be used in Ukraine. If the Russians were to use nuclear weapons it would be most likely that they would use them in Ukraine. And Ukraine does not have nuclear weapons of its own so Ukraine would not be able to retaliate. against the Russians…

Furthermore, if Russia uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine, the US is not going to use nuclear weapons against Russia because that would lead to a general thermonuclear war… The great danger is that if the Russians use nuclear weapons in Ukraine that the west would retaliate with a massive conventional attack against Russian forces, General David Petraeus has said that if Russia uses nukes in Ukraine, the US should slam Russian conventional forces inside Ukraine and Russian naval forces in the Back Sea. If we were to do that, we would then have a great power war. NATO would be at war against Russia and as Avril Haines said, that is likely to lead to a nuclear war because the Russians would not be able to stand up to the Americans and their allies.

(If Russia does use nuclear weapons in Ukraine) then the wise response, and I think, the likely response would be that we would go to great lengths to shut-down the conflict. I think the use of nuclear weapons would shut down the conflict (because) it would become so clear at that point in time that we were in danger of creating a nuclear war between the superpowers that we would go to great lengths to shut-down. That would focus the mind in ways that are hard to imagine in the current context.

(Unfortunately) we are making it (the use of nukes) more and more likely. It’s important to realize that the more successful NATO and the Ukrainians are at defeating the Russians inside Ukraine and wrecking the Russian economy, the more likely it is that they will use nuclear weapons. And, again, you do not want to underestimate what great powers will do when they are desperate. …..(“John Mearsheimer: We’re playing Russian Roulette”, Unherd; 39:25 minutes)

Mearsheimer not only explains the irreconcilable differences between the two adversaries (Russia and the US), but also presents a very credible scenario in which the conflict could lead to a nuclear war. The fact that the Biden adminsitration has rejected diplomacy outright, makes that scenario all the more likely and, perhaps, unavoidable. Here’s more from Mearsheimer:

You know the Americans have the Monroe Doctrine…which says the western hemisphere is our ‘back yard’ and no distant great power is allowed to put military forces in the western hemisphere. No great power is allowed to form a military alliance with another country in the western hemisphere because –from the American perspective– it is intolerable to have a distant great power (from Europe or Asia) on our doorstep. Well, the same logic applies to the Russians. From the Russian perspective, the idea that you are going to have NATO right on your doorstep ….is unacceptable to them. The Russians couldn’t stop NATO from expanding in 1999 and they couldn’t stop it in 2004 because they were too weak… This is what America did to Russia when the Soviet Union broke apart. We shoved NATO expansion down their throat, but the fact is, the Russians viewed this as an existential threat. Ukraine in NATO was the brightest of all red lines for Russia. And if you look at the Monroe Doctrine you should not be surprised at how the Russians are reacting to what is going on in Ukraine.” (“John Mearsheimer: We’re playing Russian Roulette”, Unherd)

He’s right, isn’t he?

*

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 Unz Review.

Michael Whitney is a renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace.

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

Featured image is from The Unz Review

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Putin Shrugs-Off Washington’s Provocations and ‘Sticks to Business’

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 a highly controversial move in the South American state of Peru, President Pedro Castillo was impeached and later placed in a detention facility after he called for the dissolution of the legislature in order to stave off a political coup.

Castillo was elected in a runoff election during 2021 to the astonishment of millions within Peru and around the world.

The actions of the parliament represented the third attempt to overthrow the government of Castillo who has been accused of corruption and violations of the constitutions. The ouster of Castillo has created even more divisions within the country and throughout Latin America.

With the coup against Castillo, Peru has witnessed the rise and fall of six presidents in five years. This phenomenon of political instability is clearly a by-product of underdevelopment and the role of imperialism.

Many remain supporters of the former president who was an educator and union leader for decades. After gaining the candidacy for president on the Peru Libre party ticket, he ascended to office promising reforms which would benefit the farmers and workers of the mineral-rich state where the majority of the people remain mired in poverty.

The election of President Castillo represented a leftward trend within politics throughout the region. United States involvement in South America, Central America and the Caribbean has served as a major impediment to the transformation of these societies from neo-colonialism to non-capitalist and socialist development.

United States imperialism has vehemently opposed any move towards the rejection of Washington and Wall Street’s hegemony throughout the region. Since the early 1960s, the U.S. has maintained a blockade against the Republic of Cuba due to its socialist and anti-imperialist domestic and foreign policy.

The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela has been subjected to extreme measures involving attempted coups, efforts to isolate the socialist government internationally and the outright theft of national assets such as resources from the oil industry which rightfully belong to the government and people of Venezuela.

In Bolivia, democratically elected President Evo Morales was overthrown in a similar fashion as Peru when in November 2019, he was forced to resign amid pressures from the right-wing elements within the security forces and military. Morales was a staunch ally of former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, a revolutionary leader who defied U.S. imperialism while seeking to build Latin American and international solidarity.

Imperialists and Oligarchs to Benefit from the Coup

Image: Peru workers in support of Pedro Castillo after coup

In Peru rival political interests have held demonstrations against the former president amid the post-coup process. Vice-President Dina Ercilia Boluarte Zegarra, who had served under the administration of Castillo, was immediately sworn in as his successor after the majority within the national assembly voted to remove the president from office. Castillo after leaving the presidential office was pulled over and arrested by the Peruvian security forces. Later an attempt to have him released under the laws of the constitution was rejected after legal machinations by the national assembly resulted in his continued incarceration.

An article published by Telesur on the situation in Peru reported on the parliamentary action aimed at denying Castillo a political trial, noting:

“In this way, right-wing lawmakers ensured that former President Castillo remains in jail since his seven-day detention will expire on Dec. 14. In an unusual plenary meeting held early Monday (Dec. 12) morning, the Peruvian Congress removed the ‘special immunity’ from former President Pedro Castillo, who has remained under arrest since he was ousted on Dec. 7. Approved with 67 votes in favor and 45 votes against, the parliamentary resolution prevents Castillo from being subjected to a political trial and directly opens the way for the Prosecutor’s Office to extend his detention on charges of rebellion.

In this way, the lawmakers ensured that the former Peruvian president remain in jail since his seven-day preventive detention will expire on Wednesday, Dec. 14.”

In light of the current political situation in Peru, ousted President Castillo has requested political asylum from the Mexican government of President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. The Mexican administration has called for respect for the human rights of former leader Castillo.

In Honduras, the left-wing government of President Iris Xiomara Castro Sarmiento has strongly  supported the former President Castillo. In a statement from the government, it emphasizes that:

“The Honduran foreign ministry energetically condemns the coup d’etat in Peru, which is the result of a series of events meant to erode democracy and the sovereign will of the people represented by President Pedro Castillo.” (See this)

In 2009, the Honduran government of President Emanuel Zalaya was overthrown at the aegis of the administration of former U.S. President Barack Obama. Today, President Joe Biden, who served as Vice-President for Obama, maintains similar foreign policy imperatives as Obama and even his predecessor, President Donald Trump. Throughout successive U.S. administrations, whether Democratic or Republican, the economic and military interests of imperialism have not wavered. Since the ascendancy of Biden to the presidency, the U.S. has provoked a proxy war with the Russian Federation in Ukraine which has prompted widespread economic distress and threats of a nuclear war in Europe.

The newly installed President Boluarte during her first public appearance stood side-to-side with the Peruvian military. Just two days after the political coup against President Castillo, Boluarte wanted to send a signal to the right-wing of Peru and U.S. imperialism that the military was supporting her tenure in office. Although opposition politicians have called for early elections, Boluarte has insisted that she should remain in office to serve out the 3-and-one-half- years term of ousted President Castillo.

According to a report by the Associated Press:

“Peru’s first female president appeared in a military ceremony on national television on Friday (Dec. 9) in her first official event as head of state, an attempt to cement her hold on power and buck the national trend of early presidential departures. Boularte addressed members of the armed forces during a ceremony marking a historic battle. Boularte, flanked by the leaders of the judiciary and Congress, sat among lawmakers who had tried to remove Castillo from office. ‘Our nation is strong and secure thanks to the armed forces, the navy, the air force, and the army of Peru,’ Boularte said before hundreds of members of the armed forces in Peru’s capital. ‘They give us the guarantee that we live in order, respecting the constitution, the rule of law, the balance of powers.’”

Yet, the overall economic crisis impacting South America has not escaped the people of Peru. One of the important factors leading to instability in Peru is the rate of inflation which has worsened the social conditions of workers and farmers inside the country.

In the same article from the Associated Press, it also points out:

“In the streets, small demonstrations by Castillo supporters continued in the capital and other parts of Peru, including Tacabamba, the district capital closest to Castillo’s rural home. Protesters demanded that the ousted leader walk free, rejected Boluarte as president and called for Congress to be closed. In Lima, protesters trying to reach the Congress building have clashed with police, who used sticks and tear gas to push them back, and more protests were planned for Friday. ‘The only thing left is the people. We have no authorities, we have nothing,’ said Juana Ponce, one of the protesters this week. ‘It is a national shame. All these corrupt congressmen have sold out. They have betrayed our president, Pedro Castillo.’”

Peruvian Instability Requires Unity of Left Forces

The failure of the Peru Libre Party, which both Castillo and Boluarte ran on their national slate during 2021, to remain united has played an important role in the continuing instability of the country. Both Castillo and Boluarte were forced out of the left-wing party while the right-wing backed by the military and the oligarchy were able to seize the political initiative.

Since March of 2022, the local monied interests in conjunction with imperialism has not refrained from its destabilization efforts in Peru. At present the prospects for renewal of a progressive trajectory presupposes the formation of a united front among the Left along with elements in the working class and farmers.

Internationalsocialist.net website advanced its own analysis of the situation in Peru saying:

“It was clear then (March 2022) that the Peruvian oligarchy was regaining its initiative, after its electoral defeat, with the intention of using this crisis to overthrow the Castillo government, with a view to limiting possible reforms for the benefit of the Peruvian working masses, and above all, fearing that the masses would push for changes more profound than those proposed by Castillo’s timid institutional agenda. Since the beginning of Castillo’s government, the oligarchy has not concealed its coup efforts. On the contrary, even before Castillo was sworn in, the oligarchy and the Peruvian capitalists threatened to prevent him from taking power. Only the fear that the mobilizations of support would get out of hand persuaded the right wing to follow this path. But what, then, has changed?”

Despite the internal divisions among the people of Peru, the antiwar and anti-imperialists forces in the western capitalist states must oppose any external interference in the domestic affairs of the country. The people of Peru have their own inherent right to self-determination and those social forces fighting for national sovereignty and non-capitalist development must be defended by all internationalists throughout the world.

*

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.

Digital Currency: The Fed Moves Toward Monetary Totalitarianism

By André Marques, December 12, 2022

The Federal Reserve is sowing the seeds for its central bank digital currency (CBDC). It may seem that the purpose of a CBDC is to facilitate transactions and enhance economic activity, but CBDCs are mainly about more government control over individuals. If a CBDC were implemented, the central bank would have access to all transactions in addition to being capable of freezing accounts.

“Violence will escalate as long as extremists are allied to Netanyahu”: Interview with Tawfieq Toameh

By Tawfieq Toameh and Steven Sahiounie, December 13, 2022

Jana Majdi Zakarneh, a 16-year-old girl, was killed by Israeli forces as she was standing on the roof of her home in Jenin, in the Occupied West Bank of Palestine.  She was shot in the head, and others were wounded in the 10 pm raid on Sunday.

US-Africa Leaders Summit: Biden to Announce Support for African Union’s Admission to G20?

By Kester Kenn Klomegah, December 13, 2022

Certainly it can be described as an irreversible historical landmark as United States President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his administration are set to renew their commitments and hold discussions relating to the global economy, democracy and governance, climate change, health and security, women, youth and education during the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit scheduled for December 13-15 in Washington.

Execution of a Protester Intensifies Opposition to Clerical Rule in Iran

By Prof. Akbar E. Torbat, December 12, 2022

On December 8, the Iranian judiciary ordered to hang Shekari, who had been convicted of injuring a basij security guard with a knife and blocking a street in Tehran. That was the first such execution after thousands of arrests over the unrest and the killing of more than 400 protestors. In reaction, on September 10, the offices of basij at Sharif University and some other locations were torched.

A Hair Trigger on Endgame

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, December 12, 2022

The insouciance of Washington and its European puppets toward the dangerous situation they are provoking with Russia is frightening.  The Western world is now led by people who have made it clear that they will risk nuclear war in their pursuit of American hegemony.  Evil has clearly triumphed in the Western world.

Ukrainian Forces Continue Shelling Donetsk

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, December 12, 2022

Kiev continues ceaselessly attacking the capital of the Donetsk People’s Republic. Despite the republic’s accession to the Russian Federation, operated after a popular referendum attesting to the will of local residents, the Ukrainian neo-Nazi regime maintains its policy of military actions against the region, violating Russian sovereign territory.

Global Central Banks Racing to Implement Digital Currencies as Cities Convert to ‘Smart’ Infrastructure

By Leo Hohmann, December 12, 2022

The Central Bank of Nigeria announced it will begin, effective in January, restricting cash withdrawals from banks and ATMs to just $45 per day as part of a push to move the country toward a cashless economy.

New Autopsy Report Reveals Those Who Died Suddenly Were Likely Killed by the COVID Vaccine

By Will Jones, December 12, 2022

A major new autopsy report has found that three people who died unexpectedly at home with no pre-existing disease shortly after COVID vaccination were likely killed by the vaccine. A further two deaths were found to be possibly due to the vaccine.

How WikiLeaks Revolutionised the World of Journalism

By Eresh Omar Jamal, December 12, 2022

Stefania Maurizi is an investigative journalist working for the Italian daily Il Fatto Quotidiano. She has worked on all WikiLeaks releases of secret documents and partnered with Glenn Greenwald to reveal the Snowden Files about Italy. In an interview with Eresh Omar Jamal of  The Daily Star, she talks about her latest book, Secret Power: WikiLeaks and Its Enemies, and how WikiLeaks revolutionised the world of journalism.

Video: On Destroying Our Health System and Big Pharma Capture

By Dr. Emanuel Garcia and Maajid Nawaz, December 12, 2022

We speak to New Zealand based American, Dr Emmanuel Garcia, about how and why his medical licence was revoked for opposing the Covid mandates. We then speak to filmmaker, health campaigner and British General Practitioner Dr Bob Gill who opposes the Big Pharma corporatisation of the British National Health System (NHS).

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Digital Currency: The Fed Moves Toward Monetary Totalitarianism

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.

***

 

 

Jana Majdi Zakarneh, a 16-year-old girl, was killed by Israeli forces as she was standing on the roof of her home in Jenin, in the Occupied West Bank of Palestine.  She was shot in the head, and others were wounded in the 10 pm raid on Sunday. 

More than 50 Palestinian children have been killed by Israel to date in the occupied territories of the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip. More than 215 Palestinians have been killed in 2022, including 17 women. The UN reported that 2022 is the deadliest year in the West Bank since 2006.

Almost daily, the Israeli forces have been raiding and killing Palestinians living under occupation, and illegal Israeli settlers have been increasing attacks on Palestinians living in their own homes.

It appears that the West Bank of Palestine is at the boiling point. Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Tawfieq Toameh, a Palestinian living in Los Angeles, California who is an expert on political affairs in the Middle East and the US. The interview brings up questions on various timely issues affecting the Middle East.

Steven Sahiounie:  Benjamin Netanyahu has come back to power in “Israel” and has an extremist ally. In your opinion, will this lead to war in Occupied Palestine?

Tawfieq Toameh:  Benjamin Netanyahu is an extremist, and we now have more extremists in his government. Ben-Gvir, and Smotrich are very extreme to the right, and they hold very sensitive positions. Especially Ben-Gvir, who is in charge of internal security affairs, which will mean everything is in his hands as far as how to direct the army and the forces in the West Bank. We already see the result of forming this government: you can see how many Palestinians are killed daily, five Palestinians almost every day since Ben-Gvir won the election and started forming the government with Netanyahu. The violence against Palestinians has been escalating tremendously, and right now they have still not formed the government.  Once they have formed it and taken office more escalation in Palestine will happen.  More violence, attacks on Palestinians, annexation of land, settlements, ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem, taking houses of Palestinians, and throwing Palestinians out of their homes.  So we expect the violence to escalate in the next few years as long as those extremists are in the Netanyahu government. I am expecting more violence, confiscation of land, and settlements in the next few years.

SS:  According to media reports, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is going to do a peace deal with the Israeli occupation very soon. In your opinion, how will this affect the Palestinian cause?

TT:  Normalization with Israel would not serve the interests of the Palestinians, Arabs, or the Arab world. Israel is an occupying power, occupying Palestine for many decades, and Israel has never fulfilled any of the UN resolutions regarding the Palestinian right for sovereignty over the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem.  Also, the right of return of Palestinians who were expelled from Palestine in 1948. So, Israel is still an occupying power, and normalization with the Arab world would mean that the Arab world have to recognize Israel as an occupying power, and that will not serve the Palestinians interest. It will give Israel more power to make Palestinians suffer more under the occupation, and will they will continue to annex: take more land from Palestinians to build more settlements, continue the confiscation of homes, continue its ethnic cleansing in East Jerusalem, and continue its aggression against Palestinians.

So, that will encourage Israel to keep doing that because of normalization. I think it is better first for Israel to recognize the Palestinian rights to sovereignty, Palestinian right to return, for full sovereignty over East Jerusalem and the West Bank and Gaza, and then normalization will be acceptable at that time.

SS:  If Riyadh and Tel Aviv make a peace treaty, in your opinion, will the resistance movements in the region launch operations on both Saudi and “Israel”?

TT:  If Riyadh and Tel Aviv make a peace treaty, I think there would be a lot of condemnation from Palestinians, from different factions of Palestinians, but not from the PA, because the Palestinian Authority is a different story. Most of the Palestinians would condemn normalization, but I don’t think that they would go into military resistance to attack Saudi Arabia or Israel; I don’t think they would do it, because if you look at the past, Israel has normalized its relationship with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan and nothing happened, just peaceful condemnations and protests against that move.  I think the same would happen if the peace treaty between Israel and Saudi Arabia took place: it would be the same as with the previous countries mentioned.

SS:  Turkey has threatened a further invasion of northern Syria in order to push back the Kurdish militias in Syria who are supported by the US. In your opinion, if Turkey invades northern Syria, what would be the US response?

TT:    About Turkey invading northern Syria: I believe right now there is talk between the US and the Kurdish militia, and they are trying to do some rearrangements with the organization of the Kurdish militias which would be acceptable; with new leaders and different faces.  Maybe that would be acceptable to the Turkish government, and they are also trying very hard to stop the Turkish invasion into northern Syria.  Turkey gave a time limit for this dialog to take place and to convince the militia to withdraw their forces from northern Syria in four different regions: Tal Rifat, Menbij, and two other cities. That is the demand of the Turks, to have all of these militias to be moved away further to the south and away from the borders of Turkey.  If that does not happen, I believe an invasion will take place from Turkey into Syria, and I think that the US will continue to condemn even if the invasion happens.  The US will not militarily face Turkey in Syria. I think the US will condemn, and maybe the US will ask the Turkish to pinpoint their missile attacks in some areas so they can avoid any casualties of the US military. There are 60 to 70, maybe 100, US military personnel in that region.  So I think, if the invasion takes place, I don’t think the US will do much other than condemnations.

SS:  The conflict in Syria has turned into a stalemate over the terrorist controlled Idlib. In your opinion, will a decision be made to eliminate the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham terrorist group from Idlib?

TT: Concerning Hayat Tahrir al-Sham: I don’t think they will eliminate them. I think they have support, and I believe Turkey supports them, and they are considered part of the so-called “Freedom Army” of Syria. They are protecting parts of Idlib, if not all of Idlib, from the Syrian Arab Army attacks, or from the taking back of Idlib by the Syrian government. There is a lot of interest for the group to be in Idlib, or maybe somewhere else. To eliminate them is a very big question, and I don’t see that happening in the near future.

Note: the answers of the guest do not represent the views of MidEastDiscourse and its chief editor, Steven Sahiounie.

*

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 Massoud Nayeri

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “Violence will escalate as long as extremists are allied to Netanyahu”: Interview with Tawfieq Toameh
  • 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 saga of Baby Will of New Zealand is now known worldwide, and I will direct the reader to Tessa Lena’s excellent summary of it here.

You have probably heard the story of the baby snapped out of the parents’ hands in New Zealand, so I’ll be brief and to the point. Here is what happened, based on available information:

  • The baby needed a heart surgery.
  • The baby’s parents had concerns about giving the baby a blood transfusion from a possibly COVID-vaccinated donor (and for good reasons—which most of us would likely agree on if the actual safety data weren’t so heavily massaged and censored).
  • Parents did their part to make it easy and found willing unvaccinated donors.
  • The not-fascist-at-all administration of the health facility felt like allowing the parents so much control over the medical decisions concerning their baby would be an unacceptable blow to the public trust in the medical establishment.
  • To solve the public trust problem, the health authorities filed a court case seeking to strip the parents of their parental rights for the duration of the surgery.

 

I believe that Baby Will received blood from the unjabbed, and I base my conclusion on the following.

First, the government of New Zealand is fully cognizant of the issues regarding the Pfizer Covid inoculation, including the damage wrought by the spike protein, the persistence of mRNA activity within the jabbed, and the excess mortality that has ensued in countries around the world, including New Zealand.

Despite their push for one hundred percent inoculation in its population and the propaganda they have used to support this, they understand full well the plethora of adverse events, which include death.

Second, given the global spotlight placed on this case, which even the mainstream media cannot have avoided, the New Zealand government and the New Zealand Blood Service would wish to avoid a public relations nightmare should Baby Will be damaged by having received blood products from those who have been jabbed.

Third, the bureaucratic rationale to deny anyone the blood donors of choice will have hit home even among people who have otherwise unquestioningly accepted every government Covid directive and recommendation. Why should anyone be denied blood from compatible donors of their own choice?

Fourth, the government of New Zealand has a national register of those who have been jabbed and those who have not.

In light of the above, a government culpable already of heinous disregard of its population’s actual health (as I have shown here) would adopt a course to buttress its existing agenda, and that course would be:

  1. secretly making sure that the infant remains healthy by taking no chances with the blood of the jabbed, covertly.
  2. Publicly using the baby’s recovery and well-being as a propaganda opportunity to assure us, falsely, that blood from those who have been inoculated is safe

This is how a devious totalitarian government would, to my mind, proceed. This is how those pushing the Globalist Agenda operate. The more we understand such machinations, the better prepared will we be.

*

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.

Dr. Garcia is a Philadelphia-born psychoanalyst and psychiatrist who emigrated to New Zealand in 2006. He has authored articles ranging from explorations of psychoanalytic technique, the psychology of creativity in music (Mahler, Rachmaninoff, Scriabin, Delius), and politics. He is also a poet, novelist and theatrical director. He retired from psychiatric practice in 2021 after working in the public sector in New Zealand.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

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 Did Baby Will of New Zealand Receive Blood from the Unjabbed After All?
  • 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.

***

Certainly it can be described as an irreversible historical landmark as United States President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his administration are set to renew their commitments and hold discussions relating to the global economy, democracy and governance, climate change, health and security, women, youth and education during the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit scheduled for December 13-15 in Washington.

According to various authentic reports monitored by the Modern Diplomacy, Biden is expected to announce American support for the African Union’s admission to G-20 as a permanent member. By joining the G-20, it would enable Africa the chance to discuss more forcefully pertinent issues, existing challenges and possible ways to achieve its sustainable development across Africa.

The G-20 members include Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Britain, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the United States, and the European Union. Our careful and systematic monitoring has also revealed that out of 55 African countries, South Africa is the only member of the group from the continent.

Therefore, Biden and his administration’s latest push further for ultimate ascension is highly appreciable. This final significant move comes after African Union Chair and Presidents of Senegal and South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa and Macky Sall, humbly requested Biden to expand their participation in the G-20.

White House reports say Biden has not scheduled one-on-one meeting with any of the 50 African leaders attending the U.S.-Africa Leaders’ Summit and has not invited Western Sahara, Eritrea, Somaliland, Sudan, Guinea, Mali and Burkina Faso.

Biden did not invite Sudan, Guinea, Mali and Burkina Faso because they are currently suspended by the African Union following coups and counter coups in the West Africa. These countries are not in good standing with the Africa Union so were not invited.

In the case of Eritrea, although the United States established diplomatic relations with Eritrea in 1993, following its independence from Ethiopia, and was one of the first countries to recognize Eritrea’s independence, relations have been frosty over government detention of political dissidents and prisoners of conscience, including religious minorities, the closure of the independent press, limits on civil liberties, violations of religious freedom, and reports of human rights abuses. They worsened in the past two years over the war in Tigray.

It said that Western Sahara, a disputed territory on the northwest coast and in the Maghreb region of North and West Africa, has not been invited to the summit. About 20% of the territory is controlled by the self-proclaimed Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, while the remaining 80% of the territory is occupied and administered by neighboring Morocco.

U.S. has no diplomatic relations with the Western Sahara – the territory of Western Sahara – so they have not been invited. Currently, Somaliland and the United States also do not have official diplomatic relations. In all, Biden did not invite Western Sahara, Eritrea, Somaliland, Sudan, Guinea, Mali and Burkina Faso.

But for the 49 African heads of state and the chairperson of the African Union Commission – those 49 countries are all in good standing with the African Union, have diplomatic relations with the United States and share ambassadors with Washington.

Biden administration will consider seriously the future of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) which expires in 2025.  It has been the bedrock of trade relations between the two regions since the legislation was passed in 2000. This question is important and connects the current African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). It will also be a platform to discuss AGOA implementation and how to work together to improve, for example, AGOA utilization rates, strengthening economic cooperation, expanding to a trade and investment, and of course, support regional economic integration.

Under President Obama, there was the Young African Leadership Initiative to really speak to the moment in terms of the large demographic youth population and partnering to provide them the skills that they need to be leaders, to be the next generation to lead the continent. It works closely, and in particular, with the African diaspora and young civil society and businesses leaders inside Africa. And the Young African Leader Diaspora Forum is just one manifestation of that during the summit.

United States looks to find innovative solutions to new and longstanding challenges, harnessing new research and technologies, and investing in long-term sources of strength while meeting immediate needs and aspirations of Africans. In practical terms, it recognizes the fact that Africa has enormous resources, one of fastest-growing populations, largest free-trade areas, most diverse ecosystems, and one of the largest voting – regional voting groups in the United Nations.

According to reports, the summit is to “really to highlight how the United States and our African partners are strengthening our partnerships and advancing shared priorities and indicates a reflection of the U.S. strategy towards sub-Saharan Africa and the African Union’s Agenda 2063, both of which emphasize the critical importance of the region in meeting this era’s defining challenges.”

In conclusion, it explicitly follows that it is an opportunity to deepen longstanding partnership and to focus on new areas. Discussions will focus on challenges and barriers hindering smooth friendship, ways of strengthening and advancing shared economic priorities, and defining opportunities for building relations into the future. United States show readiness to cooperate with African partners within the framework of the African Union’s Agenda 2063.

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on US-Africa Leaders Summit: Biden to Announce Support for African Union’s Admission to G20?
  • 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 uprising that began on September 16 in reaction to the death of 22-year-old Kurdish woman Mahsa Amini in police custody has been ongoing.

The young generation of Iranians in schools and universities has joined the uprising to demand the end of clerical rule in Iran. The uprising has created the biggest challenge to the theocratic rule in Iran since the 1979 Revolution.

The unrest was further aggravated by the execution of a 23-year-old protestor Mohsen Shekari.

On December 8, the Iranian judiciary ordered to hang Shekari, who had been convicted of injuring a basij security guard with a knife and blocking a street in Tehran. That was the first such execution after thousands of arrests over the unrest and the killing of more than 400 protestors. In reaction, on September 10, the offices of basij at Sharif University and some other locations were torched.

The International community and many Iranians inside and outside of the country condemned the execution. Many legal experts criticized Shekari’s execution as he did not have an optional attorney, due process was not observed in his show trial, and he was hastily executed. The ruling was not even in compliance with the regime’s own Islamic laws.

From a legal point of view, the death penalty did not fit the illegal act he had committed.

Shekari had not committed acts that deserved death due to the crime of “moharebeh” which is an Islamic term interpreted as “waging war against God.” His execution has caused further antagonism towards clerical rule in Iran. Nonetheless, the mullahs defended the execution and said more executions were forthcoming. In the Friday prayers sermon on December 9, senior cleric Ahmad Khatami expressed his gratitude to the judiciary for sending the first rioter to the gallows.

The reason for the momentum behind the uprising involves challenges against the regime that have been going on since the revolution. For over four decades, the people in Iran have been the victim of the mullahs’ repression.

In the first decade after the revolution, the ruling clerics eliminated their political opponents through imprisonments and subsequent mass executions. They further pushed their Islamic ideology in all aspects of Iranian social, legal, cultural, economic, and political affairs.

For years, the mullahs tried to minimize any Iranian cultural identification that was pre-Islamic. The mullahs attempted to destroy the remains of Persepolis, the capital of the Achaemenid Empire. The attempt was eventually halted due to intense public outrage against it. The mullahs have ridiculed the Iranian traditions and festivities. In the early years, they assaulted celebrations of Nowruz, the Iranian new year, on the first day of Spring. Numerous changes were made to eradicate Iranian national identity. These actions included replacing the icon of the lion and sun at the center of the Iranian flag with the Arabic word “Allah”, eliminating the Zoroastrian’s ethical words from Iran’s national anthem and adopting a new anthem that humiliates Iranians to sing it, strict censorship of the national media, elimination of joyful music from the Iranian radio and television, and enforcing Islamic hejab on women. Many Iranians consider these actions as a second Arab invasion of Iran after the downfall of the Sassanid Empire in the seventh century.

Among other matters, the educational system was subjected to Islamic ideological infusion to legitimize clerical rule.

The clerics push superstitious ideas to indoctrinate the students.

References to the Persian Empire were eliminated from schoolbooks.

So far, the regime has pushed its shi’ism ideology along with crackdowns to survive. However, pushing Islamic ideology to legitimize clerical rule has backfired. Many Iranians can no longer tolerate the fundamentalist rule of the mullahs. As a result, the regime has resorted to heavy crackdowns against protests to extend its authority. But crackdowns have not worked as the mullahs do not have the legitimacy to remain in power. Though, the Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei claims that the United States and its allies have launched hybrid warfare against the Islamic Republic, and that has instigated these demonstrations and riots.

In the past, the Western powers had publicly criticized the mullahs but tacitly supported them to rule, wanting to contain the power of Iranian nationalism throughout the region. Taking advantage of the uprising now, the West is attempting to spread propaganda to radicalize the Iranian ethnic minorities such as the Kurds, Azari, and Baluchi in the hope of partitioning the Iranian motherland.

*

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.

Akbar E. Torbat ([email protected])  is the author of “Politics of Oil and Nuclear Technology in Iran,” Palgrave Macmillan, (2020), https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9783030337650. He received his Ph.D. in political economy from the University of Texas at Dallas.   

Featured image is from Silent Crow News

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Execution of a Protester Intensifies Opposition to Clerical Rule in Iran
  • Tags:

The 2002 Bush Junior Doctrine and the Pandora Box of “Preemptive Warfare”

December 12th, 2022 by Dr. Vladislav B. Sotirović

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.

***

Originally, the Bush Doctrine was a political phrase with the aim to describe the US foreign policy goals during the 43rd US President George W. Bush (Bush Junior), 2001−2009. The doctrine had four basic standpoints. All of them were centered around American military superiority after the Cold War 1.0 as the US being the only global hyperpower in international relations.

The Bush Doctrine’s fundamental standpoints

The fundamental standpoints of the Bush Doctrine are:

1) Unilateralism;

2) A logic of “either with us or with the terrorists”;

3) Pre-emption; and

4) Regime change.

It must be noted that the Bush Junior administration turned to the direction of a realist stance of “America First” to international engagement soon after taking office in January 2001 (before 9/11). Such policy became first expressed by the US withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol (signed on December 11th, 1997).

Following the 9/11 case in New York and Washington, the Bush Junior administration combined unilateralist propensities with military interventionism that became directed at countries presumed to harbor terrorists – in other words, the pre-emptive wars. Therefore, in October 2001, Bush Junior started a war against the Taliban regime in Afghanistan followed by the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 (accompanied by the UK) as declaratively part of the policy of the War on Terror.

There are three prominent texts in which the Bush Doctrine was codified and promulgated:

1) Bush’s 2002 State of the Union Address, which included the famous terminology of the “axis of evil” for the political purpose to mark North Korea, Iraq, and Iran as the focal enemies of the US;

2) The 2002 National Security Strategy which became technically updated in 2006; and

3) The 2003 President State of the Union Address.

