All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is headed by Secretary General Haitham Al Ghais, who said on August 18 that the OPEC+ oil production deal wants to keep Russia part of the alliance beyond 2022.
“We would love to extend the deal with Russia and the other non-OPEC producers … it’s very hard for me to imagine that the deal will not continue,” Al Ghais said.
“This is a long-term relationship that encompasses broader and more comprehensive forms of communication and cooperation between 23 countries. It’s not just in terms of production adjustment,” he said.
Oil production has gradually increased in Russia in the wake of Western sanctions, and Asian buyers have boosted sales. Forecasts for output and exports by Moscow have increased until the close of 2025.
Russia, along with OPEC and its allies, has cooperated closely on oil production policy in the face of Western-imposed sanctions on Russia following the ‘special military operation’ in Ukraine which began in February. The West, led by the US-NATO collusion, has used oil as a political weapon.
On September 5, a reduction in global crude oil output by 100,000 b/d in October was agreed upon by OPEC+ and its Russian allies, which was characterized by the Saudi-led cartel as a proactive move to stabilize the market and aimed at stopping a slide in oil prices.
This marks the first cut in production in more than a year by OPEC+ and its 23-member alliance, but only amounts to 0.1 % of global demand. The last cut was huge in the face of crashing oil prices due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
On September 2, the Group of Seven (G7) industrialized powers said it would put a price cap on Russian oil in December. The G7 is attempting to change the dynamic of oil prices by forming a buyers’ alliance.
Dmitry Peskov, the spokesperson for the Kremlin, threatened Russia would retaliate if the G7 imposed any price cap.
“Any actions to impose a price cap will lead to a deficit on (initiating countries’) own markets and will increase price volatility,” Russia’s Energy Minister Nikolay Shulginov said on the sidelines of the forum in Vladivostok.
In response to the threatened price cap to begin on December 5 and February 5, 2023, Russia will increase its shipments of oil to Asia.
Randy Ollenberger, a BMO Capital Markets analyst, doubted whether an oil price cap would damage Russia in financing its Ukraine operations. Sanctions imposed on Russia to date “have proved to be ineffective, and Russia has maintained crude oil and product exports at higher levels than anticipated, which has translated to record cash inflows,” he said.
Analysts at Goldman Sachs feel bullish on oil prices while forecasting an average oil price of $125/bbl Brent in 2023.
Modest production increases under OPEC+ began last year as market conditions began to bounce back. In a market reaction to events in Ukraine, prices surged to almost $140 a barrel but recovered to about $95 as fear abounded on a potential economic slowdown in the West.
Another factor pulling down oil prices is the Iran nuclear deal negotiations which if reached would pose a boost in supply as it returns to the market. Saudi Arabia and the oil-rich Gulf Arab monarchies see Iran as a threat, not only to the price of oil and do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons.
OPEC is a Saudi-led cartel, and Saudi Arabia had enjoyed a very close relationship with the US under the President Trump administration. However, Trump was stymied by the Russian-Saudi coordination to limit oil production. Trump wanted to use US security relations with the Gulf allies to insist they pump more oil into the market.
President Joe Biden has severely strained the US-Saudi relationship by calling Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) a killer and blaming him for the death of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018.
In a face-to-face meeting between Biden and MBS, the US President claimed he brought up the murder of Khashoggi in a closed-door meeting and said he considered him to blame. According to Biden, MBS said he was not personally responsible for it.
The exchange is refuted by Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi minister of state for foreign affairs, who later told reporters that he did not hear Biden blame MBS.
Biden had hoped that his trip to Saudi Arabia would net him an increase in oil production to bring down energy prices in the US and Europe. However, Biden was not successful.
In November 2018, the CIA issued a report which found that MBS ordered the murder of Khashoggi, and it was carried out by an elite team of Saudi operatives under the direction of MBS in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul.
The CIA report cited the death squad used a Saudi government plane, as well as an intercepted phone call between the brother of MBS urging Khashoggi to go to the Consulate in Istanbul and giving his assurances for his safety.
Russia has surpassed its OPEC+ partner Saudi Arabia as the leading supplier of crude oil to China.
Russian cooperation within the OPEC+ oil alliance is focused on helping global consumers. Russia will continue developing its ties in the Asia–Pacific region where the majority of countries do not accept the “destructive logic of sanctions,” President Putin told the Eastern Economic Forum in the city of Vladivostok. He said Moscow would build new bridges with the area based on the principles of cooperation and economic benefit.
OPEC+ includes all 13 countries that are members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, plus 10 non-OPEC countries, including Russia, one of the world’s top oil exporters.
In 2019, OPEC signed a long-term cooperation pact with Russia, extending a partnership set up in 2017 to counter a surge of US oil that hurt OPEC’s pricing power.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Some newspapers defend their journalists, at least once in a while. When the charming prince of Saudi Arabia had Journalist Jamal Khashoggi sawed up into little pieces, the Washington Post expressed outrage, and the bad press cost the Saudis some embarrassment; for a while it even looked like they might not get to bomb Yemen any more.
The Post is of course every inch an establishment newspaper which houses neocons, neoliberals, warmongers, regime changers and more. It does not support Julian Assange, though it used and printed information he made available. Nevertheless, the Post did speak out for Khashoggi.
So imagine, for comparison, how KPFA 94.1 FM, our famously progressive, leftwing, radical radio station in the San Francisco Bay Area, might respond to the abuse of one of its journalists.
Well, here’s what happened.
Last September 17th, 2021, KPFA journalist Frank Sterling was arrested at a demonstration. Several activists were protesting a “Back the Blue” event honoring Antioch’s outgoing Police Chief Tammany Brooks.
Chief Brooks had protected officers involved in police brutality and had even hired a former San Francisco policeman who’d killed a homeless man. Some of the police chief’s admirers hassled the protesters, and the police moved in and arrested three people, including Frank.
“I was out there at the park as a protester and was documenting the rally and police abuses. And when I was documenting the arrest of [demonstrator] Shagoofa Khan and the brutality they were bestowing upon her, violating our civil rights, I was then attacked and tasered and held to the ground,” Frank reported.
Here’s a 13-minute video of the demonstration and the arrests, or watch the video below.
This happened in Antioch, an East Bay town on the San Joaquin River; it’s where Frank lives and covers local as well as regional news for KPFA 94.1 FM. He also attends Antioch City Council meetings to speak on matters concerning Native Americans, tenants’ issues, the rights of homeless people, police accountability and the need for police body cameras. He’s well known to city officials and to the police in Antioch.
Fortunately for Frank, this isn’t Saudi Arabia. In comparison, the Antioch police are mild and gentle. Although they occasionally choke and strangle people, they mostly prefer not to. And they’ve absolutely never, ever been known to “saw up” a journalist. In relating to Frank, they merely assaulted him, tasered him, arrested him, and confiscated his journalism equipment.
Those are occupational hazards for journalists, at least for those who raise uncomfortable issues. Frank Sterling does that and more. Journalist, activist, and Native American, he wears several hats both in the community and at KPFA. In addition to covering news events, he’s the technical director of the KPFA Apprenticeship Program. And he contributes to “Full Circle.” On Friday evenings, the station’s listeners hear his familiar voice: “Welcome to Full Circle . . . broadcasting from right here in Huichin — in that part of occupied Ohlone Territory known to settlers as Berkeley, California.”
Another hat he wears is that of Staff Rep on KPFA’s Local Station Board, the LSB. The day after that arrest was the board’s September meeting. “Are you doing okay?” board members asked him. “We saw a message that you got hurt.”
“I’m okay,” he assured us, though appearing still slightly stunned, and he briefly told us about it. “Thanks for everyone that reached out,” he said as he finished. “Thank you for your concern.”
The Contra Costa County DA, Diana Becton, was endorsed by progressives as a reformer. But we soon learned that she was charging Frank with resisting arrest. And as happens in court cases, it dragged on, month after month; at each court hearing a date was set for the next hearing.
(This same DA Becton declined to press charges against the Antioch officers involved in the death of Angelo Quinto.)
The Oscar Grant Committee mobilized support for Frank. They and members of the LSB’s minority caucus, Rescue Pacifica, accompanied him to court hearings.
A petition was circulated on his behalf. Veterans for Peace wrote a resolution in support of him.
Several non-corporate journalists publicized his case. The hosts of Hard Knock Radio and UpFront interviewed him. Steve Zeltzer of Work Week Radio also covered this, and Ann Garrison did an interview for the Black Agenda Report. Ann Garrison’s article is at several websites.
Although several KPFA programmers had interviewed Frank, there was also something the station itself could do. It could air “carts” (recorded messages) and send out emails to the membership list — these are things KPFA does during fund drives, and to announce speaker events, the crafts fair, and other events the station takes an interest in.
Although KPFA’s board is deeply divided on many issues, support of journalists would presumably be something that both sides could agree on. Moreover, Frank was well liked by people on both sides.
At the March 19th meeting, board member James McFadden brought this up with General Manager Quincy McCoy, who curtly dismissed the request.
“We’re not a political party,” the Manager replied.
There may’ve been some loud gasps, though not heard during this Zoom session where most microphones are muted.
This was KPFA, the radio station that stood up to Joe McCarthy & Co, bravely opposed the Korean War in an era when it took incredible courage to express a dissenting opinion. Likewise, KPFA strongly opposed the war in Vietnam and has spoken out against security state policies many times since. That has been KPFA’s traditional anti-establishment, anti-imperialist, antiwar stand.
It seemed unthinkable that the manager of this station would refuse to defend one of its own journalists. This manager was Quincy McCoy whose voice we often hear on KPFA airwaves, telling us: “This is a community station,” “Vigilant as always,” “Truth to power,” and “We have your back!” The manager who ends his emails with the slogan: “In times of crisis, unity is the only solution.”
Unity? Maybe not this time. Or, was there some misunderstanding here?
The board’s minority caucus, Rescue Pacifica, had written a resolution in support of Journalist Frank Sterling and asked the secretary to put it on the agenda. Although Rescue Pacifica is a one-third minority on this board, it did seem possible that this resolution might pass when put to a vote. But there was no vote. The secretary and chair, Carol Wolfley and Christina Huggins, kept the resolution off the agenda.
More was said about Frank Sterling’s case during Public Comments. This is where KPFA listeners, people attending the meeting who are not current board members, get to speak. The audio is about 35 minutes, and here are some excerpts:
“I’m disappointed this body did not even discuss support for Frank Sterling,” said KPFA staff person Sharon Peterson, “This is a news story that we should, in our ever vigilant position, be covering.”
“Why don’t you report the news of the journalist who was attacked twice by the Antioch police and tell people his next court date is in April?” asked Nancy Saibara-Naritomi from KPFT, the Pacifica sister station in Houston. “That is important.”
“I’m very concerned about the lack of support for Frank Sterling by the LSB,” said Steve Zeltzer of Workweek Radio. “And the manager said KPFA is ‘not a political party.’ Well, when does KPFA have to be a political party to support a journalist? . . . Journalists are under attack in this country. And for KPFA to be silent . . .”
Stan Woods, labor activist and former KPFA board member, said:
“[At any news outlet] if one of their journalists is under attack, falsely accused and arrested, the management of that station or newspaper or website comes to their defense.”
Several more spoke likewise, expressing support for Frank. The one public speaker who advocated non-support was former board member Sharon Adams. “The LSB’s role is not to make political pronouncements,” she declared. “One reason perhaps to avoid having the LSB make political announcements is that there are news reports about what happened there. For example, the Antioch Herald.”
The Antioch Herald, which Sharon recommended, is a conservative newspaper, a “Blue Lives Matter” and “Back the Blue” supporter. Its publisher has also been called out at city council for homophobic and transphobic remarks on his social media. Although investigative journalists and researchers do consider it important to read reports from across the political spectrum, including the Antioch Herald, it seemed strange that Sharon would not want KPFA to give its own views. After all, the very reason for KPFA/Pacifica’s seven decade existence has been to give independent news and views that are not likely to be heard from the commercial media.
Sharon Adam’s speech came as a surprise, even to those of us who are used to hearing her. She’d spent six years on KPFA’s board; she had been the treasurer, and at board meetings she had often functioned as spokesperson for the majority faction. And she is an attorney.
At the next LSB meeting, after the Pacifica National Board (which represents all five stations & 200 Affiliate stations) had stood by Frank and passed a resolution in his support, Sharon doubled down in her attack on Frank and accused him of assaulting a police officer.
So was Sharon speaking for herself? or for her faction? Her group, which uses several names, including “SaveKPFA,” “KPFA Protectors,” “New Day,” and Safety Net,” has a two-thirds majority on the KPFA LSB.
I wrote an email to all of the board members of Protectors/New Day, asking them if she spoke for them? I received no reply from any of them.
I suppose I shouldn’t have been so surprised. These are some of the same people who are petitioning the FCC to deny renewal of the WBAI license–if successful it will cost the network an asset valued at somewhere between $20 to $50 million. This fight has been going on for years, decades actually, and during the last couple of years it has become more intense.
Then, as endnote to all this, came a letter of resignation from Quincy McCoy, effective August 15th. He was general manager for nearly a decade and worked closely with the “Protectors”/”New Day” faction. There was controversy over various matters that happened on his watch, such as the non-payment of property taxes, and reports of an as of yet unexplained seven-month delay in presenting the financial documents needed for timely audits. Nevertheless, the “Protectors” loved him and praised him, and they refused to fulfill their yearly duty of evaluating his performance. They also said it’s “racist” to criticize this manager who is a person of color, (McCoy is African American). But when Frank Sterling’s supporters pointed out that to be consistent with that argument, the “Protectors” should also support Frank, also a person of color (Native American), they didn’t respond.
Why did Quincy McCoy resign? He didn’t say. But he did list his favorite people at KPFA, and among these was Sharon Adams, that star player of March 19th, as well as Carol Wolfley, the Secretary of the LSB, who sent a letter of support for the petition to the FCC.
This and other happenings at KPFA may indeed sound discouraging to KPFA listeners, and it is at times hard to be optimistic, but I don’t think it does any good to try to cover up the bad stuff. KPFA’s listener-members need to know what’s going on. We have to hang in there and work to preserve KPFA’s traditional antiwar voice and defend our journalists.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
China and India have agreed to withdraw their military troops from the disputed border area, near the latter’s Ladakh region in the Himalayas. Although there has been a lot of dialogue amid the tensions, this a somewhat surprising development, which, from an American perspective, could be the beginning of a nightmare. Both Beijing and New Delhi have issued similar-worded statements emphasizing the need to promote “peace and tranquility” in the region. Some friction points along the border still remain, however, particularly in Depsang and Demchok. In any case, this disengagement is the de-escalation of a series of frictions and military standoffs that had been going on since May 2020.
In 1962, both countries fought a war over the disputed area, but an agreement has never been reached. Tensions pertaining to this issue began to escalate in early 2020, after India accused its neighbor’s troops of invading the territory New Delhi claims as its own. Washington has been supporting India in this quarrel, and its State Department even accused Beijing of orchestrating the border clashes.
For the US, any increase in Indian-Chinese tensions has always been desirable, as part of the American Indo-Pacific Strategy. Moreover, the US-led QUAD or Quadrilateral Security Dialogue has been described by many as a “new NATO” for the region.
India has thus been in a very complex position, being a member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) which is seen by some experts as a potential counterweight to NATO, and at the same time a QUAD member. It faces tensions on its borders over disputed territories with two nuclear neighbors, namely Pakistan and China.
In any case, even amid serious bilateral contentions, Eurasian nations have found room for cooperation on quite a number of levels. Faithful to its historic pragmatism, New Delhi has managed to maintain close ties with Moscow, even while it has been getting closer and closer to Washington. With Beijing, however, the situation was quite severe.
In May 2020, for example, there were border clashes involving soldiers from both sides. Then, in June 2020, at patrolling point 14, troops from the two powers clashed for six hours. As a result of that, 20 Indian soldiers and 25-40 Chinese ones were killed at the Galwan Valley during this standoff. For a while, the two nuclear powers even seemed to be on the brink of a new war.
However, after May-June’s Indian-Chinese standoff, in September, the Kremlin was already laying the groundwork for a meeting in Moscow which was attended by both the Chinese Foreign Minister and his Indian counterpart. In February 2021, the two Asian countries were already “back to business”, engaged in a number of bilateral investment deals. Moreover, throughout the year 2021, there were discussions about disarmament of troops in Ladakh. In April 2022, Chinese Ambassador to India Sun Weidong stated that both nations should work together towards keeping their bilateral ties “on the right track”, while keeping a “long-term perspective”.
Throughout this period, however, Washington-New Delhi ties grew stronger and stronger, fueled by Indian-Chinese tensions. In late October 2020, both states signed a game-changer defense deal, the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA). This caused concern for many nationalist voices within India, which feared the country could lose part of its control over satellites to America. The very fact that it became part of a military communication network which includes its traditional rival Pakistan (a US ally) was also a point of tension.
In November 2020, during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, India accused the Pakistani authorities in Islamabad of using cross-border terrorism as an instrument of its state policy. At the same event, it also refused to support the Chinese BRI, being in fact the only country amongst the 8 SCO members to do so at that time. A large part of the project passes through Kashmir (claimed by both New Delhi and Islamabad).
Many analysts feared that in the context of a new emerging bipolarity, not to mention the new Cold War, the Hindu power would further strengthen its ties with the United States, as the latter is actively pursuing its policy of dual containment.
However, in spite of BECA, American pressure on India regarding Russia did not work: Moscow is delivering all S-400 systems to India by 2023, despite US sanctions. Both countries are also working on a new payment system for military deals, in a move which boosts the international de-dollarization process. Moreover, both India and China are sending troops to Russia for the Vostok 2022 drills.
Likewise, it would also appear that, border disputes aside, the country has no interest in antagonizing its Chinese neighbor and in fact they could further strengthen cooperation in other areas on a number of levels. Bipolarity looms in the horizon, but, alternatively, an age of multi-alignment and non-alignment might also be emerging.
In this scenario, India plays a somewhat pivotal role. Washington expects “absolute allies”, but increasingly overburdened as it is overextending its power in an effort to contain at once two superpowers (Russia and China), it has no choice but to practice restraint.
Indian nuanced foreign policy has always been pragmatic and multidimensional, and, by all indications, it will remain so, and thus the US cannot count on it for its cold war mentality driven agendas. Last month, Indian foreign minister Jaishankar said the “Asian Century” could only happen when his country joined hands with its Chinese neighbor. A small step towards it might have just been taken – and this in fact could be Washington’s greatest nightmare.
*
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.
Uriel Araujo is a researcher with a focus on international and ethnic conflicts.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
In his earlier pathbreaking book on the great “Covid Pandemic”, The Real Anthony Fauci, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. took on and discredited the major centers of power in American society that were, from the outset, responsible for what has become an unprecedented assault on humanity: Big Pharma, the intelligence apparatus, medical bureaucrats, corporate media, even the Pentagon.
Within this matrix of destructive power – the bearers of “higher immorality”, as C. Wright Mills once put it – Kennedy focused his bristling ire on such despicable public figures as Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Robert Kadlec, Peter Daszak, and Avril Haines. These Strangelovian figures were, in Kennedy’s words, among those “laying the pipe for totalitarianism”.
As trial lawyer for decades, Kennedy took on powerful corporations, holding them accountable for crimes against the environment. He set up the ecological Riverkeepers programs that, since the 1970s, have expanded across the U.S. and the world. In The Real Anthony Fauci he holds accountable a different pack of criminals – those implicated in a global Covid tyranny that has yet to run its full course. Kennedy is now chair of the Children’s Health Defense board, on the front lines of fighting Covid hysteria.
Those Covid targets, of course, richly deserve to be savaged for their wanton transgressions: the brutal lockdowns, unscientific vaccine mandates, masking requirements, school closings, myriad coercive edicts, ongoing propaganda campaigns filled with lies and myths, censorship of dissenting voices, severe punishment of those simply wanting to make their own health choices. Kennedy’s powerful critique, however, did not extend to those at the summits of U. S. governmental power – that is, mainly liberal Democrats who after all orchestrated these horrors and indeed hired Fauci and his gang of medical despots. Kennedy named some names but not all the names that needed to be named, starting with President Joe Biden himself.
In his more polemical new book, A Letter to Liberals, Kennedy moves to correct this problem that stemmed, understandably, from his deep relationship with probably the most iconic of all Democratic party families. Kennedy’s greater eagerness to hold leading Democratic liberals accountable this time must reflect his growing anger over the Covid-fueled deterioration of American politics. He seems to have given the liberalism at the core of his party something approaching a harsh (and much-deserved) farewell, at least for this cycle of Democrats. Any belief-system that so fluidly coexists with corporate oligarchy, political authoritarianism, and policies of social destruction surely deserves an obituary.
Kennedy writes: “This letter is a challenge to my fellow liberals to reexamine the scientific assertions upon which rest the oppressive policies that have savaged the prescriptions of traditional liberalism and the U.S. Constitution”. The litany of draconian (also counter-productive) Democratic responses to Covid have by now thoroughly undermined the most basic premises of liberalism – in this case sustained attacks on virtually every freedom contained in the Bill of Rights, not to mention many others in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. For the U.S. and elsewhere, liberalism today serves mainly as a façade behind which obscene levels of state power and corporate wealth flourish as never before.
In A Letter to Liberals Kennedy brilliantly counters all the fictional narratives used by ruling elites to perpetuate endless crisis and its supposed antidote, expanded governmental power grounded in “new emergencies” and “saving lives”. He carefully documents the massive harms – political, economic, social, personal – with enough clarity to render the text accessible a wide range of readers. Most crucially, Kennedy demonstrates in case after case how the unscientific Covid political regimen (above all its vaccine mandates) has caused far more destruction than any conceivable good that might be claimed by sanctimonious liberal ideologues. Many of these conclusions will be familiar to Global Research readers, yet Kennedy has managed to assemble the most salient information and analysis in one concentrated text.
One sad casualty of the Covid disaster is the death of critical thought among the most highly-educated and seemingly enlightened liberals – a problem extending to the vast majority of progressives and leftists, suddenly bereft of anti-corporate consciousness. One wonders: how could these folks so readily, so quickly, and so totally have fallen in line with all the crude Big Pharma propaganda? How could what passes for a robust liberal intelligentsia have so ritually embraced the continuous flow lies, myths, and fairy-tales?
Kennedy comments that such “blind faith in authority” is a feature of religion and autocracy, not science and democracy even as liberals prattle on about “saving our democracy”. Not only is “blind faith” arbitrarily yielded to those at the highest levels of power, it is yielded to the very worst sectors of that power apparatus, whether Big Pharma, the medical establishment, deep state (CIA, FBI), and corporate media that progressives only yesterday deemed a conduit of corrupt ruling interests. Liberals once upon a time seemed to know about Big Pharma colonization of medicine, government, and social policy, but the arrival of Covid apparently instilled bouts of dementia.
Worse yet, the liberals in charge – from President Joe Biden, the Fauci cabal, and CDC bureaucrats to the phalanx of Democratic governors and local public-health autocrats – have refused to openly discuss any key issues, instead opting to close down, shame, and punish alternative views. Kennedy writes: “Unable to defend the scientific underpinnings of their ideology in debate, liberals rely on book bans and an arsenal of coercive muzzling strategies including deplatforming, delicensing, doxing, gaslighting, defunding, restricting, marginalizing, and vilifying physicians, journalists, and vaccine-injured Americans who complied but now refuse to toe the line.” In American society, Kennedy himself has been among the most vilified targets.
While the ruling Democrats, corporate media, and tech giants regurgitate lie after lie about the efficacy and safety of poorly-tested vaccines, Kennedy brings forth abundant data from many countries – Ireland, Portugal, the UK, South Korea, Vietnam, Tunisia, Nigeria, many others – revealing a sharp rise in Covid deaths immediately after mass vaccination programs. Such information is largely ignored within the corporate media or, when briefly acknowledged, is badly distorted or relegated to the realm of “conspiracy theory”.
Kennedy shows that many nations with extremely low vaccination rates – some more heavily reliant on such medications as HCQ and ivermectin, both demonized in the U.S. – have far lower death rates than such excessively-vaxxed countries as Israel and the U.S. Thus Nigeria has just 1.5 percent of its population vaccinated, yet its Covid death rate is reported at 15 per million. For the U.S., beholden to Dr. Fauci’s goal of maximum jab totals, the Covid death rate stood at 2,995 deaths per million, a staggering 200 times greater than much lesser-developed Nigeria.
In his earlier book, Kennedy demonstrated in great detail how sectors of the ruling elite – Big Pharma, the deep state, Silicon Valley, media outlets, the Pentagon – have been looking to take advantage of global pandemic episodes for years if not decades. Dark Winter 2001 represented one of the first such “events”, referred to by Kennedy as “the spooks and the simulations” that now dominate the mammoth biosecurity complex. Three historical factors are at work here: dramatic increase in the role of Big Pharma within governmental agencies, the media, and medical establishment; steady corporatization of the Democratic Party and resulting decay of liberalism; expanded corporate globalization leading to prospects for a worldwide tyrannical “great reset”.
Kennedy argues that American liberals – and their kindred true-believers around the world – have followed a disastrous path of “orchestrated fear” and “blind trust”, suggesting not only that his Democratic Party has lost its way but easily could, in the wake of Covid, descend further into a cesspool of techno-authoritarianism. Perhaps Kennedy is not ready to concede this prospect, but the Covid outrage has done more than anything to unveil Beltway liberals as representing little more than the high-minded pursuit of wealth and power. They have also taken on the character of a modern War Party. Meanwhile, in looking to silence dissent and crush opposition, the current stratum of liberal Democrats appears to seek something akin to a one-party state – a dictatorial system thriving on permanent crisis.
Modern-day liberals (with plenty of conservative help) have brought to the world one of the worst crimes ever inflicted on humanity – all in the name of “our democracy”, efforts to “protect human lives”, and (for many) to “save the planet”. Protagonists of this barbarism include some of the “best” and most cultivated among Western populations – well-educated, enlightened, progressive liberals, the very same groups cheerleading the Ukraine proxy war against Russia that has brought the world ever closer to nuclear catastrophe. The main culprits ought to be arrested and jailed, their futures scuttled — but alas, in a morally-corrupt order they wind up the beneficiaries of exalted governmental power, corporate privilege, generous incomes, even humanitarian and journalistic awards.
*
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.
Carl Boggs is the author of 25 books on topics ranging from social theory, popular movements, ecological politics, and U.S. foreign/military interventions. One of his most recent books is Drugs, Power, and Politics (Paradigm, 2016).
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
During the early morning hours of August 8, the Florida home of the 45th President of the United States Donald J. Trump at Mar-a-Lago was raided by a team of Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents.
There was much speculation surrounding the raid on his private residence while Trump was away.
Later it was announced that Trump was in possession of classified documents of a sensitive nature which could reasonably jeopardize the national security of the U.S. However, Trump through his lawyers and public speeches denied having the documents saying those requested materials had already been turned over to the national archives.
This was the first time in history that a former U.S. head-of-state has been targeted in an FBI raid let alone threatened with prosecution under federal law. Richard Nixon, the disgraced president who resigned in August 1974 over the attempt to cover up the break in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate building in Washington, D.C., was pardoned by his successor President Gerald R. Ford.
Trump may have anticipated attempts to prosecute him in connection with the [alleged] January 6, 2021 insurrection at the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. Just minutes prior to the attack on the Capitol, Trump and his allies had urged those who were invited to Washington to “stop the steal” of the national presidential elections of 2020.
What has been remarkable are the reports which suggest that Trump could be prosecuted under the 1917 Espionage Act passed and signed under then President Woodrow Wilson. The purpose of the law was to imprison, deport, silence and neutralize critics of the U.S. involvement in World War I.
The former president and his supporters accused President Joe Biden’s Justice Department of conducting a politically motivated prosecution of Trump in order to prevent him from running for office again in 2024. Media reports and documents released indicate that the investigation is centered around the possession by Trump of classified information related to nuclear weapons technology.
Historic Prosecutions Under the Espionage Act
There were many people who spoke out against U.S. involvement in the world’s first imperialist war between 1914-1918. During the first three years (1914-1917) people from various political tendencies opposed any effort to enter the war in Europe.
By 1917, the sentiment among the ruling class and the Wilson administration had shifted to intervention. A draft was imposed and workers, nationally oppressed communities along with other social forces were expected to enthusiastically support the war. See this.
An opinion piece by Jameel Jaffer published in Politico analyzing the character of the 1917 Espionage Act notes the following:
“The Espionage Act is wildly overbroad. We know this from experience. Former President Woodrow Wilson signed the measure into law in 1917 and immediately began using it as an instrument of political repression. During and after the First World War, his administration used the Espionage Act to prosecute thousands of people for legitimate political speech. One of those people was the socialist and labor activist Eugene Debs, who was sentenced to a decade in prison for an anti-war speech that allegedly obstructed military recruitment. (It’s perhaps worth noting, given questions about Trump’s future, that Debs later ran for president from his prison cell.)”
Since the advent of WWI, there have been attempted and successful prosecutions of people under the Espionage Act. Daniel Ellsberg in early 1973 was accused under the same law for making public a Pentagon study which documented the propagation of falsehoods told to the people of the U.S. to maintain public opinion in favor of the Vietnam War.
After being charged, Ellsberg, a military analyst, was acquitted several months later in the failed attempt to send him to prison for 115 years. By the early 1970s it was common knowledge that the Pentagon and the White House were misrepresenting the actual situation in Vietnam and Southeast Asia as a whole. By 1973, most ground troops were taken out of South Vietnam and by April 30, 1975, the revolutionary forces had overrun the imperialist stronghold of Saigon, now known as Ho Chi Minh City.
Even during the Trump presidency several people were prosecuted under the Espionage Act and sentenced to terms in prison. At least five of them gained some notoriety in the mainstream press such Reality Winner, Terry Albury, Joshua Shulte, Daniel Hale and Henry Kyle Frese.
Winner, 26 a contractor with the National Security Agency (NSA) at the time of her indictment in 2017 plead guilty during the trial and was sentenced to five years in federal prison for leaking an NSA document. Albury, an FBI agent who is African American, was prosecuted and sentenced to four years in prison for leaking classified information. Shulte, Hale, and Frese were also sentenced during the Trump administration for leaking classified documents including some pertaining to the Chinese government and its military capabilities.
Two other figures, Julian Assange, an Australian citizen, and Edward Snowden, a former contractor with U.S. intelligence, are still wanted by the current administration. Assange has resisted extradition to the U.S. saying that he could not have a fair trial there. The co-founder of WikiLeaks has obtained and released materials which highlight crimes being committed by successive administrations in Washington. After being granted asylum by the Ecuador government and later having it withdrawn, Assange awaits while in detention further decisions by the British courts on his status.
Snowden is said to be living in the Russian Federation where he has been granted asylum. The former contractor has exposed many crimes which are being carried out by the intelligence services under the supervision of the White House and the Congress.
According to the Intercept, there has been no motivation attributed to Trump’s actions. The documents in the former president’s possession, which are of a classified nature, would only be useful perhaps for monetary compensation from a foreign government.
“Now, Trump has found himself on the other end of an Espionage Act investigation. (President Joe Biden’s Justice Department authorized a search of Mar-a-Lago that cited the Espionage Act in its justification, but no charges against Trump have been filed yet.)
Unlike most of the people charged with the Espionage Act under the Trump administration, except perhaps Schulte, Trump’s theft of classified documents wasn’t aimed at exposing attacks on democracy, shining a light on government atrocities, or adding anything newsworthy to the public discourse.”
Under Section 793 of the Espionage Act Trump could theoretically be sentenced up to ten years in prison. If Trump’s supporters within the Republican Party use this Justice Department investigation and possible prosecution as a rallying cry for their candidates in November during the midterms and in the 2024 primaries and general election, the political atmosphere within the U.S. will become even more tense.
Political Implications of the Raid on Trump’s Residence
Of course, there is a political motivation inspiring the prosecution of Trump because this does take attention away from the failure of the Biden administration and the Congress to address some of the most pressing issues facing the U.S. during this period. Since the beginning of a full blown proxy war between Washington and the Russian Federation on February 24, unprecedented sanctions have been leveled at Moscow which are in effect weakening U.S. allies in Europe who are members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
The inflationary spiral is not limited to the U.S. in the form of rising food prices, gasoline, heating and cooling costs, rents and other commodities. In the European Union (EU) states a real threat of a cold winter has already been projected by French President Emmanuel Macron.
It is highly unlikely that the situation will improve until there is some resolution to the Ukraine war. Yet the provocations continue in the Asia Pacific where the Biden administration is deliberately inflaming tensions with the People’s Republic of China.
Whether Trump is prosecuted under the Espionage Act or some other federal law, will not determine the outcome of the situation involving Russia and Ukraine. The ever-expanding military budget to fund the war in Ukraine and a heightening of tensions with Beijing, will continue to take away the much-needed resources to feed, clothe, house, transport and educate millions of people in the U.S.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Abayomi Azikiwe is the editor of the Pan-African News Wire. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The reason health officials don’t want individual vaccine vials examined by independent scientists is because the vials are all different — and the mRNA in the shots is not intact
For an effective mRNA product, the mRNA integrity needs to be 100%, meaning all the RNA must be intact. Considering how ineffective the jabs are, it seems fair to question whether lack of mRNA integrity might be to blame
Fragmented RNA could potentially also be hazardous to health by generating incomplete spike proteins. While we do not know if incomplete spike proteins are dangerous, it’s possible they might contribute to cellular stress
The “bad batch” phenomenon may also be indicative of quality problems. Independent investigations have revealed that some lots of the shots are associated with very severe side effects and death, whereas other lots have very few or no adverse events associated with their use
However, the fact that “hot” lots are being released in a coordinated fashion suggests vaccine makers may in fact be doing intentional lethal-dose testing on the public, and that these “bad batches” are not merely the result of intermittently poor manufacturing
*
A 14-minute video (above) that has been overlooked for nearly two years has now resurfaced, exposing stunning information about the COVID-19 jabs and why health officials don’t want individual vaccine vials examined by independent scientists.
The reason, it turns out, is because the vials are all different — and the mRNA in the shots “is not intact.” Both of these pose potentially serious problems. In an August 31, 2022, Substack article, Steve Kirsch explains:1
“Even if you are getting 100% intact mRNA which would be really rare, you’re still not getting anything that resembles the virus. So the efficacy as far as PROTECTING you will be next to nothing.
However, what it will do very effectively, if you got reasonably intact mRNA, is to cause you significant harm. You are playing a game of chance with your immune system and what is in the bottle.”
The video notes that members of the European Parliament were only allowed to read the contracts with the drug makers after they’d been heavily redacted. Why the heavy-handed secrecy, even toward legislators?