George W. Bush Junior and the “Axis of Evil”  

Concerning the first text, President Bush Junior got his idea for the phrase “axis of evil”, in fact, by combining the US President Ronald Reagan’s (who invaded the independent state of Grenada in 1983) description of the USSR as the “evil empire” (which kind of empire the US was is not clear by Reagan’s descriptions) with the term axis as used in WWII (Italy, Japan, and Germany).

The term “axis” for the first time appeared in a speech in the cathedral of the Italian city of Milan by Benito Mussolini on November 1st, 1936. On that occasion, he described by the term the relations between Italy and Germany. At least from the very mathematical viewpoint, the term “axis” was suggesting that Italy and Germany saw Europe revolved around the line connecting Rome and Berlin (in practice more around Berlin than Rome) as a mathematical axis describes a straight line around which a geometric figure can rotate.

George W. Bush Junior & the Democrats

A Conservative-Republican George W Bush Junior’s doctrine had a key place in the “peace” theory of the US democrat party. The Bush Doctrine assumed that America must spread democracy all over the world (however, if democracy exists in the US is not clear!). The Bush Doctrine potentially predicts that, once democratic institutions exist in some country (for example in Iraq), democracy as a political system is going to be spread over to all neighboring states in the region, and subsequently all these countries would adopt democratic peaceful policies in international relations (nevertheless, why the US as “democratic” state is not adopting a peaceful policy in international relations is still not clear!). Nevertheless, since countries in transition to democracy may be more warlike than other regimes, efforts to spread democracy may, actually, lead to more wars – a typical example, in this case, can be the USA.

The “War on Terror” as a preemptive war     

The “War on Terror” (or “terrorism”) became a focal point of the 2002 Bush Doctrine and the cornerstone of his imagination on the preemptive war within the framework of international relations, however, at the time when the US was still a hyperpower in global politics. Soon, within the circle of American policymakers, the idea became known as the Global War on Terror (GWOT), referring to the efforts by the Pentagon and the key US allies (the Brits in the first place) to root out and finally destroy different groups of forces allegedly accused to be responsible for global terrorism. The first of such kind of preemptive wars launched by the US administration happened soon after 9/11 and it mapped a military strategy for a “Long War” that marked the focal security threats to global politics in the new (21st) century.

The concept of Bush’s preemptive war had the final aim to beat the historically new combination of threats posed by non-state actors and especially terrorist groups (which in the majority of cases fought against organized state [governmental] terrorism like Israel or Turkey). Nevertheless, all critics of the 2002 Bush concept of a preemptive “War on Terror” stressed that it, in fact, legitimized almost unlimited power in both foreign and domestic policies interventions and, subsequently, the concept and the whole doctrine have been building the proper political and propaganda atmosphere of fear and apprehension. In other words, the doctrine simply allowed the American and other Western governments to manipulate public opinion and create conditions for imperialistic military actions (what happened soon in Iraq, Libya, and Syria).

In essence, the doctrine of “War on Terror” was an umbrella by the US administration of George W. Bush Junior referring to the various military, political, and legal actions taken by the Pentagon and the US allies after the attack on 9/11 2001 in order to curb the spread of the terrorist way of struggle for political aims in general but, in fact, Islamic inspired terrorism in particular.

A Pandora Box of the Bush doctrine of preemptive war

By the academic definition, preemptive (or preventive) war is a such war that is initiated to gain an advantage over an enemy that is itself about to attack (Richard W. Mansbach, Kirsten L. Taylor, Introduction to Global Politics, Second edition, London−New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, 2012, p. 582).

Subsequently, the Russian (humanitarian and anti-Nazi) military intervention in East Ukraine which started in February 2022 is a typical preventive self-defense war (against Ukrainian state terror on the Russian-speaking minority and designed NATO military intervention against Russia.

The question is: Who is the initiator of the modern view of the doctrine of preventive war?

The answer is quite clear: the Bush administration in 2002. The Bush Doctrine of preemptive war wrapped into the package of the “War on Terror” simply produced two decades later a boomerang effect and opened Pandora’s box in global politics with unpredictable consequences for the system of international relations and world peace.

*

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. Vladislav B. Sotirović is a former university professor in Vilnius, Lithuania. He is a Research Fellow at the Center for Geostrategic Studies. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The 2002 Bush Junior Doctrine and the Pandora Box of “Preemptive Warfare”
  • Tags:

A Hair Trigger on Endgame

December 12th, 2022 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

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

***

The insouciance of Washington and its European puppets toward the dangerous situation they are provoking with Russia is frightening.  The Western world is now led by people who have made it clear that they will risk nuclear war in their pursuit of American hegemony.  Evil has clearly triumphed in the Western world.

We are now on the brink of a nuclear holocaust.  One false warning of nuclear attack, believed to be true, could cause Russia to launch a full-scale nuclear attack against the US and Europe.

False warning signals indicating incoming nuclear weapons have happened before, but were discounted because a sufficient level of mutual trust had been achieved.

Now, with two decades of reckless provocations against Russia, with missile bases being constructed on Russia’s borders in Poland and Romania, with US/NATO fully committed to defeating Russia in Ukraine, and with massive anti-Russian propaganda in place of diplomatic negotiation, trust has been destroyed.

Notice the provocative idiocy of US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin who mischaracterizes Putin’s warning about the extremely dangerous situation as “Russian saber-rattling.”  With utter fools like Austin making decisions, there is a zero chance of avoiding Armageddon.  Lloyd’s position is that it is Putin who must avoid provocative behavior, not Washington.

The expressed willingness of Finland, Sweden, Poland, and Romania to accept US nuclear weapons in their countries, together with the ability of the US to launch against Russia from the Black and Baltic seas, greatly heightens anxiety in Russia.  Unlike the Cold War period, in the 21st century Washington has worked overtime to destroy all trust.  Consequently, one more false warning is all it takes to exterminate mankind.

We are on the brink of nuclear war, and we do not have a John F Kennedy in the White House to stop it. Instead, we have insane neoconservatives committed to US hegemony at all cost.

Putin said:

Russia’s nuclear doctrine is based on the “launch on warning” concept, which envisions nuclear weapons’ use in the face of an imminent nuclear attack spotted by its early warning systems.“When the early warning system receives a signal about a missile attack, we launch hundreds of missiles that are impossible to stop,” he said, smiling. “Enemy missile warheads would inevitably reach the territory of the Russian Federation. But nothing would be left of the enemy too, because it’s impossible to intercept hundreds of missiles. And this, of course, is a factor of deterrence.”

See this.

*

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

Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned author and academic, chairman of The Institute for Political Economy where this article  was originally published. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. 

Featured image is from Notes from the Twilight Zone

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A Hair Trigger on Endgame

A Looming Elephant in the Room: Inflation

December 12th, 2022 by Connor Vasile

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.

***

With rising inflation, ever-present shortages, and the legacy media recommending Americans tighten their belts, let’s take a look how much the federal government has been spending on foreign aid, and on what.

With Thanksgiving and Black Friday in the rearview mirror, American families are now preparing for the Christmas season, buying gifts and planning trips with family and friends. Despite our efforts to keep the holiday cheer, there will be a looming elephant in the room: inflation. Currently at 7.75 percent, there seems to be no stopping the price hikes, let alone the shipping delays.

On top of that, average gas prices are still around $3.50-3.60 (and likely to rise again). Many individuals are dipping into their savings accounts to deal with these price hikes, and the government has still not solved the baby formula shortagea problem it created—yet news outlets have deemed it too unimportant to continue to report on.

In order to combat these woes, legacy media has come up with countless articles and how-to videos, educating Americans on how they can stretch their dollars. Earlier this year, Bloomberg published an article recommending that families making under $300k a year should switch out meats for vegetables like lentils stating: “Though your palate may not be used to it, tasty meat substitutes include vegetables (where prices are up a little over 4%, or lentils and beans which are up about 9%)…” The author also recommends taking the bus instead of driving, not buying food in bulk, and forgoing pets’ medical bills. This seems perfectly logical; why halt an ever expanding bureaucracy from printing billions of dollars or raising the federal interest rate when the average American can contribute by tightening their belts, and buying less for themselves and their families?

As the Director of Research of the Economic Policy Institute Josh Biven has stated, “…Inflation is largely a global, geopolitical phenomenon that is just not under the Biden administration’s control…”

Then let’s see what steps the federal government and the Biden Administration have been taking in order to contribute to the alleviation of this global phenomenon of inflation, and in turn help Americans with pricing at home.

With the war in the Ukraine, labor strikes, social unrest, and, yes, still Covid on the tongues of many world leaders, the Biden Administration has taken on the herculean responsibility of providing/continuing foreign aid to various countries with the hopes of mending trade relations and to help get the globe back to some sense of economic normalcy.

In fiscal year 2022, the total amount of foreign obligations the federal government committed to disburse throughout the world was $44 billion dollars—a $9 billion increase from the previous year. The Biden government is distributing taxpayer dollars to many regions and for many purposes: from humanitarian aid, to military funding, to green initiatives.

Let’s focus on some of the salient contributions.

With Russia’s invasion of Ukraine now reaching its tenth month, the US government hasn’t wavered in providing military and humanitarian aid to the latter. According to the US State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, the United States has invested about $19.3 billion for “security assistance” since January of 2021. However, this doesn’t paint a full picture of exactly how much Biden sent to Ukraine this past fiscal year.

According to research conducted by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, from January 24 to October 3, the United States committed and dispersed $52.3 billion to Ukraine—$10.8 billion more than every other participating country and global institution combined ($41.5B).

Any portion of this could have made considerable strides towards fixing the ‘crumbling infrastructure’ dilemma this president and his predecessors have been campaigning on for decades, or to providing tax relief to Americans. The amount of aid we are funding to Ukraine may very well rise again soon, with Biden recently asking Congress for an additional $37 billion in “emergency aid” while Russia continues to fight in the Donbass.

One would assume that after the August 15, 2021 takeover of Kabul, the US would halt aid to a country now dominated by the Taliban. However, on top of the billions in military and transportation equipment left behind, the deaths of 13 US service members, and the countless women and young girls now being forcibly married and raped by militants, Biden has made sure to continue funding ‘humanitarian aid’ to Afghanistan in the form of $3.79 billion for fiscal year 2022.

Unfortunately, all federal information regarding the exact types of projects or initiatives these funds are reportedly supporting has been redacted in accordance with the exceptions outlined in the Foreign Aid Transparency Act of 2016—ironic to say the least. What we do know is that said monies are allotted for emergency disaster relief and “basic education.”

Considering how the Taliban commands with Sharia Law, dictates what is being taught and shared with the public, and outright bans girls from attending school, it begs the question of where exactly all this foreign aid is going. Why would the US continue to support a country which violates UN human rights agreements and is one of America’s largest enemies?

Let’s keep in mind that these payments were taking place while American citizens experienced exploding inflation, unemployment, price hikes, and a deadly opioid epidemic with no end in sight.

This is by no means an exhaustive list; one could write a white paper on the subject of US foreign aid allotments just in 2022. However, I wanted to highlight a handful of other expenses since 2020.

  1. As part of the 5,593 page, $1.4 trillion Omnibus bill passed in December 2020, “up to $15,000,000 may be made available for assistance for Sri Lanka for the refurbishing of a high endurance cutter” (aka speedboat) for the purpose of “instruction in human rights.” Considering how the Sri Lanka government has been under investigation for human rights abuses and land confiscations, such a hefty donation to progress “human rights” seems questionable.
  2. In the same bill, $15 million was allotted to “democracy programs,” $10 million to “gender programs” in Pakistan, and millions more to other countries’ defense budgets.
  3. In Ecuador, from September 30, 2022 until August 31, 2023, the US State Department is spending $20,600 on 12 drag queen theater performances, 3 workshops, and a 2-minute documentary in order to “promote diversity and inclusion”. The State Department told the Washington Examiner via email that this funding is “…to promote tolerance and … provide new opportunities for LGBTQI+ Ecuadorians to express themselves freely and safely”—during a time when Ecuador is currently taking in hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan refugees fleeing the communist Maduro regime. Priorities, I assume.

To put it into perspective—only in regards to the expenditures I’ve mentioned in this article—the US government has committed just over $93 billion in foreign aid while the US economy is still reeling from pandemic lockdowns, a rise in unemployment, and skyrocketing prices.

While we are all doing what we can to provide for our families as pricesacross pretty much every industry continue to rise, the Biden Administration has been doing what it can to provide billions of taxpayer dollars, gender programs, and military aid to other nations.

Some may see these “contributions” as a kind of benevolence, but it would be a mistake to confuse government largesse with genuine solicitude.

“It is easy to be conspicuously ‘compassionate’ if others are being forced to pay the cost,” the economist Murray Rothbard once noted.

When he said Build Back Better, who would have thought he intended it for other countries?

*

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.

Connor Vasile is a first-generation American and writer who wishes to raise awareness about classical liberal ideas which empower every individual, no matter their background or experience, to live their best lives and fulfill their goals. 

Featured image is from iStock

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on A Looming Elephant in the Room: Inflation
  • Tags:

Ukrainian Forces Continue Shelling Donetsk

December 12th, 2022 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.

***

Kiev continues ceaselessly attacking the capital of the Donetsk People’s Republic. Despite the republic’s accession to the Russian Federation, operated after a popular referendum attesting to the will of local residents, the Ukrainian neo-Nazi regime maintains its policy of military actions against the region, violating Russian sovereign territory. Worsening the situation, the main targets of Ukrainian attacks are civilian buildings, killing innocent people without having any impact on the Russian armed forces or popular militias – which undoubtedly is a war crime and an abuse of international humanitarian law.

The second week of December was marked by brutal attacks in Donbass. Between 6 and 11 December, every day unarmed civilians were killed by Ukrainian shelling in the streets of Donetsk’s capital. During their long-range operations, Ukrainian military, neo-Nazi militiamen, and foreign mercenaries destroyed mainly civilian facilities in central Donetsk, with no damage reported to any Russian military base. As on other occasions, the streets near Donetsk’s central market, where there is a large concentration of civilians, were one of the most affected places. More precise data regarding the exact number of dead and injured people are still being analyzed. As the attacks have been constant and reached different parts of the republic, it is difficult to calculate the damage and the victims.

On December 6, for example, six civilians died in the region as a result of Ukrainian bombings. The following day, at least ten fatal victims were caused by the strikes. At the time, the Ukrainian authorities even made public pronouncements blaming Russia for the bombings, trying to produce another false flag situation. On 11 December, a huge number of bombings occurred, with over 170 shells of various calibers having been launched in the region. Just between 15:05 to 15:52 Moscow Time 36 shells were reported by Russian authorities in Donetsk.

In parallel with the official data reported by the local administration, there is also information circulating on social networks due to the work of several journalists on the ground. Various war correspondents documented the attacks and published photos and videos on the internet showing in real time the effects of the Ukrainian terror campaign. The photos include images of dead and wounded civilians, clearly exposing the brutality to which the population of Donetsk is constantly subjected.

It is important to emphasize that although Donetsk is the main target of these Ukrainian clandestine operations, Kiev has also been bombing other regions of Donbass. On the 11th, for example, two houses were destroyed and more than twenty people injured in Ukrainian bombings in the Lugansk People’s Republic. As well as some of the attacks in Donetsk, the assaults in Lugansk were operated with HIMARS missiles supplied by NATO, which once again makes it clear that Kiev only continues to commit crimes in Donbass because it is receiving Western weapons.

As well known, Ukrainian violence against the people of Donbass is nothing new. Scenes of terror have been constant in the region since the Maidan coup in 2014, with the extermination of the Russian-speaking population being considered by experts around the world as a true genocide. Indeed, this relentless violence was one of the main reasons why Moscow had no choice but to launch its special military operation in February. The main problem is that since September Donetsk and Lugansk are no longer seen by Moscow as part of the sovereign territory of Ukraine or as independent countries, but as Russian oblasts, which is why these attacks take on much greater seriousness.

Kiev is shelling unarmed, semi-pacified and almost fully demilitarized Russian regions far from the line of contact between the troops. Moscow has been tolerating Ukrainian attacks on still militarized regions within Russian territories, but it is unacceptable that aggression continues to escalate in the central zones, where the normalization of civilian life is progressing significantly. In addition to a violation of Russian sovereign space, these attacks are true war crimes, as they do not target military forces, with the sole objective of murdering innocents and destroying cities.

On the part of Moscow, this escalation is expected to be responded with more intense attacks on Kiev’s infrastructure, worsening the supply situation of Ukrainian military bases, which will reduce the ability of the neo-Nazi regime to conduct long-range operations. However, it is essential that international organizations also pronounce on these cases and denounce that NATO co-participates in the crimes by sending the weapons with which the neo-Nazis kill innocent people in Donbass.

*

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: Photo courtesy of Sonja Van den Ende

Defense Bill Includes Massive Military Land Grab in Nevada

December 12th, 2022 by Center For Biological Diversity

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 final version of the National Defense Authorization Act released Tuesday night by the House Rules Committee contains provisions that would enable an enormous military land grab in Nevada.

Despite celebrations by the environmental justice community about the omission of Sen. Joe Manchin’s permitting reform deal from the bill, the must-pass legislation does include a long-sought-after expansion of Naval Air Station Fallon in central Nevada. This provision would allow the Navy to gain complete or partial control of more than 500,000 acres of public land for bombing ranges and military exercise areas.

The public lands of central Nevada that would be turned into a military training area feature towering snow-capped mountain ranges and broad, sagebrush-filled basins. They’re rich in wildlife, including desert bighorn sheep, pronghorn antelope, golden eagles and greater sage-grouse.

“This is a dark day for the public lands and wildlife of central Nevada,” said Patrick Donnelly, Great Basin director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “I’m outraged that Nevada’s senators are helping the military seize control of hundreds of thousands of acres of irreplaceable public land.”

The expansion would entail a significant increase in military airplane activity above Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge, an essential stopover on the Pacific flyway and a Western Hemispheric shorebird reserve. The refuge is dense with bald eagles, tundra swans and shorebirds such as American avocets and long-billed dowitchers. The increased overflights will disturb the birds as they stop to rest on their long migrations.

The bill also includes a backdoor authorization for the Dixie Valley water grab, a proposed project that would suck water out of remote Dixie Valley and pipe it 50 miles to Fallon to fuel unsustainable growth. This project was recently cited by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as a factor contributing to the endangered species listing of the Dixie Valley toad.

“Sen. Cortez Masto and Sen. Rosen have sold out Nevada’s public lands and wildlife,” said Donnelly. “They talk the talk about conservation, but when push comes to shove, they’re apparently willing to sacrifice our shared national heritage on the altar of the ever-expanding military-industrial complex.”

*

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: Wetlands at Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge at sunset. Photo by Patrick Donnelly/Center for Biological Diversity.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Defense Bill Includes Massive Military Land Grab in Nevada

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 Federal Reserve is sowing the seeds for its central bank digital currency (CBDC). It may seem that the purpose of a CBDC is to facilitate transactions and enhance economic activity, but CBDCs are mainly about more government control over individuals. If a CBDC were implemented, the central bank would have access to all transactions in addition to being capable of freezing accounts.

It may seem dystopian—something that only totalitarian governments would do—but there have been recent cases of asset freezing in Canada and Brazil. Moreover, a CBDC would give the government the power to determine how much a person can spend, establish expiration dates for deposits, and even penalize people who saved money.

The war on cash is also a reason why governments want to implement CBDCs. The end of cash would mean less privacy for individuals and would allow central banks to maintain a monetary policy of negative interest rates with greater ease (since individuals would be unable to withdraw money commercial banks to avoid losses).

Once the CBDC arrives, instead of a deposit being a commercial bank’s liability, a deposit would be the central bank’s liability.

In 2020, China launched a digital yuan pilot program. As mentioned by Seeking Alpha, China wants to implement a CBDC because “this would give [the government] a remarkable amount of information about what consumers are spending their money on.”

The government could easily track digital payments with a CBDC. Bloomberg noted in an article published when the digital yuan pilot program was launched that the digital currency “offers China’s authorities a degree of control never possible with cash.” A CBDC could allow the Chinese government to monitor mobile app purchases (which accounted for about 16 percent of the country’s gross domestic product in 2020) more closely. Bloomberg describes how much control a CBDC could give Chinese authorities:

The PBOC [People’s Bank of China] has also indicated that it could put limits on the sizes of some transactions, or even require an appointment to make large ones. Some observers wonder whether payments could be linked to the emerging social-credit system, wherein citizens with exemplary behavior are “whitelisted” for privileges, while those with criminal and other infractions find themselves left out.

(Details on China’s social credit system can be found here.)

The Chinese government is waging war on cash. And they are not alone. In 2017, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) published a document offering suggestions to governments—even in the face of strong public opposition—on how to move toward a cashless society. Governments and central bankers claim that the shift to a cashless society will help prevent crime and increase convenience for ordinary people. But the real motivation behind the war on cash is more government control over the individual.

And the US is getting ready to establish its own CBDC (or something similar). The first step was taken in August, when the Fed announced FedNow. FedNow will be an instant payment system and is scheduled to be launched between May and July 2023.

FedNow is practically identical to Brazil’s PIX. PIX was implemented by the Central Bank of Brazil (BCB) in November 2020. It is a convenient instant payment system (using mobile devices) without user fees, and a reputation as being safe to use.

A year after its launch, PIX already had 112 million people registered, or just over half of the Brazilian population. Of course, frauds and scams do occur over PIX, but most are social engineering scams (see herehere, and here) and are not system flaws; that is, they are scams that exploit the public’s lack of knowledge of PIX technology.

Bear in mind that PIX is not the Brazilian CBDC. It is just a payment system. However, the BCB has access to transactions made through PIX; therefore, PIX can be considered the seed of the Brazilian CBDC. It is already an invasion of the privacy of Brazilians. And FedNow is set to follow suit.

Additionally, the New York Fed has recently launched a twelve-week pilot program with several commercial banks to test the feasibility of a CBDC in the US. The program will use digital tokens to represent bank deposits. Institutions involved in the program will make simulated transactions to test the system. According to Reuters, “the pilot [program] will test how banks using digital dollar tokens in a common database can help speed up payments.”

Banks involved in the pilot program include BNY Mellon, Citi, HSBC, Mastercard, PNC Bank, TD Bank, Truist, US Bank, and Wells Fargo. The global financial messaging service provider SWIFT is also participating to support interoperability across the international financial ecosystem.” (This video details the pilot program and how the US CBDC would work.)

The IMF is also thinking of a way to connect different CBDCs under a single system. In other words, the IMF plans to create a PIX/FedNow for CBDCs around the globe:

Things could change as money becomes tokenized; that is, accessible to anyone with the right private key and transferable to anyone with access to the same network. Examples of tokenized money include so-called stablecoins, such as USD Coin, and central bank digital currency.

The reception of Brazil’s PIX shows that FedNow will likely be widely adopted due to its convenience; however, this positive economic and technological element should not overshadow the increased control instant payment systems will give to central banks. The BCB has access to all transactions made by Brazilians through PIX, and this would only get worse should a CBDC be implemented. With a CBDC, it would be easier for the government to carry out expansionary monetary policies (which cause misallocations of resources and business cycles) and exert greater control over citizens’ finances.

*

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.

André Marques is 27, Brazilian (Recife-PE) and he holds a graduate degree in Political Science and International Relations at Universidade Nova de Lisboa and a master’s degree in International Economics at Universidade de Lisboa. He also writes articles and analysis about economics and the precious metals market for Elementum Portugal.

Featured image is from Adobe Stock

Almost a Third of Wildlife Species at Risk of Extinction

December 12th, 2022 by Center For Biological Diversity

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 update released today by the International Union for Conservation of Nature found that 28% of plants and animals around the globe are threatened with extinction. The new IUCN Red List identifies 42,108 species as threatened out of 150,388 species for which there is enough information to determine a conservation status.

The Red List update comes as governments from around the globe gather in Canada at COP15, the Convention on Biological Diversity, to negotiate a framework on biodiversity conservation objectives for the next decade.

“These horrific Red List numbers are yet another wake-up call to negotiators in Montreal that we have to do everything in our power to save biodiversity,” said Tierra Curry, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We can halt the suicidal march toward mass extinction if we take bold actions to save life on Earth.”

Scientists are working to assess the status of all species. Today’s update focuses on the dire situation of marine species threatened by illegal and unsustainable fishing, pollution, climate change and disease. Of the 54 global species of abalone, 20 were found to be threatened.

The pillar coral found throughout the Caribbean, including Florida, was downgraded from vulnerable to critically endangered after its population shrunk by more than 80% since 1990 because of bleaching from climate change and pollution.

“These updates feel soul-crushing, but they should be a catalyst for action,” said Curry. “Nations have an opportunity to agree to halt extinctions now and build a framework to reduce threats to life. Real change must come out of the negotiations in Montreal that benefit wildlife and vulnerable human communities.”

Every decade, global governments negotiate a framework to implement the Convention on Biological Diversity over the next 10 years. This framework, more formally known as “the post-2020 global biodiversity framework,” is centered around the vision of living in harmony with nature by 2050.

Negotiators planned to adopt the agreement in 2020 but because of the pandemic, final negotiations are taking place now. Funding problems, controversies over sharing genetic resources and a lack of ambition have hamstrung the negotiations. The United States and the Vatican are the only countries not party to the Convention.

*

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 Almost a Third of Wildlife Species at Risk of Extinction
  • 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.

***

Track and control grid being erected right under our noses

The Central Bank of Nigeria announced it will begin, effective in January, restricting cash withdrawals from banks and ATMs to just $45 per day as part of a push to move the country toward a cashless economy.

If this were a one-off, I wouldn’t bother writing about it. But it comes on the heels of mega-banks announcing similarly creepy new policies in recent months in China, India, Russia, Brazil, Sweden, the U.S. and many other nations, all pointing to an imminent switch over to a global digital money system.

In the U.S., the Federal Reserve put out an announcement in November that it is launching a 12-week “pilot program” to test out a new central bank digital currency, or CBDC, with six major banks.

Thursday’s announcement in Nigeria is also a big deal because Nigeria is one of only nine countries that have already launched an official CBDC. That happened earlier this year, and now they are already moving to restrict the use of cash. This proves that digital currencies were never designed to function alongside paper currencies but rather to replace them.

Fox News reports that the Central Bank of Nigeria will limit weekly cash withdrawals to 100,000 naira ($225) for individuals and 500,000 naira ($1,124) for corporations, with a processing fee required to access more.

Haruna Mustafa, the central bank’s director of banking supervision, said cash withdrawals may be permitted in “compelling circumstances, not exceeding once a month.”

Isn’t that nice of him?

It’s almost that bad here in the U.S. Try going to your bank and telling them you want to withdraw as little as $5,000 and you will discover that you are required to basically state your case and prove you also have a legitimate “compelling” reason for wanting that much cash.

Of course it’s all for our own good, right? “Safety and security,” they tell us.

Policymakers in Nigeria say the limits on cash withdrawals along with the country’s new digital currency will “bring more people into the banking system and curb currency hoarding, illicit flows, and inflation,” according to Fox News.

Of course, it will do just the opposite, shutting more people out of the ability to buy and sell freely.

The same argument — fighting crime, money hoarding and inflation — could be made in any country in the world and it will be. But we all know the real reason has nothing to do with stopping crime or curbing inflation.

This is about going digital, and replacing cash with a more controllable, more trackable mode of exchange.

Remember what globalist economist Pippa Malmgren said at the World Government Summit in March of this year when she said the quiet part out loud, stating:

“We are on the brink of a dramatic change where we are about to, and I’ll say this boldly, we are about to abandon the traditional system of money and accounting and introduce a new one. And the new one; the new accounting is what we call blockchain… It means digital, it means having an almost perfect record of every single transaction that happens in the economy, which will give us far greater clarity over what’s going on.”

Nigeria’s economy is no different than any other in the sense that it relies heavily on informal activities outside the legal framework and government regulation, such as farming, street and market trade, flea markets, thrift stores, cab drivers, etc. In these businesses, cash is usually preferred for transactions because many lack bank accounts or just don’t want to fool with processing credit or debit cards.

The globalists know this and so they want to get everyone digitally marked and dependent on digital-only transactions for all their needs. That way they will know how much gasoline or heating oil you are consuming, how much meat you are consuming, and it will all be added to your carbon footprint by which you will be taxed for any usage over your allotted amount. If you persist in going over your allotted amount of food and fuel, you can now be controlled by simply cutting off the supply of digital money, which really isn’t money at all in the traditional sense. It’s more like a voucher system.

This will be easily accomplished once they lock everyone’s money into a bank account and replace actual money with digital tokens. At the point in which the American middle class accepts such a system, it’s game over and we will see tyranny sweep across the globe even faster than it is now. The banksters and corporate titans will have captured everyone into their digital beast system, which operates much like a high-tech feudal system, where you no longer truly own anything outright. You will become the equivalent of a sharecropper in the old feudal system of the Middle Ages — your obedience to whatever new rules they throw out for “sustainable living” will no longer be optional but mandatory.

The sustainability rules will start out as “suggestions” or “recommendations,” only to be later demanded and mandated, with heavy fines for disobedience. If you think you can ignore the fines, think again, as they now have direct access to your digital wallet and can simply deactivate whatever digital tokens are in that account.

Some analysts, such as Rebecca Walser at WalserWealth.com, have predicted that the U.S. Federal Reserve will launch its digital dollar as soon as May of 2023. You can listen to a Dec. 7 interview Walser did with Brannon Howse Live here.

Once they get the digital currency in place, the next big thing will be to restrict travel by plane and motor vehicles.

In case you missed it, the globalists are already experimenting with that, too.

Watch the excellent 13-minute video below for an update on what’s going on in Oxford, England, one of the World Economic Forum’s “smart cities,” which are also now being referred to as “15-minute cities.” Of course the only way to fight this will be to directly disobey all of their dictates. Use cash. Drive gasoline-powered cars. Eat real meat. Stop giving your money to “woke” corporations. Become as self-sufficient as possible and pray for God’s mercy!

*

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.

Leo Hohmann is a veteran investigative reporter and author whose recent book, “Stealth Invasion” spent the majority of 2017 among Amazon.com’s top 10 books on immigration. He has spent decades researching and writing about education, immigration, crime, politics and religion.

Featured image is from Truth Talk UK

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Global Central Banks Racing to Implement Digital Currencies as Cities Convert to ‘Smart’ Infrastructure
  • Tags:

End the U.S. Empire!

December 12th, 2022 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.

***

Currently, the U.S. has exactly 900 military bases in foreign countries, in addition to the 749 bases inside the U.S. itself. The U.S. Government minimizes and tries to hide this reality from the public.

Furthermore, although the U.S. is officially estimated to spend around 36% of the entire world’s military expenditures, the actual figure is around 50% of the world’s military expenditures, and the added approximately 14% is being paid-out through federal U.S. Departments other than the ‘Defense’ Department, so as to make the total U.S. figure appear to be only 36% of the global total. Moreover: on November 15th, the U.S. Department of ‘Defense’ announced that “The results of the fifth annual DOD [Department Of Defense] wide financial audit will be a disclaimer of opinion for DOD” and used other such obtuse phraseology, so that the reality that — as one of the very few published news-reports that was based on it headlined optimistically — “Defense Department fails another audit, but makes progress”, and it opened:

The Defense Department has failed its fifth-ever audit, unable to account for more than half of its assets, but the effort is being viewed as a “teachable moment,” according to its chief financial officer.

After 1,600 auditors combed through DOD’s $3.5 trillion in assets and $3.7 trillion in liabilities, officials found that the department couldn’t account for about 61 percent of its assets, Pentagon Comptroller Mike McCord told reporters on Tuesday.

Neither the New York Times, USA Today, Wall Street Journal, Reuters, nor AP, reported it, at all. Nor did anyone report that ONLY the U.S. Aggression (or ‘Defense’) Department fails — and repeatedly fails — its audit-attempts. All other Departments pass their audits. This attempt, which had hired 1,600 independent auditors, failed for the same reason as before: the audit-team refused to sign findings, because where or to whom most of the money is going can’t be traced. But the public don’t know how corrupt or otherwise bad the U.S. military actually is; so, at least ever since the year 2000, the most respected “institution” of all, by the American people, is “The military.” It’s a great PR success.

There is only a single empire remaining in the world: the U.S.-and-allied empire. It relies upon the U.S. military. U.S.-and-allied media have been serving it well.

On 1 December 2019, The Conversation.com headlined “Why does the US pay so much for the defense of its allies? 5 questions answered”, and said:

1. What’s in it for the US?

The U.S. currently has approximately 174,000 active-duty personnel deployed to overseas locations in approximately 140 countries. The Department of Defense Comptroller’s Office estimates the total cost of overseas bases and deployments at US$24.4 billion in fiscal year 2020. These figures generally exclude the costs of ongoing combat operations.

When stronger countries provide security for weaker countries, they receive non-material benefits in return.

For example, the weaker country may sacrifice control over their foreign policy.

To “sacrifice control over their foreign policy” is to be a vassal-nation, or ‘ally’, of the imperial power. It’s to serve the imperial power’s billionaires — to give them control over the vassal nation. That’s to “sacrifice” a lot. The imperial power’s billionaires benefit enormously. So, their media serve it. Here’s why that is being allowed:

U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt formulated his concept of, and named, “the United Nations,” during his conversations with the UK Empire’s Prime Minister Winston Churchill in Newfoundland Canada during 9-11 August 1941, because FDR discovered there that he and Churchill had very different aims for what the post-WW-II world should be like: Churchill insisting upon continuation of empires, and FDR insisting upon the end of all empires and the ultimate replacement of them by a “United Nations” that would possess the exclusive authority, and means, to make and to enforce international laws — the laws that would govern not in national (domestic) matters — but ONLY in international matters.

FDR was convinced that the WW-I-era League of Nations had failed because it was partisan between nations and excluded some, and that the thing that had caused both World Wars was conflicts between empires — it was, regarding both WW I and WW II, wars between imperialistic gangs of nations. Whereas Churchill wanted post-WW-II to be ruled globally by a joint UK-U.S. empire, FDR wanted post-WW-II to be ruled globally by a democratic U.N. that would respect and preserve the individual independence of each and every nation and thus there would no longer be any “imperial” countries (such as the English Empire, and the French Empire), but instead there would be only independent nations and no master-slave relationship any longer existing between an imperial country and its vassal nations or ‘allies’.

It was to be an international democracy of nations; and, in this international global democracy, no nation would possess any right to demand of any other nation compliance with its own internal (domestic) values and laws.

Whereas FDR’s vision was for a further implementation of the Westphalian Principle — that the difference between national laws and international laws must always be honored and adhered-to — Churchill, like all imperialists, rejected the Westphalian Principle. FDR’s successor, Harry S. Truman, starting on 25 July 1945, committed America to Churchill’s vision, and within two years of becoming President, he replaced FDR’s entire Cabinet and advisors, so as to build the coming U.S./UK all-inclusive global empire and to eviscerate FDR’s intended U.N. — which therefore became the weak U.N. we have today. The only way to prevent WW III is to implement FDR’s vision, of a global democracy of nations, but it can’t be done without first cancelling those 900 foreign U.S. military bases. The empire — empire itself — must end. FDR was right; Truman was wrong.

*

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

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book is AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

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

***

“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.” – Ayn Rand

While the masses continue to happily accept any and every tiny bit of ‘permission’ to have a miniscule amount of ‘freedom,’ all at the whim of the rulers, the drive toward more ‘climate change’ lockdown policy and societal regulation and total control are going forward quickly and without restriction. The candy offered to the herd in the form of temporary lifting of draconian mandates is meant only to satisfy the short-term longing of the proletariat so as to gain future compliance and obedience from the sheep in order for the state to create a true slave society. One of the  linchpins of this plot is to concentrate the population into so-called ‘smart’ cities, with 15 minute zones, where no travel outside this time frame is allowed without very restrictive monitoring. This is true insanity sold in the form of convenience, safety, and the bogus claim of protecting the earth.

Preparation, trials, and implementation of these atrocious prison-system cities are fully underway, and are being planned and sold as a public ‘good,’ an atrocious and deceptive lie. As I write this, 15-minute cities are being actively planned in Saudi, Arabia called “The Line,” Dubai, UAE, Oxford, U.K., Australia in Melbourne and Brisbane, in Spain in Barcelona, Buenos Aries, and even in Portland, Oregon in the Fascist U.S. While most have been asleep and basking in ignorance believing that totalitarianism has lessened, the master technocratic plot has never slowed. For those who are feeling left out, worry not, as a 15 minute prison system will soon be in a city or town near you.

Oxfordshire County in the U.K. is moving very fast to set up the first complete 15-minute city scam, and has announced a full “TRIAL” for January 2024. This is simply a climate lockdown trial meant to prepare the citizenry for continuous lockdowns, or more accurately, a minor existence in incarceration centers. Keep in mind that the plot to control the world depends on concentrating populations into smaller centers, with exhaustive technological measures of government regulation and authority that will require complete and total surveillance of all. This will be based on the ‘climate change’ lie, and world domination depends on a controlled, digital monetary system, that is also being structured by the central banking systems worldwide, and privately run by the ruling class. This is the same deep state that controls all government. Once the centralized bank digital currencies become reality, all freedom will end. The idea and implementation of controlled digital currencies is anathema to all liberty, and is mandatory for state control.

Once again I must mention the “big picture,”  as everything going on from ‘virus lies,’ ‘variants,’ staged wars, ‘climate change,’ CBDCs, 15-minute cities, transgender nonsense, fake racism, bioweapon injections, and a myriad of current and future control scenarios, are all meant to accomplish but one thing, and therefore, they are all linked, and all part of the singular agenda of total technocratic control of all people on earth. This is exactly what the ‘great reset,’ the new one world government, and the monetary takeover are all about. Regardless of which particular plot is the news item of the day, it is simply all meant to achieve but one end. Do not disregard all of the minor plots, but recognize that the single plot desired is to control you and all on earth, and nothing less.

The case addressed here can be summed up with one statement coming from the World Economic Forum (WEF) weforum.org on March 15, 2022.

“As climate change and global conflict cause shocks and stresses at faster intervals and increased severity, the 15-minute city will become even more critical.”

This single statement connects the entire fake ‘climate change’, and Ukraine (all war) scenarios and agendas as reasoning to lockdown the world. Make no mistake, this is the plan that is and has been in high gear for decades, but especially so since the bogus ‘covid’ lockdown terror levied at the hands of the state in 2020.

Without mass resistance to this totalitarian push, be prepared for more and more restrictions on every aspect of life; including movement, travel, thought, communication, health decisions,’ medical care,’ money and spending, carbon tracking, total and complete surveillance, social credit systems, and renewed climate lockdowns.

Considering the U.S. government and American citizens, remember that this government and all its controlling rule system is nothing more than an organized crime syndicate; an operation based on the mass cooperation and acceptance of a nearly universal, compliant, and submissive population, intent only on getting by and being able to survive with their smart phones, TVs, games, bread and circuses, and dependence on rule. This general attitude will be the death knell of this society, but it does not have to remain as such given the huge numbers of us, and the few who claim ownership of the bulk of the pathetic inhabitants that make up the vast majority in this country.

Remember that the term ‘climate change’ is the basis of all future plans to take total control over everything, and that is and will be the weapon of fear used to round up the masses. Every time you hear the word “sustainable” and accept it as legitimate, every time the state claims to be protecting the earth to ‘save it,’ every time ‘sustainable development’ is the term used to create and enforce government policy, you have lost all, while the state has gained more power and control over you. The final agenda of fear called ‘climate change,’ is the hammer, while each of you are only a nail, but acting as one, you can hold everything together.

As I stated in an article earlier this year:

“The intentional manmade ‘climate change’ fraud is continually gaining steam, as it will always be the linchpin to future abuses and control by the rulers and their pawns in politics and mainstream media. While the controllers are destroying economies, decimating all quality food sources and production, eliminating vast amounts of life-sustaining energy, greatly harming the environment and its vital resources necessary for life, pursuing eugenics agendas, and advancing depopulation efforts, the majority of people continue to acquiesce to all orders and propaganda, while completely attached and addicted to their cell phones and their apathetic and pitiful pretend lives. All this is indicative of the downfall of humanity, and the rise of the technocratic oligarchs.”

*

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 Pixabay

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on 15-Minute City Insanity Is Only ‘Climate Change’ Lockdown Madness
  • 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.

***

A major new autopsy report has found that three people who died unexpectedly at home with no pre-existing disease shortly after COVID vaccination were likely killed by the vaccine. A further two deaths were found to be possibly due to the vaccine.

The report, published in Clinical Research in Cardiology, the official journal of the German Cardiac Society, detailed autopsies carried out at Heidelberg University Hospital in 2021. Led by Thomas Longerich and Peter Schirmacher, it found that in five deaths that occurred within a week of the first or second dose of vaccination with Pfizer or Moderna, inflammation of the heart tissue due to an autoimmune response triggered by the vaccine had likely or possibly caused the death.

Case characteristic of five deaths likely or possibly caused by the COVID vaccines.

Epoch Times Photo

Lymphocyte immune cells (white blood cells) are shown in blue and brown among the heart tissue, causing localised inflammation that proved fatal.

In total the report looked at 35 autopsies carried out at the University of Heidelberg in people who died within 20 days of COVID vaccination, of which 10 were deemed on examination to be due to a pre-existing illness and not the vaccine. For the remaining 20, the report did not rule out the vaccine as a cause of death, which Dr. Schirmacher has confirmed to me is intentional as the autopsy results were inconclusive. Almost all of the remaining cases were of a cardiovascular cause, as indicated in the table below from the supplementary materials, where 21 of the 30 deaths are attributed to a cardiovascular cause. One of these is attributed to blood clots (VITT) from AstraZeneca vaccination (the report was looking specifically at post-vaccine myocarditis deaths), leaving 20 from other cardiovascular causes.

Epoch Times Photo

For the five deaths in the main report attributed as likely or possibly due to the vaccines, the authors state:

“All cases lacked significant coronary heart disease, acute or chronic manifestations of ischaemic heart disease, manifestations of cardiomyopathy or other signs of a pre-existing, clinically relevant heart disease.”

This indicates that the authors limited themselves to deaths where there was no “pre-existing, clinically relevant heart disease,” making the report very conservative in which deaths it was willing to pin on the vaccines.

Dr. Schirmacher told me:

“We included only cases, in which the constellation was unequivocally clear and no other cause of death was demonstrable despite all efforts. We cannot rule out vaccine effects in the other cases, but here we had an alternative potential cause of death (e.g., myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism). If there is severe ischemic cardiomyopathy it is almost impossible to rule out myocarditis effects or definitively rule in inflammatory alterations as due to vaccination. These cases were not included.

“We did not aim to include or find every case but the characteristics of definitive, unequivocal cases beyond any doubt. Only by this way you can establish the typical characteristics; otherwise less strict criteria may lead to ‘contamination’ of the collective; it is absolutely plausible that by these criteria we may have missed further cases but the intention of our study was never quantitative or extrapolation and there are numerous positive and negative bias. But we wanted to establish the fact not the size.”

It is of course very possible that the vaccines also cause death where there is an underlying cardiovascular condition, and indeed, that it is more likely to do so. Thus these five deaths are the minimum from these autopsy cases in which the vaccines are involved—those in which there is no other plausible explanation.

It is worth noting here that initially in 2021, when the autopsies were first carried out, Dr. Schirmacher stated that his team had concluded 30–40 percent of the deaths were due to the vaccines. These earlier estimates may give us a better indication of how many of the deaths the authors really think are attributable to the vaccines, when they are unconstrained by highly conservative assumptions (and looking at causes besides myocarditis). Note that these percentages are based on a selection of deaths that occurred shortly after vaccination, not a random sample of all deaths, so the authors rightly warn that no estimation of individual risk can be made from them.

Did the autopsies find spike protein from the vaccines present in the heart tissue? The samples from the five vaccine-attributed deaths were tested for infectious agents including SARS-CoV-2 (in one instance revealing “low viral copy numbers” of a herpes virus, which the authors deemed insufficient to explain the inflammation). However, no tests were done specifically for the virus spike protein or nucleocapsid protein, such as have been used successfully in other autopsies to aid attribution to the vaccine, so unfortunately this evidence was unavailable for these autopsies.

The autopsies in the report also only cover doses 1 and 2, not any booster doses, and only deaths within 20 days of vaccination, so the report doesn’t address directly the question of what’s been causing the elevated heart deaths since the booster rollouts from autumn 2021 or whether the vaccines can trigger cardiovascular death weeks or months later. (Other autopsies have confirmed that the spike protein can persist in the body for weeks or months after vaccination and trigger a fatal autoimmune attack on the heart.)

What the report does do, however, is establish that people who die suddenly in the days immediately following vaccination may well have died from a vaccine-related autoimmune attack on the heart. It also confirms how deadly even mild vaccine-induced myocarditis can be—and thus why studies like the one from Thailand, finding cardiovascular adverse effects in around a third of teenagers (29.2 percent) following Pfizer vaccination and subclinical heart inflammation in one in 43 (2.3 percent), and the study from Switzerland finding at least 2.8 percent with subclinical myocarditis and elevated troponin levels (indicating heart injury) across all vaccinated people, are so worrying.

The authors of the new study diplomatically write that the “reported incidence” of myocarditis after vaccination is “low” and the risks of hospitalisation and death associated with COVID-19 are “stated to be greater than the recorded risk associated with COVID-19 vaccination”—notably declining to commit themselves to the official propositions that they dutifully repeat.

The fact that those who die suddenly after vaccination may have died from the hidden effects of the COVID vaccine on their heart is thus now firmly established in the medical literature. The big remaining question is how often it occurs.

Stop Press: Dr. John Campbell has produced a helpful overview of the report’s findings in his latest 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.

Dr. Will Jones is a math’s graduated with a Ph.D. in political philosophy and author of “Evangelical Social Theology: Past and Present” (2017). He is editor of The Daily Sceptic and blogs at Faith-and-Politics.com.

Featured image is from Anatta_Tan/Shutterstock


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

“Inside the COVID-19 Global Coup d’état”

December 12th, 2022 by Emanuel Pastreich

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.

***

Geopolitics & Empire: Geopolitics & Empire is joined by Emanuel Pastreich, who serves as the president of The Asia Institute and as director general of the Institute for Future Urban Environments. He declared his candidacy for president of the US as an independent in February of 2020. Welcome to Geopolitics & Empire, Mr. Pastreich.

Emanuel Pastreich: It’s an honor to be here.

Geopolitics & Empire: I came across your work recently, your writing and your interviews, and I thought I had to have you on the show because you have many unique insights and you’ve got a fascinating life experience. It is hard to peg who you are because of your interesting background. If you could just briefly maybe tell us, who is Emanuel Pastreich?

Emanuel Pastreich: Right. Well, that’s a tough one and I’m maybe not the most qualified to explain myself. I came from a relatively establishment background in the United States. I’m still wearing a tie, and I was a professor of Asian studies, so I spent a good part of my life in Korea and Japan, and I studied Chinese, Japanese, and Korean. When I was at the University of Illinois back in 2000, 2001, I became quite committed to opposing the totalitarian rule in the United States, which continues to the day. And as a result of my efforts with others, I ended up being basically unable to work in the United States and living in Korea from 2007. Tried to come back to the United States once in 2019, which was not successful.

I’m back in the United States after three years away; just arrived a week ago. I am trying my best to address real issues in the United States and to puncture a hole in the blanket of hypocrisy and fraud that has wrapped around every aspect of American society, and, by extension, around the world. I want to talk about real things.

I had declared in February, 2020, when I saw what was happening with this so-called Biden-Trump election, that I would run as an independent candidate for president and address real issues, not with any particular leftist or rightist perspective. I tried to just scientifically address what were the problems in the United States. And that caused a lot of problems, but it did give me the chance to get in the habit of giving talks, speeches, which has now become my primary means of expressing myself.

I hope we can return to politics based on intellectual inquiry, on a moral commitment, and on real engagement with citizens, as opposed to a fraudulent “feel good” approach to blanket marketing.

Geopolitics & Empire: I purchased your book “I Shall Fear No Evil.” I think people can download it for free. You touch on most of your points in that book.

I agree with much of what you say. And maybe we can start with what you touched on: what’s wrong with the US?

I’m from Illinois, I’m from Chicago, and 20 years ago I saw a lot wrong. I’m a history major, former teacher, former professor of history, I could just see the cycle of history.

Emanuel Pastreich: Where were you teaching?

Geopolitics & Empire: Well, I taught abroad in Kazakhstan and in Mexico. That’s part of the story. I decided to leave the United States. When you’re born as an American, you never imagine we were an empire. I thought we were just a country, the United States, and then you realize there is stuff we get into like 9/11, and other things. The reality is we’re an empire, and we’re the biggest empire in the history of the world. So we are starting all these wars, killing millions of people.

There’s a lot of good that America has done, but a lot of bad too. We have to be fair. There’s the militarism. And we’re bankrupt financially–you talk about that. I also think that spiritually we’re bankrupt.

Emanuel Pastreich: Intellectually too.

Geopolitics & Empire: We’re at each other’s throats. Then there’s the techno-authoritarianism. I might get you in into trouble. In April, I believe the Department of Homeland Security told PayPal to shut off my account. I’m banned from using PayPal.

Emanuel Pastreich: Well, congratulations.

Geopolitics & Empire: And so if you could tell us basically, what’s wrong with America as you see it?

Emanuel Pastreich: Well, to some degree it’s a cyclical process. If you have any institution, any government or empire and it runs 250 years, you start to have these institutional contradictions and collapse. To some degree it’s because of the institutions that were originally set up no longer correspond with the reality of how decisions are made, or how the economy works. I happen to like the US Constitution and I refer to it. It’s not a perfect document, but it gives some basic principles for governance, which I think are quite unique.

It was a unique, successful experiment in history. It doesn’t mean the United States was successful, it just means that concept of constitutional government where they took some of the essence of what was discussed in Greece and Rome and tried to take the empire out of it. That was the concept behind the United States. It was a noble experiment that offers much for us.

However, it was flawed from the beginning. Obviously slavery, the destruction of the native peoples, also the idea of real estate and how it was imported here and enclosure, all that part of the project was obviously flawed. But we did have some good aspects to the United States, which sometimes were positive for the world.

But over the last 50 years, we saw the militarization of the economy and then this move towards a radical expansion of financialization and privatization. And in that process, I think, we also have to take note of the end of the Cold War, which has been celebrated in what we’re force fed in media and in academics. But the end of the Cold War was essentially the end of an opposing perspective in the world. Basically during the Cold War (I’m not saying Soviet Union or the People’s Republic of China got it all right) socialist nations at least offered a different perspective, were able to suggest that things like class struggle, the concentration of capital, and ideology were topics to talk about. These were things that were important in their newspapers and universities. And when the Soviet Union and China basically went over to a modified neo-capitalism, with a little bit of socialist characteristics mixed in the drink, then we lost that other perspective in the world.

And as a result from the 1990s on increasingly these ridiculous ideas about economics spread. In the United States, or in Japan, or in Germany in the 1970s—through the 80s even, there were professors of economics who took Marxist economics as a major part of their approach to economic theory. There are zero people like that now, except for bloggers.

We’ve lost this potential for other perspectives. It’s not saying that Marxism is perfect. I’m not a Marxist by the way, but I’m sympathetic to Marxist analysis. I think that addressing class issues and finance and ideology is critical. And so we now are in this position in which consumption, growth, exports are assumed by basically everybody to be essential for the wellbeing of people, or that the stock market has a relationship (other than parasitic) to the lives of ordinary citizens.

These things are accepted as truths, right? They’re talking about a rise in the stock market as good for you.

And we have in the United States now these cardboard messiahs, whether it’s Bernie Sanders, or AOL, or Donald Trump who come up with these quirky ideas about what economics is, or how we can be more progressive, concerned with working people.

But essentially they buy into the entire economic money system and they’re not interested in saying, “Why don’t we make people independent from money?” They’re not trying to say, we can support ourselves.

We don’t have to spend money. People in the 19th century, most of them didn’t use money. They used it only when they went to market once a month to buy things they needed. Some metal products or certain items like clocks. But basically in their daily lives, they were able to support themselves and their communities were able to support them. That is real economics; that’s positive.

Actually that’s the real meaning of market economy. It has become a horrible term that’s been so distorted. Market economy means you go to the market in your community and you sell carrots, or the chairs you made, and you exchange them with your neighbor who is selling butter, or fabrics or whatever. And you have this mutual support system.

Now market economy means Google and Facebook and all these techno tyrants, which print up their own money by devaluing our money, and they control the entire system. They set up these IT systems (like the technology we are using now) in which we are forced to communicate with each other, to exchange, to buy things through them. They control the means of production, means of distribution, means of sales, and the means of communication, and increasingly the ideological structure itself. They produce these false conservatives and these false progressives whom we are supposed to buy.

Geopolitics & Empire: That was my next question. We’ve got an oligarchy in the US and I think it’s just as bad as the Russian oligarchies and these foreign dictatorships. I think the issue for us is that because Americans are more prosperous, we care less—as long as we can buy our nice cars, iPhones, and other stuff. We don’t really care about our oligarchy, but they’re just as bad, if not worse.

You mention sham elections. I agree with you; just to read a quote from your book, you say, “I say that if we do not have an election in which someone like me can be a candidate, can have a chance to be covered in the media, that we are not holding elections but rather holding an impressive sham. We have no intention of recognizing any such sham elections. In fact, until there is an election in which someone like me can get proper attention and the chance to be on the ballot, we will not recognize any of these elections.”

Just a quick thought on the elections. As you say, on our left, our right, we’ve got fake conservatives and a fake left. No one is anti-war anymore on the left.

Emanuel Pastreich: That’s true.

Geopolitics & Empire: There’s a handful on the right, but they all stay within a certain bounds. None of them have ever crossed the red line.

Emanuel Pastreich: Right. Well I think the decision to run as independent candidate for president was a serious one. I take it quite seriously and I put a lot of work into the speeches. The preference to my book is out in 40 languages. I don’t have Croatian, but I have many other languages—many from Central Europe for that matter. It was a campaign both in the United States and also globally meant to say, let’s have an alternative view.

And we’ve been basically blocked out. I think that American elections were always flawed. I wouldn’t say there was a perfect time, but there’s been a catastrophic collapse of the political system over the last 20 years. And the result is these sham elections, as I was suggesting in my recent post.

Now politics is determined not by elections, but by false flag operations, like 9/11 or COVID-19 or these mass shootings, whatever, these are how politics are determined, not by voting at the ballot.

In order to move beyond, to go back to some logical, scientific, rational process, I think we have to look back to the founding of the United States, or other countries, and recognize that the basis for the United States in the beginning, and the ways in which it was successful, were based on revolutionary thought, recognized that the United States is a revolutionary country.

That’s the core where we start. And we have to say that the Declaration of Independence notes very clearly,

“When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

Our two founding documents are the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.  You not only are entitled to, but you have a moral obligation to oppose this system, to overthrow it, and to create a system which is democratic, transparent and accountable.

That is my position when I am running as a candidate. I would love it if people vote for me, if they put me on TV, and if I got attention like Donald Trump, or these bedridden people like Joe Biden.

But that’s not my purpose. My purpose is to be revolutionary. And so I believe the best way that I can affect politics, that we can affect politics, is to take a stand and to say, “This is the truth. This is what needs to be done.” I’m not interested in whether the New York Times or CNN will cover me, because they’re so corrupt and so useless and dangerous, that as far as I’m concerned, we should lock them all up too. I have no interest in pandering to them.

And I would also say that that was the major mistake made by so many people in the United States over the last decade (as we fell into late imperial decay): they thought, I have this good idea, what might be a good idea, and in order to realize that idea, I’m going to compromise. I’m going to downplay it, going to soften it up a little bit, modify it in such a way that, one, the New York Times will mention me, and two, some wealthy donor will give me money.

And my position is to say, I’m not going to do that. And that this is the only way to achieve real change in the United States, and globally, to draw a line in the sand.

It may seem pointless. You might see me as someone who is a failure. I was not able to work in the United States from 2007. I have been unemployed for long periods of time, which was not all that pleasant. But I think that my actions were more politically meaningful than if I had compromised on 9/11 and other issues and tried to play the game here in Washington D.C.

Geopolitics & Empire: Just one real quick question on 9/11, not to go in depth, just get your big picture take. One of my subscribers recently tuned to the email list told me they’re signing off because I believe 9/11 was a false flag operation. And I’m like…

Emanuel Pastreich: It’s so obvious

Geopolitics & Empire: For me you’re not a serious person if you can’t take on the false flag operations. My response to him was that in graduate school in Geneva, Switzerland I was taught about this type of thing. It is a basic historical fact. The Roman Empire did it. Nazi Germany did it.

Emanuel Pastreich: I would even say it is an ancient tradition.

Geopolitics & Empire: Russia has done it. It’s a basic military strategy. NATO has done it. Japan has done it, Israel has done it, Turkey has done it. Tell me a country which has not run the false flag operation.

But just real quick, you mentioned previously, but also in one of your writings, you’ve written the false flag “serves as critical tool in American politics by creating mass trauma in the population that inhibits the formation of organized resistance or the possibility of rational intellectual discourse.” And so just your quick take on 9/11.

Emanuel Pastreich: Well I think that in that respect, 9/11 was extremely successful. Basically it shut down the American mind.

We need to use Hermann Broch’s term “the sleepwalkers” to describe our ruling class. We see people who are intellectuals, who are extremely well educated. They read books. They are lawyers, doctors, businessmen, but they’re incapable of conceiving of what is happening. They’re basically sleepwalking through history, unable to conceive of these higher-level traumatic shifts in governance.

And so 9/11, is most representative in that respect. If you’ve taken one semester of physics in high school, you can figure out that this event was impossible. It cannot possibly be true. I watched it. I was in the US, at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign at the time. I saw it. I was not a physics major. I thought, this is not possible. Something else is going on here.

But there’s no way that if two (if it’s what happened) airliners crash, it’ll cause three buildings that made of concrete reinforced with steel to collapse. It cannot possibly be true.

But I think looking back on it now, that that was the whole point; the point was, just like with COVID-19, to force-feed the population a story which was not credible from the beginning. And the purpose of that was to degrade the ability of citizens to think for themselves scientifically and co-opt an entire class of intellectuals.

I’ve written about this topic using the ideas from Julien Benda’s classic book “The Treason of the Intellectuals” from 1927.

That was a large part of 9/11, and of COVID-19. This large class of privileged intellectuals, people like myself, decided –and I saw this at the University of Illinois and elsewhere– that they would go on with this incredibly stupid, unbelievable, argument on physics and on geopolitics to explain this trauma.

They went along with it. They took the money. There are always going to be some intellectuals like that, but the fact that there were so many for both 9/11 and COVID-19 who were willing to buy the story indicates something deeply wrong.

I have a classmate who’s a teaching at MIT and I talked to her, and talked to her about COVID-19 at the very start. She was just following the rules. I know that she’s smart enough to know that it just doesn’t make any sense scientifically.

As I put it in one of my articles, technology buried science in a shallow grave. We have a system in which technology is mistaken for science. We moved towards this “sciencism,” as opposed to science. In sciencism the truth is determined by experts at Harvard or Stanford, or wherever, as opposed to by a rigorous investigation of phenomena.

That started before 9/11. You can trace it back. In some ways it started with Oklahoma, which was the precursor to 9/11. I think if we hadn’t had the trauma of the Oklahoma bombings, that 9/11 would’ve been harder to pull off. And finally, I would conclude by saying that many of these things they’re planned out. DARPA (defense advanced research projects agency) and RAND and other agencies–now there’s a proliferation of these think tanks or consulting firms—planned these traumas. From the 1960s on they carried out a whole series of studies in psychology, mass trauma, et cetera, in which they essentially came up with these classified plans, some of which have been declassified, most of which have not. The plans describe how to transition a population from one state to another over time through the use of mass trauma.

And that’s what 9/11 was about. Oklahoma was the first point of mass trauma, then 9/11, then COVID-19–and there were a few others in between.

On the one hand the operations had very specific agendas, what they were trying to do in the short term. But there is a larger agenda, which is to create a totalitarian state, on in which people are not aware, as you mentioned, that the system is totalitarian.

There’s a radical alienation between the reality on the ground and the manner in which ruling class intellectuals, who set the tone and the message, perceive the world. We live in a fantasy world in which we are told this is how the United States works. And then there’s the reality of how it really works. Basically they’ve become two unrelated realms.

Geopolitics & Empire: Just to comment on the academic aspect, I worked in education, in academia here in Mexico, and just as you described it, I find it sad. Most academics, all they care about is their money, their salary, their wages, and their career. I want the truth. I had my classes taken away from me when I taught at a high school and at a university. And the trick was that it’s harder to get fired from the high school than it is the university.

Emanuel Pastreich: Interesting.

Geopolitics & Empire: After one or two semesters they took away my courses at the university on international relations because I was talking like you are. Eventually there was a new person who took charge and he didn’t know my way of thinking. And so I got my courses back. It’s just really sad. It just goes back to the fact that the people want the money, they don’t care about the truth.

Emanuel Pastreich: Well, I’ve seen that. Certainly many academics now, and I see this in my colleagues, people who I used to be quite close to in another lifetime. Consider the priority to be getting grants. And so grants are the goal, certainly not scientific method, right? They must go along with what grantors want. And that process no longer involves any sense of public good, or of government or institutions that are run for the public good.

We have the Drew Faust, the previous president of Harvard. When she retired, she was appointed to the board of directors of Goldman Sachs. Unprecedented in American history. But it’s telling. So the priority for these research institutes and their administrators is their ability to suck up to global capital.

That is what it’s about. And so obviously if we’re talking about Goldman Sachs, BlackRock, or other Blackstone, or other private equity, these guys are sophisticated. They hire consulting firms and tell them how to modify teaching and academic research at Harvard over time so that it serves their purpose, essentially they help to cover your tracks for you. You do not modify intellectual discourse in too explicit a way. You throw in a little bit of multiculturalism here, a little bit of gender theory there; you talk about how unfair it is that poor people are not doing so well, but you don’t identify the process of how we got here.

It’s become, I think it’s a major, major industry, this whole distortion of reality in advertising, public relations, consulting, and then on beyond that in research, academics, journalism, and the basic principles of discourse now. It’s a form of prostitution.

I like to talk this trauma in terms of incest, rape, and prostitution, the three fundamental traumas in human relations, in sexual relations–sexual relations have profound symbolic power in our society.

And all of them, incest, rape and prostitution, have their equivalents in our political world and in our intellectual world. And that’s what we’re witnessing. Increasingly we’re talking about all of those. Incest is the false flag, the internal compromise in which the compromise is so profound for the victim that it can’t even be addressed. Rape is similar in that it brings the person into this relationship which was unwanted, but in a way which is so embarrassing (and sometimes involves some mutual attraction), that it becomes so horrific that the individual cannot even conceive of what happened.

And so in many cases of rape in the real world, people never report it because they think it is so demeaning to the self and they can’t even confront it in themselves.

In the case of prostitution, that which should be expression of concern, or affection, or love, or commitment to family, becomes a means of making money, a service. And we see such a distortion all across our society, especially in education. Rather than teachers being concerned with society or with students, or with family, it becomes just a means to produce money. Maybe you are not selling your body but you are selling your soul.

Geopolitics & Empire: I wanted to have you unpack COVID-1984, as I call it, and basically the same thesis I’ve held from the very beginning, January, 2020, you put into words, I never viewed that there was a pandemic at all. My theory is that it was planned, this whole event. It was either some low key bio weapon or it was entirely manufactured from whole cloth. Either way, there was no pandemic. We just could have just gone on with our lives normally.

You wrote recently on your Substack, and I recommend people read this article, the links will be in the description. You say, “Operation COVID-19 was a global coup d’etat disguise as a pandemic that was launched against China and the world in December, 2019. And that continues onto the present.”

You say that, the reality is that a tiny group of key players representing the super-rich in the US and in China coordinate closely to promote COVID lockdowns in China. And you say that everywhere they were applying this digital dictatorship. This is my interpretation. All the nations did it. I was living in Kazakhstan, I fled through the US to Mexico. I observed the creation of the “algorithm ghetto” social credit system, the “electronic concentration camp” passports, QR codes, and mandatory injections. And in some places you couldn’t even buy food without it. It’s like the Book of Revelation. You can’t buy or sell without the mark.

Emanuel Pastreich: That’s true.

Geopolitics & Empire: I some places they say you can’t even go to the public park without vaccine certificates. I can see that it’s a global elite that has no allegiance to nationality. It’s the US elite, it’s the Chinese elite. And they use, as you said, these private tech IT companies that are already embedded within all of our countries. We’re basically being run by big tech. Could you tell us more about how you see COVID?

Emanuel Pastreich: Well, I think you’ve described it quite accurately there. I maybe just add a few words to say how it works. I think one of the key aspects of this takeover has to do with the concept of government. So we’re being fed this narrative by the controlled opposition that says government is bad, inherently bad, and all the bad things happen because of evil politicians or bad government. Now, obviously, government is bad these days, but if you say that government cannot possibly serve a purpose, meet the needs of the people, that this is a nihilistic and depressing perspective. I think that view is being force-fed to us by those power elites in order to discourage us from trying to organize ourselves and to create government. That is the first thing I would say.