Leaked Documents Reveal Serious Quality Issues
The finding that the mRNA in the shots was of questionable quality was revealed in a BMJ feature investigation article2 published in March 2021. As explained by the author, journalist Serena Tinari, cyber attackers retrieved more than 40 megabytes of Pfizer COVID jab data from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in December 2020.
The hacked data was subsequently sent to journalists and academics worldwide. It was also published on the dark web. Some of the documents show European regulators had significant concerns over the lack of intact mRNA in the commercial batches sampled.
Compared to the clinical batches, i.e., the shots used in the clinical trial, 55% to 78% of the commercial shots had “a significant difference in % RNA integrity/truncated species.”
In one email, dated November 23, 2020, a high-ranking EMA official noted that the commercial batches failed to meet expected specifications, and that the implications of this RNA integrity loss were unclear. In response to the findings, the EMA sent a list of questions and concerns to Pfizer.
While we do not know if and how the EMA’s concerns were actually addressed and corrected, the EMA authorized Pfizer’s COVID jab December 21, 2020. According to its public assessment report, “the quality of this medicinal product, submitted in the emergency context of the current (COVID-19) pandemic, is considered to be sufficiently consistent and acceptable.”
Similarly, Health Canada told The BMJ that “changes were made in their processes to ensure that the integrity was improved and brought in line with what was seen for clinical trial batches.” The EMA further tried to deflect concern by claiming some of the leaked documents had been doctored. As reported by The BMJ:3
“EMA says the leaked information was partially doctored, explaining in a statement that ‘whilst individual emails are authentic, data from different users were selected and aggregated, screenshots from multiple folders and mailboxes have been created, and additional titles were added by the perpetrators.’”
Intact mRNA Is Essential to Its Effectiveness
Curiously, when The BMJ asked Pfizer, Moderna, CureVac and several regulators to specify the percentage of mRNA integrity considered acceptable, none replied with specifics.
According to the British Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, the FDA and Health Canada, the specification limit on RNA integrity is “commercially confidential.” What we do know — and the EMA has acknowledged — is that intact mRNA is essential for efficacy. As noted by The BMJ:4
“… the documents offer the broader medical community a chance to reflect on the complexities of quality assurance for novel mRNA vaccines, which include everything from the quantification and integrity of mRNA and carrier lipids to measuring the distribution of particle sizes and encapsulation efficiency.
Of particular concern is RNA instability, one of the most important variables relevant to all mRNA vaccines that has thus far received scant attention in the clinical community …
RNA instability is one of the biggest hurdles for researchers developing nucleic acid based vaccines. It is the primary reason for the technology’s stringent cold chain requirements and has been addressed by encapsulating the mRNA in lipid nanoparticles.
‘The complete, intact mRNA molecule is essential to its potency as a vaccine,’ professor of biopharmaceutics Daan J.A. Crommelin and colleagues wrote in a review article in The Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences late last year.
‘Even a minor degradation reaction, anywhere along a mRNA strand, can severely slow or stop proper translation performance of that strand and thus result in the incomplete expression of the target antigen.’”
For an effective product, mRNA integrity needs to be 100%. Considering how ineffective the jabs are, it seems fair to question whether lack of mRNA integrity might be to blame. We also do not know whether nonintact mRNA might be harmful.
As noted by Kirsch,5 “Unstable mRNA means the spike protein … cold collapse, making the whole process useless to support immunity, but still dangerous in terms of damage to cells. So, you get all the risk and no benefit.”
While our public health agencies claim fragmented RNA poses no health risk, just how do they know that? The leaked documents revealed they specifically did not have an answer to that question, and no research into the matter has been published, that I’m aware of.
Fragmented RNA May Produce Incomplete Spike Proteins
In May 2021, Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at MIT for over five decades, published an excellent paper6 in which she highlighted several potential dangers of the COVID jabs, including the unknown hazard of injecting fragmented RNA. That same month, I interviewed her about her concerns. You can find that interview in “COVID Vaccines May Bring Avalanche of Neurological Disease.” In her paper, Seneff noted:7
“The EMA Public Assessment Report … describes in detail a review of the [Pfizer] manufacturing process … One concerning revelation is the presence of ‘fragmented species’ of RNA in the injection solution. These are RNA fragments resulting from early termination of the process of transcription from the DNA template.
These fragments, if translated by the cell following injection, would generate incomplete spike proteins, again resulting in altered and unpredictable three-dimensional structure and a physiological impact that is at best neutral and at worst detrimental to cellular functioning.
There were considerably more of these fragmented forms of RNA found in the commercially manufactured products than in the products used in clinical trials. The latter were produced via a much more tightly controlled manufacturing process …
While we are not asserting that non-spike proteins generated from fragmented RNA would be misfolded or otherwise pathological, we believe they would at least contribute to the cellular stress that promotes prion-associated conformational changes in the spike protein that is present.”
Kirsch points out that the EMA also expressed concern over visible particles in the vials, which The BMJ did not follow up on. “Is it still a problem?” Kirsch asks. That’s a good question, and the answer is probably yes.
But even worse is that we have absolutely no idea what these incomplete spike proteins are doing, none, zero, nada. It has never been directly examined. For that matter efforts to evaluate, and complications of the jab, have been consciously suppressed as have following simple metrics such as increases in all-cause mortality.
Deaths Dismissed and Side Effects Misclassified
The leaked EMA documents also showed that Pfizer dismissed all deaths in its trial as “unrelated to the vaccine,” even though no proper investigation was ever conducted. We now have additional evidence of this — just like the court-ordered FOIA documents showed what Pfizer did in their U.S. trials. At least they are consistent in implementing their fraud.
As reported by Children’s Health Defense (CHD) back in June 2022, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) documents, released by court-order, reveal Pfizer classified nearly all severe reactions in its trials as unrelated to the shot, even in cases where the health problems in question are extremely difficult to dismiss as anything other than a direct effect of the shot:8
“The latest release by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine documents9 reveals numerous instances of participants who sustained severe adverse events during Phase 3 trials. Some of these participants withdrew from the trials, some were dropped and some died …
The CRFs [case report forms] included in this month’s documents contain often vague explanations of the specific symptoms experienced by the trial participants. They also reveal a trend of classifying almost all adverse events — and in particular severe adverse events (SAEs) — as being ‘not related’ to the vaccine …
The many serious adverse events — and several deaths — recorded during the Phase 3 trials are also apparent in a separate, massive document10 exceeding 2,500 pages, cataloging such adverse events.
This document lists a wide range of adverse events suffered by trial participants classified as toxicity level 4 — the highest and most serious such level. However, not one of the level 4 (most severe) adverse events listed in this particular document is classified as being related to the vaccination.”
As just one example,11 a teenage girl got the shot September 11, 2020, and in mid-November 2020 was diagnosed with right lower extremity deep vein thrombosis, which we now know is a potential side effect of the jab. According to the CFR, her condition was due to a bone fracture that occurred before the date of her injection — a determination that seems questionable at best.
What’s the Cause Behind the ‘Bad Batch’ Phenomenon?
The “bad batch” phenomenon may also be indicative of quality problems. Independent investigations have revealed that some lots of the shots are associated with very severe side effects and death, whereas other lots have very few or no adverse events associated with their use.
According to howbadismybatch.com, a site that matches up vaccine lot codes with reports in the VAERS system, approximately 5% of the lots are responsible for 90% of all adverse reactions. Some of these batches have 50 times the number of deaths and disabilities associated with them, compared to other lots.12
Another website that basically does the same thing is TheEagle’s VAERS Dashboard. A video explaining how to use the dashboard can be found on Bitchute.13
However, an even deeper dive into this data suggests random quality issues are not the problem. In the video above, Reiner Fuellmich, cofounder of the German Corona Investigative Committee, and Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a former member of the German parliament, discuss this “smoking gun” evidence.
According to Fuellmich and Wodarg, the lot-dependent data suggests vaccine makers may be conducting secret experiments within the larger public trial. In other words, they appear to be doing lethal-dose testing on the public. The tipoff that these “hot” batches are not caused by intermittent poor manufacturing is the fact that they’re being released in a coordinated fashion.
Wodarg argues that the evidence for this is very clear from the data. Basically, the vaccine manufacturers are coordinating their lethal-dose experiments so that they’re not all releasing their most toxic lots at the same time, or in the same areas. This avoids detection through clustering.
New Boosters Will Not Undergo Additional Testing
Considering the multitude of open questions surrounding the safety of the original COVID shots, the fact that new, reformulated boosters will not require any additional testing whatsoever is beyond disturbing.
In the “Friday Roundtable” video above, Dr. Meryl Nass, Toby Rogers, Ph.D., Aimee Villella McBride, Polly Tommey and Brian Hooker, Ph.D., discuss the FDA’s decision to allow vaccine makers to reformulate their COVID shots without additional testing, in perpetuity.
As noted by Rogers, Pfizer’s bivalent booster against Omicron variants BA.4 and BA.5 was tested on a total of eight mice, and only to check antibody levels. Moderna also used mice to ascertain antibody responses, but have not disclosed the number of mice used.
That’s the extent to which these shots were tested. The original COVID jabs are the most dangerous drugs ever released to the public, and these newer boosters may turn out to be even worse.
As explained by Rogers, the shots “imprint” your immune system to respond only to the antigen in the shot, while simultaneously impairing your immune system so that it’s less capable of protecting you against other pathogens. Another term for this process is “original antigenic sin.” It essentially explains why those are jabbed are getting infected and sicker than those who avoided the jabs.
Rogers predicts we’ll be faced with a winter of severe illness and death among those who have gotten the jabs. All the rest of us can do is stand back, avoid the shots at all cost and “let the mainstream system self-destruct.” Hopefully, he’s correct in his other prediction, which is that the vast majority of Americans will reject these boosters.
*
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.
Featured image: A hand holding an mRNA vaccine vial. (Spencer Davis / Unsplash)
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Have you ever wondered how come that people, especially young people, almost in uniformity walk around in torn jeans? This includes highly educated university students and graduates. They have become lasting fashion models over the past two decades – and the fashion prevails. To the point that people pay more for ripped and used-looking pants than for new ones. Common sense has totally disappeared from the mainstream.
There are lots of every-day trend-setting facets, indoctrinated by media and propaganda – not only for commercial purposes, but for reasons of subtle but targeted mind-bending.
“Their” plot is brilliant. Gradually forging people’s minds into one direction, one template – is needed for eventually achieving total control.
Another little example, you may or may not know about: Car colors. Have you noticed, during the past two decades or so, the vast majority of cars – actually about 90% to 95% – are either black or white, or shades in between? All with the same purpose. We, the people, ought to think in a black and white pattern.
Some 15 years ago, responding to my remark that he had only black and white cars in his lot, a car dealer smiled and said, yes, that’s the norm. He added that about 90% or more of all the cars in Europe and the US (and maybe elsewhere) were black or white or shaded in between. He noted, this was done on purpose to influence people’s thinking. I was flabbergasted. But then observing it myself and today connecting the dots – it all makes sense. Brilliant. No coincidence.
Things seem to be changing a bit, as you may see now, more colorful cars are decorating our western road networks. But by far not enough. Will it last? Will people’s minds be open for colors? For a kind of societal “Color Revolution”?
Or is it just a little time-bound relief, making believe we actually have a choice.
What better occasion than the 21st Anniversary of 9/11 (2001), the wanton collapse of the NYC Twin Towers, to reflect on the endless lies, deceptions and targeted mind manipulation humanity has been exposed to for the last at least 100 years. All with the intent to enslave the population, control the people and reduce the population, so that the benefits and bounty of our generous Mother Earth may be shared among just a small elite – and their insect-eating slaves.
The rest of the surviving population serving the same elitist people and financial corporate organizations – becoming confined, physically and mentally, and digitized transhumans that obey 5G-emitted signals.
Dr. Mike Yeadon, former Pfizer Vice President and Pfizer’s Director of Research appeals to us, the People, to react now, before it is unretrievably too late, namely when this coming Global Northern winter 2022 / 2023 the last fatal crackdown on humanity may take place. Among other calamities, you may expect geoengineered freezing, famine, by artificially created energy and food shortages, blackouts, communication interruptions, lockdowns for a myriad of reasons, police patrolled streets and urban warfare to suppress protest movement – and more.
But be not afraid – just aware. And being aware should give us the power NOW to prevent the Reset bulldozer from implementing its agenda.
Dr. Yeadon calls on all people to imagine the unimaginable, namely that we have been and continue to be betrayed by our governments which work for the obscure all-controlling Cult Organization.
He warns us and recommends that we “experimentally” adopt the position that our government is actively working to harm us, to dismantle modern society and enslave all people in a digitally controlled totalitarian world. If we accept this realty, all we have been living through the last 2 ½ years makes sense and fits together. There are No coincidences.
We are living under a targeted mind manipulation, leading to total mind-control. Key instruments are:
(i) lying politicians, whom we trust since we (believe) having elected them, and since they are paid by our taxes;
(ii) the bought, 24/7 indoctrinating media, 90% of which belong to five huge international media corporations, all pulling on the same string, all funded by the same corporate finance giants;
(iii) fashion – yes, fashion – and imposed lifestyle trends, and
(iv) ever newly invented fear campaigns, or “invisible non-existent viruses” – and
(v) the newest announced food and energy shortages, from where – they say – stems the astronomical inflation, for which to combat, societies’ debts – yours and mine – need to be charged higher interest rates.
Anything goes, lie after miserable lie, and people buy it. We know; however, the purpose is the contrary, namely leading to the ruin and collapse of western industry and civilization.
Who is to blame for it all? Of course, Russia-Russia-Russia, or rather President Putin. Another flagrant lie.
All is made in the US of A and in their vassal-Continent, called Europe; by bought, compromised and unelected criminal politicians, who enjoy wielding their dictatorial power over people.
People! Wake up to reality, before it is too late. There is not much time left.
You are also being sold a “Green Agenda” – supposedly preventing man-made climate change.
Be aware: Carbon as well as CO2 is a life support line. Without CO2, there are no trees, no plants, no life.
Today’s Green is yesterday’s Brown.
We are being lied to, that man-made CO2 is destroying our planet. We are drifting ever faster into a total-control, digital Fascist One World Order (OWO). Globalization is taking hold as we are doing nothing against it, and tacitly letting it happen.
Solidarity is out of the window, as the “Dark Cult Masters” invent ever new means to divide us, divide society, countries, political parties and even families.
Yes, climate change is man-made – but its not what you are made to believe. It’s called “geoengineering” – highly sophisticated weather manipulation. The kind that brought us in the Global North, in the summer of 2022 extreme heat waves and drought spells, never seen before in recorded history, destroying food crops, infrastructure, and outright killing livestock and vulnerable people.
Or, alternatively – extreme flash floods, never-heard-of catastrophic monsoon rains, also destroying agriculture, infrastructure and bringing death. See the case of Pakistan.
Geoengineering is amply documented. “Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) constitute instruments of “weather warfare”. They are an integral part of the US military arsenal:
“Weather modification will become a part of domestic and international security and could be done unilaterally… It could have offensive and defensive applications and even be used for deterrence purposes. The ability to generate precipitation, fog and storms on earth or to modify space weather… and the production of artificial weather all are a part of an integrated set of [military] technologies.”
Targeted mind manipulation – actions that make you believe what is not, or what is different from the visible, from the going narrative – is more than 100 years old. It’s solidly implanted in our western world’s minds.
Key watershed moments of this Dark Cult campaign of treason, include
1. Federal Reserve Act 1913 – laying the groundwork for the US dollar to become fiat money, unrelated to the US-economy, to be produced at will and as needed – becoming the basis for western currencies debt-economies, with the banking system becoming ever more dominant – eventually digitally controlling YOUR income, your behavior, through digitally manipulated currencies, spendable according to YOUR behavior. – If not stopped NOW, western monetary systems are soon to become instruments to enslave us, the Common People.
2. The Cold War, end of WWII – a targeted fear campaign against communism:The Soviets are coming, the Soviets are coming – be aware, be scared – we must contain them. The Berlin Wall that was translating into the term, the Iron Curtain, preventing Soviets’ ideas from spilling over into the freedom loving democracies of the west.
All the while, the Soviet Union, defeating Hitler’s Third Reich and winning WWII for the West, was so badly damaged by the war that they could never, even if they wanted to (they never had expansionist plans) be a threat to the armed-to-the-teeth west. The Cold War was a farce, another miserable lie, paveing the way to the next Watershed Moment in the war against humanity.
3. Wanton Destruction of the Soviet Union, leading the way to a globalized One World Order (OWO). We are not there yet, and indications are that an ever-greater majority of people and countries are moving away from globalization; away from western economic and monetary systems, back to national sovereignty, and towards the East – opting for eastern associations, such as the China-Russia led Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) – which by now encompasses about half the world’s population, controlling about a third of world-GDP.
4. 9/11 (2001) – marking the beginning of the end of freedom, as we thought we knew it – imposing the long-before-planned Patriot Act – depriving Americans of up to 90% of their civil and human rights, as the application of the Patriot Act supposes a State of Emergency and can be applied at will, by Presidential Decree or Congressional decision. Most Americans are still unaware to what extent their rights have been curtailed by the Patriot Act which needed an event like 9/11 to come to fruition. Europe followed suit by an ever more tyrannical – and it must be repeated – UNELECTED European Commission, that pretends calling the shots over 500 million Europeans; and finally,
5. The Great Reset, alias UN Agenda 2030 – the ultimate tightening of the screws around societies and individuals’ necks, through an intense fear campaign, based on a fake, never isolated virus, denigrating and dangerous forced mask-wearing, social distancing – separating people from each other, lockdowns, work from home – travel restrictions, keeping people in place – reducing contacts as much as possible and gradually ever more restricting measures are being imposed, including a digital all-encompassing, QR-code based (or similar) ID – the final enslavement of humanity.
This, paired by a vaxx-campaign of an experimental and poisonous mRNA injection that has so far led to the death of millions of people, contributing significantly to one of the Great Reset’s goals, massive population reduction (40% excess deaths were recorded by insurance companies since the beginning of the vaxx-campaign, mid-December 2020); artificially creating food and energy shortages with all their ramifications, famine, starvation, death; destroying what’s left of western economies, moving the bankrupted assets to the elite-billionaires and the financial giants, like BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street and other Wall Street icons.
These preliminaries are paving the way to 5G-powered digitization of everything, including the human mind, converting surviving humans into “transhumans” – following Klaus Schwab’s (WEF CEO) dream: Owning nothing but being happy.
We are not there yet. But time is short.
Togetherness, initiated by a spiritual separation from the Dark Cult, from dictate and tyranny that emanates from the World Economic Forum (WEF) – and its colossal money masters; separating ourselves as societies from our current governments and monetary systems; initiating parallel societies and monetary schemes.
If we grasp the spirit of togetherness, rather than each one for himself, dynamics of new ideas may make this endeavor come through as a societal Reset, made by the People for the People.
*
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.
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also is a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
I am frequently asked by my friends and acquaintances in what I now call the “Resistance” – those who, like myself, fight for some common sense about human liberty and the practice of medicine during the Corona War in the Age of Covid – how we can ‘wake people up’. How we can get fellow New Zealanders to recognize that the Covid jab that has been pushed upon us is actually dangerous and unnecessary, how we can get them to understand that masking and anti-social distancing are tools for control, how we can get them to understand that the “vax apartheid” system that prevailed, under so-called emergency Covid legislation, was both immoral and unfounded in rationality.
It’s a good question. I know from my work as a psychoanalyst that simply telling someone what to think or what to do never did any good. Oh, occasionally a strong directive might persuade someone momentarily, but in the long run insight and reflection and critical thinking are modes that must be autonomously engaged. We often said, in my profession, that the goal of analysis was self-analysis, and so it is. Human beings have responsibilities and they have choices, and they may indeed abrogate such responsibilities and choices when, for example, a trusted State, through its mainstream media propaganda mouthpieces, issues a diktat; but this kind of uncritical submission is hardly worthy of a human being who aspires to any sort of liberty.
I have furthermore discovered that people who, I thought, were quite reasonable and intelligent – some of whom have been close friends for many decades –behaved, when it came to all things Covid, like a closed door.
One very dear friend “divorced” me some eight months ago when he found my positions on natural immunity, early treatment, the right to assemble and exercise freedom, etc., to have been too much. “You’ve gone over to the dark side,” he said, “I can never talk to you again.” Last week this friend called me, mildly tipsy, and we had a rapprochement, and I said to him that I thought our friendship should transcend differences of opinion, given the close intertwined ties between our families over four decades, and I told him furthermore that I was the same person I had been when we first became friends: a “constitutionalist” – meaning that I regarded the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and Bill of Rights as exceptional political documents because of their acknowledgment that life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were foundational; and that I didn’t read, watch or listen to mainstream media.
The second point caught his attention, drunk though he may have been, because I know this particular fellow to be addicted to these media. Whenever I have visited him at his spacious ranch-home in the Southwest, the Big Screen was on from dawn until midnight: ABC, CNN, CBS, MSNBC et al. And I realised quite clearly that his reality was the “reality” that had been fed to him over many many years.
No, he is not psychotic, and no, he is not part of any “formation”: he has simply put complete faith and trust into his venerable communication authorities, so much so that to deviate even a small degree from their message would be unthinkable.
Perhaps the strength of his ties of friendship to me might allow him to entertain a different perspective, over time, but so far this has not been the case, certainly not as long as his ongoing reality merely mirrors what those immense paternalistic media friends have been portraying to him about lockdowns, masks, jabs, about the requirement to forego unalienable rights and, most of all, about fear.
The campaign to make everyone afraid has been immensely successful, one must admit. And in doing so it has allowed for a certain kind of line to be drawn, a line between those who lust for safety, and those who wish to live. Covid has, in the two and a half years of the Corona War, separated us very clearly. Those who have resisted the Siren song of the State are relatively few, though now growing in number. Those who have swallowed the Grand Deception are more formally united, are strengthened in their numbers by fear, are closed to debate and callous towards the travails of those who differ. They here in New Zealand willingly embraced the apartheid system that created a two-tiered society: the jabbed and the unjabbed. If the unjabbed lost their jobs, if the unjabbed couldn’t get a haircut or go to a gym or a theatre, that was their “choice.”
Yes, we must acknowledge the presence and potential for evil in all of us, and we must also acknowledge the selfishness of individuals who, to save their own skins have reneged on their principles and betrayed themselves.
I am alluding here to overwhelming majority of physicians who out of fear and selfishness have failed to be real physicians when they abdicated their duty to the Hippocratic oath, informed consent and individualized medical treatment.
Yes, I understand, they would have come under attack by a corrupt Medical Council (under the thumb of the Federation of State Medical Boards) and Ministry of Health; yes, they would have had their licences to practice suspended; yes, they would have been fired from their jobs for exercising common sense and their right to choose what to allow into their bodies – at least initially.
But imagine if they simply stood up en masse for what was right. Would a totalitarian Government have dared to persecute us all? Would even a quisling organisation like the Medical Council have tried to investigate thousands instead of the dozens of doctors who spoke out? Would the Prime Minister of New Zealand have insisted on a sweetheart deal with a disreputable and unscrupulous pharmaceutical outfit like Pfizer and suppressed inexpensive and effective treatments for a trumped-up illness? Would the government have had the audacity NOT to mandate autopsies for those who died after having received the jab, and NOT to account for and fully investigate adverse events? Would, in fact, this entire manufactured nightmare scenario have been allowed to unfold as it has, with its concomitant destruction of livelihoods, businesses, and societal fabric?
With respect to the opening of stubbornly closed Covid minds, I think there are two keys.
To show, by example, that the fear they assume and have been assaulted into believing is baseless. No amount of talking, reasoning, lecturing, dictating, cajoling or persuading will be able to achieve anything in comparison to a live demonstration of calm fearlessness.
To encourage, once an attitude of questioning has been engendered, a disavowal of mainstream media sources. In our vast proliferative decentralized realm of the internet one may occasionally lose one’s way, but one is far more likely to arrive at truth.
The Corona War is a means to an even greater and more terrifying end, as many of us know, with Climate Change restrictions and Digital IDs and Total Surveillance on the near horizon, if the New World Order of the World Economic Forum is realized. And it will be realized if individuals sell their birthright for a bowl of potage. Many naively and unthinkingly follow the State’s directives; but many too know better and go along because they are both selfish and afraid.
I like to think the good in us outweighs the propensity for evil, and that the Covidian selfishness that has been so prominent is nourished more by fear. If that’s the case, we have a fighting chance.
*
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.
Featured image is from OneWorld
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
A team of nine experts from Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and other top universities has published paradigm-shifting research about the efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines and why mandating vaccines for college students is unethical.
This 50-page study, which was published on The Social Science Research Network at the end of August, analyzed CDC and industry-sponsored data on vaccine adverse events, and concluded that mandates for COVID-19 boosters for young people may cause 18 to 98 actual serious adverse events for each COVID-19 infection-related hospitalization theoretically prevented.
The paper is co-authored by Dr. Stefan Baral, an epidemiology professor at Johns Hopkins University; surgeon Martin Adel Makary, M.D., a professor at Johns Hopkins known for his books exposing medical malfeasance, including “Unaccountable: What Hospitals Won’t Tell You and How Transparency Can Revolutionize Heath Care”; and Dr. Vinay Prasad, a hematologist-oncologist, who is a professor in the UCSF Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, as well as the author of over 350 academic and peer-reviewed articles.
But among this team of high-profile international experts who authored this paper, perhaps the most notable is Salmaan Keshavjee, M.D., Ph.D., current Director of the Harvard Medical School Center for Global Health Delivery, and professor of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Keshavjee has also worked extensively with Partners In Health, a Boston-based non-profit co-founded by the late Dr. Paul Farmer, on treating drug-resistant tuberculosis, according to his online biography.
Risking Disenrollment
As the study pointed out, students at universities in America, Canada, and Mexico are being told they must have a third dose of the vaccines against COVID-19 or be disenrolled. Unvaccinated high school students who are just starting college are also being told the COVID-19 vaccines are “mandatory” for attendance.
These mandates are widespread. There are currently 15 states which continue to honor philosophical (personal belief) exemptions, and 44 states and Washington, D.C. allow religious exemptions to vaccines. But even in these states, private universities are telling parents they will not accept state-recognized vaccine exemptions.
Based on personal interviews with some half a dozen families, The Epoch Times has learned that administrators at some colleges and universities are informing students that they have their own university-employed medical teams to scrutinize the medical exemptions submitted by students and signed by private doctors. These doctors, families are being told, will decide whether the health reasons given are medically valid.
5 Ethical Arguments Against Mandated Boosters
Though rarely reported on in the mainstream media, COVID-19 vaccine boosters have been generating a lot of controversy.
While some countries are quietly compensating people for devastating vaccine injuries, and other countries are limiting COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, the United States is now recommending children 12 and older get Pfizer-BioNTech’s Omicron-specific booster, and young adults over the age of 18 get Moderna’s updated shot.
Against a backdrop of confusing and often changing public health recommendations and booster fatigue, the authors of this new paper argue that university booster mandates are unethical. They give five specific reasons for this bold claim:
1) Lack of policymaking transparency. The scientists pointed out that no formal and scientifically rigorous risk-benefit analysis of whether boosters are helpful in preventing severe infections and hospitalizations exists for young adults.
2) Expected harm. A look at the currently available data shows that mandates will result in what the authors call a “net expected harm” to young people. This expected harm will exceed the potential benefit from the boosters.
3) Lack of efficacy. The vaccines have not effectively prevented transmission of COVID-19. Given how poorly they work—the authors call this “modest and transient effectiveness”—the expected harms caused by the boosters likely outweigh any benefits to public health.
4) No recourse for vaccine-injured young adults. Forcing vaccination as a prerequisite to attend college is especially problematic because young people injured by these vaccines will likely not be able to receive compensation for these injuries.
5) Harm to society. Mandates, the authors insisted, ostracize unvaccinated young adults, excluding them from education and university employment opportunities. Coerced vaccination entails “major infringements to free choice of occupation and freedom of association,” the scientists wrote, especially when “mandates are not supported by compelling public health justification.”
The consequences of non-compliance include being unenrolled, losing internet privileges, losing access to the gym and other athletic facilities, and being kicked out of campus housing, among other things. These punitive approaches, according to the authors, have resulted in unnecessary psychosocial stress, reputation damage, loss of income, and fear of being deported, to name just a few.
22,000 to 30,000 Previously Unaffected Young Adults Must be Vaccinated to Prevent Just 1 Hospitalization
The lack of effectiveness of the vaccines is a major concern to these researchers. Based on their analysis of the public data provided to the CDC, they estimated that between 22,000 and 30,000 previously uninfected young adults would need to be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent just a single hospitalization.
However, this estimate does not take into account the protection conferred by a previous infection. So, the authors insisted, “this should be considered a conservative and optimistic assessment of benefit.”
In other words, the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 are essentially useless.
Mandated Booster Shots Cause More Harm Than Good
But the documented lack of efficacy is only part of the problem. The researchers further found that per every one COVID-19 hospitalization prevented in young adults who had not previously been infected with COVID-19, the data show that 18 to 98 “serious adverse events” will be caused by the vaccinations themselves.
These events include up to three times as many booster-associated myocarditis in young men than hospitalizations prevented, and as many as 3,234 cases of other side effects so serious that they interfere with normal daily activities.
At a regional hospital in South Carolina, the desk clerk sported a button that read: “I’m Vaccinated Against COVID-19” with a big black check mark on it.
“What about the boosters?” a hospital visitor asked. “It’s starting to seem like we need too many shots.”
“It does seem like a lot,” the clerk agreed. “It’s hard to know what to do.” But she did have some advice for the visitor: “Just keep reading and educating yourself, so you can make an informed decision.”
This new paper is essential reading for anyone trying to decide if they need more vaccines. The authors concluded their study with a call to action. Policymakers must stop mandates for young adults immediately, be sure that those who have already been injured by these vaccines are compensated for the suffering caused by mandates, and openly conduct and share the results of risk-benefit analyses of the vaccines for various age groups.
These measures are necessary, the authors argued, to “begin what will be a long process of rebuilding trust in public health.”
May the Force Be With Brave Scientists
The two co-first authors, Dr. Kevin Bardosh and Allison Krug, both thanked their families for supporting them to “publicly debate Covid-19 vaccine mandates” in the acknowledgments section of the paper.
As we wrote in May, an increasing number of scientists and medical doctors are speaking out about the dubious efficacy and disturbing safety issuessurrounding these fast-tracked COVID-19 vaccines. They do so fully aware of the personal and professional risks involved. They deserve our encouragement and support.
*
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.
Jennifer Margulis, Ph.D., is an award-winning journalist and author of “Your Baby, Your Way: Taking Charge of Your Pregnancy, Childbirth, and Parenting Decisions for a Happier, Healthier Family.” A Fulbright awardee and mother of four, she has worked on a child survival campaign in West Africa, advocated for an end to child slavery in Pakistan on prime-time TV in France, and taught post-colonial literature to non-traditional students in inner-city Atlanta. Learn more about her at JenniferMargulis.net
Joe Wang, Ph.D., was a Molecular Biologist with more than 10 years of experience in the vaccine industry. He is now the president of New Tang Dynasty TV (Canada), and a columnist for the Epoch Times.
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
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The day after the events of Sept. 11, 2001, the United States demanded that NATO members follow Article 5 and join it in retribution for the attacks in New York and Washington, D.C. While it came to be known that the US State Department had written a letter in August, 2001, claiming that the US military would be in Afghanistan by the following October, the questions of “why Afghanistan?” and “why October?” were not closely examined.
There were no “hijackers” from Afghanistan and the Taliban had immediately been amenable to extraditing Osama bin Laden (who denied responsibility for 9/11); ultimately, the FBI found no evidence of bin Laden’s involvement. Although the US had been negotiating a gas route through Afghanistan with the Taliban until August, 2001, the lack of success was not considered that significant. And why the rush to invade Afghanistan before any investigation into 9/11 could be carried out?
Nafeez Ahmed, in his stunning Part II of “How the CIA made Google“: “Inside the secret network behind mass surveillance, endless war, and Skynet“, connects the dots through President George W. Bush’s energy policy: specifically, Vice President Dick Cheney’s relationship with Enron and Ken Lay, variously CEO or Chairman of Enron.
President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney’s administration came to office in 2001, in the middle of a California energy crisis which had caused a 10-fold rise in energy costs (largely due to Enron!). Bush claimed that the energy situation would be his administration’s top priority. Dick Cheney became chairman of a White House Energy Task Force, the “National Energy Policy Development Group”, which was to formulate national policy to deal with the energy crisis.
The “National Energy Task Force” held secret meetings that set in motion not only U.S. energy policy but also foreign and military policy, specifically for Iraq and Afghanistan. The long-sought transcripts of Dick Cheney’s meeting with Ken Lay and other Enron officials have never been made public, but it was clear that Lay’s vision of a TAPI pipeline — from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan, Pakistan and India — that the US would control became a key part of the government’s policy. As Ahmed noted: “ensuring the flow of cheap gas to India via the Trans-Afghan pipeline [became] a matter of US ‘national security.’”
The problem became Enron’s financial stability. Enron had invested $3 billion in the Dabhol plant in India, which India did not want to complete because it was uneconomical. The US government tried to help Enron by pressuring India to complete the Dabhol plant: pressure that would continue until early November, 2001. In June, 2001, however, the construction on the Dabhol power plant was shut down because the Trans-Afghan pipeline plan fell through. The failure of the $3 billion Dabhol project threatened Enron’s financial stability; Ken Lay informed the Bush administration that month that Enron was in trouble. It appears that by the next month, the administration started to look into invading Afghanistan.
That August, US officials were still trying desperately to salvage the Afghan pipeline route by negotiating with the Taliban; if the Taliban were able to secure the pipeline route through Afghanistan, the US promised to recognize the Taliban as the official Afghan government. The US reportedly told the Taliban, “We will either make you very rich or we will destroy you.” The Taliban faced two major problems, however. Firstly, Afghanistan would not benefit from the pipeline because it was not to access the gas going through its country. More importantly, the Taliban did not control Afghanistan and they had no way of being able to secure the route through their country.
On August 15th, an Enron lobbyist informed White House economic advisor Robert McNally that Enron was facing a financial crisis that could cripple American energy markets. That month, US officials claimed that the US would invade Afghanistan in mid- October.