The second part is the takeover of local government, and central governments, around the world by these IT companies. So, whether it’s in Sichuan province or it’s in Oklahoma, local governments are lobbied and then intimidated, bribed and threatened, in order to get these IT companies to run government for them. So whereas you previously had government officials, good and bad, who basically made the decisions based upon various pressures from around them in the community, now you have just one or two government officials, the president or the governor, or whatever. And their job is to outsource the budget to these IT companies who run everything for them. This happened to universities; it happened elsewhere.

This is a profound transformation. So essentially when you see a message that says, the government does this, or this is the government, or this QR code is scanned by the government, in fact, there’s no government behind it. It’s not government in any sense of the word. It’s a totalitarian dictatorship run by these global IT companies.

And they have some tricks to hide their tracks, but it’s not that hard to figure out. Basically Amazon, Google, Alibaba, there are 10 or so big players are taking over the world. And then there are smaller customized players. For example, as I mentioned, in Israel we have Black Cube and other customized private intelligence firms that facilitate the transformation. I think they were very much involved in what’s happened in China. I was criticized for this for not giving the evidence for this transformation in China, but just take my word for it.

I’d be happy to give you the evidence at some future date. But they also were very much involved in it.

And so we need to combine the evidence from these precedents. On the one hand, we have the research from DARPA and from RAND from the 1960s and 70s, how to modify people’s behavior and also how to take over basically the government through this privatization drive. Then we have the research from Guantanamo Bay and the so-called torture programs after 2001 in which experiments were carried out (Naomi Klein describes this in some detail) on how to modify behavior through isolation, i.e social distancing, masks, and other forms of repeated ritual behavior.

These rituals associated with COVID-19 are meant to be meaningless and fraudulent, and most importantly, the person involved at some level knows that the rituals (like wearing a mask) are fraudulent—but he still does them. And that action of participation in one’s own destruction degrades the ability to resist. So you can create very passive environments through those policies.

Those two strategies were combined with some understanding of AI and how it could be used to induce a passive, narcissistic, self-indulgent and decadent culture among people, especially in the mid-level ruling class. I discussed this in my article, “the terrarium economy.” We see in America this fake ruling class, people who went to Harvard and they become lawyers and doctors. They own three million, five million, $10 million in assets and a house by the beach or in France or in Italy.

They think they’re the ruling class, but it’s a fraud. The ruling class are these people who control basically the means of production and they control the nature of money. Those people are worth hundreds of billions. We don’t even know how much they’re worth because they make it up for themselves.

But for those people, the billionaires, the difference between a lawyer who has $10 million in assets and a homeless person is the difference between a roly poly and a spider. We are all bugs from their perspective. They know, based upon the reports they receive from their private intelligence and strategy teams, that by creating this false terrarium economy wherein there’s an imagined ruling class headed by someone like Biden, and it also contains a lot of poor people in it so as to create a visible little conflicts among us, that you can blind people to the fact that the whole system is all enclosed and controlled by this elite group.

And finally, much of the analysis that could be helpful for understanding economics is prohibited.

I hate to stress Marxist analysis because I’m not really a Marxist, but I’m also practical. Whatever approach works I will use—as I told Josh Jadwin the other day.

Marxist economics can be extremely helpful. I don’t think we should dismiss it just because we have some bias fed to us by the controlled opposition. We’re trapped in this system wherein the ideology is controlled by these people, as is the means of production, the means of distribution, the means of communication, and money itself is controlled by them.

And they’re dumbing us down. I think we have supercomputers doing this. They’ve calculated how fast or how slow to move towards the totalitarian system, how to create false conflicts like how Trump is excluded from Twitter, or whatever—all irrelevant. But it works because people’s thinking has been so degraded by technology. In fact, technology like Facebook or Twitter is designed to degrade your ability to think.

*

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.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video


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 “Inside the COVID-19 Global Coup d’état”

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 EU has picked its partners in developing the bloc’s controversial Wallet – and one of them is the same company that previously worked to develop the UK’s official Covid Pass and tracing app.

The companies now awarded EU’s contact are Sweden’s Scytáles – and Luxembourg-based Netcompany-Intrasoft – that’s the one with significant involvement in the UK’s scheme.

The current plan is for EU’s Digital ID Wallet legislation to pass by mid next year, and then launch in 2024.

The purpose of the digital wallet is said to be setting up “universal” digital identities of people, including their electronic signatures, and making all that accessible across countries and sectors.

Naturally, no such plan is complete without those involved devising and implementing it promising data safety and transparency, but at the same time pitching digital wallets to the population mostly as on the personal convenience “merit,” and allegedly overall lower business costs.

Scytáles announced that the EU member-countries will have a chance to take up the product once it is finished, and it will also be accessible to “other stakeholders” who meet EU’s digital identity requirements framework.

Covid is cited by Scytáles execs as a game-changer in the field, which – whether or not the pandemic is still a thing – apparently makes it “imperative to digitize public services and companies as much as possible,” for reasons of “digital safety.”

Moving at its usual snail-mail pace, the EU is navigating its huge bureaucracy and complicated rules and has as of this writing managed to agree on a common position regarding EU digital identity framework. In order to speed up developing the Digital ID Wallet system – creating another, something called “EU toolbox” has to be developed as well.

Earlier in the year, Denmark’s Netcompany (minus Luxembourg’s Intrasoft) said that after playing a key role in UK’s NHS Covid Pass, is was likely to expand operations in that country, but is also reportedly seeing a lot of interest from other European states where it comes to digitizing education, tax administration, payment of benefits, and, of course, healthcare.

Once again, “convenience” is of key importance in the eyes of these companies, and those who promote them.

In this context Denmark is singled out as an example of “a country (that) has a strong digital identity offering for every citizen which makes stitching up services easier.”

*

The EU has picked its partners in developing the bloc’s controversial Wallet – and one of them is the same company that previously worked to develop the UK’s official Covid Pass and tracing app.

The companies now awarded EU’s contact are Sweden’s Scytáles – and Luxembourg-based Netcompany-Intrasoft – that’s the one with significant involvement in the UK’s scheme.

The current plan is for EU’s Digital ID Wallet legislation to pass by mid next year, and then launch in 2024.

The purpose of the digital wallet is said to be setting up “universal” digital identities of people, including their electronic signatures, and making all that accessible across countries and sectors.

Naturally, no such plan is complete without those involved devising and implementing it promising data safety and transparency, but at the same time pitching digital wallets to the population mostly as on the personal convenience “merit,” and allegedly overall lower business costs.

Scytáles announced that the EU member-countries will have a chance to take up the product once it is finished, and it will also be accessible to “other stakeholders” who meet EU’s digital identity requirements framework.

Covid is cited by Scytáles execs as a game-changer in the field, which – whether or not the pandemic is still a thing – apparently makes it “imperative to digitize public services and companies as much as possible,” for reasons of “digital safety.”

Moving at its usual snail-mail pace, the EU is navigating its huge bureaucracy and complicated rules and has as of this writing managed to agree on a common position regarding EU digital identity framework. In order to speed up developing the Digital ID Wallet system – creating another, something called “EU toolbox” has to be developed as well.

Earlier in the year, Denmark’s Netcompany (minus Luxembourg’s Intrasoft) said that after playing a key role in UK’s NHS Covid Pass, is was likely to expand operations in that country, but is also reportedly seeing a lot of interest from other European states where it comes to digitizing education, tax administration, payment of benefits, and, of course, healthcare.

Once again, “convenience” is of key importance in the eyes of these companies, and those who promote them.

In this context Denmark is singled out as an example of “a country (that) has a strong digital identity offering for every citizen which makes stitching up services easier.”

*

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 Reclaim the Net


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

How WikiLeaks Revolutionised the World of Journalism

December 12th, 2022 by Eresh Omar Jamal

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.

***

Stefania Maurizi is an investigative journalist working for the Italian daily Il Fatto Quotidiano. She has worked on all WikiLeaks releases of secret documents and partnered with Glenn Greenwald to reveal the Snowden Files about Italy.

In an interview with Eresh Omar Jamal of  The Daily Star, she talks about her latest book, Secret Power: WikiLeaks and Its Enemies, and how WikiLeaks revolutionised the world of journalism.

*

Eresh Omar Jamal: What is this “secret power” that you are referring to in the title of your book, and why does it consider WikiLeaks its enemy?

Stefania Maurizi: I chose that title so that people around the world could understand who the real enemy of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks is, who it is that wants him, the WikiLeaks journalists, and the WikiLeaks revolution dead. That is what I refer to as “secret power,” which is not a conspiratorial entity: it is the highest level of power, where intelligence services, armies, and diplomats operate. Long before WikiLeaks was created, President Eisenhower warned the US against this power: the military-industrial complex, which has at its heart agencies like the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA. Eisenhower was not a pacifist: he was a great military leader, one of the principal architects of the victory over the Nazis in Europe, and yet he warned his country against this leviathan.

The power and influence exerted by these institutions are felt at every corner of the globe; they plan wars, coup d’états, assassinations. They sway governments and elections.

I call it “secret power” because this power is shielded by thick layers of secrecy, and ordinary citizens don’t even perceive it as relevant to their lives. They tend to think: I am a humble teacher in Bangladesh or a caregiver in New York or a waitress in London, how can secret services influence my life as an ordinary citizen? And yet, that secret power does influence their lives. It decides, for example, if a war will be unleashed in Iraq or Afghanistan, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people and creating millions of refugees desperately trying to leave their countries and seek refuge in other nations. So, it is clear that this secret power influences the lives of all of us, but the ordinary citizen has no control over this power, because he/she has no access to the restricted information on how it operates.

But for the first time in history, WikiLeaks has ripped a gaping hole in this secret power, giving billions of people systematic and unrestricted access to enormous archives of classified documents revealing how our governments behave when, completely shielded from public and media scrutiny, they prepare wars or commit atrocities.

This is the revolution unleashed by Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, and this is the reason this secret power wants him dead. It wants him and WikiLeaks dead for exposing its dirty secrets, and those secrets have nothing to do with protecting the security of citizens, but rather with shielding state criminality at the highest level, so that the state criminals are protected and enjoy “complete impunity.”

EOJ: You mentioned how WikiLeaks had discovered methods to bypass some of the weaknesses of the traditional media in the digital age. Can you elaborate on that? Did it inspire any of the big traditional media houses to adopt any new strategies?

SM: Julian Assange and the WikiLeaks journalists have pioneered the use of cryptography and the power of the internet to bypass censorship and reveal exceptionally important information in the public’s interest. Their use of cryptography to protect whistleblowers and journalistic sources has encouraged many to step out of the darkness of state secrecy and expose war crimes, like the ones we saw in the “Collateral Murder” video, to expose torture, extrajudicial killings, etc.

You have to realise that, back in 2006, when WikiLeaks was created, no media organisation was systematically using cryptography to protect sources, not even the most advanced and powerful newsrooms like The New York Times and The Guardian. That was precisely what attracted my interest in 2008, when I first looked at the work that was being done by WikiLeaks, which at that time was a little-known organisation, and had not yet revealed its bombshell scoops like the “Collateral Murder” video.

I graduated in maths before going into journalism, and to me their use of cryptography was tremendously important, because they not only provided a shield to those blowing the whistle in public interest, they also attracted sources with unique talents and professional experiences, potentially sources with access to important information. After all, back then, who could really appreciate a tool as complex and unusual as encryption? Those who had studied it, or who worked in the field of computer science or intelligence. The technologically advanced structure of WikiLeaks appealed to an entire community familiar with the language of science and technology. After WikiLeaks pioneered the use of cryptography to protect whistleblowers and sources, all major news organisations started adopting it. But it took years before they did, and that too only after being inspired by WikiLeaks.

EOJ: Without addressing these loopholes, can traditional media presently serve the public interest, or can it even survive while doing what journalists are meant to be doing, that is, revealing secrets hidden away by powerful interests?

SM: We live in the age of mass surveillance, and it has become so pervasive that protecting journalistic sources who have access to extremely sensitive information has become almost “mission impossible.”

Even Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor who had worked for the CIA (and hence had special training), decided he had to leave his country to meet with Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Ewen McAskill in Hong Kong, to give them access to the top-secret NSA documents. Of course, he was uniquely aware that if he had met with these journalists in the US, he would very likely have been discovered and arrested before he was even done talking to them. That tells you a lot. If even a CIA-trained journalistic source cannot escape his state when he has access to its dirty secrets, how can an ordinary source do so? This fact has immense consequences.

Unless we can protect our sources, no one will talk to us, because investigative journalism develops through confidential sources who talk to us.

EOJ: Having worked on many US diplomatic cables and written about them in your book, what do you make of the real “international order,” especially in comparison to what people around the world generally understand of it?

SM: I worked on the US diplomatic cables for an entire year, reporting on them for my newspaper and for my book. Even though those documents were published 12 years ago, I have never stopped regularly consulting them, because they still inform the public on the major crises the world is experiencing today, such as the Ukrainian war.

How did we end up in such a war and in this energy crisis? If you read the 251,287 cables, you gain a tremendous understanding of what was happening behind-the-scenes, and unfortunately you realise how servile US allies have been towards the US military-industrial complex, even in situations where being servile was not in their national interest and was definitely not in the interest of human rights and justice. The cables are not kind to US enemies either. They present a very bleak portrait of Russia, of course from the viewpoint of US diplomacy. And while the portrait of Russia that emerges from the cables is a grim one, that of the US is not particularly uplifting either, not only because of the wars and torture and human rights violations that it committed during the “war on terror,” but also because the cables expose the brutal face of US capitalism, backed by the most powerful diplomacy in the world: US diplomacy.

EOJ: Referring to you and your book, Daniel Ellsberg, who is famous for releasing the Pentagon Papers, wrote, “No one conveys better the urgency of averting the extradition and prosecution of Assange, which would demolish First Amendment protection of freedom of the press in America.” But apart from that, what effects, if any, can it have on journalism around the world?

SM: I wrote my book to make people around the world understand why extraditing Julian Assange to the US and entombing him in a maximum-security prison is not only a monstrous injustice, as the great British film director Ken Loach writes in the foreword to my book, but is also a point of no return for democracy.

In a democracy, it must be possible for a journalist to reveal war crimes, torture, extrajudicial killings by drones and still sleep peacefully in his bed, rather than sleeping in Britain’s harshest prison, Belmarsh. This is precisely the difference between a democracy and an authoritarian state. In dictatorships and authoritarian societies, journalists cannot reveal such facts without being killed or incarcerated.

So, the destiny of Julian Assange and the WikiLeaks journalists is the destiny of our democracies. What path are we embarking on? Are we defending the public’s freedom to know about state criminality at the highest level, or are we willing to lose this freedom and go authoritarian? Are we defending a society in which war criminals are accountable to the law and will go to jail for their atrocities, or a society in which war criminals and torturers are safe and free, and the journalists and people who have the conscience and courage to expose them rot in a high-security prison?

*

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

Video: On Destroying Our Health System and Big Pharma Capture

December 12th, 2022 by Dr. Emanuel Garcia

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 speak to New Zealand based American, Dr Emmanuel Garcia, about how and why his medical licence was revoked for opposing the Covid mandates.

We then speak to filmmaker, health campaigner and British General Practitioner Dr Bob Gill who opposes the Big Pharma corporatisation of the British National Health System (NHS).

*

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: Young indian doctor woman against a wall covering mouth, symbol of silence and repression, trying not to say anything (Source: Alliance for Natural Health)


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

Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths

December 12th, 2022 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

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

***

In his new book, “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022,” former BlackRock fund manager Edward Dowd details data showing the COVID shots are a crime against humanity

Insurance industry research in 2016 concluded that group life policyholders die at one-third the rate of the general U.S. population, so they’re the healthiest among us. Group life policyholders are those employed with Fortune 500 companies, who tend to be younger and well-educated

In 2020, the general U.S. population had higher excess mortality than group life holders, but in 2021, that flipped. Ages 25 through 64 of the group life policyholders suddenly experienced 40% excess mortality, compared to 32% in the general population. In short, a far healthier subset of the population suddenly died at a higher rate than the general population

American disability statistics are equally revealing. In the five years before COVID, the monthly disability rate was between 29 million and 30 million. After the COVID jabs, the disability trend changed dramatically. As of September 2022, there were 33.2 million disabled Americans — an extra 3.2 million to 4.2 million — a three standard deviation rate of change since May 2021

Since May 2021, the overall U.S. population has experienced an 11% increase in disabilities, while the employed — which is about 98 million out of a total population of about 320 million — experienced 26% increased rate of disability. So, something was introduced into the workforce that caused working age people to die

*

In this video, I interview repeat guest Edward (Ed) Dowd, a former analyst and fund manager with BlackRock, the largest asset manager in the world. With more than $10 trillion in assets, BlackRock wields greater financial power than any country in the world with the exception of the U.S. and China.

Dowd has a knack for seeing trends, and was able to grow the assets he managed during his time at BlackRock from $2 billion to $14 billion. Ten years ago, he left BlackRock, moved to Maui and became an entrepreneur. More recently, he’s come out as a whistleblower against the COVID shots and Big Pharma corruption.

In our last interview, we discussed the mathematical certainty of a financial collapse, and how COVID provided a convenient smoke screen to hide this reality.

Data Reveals Crimes Against Humanity

Dowd has now published a book, “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022,” in which he details the data showing the shots are a crime against humanity.

“When this product [the COVID shots] came to market, I was very suspicious because I know a lot about health care,” Dowd says. “I was on Wall Street and I used to analyze health care stocks. I knew that normal vaccines took seven to 10 years to prove effectiveness and safety.

This was an experimental vaccine, a nontraditional gene therapy that had never been tested on humans. I read the literature on the animal tests and they were an abomination. Then, this thing was approved in 28 days. They got rid of the control group. I knew it was Operation Warp Speed, so I was highly suspicious of this whole thing from the get-go.

Then in early 2021, I started hearing anecdotes that people were getting sick and/or injured, or died, from distant friends and relatives. I started reading about sudden athlete deaths, [and] suspected the vaccine right away. I didn’t have the data that I have now, but I said to myself, ‘You know, I’m going to look at insurance company results, funeral home results.’

That eventually led to excess mortality statistics … I’m known as ‘the excess mortality guy’ right now. What I’ve learned through my own personal experience is that Pharma is, on the whole, mostly fraudulent. Most drugs that have been approved by the FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] aren’t really all that safe and effective.

They have to recall so many drugs every year. The FDA has been wholly captured by the pharma industry. Seventy to 75% of the drug approval pharma arm of the FDA comes from pharma fees, directly from the companies, so this has been corrupted for a long time.

It’s now exposed primarily because [the COVID shot] is [injuring and killing] such a large amount of people. It’s hard to hide this one … This fraud is unveiled and out there for people to see, but it’s only in the echo chamber. Mainstream media is still beholden to Big Pharma because of all the ad spend and the government policymakers … [who] want this to go away.

There’s a giant cover-up going on as far as I’m concerned. The data that I’m going to talk about today is there for the global health authorities to see. They see what I see, and at this point it’s negligence, malfeasance, a cover-up and a crime.

That’s why I’m here, because I don’t believe anybody has a right to tell me what to do with my body, and I can’t believe this actually happened. The numbers I’m going to reveal to you are now a national security concern.”

Group Life Insurance Statistics Tell a Curious Story

Dowd’s concerns are based on a variety of statistics, including but not limited to government mortality and disability data, as well as data from private insurance companies, such as group life insurance data. As explained by Dowd, group life policies are policies given to large Fortune 500 corporations and mid-sized companies.

Basically, when you start to work at one of these companies, you sign onto a policy from Day 1 that includes a health care plan and life insurance plan (death benefit), which is typically one or two times your annual salary. The only way you can get a claim on these policies is if you die while employed. If you quit or get fired, you don’t get this claim.

Group life insurance is a lucrative business for insurance companies because the death rates have historically been highly predictable. In the U.S., the available civilian labor force is about 164 million people in total. Of those, 98 million are actually employed, and of those 98 million, only small subset actually has group life insurance.

“These people are a tiny subset of the 98 million because these are the workers at the best corporations with access to the best health care. They’re highly educated and employed, and you have to have some measure of health to be employed.

The industry did research in 2016 to determine how healthy this population is compared to the general U.S. population … This report said that in any given year, the group life policyholders die at one-third the rate of the general U.S. population. They experience a third the mortality rate of the general U.S. population, so they’re healthy.

What happened in 2021 to this group? Well, let’s talk about what happened in 2020. COVID affected everybody, and the general U.S. population experienced more excess mortality from COVID pre-vaccine than the group life holders, so that relationship helped. Well, in 2021 that flipped. Ages 25 through 64 of the group life policyholders, as reported by the Society of Actuaries, experienced 40% excess mortality.

The general U.S. population in 2021 experienced 32% excess mortality. This is year two of the pandemic with miracle vaccines. Isn’t that interesting? A much healthier subset of the population died at a higher rate than the general population.”

Disability Stats Reveal Jabs Are a National Security Concern

American disability statistics are equally revealing. Every month, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics conducts surveys on disability. In the five years before COVID, the monthly disability rate was between 29 million and 30 million. Those are absolute numbers.

After the COVID jabs, starting in May 2021, the disability trend changed dramatically. As of September 2022, there were 33.2 million disabled Americans. That’s an extra 3.2 million or 4.2 million, depending on whether you’re using the 29 million or 30 million baseline. That’s a three standard deviation rate of change since May 2021.

A three standard deviation means that the chance of this happening is 0.03%, so something happened around May 2021 that was highly unusual. Since then, the overall U.S. population has experienced an 11% rate of increase in disabilities, while the employed — which is about 98 million out of a total population of about 320 million — experienced 26% increased rate of disability.

“So, we have two different databases suggesting the same thing,” Dowd says. “It was detrimental to your health to be employed in 2021 and 2022 … Something is happening to the most able-bodied amongst us, college students, those employed, those in the military, the frontline workers …

Those who are employed are getting disabled faster than the general U.S. population. That shouldn’t happen. The employed amongst us are healthier, generally speaking … If you have a job, you tend to be able to show up at work. Basically, the bottom line is this. The only explanation for this that I can see is mandates for experimental biological inoculations …

One of my whistleblowers from the insurance [industry] told me that as of August 2022, the millennial cohort of the group life holders is still experiencing 36% excess mortality.

People in Fortune 500 companies are dying at a much more excessive rate than those who are not employed there, so this has implications for years to come. It’s a national security concern as far as I can tell … We seem to have poisoned the most able-bodied amongst us through [COVID jab] mandates.”

The same trends are seen in Europe. Excess mortality amongst the young has gone up. In the first year of the pandemic, old people died. In the second year, it suddenly shifted to younger working folks.

A Disaster in the Making

For now, the excess mortality trend in the U.S. has leveled out between 15% to 20% for the general population. In the U.K. and Europe, the excess mortality trend in the general population is between 10% and 20%. Meanwhile, American millennials in the workforce with group life policies have an excess death rate of 36% as of August 2022.

As noted by Dowd, if you’re employed at a Fortune 500 company that mandate boosters, it makes sense that your excess mortality will be higher than the general population if the shots are harming people.

Many in the general population are too young to take the shots, are self-employed, work for small companies that aren’t obliged to mandate shots, or are retired. In short, the general population has had greater choice when it comes to taking the shots or not. If these trends continue at this same rate, it’s an absolute disaster for our economy and society at large.

“The CEO of OneAmerica, Scott Davison, said a 10% rise in excess mortality amongst younger-age working people is a three standard deviation event, or a once in a 200-year flood. That’s just 10%. He said the 40% they saw in 2021 was just unfathomable. They couldn’t even calculate what that meant.

We’re above 10%, so we’re well above the three standard deviation event. What we don’t know is the long-term trends. Anecdotally, one young woman I know, [aged] 30, got it in December 2021.

She’s presenting with heart issues now, in the month of October [2022]. She’s got a heart rate beat per minute of 30, so she’s got problems. I’m hearing about lots and lots of heart issues in my millennial friends’ circles that have presented themselves well after the shot.”

As detailed in “Is Long-COVID the Elephant in the Room?” recent research1 from Switzerland found the rate of subclinical myocarditis is hundreds of times more common than clinical myocarditis. In fact, 100% of those who got the jab suffered some level of heart injury, even if they were asymptomatic, as they all had elevated troponin levels (an indicator of or biomarker for heart damage).

Stock Trading as an Analogy for COVID Jab Uptake

The good news is that the uptake of the latest bivalent boosters is only 10%, which means 90% of those eligible for it have not gotten it. Hopefully, this is a sign of sanity returning. However, many remain stuck in the pro-mandate box for the simple reason that their egos are wrapped up in it.

Many didn’t take and push the shots for personal health reasons. As noted by Dowd, “They did it for virtue signaling tribal reasons, and they wanted to feel superior to other people.” To break the spell, they must come to the realization that they were duped, they were fooled, and that’s painful.

“If you buy a stock and your investment thesis is proven wrong, what you should do is pull a 180 and sell the stock, because you’re wrong. What I found, even with some of the greatest investors, is that if their ego was attached to it, they would ignore clear evidence that the thesis was compromised. Sometimes fraud would even be involved in some of these companies, but they would continue to buy the stock all the way down.

That’s an analogy for what taking boosters is at this point — taking boosters for a product that doesn’t work at all, doesn’t prevent COVID nor transmission. Let’s say you think it’s safe and effective. But now there are serious safety concerns that are proven, so it’s literally your ego that’s going to kill you. We call that ‘dumb money’ on Wall Street, so think of this like a trade.

You either long [i.e., take a long position on] the vaccine or short the vaccine. Those of us who didn’t take it are short. Those who are long have an opportunity to pull a 180 on this and not get boosters. That would be the equivalent of selling stock.

Those who continue to get boosters are getting longer as more and more evidence [against the COVID shots] rolls out. [Editor’s note: In stock trading, a long position is held with the expectation that the stock will rise in value in the future. If the value goes down, you lose money.]

This is the greatest asymmetric information gap I’ve ever seen in my lifetime, and it’s due to a whole host of factors — media blackouts, government corruption, regulator corruption and ego, people’s individual ego. This is the greatest trade of my lifetime and, what side of the trade do you want to be on?

My hope is to convince people to cut their losses and stop taking this thing and then look at ways to heal the damage that’s been done. The good news is there does seem to be people working on protocols to at least mitigate and hopefully reverse some of the damage.”

Impacts on US Infrastructure

If excess mortality and disability rates remain catastrophically elevated, the impacts on our infrastructure will be severe. Dowd estimates 2 million to 3 million Americans have already been disabled by the shots. Officially, the unemployment rate is 3%, but if you add in the excess disabilities, you find that the real unemployment rate is actually around 6%.

“Why is that important? We have 3% unemployment yet we have help wanted signs everywhere. Well, the reason you have help wanted signs is because people who used to be able to work, able-boded Americans, are no longer able to work, so it’s creating shortages.

There’s also not complete disability. Some people are sucking it up and dragging their ass to work, but they’re also missing days. A lot of people are calling in and missing days … I can also talk about what I’m seeing with supply chain with automobiles. My car was hit July 14th [2022]. My left headlight panel was destroyed and the radiator was damaged.

It took 10 days to get a police report because my police department has staff shortages. Then, I called around and there are shortages of parts all across the globe and the body shops are backed up. I couldn’t even get a tow to a body shop until November, so I couldn’t get an estimate to give to my insurance company. I had to do a photo estimate.

It took them about a month to get back to me, and then when I put in [a claim for] the repairs, my insurance company said, ‘We’re going to junk your car. It’s a total loss. We’ll cut you a check.’ Now, the reason they did that was because they’re making money off my junk car.

They’re going to sell the parts, [which is why] they gave me more money than the Blue Book value … This is kind of the glacial beginning, what I call the ‘glacial Mad Max’ scenario.

Goods and services that we used to take for granted are going to start to disappear. Uber Eats, that’s going to go the way of the dodo bird. There’s just not going to be enough people to fill these jobs and it’s going to become increasingly more difficult to get things. Supply chains are already broken. They’re going to become more broken with less people on the margin.

Remember, supply chains are all done just-in-time. That was a big thing when I was on Wall Street. ‘Just-in-time supply chain, super-efficient.’ Well, just-in-time was algorithmically designed to use the least amount of people. Now, you just need a couple of people to call in sick or disappear, and everything gets backed up. So, this is beginning.

I think it’s going to get worse and worse. What I’m hearing about the medium-term impacts scare me. Because of the uptake in boosters has lessened, we should have seen excess mortality start to drop into single digits. But it’s not.

It’s still running [high], and I suspect when the numbers are in from the flu season this winter, excess mortality will trend up again because people’s immune systems are compromised. Illnesses that would have been easy to withstand are going to knock some people out.”

Life Expectancy Has Plummeted

At the end of August 2022, we also discovered that life expectancy in the U.S. dropped precipitously during 2020 and 2021,2 which further supports the hypothesis that the shots are prematurely killing people.

As I was preparing for my interview with Ed, I realized I wanted to discuss the worst decrease in life expectancy in the U.S. in over 100 years with him, as he had not discussed it in his book. I used a few of the non-Google search engines and could not find it at all. Then I realized I saved a copy of the story in one of my PowerPoint lectures (see below):

US life expectancy has plummeted

If I had not saved this screenshot and not had the precise headline to search for I would likely have never found the article.

In 2019, the average life span of Americans of all ethnicities was nearly 79 years. By the end of 2021, life expectancy had dropped to 76 — a loss of nearly three years. Typically, a drop in life expectancy by a mere month or two is a big deal, so a three-year loss is a sign that something catastrophic has occurred.

It’s also rather incriminating that The New York Times article3 that reported this historical decline in life expectancy was quickly deleted, as were all reposts. To me, the decrease in life expectancy is prima facie evidence that the COVID shots are a dangerous fraud. Probably, the article was scrubbed to protect the pro-jab narrative.

This is a classic illustration of what the global cabal is doing, and I discussed it in great depth with an upcoming interview with Whitney Webb. It is clear this censorship and removal of important information will only worsen with time. So if you value a video or article it would be really helpful to download it to your personal drives as it very well may be gone the next time you go to look for it.

More Information

To learn more, be sure to pick up a copy of Dowd’s book, “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022.” To stay abreast on Dowd’s ongoing work, you can also follow him on GETTR.

“I’m not a scientist. I’m not a doctor. I’m a financial capital markets expert,” Dowd notes. “What do we do in financial capital markets? We accumulate information edges over other people to make decisions on asset classes, to make money before everybody else sees the trend change. That’s how you make money.

I live in the world between perception, reality and timing of that switch from perception to reality. Right now, the perception by 90% of the population seems to be that the COVID shot is a safe and effective and I’m crazy. Well, my data suggests that I’m not crazy. Not only am I not crazy, you’re so wrong it’s going to be detrimental to your health.

The book is a journey through how I think. I present the theory of the case. It’s simple deductive reasoning. You don’t have to believe me, but you have to ask this question: ‘If 2020 was so exciting to the media and the health officials that counted all the deaths with such glee, why are they not talking about the excessive death rates we’re now seeing globally, especially amongst the younger age working folks and the employed folks?’

There seems to be crickets on that, so you have to ask yourself, ‘If that’s not a national security concern and a national health crisis, then what is?’ Why the silence? Well, prima facie evidence of a cover-up is my thesis … Look at my book as a stock thesis. It’s my investment case on why I would pitch a stock to you … I’m just pitching you a trade.

Get out of the vaccine. Stop taking them. You’re on the wrong side of the trade, and if you don’t listen to me, instead of losing money, you’re probably going to lose your health and/or life.”

A Red Pill for Christmas

A great feature of “Cause Unknown: The Epidemic of Sudden Deaths in 2021 and 2022” is that it’s not going to overwhelm you with complex statistical analysis. It’s a simple read with lots of pictures and graphs. It also includes QR codes to references so you can rapidly confirm them.

“Everything I sourced,” Dowd says. “It’s a powerful book. It’s a book that I hope changes the marginal mind … I think it makes a great Christmas gift for the family member who doesn’t see the reality we see and, again, it’s coming from a Wall Street guy, laid out as an investment thesis. You can disagree, but all the stuff that I put in the book is sourced and the data is the data …

What we don’t do in the book is we don’t get into the who and why. We don’t want to assault someone’s worldview, but the data’s so compelling, we do say at the end of the book … ‘There’s a cover-up going on and malfeasance.’

Jessica Rose, Ph.D., said in an interview with me, and I put her quote in the book, ‘Some things are worse than death.’ The most acute adverse reaction is death. But there are other ones that can make your life pretty miserable for a long, long time, and also make other people’s lives miserable that have to take care of you.