The US sprang into action. According to Ahmed’s article:
Two days before 9/11, Condoleeza Rice received the draft of a formal National Security Presidential Directive that Bush was expected to sign immediately. The directive contained a comprehensive plan to launch a global war on al-Qaeda, including an “imminent” invasion of Afghanistan to topple the Taliban. The directive was approved by the highest levels of the White House and officials of the National Security Council, including of course Rice and Rumsfeld. The same NSC officials were simultaneously running the Dhabol Working Group to secure the Indian power plant deal for Enron’s Trans-Afghan pipeline project. The next day, one day before 9/11, the Bush administration formally agreed on the plan to attack the Taliban. [emphasis added]
Enron’s financial problems became evident in October, and on December 2, 2001, Enron filed for Chapter 2 bankruptcy protection. The bankruptcy was one of the largest in U.S. history, eliminating $60 billion in assets and leaving thousands without their pensions and savings.
A largely unheralded event that December eliminated another U.S. motive for invading Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden, supposedly the point of the invasion, was widely believed to have died on December 17, 2001, from the advanced kidney disease he was known to have suffered from.
American theologian David Ray Griffin documented the evidence of bin Laden’s death in his 2008 book, “Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?” and also in an interview with Bonnie Faulkner in her Guns and Butter program of July 22, 2009 (accessible at the UNZ archive). Besides facial differences in photos supposedly of bin Laden after December, 2001, Griffin noted the difference in bin Laden’s language; after that date, the language ascribed to bin Laden was far less religious in content.
But for U.S. purposes, bin Laden died too early; too many soldiers and citizens were bent on 9/11 payback. And the U.S. still harbored plans for the pipeline because its Afghan bases were placed at the key points in what had been the hoped-for pipeline route.
Because the U.S. had not been honest about why it had invaded Afghanistan, it could not find a valid excuse to end the war. To finally put an end to the myth that Osama bin Laden was still living, U.S. President Barak Obama held a raid in May, 2011 that killed some poor Afghan, but the war still dragged on. The war on Afghanistan continued for 20 years, until a revived Taliban brought the NATO occupation to an abrupt end in July, 2021.
Vengeful despite the devastation it had wrought on the country and on its society, the U.S. continues to punish and impoverish Afghans. Although the U.S. refused to count civilian deaths, one estimate claims that as many as one million Afghans were killed by NATO.
Most Americans have come to distrust the U.S. government and the mainstream media. The fact that the government and media still blame the events of September 11, 2001 for:
the U.S. and NATO’s war on Afghanistan, (and at one point on Iraq);
the unending “War on Terror” that turned Muslims into terror suspects;
the “Patriot Act” with its elimination of American civil rights, and
the Presidential “AUMF” (the open-ended “Authorization to Use Military Force” which has been given wide interpretation to allow attacks on almost anyone, almost anywhere);
can be seen as valid reason for skepticism — which must be ongoing.
*
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.
Karin Brothers is a freelance writer. She is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
A German whistleblower video, clandestinely taken already in February 2021, of forced COVID vaccines in German Nursing Homes went public. They were sent to Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, Attorney, whose reaction is: “We’re Dealing with Homicide, Maybe Even Murder”.
This video and the story behind it is ageless, because that’s what is still going on today, as subsequent whistleblowers from a number of other countries revealed. They depict the most horrendous pictures; how demented nursing-home inmates were force-“vaccinated” and as a result, most of them died within days or maximum 2 weeks.
This is eugenics by definition.
A Crime against Humanity – as defined by the Nuremberg Codex.
In the meantime, the Dark Cult leaders’ protection has been enforced with categoric censure and outright death threat. A talking witness may be in deadly danger. That doesn’t prevent us from observing how excess deaths have increased by an average of 40% since the beginning of vaxxing – around mid-December 2022, as reported by CDC and major insurance companies.
What you see in these short videos is clearly homicide or worse, murder. These people who administer the experimental, and often fatal mRNA shots must be brought to justice. And so must all those inventing, planning (2010 Rockefeller Report, Event 201, to name just a few), promoting and executing the covid-19 pandemic – lets call it “plandemic”.
They are first-degree eugenists. These people are ever unnamable. Similar to countries we have on this globe whose names may hardly ever be mentioned whenever they commit the most inhumane atrocities and crimes against humanities. Indiscriminately killing defenseless people. Lest, one risks severe sanctioning, prison, or worse.
What an absurd, rule- and lawless civilization we have become! – It’s the Rule of the Beast, as in very-very ancient times.
We are talking – without naming – about high-tech billionaires, oil monopolists and banking magnates, not to speak about the trillions of dollars-worth financial corporations, all of whom act behind the curtains through their conveniently visible instrument, the World Economic Forum (WEF).
All is well camouflaged. Yet, the messages of ongoing and future planned destruction are purposely seeping out – that we, the masses are useless eaters, that we will soon be replaced by robots and algorithms – and those who survive may be converted – before they are exterminated – into transhumans, manipulable by implanted chips – or vaxx-injected graphene oxide through ultra-shortwaves, such as 5G and soon to come 6G. But they will be happy owning nothing.
Is this just fear-mongering? – Unlikely. The diabolical cult needs to announce its nefarious actions in order for them to succeed. What is announced – “the useless eaters” – is in full swing. If we let them haplessly continue, they may indeed reach their goals by the end of UN Agenda 2030, and / or the Great Reset.
The first live images of what was going on already shortly after the introduction of the killer vaxxes were revealed by these short clandestinely and bravely taken videos – already just a few months after the vaxxes were introduced in December 2020.
That’s humanities’ fate.
But “fate” must not remain “fate”. We must not fear, as we are not powerless. To the contrary, we are many, they are few. We can organize in solidarity; and as Reiner Fuellmich says – these homicides, cum murders have to be brought to justice. And all those invisibles and unnamables – plus the pharmas – and those collaborators in high government offices with them.
We may be talking about Nuremberg on steroids.
Watch this video where Dr. Reiner Fuellmich talks about forced vaccination.
*
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.
Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).
Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also is a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.
Featured image is 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
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
First published on September 7, 2022
***
Could you imagine being sent to prison for three years if you dared to set your thermostat above 66 degrees Fahrenheit? As you will see below, this is a proposed regulation that is actually being considered in a major European country right now. If you have not been paying much attention to what is happening in Europe, you need to wake up.
Natural gas in Europe is seven times more expensive than it was early last year, and that is because of the war in Ukraine. Over the past few decades, the Europeans foolishly allowed themselves to become extremely dependent on gas from Russia. In fact, more than 55 percent of the natural gas that Germany uses normally comes from Russia. But now the war has changed everything, and Europe is facing an extremely harsh winter of severe shortages, mandatory rationing and absolutely insane heating bills.
Things are going to get very cold and very dark all over Europe in the months ahead, and those Europeans that choose to rebel against the new restrictions that are being implemented could literally find themselves in prison…
Switzerland is considering jailing anyone who heats their rooms above 19C for up to three years if the country is forced to ration gas due to the Ukraine war.
The country could also give fines to those who violate the proposed new regulations.
Speaking to Blick, Markus Sporndli, who is a spokesman for the Federal Department of Finance, explained that the rate for fines on a daily basis could start at 30 Swiss Francs (£26).
19 degrees Celsius is just 66 degrees Fahrenheit.
If you live in Europe, prepare to dress very warmly this winter.
Some may be anticipating that they will just use portable radiant heaters to keep things toasty, but apparently using such heaters “would not be allowed” under the new regulations that Switzerland is considering…
Blick also reported that radiant heaters would not be allowed and saunas and swimming pools would have to stay cold.
This is serious.
We have never seen anything like this before, and the longer the war in Ukraine stretches on the worse the energy crisis in Europe will become.
An end to the era of cheap energy also means that a severe economic slowdown is in the cards, and this is already starting to show up in the numbers…
Europe is showing signs of heading into a recession as multiple economic surveys show the region’s services and manufacturing sectors slowing down while a large number of the continent’s citizens are struggling to cope with rising prices.
The S&P Global Eurozone Composite Output Index fell to an 18-month low in August at 48.9, according to a Sept. 5 news release (pdf).
The eurozone private sector “moved further into contractionary territory” in August. Both services and manufacturing output fell for the month.
Of course what we have witnessed so far is just the beginning.
In yet another truly astonishing announcement that demonstrates the desperation of this hour, German steelmaker ArcelorMittal, one of the largest steel production facilities in Europe, has shuttered operations due to high energy prices. (See their announcement here, in German.)
“With gas and electricity prices increasing tenfold within just a few months, we are no longer competitive in a market that is 25% supplied by imports,” said CEO Reiner Blaschek.
This comes after announced closures of aluminum smelters, copper smelters and ammonia production plants over the last few weeks. Ammonia — necessary for fertilizer — is now 70% offline in the EU.
Many more factories will be forced to shut down in the coming months.
Deeply alarmed by what is taking place, 40 CEOs from Europe’s metals industry have jointly issued an open letter in which they warn that their companies are facing an “existential threat to our future”…
Ahead of Friday’s emergency summit, the business leaders of Europe’s non-ferrous metals industry are writing together to raise the alarm about Europe’s worsening energy crisis and its existential threat to our future. Our sector has already been forced to make unprecedented curtailments in the last 12 months. We are deeply concerned that the winter ahead could deliver a decisive blow to many of our operations, and we call on EU and Member State leaders to take emergency action to preserve their strategic electricity-intensive industries and prevent permanent job losses.
50% of the EU’s aluminium and zinc capacity has already been forced offline due to the power crisis, as well as significant curtailments in silicon and ferroalloys production and further impacts felt across copper and nickel sectors. In the last month, several companies have had to announce indefinite closures and many more are on the brink ahead of a life-or-death winter for many operations. Producers face electricity and gas costs over ten times higher than last year, far exceeding the sales price for their products. We know from experience that once a plant is closed it very often becomes a permanent situation, as re-opening implies significant uncertainty and cost.
This is what an economic collapse looks like.
Things are already so bad that scientists are even considering shutting down the Large Hadron Collider…
Europe’s energy crisis is being felt by everyone – including the scientists working deep underground in Switzerland at the Large Hadron Collider.
The European Organization for Nuclear Research, better known as CERN, is even considering taking its particle accelerators offline.
This is due to the accelerators’ high energy demands, and the organisation’s desire to keep the region’s electricity grid stable.
So at least one good thing could potentially come out of this crisis.
But overall, the months ahead are going to be an immensely uncomfortable time for Europe.
As conditions become tougher and tougher, ordinary Europeans are going to become angrier and angrier.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is openly admitting that there will be “civil unrest”, but he insists that Europeans must make sacrifices in order to support the war in Ukraine…
Vladimir Putin’s ‘energy blackmail’ over Europe could lead to ‘civil unrest’ this winter, the NATO Secretary General has warned.
Jens Stoltenberg acknowledged that winter ‘will be hard’ as ‘families and businesses feel the crunch of soaring energy prices and costs of living’ in the coming months.
Writing in the Financial Times, the boss of the Western security alliance said that it is worth paying the price to support Ukraine.
Eventually, there will be tremendous civil unrest in major cities in the United States as well.
We are still only in the very early stages of this new global energy crisis, and it is going to turn all of our lives upside down.
Meanwhile, we are also plunging into a horrific global food crisis. As I detailed a few days ago, even the head of the UN is admitting that there will be “multiple famines” in 2023.
Life as we know it is about to change.
Right now, all eyes are on Europe because things are starting to get really crazy over there.
Europe is going to descend into “the new Dark Ages” this winter, and the entire world will experience extreme pain as a result.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Three Italian surgeons conducted a study analyzing blood from 1,006 people who developed symptoms after they got a Pfizer/BioNTech or Moderna mRNA injection and found 94 percent of them to have “aggregation of erythrocytes and the presence of particles of various shapes and sizes of unclear origin,” one month after inoculation.
Erythrocytes are a type of red blood cell that carries oxygen and carbon dioxide.
“What seems plain enough is that metallic particles resembling graphene oxide and possibly other metallic compounds … have been included in the cocktail of whatever the manufacturers have seen fit to put in the so-called mRNA ‘vaccines,’” the authors wrote in the study’s discussion and conclusions.
An example of the complex and structured crystal/lamellar organization at 120x magnification. In the picture on the right side a “module” from the morphology and recurrent structuring occurring with great frequency. The aggregating forces are guided by the negative entropic context. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
Here at 120x magnification (3xmagnification digitally produced) (a) and (b) show tubular formations that seem to be in different aggregative stages. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
Franco Giovannini, Riccardo Benzi Cipelli, and Gianpaolo Pisano, are the surgeons who authored the study, which was published on Aug. 12 in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, practice, and Research (IJVTPR).
“It could be claimed that, except for our innovative application of dark-field microscopy to mark the foreign metal-like objects in the blood of mRNA injections from Pfizer or Moderna, we have replicated the blood work of the Korean doctors with a much larger sample,” the Italian surgeons wrote.
“Our findings, however, are bolstered by their parallel analysis of the fluids in vials of the mRNA concoctions alongside centrifuged plasma samples from the cases they studied intensively,” they added.
Images of crystalline aggregation, regular and modular, with apparent “self-similar attitudes of fractal nature.” (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
This image at 120x magnification (3x magnification digitally produced)highlights a typical self-aggregating structuring in fibro/tubular mode. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
Further studies are needed to define the exact nature of the particles found in the blood and to identify possible solutions to the problems they are evidently causing.
Out of the 1,006 cases, only 58 people showed a completely normal hematological picture via microscopic analysis.
Evident tubular formations at 120x magnification in the aggregative phase showing their complex morphology. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
The researchers cited numerous studies to back up their findings, including the “well-known” tendency of fibrin to cluster, vascular toxicity of the spike protein, and other adverse effects.
They picked four cases and analyzed their pre and post-vaccination health status, while showing dark field microscopic images.
“We assert unequivocally that the 4 cases described in this series are representative of the 948 cases in which extraordinarily anomalous structures and substances were found,” the researchers wrote.
In this case, the assembly of particles takes on crystalline features; furthermore, there is an area of close influence, butterfly wings, in the context of which a crystalline-type organization occurs. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
“In conclusion, such abrupt changes as we have documented in the peripheral blood profile of 948 patients have never been observed after inoculation by any vaccines in the past according to our clinical experience. The sudden transition, usually at the time of a second mRNA injection, from a state of perfect normalcy to a pathological one, with accompanying hemolysis, visible packing and stacking of red blood cells in conjunction with the formation of gigantic conglomerate foreign structures, some of them appearing as graphene-family super-structures, is unprecedented. Such phenomena have never been seen before after any ‘vaccination’ of the past,” the researchers stated.
“In our experience as clinicians, these mRNA injections are very unlike traditional ‘vaccines’ and their manufacturers need, in our opinions, to come clean about what is in the injections and why it is there.”
Again, at 120x magnification, geometric figures tend to take shape in extremely complex aggregates. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
A highly structured fibro-tubular configuration of structures that can coalesce together, reaching dimensions ten times their initial size. In (a) and (b) at 40x magnification, we see what appears to be a laminar linkage. In (c), at 120x magnification (3x magnification digitally produced), there is a composite which is 166.54 μm (DeltaPix Software) in length. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
“In our collective experience, and in our shared professional opinion, the large quantity of particles in the blood of mRNA injection recipients is incompatible with normal blood flow especially at the level of the capillaries,” the authors wrote. “As far as we know, such self-aggregation phenomena have only been documented after the COVID-19 mRNA injections were first authorized, then, mandated in some countries.”
Graphene?
Graphene oxide is a type of material “considered two dimensional” and also considered “to be the strongest material in the world,” and the most conductive to electricity and heat, according to graphene-info.com.
Sherri Tenpenny, who has been ahead of the curve in vaccine adverse reactions, believes that these structures could be related to the strange clots embalmers have been finding in the corpses they treat since around the pandemic.
“Whatever is actually found to be in the shots, whether the components are graphene, aluminum, crystalline amyloid, disintegrated fibrin, highly charged nanotech particles, or something else, the disruption in the blood demonstrated on these slides is devastating and irrefutable, as are the corresponding histories of the patients involved,” Tenpenny told The Epoch Times.
“The rouleaux formations seen, for example, in figures 8, 16, and 22, represent widespread ‘sticky red blood cells’ which can lead to clots anywhere in the body. Figure 22 is especially frightening as this sample was taken only two days after the second Moderna jab,” she added.
Figure 8. (a) Deformation and erythrocyte aggregation with signs of hemolysis at 40x magnification. (b) A foreign crystallized tubular structure at 120x magnification. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
Figure 16. This image, at 40x magnification, is extremely representative of the “Z potential” disorders, with aggregation and “rouleaux stacking” of red blood cells. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
Figure 22. Image at 40x magnification showing aggregation and morphological modification of the erythrocytes two days after the second dose of a Moderna mRNA injection. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
James Thorp, who has been analyzing the adverse effects of COVID vaccines, thinks that this study could answer some questions about the contents in the vaccines, he shared some of his findings and theories with The Epoch Times.
“Graphene oxide is an artificial, highly magnetic substance with widespread utilization. … While first discovered in 1859, graphene oxide has extensive commercial application, especially in the field of pharmacologic nanotech delivery systems in medicine. It has the potential of self-assembly within the blood by a variety of potential energetic mechanisms,” Thorp told The Epoch Times.
But Thorp thinks that the phenomenon involving metallic objects sticking to people’s bodies, apparently magnetically, is not related to the vaccines, as some have claimed.
“Last year many social media posts alleged that the COVID-19 vaccine contained substances that caused attraction to magnets and non-magnetized metals. We conclusively demonstrated that this was a false narrative. The neodymium magnets and non-magnetized paperclips attached to the human body in about 50 percent of testing subjects unrelated to the COVID-19 vaccines,” Thorp said.
“Interestingly no other medical study could be found in the medical literature that describes human magnetism prior to this manuscript. Magnets and paperclips have been around for centuries, and it would be quite peculiar had they stuck to the human body in the past and not be the focus of intense scrutiny and investigation. One might speculate that graphene oxide in our bodies was not present 30 years ago but slowly accumulated over decades of exposure resulting in attachment of magnets and paperclips to the human body. It is speculated the electromagnetic energy possibly even from cell towers and/or WIFI could stimulate the assembly of graphene oxide and interfere with the body’s own energetics fields,” he went on.
Potential Explanation of Abnormal Assemblies
Thorp, his brother Kenneth Thorp, a radiologist, and Paul Walker, a mechanical and electric engineer, published a three part study (part I, Part II, and Part III.) named “Aether, fields & energy dynamics in living bodies” on the Gazette of Medical Sciences.
Thorp is also of the opinion that the metallic-like objects could be the cause of the strange clots that embalmers have been finding.
“The basis of most illnesses, including COVID-19, and the basis of the COVID-19 vaccine complications are directly related to energy deficiencies. The vaccine causes disruption and diversion of energy away from the water, molecular and cellular levels, away from basic physiologic processes and toward the pathologic production of spike protein. This potentially explains many of the abnormal assembly of substances within the intravascular space including the substances noted by Cipelli et al. as well as the misfolded proteins resulting in blood clots, prion disease, Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease, amyloidosis, and countless other diseases,” Thorp said.
Felipe Reitz, a biologist from Brazil, also did peripheral live blood analysis on vaccinated vs unvaccinated people’s blood using computerized thermographic imaging.
“I have observed that vaccinated individuals present some particular changes in their blood and in their peripheral circulation with more frequency than non-vaccinated,” Reitz told The Epoch Times.
Dark field Microscopic photo of blood samples. (Courtesy of Felipe Reitz)
“I am observing individuals with one jab, two jabs, three jabs, and four jabs. Individuals that were vaccinated 18 months ago, 12 months ago, and 6 months ago. This probability permutation is very important to determine the number of injections per time as I noticed it determines the degree of severity of reaction in the person’s body. That could explain why some researchers using the same tools and techniques are differing in their results. That is because they are not considering the individuality here, time of exposure, and jab content. All these variables only create difficulties for the scientific community to reach a consensus although we are all correct in what we are finding, but our findings alone do not represent the total truth,” Reitz said.
“My comparison is based on signs of compromised immune system, indications of radiation exposure, blood electrostatic changes, size and number of platelets, fibrins, infections, chemicals and crystallization structures in the blood samples, and indications of graphene.”
Official Statements
Pfizer told Reuters in July of 2021 that their COVID vaccines do not contain graphene oxide.
“Graphene oxide is not used in the manufacture of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine,” Pfizer’s senior associate of Global Media Relations told the outlet.
James Smith, the former President and Chief Executive Officer of Thomson Reuters is a board member of Pfizer.
According to a fact sheet issued by the FDA, the Moderna vaccine does not contain graphene oxide.
Moderna and Pfizer did not respond to requests for comment.
*
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.
Enrico Trigoso is an Epoch Times reporter focusing on U.S. politics, health news, social issues, and a wide range of topics.
Featured image: These photos are at 40x magnification. At the left side, (a) shows the blood condition of the patient before the inoculation. The right side image, (b) shows the same person’s blood one month after the first dose of Pfizer mRNA “vaccine.” Particles can be seen among the red blood cells which are strongly conglobated around the exogenous particles; the agglomeration is believed to reflect a reduction in zeta potential adversely affecting the normal colloidal distribution of erythrocytes as seen at the left. The red blood cells at the right (b) are no longer spherical and are clumping as in coagulation and clotting. (Courtesy of IJVTPR)
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
World Economic Forum (WEF) founder Klaus Schwab says that the forum welcomes “a diversity of ideas” after previously condemning Great Reset critics in Davos as the “frivolous fringe.”
“We welcome a diversity of ideas, expressed in the spirit of respectful discourse and dialogue,” Schwab wrote in his opening statement for the WEF Annual Report 2021-2022.
“We believe that differences within and between societies can be bridged, and that we can and must strive for a golden mean,” he added.
Schwab can talk about welcoming a diversity of ideas all he wants, but when the forum is criticized, the unelected globalists revert to name calling.
Earlier this year, Schwab took aim at the uninvited, independent media outlets covering the WEF’s annual meeting in Davos, dismissing them as the “frivolous fringe” who were only there to hijack the WEF’s brand.
“There is no place for the frivolous fringe that seeks to distract and divert attention – and I condemn it wholeheartedly – particularly of those who have nothing to do with the World Economic Forum community and just [sic] to Davos to hijack our brand,” he said.
While Schwab wrote of respectful discourse and dialogue to bridge differences in society, the WEF’s own managing director Adrian Monck did the exact opposite in a recent essay where he labeled critics of the great reset agenda, particularly the phrase “You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy,” as far right extremists, anti-Semites, bad faith actors, and white supremacists.
The WEF founder went on to say in the annual report that his organization would be placing “greater emphasis on ensuring that all parts of society are truly represented and engaged.”
But how can all parts of society be truly represented and engaged when any criticism to unelected globalist narratives is considered a disinformation campaign coming from racist fringe groups “who have nothing to do with the World Economic Forum community?”
“Own nothing, be happy. You might have heard the phrase. It started life as a screenshot, culled from the internet by an anonymous anti-Semitic account on the image board 4chan” — Adrian Monck, WEF, 2022
Reflecting back on history, Schwab wrote that “the main societal dividing line in our world was the division between the left and the right, between socialism and capitalism.”
“In that ideological battle, our natural position was that of a bridge-builder between the two sides,” he added.
It was OK to have oppressive regimes just as long as they collaborated with less oppressive ones.
But the paradigm is now shifting, according to Schwab.
Instead of a struggle between left and right, the new one is between globalism and nationalism.
“A new dividing line exists in politics and society […] between globalism and nationalism, between cooperation and protectionism, between embracing the new and preserving the old” — Klaus Schwab, WEF, 2022
“Today, a new dividing line exists in politics and society,” wrote Schwab, adding, “It is the division between globalism and nationalism, between cooperation and protectionism, between embracing the new and preserving the old.”
From an unelected globalist point of view, leaders who are elected to represent the will of their constituents should abandon their democratic duties and instead pursue more global agendas.
“Embracing the new” means implementing stakeholder capitalism where all power is given to hand-picked politicians, bureaucrats, and technocrats — the merger of corporation and state.
“Preserving the old” can be interpreted as maintaining the rights and freedoms granted under most constitutional republics and human rights charters.
The division, therefore, would be between those who want a global centralization of power and those who want power to remain with the people through democratic processes.
Klaus Schwab can say he wants to build a bridge between the divide, but in the very same statement, he concludes that his systemic approach to globalism through stakeholder capitalism and ESG scoring powered by the fourth industrial revolution is the only way forward.
How can one claim to welcome “a diversity of ideas,” but in the same statement turn around and say, “We have a duty to go against the disintegrating forces of our global system” — thus dismissing any ideas that aren’t pro-globalist out of a sense of duty?
If you don’t agree with the “forces of our global system,” what does that make you?
An extremist not worthy of having a voice?
“The mounting social pressures that we have observed, particularly in the past months, have led us to place ever greater emphasis on ensuring that all parts of society are truly represented and engaged” — Klaus Schwab, WEF, 2022
Remember when Schwab said that the forum was working to ensure all parts of society were truly represented and engaged?
There is only one narrative, and that is for citizens to surrender power, freedom, and autonomy over to unelected globalists, bureaucrats, and technocrats, so that they may finally implement their great reset over society and the global economy that they’ve been planning for many years.
And they will continue to exploit every “crisis,” real or imagined, to achieve their totalitarian agenda.
As Schwab concluded in the WEF’s annual report:
“We have no other choice than to embrace global cooperation if we want to avoid political, ecological or social disasters.”
*
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.
The Sociable editor Tim Hinchliffe covers tech and society, with perspectives on public and private policies proposed by governments, unelected globalists, think tanks, big tech companies, defense departments, and intelligence agencies. Previously, Tim was a reporter for the Ghanaian Chronicle in West Africa and an editor at Colombia Reports in South America. These days, he is only responsible for articles he writes and publishes in his own name. [email protected]
Featured image is from The Sociable
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Attorneys Dan Watkins and Michael Hamilton announced in a national Press Conference September 7 the filing of their first-in-the-nation landmark lawsuit against three hospitals on behalf of families who had lost their loved ones with the “bounties” paid to hospitals for using the toxic combination of food and fluid restriction, remdesivir, mechanical ventilation, high dose morphine-midazolam respiration-suppressing cocktail to spiral patients down the dark road to death.
After more than 2 ½ years of daily COVID deaths in America’s hospitals, we finally have the first two attorneys in the US to take legal action boldly and courageously against three hospitals in Fresno, California for wrongful death, medical battery, elder abuse and other violations of patients’ rights to hold these hospital administrators, doctors and nurse accountable for such horrific patient abuses.
Truth for Health Foundation has pledged financial support for this lawsuit as one of our human rights defense efforts to serve the public good by helping protect public safety, defend patient rights, and defend life. Both Attorney Watkins and Attorney Hamilton have been engaged by Truth for Health Foundation to assist on several legal initiatives to help defend human and civil rights secured by law.
*
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.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The New York Times has disclosed that the US shared vital intelligence with the Ukrainian military and took part in the preparation of the latter’s current “counteroffensive” near Kharkov. No matter the Biden Administration’s motivations in publicising its role in what western media is celebrating as a success story — presumably, with an eye on domestic politics in America — it could be factually correct. The media leak puts the dramatic happenings in the past 3-4 days in proper perspective.
There are two ways of looking at the surge by the Ukrainian military: one, Kiev has inflicted a heavy defeat on the Russians and forced them to retreat, or, the American intelligence finally got wind of theunobtrusive thinning out of the Russian frontline in Kharkov that had been going on in the recent weeks as part of a larger re-deployment of military formations, and shared the intelligence with Kiev, who of course gleefully acted on it.
The New York Times report effectively confirms the latter reading of the situation, which has been the stuff of hearsay and whispers so far.
Indeed, there has been hardly any fighting as such in Kharkov region during this Ukrainian surge, and the Russian focus was, unsurprisingly, to pull out the residual forces in the frontline under the cover of heavy artillery fire. The Russian operation ensured that there was no significant casualty. Thenew frontline that was being steadily put together in the recent weeks (or months) along the Oskol River has crystallised.
The withdrawal from the Balakleysko-Izyum direction stemmed from the Russian military command’s appraisal that no useful purpose would be served by maintaining such a frontline. In March, when Russian forces gained control of Izyum, the assumption was that it would help mount an operation from the north toward Sloviansk city in the Kramatorsk district of the Donetsk region. But as it turned out through the past 4 months, Russians apparently gave up that idea altogether.
Make no mistake, the battle for Donbass still remains the number one priority for the Russian special military operation. The re-deployment from the Balakleysko-Izyum direction will now significantly strengthen the offensive in Donbass instead of weakening it, as some western journalists are speculating. The confusion arises out of the ancient legend of Izium being the “gateway” to the Donbass and the Black Sea. Whereas, today, with modern communication, Russian supply lines to the Donbass can be sustained even without such a “gateway” from the north.
Second, Izyum itself is in a heavily wooded region — some call it Sherwood Forest — to its west where the Ukrainian forces had fortified themselves and the Russian presence had come under attack even previously also. Simply put, continued occupation of Izyum would only be a drain on manpower.
That said, the optics of the happenings in the Balakleysko-Izyum direction have triggered a wave of criticism within Russia itself about inept mishandling by the military command, and some of it was even directed at President Putin himself. The military command comes under pressure to show “results” in the Donbass campaign. Suffice to say, there might be some rethink too on the Russian strategy so far to depend on militia groups to do the heavy lifting rather than regular troops from its armed forces.
In reality, Kharkov Region has been largely a sideshow so far. The fact that there are no plans to hold anyreferendum in Kharkov — unlike in Kherson and Zaporozhia in the south in early September (which now stands postponed) — speaks for itself.
To be sure, last week’s happenings in the Balakleysko-Izyum direction will come as a big morale booster for the Ukrainian armed forces. This will have implications for the future. For one thing, Kiev will have noinclination whatsoever for peace talks. The thundering statement by Ukraine’s Minister of Defense Oleksiy Reznikov on Sunday sets the threshold of belligerence: “Kyiv is ready for negotiations after the vacation [by Russia] of all territories of Ukraine — within the limits of December 1, 1991. There are no more options for ‘February 24’ for Ukraine.”
That is to say, the plans of the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are to completely “liberate” all “occupied” territories, including Donbass and Crimea, and nothing less! Interestingly, Reznikov was reacting to a statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to the effect that Moscow does not reject negotiations with Ukraine, but further delay in peace talks by Kiev will complicate the possibility of reaching an agreement.
According to the Secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council Danilov, Kiev is already considering options for accepting the surrender of Russia, as well as dividing it into several nice little states! Such a level of madness and war hysteria will make things extremely difficult for the Biden Administration to carry forward the incipient signs of moderation and realism that were straining to surface in the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s rhetoric during his visit to Kiev last Friday.
Blinken reacted cautiously when asked by the travelling media party about the Ukrainian “counteroffensive.” He said: “yes, we did get a comprehensive update on the counteroffensive… it’s very early but we’re seeing clear and real progress on the ground, particularly in the area around Kherson but also some interesting developments in the Donbass in the east. But again, early days.”
Earlier in Kiev, Blinken did not respond to President Zelensky’s bottom line during their joint media appearance that he regarded the US support to be “a guarantee of the possibility of returning our territories, our lands.”
General Mark Milley, US chairman, Chiefs of Staff, also was noticeably circumspect about the Ukrainian counteroffensive in his remarks on Saturday in an interview with the National Public Radio. The general said it remains to be seen what is happening in the next few weeks. “It is a very, very difficult task that the Ukrainians are undertaking — combining their offence with manoeuver,” the general said.
While the regrouping of troops in the Kharkov region will enable the Russian forces to concentrate their attention on establishing full control over the territory of the Donetsk, it is not as if the military command has turned its back on Kharkov.
The Russian Ministry of Defence on Monday stated that Russian Aerospace Forces, missile troops and artillery “continued to launch high-precision attacks” at the Ukrainian units and reserve forces in Kharkov region. The Ukrainian forces that used to be in well-fortified positions in that heavily wooded region have now stepped out into the open and are being targeted for intense air, missile and artillery strikes.
The Russian MOD stated on Saturday that more than 2,000 Ukrainian fighters were killed near Balakleya and Izyum in the previous three days alone. For sure, a few thousand more troops would have suffered injuries too. Considering that a 15000-strong Ukrainian force is estimated to be involved in the entire Kharkov operation, that is a very heavy loss. Over time, Kiev may have little to celebrate about.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
On 6 September 2022, a conference organized by the Anti-Repression Foundation entitled “Information Gestapo: Ukrainian nationalist website Mirotvorets lists are used to suppress free speech and repress journalists” took place in Moscow”.
I participated in this conference with colleagues from several Western countries: Germany, USA, Finland, Netherlands, Canada, England.
All the journalists present condemned the very existence of Mirotvorets, while stressing that the attempt to silence them by scaring them would not work. They all confirmed that they would continue to do their work, regardless of the death threats against them.
It should be remembered that the Mirotvorets site publishes, among other things, personal data on journalists, scans of their passports, their addresses, information about their relatives and even information about their vehicles (in my case, my old car has all its data, including its VIN code and old registration number, published on this site). All this information makes it possible to track down journalists who are on Mirotvorets’ lists, and can only have been provided to this site by secret services (Ukrainian, or perhaps Western).
Mira Terada, the director of the Anti-Repression Foundation presented figures on the number of Western journalists listed on the Mirotvorets website. Of the 341 journalists listed on Mirotvorets, 83 are journalists from outside Russia, Ukraine, DPR and LPR (Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics). The overwhelming majority (80) are Western journalists.
She also recalled that several journalists had been killed after their data was published by the Mirotvorets website, such as Oles Bouzina, Andrea Rocchelli, Zemfira Soulaeïmanova, Andreï Stenine, Igor Korneliouk, Anton Volochine, and more recently Daria Douguina.
Calling the collection and publication of personal information an abhorrent violation of all international legal norms relating to the protection of the honor, dignity, personal data and life of journalists, the head of the Russian Anti-Robbery Foundation sent a letter to the head of the FSB, Aleksandr Bortnikov, calling for Mirotvorets to be classified as a terrorist organisation.
Russell Bentley said that the mafia structure that is Mirotvorets is in agreement with the fascist government of Ukraine, exposing independent journalists working in the Donbass to a real threat. He is convinced that journalists who share his view of events and are guided only by moral and ideological considerations are fighting against the Fourth Reich, against the Nazis of the 21st century.
Canadian journalist Eva Bartlett, added that her home country, Canada, actively supports and funds neo-Nazis in Ukraine and has spent over $1 billion to train Ukrainian soldiers. She also noted that the Canadian government includes direct descendants of Nazi collaborators who are proud of their origins. According to Bartlett, who cannot even imagine what awaits her if she returns to her country, and Canadian journalists are completely unconcerned about the activities of Mirotvorets. Canada, which has insisted for years that Ukraine is a democratic country, constantly turns a blind eye to the total lack of freedom of the Ukrainian media.
John Miller, a British journalist, was added to Mirotvorets’ “hit list” after reporting on the inclusion of the young Lugansk author Faina Savenkova in the Ukrainian site’s lists. I personally responded to John Miller’s assertion that journalists in Russian-controlled territory are not at risk even if they are on Mirotvorets. I reminded him that Darya Dugina was murdered in Russia, and that journalists living in the DPR, the LPR, or Moscow, risk their lives as much as those in Ukraine or in Western countries, where many Ukrainians have now found refuge.
Well aware of these risks, Dutch journalist Sonja Van Den Ende stressed the need for journalists to be extra careful, as she said Mirotvorets was created with the help of the CIA, NATO and the US. Commenting on the foreign policy of her native country, the Dutch war correspondent said that her country was waging an undeclared war against Russia and that anyone who criticized the neo-Nazis was an enemy of the Dutch state. Because of this, it would now be dangerous for her to return to her native country.
The same is true for Alina Lipp, the German journalist threatened with three years in prison in Germany for reporting on what is happening in the Donbass. According to the journalist, the repression also affected her parents: their bank accounts were blocked, they were forced to change their phone numbers, and Alina’s mother had to leave Germany because of the threats she was receiving. Following the terrorist attack on Daria Dugina, Alina is now paying more attention to her own safety.
Janus Putkonen, director and editor-in-chief of UMV-Lehti, linked the creation of Mirotvorets to Western intelligence services and condemned the inaction of foreign media and politicians who have ignored the clear human rights violations linked to the site’s activities for years. He said that Mirotvorets must be closed down to prevent such methods from spreading like a cancer to other countries in the world. He also called the site “the new Gestapo”.
I can only agree with this name. In fact, I have long called Mirotvorets a digital Gestapo, or Gestapo 2.0. As I said at the conference, if the Internet had existed during the time of Nazi Germany, there is no doubt that they would have invented a site more or less similar to Mirotvorets.
Personally, I have been aware of the risk posed by Mirotvorets for a long time. I did not wait for the attack on Daria Dugina to be careful, it only pushed me to reinforce the protection measures I apply.
All the journalists present will write a joint letter to the UN asking that the organisation adopt a resolution condemning the activities of Mirotvorets, which would serve as a basis for an international investigation into the organisation. If the FSB accedes to the request of the foundation against repression, Russia will conduct a parallel investigation and take measures against this terrorist site on a national scale. It is high time to end the impunity enjoyed by Mirotvorets, before more people pay with their lives for telling the truth about what is happening in Ukraine and the Donbass.
Video in Russian of the press conference:
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Most Americans are unaware how close Russia and Ukraine came to ending the current war in April.
Last March 27, Ukraine president Zelensky told his people “Our goal is obvious – peace and the restoration of normal life in our native state as soon as possible.”
He was hinting at what went unsaid: Ukraine and Russia, brokered by NATO member Turkey, reached a tentative fifteen-point peace plan to end the month old war. Key points were Russia withdraw from all Ukraine except for breakaway Donbas and Crimea. Ukraine would pass on future NATO membership, pledging neutrality between Russia and NATO. Donbas and Crimea would undergo political transition based on self-determination to be recognized by both combatants. Ukraine security would be guaranteed by neighboring countries but no foreign troops would enter Ukraine.
What’s not to like?
For the US weapons makers, the end to a weapons manufacturing boondoggle. That $60 billion in free weaponry to Ukraine fighters has depleted our ammo dumps.
For the US military, the end to a new perpetual war, albeit a proxy one, to relieve the boredom of peace.
For the political class, the end to the new Cold War with Russia to weaken, marginalize, and keep them from economic integration with Europe.
So on April 9, Uncle Sam sent Boris Johnson, the latest version of America’s British Prime Minister poodle, to Kiev, to school Zelensky on who’s running the war. The UK, Johnson advised “was in it for the long run,” would not be party to any Ukraine, Russian agreement since the “collective West” saw a chance to “press” Russia and make the most of it. Johnson cannot be accused of subtlety.
Two weeks later, the US sent Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to Kyiv to reinforce Johnson’s warning and make clear the US and NATO were determined to use the war to “weaken” Russia. NATO ally Turkey has blamed the US and UK for sabotaging a promising chance to end the war early on.
When it comes to provoking, preventing and prolonging senseless war, America always fails the test of peace. Getting back to the question posed: Why did the US torpedo the April Ukraine war negotiated settlement?
Because we can.
*
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.
Walt Zlotow became involved in antiwar activities upon entering University of Chicago in 1963. He is current president of the West Suburban Peace Coalition based in the Chicago western suburbs. He blogs daily on antiwar and other issues at www.heartlandprogressive.blogspot.com.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
A Swiss billboard is making the rounds on social media depicting a young woman on the telephone. The caption reads, “Does the neighbor heat the apartment to over 19 degrees (66F)? Please inform us.” While the Swiss government has dismissed the poster as a fake, the penalties Swiss citizens face for daring to warm their homes are very real. According to the Swiss newspaper Blick, those who violate the 66 degree heating limit could face as many as three years in prison!
Prison time for heating your home? In the “free” world? How is it possible in 2022, when Switzerland and the rest of the political west have achieved the greatest economic success in history, that the European continent faces a winter like something out of the dark ages?
Sanctions.
While long promoted – often by those opposed to war – as a less destructive alternative to war, sanctions are in reality acts of war. And as we know with interventionism and war, the result is often unintended consequences and even blowback.
European sanctions against Russia over its invasion of Ukraine earlier this year will likely go down in history as a prime example of how sanctions can result in unintended consequences. While seeking to punish Russia by cutting off gas and oil imports, European Union politicians forgot that Europe is completely dependent on Russian energy supplies and that the only people to suffer if those imports are shut down are the Europeans themselves.
The Russians simply pivoted to the south and east and found plenty of new buyers in China, India, and elsewhere. In fact, Russia’s state-run Gazprom energy company has reported that its profits have increased by 100 percent in the first half of this year.
Russia is getting rich while Europeans are facing a freezing winter and economic collapse. All because of the false belief that sanctions are a cost-free way to force other countries to do what you want them to do.
What happens when the people see dumb government policies making energy bills skyrocket as the economy grounds to a halt? They become desperate and take to the streets in protest.
This weekend thousands of Austrians took to the streets in a “Freedom Rally” to demand an end to sanctions and the opening of Nord Stream II, the gas pipeline on the verge of opening earlier this year. Last week an estimated 100,000 Czechs took to the streets of Prague to protest NATO and EU policy. In France, the “Yellow Vests” are back in the streets protesting the destruction of their economy in the name of “defeating” Russia in Ukraine. In Germany, Serbia, and elsewhere, protests are gearing up.
Even the Washington Post was forced to admit that sanctions on Russia are not having the intended effect. In an article yesterday, the paper worries that sanctions are inflicting “collateral damage in Russia and beyond, potentially even hurting the very countries that impose them. Some even worried that the sanctions intended to deter and weaken Putin could end up emboldening and strengthening him.”
This is all predictable. Sanctions kill. Sometimes they kill innocents in the country targeted for destruction and sometimes they kill innocents in the country imposing them. The solution, as always, is non-intervention. No sanctions, no “color revolutions,” no meddling. It’s really that simple.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
It is astonishing how many observers of war in Ukraine who should know better have been inclined to take at face value the assertions of “sources” that clearly originate among the various governments that are involved in the conflict. Those leaders who are engaged in the inexorable march by the US and its allies to turn the Ukraine crisis into World War 3 surely have learned the lesson that managing the narrative of what is taking place is the greatest weapon that the war hawks have in their possession. One recalls how post-9/11 and leading up to the Iraq War the George W. Bush White House and the neocons in the Pentagon lied about nearly everything to convince the public that Saddam Hussein was a terrorist supporting megalomaniac armed with weapons of mass destruction, inevitably describing him as a man in some ways comparable to Adolf Hitler. Nevertheless, many observers of what was occurring were not fooled and there were large scale demonstrations in a number of cities prior to the invasion in March 2003, which, of course, were rarely reported in the mainstream media in order to control the message.
Iraq in some ways was a learning experience for those in government and also for those in the media who did the heavy lifting by propagating the deception to a largely unsuspecting public. What we are seeing now relating to Ukraine and Russia, however, makes the Iraq experience look like child’s play in terms of the sheer audacity of the alleged information that makes it, or does not make it, into the news. I note particularly the recent terrorist car bombing of Russian activist journalist Dalya Dugina by a Ukrainian assassin made the news for roughly forty-eight hours before disappearing, but not before the lie that Prime Minister Vladimir Putin was responsible was firmly planted in a number of places in the mainstream media.
Now that Joe Biden is about to designate a two or three star general to head the Ukraine campaign and has pledged billions of dollars more in aid, Ukraine will be all the news all the time. The US involvement will also feature a catchy name. I would suggest Operation Empty Wallets, which is what Americans will soon be experiencing due to government bailouts and other profligate spending, or maybe Operation Give Me a Break. And it will also create a new dimension to the narrative-shaping in that Ukraine reporting’s domination of what comes out of the newsrooms already is effectively killing much of what else might otherwise be appearing on TV or in the newspapers. That selective management of information provides cover for neglecting stories that might prove embarrassing for those in power. It in effect means that there has been plenty of room for the usual players to engage in business as usual with hardly any scrutiny by the public over what is going on outside Ukraine in secondary theaters like the Middle East and Africa.
All of which leads one to examine what the two countries that have unilaterally declared themselves to be rules makers and enforcers have been up to. Those two countries are perhaps not surprisingly the United States and Israel. The US is, in fact, increasing its combat role in Africa featuring airstrikes in Somalia, all of which have taken place since US President Joe Biden approved the redeployment of hundreds of special forces troops to that country in May, reversing a decision by former President Donald Trump to reduce troop levels in AFRICOM. The two latest attacks killed at least twenty Somalis, all of whom were of course described as “terrorists” by the US command. Independent sources state that US forces have bombed Somalia at least 16 times under Biden, killing between 465 and 545 alleged al-Shabaab militants, including no less than 200 individuals in a single drone plus ground forces strike on March 13th.
Describing the paucity of reporting on the issue, Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, a senior adviser at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, observed “If you were unaware that we were bombing Somalia, don’t feel bad, this is a completely under-the-radar news story, one that was curiously absent from the headlines in all of the major newspapers…”
And then there is Syria, where a paucity of information in the media reflects White House policy. The United States, which has possibly as many as a dozen illegal bases in Syria, has a major airbase located in the al-Omar oil field in Syria’s northeastern Deir Ezzor province. Several weeks ago, three US soldiers were reportedly slightly wounded in rocket attacks directed at the base by alleged “Iranian-backed militants.” The US responded to the claimed attacks by launching strikes from Apache helicopters against three vehicles belonging to an Afghan Shia militia, killing between six and ten “militants,” and there are reports that more tit-for-tat exchanges of fire are likely. CENTCOM afterwards claimed that President Joe Biden personally ordered the strikes in “self-defense” and justified them by citing Article II of the US Constitution. But the Constitution was never intended to cover illegal activity in a foreign land where US forces are occupying a country with which it is not at war and which has a functioning government that opposes the American presence. The US reportedly has its illegal bases mostly located in the oil producing and agricultural bread basket of the country. Both the grain and oil are routinely stolen by the US and much of the oil winds up in Israel.
So, one inevitably comes to Israel, which has used the cover provided by Ukraine not only to bomb Syria frequently but also to kill Palestinians both in Gaza and on the occupied West Bank. Recently the pace has accelerated with the Israeli Army and police killing on average several Palestinians every day, very little of which is reported in the US media, a fatality rate five times higher than that which prevailed in 2021. It is clearly a deliberate policy to step up the pressure on the Palestinians and a vital part of the process is to let it happen with minimal scrutiny by the media and public, so Israel is widely publicizing the support it is giving to Ukraine to draw attention away from what it does locally.
In short, Israel is increasing efforts to make the historic Palestine Palestinian-free by rendering life so miserable that many Arabs will decide to leave. The use of selective violence and constant harassment is all part of that effort and Palestinians have found that describing Israel as an “apartheid” state does not accurately describe the intensity of the indiscriminate punishments and killings by soldiers which have become all too common.
Israel meanwhile is also doing its best to delegitimize Palestinian national identity by labeling Arab human rights groups as “terrorists.” Israeli police recently raided the offices of seven such groups, confiscated their office equipment and communications, and ordered the premises to be shut down completely. Ironically, a CIA assessment of the groups determined that they were not in any way terrorist linked. The Joe Biden administration characteristically responded to the development by indicating that it was “concerned” but did not condemn the Israeli action.
So, if you open a newspaper or turn on the television and watch or read the international news, you will be told what to think about what is going on in Ukraine. And it will be from the Ukrainian/US government point of view. If you are interested in what the US and Israel are up to in the Middle East, you will most often be out of luck as “defending democracy” in Ukraine while also demonizing Russia is providing cover for Washington and Jerusalem to get into all kinds of mischief. It is a reality derived from how the media and government work collectively to shape policies that in no way benefit the American public. Instead, powerful interest groups with plenty of cash drive the process and are the ones who gain still more power and money through it. It is the sad reality of what has happened to our “land of the free and home of the brave.”
*
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 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].
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The EU has weaponized the supply of European energy on behalf of a financial racket, against the interests of European industry and consumers.
When Green fanatic Robert Habeck, posing as Germany’s Economy Minister, said earlier this week “we should expect the worst” in terms of energy security, he conveniently forgot to spell out how the whole farce is a Made in Germany cum Made in Brussels crisis.
Flickers of intelligence at least still glow in rare Western latitudes, as indispensable strategic analyst William Engdahl, author of A Century of Oil, released a sharp, concise summary revealing the skeletons in the glamour closet.
Everyone with a brain following the ghastly Eurocrat machinations in Brussels was aware of the main plot – yet hardly anyone among average EU citizens. Habeck, Chancellor “Liver Sausage” Scholz, the European Commission (EC) Green Energy VP Timmermans, EC dominatrix Ursula von der Leyen, they are all involved.
In a nutshell: as Engdahl describes it, this is about “the EU plan to de-industrialize one of the most energy-efficient industrial concentrations on the planet.”
That’s a practical translation of the UN Green Agenda 2030 – which happens to be metastasized into crypto Bond villain Klaus Schwab’s Great Reset – now renamed “Great Narrative”.
The whole scam started way back in the early 2000s: I remember it vividly, as Brussels used to be my European base in the early “war on terror” years.
At the time, the talk of the town was the “European energy policy”. The dirty secret of such policy is that the EC, “ advised” by JP MorganChase as well as the usual mega speculative hedge funds, went all out into what Engdahl describes as “a complete deregulation of the European market for natural gas.”
That was sold to the Lugenpresse (“lying media”) as “liberalization”. In practice, that’s savage, unregulated casino capitalism, with the “free” market fixing prices while dumping long-term contracts – such as the ones struck with Gazprom.
How to decarbonize and destabilize
The process was turbo-charged in 2016, when the last gasp of the Obama administration encouraged massive export of LNG out of the U.S.’s huge shale gas production.
For that one needs to build LNG terminals. Each terminal takes as much as 5 years to build. Within the EU, Poland and Holland went for it from the start.
As much as Wall Street in the past invented a “ paper oil” speculative market, this time they went for a speculative “paper gas” market.
Engdahl details how “the EU Commission and their Green Deal agenda to ‘decarbonize’ the economy by 2050, eliminating oil, gas and coal fuels, provided the ideal trap that has led to the explosive spike in EU gas prices since 2021.”
The creation of this “single” market control implied forcing illegal rule changes on Gazprom. In practice, Big Finance and Big Energy – which totally control anything that passes for “EU policy” in Brussels – invented a new pricing system parallel to the long-term, stable prices of Russian pipeline gas.
By 2019, an avalanche of Eurocrat energy “ directives” by the EC – the only thing these people do – had established a totally deregulated gas market trading, setting the prices for natural gas in the EU even as Gazprom remained the largest supplier.
As lots of virtual trading hubs in gas futures contracts started popping up across the EU, enter the Dutch TTF (Title Transfer Facility). By 2020 the TTF was established as the real EU gas benchmark.
As Engdahl points out, “TTF is a virtual platform of trades in futures gas contracts between banks and other financial investors. Outside, of course, of any regulated exchange.
So LNG prices soon started to be set by futures trades in the TTF hub, which crucially happens to be owned by the Dutch government – “the same government destroying its farms for a fraudulent nitrogen pollution claim.”
By any means necessary Big Finance had to get rid of Gazprom as a reliable source to allow powerful financial interests behind the Green Deal racket to dominate the LNG market.
Engdahl evokes a case very few know about across Europe: “On May 12, 2022 although Gazprom deliveries to the Soyuz gas pipeline through Ukraine were uninterrupted for almost three months of conflict, despite Russia’s military operations in Ukraine, the NATO-controlled Zelensky regime in Kiev closed a major Russian pipeline through Lugansk, that was bringing Russian gas both to his Ukraine as well as EU states, declaring it would remain closed until Kiev gets full control of its pipeline system that runs through the two Donbass republics. That section of the Ukraine Soyuz line cut one-third of gas via Soyuz to the EU. It certainly did not help the EU economy at a time Kiev was begging for more weapons from those same NATO countries. Soyuz opened in 1980 under the Soviet Union bringing gas from the Orenburg gas field.”
Hybrid War, the energy chapter
On the interminable soap opera involving the Nord Stream 1 turbine, the crucial fact is that Canada deliberately refused to deliver the repaired turbine to Gazprom – its owner – but instead sent it to Siemens Germany, where it is now. Siemens Germany is essentially under American control. Both the German and Canadian governments refuse to grant a legally binding sanction exemption for the transfer to Russia.
That was the straw that broke the (Gazprom) camel’s back. Gazprom and the Kremlin concluded that if sabotage was the name of the game, they couldn’t care less whether Germany received zero gas via Nord Stream 1 (with brand new Nord Stream 2, ready to go, blocked by strictly political reasons).
Kremlin spokesman Dmity Peskov took pains to stress “problems in [gas] deliveries arose due to sanctions that have been imposed on our country and a number of companies by Western countries (…) There are no other reasons behind supply issues.”
Peskov had to remind anyone with a brain that it’s not Gazprom’s fault if “the Europeans (…) make a decision to refuse to service their equipment” which they are contractually obligated to do. The fact is the whole Nord Stream 1 operation hinges on “one piece of equipment that needs serious maintenance.”
Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak, who knows one or two things about the energy business, cleared up the technicalities:
“The entire problem lies precisely on [the EU’s] side, because all the conditions of the repair contract have been completely violated, along with the terms of shipping of the equipment.”
All that is inscribed into what Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov describes as “a total war declared against us”, which is “being waged in hybrid forms, in all areas”, with “the degree of animosity of our opponents – of our enemies” being “enormous, extraordinary.”
So none of this has anything to do with “Putin weaponizing energy”. It was Berlin and Brussels – mere messengers of Big Finance – which weaponized the supply of European energy on behalf of a financial racket, and against the interests of European industry and consumers.
Beware of the toxic trio
Engdahl has summarized how, “by systematically sanctioning or closing gas deliveries from long-term, low cost pipelines to the EU, gas speculators via the Dutch TTP have been able to use every hiccup or energy shock in the world, whether a record drought in China or the conflict in Ukraine, to export restrictions in the USA, to bid the EU wholesale gas prices through all bounds.”
Translation: casino capitalism at its finest.
And it gets worse, when it comes to electricity. There is a so-called EU Electricity Market Reform in progress. According to it, producers of electricity – from solar or wind – automatically receive “the same price for their ‘renewable’ electricity they sell to the power companies for the grid as the highest cost, i.e. natural gas.” No wonder the cost of electricity in Germany for 2022 increased by 860% – and rising.
Baerbock incessantly parrots that German energy independence cannot be secured until the country is “liberated from fossil fuels.”
According to Green fanaticism, to build the Green Agenda it’s imperative to completely eliminate gas, oil and nuclear power, which happen to be the only reliable energy sources as it stands.
And it’s here that we see the toxic trio Habeck/Baerbock/von der Leyen ready for their close up. They pose as saviors of Europe preaching that the only way out is to invest fortunes in – unreliable – wind and solar power: the “answer” from Providence to a gas price debacle manufactured by none other than Big Finance, Green fanaticism and Eurocrat “leadership”.
Now tell that to struggling pan-European households whose bills will surge to a whopping, collective $2 trillion as General Winter knocks on the door.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
An Indian national authority was instructed by a state-level high court to “expeditiously” establish a policy framework for COVID-19 vaccine-injured compensation, including dependents of the injured or deceased. Specifically the Kerala High Court, the highest legal forum in Kerala state, a small coastal southwest state with approximately 35 million people, instructed the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to set up the framework, which includes policies for compensation due to injuries associated with the COVID-19 vaccines. The situation appears to worsen to the point that, at least, one state has declared it a disaster or meriting action from the national agency in charge of disaster response.
The language of the High Court was cautious, as reported by local media. Vaccine injuries associated with COVID-19 vaccines are deemed “rare,” but this can become relative, given the mass vaccination effort around the world. With so many vaccinated, the numbers of injured can accumulate substantially.
Lots of Reported Problems & Benefits
TrialSite recently reported that the Indian Supreme Court put the national government on notice about vaccine injuries. This media reported that while the Indian government offered no vaccine injury fund during emergencies such as COVID-19, their national government, what’s known as “the Center,” does allow for compensation under the Fatal Accidents Act of 1855. Yet this antiquated law needs modernization in light of the COVID-19 unfolding events, from mass COVID-19 vaccine mandates in the world’s second most populated nation to mounting reports, albeit rare” of vaccine injury reports. TrialSite reported that during COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, the Serum Institute of India (SII), the world’s largest vaccine producer by volume, lobbied the national government to provide vaccine injury immunity to them and other vendors in the vaccine value chain, much like is the case under the PREP Act in America.
Also, TrialSite reported on a severe neurological injury involving the AstraZeneca vaccine, which SII licensed and produced for use throughout India. The injured man volunteered for a clinical trial and had debilitating issues as a result. After taking action, SII countersued, threatening to economically destroy the man. The case went silent.
With about 1.4 billion people, approximately 945 million persons in India are classified as fully vaccinated, mostly with the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine developed and distributed in India by SII, again the world’s biggest vaccine producer by volume, or Covaxin produced by Bharat Biotech, the first indigenous COVID-19 vaccine developed in India. Other vaccines used, although less frequently, include Sputnik V (the Russian vaccine produced by Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories in India with production support by SII), ZyCoV-D produced by Zydus Cadila, as well as other vaccines via clinical trials.
Even if a tenth-of-one percent of 945 million Indian citizens of residents fully vaccinated experienced some form of injury, the number would total 945,000 which isn’t minimal. The AstraZeneca vaccine, used extensively in India, was shut down in the U.S. due to clinical trial injuries. Earlier during the pandemic, The New York Times covered issues, including safety associated with AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine—see the link.
Selective Reporting
According to a piece in The Lancet earlier in the summer, an additional 4.2 million deaths were prevented via vaccination from the period December 8, 2020, to December 8, 2021. This modeling exercise, however, made many assumptions. TrialSite followed very carefully the Uttar Pradesh public health outreach campaign in 2021, which included pairs of public health workers scouring villages and towns, educating, testing, and handing out home medicine kits that included ivermectin. See a detailed piece from contributor Juan Chamie. While World Health Organization (WHO) touted the effort, it censured the use of ivermectin, as did most media, except this one, of course. An enormous turnaround occurred during the Delta variant-based surge.
High Court Position
This particular case came to the Kerala High Court via a widow’s plea for help. Her husband died, apparently, because of the COVID-19 vaccination scheme. Yet the central government here has done little to formulate rigorous policy to care for the rare cases where injury and/or death does occur.
“Given the ubiquitous COVID-19 vaccine mandates promulgated all over the world, it’s only right, fair, and just that a reasonable vaccine compensation policy fair is put in place,” shared TrialSite’s founder Daniel O’Connor.
According to the Kerala High Court:
“Even if numbers are very few, there are instances where people are suspected to have succumbed to the after-effects of immunization.”
Led by V. G. Arun, one of the Kerala High Court justices, the legal body ordered the national governments, the National Disaster Management Authority, to move on this matter, doing the “needful within three months,” reported India media such as HealthWorld and New Delhi Television Ltd. (NDTV).
Justice Arun, as it turns out, knows personally of three vaccine injury cases, declaring:
“Therefore, even if the numbers are very few, there are instances where people are suspected to have succumbed to the after-effects of immunization. In such circumstances, respondents 2 (NDMA) and 8 (Ministry of Health) are bound to formulate a policy for identifying such cases and compensating the dependents of the victim.”
In India, the respondents mentioned include the National Disaster Management Authority and the Ministry of Health, both with mandates to support the Indian people at the national level. Yet that doesn’t appear to be happening, as national/federal entities appear under the sway of a different set of policy directives.
Like in the U.S., where Attorney Generals at the state level now look into censorship collusion by the federal government in partnership with media and tech companies, the policy imperatives at the federal government level in the United States have been far less focused on patient rights and more on mandates and other directives, seemingly as part of a series of countermeasures against a pandemic.
*
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.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Ukraine’s Western-backed leader Volodymyr Zelensky opened the New York Stock Exchange telling Wall Street his country is “open” for foreign corporations to exploit it with $400 billion in state selloffs.
Ukraine’s Western-backed leader Volodymyr Zelensky virtually opened the New York Stock Exchange on the morning of September 6, symbolically ringing the bell via video stream.
Zelensky announced that his country is “open for business” – that is to say, that foreign corporations are free to come and exploit its plentiful resources and low-paid labor.
In a speech launching the neoliberal selloff program Advantage Ukraine, Zelensky offered Wall Street “a chance for you to invest now in projects worth of hundreds of billions of dollars.”
The financial news service Business Wire published a press release from the Ukrainian government in which Zelensky boasted:
The $400+ [billion] in investment options featured on AdvantageUkraine.com span public private partnerships, privatization and private ventures. A USAID-supported project team of investment bankers and researchers appointed by Ukraine’s Ministry of Economy will work with businesses interested in investing.
It also quoted the president of NYSE Group, Lynn Martin, who said:
As the largest exchange globally, we stand for freedom, investor protection and unfettered access to capital. We are pleased to welcome President Zelenskyy virtually to the NYSE bell podium, a symbol of the freedom and opportunity our U.S. capital markets have enabled around the globe. We are honored the President has chosen the NYSE to mark the kickoff of Advantage Ukraine and engage with the world’s business community.
The press release cited executives of US corporate giants Google, Alphabet, and Microsoft, who salivated over the economic possibilities offered by Ukraine.
Reuters noted that the Ukrainian government hired British public relations firm WPP to run the marketing operation for Advantage Ukraine.
Zelensky coordinated his New York Stock Exchange publicity stunt with an editorial in the Wall Street Journal imploring US capitalists to “Invest in the Future of Ukraine.”
“I committed my administration to creating a favorable environment for investment that would make Ukraine the greatest growth opportunity in Europe since the end of World War II,” Zelensky wrote.
He continued:
To create a safe, transparent environment for business engagement, Ukraine is pursuing investment guarantees from both the Group of Seven and the European Union, reforming the country’s tax system, and establishing a strong new legal framework. Our country has already adopted rules and laws to allow companies to build transparent corporate structures, attract foreign investment more easily, and use additional mechanisms to protect intangible assets. Favorable conditions will allow us to establish Ukraine as a powerful IT hub and implement innovative business ideas quickly and effectively.
Ukraine is a land of surprising opportunity. I personally invite you to be surprised by our potential and to invest in the future of Ukraine, writes @ZelenskyyUahttps://t.co/sWGpAyQhKq
The Western participants published documents calling to cut labor laws, “open markets,” drop tariffs, deregulate industries, and “sell state-owned enterprises to private investors.”
Western governments and corporations met in Switzerland to plan harsh neoliberal economic policies to impose on post-war Ukraine, calling to cut labor laws, “open markets,” deregulate industries, and “sell state-owned enterprises to private investors.”https://t.co/J0n8db8ZLr
In an interview with Multipolarista, economist Michael Hudson compared the new emergency anti-labor laws imposed by the Ukrainian government to the brutal neoliberal policies implemented by Chile’s far-right Pinochet dictatorship after a CIA-backed coup in 1973.
“It’s jaw dropping,” Hudson said of Zelensky’s Wall Street Journal op-ed. “It’s like a parody of what a socialist would have written about how the class war would be put in into action by a fascist government.”
“So of course he was welcomed on the stock exchange for abolishing labor’s rights,” Hudson added. “You could not have a more black-and-white example” of class war.
“This is exactly what [French President] Macron said when he said the ‘end of abundance.’ The Ukrainian labor force has just experienced the end of affluence, neoliberal style.
“And as Mr. Zelensky said, it may be the end of affluence for the labor force, but it’s going to be a bonanza for you investors in the New York Stock Exchange. Come on in and join the party!”
“Somebody’s loss is turned into somebody else’s game. And that’s what happens in a class war. It’s a zero-sum game. There is no attempt at all to raise living standards.”
“Ukraine is the poorest country in Europe – but Zelensky said it’s not poor enough. He said, you think this is something, wait until our new law takes effect. That’ll really show you what it means to be the poorest country in Europe.”
“But it’ll also be the richest country in Europe for the 1%,” Hudson concluded.
*
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.
Featured image is a screenshot from one of the videos above
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
China and Russia warned that US weapons bound for Ukraine could fall into the hands of terrorists in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. This claim cannot be discounted since NATO has a consistent policy of shifting Western-made weapons from battlefront to battlefront, just as previously seen with weapons used to fight Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in Libya ending up in the hands of terrorist forces in Syria.
In Kiev on September 8, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken received from the President of Ukraine the Order of Prince Yaroslav the Wise “for services to Ukraine”. During the visit to Kiev, the US Secretary of State said that the US would provide military assistance worth $2.8 billion to Ukraine and 18 neighbouring countries affected by Russia’s special military operation. The budget includes $675 million for Ukraine to receive arms, ammunition and equipment, with the remainder being long-term investments to strengthen the security of Ukraine and neighbouring countries.
Along with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, the Order of Prince Yaroslav the Wise was also awarded by Ukraine to the head of the Pentagon, the head of the European Commission and the European diplomatic mission, i.e. those who initiated and made the decision to supply weapons to Ukraine.
On the same day as Blinken’s visit to Kiev, China’s deputy permanent representative to the UN, Geng Shuang, expressed at a United Nations Security Council meeting serious concerns regarding the supply of weapons to Kiev. Such actions will not lead to peace, he said, but only complicate matters. The diplomat reaffirmed China’s consistent stance on security issues, stressing that Europe and the whole world can only be stable and secure in the long term if they work to create a reliable, indivisible and sustainable security system.
The Chinese are also interested in another issue – the transfer of more weapons to Ukraine, which only address Washington’s narrow and selfish geopolitical goals with Kiev’s help: the attempted weakening of Russia.
At the UN Security Council meeting, Geng Shuang also stated that China is seriously concerned about a large number of weapons and ammunition supplied to Ukraine falling into the “wrong hands”.
“Since the beginning of the crisis in Ukraine, China has consistently emphasised that the supply of weapons will not bring peace, and that adding fuel to fire will only complicate the problem,” Shuang said. “The harsh reality and humanitarian consequences of the past six months have fully demonstrated this. Equally worrying is the scenario that a large number of weapons and ammunition falling into the wrong hands, causing endless trouble, and creating security risks in Ukraine and in the wider region. We have noticed that relevant negative impact already began to emerge.”
Russian Ambassador to the UN Vasily Nebenzya shared the view of the Chinese diplomat and highlighted that Ukraine sells weapons supplied by the West to the world market. According to the Russian diplomat, the leaders of Western countries are turning Ukraine into a global hub for illegal weapons, which could soon be used by terrorists in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
China is concerned that American weapons supplied to Ukraine could fall into the hands of terrorists and pose a real threat to China’s economic interests in various parts of the world. With China growing at a high rate of 5% per year, achieved thanks to a sustained peace as the East Asian country has not been at war since 1974, new threats to international security from terrorism may impede its accelerated development.
Beijing is concerned that US weapons for Ukraine could fall into the hands of militant groups in countries with unstable regimes and state structures, especially as many of these countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America are strategic sources of raw materials and oil. Beijing is concerned about stability in the countries it has economic and political interests in, especially as it affects its goal of maintaining high economic growth.
On August 8, in Moscow, Chairman of the State Duma of Russia Vyacheslav Volodin and Chairman of China’s Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress Li Zhanshu discussed the situation in Ukraine. After the meeting, the Russian politician thanked his Chinese counterpart for his understanding and objective assessment of the US role in the development of the situation in Ukraine. According to Volodin, the US is pushing the world to a new round of tensions, and this threatens global security.
With China facing its own pressure because Washington is ramping up tensions in the Taiwan Strait, Beijing and Moscow will continue working closely to denounce and strategically respond to US aggression. None-the-less, having thousands of US weapons unaccounted for and spread across the world poses a major threat to China as they can be easily turned against its economic interests.
*
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.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The offensive operation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and NATO in the Kharkov region was planned by the US military command. About 200 units of heavy military vehicles and up to 9 thousand soldiers were involved in the offensive. Reportedly, every third soldier operating under the Ukrainian chevron was a citizen of a NATO member state. These forces were 4-5 times superior to the units of the DPR, LPR and Russia defending their positions in the region.
The main goal of the Ukrainian offensive was a flank attack, encirclement and subsequent destruction of the Russian grouping in the area of Balakleya, Kupyansk and Izyum.
The Russian command predicted the attack by large forces of Ukraine and NATO in this direction. It was aware that it would be extremely difficult to contain the enemy’s offensive with the forces that it had. It was also almost impossible to transfer timely sufficient reinforcement without weakening other areas on other front lines.
Assessing the risks, the Russian military decided to leave weakly fortified positions and withdraw troops to new lines and straighten communication lines.
Before the start of the Ukrainian offensive, civilians who agreed to move to the territory of the Russian Federation were evacuated from the threatened settlements.
From September 6 to 11, Russian units were withdrawing in an organized manner under the cover of specially organized units. Using mobile defense tactics, the Russian military destroyed the plan of Kiev and NATO to encircle the Russian grouping.
At the same time, there were obvious mistakes made by the Russian military. The area in front of the forward positions was not mined. Units on the front line de facto had no more than 30 percent of the listed military personnel. The soldiers were not properly provided with anti-tank weapons. There were also failures of the front-line intelligence. As a result, the artillery cover of the withdrawal was ineffective in the first days of the Ukrainian offensive.
Now on September 12, Russian troops have been withdrawn to new positions along the eastern bank of the Oskol River with minimal losses. Meanwhile, both sides confirm that the Ukrainian and NATO units suffered significant losses in manpower.