When you think about labor statistics, if there’s someone in the house that’s disabled severely, the person who’s not disabled loses work hours and work weeks taking care of that person, taking them to hospital visits, what have you.

Also, think about the hospital infrastructure that’s going to be overwhelmed, especially with the health care workers who were mandated to take all these jabs. We’re going to have a health care crisis, whether you know it or not.

It’s coming, and you’re not going to have access to health care … That’s why I think people need to look at holistic health themselves and get as healthy as possible right now … Do what you can outside the medical system because soon it’s not going to be there for you.”

*

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 Daily Skeptic October 27, 2022

2, 3 New York Times August 31, 2022 (Archived)

Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

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

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

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

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

***

The Israeli military on Sunday dropped threatening leaflets in southern Syria hours after launching missile strikes in the area.

The Israeli missile strikes took place late Saturday, and reports said the strike hit a Syrian military radar system in an area of southern Syria known as Tel al-Qalib, although the incident has not been confirmed by Syrian state media, which usually reports on Israeli operations.

The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) appeared to take credit for the missile strikes in the leaflets that were dropped. “Time after time, you have been responsible for the harm caused by your decisions,” the flyer reads, according to The Times of Israel.

The leaflet adds that the

“continuing presence of Hezbollah in the area of Tel al-Qalib and collaboration with it has brought and will bring you nothing good. The presence of Hezbollah in the area has brought you humiliation and you are paying the price for that.”

Israel frequently bombs Syria, but the IDF rarely acknowledges individual strikes. The Israelis frame their operations in Syria as attacks against Iran and Hezbollah, but they frequently kill Syrian soldiers and target civilian infrastructure, including airports in Damascus and Aleppo.

Asharq Al-Awsat, an Arabic newspaper based in London, reported on Saturday, citing unnamed Israeli political sources, that Israel has threatened Lebanon that it could bomb Beirut’s international airport. The threat was made based on allegations made in Saudi media that Iran has used civilian flights into the airport to transfer weapons to Hezbollah.

*

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 South Front

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Israel Strikes Southern Syria, Drops Threatening Leaflets
  • Tags: ,

All Korean Tanks to be Deployed in North-eastern Poland Says MoD

December 12th, 2022 by Polish Press Agency

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.

***

All 180 K2 tanks that Poland has purchased from South Korea will be deployed in north-eastern Poland, close to the border with the Russian Kaliningrad enclave, the defence minister has said.

On Tuesday, Poland received the first consignment of ten K2 tanks and 24 K9 self-propelled howitzers.

Mariusz Blaszczak told a local radio station on Saturday that ultimately all the tanks would be shipped to military units in Morag, Braniewo and Ostroda.

“It is the target location for those tanks,” the defence minister said, adding that the K2s were designed to operate in muddy, wet and hilly terrain, which is prevalent in the Polish north-eastern region of Warmia-Mazury.

“It is our priority to strengthen the eastern part of our country,” he said.

In total, Poland plans to purchase up to 1,000 K2 tanks and 672 K9 howitzers from South Korea. Additionally, the country will also buy close to K239 Chunmoo multiple rocket launchers and 48 FA-50 light combat jets.

Warsaw has stepped up its defence purchases after Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24. (PAP)

*

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 Fot. PAP/Tomasz Waszczuk

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on All Korean Tanks to be Deployed in North-eastern Poland Says MoD

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.

***

With no serious public debate or discussion, the US House of Representatives voted Thursday to spend nearly a trillion dollars on the military over the next year, funding the proxy war in Ukraine against Russia and plans for military conflict with China.

The vast majority of both Democrats and Republicans in the House voted to spend another $858 billion on the US military, a figure $45 billion higher than President Joe Biden had requested and 8 percent higher than last year’s budget.

The principal target of the bill is China, with congressional lawmakers publicly discussing preparations for war with the world’s most populous country in barely-veiled terms.

“This year’s NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] takes concrete steps towards preparing for a future conflict with China by investing in American hard power, strengthening American posture in the Indo-Pacific, and supporting our allies,” Wisconsin Republican Representative Mike Gallagher said.

In a press statement, Gallagher praised the fact that the bill “Provides similar drawdown authority to arm Taiwan as we have Ukraine.”

Despite the war in Ukraine being used as the justification for the massive surge in military spending, the central focus of the bill is US preparations for military conflict with China.

For the first time in US history, the United States is directly arming Taiwan, providing $10 billion in arms over 10 years.  The direct arming of Taiwan strikes yet another major blow at the one-China policy.

Taiwan is by far the most referenced geographic area in the bill, with 438 mentions, more than Russia, with 237, and Ukraine, with 159.

The bill ends the requirement that the Pentagon provide competitive contracts for military procurement, opening the door to massive price-gouging by military contractors Raytheon, Lockheed Martin and Boeing, which are already posting record profits fueled by the bloody, US-provoked war in Ukraine.

“Whether you want to call it wartime contracting or emergency contracting, we can’t play around anymore,” a senior congressional aide told Defense News earlier this year.

This “wartime contracting” means that arms dealers will be free to charge taxpayers effectively whatever they want, with no serious oversight or regulation.

Even as Congress slashes funding for vital measures to save lives in the COVID-19 pandemic, including vaccines and testing, it is recklessly throwing money at the Pentagon. Every department of every service will get more money, without exception. The US Navy will get $32 billion for new warships, including three Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and two Virginia-class submarines.

And the Pentagon is authorized to purchase a further 36 F-35 aircraft, each costing approximately $ 89 million, or enough to build six school buildings.

The bill continues the transformation of the US military from a force aimed primarily at subjugating and terrorizing former colonies such as Iraq and Afghanistan into one prepared to fight wars with “peer competitors” such as Russia and China.

Commenting on the planned retirement of the A-10 warthog attack aircraft, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown said in April: “The A-10 is a great platform for a [permissive] environment, but I don’t see very many [permissive] environments that we’re going to roll into in the future.”

The US media has largely ignored the House passage of the largest military budget in US history, treating it as a routine event. But what coverage does exist of US military spending has been devoted to demands for its expansion.

The bill includes a major concession to fascistic forces that make up a substantial section of the US military, repealing the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for military personnel 30 days after the bill’s passage.

Ahead of the House’s passage of the NDAA, the US military announced a “dramatic” increase in weapons production, vowing to triple annual production of 155mm artillery shells.

“We want to be able to build our stocks not just where we started the war, but higher. We’re posturing for a pretty ― over a period of three years ― a dramatic increase in conventional artillery ammunition production,” Doug Bush, the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, technology and logistics, said last week.

The passage of this bill is aimed at putting into practice a series of military strategy documents released earlier this year, which proclaimed the 2020s the “decisive decade” in the US struggle for world domination.

In June, the US-led NATO alliance pledged to prepare for “high-intensity, multi-domain warfighting against nuclear-armed peer-competitors” such as Russia and China.

US soldiers fire an M777 howitzer while deployed in Syria at Mission Support Site Conoco on December, 4, 2022. [Photo: US Department of Defense/ Army Sgt. Julio Hernandez]

In October, the US national security strategy pledged to “win the competition for the 21st century.”

Declaring that “Our strategy is rooted in our national interests,” the document pledges to “Modernize and strengthen our military so it is equipped for the era of strategic competition.”

Critically, the document declares that war abroad is a means of achieving domestic goals, stating, “[T]he United States has a tradition of transforming… foreign challenges into opportunities to spur… rejuvenation at home.”

The entire US political establishment is united behind plans for escalating its conflict with Russia and China, to be paid for through a deepening offensive against the social rights of the US population.

There is mounting opposition in the working class and youth to this policy of war and austerity.

To mobilize this opposition, this Saturday, December 10, the International Youth and Students for Social Equality is holding an online meeting, “For a mass movement of youth and students to stop the war in Ukraine!”  All readers of the World Socialist Web Site should make plans to attend this critical rally.

*

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: Soldiers assigned to the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division conduct convoy operations in Grafenwoehr, Germany, December 2, 2022. [Photo: US Department of Defense/Army Staff Sgt. Malcolm Cohens-Ashley ]

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

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

***

 

 

On December 10, 2004, the body of journalist Gary Webb, 49, was discovered in his home near Sacramento after a moving company worker found a note posted to his front door that read: “Please do not enter. Call 911 and ask for an ambulance.”

Webb’s death was listed as a suicide, but Webb was found with two bullet holes in the head, indicating that he was executed.[1]

In the days leading up to his death, Webb had told friends that he was receiving death threats, being regularly followed by what he thought were government agents, and that he was concerned about strange individuals who were seen breaking into and leaving his house.

In the late 1990s, Webb had written a series of stories for the San José Mercury News, which provided the basis for his book, Dark Alliance: The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion (New York: Seven Stories Press, 1998).

In it, Webb detailed how the explosion of crack cocaine in South Central Los Angeles during the 1980s was sparked by two Nicaraguan émigrés, Danilo Blandón and Norwin Meneses, who sold huge amounts of cocaine to raise funds for a CIA-backed rebel army—the Contras.

Webb was a Pulitzer Prize winner whose “Dark Alliance” series went viral in the early days of the internet. It caused a firestorm that led to the resignation of CIA Director John Deutch after he was grilled by angry Black activists at a meeting in L.A.[2]

Webb’s story had traced how cocaine was shipped into San Francisco and distributed in L.A. after Blandón and Meneses sold it to a street dealer from South Central named “Freeway” Ricky Ross.

Through this connection, “Freeway Rick” became a crack kingpin, using his contacts with L.A.’s Crips and Blood street gangs to help distribute crack to many other cities across the country.

Webb had first heard about the story after receiving a tip from the girlfriend of a drug dealer against whom Blandón was testifying.

In his lead paragraph, Webb wrote that “a Bay Area drug ring had funneled millions in drug profits to a Latin American guerrilla army run by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency” which was in league with “Uzi-toting ‘gangstas’ of Compton and South-Central L.A.”

The thrust of Webb’s research was confirmed in 1998 when a CIA inspector general’s report acknowledged that the CIA had worked with suspected drugrunners while supporting the Contras in Nicaragua.[3]

The corruption Webb exposed led all the way to the White House and President Reagan via his aide, Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North, who was coordinating, under Reagan’s orders, the illegal supplying to the Contras of weapons that were purchased with profits from the cocaine being smuggled into the U.S. and distributed around the country by criminals in league with the CIA.

Because of the far-reaching implications, Webb became the target of what Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair called “one of the most venomous and factually inane assaults on a professional journalist’s competence in living memory.”

The assault was spearheaded by the CIA in collaboration with the major agenda-setting media like The New York Times, The Washington Post and Los Angeles Times—which put some 17 reporters on the assignment to destroy Webb.[4]

The Mercury News’s top editor, Jerry Ceppos, ultimately buckled, and threw Webb to the wolves, deleting the website and penning a letter of apology to the readers for the “Dark Alliance” series.[5]

Webb was in turn banished to a small Mercury News bureau in Cupertino, California, south of San Francisco—125 miles from his home and family in Sacramento—and forced to write stories normally assigned to cub reporters. His career was effectively destroyed and he would never again get a job with a daily newspaper.

Webb stood by his research, nevertheless, and continued to expose corruption as a freelance journalist. His final publication unearthed the strategic use of video games by the Pentagon as a method of indoctrination and recruitment of teenage boys.

In a tribute to Webb, Robert Parry, the founder of Consortium News, wrote that Webb’s death marked “an exclamation point” on a “sorry era of journalism that began with the rise of Ronald Reagan and saw the gradual retreat—under right-wing fire—of what had once been Washington’s Watergate/Pentagon Papers watchdog press corps.”

Since these words were written, things have only gotten worse, with the media helping to advance the Russia Gate conspiracy theory while promoting scurrilous allegations against Russia that have helped mobilize public support for the war in Ukraine.

All the more reason to honor Webb and the uncompromising journalistic integrity that he stood for.

*

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.

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. Webb’s friends said that there is no way he would have taken his own life: He loved life and loved his kids. His cause of death was changed to “single gunshot wound” when people began to question how or why a man would shoot himself in the face twice. This represented a concentrated effort to cover up the nature of Webb’s death. After Webb died, he was immediately cremated thereby destroying forensic evidence of the gunshot wounds.

  2. Webb’s book was endorsed by Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) who said that “the time I spent investigating the allegations of the Dark Alliance series led me to the undeniable conclusion that the CIA, DEA, DIA and FBI knew about drug trafficking in South Central Los Angeles. They were either part of the trafficking or turned a blind eye to it, in an effort to fund the contra war. . . . This book is the final chapter on this sordid tale and brings to light one of the worst official abuses in our nation’s history.” 
  3. Associated Press journalists Robert Parry and Brian Barger had earlier reported that Contra groups had “engaged in cocaine trafficking, in part to help finance their war against Nicaragua.” 
  4. Alexander Cockburn wrote at CounterPunch that “squadrons of hacks, some of them with career-long ties to the CIA, sprayed thousands of words of vitriol over Webb and his paper, the San Jose Mercury News, for besmirching the Agency’s fine name by charging it with complicity in the importing of cocaine into the U.S.” NBC’s Andrea Mitchell characteristically branded Webb’s story as a “conspiracy theory.” 
  5. Ceppos went on to receive an award from the Society of Professional Journalists for his “superior ethical conduct” in handling the aftermath of the series and, in 1999, was promoted to vice president for news at Knight-Ridder. 

Featured image: Gary Webb with his exposé about the CIA and crack. [Source: educateinspirechange.org]

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Eighteen Years Ago: Journalist Gary Webb Was Murdered After Exposing CIA Drug Trafficking
  • 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.

***

 

 

 

 

Professor Michel Chossudovsky’s book is unmatched in his analysis of this Covid crime of biblical proportion, committed on humanity’s historic trajectory.

In fifteen concise science-based chapters, Michel traces the false covid pandemic, explaining how a PCR test, producing up to 97% proven false positives, combined with a relentless 24/7 fear campaign, was able to create a worldwide panic-laden “plandemic”; that this plandemic would never have been possible without the infamous DNA-modifying Polymerase Chain Reaction test – which to this day is being pushed on a majority of innocent people who have no clue. His conclusions are evidenced by renown scientists.

In concise terms, Professor Chossudovsky presents an investigative study of connecting the dots of a bigger plan, The Great Reset, alias UN Agenda 2030, that is to reset and digitize our planet, and to transhumanize or robotize mankind. Michel describes how this horror holocaust on humanity, planned for decades, is destroying the people’s asset base, abolishing economies, creating unemployment, poverty, famine and death; exacerbated by an equally relentless falsely named coercive “vaccination” campaign, causing worldwide population reduction and large-scale infertility, a crime being perpetrated on all 193 UN-member countries.

Michel’s masterpiece leaves us, however, with hope for an awakening in solidarity that may lead us to overcome this tyranny, back to personal, communal, national and regional sovereign freedom and autonomy.

*

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.


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 The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’État Against Humanity. Book Review

What Does the US Federal Reserve’s Jerome Powell Have Up His Sleeve?

By Ellen Brown, December 12, 2022

The Fed is doubling down on what appears to be a failed policy, driving the economy to the brink of recession without bringing prices down appreciably. Inflation results from “too much money chasing too few goods,” and the Fed has control over only the money – the “demand” side of the equation.

Video: Prepare for ‘Climate Lockdowns’: Rogue British Council Wants to Strip You of Freedoms

By Sky News Australia, December 12, 2022

Sky News host Rowan Dean says according to Darren Birks at the independent website Vision News, the Oxfordshire County Council is planning to embark on “climate lockdowns” in 2024.

New Study Confirms What We Knew All Along: mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Are Associated with More Serious Harms Than Originally Claimed

By Paul Anthony Taylor, December 12, 2022

A new study published in the journal Vaccine examines the occurrence of serious adverse events following adult clinical trials of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Authored by researchers from the United States, Spain and Australia, the analysis reveals that together these vaccines were associated in the trials with an excess risk of ‘serious adverse events of special interest’ of 12.5 per 10,000 people vaccinated.

Xi Jinping’s Visit to Saudi Arabia and the Overthrow of Atlanticism

By Matthew Ehret-Kump, December 12, 2022

With Chinese President Xi Jinping’s long-awaited three-day visit to Saudi Arabia, a powerful shift by the Persian Gulf’s most strategic Arab state toward the multipolar alliance is being consolidated. Depending on which side of the ideological fence you sit on, this consolidation is being viewed closely with great hope or rage.

Canadian Quarantine Cops Fined Close to 5,000 Children for Violating Trudeau’s COVID Rules

By Anthony Murdoch, December 12, 2022

Recently released figures show Canadian Public Health Agency inspectors who were empowered to issue fines cited an alarming 4,883 children for breaking government COVID quarantine rules.

Dr. David Martin Blasts Health Authorities for Turning Roughly 4 Billion People into “Bioweapons Factories”

By Belle Carter, December 12, 2022

Martin related this as well to the 10-year National Science Foundation grant that gave rise to the company now known as Moderna. Through its COVID-19 vaccine partnership with the U.S. government, Moderna picked up nearly $1 billion in research aid. Then, it joined the list of pharmaceutical companies to take a supply order from the federal government.

COVID Booster Mandates for Young Adults Will Cause ‘Net Harm,’ BMJ Study Says

By Children’s Health Defense, December 12, 2022

Any potential benefits of the COVID-19 booster fail to outweigh the harms for young people ages 18-29, according to a peer-reviewed study published Monday in The BMJ Journal of Medical Ethics. Researchers performed a risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis using data from Pfizer, Moderna and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). They concluded that “booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm.”

Russia Hands UN Details of Ukrainian Attacks on Civilian Targets

By RT News, December 12, 2022

Russia has submitted a letter to the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly offering a detailed description of recurring Ukrainian strikes on civilian targets in Donbass. The document also heavily emphasizes the role the Western-supplied weapons have played in these atrocities.

What Did the Biggest Anti-terror Raid in German History Uncover?

By Free West Media, December 12, 2022

The massive raid continues to make waves, especially after more than 3 000 police officers searched more than 150 properties across Germany on Wednesday. At least 27 people were arrested and another 25 are being investigated. They are said to have planned an extensive armed coup.

Defense Aid to Ukraine Tops $20 Billion as New $275M Package Announced

By Zero Hedge, December 12, 2022

The Biden administration on Friday unveiled another $275 million in weapons and defense equipment for Ukraine, which crucially will come via the presidential drawdown authority. This means the Pentagon will pull arms from its own stockpiles to send to Ukraine to fulfill this package, despite defense officials having long been on record expressing deep concern over dwindling supplies necessary to protect and defend America.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: What Does the US Federal Reserve’s Jerome Powell Have Up His Sleeve?

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.

***

Sky News host Rowan Dean says according to Darren Birks at the independent website Vision News, the Oxfordshire County Council is planning to embark on “climate lockdowns” in 2024.

“I believe we are facing a sinister threat to the freedoms and everyday liberties that we and our parents have taken for granted all our and their lives,” Mr Dean said.

“But are being squeezed out of us by woke left-wing authoritarian governments more effectively than a python crushing the breath out of Mrs Kafoops pet.

“And if we don’t wake up soon and start saying no, it will be too late.”

*

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 screenshot from the video

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 new study published in the journal Vaccine examines the occurrence of serious adverse events following adult clinical trials of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

Authored by researchers from the United States, Spain and Australia, the analysis reveals that together these vaccines were associated in the trials with an excess risk of ‘serious adverse events of special interest’ of 12.5 per 10,000 people vaccinated.

Describing how their results raise concern that mRNA vaccines are associated with more harm than initially estimated at the time they were given emergency authorization, the researchers say their findings point to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses to be conducted.

The analysis carried out in the study utilizes a priority list created in March 2020 by the Brighton Collaboration, a vaccine safety research network. Endorsed by the World Health Organization and subsequently updated, the list contains potential adverse events relevant to COVID-19 vaccines. The Vaccine journal researchers adapted the Brighton Collaboration list to evaluate serious adverse events of special interest observed in the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine trials.

Serious adverse events resulting from mRNA vaccines

The researchers describe how, to the best of their knowledge, the Brighton Collaboration’s list has not previously been applied to serious adverse events in randomized trial data. They therefore sought to investigate the association between mRNA COVID-19 vaccines authorized by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and serious adverse events identified by the Brighton Collaboration, using data from the randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials on which the authorizations were based.

For the purposes of the vaccine trials, serious adverse events were defined as being adverse events that result in either death; an incident that was life-threatening at the time of the event; inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization; persistent or significant disability/incapacity; a congenital anomaly/birth defect; or a medically important event, based on medical judgment.

The researchers found that the Pfizer trial exhibited a particularly notable 36 percent higher risk of serious adverse events occurring in the vaccine group compared to the placebo group. The Moderna trial exhibited a 6 percent higher risk of such events occurring in the vaccine group compared to the placebo group. Overall, compared to trial participants receiving placebos, the researchers found that the recipients of mRNA vaccines had a 16 percent higher risk of experiencing serious adverse events.

Serious adverse events of special interest

The researchers also evaluated serious adverse events of special interest observed in the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine trials. Such events included coagulation disorders, cardiac disorders, and other serious problems.

In the Pfizer trial, serious adverse events of special interest were reported in the vaccine group at a rate equivalent to 27.7 incidents per 10,000 people vaccinated. For each 1 million people vaccinated, this would translate into an excess risk of 2,770 serious adverse events. Compared to the placebo group, people receiving the Pfizer vaccine had a 57 percent higher risk of experiencing a serious adverse event of special interest.

In the Moderna trial, serious adverse events of special interest were reported in the vaccine group at a rate equivalent to 57.3 incidents per 10,000 people vaccinated. For each 1 million people vaccinated, this would translate into an excess risk of 5,730 serious adverse events. People receiving the Moderna vaccine had a 36 percent higher risk of experiencing a serious adverse event of special interest than those in the placebo group.

Overall, compared to those in the placebo group, people receiving these vaccines had a 43 percent higher risk of experiencing a serious adverse event of special interest. Together, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest equivalent to 12.5 per 10,000 people vaccinated. For each 1 million people vaccinated, this would translate into an excess risk of 1,250 serious adverse events.

A rational health policy would consider potential harms

Disturbingly, the researchers note that in both the Pfizer trial and the Moderna trial, the excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest was actually higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization. This is clearly contrary to what the general public has been led to believe. As the researchers correctly point out, rational health policy formation should consider potential harms alongside potential benefits.

In their conclusion, the researchers argue that a systematic review and meta-analysis using individual trial participant data should be undertaken to address questions of harm-benefit in various demographic subgroups, particularly in people at low risk of serious complications from COVID-19. They add that full transparency of COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial data is needed to properly evaluate these questions. Unfortunately, however, 2 years after the global rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, the fact is that participant level trial data remain inaccessible.

While non-transparency might be in the financial interests of the vaccine industry, it most definitely isn’t in the health interests of the general public. If the companies manufacturing mRNA vaccines really have nothing to hide, it’s time for them to come clean and prove 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.

This article was originally published on Dr. Rath Health Foundation.

Executive Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and one of the coauthors of our explosive book, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, Paulis also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings. You can find Paul on Twitter at @paulanthtaylor

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from fernandozhiminaicela/Pixabay


The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity

by Michel Chossudovsky

Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.

“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”

ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0,  Year: 2022,  PDF Ebook,  Pages: 164, 15 Chapters

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

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

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

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

***

The Real Goal of Fed Policy: Breaking Inflation, the Middle Class or the Bubble Economy?

“There is no sense that inflation is coming down,” said Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell at a November 2 press conference, — this despite eight months of aggressive interest rate hikes and “quantitative tightening.” On November 30, the stock market rallied when he said smaller interest rate increases are likely ahead and could start in December. But rates will still be increased, not cut. “By any standard, inflation remains much too high,” Powell said. “We will stay the course until the job is done.”

The Fed is doubling down on what appears to be a failed policy, driving the economy to the brink of recession without bringing prices down appreciably. Inflation results from “too much money chasing too few goods,” and the Fed has control over only the money – the “demand” side of the equation.

Energy and food are the key inflation drivers, and they are on the supply side. As noted by Bloomberg columnist Ramesh Ponnuru  in the Washington Post in March:

Fixing supply chains is of course beyond any central bank’s power. What the Fed can do is reduce spending levels, which would in turn exert downward pressure on prices. But this would be a mistaken response to shortages. It would answer a scarcity of goods by bringing about a scarcity of money. The effect would be to compound the hit to living standards that supply shocks already caused.

So why is the Fed forging ahead? Some pundits think Chairman Powell has something else up his sleeve.

The Problem with “Demand Destruction”

First, a closer look at the problem. Shrinking demand by reducing the money supply – the money available for people to spend – is considered the Fed’s only tool for fighting inflation. The theory behind raising interest rates is that it will reduce the willingness and ability of people and businesses to borrow. The result will be to shrink the money supply, most of which is created by banks when they make loans. The problem is that shrinking demand means shrinking the economy – laying off workers, cutting productivity, and creating new shortages – driving the economy into recession.

Demand has indeed been shrinking, as evidenced in a November 27 article on ZeroHedge titled: “The Consumer Economy Has Completely Collapsed – ‘It’s A Ghost Town’ for Holiday Shopping Everywhere.” But retailers have cut their prices about as far as they can go. While the rate of increase in producer costs is slowing, those costs are still rising; and retailers have to cover their costs to stay in business, whether or not they have customers at their doors. Rather than lowering their prices further, they will be laying off workers or closing up shop. Layoffs are on the rise, and data reported on December 1 showed that U.S. factory activity is contracting for the first time since the lockdowns of the Covid-​19 pandemic.

It is not just activity in shopping malls and factories that has taken a hit. The housing market has fallen sharply, with pending home sales dropping 32% year-over-year in October. The stock market is also sinking, and the cryptocurrency market has fallen off a cliff. Worse, interest on the federal debt is shooting up. For years, the government has been able to borrow nearly for free. By 2025 or 2026, according to Moody’s Analytics, interest payments could exceed the country’s entire defense budget, which hit $767 billion in fiscal 2022. That means major cuts will be needed to some federal programs.

Breaking the “Fed Put”

In the face of all this economic strife, why is the Fed not reversing its aggressive interest rate hikes, as investors have come to expect? Former British diplomat and EU foreign policy advisor Alastair Crooke suggests that the Fed’s goal is something else:

The Fed … may be attempting to implement a contrarian, controlled demolition of the U.S. bubble-economy through interest rate increases. The rate rises will not slay the inflation “dragon” (they would need to be much higher to do that). The purpose is to break a generalized “dependency habit” on free money.

Danielle DiMartino Booth, former advisor to Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard Fisher, agrees. She stated in an interview with financial journalist and podcaster Julia LaRoche:

Maybe Jay Powell is trying to kill the “Fed put.” Maybe he’s trying to break the back of speculation once and for all, so that it’s the Fed – truly an independent apolitical entity – that is making monetary policy, and not speculators making monetary policy for the Fed.

The “Fed put” is the general idea that the Federal Reserve is willing and able to adjust monetary policy in a way that is bullish for the stock market. As explained in a Fortune Magazine article titled “The Stock Market Is Freaking Out Because of the End of Free Money – It All Has to Do with Something Called ‘The Fed Put:’”

For decades, the way the Fed enacted policy was like a put option contract, stepping in to prevent disaster when markets experienced serious turbulence by cutting interest rates and “printing money” through QE [quantitative easing].

… Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Fed had supported markets with ultra-​accommodative monetary policy in the form of near-​zero interest rates and quantitative easing (QE). Stocks thrived under these loose monetary policies. As long as the central bank was injecting liquidity into the economy as an emergency lending measure, the safety net was laid out for investors chasing all kinds of risk assets.

… The idea that the Fed will come to stocks’ aid in a downturn began under Fed Chair Alan Greenspan. What is now the “Fed put” was once the “Greenspan put,” a term coined after the 1987 stock market crash, when Greenspan lowered interest rates to help companies recover, setting a precedent that the Fed would step in during uncertain times.

But the “free money” era seems to be over:

The regime change has left markets effectively on their own and led risk assets, including stocks and cryptocurrencies, to crater as investors grapple with the new norm. It’s also left many wondering whether the era of the so-​called Fed put is over.

Killing the Parasite That Is Killing the Host

The Fed put favors the rich – investors in the stock market, the speculative real estate market, the multi-trillion dollar derivatives market. It favors what economist Michael Hudson calls the “financialized” or “rentier” economy – “money making money,” formerly called “unearned income” – which drives up prices without adding productive value to the “real” economy. Hudson calls it a parasite, which is sucking out profits that should be going toward building more factories and other economic development.

By backstopping the financialized economy, the Fed has been instrumental in widening the income gap of the last two decades, pushing housing prices to heights that are unaffordable for first-time homebuyers, driving up rents and educational costs, and crushing entrepreneurs. DiMartino Booth explains:

Fed policy feeds passive investing … because you don’t have to carefully allocate your resources. You simply have to be long the NASDAQ and sit there with your money. What does that feed? It feeds the monopolization of America. The largest companies, the companies such as Google and Microsoft … if there is a competitor in their world they simply absorb them. They acquire them, which quashes … the entrepreneurial spirit that made this country so great.… If the Fed succeeds, Main Street will be the main winner.

… [T]he trick here is for the Fed to not break anything big, and that’s the delicate balancing act, … if … they can slowly, methodically take the rot out of the system without breaking anything big that forces them to pull back.

The “rot” in the system is particularly evident in the housing market:

Since the financial crisis, there’s been a lot of private equity that’s entered the space and snapped up all these homes and they’re renting them … It’s definitely exacerbated this housing cycle. It’s added an element of speculation because so many of them are all cash buyers. Don’t get me wrong, they’re levered — it is borrowed money — but they’re coming in as all cash buyers, and that I think created a lot of these massive bidding wars …

DiMartino Booth discusses the risk of derivatives contagion using the example of AIG, a giant insurance company brought down by derivatives exposure in 2008:

During the financial crisis … we rescued AIG because we didn’t want to actually see what it looked like on the other side of that cliff had derivatives actually been unwound, and what that contagion might have looked like.… We never tested the derivatives market, so that risk continues to lurk out there…. I’m not a cheerleader for there being some kind of a systemic risk event, and I do hope again that the Fed succeeds in managing this unwind, in seeing risk pulled out of the system, but one company at a time, not something that makes the global financial system implode.

Financial blogger Tom Luongo takes this argument further. He maintains that Fed Chair Powell is out to break the offshore eurodollar market – the speculative, unregulated offshore money market where the World Economic Forum and “old European money” (including mega-funds Blackrock and Vanguard) get the cheap credit funding their massive spending power. That is a complicated subject, which will have to wait for another article; but the principle is the same. Without the backstop of the Fed’s virtually free dollars to satisfy a surge in demand for them, these highly-leveraged dollar investments will collapse. (“Leverage” is an investment strategy that uses borrowed capital to increase potential returns. The risk is that if the investment sours, losses are also increased.)

Pushing “Until Something Breaks”

Whether or not popping these raging speculative bubbles is the goal, the Fed’s interest rate hikes are having that effect. According to a November 25, 2022 article on CNBC.com, “Interest rate hikes have choked off access to easy capital ….” As a result, “Investors have lost roughly $7.4 trillion, based on the 12-month drop in the Nasdaq.”

House prices are also tumbling. The third quarter of 2022 saw the biggest home equity drop ($1.3 trillion) ever recorded. Fortune Magazine quotes Moody’s Analystics: “Before prices began to decline, we were overvalued [nationally] by around 25%. Now, this means prices will normalize. Affordability will be restored.”

In 2021, 25% of all real estate purchases were being made by institutional investors. In the third quarter of 2022, investor buying of homes tumbled 30%. Blackstone, a real estate income trust notorious for buying up homes and turning them into rentals, was reported on December 2 to be limiting withdrawals from its $125 billion property fund as investors rush for the exits. George Cipolloni, portfolio manager at Penn Mutual Asset Management, said the U.S. Federal Reserve’s sharp interest rate increases have not “worked all the way through the economy yet,” and that he expects to see “more Blackstone-type news events coming forward in the next year.”

In May 2022, BlackRock stock (BLK) was down 30% for the year. And by November, the cryptocurrency market cap had plummeted from $3 trillion to $900 billion, with Bitcoin, its largest component, down 77% year-over-year.

Currently featured in the news is the crypto exchange FTX and its 30-year-old billionaire owner Sam Bankman-Fried. FTX was exposed as a Ponzi scheme by the receding tide of dollar liquidity, catching Bankman-Fried and team “swimming naked when the tide went out.” According to Swiss bank UBS’ chief of investment, “FTX’s collapse shows Federal Reserve tightening is crushing speculative assets.” Outing FTX is thought to be only the beginning of a succession of exposures of financial frauds to come.

The Delicate Balancing Act

DiMartino Booth said in a live twitter presentation on December 8, “If Jay Powell breaks the Fed put and takes away the unfair ability of private capital to rape and pillage the system, he will have finally addressed income inequality in America.”

Looked at in that light, breaking the Fed put sounds like a good idea. But can it be done without breaking the whole economy? More reputable establishments than FTX are at risk. Rate hikes seriously impact local retailers and wholesalers. In September, risky leveraged bets brought UK pension funds near to collapse, forcing the Bank of England to reverse course and lower its interest rates. And there is the stress in the U.S. Treasury, which is dealing with an enormous interest tab on its debt.

Other disturbing outcomes are being envisioned. One podcaster posits that the economy is intentionally being driven to collapse, at which point the government will declare a “bank holiday” as Pres. Roosevelt did in 1933. When the banks reopen, he says, we will have a “currency reset” in the form of a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The concern is that it will be a “programmable” currency, one that can be regulated or turned off altogether based on the user’s “social credit” score, as is already happening in China.

Alarmed observers note that the New York Fed recently embarked on a pilot project for a CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency). But defenders point out that it is a “wholesale” CBDC, used just for transfers between banks, particularly overseas transfers. Settlement times of foreign exchange transactions typically take two days. Project Cedar, the New York Innovation Center’s pilot project, found that settlement for foreign exchange transactions using distributed ledger technology can happen in 10 seconds or less, significantly reducing risks. Whether that technology will be developed and used by the Fed has not yet been determined. DiMartino Booth observes that Powell and other Fed officials have frequently questioned the need for a “retail” CBDC, in which Fed accounts would be opened directly with the public.In a Substack article titled “A Grand Unified Theory of the FTX Disaster,” author and educator Matthew Crawford lays out a darker possibility – that the end goal of the powerful network of players behind the FTX scheme is not just a U.S. CBDC but a “Global Digital Central Bank” run by international powerbrokers. Whether or not the Federal Reserve intended it, aggressive interest rate hikes could expose this sort of parasitic corruption and remove the money machine that is its power source.

Rising from the Ashes

Meanwhile, the supply-side issues inflating the prices of food, energy and other key resources need to be addressed. Those are matters for federal and state legislatures, not the Fed. In the 1930s, a federal financial institution called the Reconstruction Finance Corporation pulled the economy out of the Great Depression, put people back to work, and crisscrossed the country with new infrastructure, including the dams and power lines that brought electricity to rural America. (See my earlier article here.) The government acted quickly and decisively because times were desperate.

A bill for a National Infrastructure Bank modeled on the Reconstruction Finance Corporation is now before Congress, H.R. 3339. For a local government bank, a viable model is the publicly-owned Bank of North Dakota, which pulled that state out of a regional agricultural depression in the 1920s. (See here.) As an iconic Depression-era poster declared, “We can do it!” We just need to roll up our sleeves and get to work.

*

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

This article was first posted on ScheerPost.

Ellen Brown is an attorney, chair of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of DebtThe Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “It’s Our Money.” Her 300+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com.

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Zero Hedge

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

To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

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

***

Recently released figures show Canadian Public Health Agency inspectors who were empowered to issue fines cited an alarming 4,883 children for breaking government COVID quarantine rules.

As per Blacklock’s Reporter, Canada’s cabinet, in an Inquiry of Ministry brought before the House of Commons, said warnings to kids under age 18 were given in person by law enforcement officials “as a result of non-compliance identified either at the port of entry or during a police check at the traveler’s quarantine address.”

The information was requested by Conservative MP Marilyn Gladu and shows that some 58,760 minors, at one point or another mandated to stay home under Canada’s Quarantine Act, were issued warnings under the act.

The information did not say how old the children were but that the warnings were mostly made by Public Health Agency inspectors.

Gladu had asked,

“With regard to minors being warned of imprisonment or fines if they broke the previous quarantine requirements for certain individuals returning to Canada, since April 2020 broken down by year: How many travelers under age 18 received such warnings?”

The report noted the warnings, which “may be verbal or written. are issued to the parent or guardian.”

“They contain information regarding possible enforcement actions,” the report added.

In total, Canada’s Public Health Agency gave out a whopping $14.9 million in quarantine fines.

The fine amounts ranged from $100 for a child breaching a quarantine order to $275 for those who gave false or misleading information. A $500 fine was handed to those for “failure to comply with a reasonable measure.”

Those who breached a quarantine order were fined $750, and those who entered the county illegally were fined $1,000.

Canada’s Public Health Agency spent over $43 million hiring security guards who enforced COVID quarantine rules by making house calls on returning travelers.

Canada’s Quarantine Act was suspended October 1, and there are currently no COVID restrictions for entering or leaving the country. The rules had been in place since mid-2020. The much-hated ArriveCAN travel app was also made optional, and a mandate that foreigners must be jabbed to enter Canada was removed.

The Quarantine Act was used by the federal government to enact severe draconian COVID travel rules on all returning travelers to the country.

Trudeau’s use of the Quarantine Act gave his government the power to place upon Canadians “unprecedented travel and isolation” requirements.

*

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


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.

***

Financial analyst and self-help entrepreneur Dr. David Martin has slammed public health authorities around the world for forcing roughly four billion people to take the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) mRNA “kill shots,” turning them into biological weapons in the process.

“The reason why [the mRNA injections] are important and distinct is that they turn your body into being what I refer to as the bioweapons factory,” Martin told “Man in America” host Seth Holehouse. “Because legally, when you actually create a thing that manufactures a known pathogen, that is actually biological weapon manufacturing and the fact that your body is doing it means you’re a bioweapons factory.”

He pointed out that this “scamdemic” that paved the way for billions people to submit to the “experimental” vaccine mandate, would cause a fundamental existential problem with humanity. “That means that we have mRNA and we have DNA modifications that are going to not only impact this generation, but will also impact generations to come,” he said.

Martin related this as well to the 10-year National Science Foundation grant that gave rise to the company now known as Moderna. Through its COVID-19 vaccine partnership with the U.S. government, Moderna picked up nearly $1 billion in research aid. Then, it joined the list of pharmaceutical companies to take a supply order from the federal government.

“So anybody who wants to sit back and pretend like this is some sort of innocuous thing and it doesn’t have any long effects is absolutely ludicrous,” he said.

According to Martin, the best-case scenario would be the death or disability of 300 million vaccinated individuals. These many people would be incapacitated and would not be able to contribute to the economy, as per his risk management analysis.

The worst case, on the other hand, would be the death of more than three billion people.

“When you think about the combination of the death rates that are coming off of the injections and the fertility and miscarriage problems coming off of people exposed to the spike protein, this is a much more catastrophic event,” he noted.

Mandatory vaccination of cows a direct attack on food supply

Elsewhere in the show, Martin also discussed with Holehouse how the mRNA technology would be eventually injected into livestock per the Food and Drug Administration‘s (FDA’s) most recent standards.

According to an InfoWars article back in October, dairy farmers in Australia are now being forced to inject the gene-altering vaccine that contains spike protein into their cattle so they could remain in business. And just like in humans, the experimental jabs are causing severe damage to the animals as 35 out of 200 cows died immediately after being administered the injection. (Related: Nearly 2 in 10 cows injected with mRNA vaccine DIE almost instantly.)

Analysts consider the mandatory vaccination of cows as a direct attack on the food supply. Many of them are asking if the milk and other by-products would contain the spike protein that actually harmed the animals.

This was in line with Martin’s analysis that allowing cows to be injected would just be the gate opening for injecting the “kill shots” into other forms of food supply.

“And not unlike what we’ve seen with now, over 50 percent of the population have gastrointestinal problems because of our gene therapies in plants and crops,” he stated, adding that in case this “dangerous move” pushes through, 70 to 80 percent of the world’s population is going to be directly impacted by the mRNA modified meats and foods in the next five years.

Watch the full episode of “Man in America” with Seth Holehouse and Dr. David Martin below.

*

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 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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Dr. David Martin Blasts Health Authorities for Turning Roughly 4 Billion People into “Bioweapons Factories”

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.

***

Any potential benefits of the COVID-19 booster fail to outweigh the harms for young people ages 18-29, according to a peer-reviewed study published Monday in The BMJ Journal of Medical Ethics.

Researchers performed a risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis using data from Pfizer, Moderna and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). They concluded that “booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm.”

More than 1,000 U.S. universities and colleges mandate the COVID-19 vaccine for residential students and more than 300 mandate the booster. Students who do not comply risk disenrollment.

The authors of the BMJ study concluded universities should not enforce booster vaccine mandates.

The researchers estimated that over a six-month period, 31,207 to 42,836 young adults ages 18-29, previously uninfected with COVID-19, would have to receive a third mRNA vaccine — a booster — in order to prevent a single hospitalization.

They also anticipated there would be at least 18.5 serious adverse events among the boosted group during that time, including in males, 1.5-4.6 booster-associated cases of myopericarditis, typically requiring hospitalization.

For 32 hospitalizations prevented, there would be 593.5 serious adverse events.

The researchers also anticipated that for every hospitalization averted there would be 1,430 to 4,626 cases of adverse events serious enough to stop people from carrying out regular daily activities.

Any vaccine mandate must be based on the public health principle of “proportionality” — the benefits must outweigh the relevant risks — the authors said. Until now, no risk-benefit assessment had been done.

In April, Dr. Paul Offit, a member of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) vaccine advisory board, writing in the New England Journal of Medicine called on the CDC to conduct a risk-benefit analysis of vaccines for young people.

The CDC has not yet carried out such a study. In response, lead author Kevin Bardosh, Ph.D., explained on Twitter that their team of bioethicists, epidemiologists, legal scholars and clinicians “took up the challenge.”

Building on their empirical risk-benefit assessment, the authors argued mandates are “unethical” because they may result in a net expected harm to young people.

They added that the mandates aren’t based on updated, age-stratified risk-benefit assessment and that expected harms don’t outweigh the public health benefits “given the modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission.”

The mandates also violate the reciprocity principle, the authors said, because vaccine harms are not reliably compensated and vaccines may result in wider social harms, including social ostracization of unvaccinated people and loss of faith in public institutions.

The authors of The BMJ study concluded that:

“General mandates for young people ignore key data, entail wider social harms and/or abuses of power and are arguably undermining rather than contributing to social trust and solidarity.”

‘Mandates have caused backlash, resistance & anger’

Controversy surrounds vaccine mandates at colleges and universities, particularly for the boosters, with some arguing the mandates are based on politics, not medicine.

Last year an FDA advisory committee voted overwhelmingly against boosting the general population, including healthy young adults, but the Biden administration and the CDC overruled this recommendation.

“There’s actually a controversy, a fundamental controversy among experts in the world of vaccinology, about the appropriateness of boosters in younger people,” Bardosh told The National Desk.

“Most people have had COVID and that provides very durable protection that’s on par with two vaccines or even three vaccines if you haven’t actually had the virus,” he added.

In February, the CDC estimated that 63.7% of adults ages 18-49, both vaccinated and unvaccinated, had infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.

This, combined with increasing evidence of serious adverse effects for young people from the vaccine, which CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky and Pfizer both acknowledged does not stop transmission, led many to question the mandates.

Bardosh tweeted:

Calls to end the mandates have grown. The study reported that more than 50 petitions were filed against the mandates, with substantial support. Petitions on Change.org call out institutions including Stanford, George Mason, UMass, University of Scranton, University of Notre Dame, University at Buffalo, SUNY Stony Brook, Siena College, Manhattanville College, Le Moyne College, Merrimack College, DePauw University, Virginia State University, Salve Regina University, Montclair State University, and California State University.

Some university professors have filed open letters to their institutions, including a letter from University of California administrators in late November demanding an end to the booster mandate.

Last week, Yale alumni, Rhodes Scholar and journalist Dr. Naomi Wolf spoke at a rally against Yale’s vaccine mandates. “Putting Yale on notice,” she said if Yale continues to mandate the COVID-19 boosters, it will:

“have blood on its hand for damaging young healthy women and men. mRNA Covid Vaccines do not stop transmission but do cause multiple irreversible harms, so they do not make any sense to mandate.

“Yale, DO NOT coerce minors and young adults into damaging their lives and submitting to an illegal dangerous, injection that violates the Geneva Convention, that violates the Nuremberg Code, that violates basic human rights …

“Coercion is not consent!”

This week Ohio Republican State Rep. Scott Lipps introduced a bill that would ban COVID-19 vaccine mandates at Ohio colleges and universities. Lipps told the House Higher Education and Career Readiness Committee:

“By requiring vaccines and discriminating against individuals who choose not to receive one, we are not only making very intimate health decisions for our students, but we are showing them that their education, choice, and autonomy are less meaningful and not of their own control.”

On Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation that included rescinding the COVID-19 vaccine mandate for the military. The Senate still has to pass the bill. President Biden, who said he opposed eliminating the mandate, has not said he will veto it.

Despite evolving data about young people’s low risk for severe COVID-19 and high risk of mRNA vaccine adverse effects, the CDC recently launched a new grant, offering $1.5 million in research funds for colleges to study how to increase COVID-19 vaccination uptake among students.

They posted the funding opportunity in November and will accept grant applications until Jan. 13, 2023.

*

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 Merrimack College/flickr


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.

***

Russia has submitted a letter to the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly offering a detailed description of recurring Ukrainian strikes on civilian targets in Donbass. The document also heavily emphasizes the role the Western-supplied weapons have played in these atrocities.

This comes ahead of a Security Council meeting expected to be held on Friday about Moscow’s initiative to discuss Western arms shipments for Ukraine, First Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN Dmitry Polyansky said on Telegram. The letter was drafted by the Donetsk-based public organization ‘Fair Protection’, he added.

The NGO appeals to the UN “in connection with the catastrophic humanitarian situation” in Russia’s Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, which was caused by “the inhumane shelling of the civilian population” by Kiev’s forces.

The document offers a compilation of at least a dozen major Ukrainian attacks on Donetsk and neighboring towns between late May and early December. All the destruction and casualties outlined in the report are “mainly due to the supply of weapons to Ukraine from Western countries,” the letter claims.

According to the document, in the past two weeks alone, Kiev’s forces “daily, [and] with special ferocity attack chaotically crowded places of the central districts of Donetsk, Makeevka, Gorlovka, Yasinovataya and Elenovka.” As a result, 22 civilians have been killed and 83 wounded, the report claims.

Since February 17, Ukrainian armed forces have bombed 8,897 residential buildings and 2,113 civil infrastructure facilities in Donbass, including 106 medical and 424 educational institutions, the letter says.

“The obvious purpose of these inhumane acts by Kiev is to terrorize Donbass civilians and cause maximum damage to civilian infrastructure,” the document claimed.

Apart from other weaponry, the attacks used NATO-grade 155mm artillery and US-made HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket System), according to the report. The West has also provided Ukraine with Caesar and PzH 2000 self-propelled artillery systems that use shells of the same caliber.

Given the recurring bombardments, ‘Fair Protection’ appealed to the UN Security Council “to consider taking immediate measures” to prevent “these massive war crimes by the armed formations of Ukraine” as well as to put an end to supporting Ukraine with weapons used in attacks.

Russia has repeatedly warned the West against pumping Ukraine with weapons, arguing that this will only prolong the conflict and “bring more suffering” to the country.

*

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: Men study the damage to the Donetsk City Youth Center, which was damaged as a result of artillery shelling. ©  Sputnik / Sergey Averin

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 36 hours after the largest raid in the history of Germany, there are increasing indications that the investigators apparently did not find the expected arsenal of weapons. The Attorney General has offered no explanation.

The massive raid continues to make waves, especially after more than 3 000 police officers searched more than 150 properties across Germany on Wednesday. At least 27 people were arrested and another 25 are being investigated. They are said to have planned an extensive armed coup.

But what have the investigators actually found in this unprecedented large-scale operation?

According to the Federal Criminal Police Office, weapons were found in 50 of the 150 locations searched. That sounds like an operation with a high risk potential, but conveys very little. In the past, baseball bats, Swiss army knives and brass knuckles were also considered “weapons” in comparable large-scale operations.

It is still not clear if the authorities have found machine guns, grenades or actual firearms. It would presumably take more than a handful of kitchen knives to launch a so-called planned military coup.

Attorney General is unusually unresponsive

Berlin weekly Junge Freiheit therefore sent the Federal Public Prosecutor a comprehensive catalog of questions about what items had been confiscated, how many firearms were among them and which of them were illegal. In view of the extent of the raid and the importance that Nancy Faeser’s (SPD) interior ministry has attached to it, it can be ruled out that the authorities do not know this already.

However, the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office refuses to respond to the JF request: A spokesman asked “for your understanding that we are currently not commenting on the evidence found during the search measures – which have not yet been completed”.

It is apparently completely unclear why questions are raised in this regard or when the public will be informed. As a reminder, Faeser spoke of an “abyss of terrorist threat” from the rightwing.

These are strong words in a country where the RAF swept through Germany in the 1970s and where an Islamist with a truck killed twelve people and injured dozens more while driving into pedestrians at a Berlin Christmas market in 2016. It would be in Faeser’s interest to back up her peculiar comments with facts as soon as possible.

Service weapons found

According to German daily Welt, so far “a firearm”, stun guns, prepper supplies and thousands of euros in cash have been found. That sounds like a rather meager yield, especially since “thousands of euros” distributed over 150 houses searched certainly is no indication of the formation of a terrorist group. Notably, the Ministry of the Interior, in view of the risk of power cuts, has itself called for cash to be kept at home at all times.

The same applies to the supposed “prepper supplies”. The government has recommended that citizens prepare themselves extensively for emergencies due to risks associated with German support for the war in Ukraine.

It is therefore not clear where crisis prevention ends and supposed “prepping” starts. Since some of the suspects are said to have gun ownership cards, the discovery of stun guns is not surprising in the least. As a reminder, no parliament can be stormed with the latter.

The representatives of the Interior Committee in the Bundestag were said to have been informed a little more extensively on Friday. According to media reports, two rifles, a pistol and swords, stun guns and flare guns were confiscated. Even service weapons from accused police officers were taken. It is not yet known whether there were gun permits for the various weapons.

More and more media outlets have doubts

Meanwhile, doubts are growing in the media as to whether the historical raid was really appropriate. The editor-in-chief of Cicero, Alexander Marguier, wrote on Wednesday: “Today I spoke to a number of colleagues from other media – including those media that were at the forefront of the exuberant coverage of the treasonous plan. In unison (and of course only in confidence) it was said: It all seems completely exaggerated to us, but when the competition reacts so dramatically, we can’t take a tepid approach.”

The reporter Anna Schneider spoke on Twitter of an “extremely peculiar hysteria and staging of this spectacle”.

The former head of the parliamentary office of the Bild newspaper, Ralf Schuler, wrote on the social network that he could only hope that those responsible for the “giant raid” would also provide evidence of the alleged coup attempt.

The fact that numerous media had apparently been informed about the raids for some time can be considered proven in view of the fact that they arrived with camera teams on site at the same moment as the police task forces.

‘Organized media support’

The Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ) commented: “The historical large-scale operation and the accompanying media reporting raise questions.”

The author noted: “In political Berlin it has been heard for days that there is ‘a big thing in the bush’. Some media obviously knew about the impending raids and arrests, because many editorial offices published extensive reports on the breaking news, which was actually quite new, almost at the same time – as if after an embargo.”

She considered the “organized media support of the operations” to be fundamentally problematic. “It indicates that the matter wasn’t that dangerous after all. In the latter case, the impression could arise that this is primarily – or also – a political public relations exercise.”

A ‘show’

The domestic policy spokeswoman for the Left Party in the Bundestag, Martina Renner, criticized the handling of the Interior Ministry with the raid by 3000 police officers. The so-called “anti-terror operation” against 25 suspects around the 71-year-old Heinrich XIII living in Frankfurt am Main, Prince Reuss shouldn’t be a “show”, said the politician, who has been in the Bundestag since 2013.

*

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: Prepper gear for a coup? Photo credit Thomas Thompson

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 Biden administration on Friday unveiled another $275 million in weapons and defense equipment for Ukraine, which crucially will come via the presidential drawdown authority.

This means the Pentagon will pull arms from its own stockpiles to send to Ukraine to fulfill this package, despite defense officials having long been on record expressing deep concern over dwindling supplies necessary to protect and defend America.

A Defense Department press release indicated the package is to include “more ammunition for high mobility artillery rocket systems (HIMARS), 80,000 155 mm artillery rounds, counter-unmanned aerial systems equipment, counter air defenses, additional High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles, ambulances and medical equipment, 150 generators and other field equipment.”

The Ukrainian government and armed forces have been especially interested in procurement of more and longer-range anti-air defense systems. A recent report in The Wall Street Journal indicated the Pentagon had altered missile systems transferred to Ukraine to limit their range at 50 miles, in order to prevent the Ukrainians from targeting Russian territory.

The Friday DoD press release stated further, “This security assistance package will provide Ukraine with new capabilities to boost its air defenses in addition to providing critical equipment that Ukraine is using so effectively to defend itself on the battlefield.”

This brings US defense aid commitment since the war’s start to $19.3 billion, while the total tab at the American taxpayer’s expense for Ukraine has reached $20 billion since the start of the Biden administration (accounting additionally for aid sent just prior to the Russian invasion).

One “lesson” on display this week (and an obvious longtime trend) is that the deep state and military-industrial complex will always opt for more spending and less accountability – even at the expense of national defense readiness. On Thursday the House passed the massive, record-setting annual defense authorization bill, which will now see the $847 billion measure go to the Senate. Its mammoth size includes plans for much more Ukraine aid to come for the next fiscal year.

Just two days prior to the House approving the massive, record-setting NDAA, the Democrat-led House Foreign Affairs Committee voted down a bill to audit the tens of billions of dollars that Congress has approved to spend on the war in Ukraine. This despite high-level admissions that much of the weaponry sent to Ukraine has little to no oversight once it enters the country, thus it could end up in the hands of terrorists or criminal gangs outside the borders.

*

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 InfoBrics

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Defense Aid to Ukraine Tops $20 Billion as New $275M Package Announced

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 Atlanticists continue their commitment to a future shaped by energy scarcity, food scarcity, and war with their nuclear-capable neighbors, most states in the Persian Gulf that have long been trusted allies of the west have quickly come to realize that their interests are best assured by cooperating with Eurasian states like China and Russia who don’t think in those zero-sum terms.

With Chinese President Xi Jinping’s long-awaited three-day visit to Saudi Arabia, a powerful shift by the Persian Gulf’s most strategic Arab state toward the multipolar alliance is being consolidated. Depending on which side of the ideological fence you sit on, this consolidation is being viewed closely with great hope or rage.

Xi’s visit stands in stark contrast to US President Joe Biden’s underwhelming ‘fist bump’ meeting this summer, which saw the self-professed leader of the free world falling asleep at a conference table and demanding more Saudi oil production while offering nothing durable in return.

In contrast, Xi’s arrival was greeted by a multi-cannon salute and Saudi jets painting the red and yellow colors of China’s flag in the skies over Riyadh. Beijing’s delegation of political and business elites, in the following days, will continue to meet with Saudi counterparts to strike long-term strategic deals in cultural, economic and scientific domains.

The visit will culminate in the first ever China-Arab Summit on Friday, 9 December, where Xi will meet with 30 heads of state. The Chinese foreign ministry described this as “an epoch-making milestone in the history of the development of China-Arab relations.”

While $30 billion in deals will be signed between Beijing and Riyadh, something much bigger is at play which too few have come to properly appreciate.

Riyadh’s steps toward the BRI since 2016

Xi Jinping last visited the kingdom in 2016, to advance Riyadh’s participation in China’s newly unveiled Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). A January 2016 policy report by the Chinese government to all Arab states reads:

“In the process of jointly pursuing the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road initiative, China is willing to coordinate development strategies with Arab states, put into play each other’s advantages and potentials, promote international production capacity cooperation and enhance cooperation in the fields of infrastructure construction, trade and investment facilitation, nuclear power, space satellite, new energy, agriculture and finance, so as to achieve common progress and development and benefit our two peoples.”

It was only three months later that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) inaugurated Saudi Vision 2030 which firmly outlined a new foreign policy agenda much more compatible with China’s “peaceful development” spirit.

After decades serving as an Atlanticist client state with no viable manufacturing prospects or autonomy beyond its role in supporting western-managed terror operations, Saudi Vision 2030 demonstrated the first signs of creative thinking in years, with an outlook toward a post-oil age.

On the energy front, China Energy Corp is building a sprawling 2.6 GW solar power station in Saudi Arabia, and Chinese nuclear developers are helping Riyadh develop its vast uranium resources while also mastering all branches of the nuclear fuel cycle.

In 2016, both nations signed an MoU to build fourth generation gas-cooled nuclear reactors. This follows the UAE’s recent leap into the 21st century with 2.7 GW of energy now constructed.

By early 2017, Riyadh had firmly bought its ticket on the New Silk Road with a $65 billion agreement integrating the Saudi Vision 2030 and BRI with a focus on petrochemical integration, engineering, refining, procurement, construction, carbon capture, and upstream/downstream development.

In the new post-American epoch, signs of this spirit of cooperation and bridge building have increasingly come to be felt, even while its effects have been forcibly restrained – as millions of Yemenis suffering under seven years of war can testify.

Unlike the Atlanticist fixation on Green New Deals which threaten to annihilate industry and farming, Riyadh’s post-oil outlook is much more synergistic with China’s idea of “sustained growth” that demands nuclear power, continued hydrocarbons, and robust agro-industrial development.

China’s trade with Saudi Arabia rose to $87.3 billion in 2021, which saw a 39 percent increase over 2020, while US-Saudi trade has collapsed from $76 billion in 2012 to only $29 billion in 2021.

Some of this Beijing-Riyadh trade may now be conducted in the Chinese Yuan, which will only undermine the US-Saudi relationship further.

In the first 10 months of 2022, China’s imports from Saudi Arabia were $57 billion and exports to the kingdom rose to $30.3 billion. China is additionally building 5G systems and cultivating a vast technology hub with a focus on selling electronic goods, all while helping Saudi Arabia build up an indigenous manufacturing sector.

A trend of Harmonization

Despite the continued chaos in Yemen, and economic devastation in Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq, Beijing’s subtle trend has nonetheless been one of healing with Saudi Arabia – and regional power Turkiye.

Saudi Arabia and Turkiye have often acted as rivals, and front two distinct foreign agendas with broad regional ambitions that overlap on many fronts. But despite this competitive past, higher necessities have induced both nations to harmonize their foreign policy outlooks with a new “look east” focus.

This was expressed during the Saudi crown prince’s visit to Ankara in June 2022 where the two heads of state called for “a new era of cooperation” with a focus on political, economic, military and cultural cooperation outlined in a joint communique.

Only days after MbS’s return from Turkiye, then-Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi visited Jeddah to promote regional stability stating in a press release “they changed points of view on a number of issues that would contribute to supporting and strengthening regional security and stability.”

Iraq and Saudi Arabia had only re-established diplomatic ties in November 2020 due to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait 30 years earlier.

Between 2021-2022, Iraq had worked hard to host bilateral talks between Saudi Arabia and Iran with five rounds of talks held and Kadhimi stating his belief that “reconciliation is near.” Tehran-Riyadh diplomatic ties were cut in the aftermath of the 2016 execution of outspoken Saudi Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr, prompting the storming of the Saudi embassy in Tehran by angry protestors.

In March 2022, MbS stated that Iran and Saudi Arabia “were neighbors forever” and stated that it is “better for both of us to working it out and to look for ways in which we can co-exist.”

By August 23, 2022, the UAE and Kuwait created a new milestone by restarting diplomatic relations with Iran. And although nearly every Persian Gulf state (plus Turkiye) had devoted years to supporting regime change in Syria, a new reality has imposed itself with all Arab parties veering toward the Chinese BRI model of regional integration and economic development.

The Key Role of Iran

Not only is Iran a key player in the Greater Eurasian Partnership serving as a strategic hub for the southern route of China’s BRI, but it is also a keystone of the Russia-Iran-India-led International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) which has become a major force synergizing with the BRI.

Iraq and Iran themselves are in the final stages of building the long-awaited Shalamcheh-Basra railway which will unite the two nations by rail for the first time in decades while also offering a potential extension to the already existent 1500 km railway through Iraq to Syria’s border.

The climate for cooperation was undoubtedly made possible by the presence of Chinese economic diplomacy which established a 25 year, $400 billion energy and security deal with Iran – but also Russia, whose similar but smaller $25 billion, twenty-year deal with Tehran may easily expand to $40 billion in Russian investments in Iran’s vast oil and natural gas fields in the coming years.

Saudi Arabia and Russia’s relationship with OPEC+ demonstrated its potency this summer when Riyadh won the ire of Washington by not only denying Biden’s requests for increased oil production, but cutting overall oil production and driving up global prices of oil. Saudi Arabia benefited by vastly increased imports of discounted Russian oil which were then sold to a desperate Europe.

Furthermore, Saudi plans to join the global hub of multipolarity itself, BRICS+ (alongside Turkiye, Egypt, and Algeria), in addition to recently becoming a full-fledged Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) dialogue partner, have placed its destiny ever deeper into the growing Multipolar Alliance.

With the increased potential for stability and harmonization of interests across various power blocs, an atmosphere more conducive to long-term economic investments is finally presenting itself to Chinese investors who had long looked upon conflict-ridden West Asia with justifiable trepidation.

In August 2022, the Saudi state oil company Aramco and China’s Petroleum and Chemical Corporation Ltd signed an MOU expanding on the aforementioned $65 billion cooperation deal of 2017, which involves the construction of Fujian Refining and Petrochemical Company (FREP) and Sinopec Senmei Petroleum Company (SSPC) in Fujian, China, and Yanbu Aramco Sinopec Refining Company (YASREF) in Saudi Arabia.

Rail and interconnectivity

Perhaps most exciting are prospects for interconnectivity that play directly into the development corridors tied to the BRI. In Saudi Arabia, this train has moved steadily apace with the 450 km high speed Haramain Railway built by China Railway Construction Company connecting Mecca to Medina completed in 2018.

Photo Credit: The Cradle

Photo Credit: The Cradle

Discussions are well underway to extend this line to the 2400 km North South Railway from Riyadh to Al Haditha completed in 2015. Meanwhile, 460 km of rail connecting all Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members is currently under construction, which is driving reforms in engineering, trade schools, and manufacturing hubs across the Arabian Peninsula.

In 2021, all GCC states gave their full support to a $200 billion Persian Gulf-Red Sea high speed railway dubbed “The Saudi Landbridge,” which also dovetails another $500 billion megaproject with vast Chinese investments, dubbed the futuristic NEOM mega-city on the Red Sea.

The Eurasianists stand to gain

It can only be hoped that this new chemistry of harmonization and win-win cooperation may soon provide a key to ending the fires of conflict in Yemen and other regional states.

Further, with Russia and China both helping to broker diplomatic backchannels, and with Iran playing an active role within this process, perhaps negotiations for reconstruction can begin in this war-torn zone of conflict.

It is not an extreme stretch of the imagination to see the new Persian Gulf-Red Sea rail project extending north into Egypt and south into Yemen.

Looking at a map of the region, one can imagine the reactivation of the “Bridge of the Horn of Africa” first unveiled in 2009, that would have extended rail across the 25 km Bab el Mandeb strait connecting pipelines and rail lines into Djibouti and East Africa, more broadly.

While a western-manipulated Arab Spring derailed that concept in 2011, and the Saudi war against Yemen drove it further under ground since 2015, perhaps this new spirit of inter-civilizational cooperation under a new economic architecture liberated from the Atlanticist-dominated dollar system may provide just what it takes to revive the idea once again.

*

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.

Matthew Ehret the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , and Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow. He is author of the ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series and Clash of the Two Americas trilogy. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide FoundationHe is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Cradle


The Clash of the Two Americas

Vol. 1 & 2

by Matthew Ehret

In his new two volume series The Clash of the Two Americas, Matthew Ehret introduces a new analysis of American history from the vantage point that the globally-extended supranational shadow government that managed the British Empire was never fully defeated and has acted within the USA itself since 1776 as a continuous multi-generational fifth column managing every significant event and assassination of American presidents for the next 250 years.

Click here to order.

Important article by Michael Snyder

I suppose that we should have known that this was inevitable.  After establishing a precedent during the pandemic, now the elite apparently intend to impose lockdowns for other reasons as well. 

What I have detailed in this article is extremely alarming, and I hope that you will share it with everyone that you can.  Climate change lockdowns are here, and if people don’t respond very strongly to this it is likely that we will soon see similar measures implemented all over the western world.  The elite have always promised to do “whatever it takes” to fight climate change, and now we are finding out that they weren’t kidding.