Almost the entire territory of the Kharkov region came under the control of Kiev with minimal damage to the cities’ infrastructure. Immediately after taking control of the settlements, the Ukrainian military began repressions against the pro-Russian population, violating the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. The first cases of the executions were already reported.
Large Russian reserves are being transferred to the battlefields. The strategically important settlement of Krasny Liman has not yet been taken by the Ukrainian military. The fighting continues.
Last night, missile strikes hit the largest electricity facilities in eastern Ukraine. The collapse of the power system affected networks in the Kharkiv, Sumy, Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporozhye, Odessa, Donetsk and Kiev regions. Until now, the power supply has not yet been fully restored.
The armed conflict in eastern Ukraine has finally turned into a state of war between Russia and NATO with unpredictable results for all parties in the conflict.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Der deutsch-französische Friedensnobelpreisträger, Pazifist und „Urwaldarzt“ Albert Schweitzer war einer der bedeutendsten Denker des 20. Jahrhunderts. Sein philosophisches Denken ging davon aus, dass sich Menschen beim Nachdenken über sich selbst und ihre Grenzen wechselseitig als Brüder erkennen, die über sich selbst und ihre Grenzen nachdenken. Im Zuge des Zivilisationsprozesses würde die Solidarität, die ursprünglich nur auf den eigenen Stamm bezogen war, nach und nach auf alle, auch unbekannte Menschen übertragen. In den 1950er-Jahren war Schweitzers Lehre der „Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben“ eine moralische Instanz, ein Leitbild im Kampf gegen die atomare Bewaffnung der Völker.
Doch das allgemeine Bewusstsein des einzelnen und der Völker fand bis heute keine Antwort auf die „Kain-Frage“ aus der biblischen Urgeschichte: „Bin ich der Hüter meines Bruders? Wieder bedroht uns die Katastrophe eines Atomkriegs wie zu Albert Schweitzers Zeiten vor nahezu 70 Jahren. Deshalb hat sein „Appell an die Menschheit“ – nachzulesen in der Schriftensammlung „Friede oder Atomkrieg“ (1) – nichts von seiner Aktualität eingebüßt.
Image: Albert Schweitzer (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 de)
Bertha von Suttner: „Die Waffen nieder!“
Noch nie konnten Probleme der Völker durch die Methode der Gewalt, den Krieg gelöst werden. Das ist heute nicht anders als in der bisherigen Menschheitsgeschichte. Der Rückfall in den Krieg ist ein Rückfall in die Barbarei, der sich auf allen Gebieten des gesellschaftlichen Lebens bemerkbar macht: er verursacht im Leben des Einzelnen wie der Völker unsägliches Leiden. Die täglichen TV-Bilder über den Krieg in der Ukraine gewähren uns einen nachhaltigen Eindruck dieses Leidens.
Die heutigen Kriege sind nicht mehr verantwortbar, sie sind obsolet geworden. Schon der Erste Weltkrieg war kein konventioneller Krieg mehr, er war Genozid, Völkermord, Volksmord. Und seither sind die illegalen Angriffskriege noch mörderischer, hinterhältiger, flächendeckender, genozidaler geworden.
Für den österreichischen Kultur-Historiker Friedrich Heer sind diese Kriege Vorbereitungen zur „Endlösung der Menschheitsfrage“ oder wie Bertha von Suttner in ihrem Roman „Die Waffen nieder!“ prophezeit: „Der Untergang für alle“ (2). Dies trifft für einen allseits befürchteten Krieg mit Atomwaffen ganz sicher zu.
Mahatma Gandhi schrieb nach dem Erscheinen des Romans in einem Brief an Bertha von Suttner: „Gott möge es so fügen, dass die Abschaffung des Krieges Ihrem Werke folge.“ (3) Alfred Nobel ließ sich durch Bertha von Suttner in seinem Testament zur Stiftung des Friedensnobelpreises anregen (4).
Die Geschichte – ein Werk des Menschen
Wir wissen heute, dass der Krieg ein Verhängnis ist. Auch wissen wir, dass seine Ursache nicht in der „menschlichen Natur“, sondern in der Ungerechtigkeit und Unmenschlichkeit unserer Sozialordnung begründet ist. Dieser Umstand darf uns nicht vergessen lassen, dass die Geschichte ein Werk des Menschen ist und dass man den Menschen ändern muss, wenn man die Welt ändern will. Demgemäß sind Aufklärung und Erziehung die wichtigsten Maßnahmen, die gegen den Krieg ergriffen werden können.
Noch können wir nicht sagen, wann sich das Menschheitsgewissen, dessen Mahnruf durch die Jahrhunderte geht, endgültig Gehör verschaffen wird. Aber wir zweifeln nicht daran, dass an der Frage, ob sich die Menschen in weit höherem Maße als bis heute zur allmenschlichen Solidarität bekennen werden, der Bestand des Menschengeschlechtes hängt.
*
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. Rudolf Hänsel, Jahrgang 1944, ist Rektor i.R., promovierter Erziehungswissenschaftler, ehemaliger Lehrer und Schulberater sowie Diplom-Psychologe mit den Schwerpunkten Klinische Psychologie, Pädagogische Psychologie und Medienpsychologie. Er ist Buchautor sowie Autor von Fachartikeln zu den Themen Jugendgewalt (beispielsw. über Gewaltprävention in der Schule als Beitrag zur Friedenserziehung), Mediengewalt (z.B. „Unterhaltungsgewalt“ in Fernsehen, Video- und Computerspielen) und bewusste ethisch-moralische Werteerziehung. Er schreibt regelmäßig Beiträge für Global Research.
Noten
(1) Schweitzer, A. (1984). Friede oder Atomkrieg. München
(2) Heer, F. In: Von Suttner, B. (1977). Die Waffen nieder! Einführung, S. VII
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
It’s like rolling the dice for what you get in your vial. Both the FDA and EMA knew this but kept this out of the public view because if it were known, nobody would take the vaccines.
He recently posted this substack article documenting his attempts to get visibility on what the EMA document leak revealed.
The gem in the article is this video which was posted 18 months ago that few people have seen. The video is just 14 minutes long and is very well done. The findings are all consistent with what I and others have long suspected: the vials are all different.
The key finding is the reason they won’t let anyone analyze the vials: mRNA is not intact. The BMJ wrote about this on March 10, 2021 [my comments are in brackets]:
On Nov 23, 2020, EMA knew about the quality control issues with severely compromised mRNA integrity (ranging from 78% to 55%). [It’s supposed to be 100% if you want an effective vaccine.]
Just two days later, a source in the US said the lots were now “back at around 70-75%, which leaves us cautiously optimistic that additional data could address the issue.”
“The complete, intact mRNA molecule is essential to its potency as a vaccine,” professor of biopharmaceutics Daan J.A. Crommelin and colleagues wrote in a review article in The Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences late last year.”
The BMJ asked Pfizer, Moderna, and CureVac, as well as several regulators, what percentage mRNA integrity they consider acceptable for vaccines against covid-19. None offered any specifics. [“Wow, that’s really comforting. <sarcasm off>”]
The EMA told The BMJ that the levels of truncated mRNA “and the amounts of a potential protein produced by the truncated mRNA would be too low to constitute a safety risk.” [uh… how does the EMA know that exactly?]
Health Canada told The BMJ that Pfizer had conducted investigations into the root cause of reduced integrity in the commercial vaccine batches, and “changes were made in their processes to ensure that the integrity was improved and brought in line with what was seen for clinical trial batches.” Health Canada said the three agencies subsequently determined that “there was no concern with the RNA integrity or any other product specifications.” [Whew! Now I’m relieved! No data on the new levels produced. If you can’t trust Pfizer, who can you trust?]
In general, the BMJ wasn’t happy about anything they heard from the regulators. They were basically stonewalled in their requests.
The fact that it’s illegal for anyone to analyze the vials (they are government property) doesn’t help inspire confidence at all.
Even if you are getting 100% intact mRNA which would be really rare, you’re still not getting anything that resembles the virus. So the efficacy as far as PROTECTING you will be next to nothing. However, what it will do very effectively, if you got reasonably intact mRNA, is to cause you significant harm. You are playing a game of chance with your immune system and what is in the bottle.
The video highlights some of the things we learned from the EMA data breach:
The EMA claims the documents were manipulated to make them look bad, but won’t say how they were manipulated. I’m not buying the EMA story at all.
The Members of the European Parliament (MEP) weren’t allowed to read the contracts with the vaccine makers (only heavily redacted versions). Again, if you can’t trust Pfizer and the EMA, who can you trust?
The mRNA is unstable, even at the required temperatures because light, movement (like shipping it to a destination), and any temperature variation disrupts it.
Unstable mRNA means the spike protein (which was artificially propped up) could collapse making the whole process useless to support immunity, but still dangerous in terms of damage to cells. So you get all the risk and no benefit.
The mRNA integrity was better in the clinical trial than commercial batches.But don’t assume that the vaccine worked in the trials since the trials were heavily gamed to produce favorable outcomes, mostly by excluding people with weak immune systems from the vaccine group (this is why there were 5X the number of exclusions in the vax group). So you’re looking at a vaccine which likely does absolutely nothing except make people believe they are protected. This mind control works quite well. People bought the story for over a year before they realized they were getting infected at the same rate as people who didn’t get the vaccine.
The mRNA integrity varied between countries.
Pfizer never told anyone that the commercial vaccines had lower mRNA integrity than the vaccines used in the trials. This is unethical, bordering on fraud.
The EMA tried to cover it up. Instead of protecting the public and making Pfizer look bad, the EMA basically covered up the problem.
Pfizer never told the public or governments about the risks associated with mRNA integrity. If it wasn’t for the leak, we’d never have known. But it’s all OK because the drug companies are exempt from any liability. The patient takes all the risk here, not the drug companies.
EMA was concerned about visible particles in the vials. The BMJ never investigated that. Is it still a problem? I don’t think anyone cares to know the answer to that.
The deaths in the trials are all dismissed as “unrelated to the vaccine” without doing the proper analysis.
There should be an investigation into these issues, but the governments are not going to expose their own fraud since it would be too embarrassing so nothing will happen.
Summary
This video summarizing the leaked EMA documents constitutes yet more evidence that the vaccines confer no benefits, only risk.
However, like everything else, it will be ignored by the authorities.
However, this is important information for the public to know about how they are being manipulated into taking a useless vaccine.
NOBODY is calling for any quality control here.
Have you ever seen a study where the authors collect vials randomly and sequence them? It’s not going to happen. Not in my lifetime.
*
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.
Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
by Michel Chossudovsky
Michel Chossudovsky reviews in detail how this insidious project “destroys people’s lives”. He provides a comprehensive analysis of everything you need to know about the “pandemic” — from the medical dimensions to the economic and social repercussions, political underpinnings, and mental and psychological impacts.
“My objective as an author is to inform people worldwide and refute the official narrative which has been used as a justification to destabilize the economic and social fabric of entire countries, followed by the imposition of the “deadly” COVID-19 “vaccine”. This crisis affects humanity in its entirety: almost 8 billion people. We stand in solidarity with our fellow human beings and our children worldwide. Truth is a powerful instrument.”
ISBN: 978-0-9879389-3-0, Year: 2022, PDF Ebook, Pages: 164, 15 Chapters
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Turn on the television. Move to the screen. Switch on the device – if you ever left it off. Queen Elizabeth II may have passed, but she is everywhere in very lively fashion, a spectral manifestation that has utterly controlled large chunks of a transfixed global media system.
It helps that she has captured the media mecca that is the United States, where anything outside its coverage is either, in self-described terms, irrelevant or non-existent. In the centre of the imperium, without a shade of irony, she and the British royal family have exercised a spiritual and celluloid existence almost abnormal in spread. Dramas of aristocratic themes such as Downton Abbey and The Crown captivate. Royal weddings prove to be absorbing spectacles, as do funerals. “I was here [in Washington] in 1997 when Princess Diana died,” retired British diplomat, Roy Forey, told the Financial Times. “At the time you couldn’t even walk on this street, it was so full of flowers.”
States of class, inequality and hereditary systems of rule are almost titillating, a reminder that the American Revolution was less radical than a revolt begun reluctantly by aristocratic, plantation owning slavers. Indeed, Britain’s royal institutions, in many ways, were reconstituted and applied to the rough timber of US expansion in the form of a Republic. The batons of empire were changed, but the purpose remained the same.
The Queen’s death stopped, briefly, trading on Wall Street, with the New York Stock Exchange in solemn observance after 3pm. In sporting terms, the US Open women’s semi-final between Ons Jabeur and Caroline Garcia was similarly delayed in respect, though one sports reporter promised tennis fans that the rest of the tournament would continue being broadcast on UK television.
More understandable, if barely, was to see coverage block and stifle all else before in Commonwealth countries such as Australia, itself still subject to British constitutional rule. The Australian constitution, in the wisdom of its drafters, lacks any mention of an independent prime minister or cabinet; the Governor-General remains the British sovereign’s representative down under. Reference is made, almost cursorily, to an amorphous Federal Executive Council.
In Australia, Pakistan’s catastrophic floods, the dangers of radiation spread from the Zaporizhzhia plant, and Ukrainian offensives against Russian forces were filed away in the less relevant news item file. The world, because Britain is, for those in Britain and its historically subject entities, The World, took centre stage, blocking the sun and replacing it with ticker tape announcements about ceremony and prevailing banality.
In the darkest of shades, Graham Smith, CEO of Republic, delivered a pointed reminder that the memorialisation of the Queen’s passing was itself a misdirection among many, be they about soft power tourism, industrious royals or a firm constitutional defender. “Platitude, myth, and sentimentality get in the way of a desperately needed challenge to inherited power and wealth, the significant failings of the royal household and the detrimental impact of monarchy on our nation’s political life.”
Expert commentary, or a tinny impression of it, was offered in such prosaic outlets as The Conversation to explain the phenomenon of grief for a person unrelated, unknown and unmet. This all served to further saturate the coverage, offering splashings and coatings for the phenomenon. “So this 24-hour news cycle, and being updated every single step of the queen’s illness and now death,” wrote a solemn academic from the University of New England, “can trigger our own lived experiences of loss. We need to be gentle with those varied reactions.”
Twitter, despite its screechy quality, at least offered a platform for puzzled individuals wondering if the Australian public broadcaster had been kidnapped by zealous monarchists. The veteran ABC broadcaster and former media advisor Barrie Cassidy sensed that something might have gone a bit awry in the adoration binge. “I suspect the ABC has misread its audience. If you want wall to wall royalty you can get it elsewhere in spades. The ABC is better when it offers an alternative to populism.”
The Australian satirical news site, The Shovel, summarised things fairly well when it noted how the minutiae of scant encounters with royalty and memory served to make one an authority. “An Australian man who briefly chatted to Queen Elizabeth at a function 58 years ago has been asked to reflect on the life and times of the monarch, as part of the ABC’s rolling coverage of the royal’s death.” It did not matter that the man’s memory was empty of what was said; what mattered was that he “was labelled a ‘royal expert’, given his intimate relationship with the royal family.”
A degree of this is forgivable. Queen Elizabeth was Madame Continuity, Mother Stability, the one who reigned rather than ruled. And the media adulation circuit is filled with its selected images, its consecrated saints and its pedestal-placed figures. For the moment, it’s a Queen as protagonist, and for many, The Queen.
*
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. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]
Featured image is from Joel Rouse/ Ministry of Defence, licensed under OGL 3
The American military government left Japan in 1952 leaving behind the 1948 peace constitutions intended to prevent Japan from ever rising again as imperial military power. But, the irony of the political fate was such that the U.S. had to ask its hated former mega-enemy to give hand to fight communism.
From the outset, the objective was to use 9/11 as a pretext for launching the first phase of the Middle East Central Asian War, which consisted in the bombing and occupation of Afghanistan. This was achieved by sustaining the myth that Muslim terrorists supported by the Afghan government had attacked the WTC on September 11, 2001.
Global, personal, individual. The reactions to the death of Queen Elizabeth II seemed to catch even unsuspecting republicans off guard. In Australia, former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who had led the Australian Republic Movement, was a mess of reflection on the passing. The old enemy France glowed with a distant familial warmth. In the United States, monarchical fetishism reasserted itself.
As should be more than obvious, the “riot” at the nation’s Capitol was blown severely out of proportion for propaganda purposes. Most Americans are not aware (being largely political imbeciles) that the FBI and Capitol Police played a major role instigating violence and property damage during the mischaracterized riot.
In this episode, Mike is joined by scientist and social theorist, Denis Rancourt, to debunk climate change hysteria and the myths forwarded by its cult leaders and adherents.
According to The Canadian Press, Health Canada says the decision came after a “thorough and independent scientific review of the evidence,” and concluded that the benefits of giving young children, who face extremely low risk from COVID-19, the novel Pfizer-BioNTech’s shot outweigh the risks.
The EU asked its members earlier this summer to reduce gas consumption by 15% starting this fall and running through the winter. While initially a request, it left the door open for it to become mandatory should the need arise. The 15% gas cut framework could also be applied to today’s plan to cut electricity usage by 10%, the ministers said on Friday.
Declassified files show how British oil giant Shell hatched a secret plan in the 1960s to defend the West’s share of the global energy market, with help from UK propaganda and intelligence agencies.
The latest empty cliché that one hears out of the mouth of Christians is “Pray for Ukraine.” But do Christians who utter this pious platitude even know what they mean when they say it?
At the top of the list are JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America and BlackRock, each with US$ 1 billion invested in the network of livestock financiers. The list of implicated companies includes Suzano, JBS, Marfrig, Cargill and ADM — agribusiness giants that wield their corporate might to sway Brazilian politics against the interests of the environment, peasants, Indigenous groups, and working people everywhere.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Despite tens of thousands of reported injuries and deaths, Health Canada has approved administering Pfizer’s experimental mRNA COVID injection to children six months old and up.
According to The Canadian Press, Health Canada says the decision came after a “thorough and independent scientific review of the evidence,” and concluded that the benefits of giving young children, who face extremely low risk from COVID-19, the novel Pfizer-BioNTech’s shot outweigh the risks.
This is the second COVID injection that Health Canada has approved for babies, with the federal agency already having allowed Moderna’s Spikevax COVID jab for the same age group in July.
Regardless of the so-called approval given by various health authorities across the world, the truth remains that the official clinical trial completion date for the shots is February 8, 2024, meaning until then the jabs are experimental.
The push to vaccinate young children comes despite the fact that researchers with Johns Hopkins School of Medicine found a “mortality rate of zero among children without a pre-existing medical condition such as leukemia” when they “analyze[d] approximately 48,000 children under 18 diagnosed with Covid in health-insurance data from April to August 2020.”
This, combined with the thousands of reports of serious adverse events and deaths following the shots, has led numerous experts to criticize the push to inject children with the experimental vaccines.
In fact, recent autopsy data shows a close association between the COVID mRNA shots and heart inflammation, and two additional medical studies from Europe have recently reported a link between the jabs and blood damage.
Despite these risks, Health Canada advisers are now recommending Canadians take a “booster” injection every three months, with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently threatening a return of “restrictions and rules” if the public fails to do so.
*
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.
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
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
A meeting of EU energy ministers on Friday has suggested that each EU country implement strategies to reduce overall electricity consumption by a minimum of 10 percent, the Wall Street Journal has reported.
The EU should also reduce electricity by at least 5% during peak price hours, according to a draft document seen by the WSJ.
The EU asked its members earlier this summer to reduce gas consumption by 15% starting this fall and running through the winter. While initially a request, it left the door open for it to become mandatory should the need arise. The 15% gas cut framework could also be applied to today’s plan to cut electricity usage by 10%, the ministers said on Friday.
According to the WSJ, the electricity rationing plan appears to have support from many member states.
The emergency EU energy minister meeting was held on Friday to discuss skyrocketing consumer energy bills and a price cap on Russian natural gas. The meeting concluded without a concrete plan, with the group stating that more work needed to be done. Proposals for potentially capping the price of Russian gas—a controversial measure that critics claim will be ineffective—are due mid-September.
Russia, for its part, has vowed to withhold gas exports to countries engaged in price capping, threatening to let Europe freeze if it runs contrary to Russia’s interests. Nevertheless, the EU seems determined to show its resolve on the matter to find a solution to restricting Russia’s oil and gas revenues.
Today’s emergency meeting is just the latest of many efforts the EU has made to quash economic upheaval due to industry shutdowns, and to prevent protests due to skyrocketing energy prices.
*
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.
Julianne Geiger is a veteran editor, writer and researcher for Oilprice.com, and a member of the Creative Professionals Networking Group.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
According to media reports on 8 September, the newly appointed Russian ambassador to Algeria, Valeryan Shuvayev, announced that the North African country’s president, Abdelmajid Tebboune, will likely visit Moscow before the end of the year to discuss mutual cooperation between the two countries.
Tebboune’s potential visit will center around Algeria’s desire to join the Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) group of emerging economies.
The BRICS group of nations represents the world’s most prominent economies outside of the western hemisphere.
In his first media appearance outside of the Russian embassy in Algeria, Shuvayev stated that President Tebboune sent a letter to Russia’s President Vladimir Putin regarding his country’s desire to join BRICS.
In May, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Algeria and met with President Tebboune, as well as his Algerian counterpart, Ramtane Lamamra, where they discussed a boost in relations between both countries, and the intention to sign a number of agreements in the near future that will further enhance the relationship between Moscow and Algiers.
Two months later, in late July, Tebboune referred to the BRICS group as a significant “economic and political power” which is of interest to the North African state and added that his country holds the necessary criteria to be included into the organization.
In mid-August, former Algerian Industry Minister, Ferhat Ait Ali, said during an interview:
“This bloc seeks to attract countries that are neither poor nor very rich, but rather countries that [can serve as an] alternative to Western hegemony.”
The BRICS group “includes two historical allies and partners for Algeria to trust in… namely China and Russia, and other partners who have no problem in the progress of our economic system in parallel with theirs,” the former Algerian minister added.
Algeria and Russia have historically enjoyed a smooth relationship. The Soviet Union was the first country to establish diplomatic relations with Algeria following its independence from French colonial occupation in 1962.
The BRICS group of emerging economies represents a beneficial alternative to the dominant US and western-led economic system, especially for countries negatively affected by western sanctions.
In June, the Islamic Republic of Iran submitted an application to become a member of the BRICS group. Tehran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Saeed Khatibzadeh, said at the time that the bloc’s member countries represent 30 percent of the world’s GDP and 40 percent of the global population.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Declassified files show how British oil giant Shell hatched a secret plan in the 1960s to defend the West’s share of the global energy market, with help from UK propaganda and intelligence agencies.
British oil corporation Shell hatched plans for a secret Cold War propaganda unit, recently declassified documents reveal.
In 1960, Shell commissioned a report into “communist efforts to disrupt the operations of major oil companies” across the developing world, and what private industry should do about it.
The report was authored by Sir George Sinclair, a staunch anti-communist who had spent decades in Britain’s colonial services, and whose brother was the general manager of Shell in Burma.
Between 1960 and 1962, Sinclair used his long-standing links with the Foreign Office to produce the report, receiving “the greatest help from Her Majesty’s Government and from Shell, not only in London but also…in many countries overseas”.
Sinclair drew particularly on the resources and advice of the Information Research Department (IRD), Britain’s covert Cold War propaganda arm. He also collaborated with Britain’s intelligence services.
In his final report, Sinclair warned that communist activities across Asia, Africa, and Latin America had serious “implications for Western oil interests”.
To this end, Sinclair attached a secret appendix to his final report, detailing plans for a private industry-funded propaganda unit designed to defend the West’s share of the global energy market.
The unit would be funded by Britain’s leading oil, banking and pharmaceutical companies, and engage in covert information operations across the developing world in the service of Western private enterprise. Its annual budget would run into the hundreds of thousands of pounds.
The degree to which the proposal for the unit was implemented, and whether the campaign was successful, remains unclear. But the plan throws new light on the Foreign Office’s relationship with big oil during the Cold War, and how covert propaganda operations were seen as a device to maintain Western control over global oil supplies.
Recommendation X was discussed in secret. (Photo: John McEvoy)
Recommendation X
The secret plan was codenamed “Recommendation X”, and was drawn up “in close association” with IRD chief Donald Hopson, his predecessor Ralph Murray, and Foreign Office official Leslie Glass.
Britain’s intelligence services were also aware of Sinclair’s activities. In October 1960, Sinclair met MI5 chief Roger Hollis for “a discussion about his new job and the extent to which we [MI5] may be able to help him in it”. Details of the meeting were then passed on to “C”, MI6 chief Sir Dick White.
After numerous drafts and redrafts, Recommendation X was finalised on 5 February 1962. The document ran to 52 pages, specifying the requirement for a big business-funded propaganda unit, as well as its functions, structure, staffing, and costs.
There was a “gap to be filled” in the information field, wrote Sinclair, given that “Western free enterprise…has been declared by the Russians as a target to be weakened and destroyed”.
Sinclair thus recommended the unit have “two interdependent divisions”: one “for assessment” of the risks to Western industry, and the other “for projection” of a “favourable image” of Western private enterprise across Africa, Asia, and Latin America.
To this end, Sinclair proposed that the unit use “unattributable material indirectly commissioned through some third party” to project “the basic case for… private enterprise”.
Sinclair also suggested that funds be provided “confidentially” for “non-attributable anti-Communist work in areas of particular financial interest” to Shell and other major Western companies.
This included “visits of influential people to the UK and visits of suitable Western personalities to the key areas overseas”.
In making the case for private enterprise across the developing world by covert means, the unit would mirror tactics used by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the IRD during the same period.
Indeed, Sinclair recommended using British and US intelligence-linked organisations to use and distribute the unit’s material, such as the Economic League, Interdoc, and the Latin America Information Committee.
The ‘Unit’
Sinclair could not decide on a name for the organisation, and referred to it simply as the “Unit”.
However, he insisted that the “choice of a title for an organisation that has some overt and some covert activities is important”. It was, he said, “often best to select a title that describes the overt activities as accurately as possible and thus provides a convincing cover story for the other work of the organisation and its staff”.
As such, he preferred something along the lines of the “Overseas Industrial Research Unit”.
It would require one director, one deputy director, one chief research economist, three research officers (one for each Latin America, Africa and Asia), one statistics officer, two production officers, an accountant, a registry officer, a librarian, two secretaries, and a messenger. Such staff needed to be “of high calibre” to make “a real impact in the war of ideas”, he wrote.
In the unit’s first year of operation, costs of staff, offices, consultants, and production were estimated to be £134,350, roughly £2m today. By the unit’s third year, costs were projected to rise to £410,170, over £6m today.
Shell would be the primary, but not the sole sponsor of the unit.
To get the organisation off the ground, Sinclair proposed approaching a number of Britain’s leading oil, pharmaceutical, chemical and banking companies such as BP, Unilever, ICI, British-American Tobacco, Barclays, and the Bank of London and South America.
“Once discussion of this project between Shell and HMG had reached a stage which would… justify an approach to other industries”, Sinclair wrote, the managing directors of Shell should approach Unilever and, with Unilever, approach ICI and, with Unilever and ICI, approach the banks, and so on.
“If the free enterprises of the West wish to foster, in the developing countries, a climate of ideas favourable to the survival and expansion of the free enterprise system, they should, in my view, tackle this problem now”, Sinclair emphasised in an earlier draft.
Such a project would be “bound to” meet “nationalist resistance”, he lamented, and therefore the unit should “get local leaders and organisations” to contribute as much as possible.
“This is a pump priming exercise: so is outside aid and technical assistance: both are liable to run up against nationalist feelings, but both are necessary. What is important is that both operations should be carried out as sensitively as possible”, he concluded.
No question of going back
After Sinclair submitted his report, the Foreign Office held a series of internal discussions on how to respond to it.
On 9 March 1962, Foreign Office deputy under-secretary Humphrey Trevelyan noted that “I think we should have a very clear idea” on “the degree of our interest [in the Unit] ranging from benevolent neutrality to active encouragement”.
He added: “There is of course no question of going back on the decision reached so far that we should take a positive and encouraging attitude towards this scheme”.
On 28 March, IRD chief Donald Hopson responded more positively to the initiative. “IRD have for years been looking for ways to tap big business’s reserves of good will and money and use them to plug the gap between secret and open vote expenditure on the Cold War”, he wrote.
As Declassifiedrevealed, Shell and BP had been providing secret subsidies to the IRD to fund covert propaganda operations around the companies’ areas of operation, such as the Middle East and Africa.
In Hopson’s view, a big business-funded unit would be less likely to “create suspicion”, and would be able to reach targets often “inaccessible to the guns of the official machine” such as opposition parties, as well as hostile trade union and student organisations.
It would also solve the problem of a “shortage of public money” for covert British propaganda activities. As such, Hopson concluded, “Recommendation X of the Sinclair report might be the answer” to the IRD’s difficulties.
The next month, Assistant Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs Leslie Glass similarly noted that the British government had a “wider interest” in supporting Recommendation X. “We are endeavouring to fight the Cold War largely with our public sector only, whereas our rivals have centralised direction of all sectors of their economy. It is to HMG’s interest to get Big Business more directly involved in the Cold War”, he noted.
By December 1962, Shell had held “tentative discussions” with Unilever and ICI, but “had found little enthusiasm for the project – particularly for something which was a new organisation altogether, and which appeared to be ‘hush-hush’”.
Despite this, Shell director Harold Wilkinson was “not likely yet to drop the idea”. In fact, Wilkinson felt that the objectives in Recommendation X were defined too narrowly.
“It appeared to Shell that in fact the danger to them came not only from Russian or Chinese Communism but from any sort of nationalist Marxism which could lead to expropriation, nationalisation and anti-capitalism generally”, one IRD official noted.
Whether Shell thus expanded its terms of reference for Recommendation X, or abandoned the project altogether, remains unclear.
Shell did not respond to requests for comment.
*
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.
John McEvoy is an independent journalist who has written for International History Review, The Canary, Tribune Magazine, Jacobin and Brasil Wire.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The latest empty cliché that one hears out of the mouth of Christians is “Pray for Ukraine.” But do Christians who utter this pious platitude even know what they mean when they say it?
I suppose that it is supposed to mean that we should pray for the people of Ukraine who are suffering because of the unjustified Russian invasion of their country. If only things were that simple.
Some observations are in order.
This appeal is based on the overly simplistic yet false and evil notion of Ukraine, good; Russia, bad.
This trite expression in the form of a prayer request is virtue signaling at its worst.
I think we are at the point now where someone saying “Pray for Ukraine” is the verbal equivalent of someone wearing a face mask.
If U.S. soldiers are heroes for following their government’s orders, then why aren’t Russian soldiers heroes for doing the same?
The Ukrainian nationalists (and the Christians who hang on their every word) who compare Putin to Hitler are gravely insulting Jews.
How come I have never heard any Christians say that we should pray for the ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine who were shelled for the past eight years by the Ukrainian military?
Where were these Christians when the U.S. military was killing Vietnamese, Laotians, and Cambodians by the millions during the Vietnam War?
Why are these Christians silent about Cubans suffering because of the U.S. embargo against Cuba?
Would Christians be saying “Pray for Yemen” if the United States was not supporting Saudi Arabia in its war in Yemen.?
And what about the people of Saudi Arabia suffering under the brutal rule of the Mohammed bin Salman regime? Shouldn’t we pray for them? Oh, I forgot, they are Muslims.
How many of these Christians expressed any concern about all the widows and orphans that the U.S. military made over a twenty-year period in Afghanistan?
How many of these Christians offered up prayers for the people of Iraq—a country that never attacked the United States—when hundreds of thousands of them were injured, maimed, or killed during the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq and, before this, as a consequence of the brutal sanctions that the United States imposed on the Iraqi people?
Why should we take any of these Christians seriously when they say “Pray for Ukraine”?
What Ron Paul said back in 2014 about the Russian annexation of Crimea is still just as true today: “Why does the U.S. care which flag will be hoisted on a small piece of land thousands of miles away?”
So, yes, pray for Ukraine. But pray for the civilians of the world who are on the receiving end of bombs and bullets from any army. And pray especially for the civilians of the world who are on the receiving end of weapons made in the good ole USA by merchants of death like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs Amir Khan Muttaqi expressed criticism over reports of US drones that are flying above Afghanistan and called on Washington to stop the violation of Afghan air space.
Muttaqi called on the international community to put pressure on the US to stop violating Afghan airspace.
“This is against international norms and also against the Doha agreement. We have talked with the delegation of the US many times and we emphasized that the Afghan airspace must not be violated from now on,” he said.
Referring to the US announcement of killing the al-Qaeda leader in Kabul, Muttaqi said that the US has yet to provide details or proof of Zawahiri’s killing.
“The US did not give us proof nor has our investigation been completed. I can assure you that the appointed delegation, they have yet to reach a final result on it,” he said.
Speaking at a press conference to provide details of the ministry’s annual activities, officials said the Islamic Emirate is pursuing a moderate policy toward all countries.
“We had exports of more than $1 billion over the past year, which is unprecedented in the last 20 years,” said Mohammad Shafiq Khateeb, head of the consulate department of the Foreign Ministry.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Global, personal, individual. The reactions to the death of Queen Elizabeth II seemed to catch even unsuspecting republicans off guard. In Australia, former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, who had led the Australian Republic Movement, was a mess of reflection on the passing. The old enemy France glowed with a distant familial warmth. In the United States, monarchical fetishism reasserted itself.
Not all the reflections were rosy. In South Africa, the Economic Freedom Fighters party admitted no mourning for the passing of the monarch of seven decades,
“because to us her death is a reminder of a very tragic period in this country and Africa’s history. Britain, under the leadership of the royal family, took over control of this territory that would become South Africa in 1795 from Batavian control, and took permanent control of the territory in 1806.” From then, the native populace knew no peace, nor “enjoyed the fruits of the riches of this land, riches were and still are utilized for the enrichment of the British royal family and those who look like them.”
Negative commentary, notably of the brisk too-soon mould, caused sparks and retributive anger. When news of Elizabeth II’s deteriorating condition reached critical race theorist and Carnegie Mellon academic Uju Anya on September 8, she jumped on Twitter with menacing enthusiasm. “I heard the chief monarch of a thieving raping genocidal empire is finally dying. May her pain be excruciating.” In the room next door, grant applications for future funding were probably being written.
The comment, even if academically toothless, was enough to stir empire building types such as the amoral Amazon founder, Jeff Bezos. In confounded fashion, he asked whether this was “someone supposedly working to make the world better […] I don’t think so.” Anya, unrepented, suggested that the Queen had “supervised a government that sponsored the genocide that massacred and displaced half my family”. As for Bezos, the bilious academic hoped that those who had suffered harm from his “merciless greed” would “remember you as fondly as I remember my colonizers.” On that score, many would agree.