Over in the UK, residents of Oxfordshire will now need a special permit to go from one “zone” of the city to another.  But even if you have the permit, you will still only be allowed to go from one zone to another “a maximum of 100 days per year”

Oxfordshire County Council yesterday approved plans to lock residents into one of six zones to ‘save the planet’ from global warming. The latest stage in the ’15 minute city’ agenda is to place electronic gates on key roads in and out of the city, confining residents to their own neighbourhoods.

Under the new scheme if residents want to leave their zone they will need permission from the Council who gets to decide who is worthy of freedom and who isn’t. Under the new scheme residents will be allowed to leave their zone a maximum of 100 days per year, but in order to even gain this every resident will have to register their car details with the council who will then track their movements via smart cameras round the city.

Are residents of Oxfordshire actually going to put up with this?

 

I never thought that we would actually see this sort of a thing get implemented in the western world, but here we are.

Of course there are a few people that are loudly objecting to this new plan, but one Oxfordshire official is pledging that “the controversial plan would go ahead whether people liked it or not”.

Ouch.

Meanwhile, France has decided to completely ban certain short-haul flights in an attempt to reduce carbon emissions…

France can now make you train rather than plane.

The European Commission (EC) has given French officials the green light to ban select domestic flights if the route in question can be completed via train in under two and a half hours.

The plan was first proposed in 2021 as a means to reduce carbon emissions. It originally called for a ban on eight short-haul flights, but the EC has only agreed to nix three that have quick, easy rail alternatives with several direct connections each way every day.

This is nuts.

But if the French public accepts these new restrictions, similar bans will inevitably be coming to other EU nations.

In the Netherlands, the government is actually going to be buying and shutting down approximately 3,000 farms in order to “reduce its nitrogen pollution”… 

The Dutch government is planning to purchase and then close down up to 3,000 farms in an effort to comply with a European Union environmental mandate to slash emissions, according to reports.

Farmers in the Netherlands will be offered “well over” the worth of their farm in an effort to take up the offer voluntarily, The Telegraph reported. The country is attempting to reduce its nitrogen pollution and will make the purchases if not enough farmers accept buyouts.

“There is no better offer coming,” Christianne van der Wal, nitrogen minister, told the Dutch parliament on Friday.

This is literally suicidal.

We are in the beginning stages of an unprecedented global food crisis, and the Dutch government has decided that now is the time to shut down thousands of farms?

I don’t even have the words to describe how foolish this is.

Speaking of suicide, Canada has found a way to get people to stop emitting any carbon at all once their usefulness is over.  Assisted suicide has become quite popular among the Canadians, and the number of people choosing that option keeps setting new records year after year

Last year, more than 10,000 people in Canada – astonishingly that’s over three percent of all deaths there – ended their lives via euthanasia, an increase of a third on the previous year. And it’s likely to keep rising: next year, Canada is set to allow people to die exclusively for mental health reasons.

If you are feeling depressed, Canada has a solution for that.

And if you are physically disabled, Canada has a solution for that too

Only last week, a jaw-dropping story emerged of how, five years into an infuriating battle to obtain a stairlift for her home, Canadian army veteran and Paralympian Christine Gauthier was offered an extraordinary alternative.

A Canadian official told her in 2019 that if her life was so difficult and she is ‘desperate’, the government would help her to kill herself. ‘I have a letter saying that if you’re so desperate, madam, we can offer you MAiD, medical assistance in dying,’ the paraplegic ex-army corporal testified to Canadian MPs.

“Medical assistance in dying” sounds so clinical.

But ultimately it is the greatest lockdown of all.

Because once you stop breathing, you won’t be able to commit any more “climate sins”.

All over the western world, authoritarianism is growing at a pace that is absolutely breathtaking.

If they can severely restrict travel and shut down farms today, what sort of tyranny will we see in the future?

Sadly, most people in the general population still do not understand what is happening.

Hopefully they will wake up before it is too late.

***

Our thanks to Michael Snyder. 

It is finally here! Michael Snyder’s new book entitled “End Times” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

 

***

 

Biden Regime Secretary of State Blinken has blocked negotiations between Russia and Ukraine by declaring it is US policy to drive Russia out of the reincorporated territories, including Crimea.

Biden’s announcement that the US will use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear threats, and the knowledge that US nuclear weapons are deployed close to Russia are forcing Putin to abandon his no first use of nuclear weapons pledge.

In other words, unlike the 20th century Cold War, today there is a hair-trigger on nuclear war.

People who say nuclear war is impossible because there are no winners are out to lunch.

Wars are the product of humans, and humans are emotional and stupid. They make mistakes hand over fist. Error is the human way.

During the Cold War, US presidents assured the Kremlin that the US had no intention of initiating a war.  Today this assurance does not exist.

A Russian official has charged that the CIA and NSA were involved in the attack by drones deep inside Russia.

So here we see the total validity of my warnings that Putin’s Goody Two Shoes behavior invites more and more reckless provocations.  It is the inability of Putin to understand that Russia is at war with Ukraine and the US/NATO and that his “limited military operation” is nothing but his own delusion that is leading to nuclear war.

The United States government has now attacked Russia twice, not counting the attacks on the former Russian territory Russia has reincorporated

The attack on the Nord Stream pipelines and now drone attacks deep inside Russia are beyond Ukraine’s unassisted capability.

Washington feels comfortable in these reckless acts, because Washington has dismissed Putin’s declared, but never defended, “red lines” as meaningless.  

One wonders what is wrong with Putin and with the Kremlin in general that Russia forever complains but never acts. It should be self evident to the Kremlin that the longer the conflict and anti-Russian propaganda continue, the harder for the West to bow out.  

Prestige and predictions are at risk. a network of relationships develops.

Powerful interest groups such as armaments corporations acquire  stake in the conflict. With Ukraine facing defeat, there will be agitation for committing US and European soldiers.

At first the claim will be that only one division is needed to bolster Ukraine at this or that point.  Then to save that division another will be needed.  We saw it all in Vietnam.

Will Putin finally realize that Russia is at war when Moscow goes up in smoke?

That would be a bit too late.

Putin now admits that he waited too late to intervene in Ukraine, thus giving Washington time to build a Ukrainian military force.  So why wait too late again?  Can Putin learn from his mistakes?

My fear is that Putin is unrealistic and does not comprehend the likely consequences of his Goody Two Shoes behavior.

Putin’s restrained behavior gives the green light to greater provocations from Washington. These provocations are accelerating. Russia needs to use the force necessary to quickly end the war before it spins out of control.

Some years ago I wrote that Russia was disadvantaged, because Putin and the Russian liberals overestimated the humanity of the West.

Now Putin says that “we may have realized too late” that Russia was being deceived.

Nevertheless, he is still willing to negotiate and to be deceived again.

Russian liberals, alienated from the Soviet government, were easy victims of American propaganda presenting the US as a light unto the world.  This has had a disarming effect on the Russian ability to comprehend the West.

The Kremlin complains endlessly but never acts.  Russia complains to the UN Security Council that weapons supplied by the West are used to hit Russian schools and homes.  Why does Russia think the Security Council cares or will do anything about it?  The real question is why does Putin by pulling Russia’s punches permit Ukraine the latitude to use the “foreign-supplied” weapons?  The Russians are too diplomatic to say “West-supplied.” Russia says there will be legal consequences for the war crimes in the future.  Why not military consequences now?  Until Putin gets serious about the war, provocations will continue their escalation.

Another mistake Putin is making is not having a large professional standing army.

Notice how long it took for Russia to mobilize 300,000 soldiers for reinforcing the “limited” operation in Ukraine.

This should have taught the Kremlin something, but no, Putin announces no further need for more mobilization.

Consequently, if the Ukraine situation does spin out of control, Putin has nothing to fight with except nuclear weapons.

Perhaps Putin fears domestic opposition from Americanized Russian youth that the Kremlin permitted American-financed NGOs to indoctrinate unhampered for years, or perhaps the Kremlin is “saving money.”

How does Putin reconcile his statements that the West seeks the destruction of Russia with the absence of a large professional Russian army?  That leaves him with only the nuclear option.

Commentators scoffed at my warnings that Western intervention in Ukraine was cooking up nuclear war.

Now Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO Secretary General says

“I fear that the war in Ukraine will spiral out of control and become a major war between NATO and Russia. If things go wrong, they can go horribly wrong.” 

Amazing how long it took him to realize that.  With dumbshits like Stoltenberg and the American neoconservatives running the show, how can war be avoided?

To come back to my 8 year old question:

Why does Putin refuse to act and bring the conflict to a quick close before it widens out of control?

The “limited operation” has not limited anything.  It has expanded the war into attacks on Russia herself.  Foreign Minister Lavrov has admitted that Washington and NATO are “directly involved” in war against Russia.

How can the Kremlin make such an admission and do nothing about it?

How provocative will the next attack be?  Why not go ahead and win the war before the next provocation happens?

Yes, I would rather  Russia win the war than for the conflict to escalate into nuclear war.

Until recently, Ukraine was a part of Russia for centuries. During the 20th century Soviet leaders attached parts of Russia to their Ukrainian province.

These Russians were suffering under the neo-Nazi regime established by Washington in 2014, formed independent republics and asked to be returned to Russia.  This legitimate request is no basis for a nuclear war.

Washington and Europe need to consider that sooner or later Putin will have to act if US/NATO keep pushing him into a corner.

The harder and further Putin is pushed, the more limited his options.

As Stoltenberg now realizes, the situation can spin out of control.

Are American neoconservatives capable of this realization?  Does Putin realize the situation is spinning out of control because of his inaction?

I was involved in the 20th Century Cold War.  I helped President Reagan end it. The situation was never as dangerous as the current situation.  In those days there were still intelligent people in Washington.  Today there are none.

In those days no one doubted that the Soviets would act. Today Russia is seen as all talk and no action.  Consequently, push is coming to shove.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts is a renowned economist and author, U.S. Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under President Ronald Reagan.  He is a regular contributor to Global Research. 

Image Professor Peter Dale Scott

This article was originally published in November 2011

“I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency [the National Security Agency] and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”   — Senator Frank Church (1975)

I would like to discuss four major and badly understood events – the John F. Kennedy assassination, Watergate, Iran-Contra, and 9/11. I will analyze these deep events as part of a deeper political process linking them, a process that has helped build up repressive power in America at the expense of democracy.

In recent years I have been talking about a dark force behind these events — a force which, for want of a better term, I have clumsily called a “deep state,” operating both within and outside the public state. Today for the first time I want to identify part of that dark force, a part which has operated for five decades or more at the edge of the public state. This part of the dark force has a name not invented by me: the Doomsday Project, the Pentagon’s name for the emergency planning “to keep the White House and Pentagon running during and after a nuclear war or some other major crisis.”1

My point is a simple and important one: to show that the Doomsday Project of the 1980s, and the earlier emergency planning that developed into it, have played a role in the background of all the deep events I shall discuss.

More significantly, it has been a factor behind all three of the disturbing events that now threaten American democracy. The first of these three is what has been called the conversion of our economy into a plutonomy – with the increasing separation of America into two classes, into the haves and the have-nots, the one percent and the 99 percent. The second is America’s increasing militarization, and above all its inclination, which has become more and more routine and predictable, to wage or provoke wars in remote regions of the globe. It is clear that the operations of this American war machine have served the one percent.2

The third – my subject today — is the important and increasingly deleterious impact on American history of structural deep events: mysterious events, like the JFK assassination, the Watergate break-in, or 9/11, which violate the American social structure, have a major impact on American society, repeatedly involve law-breaking or violence, and in many cases proceed from an unknown dark force.

There are any number of analyses of America’s current breakdown in terms of income and wealth disparity, also in terms of America’s increasing militarization and belligerency. What I shall do today is I think new: to argue that both the income disparity – or what has been called our plutonomy — and the belligerency have been fostered significantly by deep events.

We must understand that the income disparity of America’s current economy was not the result of market forces working independently of political intervention. In large part it was generated by a systematic and deliberate ongoing political process dating from the anxieties of the very wealthy in the 1960s and 1970s that control of the country was slipping away from them.

This was the time when future Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell, in a 1971 memorandum, warned that survival of the free enterprise system depended on “careful long-range planning and implementation” of a well-financed response to threats from the left.3 This warning was answered by a sustained right-wing offensive, coordinated by think tanks and funded lavishly by a small group of family foundations.4 We should recall that all this was in response to serious riots in Newark, Detroit, and elsewhere, and that increasing calls for a revolution were coming from the left (in Europe as well as America). I will focus today on the right’s response to that challenge, and on the role of deep events in enhancing their response.

What was important about the Powell memorandum was less the document itself than the fact that it was commissioned by the United States Chamber of Commerce, one of the most influential and least discussed lobbying groups in America. And the memorandum was only one of many signs of that developing class war in the 1970s, a larger process working both inside and outside government (including what Irving Kristol called an “intellectual counterrevolution”), which led directly to the so-called “Reagan Revolution.”5

It is clear that this larger process has been carried on for almost five decades, pumping billions of right-wing dollars into the American political process. What I wish to show today is that deep events have also been integral to this right-wing effort, from the John F. Kennedy assassination in 1963 to 9/11. 9/11 resulted in the implementation of “Continuity of Government” (COG) plans (which in the Oliver North Iran Contra Hearings of 1987 were called plans for “the suspension of the U.S. constitution”). These COG plans, building on earlier COG planning, had been carefully developed since 1982 in the so-called Doomsday Project, by a secret group appointed by Reagan. The group was composed of both public and private figures, including Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney.

I shall try to show today that in this respect 9/11 was only the culmination of a sequence of deep events reaching back to the Kennedy assassination if not earlier, and that the germs of the Doomsday Project can be detected behind all of them.

More specifically, I shall try to demonstrate about these deep events that

1) prior bureaucratic misbehavior by the CIA and similar agencies helped to make both the Kennedy assassination and 9/11 happen;

2) the consequences of each deep event included an increase in top-down repressive power for these same agencies, at the expense of persuasive democratic power;6

3) there are symptomatic overlaps in personnel between the perpetrators of each of these deep events and the next;

4) one sees in each event the involvement of elements of the international drug traffic – suggesting that our current plutonomy is also to some degree a narconomy;

5) in the background of each event (and playing an increasingly important role) one sees the Doomsday Project — the alternative emergency planning structure with its own communications network, operating as a shadow network outside of regular government channels.

Bureaucratic Misbehavior as a Factor Contributing to both the JFK Assassination and 9/11

Both the JFK assassination and 9/11 were facilitated by the way the CIA and FBI manipulated their files about alleged perpetrators of each event (Lee Harvey Oswald in the case of what I shall call JFK, and the alleged hijackers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi in the case of 9/11). Part of this facilitation was the decision on October 9, 1963 of an FBI agent, Marvin Gheesling, to remove Oswald from the FBI watch list for surveillance. This was shortly after Oswald’s arrest in New Orleans in August and his reported travel to Mexico in September. Obviously these developments should normally have made Oswald a candidate for increased surveillance.7

This misbehavior is paradigmatic of the behavior of other agencies, especially the CIA, in both JFK and 9/11. Indeed Gheesling’s behavior fits very neatly with the CIA’s culpable withholding from the FBI, in the same month of October, information that Oswald had allegedly met in Mexico City with a suspected KGB agent, Valeriy Kostikov.8 This also helped ensure that Oswald would not be placed under surveillance. Indeed, former FBI Director Clarence Kelley in his memoir later complained that the CIA’s withholding of information was the major reason why Oswald was not put under surveillance on November 22, 1963.9

A more ominous provocation in 1963 was that of Army Intelligence, one unit of which in Dallas did not simply withhold information about Lee Harvey Oswald, but manufactured false intelligence that seemed designed to provoke retaliation against Cuba. I call such provocations phase-one stories, efforts to portray Oswald as a Communist conspirator (as opposed to the later phase-two stories, also false, portraying him as a disgruntled loner). A conspicuous example of such phase-one stories is a cable from the Fourth Army Command in Texas, reporting a tip from a Dallas policeman who was also in an Army Intelligence Reserve unit:

Assistant Chief Don Stringfellow, Intelligence Section, Dallas Police Department, notified 112th INTC [Intelligence] Group, this Headquarters, that information obtained from Oswald revealed he had defected to Cuba in 1959 and is a card-carrying member of Communist Party.”10

This cable was sent on November 22 directly to the U.S. Strike Command at Fort MacDill in Florida, the base poised for a possible retaliatory attack against Cuba.11

The cable was not an isolated aberration. It was supported by other false phase-one stories from Dallas about Oswald’s alleged rifle, and specifically by concatenated false translations of Marina Oswald’s testimony, to suggest that Oswald’s rifle in Dallas was one he had owned in Russia.12

These last false reports, apparently unrelated, can also be traced to officer Don Stringfellow’s 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit.13 The interpreter who first supplied the false translation of Marina’s words, Ilya Mamantov, was selected by a Dallas oilman, Jack Crichton, and Deputy Dallas Police Chief George Lumpkin.14 Crichton and Lumpkin were also the Chief and the Deputy Chief of the 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit.15 Crichton was also an extreme right-winger in the community of Dallas oilmen: he was a trustee of the H.L. Hunt Foundation, and a member of the American Friends of the Katanga Freedom Fighters, a group organized to oppose Kennedy’s policies in the Congo.

We have to keep in mind that some of the Joint Chiefs were furious that the 1962 Missile Crisis had not led to an invasion of Cuba, and that, under new JCS Chairman Maxwell Taylor, the Joint Chiefs, in May 1963, still believed “that US military intervention in Cuba is necessary.”16 This was six months after Kennedy, to resolve the Missile Crisis in October 1962, had given explicit (albeit highly qualified) assurances to Khrushchev, that the United States would not invade Cuba.17 This did not stop the J-5 of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (the JCS Directorate of Plans and Policy) from producing a menu of “fabricated provocations to justify military intervention.”18 (One proposed example of “fabricated provocations” envisioned “using MIG type aircraft flown by US pilots to … attack surface shipping or to attack US military.”)19

The deceptions about Oswald coming from Dallas were immediately post-assassination; thus they do not by themselves establish that the assassination itself was a provocation-deception plot. They do however reveal enough about the anti-Castro mindset of the 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit in Dallas to confirm that it was remarkably similar to that of the J-5 the preceding May – the mindset that produced a menu of “fabricated provocations” to attack Cuba. (According to Crichton there were “about a hundred men in [the 488th Reserve unit] and about forty or fifty of them were from the Dallas Police Department.”)20

It can hardly be accidental that we see this bureaucratic misbehavior from the FBI, CIA, and military, the three agencies with which Kennedy had had serious disagreements in his truncated presidency.21 Later in this paper I shall link Dallas oilman Jack Crichton to the 1963 emergency planning that became the Doomsday Project.

Analogous Bureaucratic Misbehavior in the Case of 9/11

Before 9/11 the CIA, in 2000-2001, again flagrantly withheld crucial evidence from the FBI: evidence that, if shared, would have led the FBI to surveil two of the alleged hijackers, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaz al-Hazmi. This sustained withholding of evidence provoked an FBI agent to predict accurately in August, 2001, that “someday someone will die.”22 After 9/11 another FBI agent said of the CIA: “They [CIA] didn’t want the bureau meddling in their business—that’s why they didn’t tell the FBI….  And that’s why September 11 happened. That is why it happened. . . . They have blood on their hands. They have three thousand deaths on their hands”23 The CIA’s withholding of relevant evidence before 9/11 (which it was required by its own rules to supply) was matched in this case by the NSA.24

Without these withholdings, in other words, neither the Kennedy assassination nor 9/11 could have developed in the manner in which they did. As I wrote in American War Machine, it would appear that

Oswald (and later al-Mihdhar) had at some prior point been selected as designated subjects for an operation. This would not initially have been for the commission of a crime against the American polity: on the contrary, steps were probably taken to prepare Oswald in connection with an operation against Cuba and al-Mihdhar [I suspect] for an operation against al-Qaeda. But as [exploitable] legends began to accumulate about both figures, it became possible for some witting people to subvert the sanctioned operation into a plan for murder that would later be covered up. At this point Oswald (and by analogy al-Mihdhar) was no longer just a designated subject but also now a designated culprit.25

Kevin Fenton, in his exhaustive book Disconnecting the Dots, has since reached the same conclusion with respect to 9/11: “that, by the summer of 2001, the purpose of withholding the information had become to allow the attacks to go forward.”26 He has also identified the person chiefly responsible for the misbehavior: CIA officer Richard Blee, Chief of the CIA’s Bin Laden Unit. Blee, while Clinton was still president, had been one of a faction inside CIA pressing for a more belligerent CIA involvement in Afghanistan, in conjunction with the Afghan Northern Alliance.27 This then happened immediately after 9/11, and Blee himself was promoted, to become the new Chief of Station in Kabul.28

How CIA and NSA Withholding of Evidence in the Second Tonkin Gulf Incident, Contributed to War with North Vietnam

I will spare you the details of this withholding, which can be found in my American War Machine, pp. 200-02. But Tonkin Gulf is similar to the Kennedy assassination and 9/11, in that manipulation of evidence helped lead America – in this case very swiftly – into war.

Historians such as Fredrik Logevall have agreed with the assessment of former undersecretary of state George Ball that the US destroyer mission in the Tonkin Gulf, which resulted in the Tonkin Gulf incidents, “was primarily for provocation.”29 The planning for this provocative mission came from the J-5 of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the same unit that in 1963 had reported concerning Cuba that, “the engineering of a series of provocations to justify military intervention is feasible.”30

The NSA and CIA suppression of the truth on August 4 was in the context of an existing high-level (but controversial) determination to attack North Vietnam. In this respect the Tonkin Gulf incident is remarkably similar to the suppression of the truth by CIA and NSA leading up to 9/11, when there was again a high-level (but controversial) determination to go to war.

Increases in Repressive Power After Deep Events

All of the deep events discussed above have contributed to the cumulative increase of Washington’s repressive powers. It is clear for example that the Warren Commission used the JFK assassination to increase CIA surveillance of Americans. As I wrote in Deep Politics, this was the result of

the Warren Commission’s controversial recommendations that the Secret Service’s domestic surveillance responsibilities be increased (WR 25-26). Somewhat illogically, the Warren Report concluded both that Oswald acted alone (WR 22), . . . and also that the Secret Service, FBI, CIA, should coordinate more closely the surveillance of organized groups (WR 463). In particular, it recommended that the Secret Service acquire a computerized data bank compatible with that already developed by the CIA.31

This pattern would repeat itself four years later with the assassination of Robert Kennedy. In the twenty-four hours between Bobby’s shooting and his death, Congress hurriedly passed a statute— drafted well in advance (like the Tonkin Gulf Resolution of 1964 and the Patriot Act of 2001) — that still further augmented the secret powers given to the Secret Service in the name of protecting presidential candidates.32

This was not a trivial or benign change: from this swiftly considered act, passed under Johnson, flowed some of the worst excesses of the Nixon presidency.33

The change also contributed to the chaos and violence at the Chicago Democratic Convention of 1968. Army intelligence surveillance agents, seconded to the Secret Service, were present both inside and outside the convention hall. Some of them equipped the so-called “Legion of Justice thugs whom the Chicago Red Squad turned loose on local anti-war groups.”34

In this way the extra secret powers conferred after the RFK assassination contributed to the disastrous turmoil in Chicago that effectively destroyed the old Democratic Party representing the labor unions: The three Democratic presidents elected since then have all been significantly more conservative.

Turning to Watergate and Iran-Contra, both of these events were on one level setbacks to the repressive powers exercised by Richard Nixon and the Reagan White House, not expansions of them. On the surface level this is true: both events resulted in legislative reforms that would appear to contradict my thesis of expanding repression.

We need to distinguish here, however, between the two years of the Watergate crisis, and the initial Watergate break-in. The Watergate crisis saw a president forced into resignation by a number of forces, involving both liberals and conservatives. But the key figures in the initial Watergate break-in itself – Hunt, McCord, G. Gordon Liddy, and their Cuban allies — were all far to the right of Nixon and Kissinger. And the end result of their machinations was not finalized until the so-called Halloween Massacre in 1975, when Kissinger was ousted as National Security Adviser and Vice-President Nelson Rockefeller was notified he would be dropped from the 1976 Republican ticket. This major shake-up was engineered by two other right-wingers: Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney in the Gerald Ford White House.35

That day in 1975 saw the permanent defeat of the so-called Rockefeller or liberal faction within the Republican Party. It was replaced by the conservative Goldwater-Casey faction that would soon capture the nomination and the presidency for Ronald Reagan.36 This little-noticed palace coup, along with other related intrigues in the mid-1970s, helped achieve the conversion of America from a welfare capitalist economy, with gradual reductions in income and wealth disparity, into a financialized plutonomy where these trends were reversed.37

Again in Iran-Contra we see a deeper accumulation of repressive power under the surface of liberal reforms. At the time not only the press but even academics like myself celebrated the termination of aid to the Nicaraguan Contras, and the victory there of the Contadora peace process. Not generally noticed at the time was the fact that, while Oliver North was removed from his role in the Doomsday Project, that project’s plans for surveillance, detention, and the militarization of the United States continued to grow after his departure.38

Also not noticed was the fact that the US Congress, while curtailing aid to one small drug-financed CIA proxy army, was simultaneously increasing US support to a much larger coalition of drug-financed proxy armies in Afghanistan.39 While Iran-Contra exposed the $32 million which Saudi Arabia, at the urging of CIA Director William Casey, had supplied to the Contras, not a word was whispered about the $500 million or more that the Saudis, again at the urging of Casey, had supplied in the same period to the Afghan mujahedin.40 In this sense the drama of Iran-Contra in Congress can be thought of as a misdirection play, directing public attention away from America’s much more intensive engagement in Afghanistan – a covert policy that has since evolved into America’s longest war.

We should expand our consciousness of Iran-Contra to think of it as Iran-Afghan-Contra. And if we do, we must acknowledge that in this complex and misunderstood deep event the CIA in Afghanistan exercised again the paramilitary capacity that Stansfield Turner had tried to terminate when he was CIA Director under Jimmy Carter. This was a victory in short for the faction of men like Richard Blee, the protector of al-Mihdhar as well as the advocate in 2000 for enhanced CIA paramilitary activity in Afghanistan.41

Personnel Overlaps Between the Successive Deep Events

I will never forget the New York Times front-page story on June 18, 1972, the day after the Watergate break-in. There were photographs of the Watergate burglars, including one of Frank Sturgis alias Fiorini, whom I had already written about two years earlier in my unpublished book manuscript, “The Dallas Conspiracy” about the JFK assassination.

Sturgis was no nonentity: a former contract employee of the CIA, he was also well connected to the mob-linked former casino owners in Havana.42 My early writings on the Kennedy case focused on the connections between Frank Sturgis and an anti-Castro Cuban training camp near New Orleans in which Oswald had shown an interest; also in Sturgis’ involvement in false “phase-one” stories portraying Oswald as part of a Communist Cuban conspiracy.43

In spreading these “phase-one” stories in 1963, Sturgis was joined by a number of Cubans who were part of the CIA-supported army in Central America of Manuel Artime. Artime’s base in Costa Rica was closed down in 1965, allegedly because of its involvement in drug trafficking.44 In the 1980s some of these Cuban exiles later became involved in drug-financed support activities for the Contras.45

The political mentor of Artime’s MRR movement was future Watergate plotter Howard Hunt; and Artime in 1972 would pay for the bail of the Cuban Watergate burglars. The drug money-launderer Ramón Milián Rodríguez has claimed to have delivered $200,000 in cash from Artime to pay off some of the Cuban Watergate burglars; later, in support of the Contras, he managed two Costa Rican seafood companies, Frigorificos and Ocean Hunter, that laundered drug money.46

It is alleged that Hunt and McCord had both been involved with Artime’s invasion plans in 1963.47 It was I believe no accident that the organization of Hunt’s protégé Artime became enmired in drug trafficking. Hunt, I have argued elsewhere, had been handling a U.S. drug connection since his 1950 post in Mexico City as OPC (Office of Policy Coordination) chief.48

But McCord not only had a past in the anti-Castro activities of 1963, he was also part of the nation’s emergency planning network that would later figure so prominently in the background of Iran-Contra and 9/11. McCord was a member of a small Air Force Reserve unit in Washington attached to the Office of Emergency Preparedness (OEP); assigned “to draw up lists of radicals and to develop contingency plans for censorship of the news media and U.S. mail in time of war.”49 His unit was part of the Wartime Information Security Program (WISP), which had responsibility for activating “contingency plans for imposing censorship on the press, the mails and all telecommunications (including government communications) [and] preventive detention of civilian ‘security risks,’ who would be placed in military ‘camps.’”50 In other words, these were the plans that became known in the 1980s as the Doomsday Project, the Continuity of Government planning on which Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld worked together for twenty years before 9/11.

A Common Denominator for Structural Deep Events: Project Doomsday and COG

McCord’s participation in an emergency planning system dealing with telecommunications suggests a common denominator in the backgrounds of almost all the deep events we are considering. Oliver North, the Reagan-Bush OEP point man on Iran-Contra planning, was also involved in such planning; and he had access to the nation’s top secret Doomsday communications network. North’s network, known as Flashboard,  “excluded other bureaucrats with opposing viewpoints…[and] had its own special worldwide antiterrorist computer network, … by which members could communicate exclusively with each other and their collaborators abroad.”51

Flashboard was used by North and his superiors for extremely sensitive operations which had to be concealed from other dubious or hostile parts of the Washington bureaucracy. These operations included the illegal shipments of arms to Iran, but also other activities, some still not known, perhaps even against Olof Palme’s Sweden.52 Flashboard, America’s emergency network in the 1980s, was the name in 1984-86 of the full-fledged Continuity of Government (COG) emergency network which was secretly planned for twenty years, at a cost of billions, by a team including Cheney and Rumsfeld. On 9/11 the same network was activated anew by the two men who had planned it for so many years.53

But this Doomsday planning can be traced back to 1963, when Jack Crichton, head of the 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit of Dallas, was part of it in his capacity as chief of intelligence for Dallas Civil Defense, which worked out of an underground Emergency Operating Center. As Russ Baker reports, “Because it was intended for ‘continuity of government’ operations during an attack, [the Center] was fully equipped with communications equipment.”54 A speech given at the dedication of the Center in 1961 supplies further details:

This Emergency Operating Center [in Dallas] is part of the National Plan to link Federal, State and local government agencies in a communications network from which rescue operations can be directed in time of local or National emergency. It is a vital part of the National, State, and local Operational Survival Plan.55

Crichton, in other words, was also part of what became known in the 1980s as the Doomsday Project, like James McCord, Oliver North, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney after him. But in 1988 its aim was significantly enlarged: no longer to prepare for an atomic attack, but now to plan for the effective suspension of the American constitution in the face of any emergency.56 This change in 1988 allowed COG to be implemented in 2001. By this time the Doomsday Project had developed into what the Washington Post called “a shadow government that evolved based on long-standing ‘continuity of operations plans.’”57

It is clear that the Office of Emergency Preparedness (OEP, known from 1961-1968 as the Office of Emergency Planning) supplies a common denominator for key personnel in virtually all of the structural events discussed here. This is a long way from establishing that the OEP itself (in addition to the individuals discussed here) was involved in generating any of these events. But I believe that the alternative communications network housed first in the OEP (later part of Project 908) played a significant role in at least three of them: the JFK assassination, Iran-Contra, and 9/11.

This is easiest to show in the case of 9/11, where it is conceded that the Continuity of Government (COG) plans of the Doomsday Project were implemented by Cheney on 9/11, apparently before the last of the four hijacked planes had crashed.58 The 9/11 Commission could not locate records of the key decisions taken by Cheney on that day, suggesting that they may have taken place on the “secure phone “ in the tunnel leading to the presidential bunker – with such a high classification that the 9/11 Commission was never supplied the phone records.59 Presumably this was a COG phone.

It is not clear whether the “secure phone” in the White House tunnel belonged to the Secret Service or (as one might expect) was part of the secure network of the White House Communications Agency (WHCA). If the latter, we’d have a striking link between 9/11 and the JFK assassination. The WHCA boasts on its Web site that the agency was “a key player in documenting the assassination of President Kennedy.”60  However it is not clear for whom this documentation was conducted, for the WHCA logs and transcripts were in fact withheld from the Warren Commission.61

The Secret Service had installed a WHCA portable radio in the lead car of the presidential motorcade.62 This in turn was in contact by police radio with the pilot car ahead of it, carrying DPD Deputy Chief Lumpkin of the 488th Army Intelligence Reserve unit.63 Records of the WHCA communications from the motorcade never reached the Warren Commission, the House Committee on Assassinations, or the Assassination Records Review Board.64 Thus we cannot tell if they would explain some of the anomalies on the two channels of the Dallas Police Department. They might for example have thrown light upon the unsourced call on the Dallas Police

tapes for a suspect who had exactly the false height and weight recorded for Oswald in his FBI and CIA files.65

Today in 2011 we are still living under the State of Emergency proclaimed after 9/11 by President Bush. At least some COG provisions are still in effect, and were even augmented by Bush through Presidential Directive 51 of May 2007. Commenting on PD-51, the Washington Post reported at that time,

After the 2001 attacks, Bush assigned about 100 senior civilian managers [including Cheney] to rotate secretly to [COG] locations outside of Washington for weeks or months at a time to ensure the nation’s survival, a shadow government that evolved based on long-standing “continuity of operations plans.”66

Presumably this “shadow government” finalized such long-standing COG projects as warrantless surveillance, in part through the Patriot Act, whose controversial provisions were already being implemented by Cheney and others well before the Bill reached Congress on October 12.67 Other COG projects implemented included the militarization of domestic surveillance under NORTHCOM, and the Department of Homeland Security’s Project Endgame—a ten-year plan to expand detention camps at a cost of $400 million in fiscal year 2007 alone.68

I have, therefore, a recommendation for the Occupy movement, rightfully incensed as it is with the plutonomic excesses of Wall Street over the last three decades. It is to call for an end to the state of emergency, which has been in force since 2001, under which since 2008 a U.S. Army Brigade Combat Team has been stationed permanently in the United States, in part to be ready “to help with civil unrest and crowd control.”69

Democracy-lovers must work to prevent the political crisis now developing in America from being resolved by military intervention.

Let me say in conclusion that for a half century American politics have been constrained and deformed by the unresolved matter of the Kennedy assassination. According to a memo of November 25 1963, from Assistant Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach, it was important then to persuade the public that “Oswald was the assassin,” and that “he did not have confederates.”70 Obviously this priority became even more important after these questionable propositions were endorsed by the Warren Report, the U.S. establishment, and the mainstream press. It has remained an embarrassing priority ever since for all succeeding administrations, including the present one. There is for example an official in Obama’s State Department (Todd Leventhal), whose official job, until recently, included defense of the lone nut theory against so-called “conspiracy theorists”71

If Oswald was not a lone assassin, then it should not surprise us that there is continuity between those who falsified reports about Oswald in 1963, and those who distorted American politics in subsequent deep events beginning with Watergate. Since the deep event of 1963 the legitimacy of America’s political system has become vested in a lie — a lie which subsequent deep events have helped to protect.72

Peter Dale Scott, a former Canadian diplomat and English Professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author of Drugs Oil and War, The Road to 9/11, and The War Conspiracy: JFK, 9/11, and the Deep Politics of War.

His most recent book is American War Machine: Deep Politics, the CIA Global Drug Connection and the Road to Afghanistan.

His website, which contains a wealth of his writings, is here http://www.peterdalescott.net/q.html  

Peter Dale Scott is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization

Notes

1 Tim Weiner, “The Pentagon’s Secret Stash,” Mother Jones Magazine Mar-Apr 1992, 26.

2 J.A. Myerson “War Is a Force That Pays the 1 Percent: Occupying American Foreign Policy,” Truthout, November 14, 2001, link. Cf. Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007), 6, etc.

3 Scott, Road to 9/11, 22, 29, 98.

4 Scott, Road to 9/11, 22, 97.

5 Scott, Road to 9/11, 21, 51-52; Kristol as quoted in Lewis H. Lapham, “Tentacles of Rage: The Republican Propaganda Mill, a Brief History,” Harper’s Magazine, September 2004, 36.

6 E.g. Peter Dale Scott, American War Machine, 204-05.

7 Peter Dale Scott, The War Conspiracy, 354.

8 Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics II, 30-33; Scott, The War Conspiracy, 387; Scott, American War Machine, 152.

9 Clarence M. Kelley, Kelley: The Story of an FBI Director (Kansas City, MO:

Andrews, McMeel, and Parker, 1987), 268, quoted in Scott, The War Conspiracy (2008), 389.

10 Scott, Deep Politics, 275; Scott, Deep Politics II, 80, 129n; HSCA Critics Conference of 17 September 1977, 181, link. Stringfellow worked under Jack Revill in the Vice Squad of the DPD Special Services Bureau. As such he reported regularly to the FBI on such close Jack Ruby associates as James Herbert Dolan, a “known hoodlum and strong-arm man” on the FBI’s Top Criminal list for Dallas (Robert M. Barrett, FBI Report of February 2, 1963, NARA#124-90038-10026, 12 [Stringfellow]; cf. NARA#124-10212-10012, 4 [hoodlum], NARA#124-10195-10305, 9 [Top Criminal]). Cf. 14 WH 601-02 Ruby and Dolan]. Robert Barrett, who received Stringfellow’s reports to the FBI, had Ruby’s friend Dolan under close surveillance; he also took part in Oswald’s arrest at the Texas Theater, and claimed to have seen DPD Officer Westbrook with Oswald’s wallet at the site of the Tippit killing [Dale K. Myers, With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Murder of Officer J.D. Tippit (Milford, MI: Oak Cliff Press, 1998), 287-90]).

11 It was sent for information to Washington, which received it three days later (Scott, Deep Politics, 275; Scott, Deep Politics II, 80, 129n; Scott, War Conspiracy, 382).

12 Warren Commission Exhibit 1778, 23 WH 383. (Marina’s actual words, before mistranslation, were quite innocuous: “I cannot describe it [the gun] because a rifle to me like all rifles” (Warren Commission Exhibit 1778, 23 WH 383; discussion in Scott, Deep Politics, 168-72).

13 Stringfellow himself was the source of one other piece of false intelligence on November 22: that Oswald had confessed to the murders of both the president and Officer Tippit (Dallas FBI File DL 89-43-2381C; Paul L. Hoch, “The Final Investigation? The HSCA and Army Intelligence,” The Third Decade, 1, 5 [July 1985], 3),

14 9 WH 106; Scott, Deep Politics, 275-76; Russ Baker, Family of Secrets, 119-22.

15 Rodney P. Carlisle and Dominic J. Monetta, Brandy: Our Man in Acapulco (Denton, TX: University of North Texas Press, 1999), 128.

16 Joint Chiefs of Staff, “Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” Report of the J-5 to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1 May 1963, NARA #202-10002-10018, 12. Cf. pp. 15-16: “The United States should intervene militarily in Cuba and could (a) engineer provocative incidents ostensibly perpetrated by the Castro regime to serve as the cause of invasion…”

17 Robert Dallek, An Unfinished Life, 568; James A. Nathan, The Cuban missile crisis revisited, 283; Waldron and Hartmann, Legacy of Secrecy, 9.

[18 Joint Chiefs of Staff, “Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” Report of the J-5 to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 1 May 1963, NARA #202-10002-10018, 12.

19 “Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” NARA #202-10002-10018, 20. I see nothing in this document indicating that the President should be notified that these “fabricated provocations” were false. On the contrary, the document called for “compartmentation of participants” to insure that the true facts were not leaked (“Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” NARA #202-10002-10018, 19).

20 Quoted in Baker, Family of Secrets, 122. One of these, DPD Detective John Adamcik, was a member of the party which retrieved a blanket said to have contained Oswald’s rifle; and which the Warren Commission used to link Oswald to the famous Mannlicher Carcano. Adamcik was later present at Mamantov’s interview of Marina about the rifle, and corroborated Mamantov’s account of it to the Warren Commission. There is reason to believe that Mamantov’s translation of Marina’s testimony was inaccurate (Scott, Deep Politics, 268-70, 276).

21 See James Douglass, JFK and the Unspeakable (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008).

22 9/11 Commission Report, 259, 271; Lawrence Wright, The Looming Tower:

Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11 (New York: Knopf, 2006), 352–54 (FBI agent).

23 James Bamford, A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America’s Intelligence Agencies (New York: Doubleday, 2004, 224. For a fuller account of the CIA’s withholding before 9/11, see Kevin Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots; Rory O’Connor and Ray Nowosielski, “Insiders Voice Doubts about CIA’s 9/11 Story,” Salon, October 14, 2011, link.

24 Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots, 7-12, 142-47, etc.

25 Scott, American War Machine, 203.

26 Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots, 371, cf. 95. Quite independently, Richard Clarke, the former White House Counterterrorism Chief on 9/11, has charged that “There was a high-level decision in the CIA ordering people not to share information” (Rory O’Connor and Ray Nowosielski, “Insiders Voice Doubts about CIA’s 9/11 Story,” Salon, October 14, 2011).

27 Coll, 467-69.

28 Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots, 107-08.

29 James Bamford, Body of Secrets, 201. Cf. Fredrik Logevall, Choosing War: The Lost Chance for Peace and the Escalation of War in Vietnam (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999), 200, citing John Prados, The Hidden History of the Vietnam War (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1995), 51.

30 “Courses of Action Related to Cuba (Case II),” Report of the J-5 to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, May 1, 1963, JCS 2304/189, NARA #202-10002-10018, link.

31 Peter Dale Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 280.

32 Public Law 90-331 (18 U.S.C. 3056); discussion in Peter Dale Scott, Paul L.

Hoch, and Russell Stetler, The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond (New York: Random

House, 1976), 443–46.

33 Army intelligence agents were seconded to the Secret Service, and at this time there was a great increase in their number. The Washington Star later explained that “the big build-up in [Army] information gathering…did not come until after the shooting of the Rev. Martin Luther King” (Washington Star, December 6, 1970; reprinted in Federal Data Banks Hearings, p. 1728).

34 George O’Toole, The Private Sector (New York: Norton, 1978), 145, quoted in

Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 278–79.

35 Scott, Road to 9/11, 52-53.

36 Scott, Road to 9/11, 53-54.

37 Scott, Road to 9/11, 50-64.

38 Peter Dale Scott, “Northwards without North,” Social Justice (Summer 1989). Revised as “North, Iran-Contra, and the Doomsday Project: The Original Congressional Cover Up of Continuity-of-Government Planning,” Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, February 21, 2011.

39 Scott, Road to 9/11, 132.

40 Jonathan Marshall, Peter Dale Scott, and Jane Hunter, The Iran-Contra Connection, 13 (Contras); Richard Coll, Ghost Wars, 93-102 (mujahedin).

41 Richard Coll, Ghost Wars, 457-59, 534-36,

42 According to testimony from CIA Deputy Director Vernon Walters, only “Hunt and McCord had ever been CIA full-time employees. The others [including Sturgis] were contract employees for a short duration or a longer duration” (Watergate Hearings, 3427). Cf. Marshall, Scott, and  Hunter, The Iran-Contra Connection, 45 (casino owners).

43 Peter Dale Scott, “From Dallas to Watergate,” Ramparts, December 1973; reprinted in Peter Dale Scott, Paul L. Hoch, and Russell Stetler, The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond, 356, 363.

44 Peter Dale Scott, Crime and Cover-Up, 20.

45 Peter Dale Scott and Jonathan Marshall, Cocaine Politics, 25-32, etc.

46 Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs, and the Press  (London: Verso, 1998), 308-09; Martha Honey, Hostile Acts: U.S. Policy in Costa Rica in the 1980s (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 1994), 368 (Frigorificos).

47 Tad Szulc, Compulsive Spy: The Strange Career of E. Howard Hunt (New York: Viking, 1974), 96-97.

48 Scott, American War Machine, 51-54. Hunt helped put together what became the drug-linked World Anti-Communist League. Artime’s Costa Rica base was on land whose owners were part of the local WACL chapter (Scott and Marshall, Cocaine Politics, 87, 220).

49 Woodward and Bernstein, All the President’s Men (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1974), 23

50 Jim Hougan, Secret Agenda (New York: Random House, 1984), 16, citing Department of Defense Directive 5230.7, June 25, 1965, amended May 21, 1971.

51 Peter Dale Scott, “North, Iran-Contra, and the Doomsday Project: The Original Congressional Cover Up of Continuity-of-Government Planning,” Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, February 21, 2011. Cf. Peter Dale Scott, “Northwards Without North: Bush, Counterterrorism, and the Continuation of Secret Power.” Social Justice (San Francisco), XVI, 2 (Summer 1989), 1-30; Peter Dale Scott, “The Terrorism Task Force.” Covert Action Information Bulletin, 33 (Winter 1990), 12-15.

52 Peter Dale Scott and Jonathan Marshall, Cocaine Politics: Drugs, Armies, and the CIA in Central America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 140-41, 242 (Iran, etc.); Ola Tunander, The secret war against Sweden: US and British submarine deception in the 1980s, 309 (Sweden).

53 Scott, Road to 9/11, 183-87.

54 Russ Baker, Family of Secrets, 121.

55 “Statement by Col. John W. Mayo, Chairman of City-County Civil Defense and Disaster Commission at the Dedication of the Emergency Operating Center at Fair Park,” May 24, 1961, link.

Six linear inches of Civil Defense Administrative Files are preserved in the Dallas Municipal Archives; a Finding Guide is viewable online here.  I hope an interested researcher may wish to consult them.

56 Scott, Road to 9/11, 183-87.

57 Washington Post, May 10, 2007.

58 9/11 Report, 38, 326, 555n9; Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America, 224.

59 Scott, Road to 9/11, 226-30. A footnote in the 9/11 Report (555n9) says:

“The 9/11 crisis tested the U.S. government’s plans and capabilities to ensure the continuity of constitutional government and the continuity of government operations. We did not investigate this topic, except as needed to understand the activities and communications of key officials on 9/11. The Chair, Vice Chair, and senior staff were briefed on the general nature and implementation of these continuity plans.”

The other footnotes confirm that no information from COG files was used to document the 9/11 report. At a minimum these files might resolve the mystery of the missing phone call which simultaneously authorized COG, and (in consequence) determined that Bush should continue to stay out of Washington. I suspect that they might tell us a great deal more.

60 “White House Communications Agency,” Signal Corps Regimental History, link.

61 The Warren Commission staff knew of the WHCA presence in Dallas from the Secret Service (17 WH 598, 619, 630, etc.).

62 Statement of Secret Service official Winston Lawson, 17 WH 630 (WHCA radio).

63 Pamela McElwain-Brown, “The Presidential Lincoln Continental SS-100-X,” Dealey Plaza Echo, Volume 3, Issue 2, 23, link (police radio); Scott, Deep Politics and the Death of JFK, 272-75 (Lumpkin).

64 In the 1990s the WHCA supplied statements to the ARRB concerning communications between Dallas and Washington on November 22 (NARA #172-10001-10002 to NARA #172-10000-10008).  The Assassination Records Review Board also attempted to obtain from the WHCA the unedited original tapes of conversations from Air Force One on the return trip from Dallas, November 22, 1963. (Edited and condensed versions of these tapes had been available since the 1970s from the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library in Austin, Texas.) The attempt was unsuccessful: “The Review Board’s repeated written and oral inquiries of the White House Communications Agency did not bear fruit. The WHCA could not produce any records that illuminated the provenance of the edited tapes.” See Assassinations Records Review Board: Final Report, chapter 6, Part 1, 116, link. In November 2011 AP reported that Gen. Chester Clifton’s personal copy of the Air Force One recordings was being put up for sale, with an asking price of $500,000 (AP, November 15, 2011, link).

65 See Scott, War Conspiracy (2008), 347-48, 385-87.

66 Washington Post, May 10, 2007.

67 Dick Cheney, In My Time: A Personal and Political Memoir (New York: Threshold Editions, 2011), 348: “One of the first efforts we undertook after 9/11 to strengthen the country’s defenses was securing passage of the Patriot Act, which the president signed into law on [sic] October 2001.” Cf. “The Patriot Act, which the president signed into law on October 2001,″ link; “Questions and Answers about Beginning of Domestic Spying Program; link.

68 Scott, Road to 9/11, 236-45; Peter Dale Scott, “Is the State of Emergency Superseding our Constitution? Continuity of Government Planning, War and American Society,” November 28, 2010, http:/1/japanfocus.org/-Peter_Dale-Scott/3448.

69 “Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1,” Army Times, September 30, 2008, link. As part of the Army’s emergency plan GARDEN PLOT in the 1960s, there were until 1971 two brigades (4,800 troops) on permanent standby to quell unrest.

70 “Memorandum for Mr. Moyers” of November 25, 1963, FBI 62-109060, Section 18, p. 29, link. Cf. Nicholas Katzenbach, Some of It Was Fun (New York: W.W. Norton, 2008), 131-36.

71 Leventhal’s official title is (or was) “Chief of the Counter-Misinformation Team, U.S. Department of State” (link). In 2010 the U.S. State Department “launched an official bid to shoot down conspiracy theories….The “Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation” page… insists that Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F Kennedy alone, and that the Pentagon was not hit by a cruise missile on 9/11” Daily Record [Scotland], August 2, 2010, (link). The site still exists here, (“Conspiracy theories exist in the realm of myth, where imaginations run wild, fears trump facts, and evidence is ignored.”) The site still attacks 9/11 theories, but a page on the Kennedy assassination has been suspended (link). Cf. Robin Ramsay, “Government vs Conspiracy Theorists: The official war on “sick think,” Fortean Times, April 2010, link; “The State Department vs ‘Sick Think’

The JFK assassination, 9/11, and the Tory MP spiked with LSD,” Fortean Times, July 2010, link; William Kelly, “Todd Leventhal: The Minister of Diz at Dealey Plaza,” CTKA, 2010, link.

72 For Nixon’s sensitivity concerning the Kennedy assassination, and the way this induced him into some of the intrigues known collectively as Watergate, see e.g. Scott, Hoch, and Stetler, The Assassinations, 374-78; Peter Dale Scott, Crime and Cover-up (Santa Barbara, CA: Open Archive Press, 1993), 33, 64-66.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate This Article 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 October 11, 2022

***

On March 11, 2022, President Biden reassured the American public and the world that the United States and its NATO allies were not at war with Russia. “We will not fight a war with Russia in Ukraine,” said Biden. “Direct conflict between NATO and Russia is World War III, something we must strive to prevent.”

It is widely acknowledged that U.S. and NATO officers are now fully involved in Ukraine’s operational war planning, aided by a broad range of U.S. intelligence gathering and analysis to exploit Russia’s military vulnerabilities, while Ukrainian forces are armed with U.S. and NATO weapons and trained up to the standards of other NATO countries.

On October 5, Nikolay Patrushev, the head of Russia’s Security Council, recognized that Russia is now fighting NATO in Ukraine. Meanwhile, President Putin has reminded the world that Russia has nuclear weapons and is prepared to use them “when the very existence of the state is put under threat,” as Russia’s official nuclear weapons doctrine declared in June 2020.

It seems likely that, under that doctrine, Russia’s leaders would interpret losing a war to the United States and NATO on their own borders as meeting the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons.

President Biden acknowledged on October 6 that Putin is “not joking” and that it would be difficult for Russia to use a “tactical” nuclear weapon “and not end up with Armageddon.” Biden assessed the danger of a full-scale nuclear war as higher than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.

Yet despite voicing the possibility of an existential threat to our survival, Biden was not issuing a public warning to the American people and the world, nor announcing any change in U.S. policy. Bizarrely, the president was instead discussing the prospect of nuclear war with his political party’s financial backers during an election fundraiser at the home of media mogul James Murdoch, with surprised corporate media reporters listening in.

In an NPR report about the danger of nuclear war over Ukraine, Matthew Bunn, a nuclear weapons expert at Harvard University, estimated the chance of Russia using a nuclear weapon at 10 to 20 percent.

How have we gone from ruling out direct U.S. and NATO involvement in the war to U.S. involvement in all aspects of the war except for the bleeding and dying, with an estimated 10 to 20 percent chance of nuclear war? Bunn made that estimate shortly before the sabotage of the Kerch Strait Bridge to Crimea. What odds will he project a few months from now if both sides keep matching each other’s escalations with further escalation?

The irresolvable dilemma facing Western leaders is that this is a no-win situation. How can they militarily defeat Russia, when it possesses 6,000 nuclear warheads and its military doctrine explicitly states that it will use them before it will accept an existential military defeat?

And yet that is what the intensifying Western role in Ukraine now explicitly aims to achieve. This leaves U.S. and NATO policy, and thus our very existence, hanging by a thin thread: the hope that Putin is bluffing, despite explicit warnings that he is not. CIA Director William Burns, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines and the director of the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency), Lieutenant General Scott Berrier, have all warned that we should not take this danger lightly.

The danger of relentless escalation toward Armageddon is what both sides faced throughout the Cold War, which is why, after the wake-up call of the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, dangerous brinkmanship gave way to a framework of nuclear arms control agreements and safeguard mechanisms to prevent proxy wars and military alliances spiraling into a world-ending nuclear war. Even with those safeguards in place, there were still many close calls – but without them, we would probably not be here to write about it.

Today, the situation is made more dangerous by the dismantling of those nuclear arms treaties and safeguards. It is also exacerbated, whether either side intends it or not, by the twelve-to-one imbalance between U.S. and Russian military spending, which leaves Russia with more limited conventional military options and a greater reliance on nuclear ones.

But there have always been alternatives to the relentless escalation of this war by both sides that has brought us to this pass. In April, Western officials took a fateful step when they persuaded President Zelenskyy to abandon Turkish- and Israeli-brokered negotiations with Russia that had produced a promising 15-point framework for a ceasefire, a Russian withdrawal and a neutral future for Ukraine.

That agreement would have required Western countries to provide security guarantees to Ukraine, but they refused to be party to it and instead promised Ukraine military support for a long war to try to decisively defeat Russia and recover all the territory Ukraine had lost since 2014.

U.S. Defense Secretary Austin declared that the West’s goal in the war was now to “weaken” Russia to the point that it would no longer have the military power to invade Ukraine again. But if the United States and its allies ever came close to achieving that goal, Russia would surely see such a total military defeat as putting “the very existence of the state under threat,” triggering the use of nuclear weapons under its publicly stated nuclear doctrine.

On May 23rd, the very day that Congress passed a $40 billion aid package for Ukraine, including $24 billion in new military spending, the contradictions and dangers of the new U.S.-NATO war policy in Ukraine finally spurred a critical response from The New York Times Editorial Board. A Times editorial, titled “The Ukraine War is Getting Complicated, and America Is Not Ready,” asked serious, probing questions about the new U.S. policy:

“Is the United States, for example, trying to help bring an end to this conflict, through a settlement that would allow for a sovereign Ukraine and some kind of relationship between the United States and Russia? Or is the United States now trying to weaken Russia permanently? Has the administration’s goal shifted to destabilizing Putin or having him removed? Does the United States intend to hold Putin accountable as a war criminal? Or is the goal to try to avoid a wider war…? Without clarity on these questions, the White House…jeopardizes long-term peace and security on the European continent.”

The NYT editors went on to voice what many have thought but few have dared to say in such a politicized media environment, that the goal of recovering all the territory Ukraine has lost since 2014 is not realistic, and that a war to do so will “inflict untold destruction on Ukraine.” They called on Biden to talk honestly with Zelenskyy about “how much more destruction Ukraine can sustain” and the “limit to how far the United States and NATO will confront Russia.”

A week later, Biden replied to the Times in an Op-Ed titled “What America Will and Will Not Do in Ukraine.” He quoted Zelenskyy saying that the war “will only definitively end through diplomacy,” and wrote that the United States was sending weapons and ammunition so that Ukraine “can fight on the battlefield and be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.”

Biden wrote, “We do not seek a war between NATO and Russia.…the United States will not try to bring about [Putin’s] ouster in Moscow.” But he went on to pledge virtually unlimited U.S. support for Ukraine, and he did not answer the more difficult questions the Times asked about the U.S. endgame in Ukraine, the limits to U.S. involvement in the war or how much more devastation Ukraine could sustain.

As the war escalates and the danger of nuclear war increases, these questions remain unanswered. Calls for a speedy end to the war echoed around the UN General Assembly in New York in September, where 66 countries, representing most of the world’s population, urgently called on all sides to restart peace talks.

The greatest danger we face is that their calls will be ignored, and that the U.S. military-industrial complex’s overpaid minions will keep finding ways to incrementally turn up the pressure on Russia, calling its bluff and ignoring its “red lines” as they have since 1991, until they cross the most critical “red line” of all.

If the world’s calls for peace are heard before it is too late and we survive this crisis, the United States and Russia must renew their commitments to arms control and nuclear disarmament, and negotiate how they and other nuclear armed states will destroy their weapons of mass destruction and accede to the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, so that we can finally lift this unthinkable and unacceptable danger hanging over our heads.

*

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.

Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies are the authors of War in Ukraine: Making Sense of a Senseless Conflict, available from OR Books in November 2022. They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Medea Benjamin is the cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and the author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood on Our Hands: The American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq.


Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War” 

by Michel Chossudovsky

Available to order from Global Research! 

ISBN Number: 978-0-9737147-5-3
Year: 2012
Pages: 102

PDF Edition:  $6.50 (sent directly to your email account!)

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), which hosts the critically acclaimed website www.globalresearch.ca . He is a contributor to the Encyclopedia Britannica. His writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Reviews

“This book is a ‘must’ resource – a richly documented and systematic diagnosis of the supremely pathological geo-strategic planning of US wars since ‘9-11’ against non-nuclear countries to seize their oil fields and resources under cover of ‘freedom and democracy’.”
John McMurtry, Professor of Philosophy, Guelph University

“In a world where engineered, pre-emptive, or more fashionably “humanitarian” wars of aggression have become the norm, this challenging book may be our final wake-up call.”
-Denis Halliday, Former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations

Michel Chossudovsky exposes the insanity of our privatized war machine. Iran is being targeted with nuclear weapons as part of a war agenda built on distortions and lies for the purpose of private profit. The real aims are oil, financial hegemony and global control. The price could be nuclear holocaust. When weapons become the hottest export of the world’s only superpower, and diplomats work as salesmen for the defense industry, the whole world is recklessly endangered. If we must have a military, it belongs entirely in the public sector. No one should profit from mass death and destruction.
Ellen Brown, author of ‘Web of Debt’ and president of the Public Banking Institute

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 November 30, 2022

***

That the economic sanctions resulting from the invasion of Ukraine affect Europe more than Russia is an annoying fact. But now a recent study by The Economist suggests that because of high fuel prices, the additional death toll in Europe in the coming winter could exceed the number of soldiers killed in combat in Ukraine so far. Food for thought. 

Before the war, Russia supplied about 40 percent of the European Union’s total gas consumption. In response to the war and in order to reduce dependence on Russian gas, Ukraine and Poland have shut down some pipelines bringing gas from Russia to Western Europe.

Countries, such as Finland, Bulgaria and Poland, that were unwilling to pay for their gas in rubles were disconnected by Russia. In addition, the maintenance required to keep the important Nord Stream I pipeline at full capacity was also compromised.

The sharply reduced gas supply, which for now cannot be fully offset by imports from elsewhere, has sent gas prices and indirectly electricity prices in Europe skyrocketing.

Due to the very mild autumn and because Europe has built up a large gas stock, market prices have meanwhile fallen compared to their peak in the summer. Yet the average price for gas today is almost two and a half times as much as in the period 2000-19. For electricity, it is almost double.

And now winter is upon us. It is a well-known phenomenon that more people die in winter, because of the cold, than in summer. In both Europe and the US, the number of deaths is about 20 per cent larger on average.

In the past, energy prices had little or no impact on excess mortality, because price fluctuations were very small. But now the cost increases are remarkably large and therefore a much greater impact is expected.

To calculate that impact, The Economist has built a statistical model. Besides the price of energy, there are three other factors that cause the number of extra deaths: the most important is how severe the winter is, in addition to that, the severity of the flu season (which is partly determined by how cold it is) and, finally, the compensation of the governments to households for absorbing the price hikes.

High fuel prices can exacerbate the effect of low temperatures on deaths by discouraging people from using heating and making people more exposed to cold. The same applies significantly to the government’s support to households meant to absorb the energy shock.

According to The Economist’s model, the “firm conclusion” is that the impact “will prove highly potent” and the death toll “could exceed the number of soldiers who have died so far in combat”.

If energy prices remain at current levels, about 147,000 more people in Europe would die in a typical winter than under a situation with “normal” prices. With mild temperatures – assuming the warmest winter of the past 20 years for each country – this figure drops to 79,000. In a severe winter, using the coldest winter for each country since 2000, the extra excess mortality rises to 185,000.

Supposedly, about 25,000 to 30,000 military personnel on both sides died in the war and another 6,500 Ukrainian civilians were killed. In total, this is less than in the best-case scenario from The Economist’s model.

The magazine notes that the effect can vary greatly from country to country. In countries that have set maximum prices or a maximum bill, there will be hardly any additional mortality or the mortality rate may even fall. This is the case for France, Britain, Spain and Austria, among others.

Much larger numbers of deaths are predicted in countries where government support is (for now) low, such as Italy, Estonia and Finland. The Economist does not explicitly mention Belgium, the country where I live. In terms of government support, the country is somewhere between the two extremes.

In the long run, the sanctions against Putin will most certainly weaken the Russian economy. But so far that is absolutely not the case. Expected revenues from Russian energy exports will be a third higher this year than last year.

It is mainly the European countries that are shooting themselves in the foot with the sanctions. Recent data shows that the Russian ‘current activity indicator’ (measure of economic activity) is higher than in other major European countries.

As a result of high energy prices, many companies may have to close or relocate to other regions, where energy costs are lower. Moreover, to combat inflation, which in turn is mainly due to high energy prices, we are almost certainly heading for a full-blown recession in Europe.

In addition to the economic self-flagellation, the toll in human lives in Europe will be extremely high. It may be time to think deeply about the sense or nonsense of the economic sanctions against Russia.

*

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.

Marc Vandepitte is a Belgian economist and philosopher. He writes on North-South relations, Latin America, Cuba, and China. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

The ‘Twitter Papers’ Reveal the Totalitarians Among Us

December 11th, 2022 by Rep. Ron Paul

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 6, 2022

***

I admit to being skeptical of Elon Musk as a free speech hero. He has moved from one US government-subsidized business to another on his path to becoming the world’s richest person. But there is no denying that his release of the “Twitter Papers” this past weekend, which blew the lid off government manipulation of social media, has been a huge victory for those of us who value the First Amendment.

The release, in coordination with truly independent journalist Matt Taibbi, demonstrated indisputably how politicians and representatives of “official Washington” pressed the teams that were then in charge of censorship at Twitter to remove Tweets and even ban accounts that were guilty of nothing beyond posting something the power-brokers did not want the general public to read. Let’s not forget that many of those demanding Twitter censorship were US government officials who had taken an oath to the US Constitution and its First Amendment.

It is important to understand that both US political parties were involved in pushing Twitter to censor information they didn’t like. There is plenty of corruption to go around. However, as the Twitter Papers demonstrated, vastly more Tweets were censored at the demand of Democratic Party politicians simply because Twitter employees on the censorship team were overwhelmingly Democratic Party supporters.

Perhaps the most damning piece of evidence released in this first installment of the Twitter Papers was a series of Tweets from the Biden 2020 campaign to its contact inside Twitter asking that the social media censor them. An internal Twitter document shows that the censor team “handled these,” meaning censored them.

Elon Musk himself openly stated before the release that, prior to his taking control of the company and engaging in mass firing, Twitter had been manipulating elections. So all those years we heard lies from the Washington elites that Russia was interfering in our elections when after all it was Twitter. Of course that raises the question about other large social media companies like Facebook. Will Mark Zuckerberg come clean about his own company’s election interference? Will anyone have the courage to demand that he do so?

How did they get away with all of this? As another truly independent journalist, Glenn Greenwald, pointed out on the Tucker Carlson show the night the “Twitter Papers” were released, while it was once controversial for the CIA to attempt to manipulate what Americans consume in the mainstream media, nowadays these outlets openly hire “former” US intelligence leaders and officers as news analysts. CNN, MSNBC, Fox, and the rest of them all bring on “former” members of the intelligence services to tell Americans what to think. “Big tech censorship is a critical tool of the national security state,” Greenwald told Tucker. “Whenever anyone tries to do anything about it these former people from the CIA and the Pentagon and the rest jump up and say ‘we cannot allow you to restore free speech.’”

This is a corruption scandal so massive that it is almost guaranteed to never be properly investigated. Government itself is among the most guilty and we know “government commissions” are really about covering up rather than uncovering the crimes committed. But the truth is powerful. Some 58 years after the Warren Report whitewashed the assassination of President Kennedy, polls show that few Americans believe the “official” narrative.

Truth is powerful and we must always seek it. No amount of lies can withstand the disinfectant of truth. Thanks to Elon Musk for his courage and we encourage him to continue.

*

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 OneWorld