In India, the historical site of controversial debates about the British monarchy, responses varied between lukewarm recognition to tangy irritation. The government of Narendra Modi declared a day of mourning on Sunday, with flags to fly at half-staff. But on closer inspection of social media chatter, Sucheta Mahajan of Jawaharlal Nehru University could detect little by way of effusive tear-filled adoration. There was “a lot of discussion but not much concern”. The passing was not treated as one of “an important world leader. After all, she did not call the shots.”
In 1997, when the late Queen made her third and last visit to India, much debate was provoked by the visit to Jallianwala Bagh. In April 1919, this site in the northern city of Amritsar was bloodied by the actions of the British Brigadier General Reginald Dyer, who ordered troops to fire upon a gathering of thousands of Indians that resulted in the deaths of, according to an official report, 379 men, women and children.
Did such a visit amount to an apology for the past sins of empire? Hardly, if we are going by the remarks she made at a New Delhi state banquet held just prior to the visit. “It is no secret that there have been some difficult episodes in our pasts – Jallianwala Bagh, which I shall visit tomorrow, is a distressing example. But history cannot be rewritten, however much we might sometimes wish otherwise. It has its moments of sadness, as well as gladness. We must learn from the sadness and build on the gladness.”
The statement is strikingly bereft of sorrow and filled with understatement. Build on gladness; forget the sadness. British rule over India offered more than just “distressing” examples. And “sadness” is certainly one numbing way of looking at an atrocity, not to mention various decisions made with telling consequences.
Indian historian and politician Shashi Tharoor is one who has elaborated an extensive laundry list of British sins, noting how the empire imposed a system of rule and economy on a pre-existing, rich society of agrarian sophistication largely for self-enriching goals. Far from civilising native subjects, British rule was marked by impoverishment, its trains decidedly governed by military self-interest, its governing policy one of constipated, selective inclusion.
Distinctions, however, are drawn between the occupant of a constitutional monarchy, and the government that used her name to prosecute a policy. Specific to Elizabeth II, Tharoor noted a “largely ceremonial” reign executed with “uncommon grace, her conduct on the throne marked by a selfless serenity, a total self-abnegation and devotion to the public trappings of her position.” In her rule, she seemed to be a consummate expression of Walter Bagehot’s formulation of a constitutional monarch’s three rights: the right to be consulted, the right to encourage, the right to warn.
Indians had tried to learn and forgive, for the most part, the “cruelties of colonialism”, with some even valuing the British connection. But the Queen could be faulted for never once acknowledging, let alone apologising, for “those centuries of colonial plunder and cruelty that made her position and wealth possible.”
Where, then, did she figure in the Bagehot scheme of consulting, encouragement and warning regarding British actions in Kenya in the use of concentration camps to break the Mau Mau rebellion, or the suppression of Communists in the Malaysian Emergency? The Westminster shroud, in this regard, is thick indeed, a layer of forced exculpation.
In that curious sense, the constitutional monarch could derive the profits of plunder yet disclaim responsibility. Monarchs, Tharoor noted, “did not actually order any of these things”. It followed that the Queen did not have to apologise for them, though a sovereign’s good sense might have demanded it.
As to what’s left of any republican sentiment, the Irish politician Clare Daly, Member of the European Parliament, put it well in expressing her “deepest sympathies and solidarity with republicans living under British rule.” The forthcoming weeks would prove hard, “but it will pass.” Maybe a bit wistfully, she suggested that the “day will come.” Those days always do, but Queen Liz has made it that much more difficult.
*
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. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Much will be said, remembered and commemorated on this day, the 21st anniversary of the tragedies on September 11, 2001.
While there are many lessons from what happened prior to, during and following that day, there’s one take-a-way that should never be forgotten: the political and economic power elite never lets a tragedy, catastrophe or crisis go to waste to further attempt to increase their political and/or economic dominance.
In the case of September 11, a major success in this vein was the Patriot Act, passed soon afterwards to supposedly enhance “national security” to catch “terrorists,” specifically Middle Eastern Muslims inside the United States. While some of its provisions were intended to address problems that predated 9/11, most of the others allowed the government to more easily and effectively violate the privacy rights of innocent citizens and residents. These included tracking the activities of people on the Internet, compiling credit and bank records and expanding the monitoring of phone and email communications. September 11 was just a pretext by the government to enact unprecedented violations of civil rights and surveillance expansion that were labeled as “un-American” prior to 9/11.
It’s not just the government. Corporations have taken full advantage of emergencies, urgencies and crises to expand their power, wealth and rights – which by definition diminishes the democratic power of people and safeguards communities and the natural world.
The 2007-2009 financial crisis, caused by the reckless and criminal activities of the largest financial institutions, was the rationale for providing $16 trillion in bailout funds to major U.S. and foreign banking corporations that were asserted by banking lobbyists as “too big to fail.”
The pandemic was the pretext for many corporations to make obscene profits, which continues in many instances. Pfizer Corporation, for example, has engaged in “aggressive corporate practices and ruthless profiteering that has led to an obscene inequality in access to COVID-19 vaccines”
The war in Ukraine has been incredibly profitable for weapons contractors as the military budget soars to $813 billion for next fiscal year.“The proposed increase of $31 billion is shielded by support for Ukraine, “but make no mistake, most of this bloated budget was in the pipeline years back, prior Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.” Public calls to reduce the military budget in this environment are deemed far less “credible.”
Recent flooding in Jackson, MS that caused the widespread lack of safe water prompted calls to explore privatization/corporatization of the city’s water system by the state’s Governor, which would fundamentally reduce the political power of citizens to decide the future direction of the system.
There are many other examples of what author Naomi Klein calls The Shock Doctrine. Emergencies, crises, and urgencies become the justifications to “fast track” proposals with little or no public transparency, hearings, or input.
Corporations use the cover of crises to privatize/corporatize public assets, to demand millions or billions of public tax dollars, to call for greater secrecy, to amass greater political power and/or to support laws making it more difficult to vote, protest, and organize for real democracy.
But “never letting a tragedy, catastrophe or crisis go to waste” has a flip side.
It provides opportunities for people of conscience to show our humanity by tangibly supporting individuals and communities harmed by crisis.
It provide teachable and organizing moments to expose and resist the structures, institutions and systems that when crises arise, the responses disproportionately benefit the political and economically rich and powerful, and
It provides openings for alternative visions of what a bottom-up, democratic, people- and nature-centered society can look like. Of course, part of these fundamental alternatives is ensuring that only human beings, not corporations, have inalienable constitutional rights and that the voices of people should be heard and responded to over the “voices” of money (i.e. money is not free speech) – both core components of the We the People Amendment (HJR48)
However you observe September 11, if at all, always remember this lesson.
It’s up to us to apply it in ways that promote justice, peace, a livable world and authentic democracy.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
At the top of the list are JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America and BlackRock, each with US$ 1 billion invested in the network of livestock financiers. The list of implicated companies includes Suzano, JBS, Marfrig, Cargill and ADM — agribusiness giants that wield their corporate might to sway Brazilian politics against the interests of the environment, peasants, Indigenous groups, and working people everywhere.
Between 2019 and 2021, transnational banks and investment funds contributed more than US$ 27 billion to companies that are part of the funding chain of Instituto Pensar Agro (Pensar Agro Institute – IPA). IPA is the think tank behind the Frente Parlamentar da Agropecuária (Agricultural Parliamentary Front – FPA) which is responsible for a package of anti-environmental measures being considered in the Brazilian Congress. The amount invested corresponds to Lebanon’s GDP, according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimate for 2020.
The billion-dollar figure corresponds to share purchases by sovereign wealth funds, loan concessions, debt renegotiations, and bond issues executed between January 2019 and April 2021 (date of the last data collection). In the case of multinational groups, such as soybean processors Cargill, ADM and Bunge, and meat processing companies JBS, Marfrig and Minerva, only investments for operations in Brazil were considered.
The results show six global financial groups at the head of investments in companies linked to the IPA. Together, JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, and the BlackRock, Vanguard, and Dimensional funds transferred US$ 4.12 billion to companies involved in financing the agribusiness lobby in Brasília. The amount corresponds to 15% of the total value of US$ 27.06 billion in transactions analyzed in the period.
Suzano Concentrates 51.9% of Investments Among IPA Funders
The report compiled by De Olho shows that Suzano was foreign capital’s favorite over the last three years. Between 2019 and 2021, the group led by the Feffer family received US$14.03 billion from global banks and investment funds, the equivalent of 51.9% of the total invested in IPA-associated companies in the period. The company’s main supporters were Bank of America ($791.3 million), JP Morgan Chase ($774.8 million), and BlackRock ($525.5 million).
Investor attention was mainly focussed on the merger with Fibria (formerly Veracel), announced in 2018 and completed the following year. This process has created a virtual monopoly: Suzano S.A., because of the merger, is the largest producer of pulp and eucalyptus in the world and the fifth largest company in Brazil, across all economic sectors.
Women from the MST occupying a Suzano unit in 2015
The CEO, Walter Schalka, is vice president of Ibá, an association that brings together the largest pulp producers in Brazil and one of the main supporters of the Instituto Pensar Agro. Apart from the timber sector, Suzano also operates in the pesticide and transgenic seed sectors through its subsidiary FuturaGene, which participates in CropLife Brasil.
In addition to these conflicts, the company is known for the participation of its directors, brothers David and Daniel Feffer, in financing movements of the so-called “new right” in Brazil. Daniel is one of the founders of the Millenium Institute, alongside the Minister of Economy, Paulo Guedes. His brother David was involved, in 2007, in the creation of the Institute for Leadership Formation, one of the organizers of the Liberty and Democracy Forum, alongside José Salim Mattar Junior, owner of the car rental company Localiza Hertz and former Secretary General for Privatization in Mr. Bolsonaro’s government.
The family also has close ties to the former Minister of the Environment, Ricardo Salles. In 2018, De Olho nos Ruralistas showed that Suzano was the main beneficiary of Salles’ attempt to irregularly modify the Management Plan of the Environmental Protection Area (APA) Várzea do Rio Tietê when he was Environment Secretary in São Paulo. Indicted by the Federal Public Prosecution Office, he was acquitted in March 2021.
United States and Europe Lead International Funding
The analysis of financial transactions based on data from the Florestas & Finanças platform shows a large concentration of resources directed to Brazilian agribusiness companies come from investors in the global North. The United States is the biggest provider of funds, with US$ 7.44 billion coming mostly from banks such as American International Group (AIG), Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, and Vanguard.
JBS is one of the leaders in international investments
Large European financial groups, such as the German Allianz and Deutsche Bank; the British Barclays and Standard Chartered; the Spanish BBVA and Santander; the French BNP Paribas; the Dutch ABN-Amro and Rabobank, among others; have invested $4.5 billion in IPA companies.
As the sole remaining survivor among the financial players that were behind the 2008 global crisis, JP Morgan Chase tops the list, having invested more than US$1.1 billion in transactions during the period. In addition to the aforementioned Suzano, the Wall Street bank invested in 15 other companies, especially the meat processing company Marfrig, which received US$ 103.29 million in 2019 and another US$ 4.7 million between January and April 2021.
Bank of America and BlackRock have also invested $1 billion each. The latter is famous for being the main investor in Brazil’s JBS, totaling $139.34 million in transfers since 2019. The world’s largest producer of animal protein, the company owned by brothers Wesley and Joesley Batista has also received money from stockbrokers registered in offshore tax havens.
According to the report, the meat processing company received US$ 60 million for the purchase of shares and bonds by two private brokerage firms in Bermuda, Fidelity International and Lazard, both cited in the Offshore Leaks, an investigation into tax evasion and capital flight led by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalism (ICIJ). To a lesser extent, both also traded Bunge shares in 2021.
The Brazilian Financial Sector Also Joins the Party
Despite leading the investments, international groups are not the only ones to support the activities of the companies that make up the IPA. Banks and players in the Brazilian financial market such as BTG Pactual, Safra, Verde Asset Management, Vinci Partners, and XP Investimentos – whether through credit, holding shares and bonds, or loans, direct or via the Plano Safra – maintain bonds estimated at US$ 9.3 billion.
In addition to the private sector, the National Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES) – which has an investment policy partly focused on agribusiness – has lent more than US$ 3 billion to companies linked to the IPA between January 2019 and April 2021. Standing out is the bank’s equity stake in Ourofino Saúde Animal, part of the Ourofino group, second in the ranking of companies that operate within the structure of agribusiness associations, with participation in six entities.
In addition to the development bank, Brazilian institutional investment funds, such as Petros, of Petrobras, and Valia, of mining company Vale’s employees, also have a share.
*
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.
Caio de Freitas Paes is a journalist. He writes for De Olho nos Ruralistas and The Intercept Brasil, among other media outlets.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
It is declared, fallaciously, that America is a “democracy,” and that supposed democracy is now in danger from aggressive and vile challengers, that is to say the former president and his staff.
“A grand jury has subpoenaed several associates of former President Donald Trump in connection with the Department of Justice’s investigation into the origins of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, [indicate] multiple people familiar with the case,” reports the corporate media.
As should be more than obvious, the “riot” at the nation’s Capitol was blown severely out of proportion for propaganda purposes. Most Americans are not aware (being largely political imbeciles) that the FBI and Capitol Police played a major role instigating violence and property damage during the mischaracterized riot. The New York Times admitted as much, but threw in the typical spin, making excuses for Stasi-like tactics.
Last September, The Hill reported the “FBI had an informant in the crowd during the Jan. 6 attack,” an unlikely prospect, as I have researched the state’s political police force for a number of years. There were undoubtedly numerous FBI informants and agents provocateurs embeded in the demonstration against what is perceived to be an illegitimate and rigged election.
There was an event more than a decade ago that did not result in FBI subversion and the Democrat push to hobble Republicans, tar and feathering them all as Trump loyalists and dangerous extremists, even “fascists” (the politically illiterate “representatives” in Congress know virtually nothing about real fascism).
The event occurred on December, 2011. On that date Congress was occupied by labor activists. “Our Occupy Congress actions on the steps of Congress were unsanctioned by Democratic Party leadership,” said Nick Brana, National Chair of the People’s Party.
“I was there when the Squad occupied Congress and the police treated the group with velvet gloves. When dozens of us with the People’s Party took the steps on Labor Day, the police were so determined to stop us from occupying Congress that they arrested Paula Jean Swearengin, Jackson Hinkle, Martin Gugino and I and kicked everyone else, protesters and tourists, off the Capitol grounds and closed it entirely,” he wrote.
Unlike the January 6 “protest,” nobody was shot to death or beaten by police during the aborted occupation. Nobody was sent to solitary confinement.
More than a decade ago, at the state capitol in Madison, Wisconsin, a mob of Democrats occupied the state house.
“Most conservatives have condemned the right-wing mob that assaulted the U.S. Capitol. But 10 years ago, Democrats embraced the left-wing mob that occupied the state Capitol in Madison,” writes Marc A. Thiessen for The Washington Post. “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) praised the occupiers for an ‘impressive show of democracy in action’ and tweeted as they assaulted the Capitol that she continued ‘to stand in solidarity’ with the union activists. In other words, Democrats were for occupying capitols before they were against it. (Emphasis added.)
In other words, if the cause reflects the agenda of the elite that own the Democrat-Republican one party system, the authorities will respond in a more mild mannered fashion.
Obviously, Trump is an outsider, an outlier, and his surprise victory of the electoral vote was considered completely unacceptable by the one-party pretending to be two separate and (according to the corporate media) divided parties.
Trump was, of course, a disaster. I do not want to see him re-elected, but if that’s what the American people want, the ideologically radical Democrat party must step aside. Of course, they will not, as the legal and propaganda shenanigans went on nonstop during his tenure and continue until this very day. The Democrats are determined to get Trump indicted and put behind bars, thus revealing their endless venality for any opposition to their corporate-dominated rule.
This is normal behavior for a ruling party. For them, only the opposition is capable of criminality and extremism, no matter the political platform or popular support. Democracy in America, for a very long time, has served as window dressing for authoritarianism. That showy window dressing is now beginning to fray and the people, those with any political sense (or, for that matter, can tell the difference between right and wrong), are either outraged or keep their mouths shut, as most people do during the reign of authoritarians, lest they become victims.
Case in point: Hillary Clinton’s email server, loaded up with classified documents, was easily hacked by a number of intelligence agencies in other countries. She will never be prosecuted. She is nothing short of sacrosanct to large numbers of Democrats, a top figure representing the corporate-banker dominated elite. If Democrats have their way, she may be the next president, never mind her thick ledger of war crimes during the especially violent Obama administration.
The state will no longer tolerate dissidence or demands of a change in policy (for instance, torturing and killing millions of people in foreign lands, then stealing their resources and privatizing everything from water to state services paid for by taxpayers).
The crack down on Trump supporters is only the beginning. If Democrats and their Republican allies continue to engage in political repression of opposing political organizations and parties, America will soon become a full-blown dictatorship. In fact, it is well on the way.
*
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.
Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
In this episode, Mike is joined by scientist and social theorist, Denis Rancourt, to debunk climate change hysteria and the myths forwarded by its cult leaders and adherents.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Sanctions on Russia are preventing Gazprom from operating North Stream 1, the only one bringing Russian gas to Germany after the forced closure of its sister pipeline, North Stream 2. The Kremlin reports that “Sanctions imposed by the EU, UK, US and Canada have disrupted the technical maintenance system of turbine components that ensured pumping.”
The U.S.-EU strategy is clear: to prevent Europe from receiving Russian gas at low prices due to the long-term agreements previously made with Russia, forcing European consumers to buy it on the spot market at extremely higher prices set according to speculative and political mechanisms by the Amsterdam Stock Exchange, which is now part of a large U.S. holding company.
The only pipeline that regularly transports Russian gas to Europe is the TurkStream, via the Black Sea and the Balkans. Hungary, which opposes EU sanctions (despite being part of the EU and NATO), has signed a long-term agreement with Gazprom to receive 80 percent of the gas it needs from Russia through this pipeline.
However, there are growing tensions in the Balkans, especially against Serbia through which TurkStream passes, caused by NATO’s long hands, which could lead to the blocking of this last pipeline from Russia as well.
This situation is part of an increasingly explosive political-military scenario. The new British premier Liz Truss declares herself “ready to use nuclear weapons.”
A further danger is caused by the fact that Ukrainian forces – armed, trained and de facto commanded by NATO – are firing guns supplied to them by NATO and the EU on the Zaparozhye nuclear power plant currently under Russian control, exposing Italy and Europe to the very serious risk of a new Chernobyl.
The International Atomic Energy Agency warns: “With the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant we are playing with fire and something very, very catastrophic could happen” .
*
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 byoblu.
Manlio Dinucci, award winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Calls have been growing for some of the Queen’s crown jewels to be returned to India and Africa.
While many have taken to the streets of London near Buckingham Palace, the area around Windsor Castle, as well as social media to pay their respects, others have spoken out about the colonial history of the country which the Queen served for 70 years.
In particular, people have been calling for the return of the Koh-i-Noor diamond which is currently set in the crown of the Queen Mother and is part of the Crown Jewels on display at the Tower of London and the Great Star of Africa set in the Sovereign’s Sceptre, which is also part of the Crown Jewels.
‘The Koh-i-noor diamond from India sits atop the crown made for the Queen Mother in 1937 and the Great Star of Africa sits in the Queen's scepter’ pic.twitter.com/l1gZfmmrh5
The Koh-i-Noor is one of the largest cut diamonds in the world coming in at just over 105 carats. It is said to be worth between $140 and $400 million, but is also hailed as priceless. It is also known as one of the world’s most controversial diamonds too.
While it is believed to have first been mentioned over 5,000 years ago in a Sanskrit script, the diamond was referred to as the Syamantaka and subsequently who actually had ownership of it was simply speculation.
After that, for the next 300 years from the year of 1339, it stayed in the city of Samarkand.
The Koh-i-Noor remained in India until 1849, when British forces conquered the Punjab and it became part of the British East India Company.
It was then shipped back to Britain and, in July 1850, given to Queen Victoria.
The diamond became part of the crown jewels after Queen Victoria passed away.
“Instead of returning plundered patrimony to its rightful owners, the British are clinging to stolen artefacts such as the Kohinoor diamond, which they embedded in the Queen Mother’s tiara and shamelessly flaunt in the Tower of London,” Tharoor said.
Calls have also grown for the Great Star of Africa – also known as Cullinan I and First Star of Africa – to be returned.
Africa Archives tweeted:
“Queen Elizabeth II owns the largest clear-cut diamond in the world known as the Great Star of Africa. The 530-carat gem was mined in South Africa back in 1905. It was stolen from South Africa. It has an estimated worth of $400 million.
Queen Elizabeth II owns the largest clear cut diamond in the world Known as 'The Great Star of Africa' the 530 carats gem was mined in South Africa back in 1905. It was stolen from South Africa. It has an estimated worth of $400 million. pic.twitter.com/HesTmGTv4d
Africa Archives tweeted: “Queen Elizabeth II owns the largest clear-cut diamond in the world known as the Great Star of Africa. The 530-carat gem was mined in South Africa back in 1905. It was stolen from South Africa. It has an estimated worth of $400 million.
“The British claim that it was given to them as a symbol of friendship and peace yet it was during colonialism. The British then replaced the name ‘The Great Star of Africa’ with name of Chairman of Mine ‘Thomas Cullinan’.”
*
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.
Featured image is a collage from Unilad, image copyright Alamy Stock Photo
If anybody thinks that the recent extreme Pakistani monsoon floods (see Red Cross photo below) and the US-instigated ousting of Pakistan’s Prime Minister, Imran Khan, are sheer coincidence, might be dead-wrong.
Lest we forget, one day before the 9/11 attacks [as well as on the morning of 9/11, the dad of the sitting President of the United States of America, George Herbert Walker Bush was meeting none other than Shafiq bin Laden, the brother of the alleged terror mastermind Osama bin Laden.
Much of the traditional control the UK exerted over the Middle East was grounded in a range of monarchies that had been imposed or backed by the empire and maintained close links to Britain’s royal family.
Damning words from Dunja Mijatovic, human rights commissioner for the Council of Europe on the controversial Legacy Bill, which is currently going through Parliament. The sense of panic to get this legislation into law has been hastened by the brilliant work of organisations like Relatives for Justice and the Pat Finucane Centre, which have been a tremendous help and support to victims and families of the Troubles.
When Stephanie de Garay allowed her three children to sign up for Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot trial, she assumed the worst that could happen was anaphylactic shock — and in that case, they’d be treated with an EpiPen and be fine. From her daughter’s perspective, the trial was a way to keep up with a close friend who had already signed up for the trial.
I have taken the risky step of referring to the speech of Charles Coughlin in my recent writings. Coughlin was the most trenchant critic of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, after he had come out as an early supporter. Although Coughlin’s later writings are problematic, and at some points disturbing, it is not accurate to say he was simply an American fascist.
This article demonstrates unequivocally that mortality and morbidity has increased dramatically as a result of the vaccine. The incidence of Covid positive cases has also increased.
The German-French Nobel Peace Prize winner, pacifist and “jungle doctor” Albert Schweitzer was one of the most important thinkers of the 20th century. His philosophical thinking was based on the assumption that when people reflect on themselves and their limits, they mutually recognise each other as brothers who reflect on themselves and their limits.
In a rare gesture of political realism, the US government refused to consider Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. President Joe Bidenstressed that the measure would bring many problems and damages, being firm in his negative response.
The statement by Poland that it needs to rearm its troops in preparation for a “war with Russia” in the next few years is intended to attract additional aid and weapons from NATO to strengthen its eastern borders and to modernise its arsenal after it supplied obsolete weapons to Ukraine. However, this comes at the price of destroying the economy and the quality of life of the average citizen.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
According to Reuters, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky will appear at a summit with Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and other American weapons manufacturers later this month. The Ukrainian leader is expected to appeal for more arms transfers. On Thursday, top White House officials announced nearly $3 billion in military support for the war.
The conference will be hosted in Austin, Texas on September 21 and Zelensky will appear via video conference. Since the war started, he has spoken with Congress, the Grammys and numerous other worldwide cultural events. The summit later this month will be the first time Zelensky directly appealed to the heads of arms manufacturers.
After Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, the Biden Administration has announced several rounds of security assistance for Kiev totaling tens of billions of dollars. The US has sent over one dozen High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) produced by Lockheed and thousands of Javelin anti-tank missiles produced jointly by Lockheed and Raytheon. Both companies experienced bumps in their stock prices after the start of the war.
The weapons sales from the war in Ukraine are expected to last well into the future. This week, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin told a group of European officials the US will support Kiev for the long haul. “We will work together to train Ukraine’s forces for the long haul. We will work together to help integrate Ukraine’s capabilities and bolster its joint operations for the long haul,” he said.
Austin was formerly employed at Raytheon and has supported the US intervention in Ukraine. On Tuesday, Austin, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, announced $2.8 billion in military aid for Ukraine. The US has pledged over $15 billion in weapons for Kiev since February.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Maddie de Garay signed up for Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot trial when she was 12; previously a healthy preteen, her life has been forever changed due to health problems caused by the shots
Maddie suffered a severe systemic adverse reaction to her second dose of the shot and struggled through 11 ER visits and four hospital admissions in the year and a half that followed
Injuries from the shot have left her unable to walk or eat — she receives her nutrition via a feeding tube — and suffering from constant pain, vision problems, tinnitus, allergic reactions and lack of neck control
Maddie and her family were continually dismissed by the medical professionals put in place to help, ignored by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and denied the care needed to help Maddie
The medical professionals went so far as to label Maddie’s health problems as psychological in nature, and they still haven’t been contacted by anyone from Pfizer or the FDA — even after her true diagnosis was revealed and found to be related to the shots
*
When Stephanie de Garay allowed her three children to sign up for Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot trial, she assumed the worst that could happen was anaphylactic shock — and in that case, they’d be treated with an EpiPen and be fine. From her daughter’s perspective, the trial was a way to keep up with a close friend who had already signed up for the trial.
It also didn’t hurt that the trial offered monetary compensation of $119 per visit.1 This is what prompted all three of de Garay’s children to ultimately sign up for the COVID-19 shot trial, which changed the life of de Garay’s daughter Maddie. A healthy 12-year-old girl prior to the trial, Maddie loved to dance, play soccer and spend time with her friends.
She suffered a severe systemic adverse reaction to her second dose of the shot, however, and struggled through 11 ER visits and four hospital admissions in the year and a half that followed. Injuries from the shot have left her unable to walk or eat — she receives her nutrition via a feeding tube — and suffering from constant pain, vision problems, tinnitus, allergic reactions and lack of neck control.2
As though the physical trauma weren’t enough, Maddie and her family were continually dismissed by the medical professionals put in place to help, ignored by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and denied the care needed to help Maddie.
The medical professionals went so far as to label Maddie’s health problems as psychological in nature, and they still haven’t been contacted by anyone from Pfizer or the FDA — even after her true diagnosis was revealed and found to be related to the shots.
In the video above, Del Bigtree with “The Highwire” details Maddie’s ordeal and the family’s continued fight to not only get help for their daughter but get the word out so others aren’t similarly harmed by COVID-19 injections.3
Adverse Reaction Started Within Hours of the Second Dose
After Maddie joined Pfizer’s COVID-19 trial for 12- to 15-year-olds, she received her first dose of the experimental shot December 30, 2020. They were told it was just like a flu shot, “no big deal,” de Garay said. The second dose was given three weeks later, blood drawn two weeks after that and immune responses compared.
Participants were given access to the TrialMax app to record side effects, like a swollen arm, but de Garay was surprised at the format it used. There wasn’t space for open-ended comments, only direct questions with “yes” or “no” options for answers, or check boxes to signify a set of predetermined potential effects.
With the first shot, Maddie had a fever and her arm swelled. She received the second dose January 20, 2021, which the children said hurt more than the first shot. At that point, de Garay started writing notes to make sure she was documenting what happened to the children; she thought it would be valuable for the trial.
The next day, January 21, 12 hours after Maddie’s second COVID-19 shot, de Garay wrote, “Maddie came into our room around 4 a.m. and said she didn’t feel right and asked if she could sleep with us. Not typical of her.”4
The next day, she barely made it through the day at school, and when she walked in the door from the bus, she wasn’t in good shape. De Garay’s husband sent her a text at work saying Maddie was having a reaction to the shot. In the background, de Garay could hear her daughter screaming that her heart felt like it was going to be ripped out through her neck; she was in that much pain.
A trip to the ER was useless — they checked her out for appendicitis, ruled it out and sent her home, saying it was most likely an adverse reaction to the COVID-19 shot and would get better in time.
They recommended seeing a family doctor if there were any more issues — even though Maddie was part of a clinical trial, arguably the most high-profile clinical trial ongoing at the time, the whole purpose of which is to find out if the shots cause adverse reactions. Yet, Pfizer did not contact the family and Maddie’s heart pain wasn’t addressed.
Shot Reaction Labeled a Psychological Problem
January 23, 2021, de Garay recorded Maddie’s continued symptoms, which included severe body pain, nausea, diarrhea and extreme fatigue. They visited an ER three times that week and Maddie was finally admitted on the third visit.
But instead of sending in medical specialists and doing extensive testing, they sent in psychologists and social workers, as they were focused on her mental health. They labeled Maddie with anxiety and suggested that her anxiety about the shot was causing all of the symptoms.5 On Life Funder, a website where a fundraising effort has been started for Maddie, it’s explained:6
“After reporting everything to the Pfizer clinical trial Principal Investigator [Dr. Robert Frenck] and being brushed aside, we started documenting every detail of Maddie’s injury. Cincinnati Children’s first tried to treat Maddie as “a mental patient,” telling us it was anxiety and it was all in Maddie’s head.
Pfizer listed her traumatic systemic adverse reaction as “functional abdominal pain” when reporting to the FDA. A day before Pfizer submitted their request for emergency approval for the covid vaccine for 12-15-year-olds and before necessary testing was done, they put Functional Neurological Disorder (FND) as a diagnosis in her chart.”
Maddie’s symptoms continued into February, with old symptoms getting worse and new symptoms, including extreme bloating after eating, starting. Maddie was dizzy, nauseous and in pain. She felt like her heart was on fire and soon began throwing up when she ate, until she couldn’t eat at all. Her ability to shower on her own became a thing of the past.7
It was Dr. Amal Assa’ad at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital who, after spending just 15 minutes with Maddie, determined that her physical symptoms weren’t the result of the shots but were due to a functional neurological disorder.
She put in her notes that she had discussed with another doctor, Robert Frenck, measuring an antibody titer to determine whether Maddie had received the shot or a placebo in the trial, but ultimately she said she thought it will be “irrelevant to the management of Madeline’s functional disorder.”8 Assa’ad’s notes went so far as to advise against any further investigation, even though Maddie was a participant in a clinical trial:9
“My assessment is that Madeline has a functional impairment that is not organic in nature … I also discourage further work up since this is usually detrimental in functional disorders because it drives the patient to thinking that there must be something wrong that is indicating all this work up. It also delays the necessary psychologic intervention that is needed to help resolve the functional disorder.”
‘It’s Like We’re Stuck in a Nightmare’
Frenck, director of the Vaccine Research Center at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, was principal investigator of the Pfizer COVID-19 trial, put there to act as an advocate for the people in the trial and making sure that they were safe, as well as determine if any reactions they experienced were due to the vaccine. He offered little help to the de Garays, even as Maddie’s symptoms persisted and worsened.
February 19, 2021, de Garay wrote that Maddie fainted and, when she came to, couldn’t remember her birthday or her friend’s names. In response, the hospital gave her a different tape for her IV and said she may have a rubber allergy.
During her second hospital stay, Maddie woke up from an MRI of her brain and upper GI, fell to the ground and hasn’t been able to walk since. Her father said, “It’s like we’re stuck in a nightmare,” and they feel they’ve been abandoned.
When they signed Maddie up for the clinical trial, the de Garays assumed they’d have medical staff on hand and scientists there to support them. Any medical bills due to adverse events were also supposed to be covered, but Pfizer and the hospital were refusing to pay for Maddie’s treatments, claiming they weren’t research-related. De Garay’s notes continued into March 2021:10
March 24, blackout that lasted 20 minutes, pulse went up to 150
March 28, 10 convulsions and seizures, can’t walk, gets around by scooting on her butt
Previously, doctor’s notes said Maddie had no anxiety, but then they changed their tune, writing that she “seems to have some anxiety which may be augmenting her pain.” Even after 1.5 months in the hospital, the health care providers were treating Maddie’s shot reaction as a psychological issue instead of a physical one.
After she didn’t make any physical progress, the hospital transferred Maddie to a mental institution — but after seeing the harsh conditions used at the facility, the de Garays took Maddie home instead, with no support offered for her care.
“They’ve just basically pretended this didn’t happen … I thought in a clinical trial that if anything happened, they were going to do everything they could to figure it out,” de Garay said. “I thought that was the whole point. So that’s why I wasn’t worried. But they didn’t do that. They just tried to make her look like she was crazy.”11
Pfizer Reported Maddie’s Severe Reaction as Abdominal Pain
If you’re wondering how Pfizer got away with this, in Pfizer’s April 2021 disclosure of Maddie’s case to the FDA, it’s stated:12
“One participant experienced an SAE [serious adverse event] reported as generalized neuralgia, and also reported 3 concurrent non-serious AEs (abdominal pain, abscess, gastritis) and 1 concurrent SAE (constipation) within the same week. The participant was eventually diagnosed with functional abdominal pain. The event was reported as ongoing at the time of the cutoff date.”
Bigtree stated, “That looks like fraud to me.” Even as the de Garays tried to transfer Maddie’s care to a different local hospital, they were met with bias and red tape; the health care providers who received all the digital records had already made their minds up about the diagnosis before Maddie was seen.
The de Garays feel they’re blacklisted at major hospitals, and any doctor who’s going to do the right thing is going to risk their career in doing so. And, as noted on Life Funder, “Pfizer has zero financial obligation for Maddie’s injury and they have not offered any assistance.”13
After a year and a half, with the help of the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) and React19, a nonprofit that offers support for those suffering from long-term COVID-19 shot adverse events, they found doctors willing to conduct the proper tests, who diagnosed Maddie’s vaccine reaction as follows:14
“The findings were consistent with severe distal chronic acquired demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy, small fiber sensory neuropathy and orthostatic intolerance in the setting of COVID vaccination.”
Pfizer Classifies Severe Reactions as ‘Not Related’ to Shots
The FDA and Pfizer attempted to hide the COVID-19 shot clinical trial data for 75 years, but the FDA was ordered by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to release redacted versions of trial documents on a much faster schedule. As part of the court order, 80,000 pages of documents related to the FDA’s approval of Pfizer’s COVID-19 shots were released June 1, 2022.15
Among those documents were case report forms (CRFs) revealing that deaths and severe adverse events took place during Phase 3 trials, but, as reported by Children’s Health Defense, Pfizer had “a trend of classifying almost all adverse events — and in particular severe adverse events (SAEs) — as being ‘not related’ to the vaccine.”16
Examples include a woman in her early 50s who died from a heart attack November 4, 2020, five days after she’d received the second dose of Pfizer’s experimental COVID-19 shot. Her death was listed as “not related” to the shots. Two other heart attack deaths — one in a woman in her late 50s and the other in a man in his mid-60s — also occurred within two to three months of the shots, but were also listed as “not related.”17
In other instances, a teenage girl suffered from deep vein thrombosis two months after the second dose of the shot, but it, too, was deemed “not related,” as was the acute exacerbation of asthma experienced by a woman in her late 50s about two months after the shots.18 According to independent journalist Michael Nevradakis, for Children’s Health Defense:19
“The many serious adverse events — and several deaths — recorded during the Phase 3 trials are also apparent in a separate, massive document exceeding 2,500 pages, cataloging such adverse events. This document lists a wide range of adverse events suffered by trial participants classified as toxicity level 4 — the highest and most serious such level.
However, not one of the level 4 (most severe) adverse events listed in this particular document is classified as being related to the vaccination … Similarly, only a small number of toxicity level 3 adverse events were indicated as having been “related” to vaccination.”
Even the instances that were attributed to the shots were downplayed, such as the report of “one younger participant with no past medical history [who] had a life-threatening SAE of myocardial infarction 71 days after Dose 2 that was assessed by the investigator as related to study intervention.” The report then goes on to state that the SAE “lasted one day and resolved the same day.”20
The FDA Ignored Maddie’s Case
Just as it ignored the many red flags in Pfizer’s clinical trial data, the FDA also ignored Maddie’s case, even when attorneys got involved. In August 2021, the de Garays reached out to ICAN’s legal team; ICAN’s Aaron Siri is now representing them. According to Siri:21
“What happened to Maddie is not only the story of an injury to a child, which is heartbreaking in and of itself. But Maddie was in a clinical trial that only had 1,000 children in the age bracket of 12 to 15 years old that got the COVID-19 vaccine.
When she suffered that reaction, there should have been every medical expert at Cincinnati and at the FDA that should have descended to study what happened to Maddie, because if that could happen to one in 1,000 children, the repercussions could be really devastating, especially for an infection that doesn’t harm children anywhere near that rate.”
After ICAN’s team got Maddie’s medical records and reviewed them, they believe the causal connection to Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot is extraordinarily strong. In October 2021, they sent a letter to the FDA, including all of Maddie’s medical records and highlighting how Pfizer downplayed the condition in their disclosure, describing Pfizer’s move as “at best dishonest. To regulators, it should be criminal.”22
In February 2022, the FDA finally responded, incredulously by saying to file a VAERS report or send a letter to CISA — Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment Project — which is run by Dr. Kathryn Edwards, who sits on the data safety monitoring board for Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot trials. In other words, they did nothing.23
Maddie’s story is ongoing but, sadly, is only one of many cases of people being seriously injured or killed by COVID-19 shots and not being taken seriously — or outright discredited — by health care providers and health officials. However, there is hope — and it comes in the form of protecting your right to informed consent and the freedom to make your own medical choices. As Siri put it:24
“The hope is that we make sure that we always have the choice to say no. As long as we can say no, that is the safeguard. That is the stopgap to all of this bad conduct. It’s not going to protect those who don’t know better to say no in certain situations, but it will protect those who do … There should be a lot of hope out there because COVID vaccine mandates have receded all across this country …
Freedom of speech, the ability to have individual liberties. That is what will save us … The ability to become educated, to have access to information and to make informed decisions … the ability to say no about something, or a medical procedure, that we don’t want to have on our bodies or our children’s bodies.”
*
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.
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
BBC live report of the collapse of WTC building 7, more than minutes before the collapse took place. Building Seven in the background is still intact.
Author’s note
21 years ago. Commemorating 9/11: September 11, 2001:
The article below was published in April 2015. In the meantime, the issue of the mysterious 28 pages had resurfaced. The 28 pages were made public. Essentially they served as a distraction which undermines 9/11 Truth. They revive the role of Al Qaeda supported by Saudi Arabia. But Al Qaeda was not behind the attacks and therefore the links to Saudi Arabia constitute a non sequitur.
It is fairly well established that Al Qaeda could not have been behind the 9/11 attacks. This is confirmed by the analysis of Richard Gage and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The WTC towers were brought down through controlled demolition.
Al Qaeda did not have the technical capabilities of bringing down the WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7.
Osama bin Laden was said to have coordinated the attacks. Where was he on the morning of 9/11? According to Dan Rather in a special CBS News report, Osama bin Laden had been admitted to a Pakistani military hospital in Rawalpindi on the 10th of September, one day before the tragic events of 9/11. His whereabouts were known to both Pakistani and US authorities.
Al Qaeda is known to be supported by Saudi Arabia in liaison with the CIA.
But there is a lot more to this saga.
The two key figures behind this new wave of propaganda are former Senator Bob Graham, who led the joint inquiry of the Senate and the House intelligence committees together with (former) Rep. Porter Goss, a career CIA official who was subsequently appointed Director of National Intelligence (DNI) by the Bush administration.
Graham coordinated the drafting and editing of the report including the 28 classified pages on Saudi Arabia.
While Graham is now heralded by the mainstream media as a 911 Truther, the evidence suggests that immediately in the wake of 9/11, he was involved (together with Porter Goss) in a coverup on behalf of Bush-Cheney.
The 28 pages have nothing to with 9/11 Truth. This alleged Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks has served to precipitate segments of the 9/11 Truth movement into an erroneous and contradictory discourse.
The objective of the Saudi connection propaganda ploy is to ultimately sustain the official narrative which states that Islamic terrorists were behind the 9/11 attacks, which has been disproved by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
Even assuming that Al Qaeda were behind the attacks, it is amply documented that al Qaeda, “the Base” was a creation of the CIA and that Osama bin Laden was a CIA intelligence asset. In this regard, Saudi Arabia as well Pakistan were involved in close liaison with the CIA in the recruitment and training of terrorists.
And because Bob Graham accuses the FBI and the federal government, the 9/11 Truth movement applauds without realizing that these accusations directed against the FBI are “framed” with a view to sustaining the mainstream 9/11 narrative. What is at stake is a desperate ploy to uphold the legend that Muslims were behind 9/11 and that Saudi Arabia was behind the terrorists giving them money, with the FBI involved in a coverup, George W. Bush protecting his Saudi cronies because the Bushes and the bin Ladens were “intimo amigos”.Porter Goss and Bob Graham played a direct role in sustaining the propaganda ploy in the immediate wake of the 9/11 attacks. (quoted from article below)
In late August 2001 Bob Graham and Porter Goss were in Pakistan for consultations with the head of Pakistani military intelligence (ISI), General Mahmoud Ahmad. The Inter-services Intelligence (ISI) was known to having provided covert support to various al Qaeda affiliated organizations in liaison and consultation with the CIA.
Michel Chossudovsky, April 28, 2016, updated September 4, 2016, September 11, 2022
* * *
Saudi Arabia’s Alleged Involvement in the 9/11 Attacks and the 28 Pages: “Red-Herring”, Propaganda Ploy
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, April 2015
***
The 9/11 narrative in the mainstream media has taken on a new slant. The FBI is now accused of whitewashing Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks.
The alleged Saudi involvement in supporting Osama bin Laden, not to mention the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 joint Congressional inquiry pertaining to the insidious role of Saudi Arabia in supporting the hijackers is part of a propaganda ploy.
When the report of Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 was released in December 2002, it was met with considerable skepticism. That skepticism grew for a period of time but then was reduced to speculation about what was contained in the 28 pages that had been redacted by the Bush White House.
Various U.S. government leaders have since suggested that the missing 28 pages point to Saudi Arabia’s complicity in the 9/11 crimes. However such musings fail to discuss other important issues, like the links between the Saudi regime and the Western deep state, or the fact that, from the start, even the Saudis were calling for the 28 pages to be released. Discussion of the missing 28 pages also omits mention of the highly suspicious nature of the Inquiry’s investigation and its leaders. (Kevin Ryan, The 9/11 Joint Congressional Inquiry and the 28 Missing Pages, Global Research, March 14, 2014
The report of the FBI 9/11 Review Commission (25 March 2015) has revealed circumstances which allegedly were withheld by the FBI from both the 9/11 Commission headed by former Jersey Governor Thomas Kean as well from the joint Senate House inquiry committee chaired by former Senator Bob Graham. Graham.
And now agencies of the US government including the FBI are being accused of protecting the Saudis. This alleged Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks has served to precipitate segments of the 9/11 Truth movement into an erroneous and contradictory discourse. On the part of the US government and its intelligence apparatus, the objective is to ultimately to build a narrative which will weaken the 9/11 Truth movement.
The purpose of this new propaganda ploy is ultimately to sustain the legend that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks and that Saudi Arabia relentlessly supported Al Qaeda, namely that Saudi Arabia acted as a “state sponsor of terrorism”.
In this regard, the media reports intimate that if the Saudi connection is confirmed by the 28 classified pages, this “would make 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war by a foreign government.”
There is, however, an obvious hiccup in this reasoning: if the Saudis were indeed the State sponsors of 9/11, why on earth did the US and the Atlantic Alliance (under the doctrine of collective security) choose to wage a “Just War” of retribution against Afghanistan. Did they get their countries mixed up?
9/11 Truth
Many 9/11 Truthers across America are now calling for the release of the 28 classified pages. They are also accusing the FBI of coverup and complicity.
All eyes are on the classified 28 pages, which document Saudi support for the alleged hijackers. Meanwhile, the irrefutable evidence of controlled demolition of the Twin Towers –not to mention the mysterious collapse of WTC 7 which was announced by CNN and the BBC more than 20 minutes before it occurred– no longer constitutes the centrefold of the 9/11 Truth movement: ‘The Saudis are behind 9/11 and our government is protecting them.”
Framed in a “Tele Novela” style scenario featuring wealthy Saudis in the plush suburban surroundings of Sarasota, Florida two weeks before 9/11, the New York Post describes the circumstances of Saudi involvement (quoting the FBI 9/11 Review Commission Report) in an article entitled How the FBI is whitewashing the Saudi connection to 9/11: .
“Just 15 days before the 9/11 attacks, a well-connected Saudi family suddenly abandoned their luxury home in Sarasota, Fla., leaving behind jewelry, clothes, opulent furniture, a driveway full of cars — including a brand new Chrysler PT Cruiser — and even a refrigerator full of food.
About the only thing not left behind was a forwarding address. The occupants simply vanished without notifying their neighbors, realtor or even mail carrier.
The 3,300-square-foot home on Escondito Circle (see image right) belonged to Esam Ghazzawi, a Saudi adviser to the nephew of then-King Fahd. But at the time, it was occupied by his daughter and son-in-law, who beat a hasty retreat back to Saudi Arabia just two weeks before the attacks after nearly a six-year stay here.
Neighbors took note of the troubling coincidence and called the FBI, which opened an investigation that led to the startling discovery that at least one “family member” trained at the same flight school as some of the 9/11 hijackers in nearby Venice, Fla.
… The Saudi-9/11 connection in Florida was no small part of the overall 9/11 investigation. Yet it was never shared with Congress. Nor was it mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report.
Now it’s being whitewashed again, in a newly released report by the 9/11 Review Commission, set up last year by Congress to assess “any evidence now known to the FBI that was not considered by the 9/11 Commission.” Though the FBI acknowledges the Saudi family was investigated, it maintains the probe was a dead end.
The panel’s report also doesn’t explain why visitor security logs for the gated Sarasota community and photos of license tags matched vehicles driven by the hijackers, including 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta.
The three-member review panel was appointed by FBI Director James Comey, who also officially released the findings.
Former Democratic Sen. Bob Graham, who in 2002 chaired the congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11, maintains the FBI is covering up a Saudi support cell in Sarasota for the hijackers. He says the al-Hijjis “urgent” pre-9/11 exit suggests “someone may have tipped them off” about the coming attacks.
Graham has been working with a 14-member group in Congress to urge President Obama to declassify 28 pages of the final report of his inquiry which were originally redacted, wholesale, by President George W. Bush.
….
Sources who have read the censored Saudi section say it cites CIA and FBI case files that directly implicate officials of the Saudi Embassy in Washington and its consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks — which if true, would make 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war by a foreign government. The section allegedly identifies high-level Saudi officials and intelligence agents by name, and details their financial transactions and other dealings with the San Diego hijackers. It zeroes in on the Islamic Affairs Department of the Saudi Embassy, among other Saudi entities.
The [FBI] review commission, however, concludes there is “no evidence” that any Saudi official provided assistance to the hijackers, even though the panel failed to interview Graham or his two key investigators — former Justice Department attorney Dana Lesemann and FBI investigator Michael Jacobson — who ran down FBI leads tying Saudi officials to the San Diego hijackers and documented their findings in the 28 pages. (emphasis added)
The key figure behind this new wave of propaganda is former Senator Bob Graham, who led the joint inquiry of the Senate and the House intelligence committees together with Rep. Porter Goss, a career CIA official who was subsequently appointed Director of National Intelligence (DNI) by the Bush administration. Graham coordinated the drafting and editing of the report including the 28 classified pages on Saudi Arabia.
While Graham is now heralded by the mainstream media as a 911 Truther, the evidence suggests that immediately in the wake of 9/11, he was involved (together with Porter Goss) in a coverup on behalf of Bush-Cheney. According to Kevin Ryan, “in the months following 9/11, both Goss and Graham rejected calls for an investigation”:
The Senate voted for one anyway, however, and that led both Bush and Cheney to attempt to stop it or limit its scope. Apparently the best they could do was to make sure that Goss and Graham were put in charge. That seemed to work as the Inquiry began in February 2002, more than five months after the attacks, and the approach taken was one of uncritical deference to the Bush Administration and the intelligence community.
Goss immediately made it clear that the Inquiry would not be looking for guilt or accountability with regard to 9/11. Saying he was “looking for solutions, not scapegoats,” Goss continued to defend the White House with regard to warnings the president had received about an impending attack, saying it was “a lot of nonsense.” The FBI did not cooperate but that didn’t seem to bother Goss and Graham. (Kevin Ryan, The 9/11 Joint Congressional Inquiry and the 28 Missing Pages, Global Research, March 14, 2014
Both the joint inquiry led by Graham and the 9/11 Commission were part of a Big Lie. And now Bob Graham and 9/11 Commission Chairman Thomas Kean are accusing the FBI of camouflage and the Saudis of collusion in the 9/11 attacks, while failing to acknowledge coverup and complicity at the highest levels of the US government.
According to Bob Graham in an interview with the Miami Herald,
‘The FBI has served America through most of its history. There were stumbles by the agency before 9/11 and since the tragedy there has been a consistent effort to cover up the extent of Saudi Arabia’s involvement.’ (emphasis added)
And because Bob Graham accuses the FBI and the federal government, the 9/11 Truth movement applauds without realizing that these accusations directed against the FBI are “framed” with a view to sustaining the mainstream 9/11 narrative. What is at stake is a desperate ploy to uphold the legend that Muslims were behind 9/11 and that Saudi Arabia was behind the terrorists giving them money, with the FBI involved in a coverup, George W. Bush protecting his Saudi cronies because the Bushes and the bin Ladens were “intimo amigos”.
Former Senator Graham “smells a rat” and that rat is the FBI and complicit government agencies:
“This is a pervasive pattern of covering up the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11 by all of the agencies of federal government which have access to information that might illuminate Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11.”
“The 28 pages primarily relate to who financed 9/11, and they point a very strong finger at Saudi Arabia as being the principal financier,” he said, adding, “I am speaking of the kingdom,” or government, of Saudi Arabia, not just wealthy individual Saudi donors.
But who is the rat? The FBI or Senator Bob Graham who is visibly involved in a coverup on behalf of US intelligence? He accuses US government agencies of negligence, which serves to arouse protest against the FBI by many 9/11 Truthers.
Graham’s staged accusations thereby serve to distract the American public’s attention from the real evidence, amply documented that the WTC towers were brought down through controlled demolition and that Islamic terrorists were not behind the 9/11 attacks. The issue of Saudi financial support of al Qaeda is not only known and documented since the heyday of the Soviet Afghan war, it is irrelevant in establishing who was behind the terror attacks. Moreover, the contents of the 28 classified pages are known.
Former Senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.), who co-chaired a congressional inquiry into 9/11 — separate from the 9/11 Commission — stated, as though now it was obvious, “None of the people leading this investigation think it is credible that 19 people — most who could not speak English and did not have previous experience in the United States — could carry out such a complicated task without external assistance.”
Now, Graham says, a breakthrough may finally be around the corner with the upcoming declassification of the 28 pages of the “Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.”
Calling for the official release and publication of the 28 page classified section of the joint inquiry report pertaining to Saudi Arabia is an obvious red-herring. The objective is to confuse matters, create divisions within the 9/11 Truth movement and ultimately dispel the fact that the 9/11 attacks were a carefully organized False Flag event which was used to declare war on Afghanistan as well as usher in sweeping anti-terrorist legislation.
Both the Congressional inquiry as well the 9/11 Commission report are flawed, their objective was to sustain the official narrative that America was under attack on September 11, 2001. And Graham’s role in liaison with the CIA, is “damage control” with a view to protecting those who were behind the demolition of the WTC towers as well sustaining the Al Qaeda legend, which constitutes the cornerstone of US military doctrine under the so-called “Global War on Terrorism”.
Without 9/11 and the “Global War on Terrorism”, the warmongers in high office would not have a leg to stand on. In turn, 9/11 Truth is an encroachment which undermines war propaganda and the US-led campaign of Islamophobia, which is sweeping the Western World.
Note to Readers: Remember to bookmark this page for future reference.
Please Forward the GR I-Book far and wide.
This text was first published in August 2012.
It provides a detailed introduction and overview as well as a collection of articles by Global Research authors on 9/11 and the “Global War on Terrorism”.
Note: Apart from minor edits, this text including the selection of articles has not been modified since its publication in August 2012.
[scroll down for I-BOOK Table of Contents]
*
GLOBAL RESEARCH ONLINE
INTERACTIVE READER SERIES
GR I-BOOK No. 7
THE 9/11 READER
The September 11, 2001 Terror Attacks
9/11 Truth: Revealing the Lies, Commemorating the 9/11 Tragedy
Michel Chossudovsky (Editor)
August 2012
The 911/ Reader is part of Global Research’s Online Interactive I-Book Reader, which brings together, in the form of chapters, a collection of Global Research feature articles, including debate and analysis, on a broad theme or subject matter. To consult our Online Interactive I-Book Reader Series, click here.
INTRODUCTION
The tragic events of September 11, 2001 constitute a fundamental landmark in American history. a decisive watershed, a breaking point. Millions of people have been misled regarding the causes and consequences of 9/11.
September 11 2001 opens up an era of crisis, upheaval and militarization of American society.
A far-reaching overhaul of US military doctrine was launched in the wake of 9/11.
Endless wars of aggression under the humanitarian cloak of “counter-terrorism” were set in motion.
9/11 was also a stepping stone towards the relentless repeal of civil liberties, the militarization of law enforcement and the inauguration of “Police State USA”.
September 11, 2001 marks the onslaught of the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT), used as a pretext and a justification by the US and its NATO allies to carry out a “war without borders”, a global war of conquest.
At eleven o’clock, on the morning of September 11, the Bush administration had already announced that Al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) and the Pentagon. This assertion was made prior to the conduct of an indepth police investigation.
CIA Director George Tenet stated that same morning that Osama bin Laden had the capacity to plan “multiple attacks with little or no warning.”
Secretary of State Colin Powell called the attacks “an act of war” and President Bush confirmed in an evening televised address to the Nation that he would “make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them”.
Former CIA Director James Woolsey, without mentioning Afghanistan, pointed his finger at “state sponsorship,” implying the complicity of one or more foreign governments. In the words of former National Security Adviser, Lawrence Eagleburger, “I think we will show when we get attacked like this, we are terrible in our strength and in our retribution.”
That same evening at 9:30 pm, a “War Cabinet” was formed integrated by a select number of top intelligence and military advisors. And at 11:00 pm, at the end of that historic meeting at the White House, the “War on Terrorism” was officially launched.
The tragic events of 9/11 provided the required justification to wage war on Afghanistan on “humanitarian grounds”, with the full support of World public opinion and the endorsement of the “international community”. Several prominent “progressive” intellectuals made a case for “retaliation against terrorism”, on moral and ethical grounds. The “just cause” military doctrine (jus ad bellum) was accepted and upheld at face value as a legitimate response to 9/11.
In the wake of 9/11, the antiwar movement was completely isolated. The trade unions and civil society organizations had swallowed the media lies and government propaganda. They had accepted a war of retribution against Afghanistan, an impoverished country in Central Asia of 30 million people.
The myth of the “outside enemy” and the threat of “Islamic terrorists” was the cornerstone of the Bush administration’s military doctrine, used as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, not to mention the repeal of civil liberties and constitutional government in America.
Amply documented but rarely mentioned by the mainstream media, Al Qaeda is a creation of the CIA going back to the Soviet- Afghan war. This was a known fact, corroborated by numerous sources including official documents of the US Congress, which the mainstream media chose to either dismiss or ignore. The intelligence community had time and again acknowledged that they had indeed supported Osama bin Laden, but that in the wake of the Cold War: “he turned against us”.
The 9/11 Commission Report has largely upheld the “outside enemy” mythology, heralding Al Qaeda as the “mastermind” organization behind the 9/11 attacks.
The official 9/11 narrative has not only distorted the causes underling the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, it has also erased the historical record of US covert support to international terrorism, while creating the illusion that America and “Western Civilization” are threatened.
Without an “outside enemy”, there could be no “war on terrorism”. The entire national security agenda would collapse “like a deck of cards”. The war criminals in high office would have no leg to stand on.
After 9/11, the campaign of media disinformation served not only to drown the truth but also to kill much of the historical evidence on how this illusive Al Qaeda “outside enemy” had been fabricated and transformed into “Enemy Number One”.
The 911 Reader is composed of a carefully selected collection of key articles published by Global Research in the course of the last eleven years. [since 2001]
9/11 was an important landmark for Global Research. Our website was launched on September 9, 2001, two days prior to 9/11. Our coverage of 9/11 was initiated on September 12, 2001.
Within this collection of more than 60 chapters, we have included several important reports from our archives, published by Global Research in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. These articles provide a focus on issues pertaining to the 9/11 Timeline, foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, the attack on the Pentagon, the issue of insider trading on Wall Street in the days preceding 9/11 pointing to foreknowledge of the attacks.
What prevails is a complex web of lies and fabrications, pertaining to various dimensions of the 9/11 tragedy. The falsehoods contained in the official 9/11 narrative are manifold, extending from the affirmation that Osama bin Laden was the mastermind, to the assertion by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that the WTC buildings collapsed due to the impacts of fire. (see Part III).
Where was Osama bin Laden on September 11, 2001?
Is there any proof to the effect that Osama bin Laden, the bogeyman, coordinated the 9/11 attacks as claimed in the official 9/11 narrative?
According to CBS news (Dan Rather, January 28, 2002), “Enemy Number One” was admitted to the urology ward of a Pakistani military hospital in Rawalpindi on September 10, 2001, courtesy of America’s indefectible ally Pakistan. He could have been arrested at short notice which would have “saved us a lot of trouble”, but then we would not have had an Osama Legend, which has fed the news chain as well as presidential speeches in the course of the last eleven years.
DAN RATHER. As the United states and its allies in the war on terrorism press the hunt for Osama bin Laden, CBS News has exclusive information tonight about where bin Laden was and what he was doing in the last hours before his followers struck the United States September 11.
This is the result of hard-nosed investigative reporting by a team of CBS news journalists, and by one of the best foreign correspondents in the business, CBS`s Barry Petersen. Here is his report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) BARRY PETERSEN, CBS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Everyone remembers what happened on September 11. Here`s the story of what may have happened the night before. It is a tale as twisted as the hunt for Osama bin Laden.
CBS News has been told that the night before the September 11 terrorist attack, Osama bin Laden was in Pakistan. He was getting medical treatment with the support of the very military that days later pledged its backing for the U.S. war on terror in Afghanistan.
The foregoing CBS report which is of utmost relevance indicates two obvious facts:
1. Osama bin Laden could not reasonably have coordinated the 9/11 attacks from his hospital bed;
2. The hospital was under the jurisdiction of the Pakistani Armed Forces, which has close links to the Pentagon. Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts were known to both the Pakistani and US military.
U.S. military and intelligence advisers based in Rawalpindi. were working closely with their Pakistani counterparts. Again, no attempt was made to arrest America’s best known fugitive. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld claimed, at the time, that the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden were unknown. According to Rumsfeld: “Its like looking for a needle in a stack of hay”.
October 7, 2001: Waging America’s 9/11 War of Retribution against Afghanistan
The immediate response of the US and its allies to the 9/11 attacks was to declare a war of retribution against Afghanistan on the grounds that the Taliban government was protecting “terror mastermind” Osama bin Laden. By allegedly harboring bin Laden, the Taliban were complicit, according to both the US administration and NATO, for having waged an act of war against the United States.
Parroting official statements, the Western media mantra on September 12, 2001 had already approved the launching of “punitive actions” directed against civilian targets in Afghanistan. In the words of William Saffire writing in the New York Times:
“When we reasonably determine our attackers’ bases and camps, we must pulverize them — minimizing but accepting the risk of collateral damage” — and act overtly or covertly to destabilize terror’s national hosts”.
This decision was taken by the Bush-Cheney war cabinet in the evening of September 11, 2001. It was based on the presumption, “confirmed” by the head of the CIA that Al Qaeda was behind the attacks.
On the following morning, September 12, 2001, NATO’s Atlantic Council meeting in Brussels, endorsed the Bush administration’s declaration of war on Afghanistan, invoking Article 5 of the Washington Treaty.
An act of war by a foreign nation (Afghanistan) against a member of the Atlantic Alliance (the USA) is an act of war against all members under NATO’s doctrine of collective security. Under any stretch of the imagination, the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon cannot be categorized as an act of war by a foreign country. But nobody seemed to have raised this issue.
Meanwhile, on two occasions in the course of September 2001, the Afghan government –through diplomatic channels– offered to hand over Osama Bin Laden to US Justice. These overtures were turned down by president Bush, on the grounds that America “does not negotiate with terrorists”.
The war on Afghanistan was launched 26 days later on the morning of October 7, 2001. The timing of this war begs the question: how long does it take to plan and implement a major theater war several thousand miles away. Military analysts will confirm that a major theater war takes months and months, up to a year or more of advanced preparations. The war on Afghanistan was already in the advanced planning stages prior to September 11, 2001, which begs the question of foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks.
The repeal of civil liberties in America was launched in parallel with the bombing and invasion of Afghanistan, almost immediately following 9/11 with the adoption of the PATRIOT legislation and the setting up of a Homeland Security apparatus, under the pretext of protecting Americans. This post-911 legal and institutional framework had been carefully crafted prior to the 9/11 attacks.
Al Qaeda is a US Intelligence Asset
Important to the understanding of 9/11, US intelligence is the unspoken architect of “Islamic terrorism” going back to the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war.
Bin Laden was 22 years old and was trained in a CIA sponsored guerrilla training camp. Education in Afghanistan in the years preceding the Soviet-Afghan war was largely secular. With religious textbooks produced in Nebraska, the number of CIA sponsored religious schools (madrasahs) increased from 2,500 in 1980 to over 39,000.
“Advertisements, paid for from CIA funds, were placed in newspapers and newsletters around the world offering inducements and motivations to join the [Islamic] Jihad.” (Pervez Hoodbhoy, Peace Research, 1 May 2005)
“The United States spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings….The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system’s core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the American-produced books,..”, (Washington Post, 23 March 2002)
Under the Reagan administration, US foreign policy evolved towards the unconditional support and endorsement of the Islamic “freedom fighters”. This endorsement has not in any way been modified.
In a twisted irony, throughout the post 911 era, US intelligence in liaison with Britain’s MI6, an Israel’s Mossad, continues to provide covert support to the radical Islamist organization allegedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Al Qaeda and its various affiliated groups including the Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and factions within the Free Syria Army (FSA) are directly supported by the US and NATO.
In a bitter irony, the US and its allies claim to be waging a “war on terrorism” against the alleged architects of 9/11, while also using Al Qaeda operatives as their foot-soldiers.
Front row, from left: Major Gen. Hamid Gul, director general of Pakistan’s
Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI), Director of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
Willian Webster; Deputy Director for Operations Clair George; an ISI colonel; and senior CIA official,
Milt Bearden at a Mujahideen training camp in North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan in 1987.
(source RAWA)
Ronald Reagan meets Afghan Mujahideen Commanders at the White House in 1985 (Reagan Archives)
The Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings
Based on the findings of Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings was not caused by fire resulting from the crash of the planes:
In more than 100 steel-framed, high-rise fires (most of them very hot, very large and very long-lasting), not one has collapsed, ever. So it behooves all of us, as your own former chief of NIST’s Fire Science Division, Dr. James Quintiere, said, “to look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of these collapses.”
Let’s start with temperatures – 1,340° F. temperatures, recorded in thermal images of the surface of the World Trade Center rubble pile a week after 9/11 by NASA’s AVIRIS equipment on USGS overflights. Such temperatures cannot be achieved by oxygen-starved hydrocarbon fires. Such fires burn at only 600 to 800° F. Remember, there was no fire on the top of the pile. The source of this incredible heat was therefore below the surface of the rubble, where it must have been far hotter than 1,340 degrees.
Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc., who was hired for the Building 7 cleanup, said that “molten steel was found at 7 WTC.” Leslie Robertson, World Trade Center structural engineer, stated that on October 5, “21 days after the attacks, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running.” Fire department personnel, recorded on video, reported seeing “molten steel running down the channel rails… like you’re in a foundry – like lava from a volcano.” Joe O’Toole, a Bronx firefighter, saw a crane lifting a steel beam vertically from deep within a pile. He said “it was dripping from the molten steel.” Bart Voorsanger, an architect hired to save “relics from the rubble,” stated about the multi-ton “meteorite” that it was a “fused element of molten steel and concrete.”
Steel melts at about 2,850 degrees Fahrenheit, about twice the temperature of the World Trade Center Tower 1 and 2 fires as estimated by NIST. So what melted the steel?
Appendix C of FEMA’s BPAT Report documents steel samples showing rapid oxidation, sulfidation, and intergranular melting. A liquid eutectic mixture, including sulfur from an unknown source, caused intense corrosion of the steel, gaping holes in wide flange beams, and the thinning of half-inch-thick flanges to almost razor-sharpness in the World Trade Center 7 steel. The New York Times called this “the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.”
NIST left all of this crucial forensic evidence out of its report. Why? Because it didn’t fit in with the official conspiracy theory.
Last year, physicist Steven Jones, two other physicists, and a geologist analyzed the slag at the ends of the beams and in the samples of the previously molten metal. They found iron, aluminum, sulfur, manganese and fluorine – the chemical evidence of thermate, a high-tech incendiary cutting charge used by the military to cut through steel like a hot knife through butter. The by-product of the thermate reaction is molten iron! There’s no other possible source for all the molten iron that was found. One of thermate’s key ingredients is sulfur, which can form the liquid eutectic that FEMA found and lower the melting point of steel.
In addition, World Trade Center 7’s catastrophic structural failure showed every characteristic of explosive, controlled demolition. … The destruction began suddenly at the base of the building. Several first responders reported explosions occurring about a second before the collapse. There was the symmetrical, near-free-fall speed of collapse, through the path of greatest resistance – with 40,000 tons of steel designed to resist this load – straight down into its own footprint. This requires that all the columns have to fail within a fraction of a second of each other – perimeter columns as well as core columns. There was also the appearance of mistimed explosions (squibs?) at the upper seven floors on the network video recordings of the collapse. And we have expert testimony from a European demolitions expert, Danny Jowenko, who said “This is controlled demolition… a team of experts did this… This is professional work, without any doubt.”
Fire cannot produce these effects. Fire produces large, gradual deformations and asymmetrical collapses. Thermate can produce all of these effects used in conjunction with linear shaped charges. If the thermate is formed into ultra-fine particles, as has been accomplished at Los Alamos National Laboratory, it is called super-thermate, and is very explosive.(Richard Gage, January 2008)
The following AE911Truth Video provides evidence that the WTC center towers were brought down through controlled demolition.
According to David Ray Griffin:
“The official theory of the collapse, therefore, is essentially a fire theory, so it cannot be emphasized too much that fire has never caused large steel-frame buildings to collapse—never, whether before 9/11, or after 9/11, or anywhere in the world on 9/11 except allegedly New York City—never.” See David Ray Griffin).
According to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, based on solid scientific analysis and evidence, the collapse of the WTC towers was engineered through controlled demolition. While AE11Truth does not speculate on who might be behind the conspiracy to bring down the WTC buildings, they nonetheless suggest that the carrying out such an operation would require a carefully planned course of action with prior access to the buildings as well as an advanced level of expertise in the use of explosives, etc.
The Collapse of WTC Building Seven
The most grotesque lie pertains to the BBC and CNN announcement in the afternoon of September 11, that WTC Building Seven (The Solomon Building) had collapsed. The BBC report went live at 5.00pm, 21 minutes before the actual occurrence of the collapse, indelibly pointing to foreknowledge of the collapse of WTC 7. CNN anchor Aaron Brown announced that the building “has either collapsed or is collapsing” about an hour before the event.
CNN anchor Aaron Brown seems to struggle to make sense of what he is seeing one minute after announcing that WTC Building 7, whose erect facade is clearly visible in his view towards the Trade Center, has or is collapsing.
Coverup and Complicity
The 911 Reader presents factual information and analysis which points to cover-up and complicity at the highest levels of the US government.
This body of articles by prominent authors, scholars, architects, engineers, largely refutes the official narrative of the 9/11 Commission Report, which is reviewed in Part IV. It dispels the notion that America was attacked on September 11, 2001 on the orders of Osama bin Laden.
This is a central issue because US military doctrine since 9/11 has been predicated on “defending the American Homeland” against Islamic terrorists as well as waging pre-emptive wars against Al Qaeda and its various “state sponsors”. Afghanistan was bombed and invaded as part of the “war on terrorism”. In March 2003, Iraq was also invaded.
War Propaganda
Fiction prevails over reality. For propaganda to be effective, public opinion must firmly endorse the official 9/11 narrative to the effect that Al Qaeda was behind the attacks. A well organized structure of media disinformation (Part XI) is required to reach this objective. Perpetuating the 9/11 Legend also requires defying as well smearing the 9/11 Truth Movement.
Throughout the post 9/11 era, a panoply of Al Qaeda related events and circumstances is presented to public opinion on a daily basis. These include terrorist threats, warnings and attacks, police investigations, insurgencies and counter-insurgencies, country-level regime change, social conflict, sectarian violence, racism, religious divisions, Islamic thought, Western values, etc.
In turn, 9/11, Al Qaeda – War on Terrorism rhetoric permeates political discourse at all levels of government, including bipartisan debate on Capitol Hill, in committees of the House and the Senate, at the British House of Commons, and, lest we forget, at the United Nations Security Council.
September 11 and Al Qaeda concepts, repeated ad nauseam have potentially traumatic impacts on the human mind and the ability of normal human beings to analyze and comprehend the “real outside World” of war, politics and the economic crisis.
What is at stake is human consciousness and comprehension based on concepts and facts.
With September 11 there are no verifiable “facts” and “concepts”, because 9/11 as well as Al Qaeda have evolved into a media mythology, a legend, an invented ideological construct, used as an unsubtle tool of media disinformation and war propaganda.
Al Qaeda constitutes a stylized, fake and almost folkloric abstraction of terrorism, which permeates the inner consciousness of millions of people around the World.
Reference to Al Qaeda has become a dogma, a belief, which most people espouse unconditionally.
Is this political indoctrination? Is it brain-washing? If so what is the underlying objective?
People’s capacity to independently analyse World events, as well as address causal relationships pertaining to politics and society, is significantly impaired. That is the objective!
The routine use of 9/11 and Al Qaeda to generate blanket explanations of complex political events is meant to create confusion. It prevents people from thinking.
All of these complex Al Qaeda related occurrences are explained –by politicians, the corporate media, Hollywood and the Washington think tanks under a single blanket “bad guys” heading, in which Al Qaeda is casually and repeatedly pinpointed as “the cause” of numerous terror events around the World.
The Alleged Role of Iraq in the 9/11 Attacks
9/11 mythology has been a mainstay of war propaganda. In the course of 2002, leading up to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, “Osama bin Laden” and “Weapons of Mass Destruction” statements circulated profusely in the news chain. While Washington’s official position was that Saddam Hussein was not behind the 9/11 attacks, insinuations abounded both in presidential speeches as well as in the Western media. According to Bush, in an October 2002 press conference:
“The threat comes from Iraq. It arises directly from the Iraqi regime’s own actions — its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror. .,.. We also must never forget the most vivid events of recent history. On September the 11th, 2001, America felt its vulnerability — even to threats that gather on the other side of the earth. We resolved then, and we are resolved today, to confront every threat, from any source [Iraq], that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America.” (President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat, October 7, 2002)
Barely two weeks before the invasion of Iraq, September 11, 2001 was mentioned abundantly by president Bush. In the weeks leading up to the March invasion, 45 percent of Americans believed Saddam Hussein was “personally involved” in the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. (See . The impact of Bush linking 9/11 and Iraq / The Christian Science Monitor – CSMonitor.com, March 14, 2003)
Meanwhile, a new terrorist mastermind had emerged: Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi.
In Colin Powell’s historic address to the United Nations Security Council, in February 2003, detailed “documentation” on a sinister relationship between Saddam Hussein and Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was presented, focussing on his ability to produce deadly chemical, biological and radiological weapons, with the full support and endorsement of the secular Baathist regime. The implication of Colin’s Powell’s assertions, which were totally fabricated, was that Saddam Hussein and an Al Qaeda affiliated organization had joined hands in the production of WMD in Northern Iraq and that the Hussein government was a “state sponsor” of terrorism.
The main thrust of the disinformation campaign continued in the wake of the March 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq. It consisted in presenting the Iraqi resistance movement as “terrorists”. The image of “terrorists opposed to democracy” fighting US “peacekeepers” appeared on television screens and news tabloids across the globe.
Iran: Alleged State Sponsor of 9/11
In the wake of the Iraq invasion, the same alleged “state sponsorship” of terrorism accusations emerged in relation to Iran.
In December 2011, the Islamic Republic of Iran was condemned by a Manhattan court, for its alleged role in supporting Al Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks.
The investigation into Tehran’s alleged role was launched in 2004, pursuant to a recommendation of the 9/11 Commission “regarding an apparent link between Iran, Hezbollah, and the 9/11 hijackers”. The 91/11 Commission’s recommendation was that the this “apparent link” required “further investigation by the U.S. government.” (9/11 Commission Report , p. 241). (See Iran 911 Case ).
“U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels ruled that Iran and Hezbollah materially and directly supported al Qaeda in the September 11, 2001 attacks and are legally responsible for damages to hundreds of family members of 9/11 victims who are plaintiffs in the case”.
According to the plaintiffs attorneys “Iran, Hezbollah, and al Qaeda formed a terror alliance in the early 1990s. Citing their national security and intelligence experts, the attorneys explained “how the pragmatic terror leaders overcame the Sunni-Shi’a divide in order to confront the U.S. (the “Great Satan”) and Israel (the “Lesser Satan”)”. Iran and Hezbollah allegedly provided “training to members of al Qaeda in, among other things, the use of explosives to destroy large buildings.” (See Iran 911 Case ).
This judicial procedure is nothing more than another vicious weapon in the fabricated “War on Terror” to be used against another Muslim country, with a view to destabilizing Iran as well as justifying ongoing military threats. It also says a lot more about the people behind the lawsuit than about the accused. The expert witnesses who testified against Iran are very active in warmongering neocon circles. They belong to a web of architects of the 21st century Middle-Eastern wars, ranging from high profile propagandists to intelligence and military officers, including former U.S. officials.
But what makes this case absurd is that in September 2011, a few months before the judgment, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has questioned the official 9/11 narrative, was accused by Al-Qaeda leaders of “spreading conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks”. The semi-official media outlet of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, insisted that al-Qaeda “had been behind the attacks and criticised the Iranian president for discrediting the terrorist group.” (See Julie Levesque, Iran Accused of being behind 9/11 Attacks. U.S. Court Judgment, December 2011 (Havlish v. Iran), Global Research, May 11, 2012)
Al Qaeda: US-NATO Foot-soldiers
Ironically, while Washington accuses Iran and Afghanistan of supporting terrorism, the historical record and evidence indelibly point to the “state sponsorship” of Al Qaeda by the CIA, MI6 and their counterparts in Pakistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
Al Qaeda death squads have been recruited to wage America’s humanitarian wars throughout the Middle East and North Africa.
In Syria Al Qaeda units were recruited by NATO and the Turkish High command: “Also discussed in Brussels and Ankara, our sources report, is a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels.”
In Libya, jihadists from Afghanistan trained by the CIA were dispatched to fight with the “pro-democracy” rebels under the helm of “former” Libya Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Commander Abdel Hakim Belhadj:
Western policy makers admit that NATO’s operations in Libya have played the primary role in emboldening Al Qaeda’s AQIM faction (Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb). The Fortune 500-funded Brookings Institution’s Bruce Riedel in his article, “The New Al Qaeda Menace,” admits that AQIM is now heavily armed thanks to NATO’s intervention in Libya, and that AQIM’s base in Mali, North Africa, serves as a staging ground for terrorist activities across the region. http://www.globalresearch.ca/al-qaeda-and-natos-pan-arab-terrorist-blitzkrieg/
Table of Contents of the 9/11 Reader
In Part I, the 911 Reader provides a review of what happened on the morning of 9/11, at the White House, on Capitol Hill, the Pentagon, at Strategic Command Headquarters (USSTRATCOM), What was the response of the US Air Force in the immediate wake of the attacks? Part II focusses on “What Happened on the Planes” as described in the 9/11 Commission Report.
Part III sheds light on what caused the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings. It also challenges the official narrative with regard to the attack on the Pentagon.
Part IV reviews and refutes the findings of the 9/11 Commission Report.
Part V focusses on the issue of foreknowledge by Western intelligence agencies. Part VI examines the issue of how foreknowledge of the attacks was used as an instrument of insider trading on airline stocks in the days preceding September 11, 2001. The bonanza financial gains resulting from insurance claims to the leaseholders of the WTC buildings is also examined.
Part VII focusses on the history and central role of Al Qaeda as a US intelligence asset. Since the Soviet-Afghan war, US intelligence has supported the formation of various jihadist organizations. An understanding of this history is crucial in refuting the official 9/11 narrative which claims that Al Qaeda, was behind the attacks.
Part VIII centers on the life and death of 9/11 “Terror Mastermind” Osama bin Laden, who was recruited by the CIA in the heyday of the Soviet Afghan war. This section also includes an analysis of the mysterious death of Osama bin Laden, allegedly executed by US Navy Seals in a suburb of Islamabad in May 2011.
Part IX focusses on “False Flags” and the Pentagon’s “Second 9/11”.
Part X examines the issue of “Deep Events” with contributions by renowned scholars Peter Dale Scott and Daniele Ganser.
Part XI examines the structure of 9/11 propaganda which consists in “creating” as well “perpetuating” a “9/11 Legend”. How is this achieved? Incessantly, on a daily basis, Al Qaeda, the alleged 9/11 Mastermind is referred to by the Western media, government officials, members of the US Congress, Wall Street analysts, etc. as an underlying cause of numerous World events.
Part XII focusses on the practice of 9/11 Justice directed against the alleged culprits of the 9/11 attacks.
The legitimacy of 9/11 propaganda requires fabricating “convincing evidence” and “proof” that those who are accused actually carried out the attacks. Sentencing of Muslims detained in Guantanamo is part of war propaganda. It depicts innocent men who are accused of the 9/11 attacks, based on confessions acquired through systematic torture throughout their detention.
Part XIII focusses on 9/11 Truth. The objective of 9/11 Truth is to ultimately dismantle the propaganda apparatus which is manipulating the human mindset. The 9/11 Reader concludes with a retrospective view of 9/11 ten years later.
PART I
Timeline: What Happened on the Morning of September 11, 2001
On the morning of September 11, Pakistan’s Chief Spy General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged “money-man” behind the 9-11 hijackers, was at a breakfast meeting on Capitol Hill hosted by Senator Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairmen of the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
Response to Questions Evoked by My Fifth Estate Interview
– by Prof David Ray Griffin – 2010-01-12
Given the cell phone technology available in 2001, cell phone calls from airliners at altitudes of more than a few thousand feet, were virtually impossible
The official theory about the Twin Towers says that they collapsed because of the combined effect of the impact of the airplanes and the resulting fires
Besides omitting and otherwise falsifying evidence, NIST also committed the type of scientific fraud called fabrication, which means simply “making up results.”
The Pentagon revealed that some of the unidentifiable remains from victims at the Pentagon and Shanksville sites on September 11, 2001 were disposed of in a landfill.
“Foreknowledge” and “Failure to act” upholds the notion that the terrorist attacks (“act of war”) “waged by Muslims against America” are real, when all the facts and findings point towards coverup and complicity at the highest levels of the US government.
On the morning of September 11, Pakistan’s Chief Spy General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged “money-man” behind the 9-11 hijackers, was at a breakfast meeting on Capitol Hill hosted by Senator Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss, the chairmen of the Senate and House Intelligence committees.
Osama bin Laden was recruited by the CIA in 1979. The US spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings.
The main justification for waging this war has been totally fabricated. The American people have been deliberately and consciously misled by their government into supporting a major military adventure which affects our collective future.
Muslim countries possess three quarters of the World’s oil reserves. In contrast, the United States of America has barely 2 percent of total oil reserves.
“Another [9/11] attack could create both a justification and an opportunity to retaliate against some known targets”
– by Michel Chossudovsky – 2006-08-10
The presumption of this military document, is that a Second 911 attack “which is lacking today” would usefully create both a “justification and an opportunity” to wage war on “some known targets
This is not the first time that brash and unsubstantiated statements have been made regarding an impending terror attack, which have proven to be based on “faulty intelligence”.
The Doomsday Project is 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.”
In both 9/11 and the JFK assassination, the US government and the media immediately established a guilty party. Eventually, in both cases a commission was set up to validate the official narrative.
9/11 Ringleader connected to secret Pentagon operation
– by Dr. Daniele Ganser – 2005-08-27
Atta was connected to a secret operation of the Pentagon’s Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in the US. A top secret Pentagon project code-named Able Danger identified Atta and 3 other 9/11 hijackers as members of an al-Qaida cell more than a year before the attacks.
According to Chossudovsky, the “war on terrorism” is a complete fabrication based on the illusion that one man, Osama bin Laden, outwitted the $40 billion-a-year American intelligence apparatus. The “war on terrorism” is a war of conquest. Globalisation is the final march to the “New World Order”, dominated by Wall Street and the U.S. military-industrial complex.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
Today is the 21st anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center in New York City. There has never been an official US investigation of the attack. After much pressure from families of those who died in the collapse of the towers, the White House finally and most reluctantly assembled a 9/11 Commission consisting largely of politicians and a neoconservative staff director to sit and listen to the government’s narrative and to write it down. This is what comprised the 9/11 Commission Report.
Afterwards the commission’s co-chairmen and legal counsel wrote books in which they said the 9/11 Commission was set up to fail, that resources and information were withheld from the Commission, and that the Commission considered referring criminal charges to the Department of Justice against some of the government officials who falsely testified before the commission. These confessions were ignored by the presstitutes and had no effect on the government’s highly implausible narrative.
NIST’s account of the collapse is simply a computer simulation that delivered the results NIST programed into the simulation.
For 21 years I reported on the independent investigations and findings of scientists, scholars, engineers, and architects that concluded on the basis of hard evidence that the government’s narrative was a false account. Initially, the distinguished scientists, architects, and engineers who rejected the official narrative were characterized by the presstitutes as “conspiracy theorists,” following the line the CIA had employed against experts who disputed the official narrative of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination. However, over time the efforts of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth convinced more and more Americans that the official story was false. In recent years polls have shown that half of those polled no longer believe the official narrative.
It was obvious to me early that 9/11 was an inside job, a false flag event blamed on Muslims in order to justify two decades of a “war on terror” whose purpose was to destroy Israel’s Middle Eastern opponents who were funding Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia that twice drove the vaunted Israeli Army out of Israel’s attempted occupation of southern Lebanon. If Hezbollah’s supporters–Iraq, Syria and Iran–could be eliminated, Israel could seize the water resource in southern Lebanon. This, and profits and power for the US military/security complex are all the “war on terror” was about.
The reason it was obvious to me that 9/11 was an inside job is that, as it was presented, it amounted to the worse humiliation a superpower had suffered in all of recorded history.
The Official Narrative
A handful of young Saudi Arabians without support of any state or security agency had delivered a crushing blow to the image of the United States. The almighty National Security Apparatus was incapable of warding off a handful of foreigners who, magically, caused US airport security to fail four times on the same morning, hijack 4 airliners, cause the US military to conduct a simulation of the attack at the same time an actual attack was occurring, thus causing massive confusion and prevented the US Air Force from intercepting the hijacked airliners. The young men also prevented VP Dick Cheney, who was monitoring “the attack on America,” from blocking the attack on the Pentagon.
When you look at this record of extraordinary failure of the multi-trillion dollar National Security State and hear no demand from the President of the United States, the Pentagon and Joint Chiefs of Staff, Congress, and the media for investigation and accountability for the government’s total failure, hearing instead opposition to any inquiry, you know for an absolute fact that the highest levels of the US government were responsible for the attack in order to unleash war on the Middle East, just as Pearl Harbor was a Roosevelt orchestration to get the US into a war that Congress and the American people opposed.
If in fact the US government believed its narrative, the government, embarrassed to the hilt, would have been demanding explanation and accountability. There would have been endless investigation. Many heads would have rolled. I spent a quarter century in Washington, and I know for a fact that the government would not have been content to assemble a Commission and then read an implausible account to them and call that an investigation of America’s and their own humiliation.
What the government did instead of an investigation was to quickly destroy all the evidence. The massive steel beams of the towers clearly cut at an angle by high temperature explosives were quickly collected over objections by fire marshals, shipped out of the country in order to get rid of the evidence, and sold as scrap metal in Asia.
No explanation or even admission was given for the molten steel still under the ruble weeks after the event.
The testimony of more than a hundred, firemen, police, and building maintenance workers that they experienced explosions all over the towers, including one in the basement before the alleged airliners even hit the towers, was ignored.
That the three buildings collapsed into their own footprints as in controlled demolition was ignored. That the BBC reporter announced the collapse of the third building 30 minutes before it happened while she was standing in front of the still standing building was ignored.
But Americans were sitting ducks for their deception, as they always are. Americans, self-righteous, content in the goodness of their country with the belief reinforced by patriotism and flag-waving were pleased to believe that they were attacked, as President Bush said, because America is so good.
One wonders if today, after 21 years of Identity Politics, Aversive Racism, Critical Race Theory, transgender theory, the NY Times’ 1619 Project, the demonization of our Founding Fathers, destruction of their reputations and removal of their statues, and the glorification of perversity, Americans would still have the confidence in their goodness to fall victim to another 9/11 deception?
Perhaps they would. Many of them seem to have fallen for “we have to save the liberty of Ukraine from Putin,” by which is really meant is that “we must save the Biden family’s and the Democrats’ money laundering operation in Ukraine.” The insouciant Americans sent over billions of dollars, and the money comes back, with a cut taken out for Zelensky and his henchmen, to the Democrats for advice, consulting fees, facilitators of wartime needs.
In recorded history there have been corrupt empires, but the American one takes the cake.
*
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. Dr. Roberts was previously associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal. He was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy during the Reagan Administration. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
When the lateQueen Elizabeth II took the throne in February 1952, the UK was still an empire that held control over vast swathes of the planet and counted hundreds of millions of subjects.
Since then the world has seen wars, revolutions and coups. Britain’s empire has largely disappeared.
Much of the Middle East and North Africa, still a region where the UK holds deep ties – not least through the monarchy – was largely under British control, both directly and indirectly, when she came to the throne.
Much of the traditional control the UK exerted over the Middle East was grounded in a range of monarchies that had been imposed or backed by the empire and maintained close links to Britain’s royal family.
Elizabeth ascended to the British throne on 6 February 1952. At that time, Britain directly controlled most of what are now the Gulf Arab states, with only Saudi Arabia and North Yemen as independent states – albeit ones closely aligned to the empire.
Kuwait would have to wait until 1963 before it became formally independent, while the UAE (then known as the Trucial States), Qatar and Oman would remain protectorates until the 1970s.
Iraq, Iran, Egypt and Jordan were all monarchies aligned with Britain, while the Republic of Turkey would join the Nato alliance that year and come into the Western sphere of influence.
In 1955, Iraq, Iran and Turkey would join Pakistan and the UK in the anti-communist Baghdad Pact.
Four years before Elizabeth became queen, Britain pulled out of Palestine, but not before encouraging Jewish immigration and the Zionist movement’s plan to settle there – a policy that rocked a region that is still coming to terms with the creation of Israel.
Though Britain had left Palestine, in the wake of the Second World War the Middle East was firmly in the Western camp – though the fear of communism and Arab nationalism was never far from rulers’ minds.
Though no longer a direct colony, Egypt played a crucial role in the empire.
Under the rule of King Farouk, the country was closely aligned with Britain, the former colonial power. Poverty and inequality were rife in the kingdom under Farouk, but British support ensured – for a time at least – his administration’s ability to weather the burst of discontent from the populace.
The British had also shared sovereignty over Sudan with Egypt since 1899, maintaining forces in the southern region following their victory in the Mahdist war of 1881-1899.
Crucially, British forces were stationed around the Suez Canal, a route integral to international trade.
Constructed by the Suez Canal Company between 1859 and 1869, the British- and French-owned canal would later become symbolic for Egyptian nationalists of their country’s subservience to foreign powers.
Ensuring the steady flow of ocean trade was one of the key goals of the British Empire in the Middle East.
At the other end of the Red Sea was Aden, in the southwest of the Arabian Peninsula. The city’s port was one of the busiest harbours in the world for trade and travel in the 1950s, overlooking the Gulf of Aden.
Tens of thousands of British soldiers were stationed in Aden. Deals with local tribal leaders helped keep down threats from labour unions and leftists who demanded autonomy and better treatment for native workers – at least for the time being.
In addition to the forces stationed at Suez, control of the canal and Aden left the British fully in control of the quickest shipping route between the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean.
At the time of her accession, Elizabeth counted more than 7,300,000 subjects in the MENA region, while a further 55,000,000 at least were under British influence.
A question of sovereignty
The Iranian government led by Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh, who in 1951 had nationalised his country’s oil industry, provided real concern for the empire.
Mosaddegh’s decision to take over the British-0wned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company – with the popular support of the communists – was in part motivated by the belief that the company existed as a means of exerting foreign control over Iran.
The takeover alarmed Britain and its allies. But the problem would be rectified soon: a year later, with the backing of the UK and the US, Mosaddegh would be overthrown in a coup and Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi would be placed in full control of the country and in full deference to foreign powers.
Across the rest of the Middle East and North Africa, other colonial powers still held sway, as well.
Following the infamous Sykes-Picot agreement during World War 1, Syria and Lebanon had fallen under French control but had achieved independence by the 1940s.
However, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria were still under French colonial rule, while Spain controlled what is now known as Western Sahara.
It would not be long before all demanded their own indepdence, with Algeria plunging in a brutal anti-colonial conflict, while Western Sahara remains a disputed region and site of anti-colonial struggle to this day.
The status quo was not to last.
Just five months after Elizabeth ascended to the throne, a group of nationalist military officials, including Gamal Abdel Nasser, launched a coup d’etat in Egypt, abolished the monarchy and declared the country a republic.
That event, perhaps more than any other, kicked off the process ending Britain’s role as the dominant power in the Middle East. Nasser’s government would later oversee indepedence and the end of UK rule in Sudan in 1956, as well as expelling British forces from Suez and nationalising the canal.
The Suez Crisis that followed would see Britain – and its allies France and Israel – fail to unseat Nasser through military force and re-assert control over the canal. The British Empire’s status as the foremost imperial power was over and the US would soon move in to take its place.
“We feel that we are strong, we feel that the world has changed,” Nasser said in a speech following the start of the invasion.
“They want to insult us? Well, we can also insult them… can’t our papers also insult the Queen and their prime minister?”
What the young queen thought – if anything – of these events goes unnoted, as became standard for a figurehead keen to be seen as apolitical.
The same year as the Suez Crisis, King Faisal II of Iraq would pay a visit to London.
In footage taken by British Pathe, Elizabeth, her husband Prince Phillip and other royals and government officials meet Faisal off the train at Victoria Station before being taken by a coach and horses down the thronged street to Buckingham Palace.
During the visit Elizabeth described Iraq as the “model of a modern state built on ancient and famous foundations and confidently facing towards the future”.
Within two years, Faisal would be overthrown and killed in a nationalist takeover inspired by Nasser’s coup in Egypt. The country would be declared a republic and withdrawn from the Baghdad Pact, growing closer to the Soviet Union.
By the end of the 1970s the only remaining monarchy outside of the Gulf was Jordan, with South Yemen becoming a “socialist country” after independence in 1967 (later uniting with the north in 1990), and Iran’s transformation into the Islamic Republic following the 1979 revolution.
*
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.
Featured image: Mohammad Mosaddegh in court, 8 November 1953 (Source: Wikimedia Commons)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
“The UK government has embarked on a course of action that runs a very significant risk of eventually being found by domestic courts and/or the European Court of Human Rights not to be compliant with the convention.”
Damning words from Dunja Mijatovic, human rights commissioner for the Council of Europe on the controversial Legacy Bill, which is currently going through Parliament.
The sense of panic to get this legislation into law has been hastened by the brilliant work of organisations like Relatives for Justice and the Pat Finucane Centre, which have been a tremendous help and support to victims and families of the Troubles.
Also the recovery of information by Cairan MacAirt at Paper Trail, who has consistently published information supporting the allegations of collusion and cover-up by agencies of the British government.
Recently uncovered documents by Paper Trail highlight missed opportunities that could have saved more lives on what was one of the most frightening days of the Troubles.
It was a little over 50 years ago when the IRA rocked Belfast with 19 bombs across the city. Labelled by the media as Bloody Friday, the bombs on July 21 1972 claimed the lives of nine people and injured 130 others.
All of the fatalities on that awful day occurred at two of the explosions: the Oxford Street bus station where six people died at 3.02pm; and Cavehill Road shops at about 3.15pm where three people lost their lives.
However, Paper Trail discovered documents including British military logs which calls into question the account given by the British army on that terrible day.
The IRA alleged at the time that warnings were given via the Public Protection Agency (PPA) which had been set up by the British government to field complaints of intimidation and attack.
However, on July 30 1972, the Sunday Times published an article under the heading “Mystery of Bloody Friday’s Lost Warnings.”
This article highlighted the discrepancy between records kept by the PPA and public reports by the British armed forces.
The PPA said its log showed it had passed the IRA warnings to the British army immediately. The warning for Oxford Street at 2.40pm, 22 minutes before the explosion and at 2.07pm for Cavehill, one hour and eight minutes before the bomb exploded. Regardless of this revelation, the British army remained adamant that no warnings were given.
The Historical Enquiries Team (HET), which was initially set up in 2005 and operated until 2014 to look into unsolved murders committed during the 30 years of the Troubles, reported that 19 explosions occurred (from 21 planted bombs) on Bloody Friday.
Paper Trail researchers scrutinising these files and others concerning Bloody Friday, discovered a warning against the Europa Hotel via its manager at 6pm the night before Bloody Friday to say a threat was imminent within the next 24 hours.
The threat against the Europa Hotel was considered serious enough for the Welsh Guards, the British army regiment detailed with responsivity for that area, to ask units of the Military Reaction Force (MRF), a covert unit of British soldiers that dressed in civilian clothes and appeared to operate outside of the rules that governed British forces in the North of Ireland, for their assistance.
The MRF confirmed its allocation of six covert operators from 11.59pm on July 20 to 3am on the 23rd and in addition requested a “sniffa team.”
Further evidence of a threat on the Europa hotel was found when the Welsh Guards informed the British army’s 39 Brigade that “journalist reports he has been warned to keep away from the Europa Hotel from 1500 hrs today.”
The HET report confirmed a warning had been passed to the British army at 2.42pm for the bomb located at the bus station in Oxford Street.
The bomb exploded 20 minutes later while members of the Welsh Guards were tasked with the duty at 2.40pm of trying to find it and clear the area.
However, records obtained by Paper Trail show 39 Brigade logged a warning from the PPA of a 200lb bomb at Oxford Street bus station between 2.25pm and 2.30pm, and not 2.40pm as reported by the PPA, 32 minutes before the bomb exploding at 3.02pm.
With regards to the explosions at Cavehill and Limestone road, Paper Trail again found discrepancies. Despite bombs at both locations being recorded as “No-warning bombs,” the “British army Brigade and Headquarters Northern Ireland” logs show warnings were given for both locations.
Files for Headquarters Northern Ireland also record a message from its exchange regarding the car bomb in Cavehill. In addition, the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) liaison officer was informed of the Cavehill earning at 2.08pm but that had already been reported by the RUC to Brigade at 2.06pm.
At 2.06pm 39 Brigade logged a warning from the PPA regarding a car bomb at Limestone Road. The report was very informative and contained the make, model and full registration number of the vehicle.
At the same time, the log also shows a warning of a car bomb located at Cavehill received from the RUC. Again, the vehicle’s registration number was included.
This information suggests that by 2.06pm, both the RUC and the British army were aware not only of the location of the bombs but the registration of the cars that contained the bombs.
However, neither the RUC nor the British army recorded any action taken to clear the area or deactivate the bombs at Cavehill or Limestone Road.
Instead, the bombs were left to explode. The Limestone Road bomb exploded approximately 44 minutes after the warnings (again, the reports of the bomb differ with the British army recording the explosion at 2.50pm, while the HET logs it at 2.40pm) while the Cavehill bomb was left in situ for approximately 69 minutes before it too exploded.
Understandably, the families of those who had relatives caught up in the explosions, some left with life-changing injuries, like a woman who lost both legs in the blast, and a child who lost a leg will rightly blame the IRA for planting the bombs.
They may also want answers to why the bombs were classed as “no-warning bombs,” and understandably feel there were missed opportunities to save more lives and prevent casualties.
Families would also be right to question why they and the coroner were provided with false information by the authorities.
No-one can argue with the fact that the actions of the British army, despite being stretched to breaking point that day, still saved many lives, but so too did the actions of one 14-year-old boy.
Stephen Parker was rightly described as heroic after he lost his life as he attempted to clear people from the local shops after spotting the bomb in Cavehill.
His father, a local minister, was only able to identify his son’s body by the box of trick matches in his pocket. A task no parent should have to do, and which should serve as a reminder of why the peace process must not be allowed to be jeopardised by any British government.
*
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.
Featured image: A dark cloud of smoke drifts across the centre of Belfast, as firemen hose down the remains of Oxford Street bus station on the day which later became known as Bloody Friday in 1972 (Source: Morning Star)
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
I have taken the risky step of referring to the speech of Charles Coughlin in my recent writings. Coughlin was the most trenchant critic of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, after he had come out as an early supporter. Although Coughlin’s later writings are problematic, and at some points disturbing, it is not accurate to say he was simply an American fascist. I suspect there is an agenda behind that argument as well.
That someone like myself with Jewish ancestry who sees great value in the Jewish tradition, would see value in Coughlin also suggests that dismissing him as rabid anti-Semite is overly simplistic, even destructive.
Coughlin’s speech, “Americanism, Neither Nazism Nor Communism” (1939) is most certainly not a model for us, but it does suggest an effort to address the problems of global finance that Roosevelt was afraid to take on.
I would like to read for you a slightly shortened version of Coughlin’s speech of 1934, “Money is no Mystery,” a speech that inspired my series of speeches on the topic of money and led me to the conclusion that we cannot simply go back to the New Deal to find solutions to today’s crisis because the shortcomings of the New Deal in addressing the axis of global finance that ties New York together with London are the very source of today’s financial, social, and civilizational collapse.
As a product myself of Harvard and Yale, I want to make sure that it is perfectly clear that I represent the Franklin D. Roosevelt who held up the responsibility of the intellectual, of those who have privileged backgrounds, to serve the people, but that I cannot endorse his refusal to give up his ties to the bankers and industrialists of Wall Street which undermined the true potential of the New Deal. I hope I can be a true traitor to my class and offer a true “New Deal” to all Americans, to all citizens of the Earth.
Unlike Roosevelt, I was ready to be dismissed from my job, to be driven out of Washington D.C., and to be impoverished for my critiques of the deep corruption within my country.
Unlike Roosevelt, I was ready to lose all my ties to colleagues at Yale and Harvard if that was what it took to fight for true social justice. When push comes to shove, I stand with you, not with the bankers and billionaires. I am not interested in any backroom deals to protect myself from their wrath.
“Money is no Mystery”
by Charles E. Coughlin, December 30th, 1934
We, in America, have one choice, namely, to construct a new system founded upon social justice. Still, withal, those who prospered most and produced least under the old system are battling fiercely to maintain their privileges and their functions of legislation.
Certainly, during this coming year and the years immediately following, we will witness the total dissolution of modern capitalism. It is advisedly that I use the adjective “modern,” because capitalism, as we knew it in the past twenty or thirty years, differs substantially from the capitalism which was originally conceived. Today it is more renowned for its vices than for its virtues.
Those who are fighting so relentlessly to preserve its poverty-breeding corpse refuse to face the pressing problem of squaring production with distribution. They are those who, during the coming years, will continue to oppose the restoration to Congress of its right to coin and regulate the value of money.
They still believe that the debts of the farmer, of the merchant, of the municipality, of the state which were incurred through the operation of an insane credit inflation, of manufactured bookkeeping money, should be paid back to them in honest currency which does not exist.
That we will refuse to suffer this financial domination any longer is certain. This form of capitalism, now a corpse, demands at least, an honorable burial.
As for modern democracy it has degenerated into a system whereby two political parties, under the leadership of the bankers and the banker-controlled industrialists, so manipulate conventions and elections and so control, either directly or indirectly, the majesty of the state that there is too little democracy and too much plutocracy.
Against all these systems – unspeakable communism, philosophic socialism, dictatorial Fascism, decadent capitalism, controlled democracy and modern plutocracy – there stands an economic system known as social justice. Seeking no compromise, enticing no man by vain promises, it writes down a platform for today, with principles of truth, of justice, of humanity as the Jews of old had them in their codes, as Jesus taught them on the Mount: Justice to the laborer, justice to the farmer, justice to the property owner, justice to all!
Social justice regards man and his family, not as chattel of the state, but regards the state as the servant of its citizens.
Finally, the philosophy of social justice teaches us that the earth is to be apportioned for our maintenance, according to our merits, in such a manner that he who gains ownership of any property cannot use that property contrary to the common good.
This program of social justice does not militate against the Constitution of the United States in any degree. It does, however, oppose the misinterpretation given to that Constitution by the international bankers who have written laws for their own selfish purposes.
At times our bankers extended credit until it became an inflated balloon that could do nothing else but burst. And at all times, with only their billion dollars of real currency on deposit, they loaned this extra twenty or thirty or forty billions of dollars of stage money, of fiction money, at five or six or seven per cent, making a billion dollars in profit even in a poor year.
Bankers, as a class, have proven themselves greedy. They can no more escape that qualification than can a tiger escape being called vicious. Their very nature demands that they be greedy.
Now it is very well for the banker to start his printing press. But at the moment a student of banking and of monetary reform brings the facts to his attention, the banker and his kept press yells out, “Stop, thief!”
The printing press money is the banker’s money. It is his currency. He owns this prerogative. That is why the Baruchs, the Warburgs, the Morgans, and the Mellons, the Federal Reserve bankers and every white-carnation-bedecked banker in America sees red if the bankers’ racket is interfered with.
That is why they scamper up the steps of the White House, and into the cloakrooms of Congress, if anyone dares suggest that the sovereign people of the United States recapture their power over money which originally was placed squarely in the hands of Congress by the Constitution.
A banker is not a producer. He is a leech who lives upon the artistry, the labor, and the scientific development of others. He is in business with his prerogative of manufacturing money through an act of Congress and through the grace of a printing press and fountain pen. His business is eventually to get that which he did not create.
Do you wonder, then, that depressions have been decreed by bankers?
What matters it to them if fifteen million men be idle, if factories close, if commerce freezes, if dire and abject poverty be the lot of the multitude in this land of plenty! Their racket must continue – a sordid, vicious racket that poisons the very life blood of the nation.
What if there is less banking business to be done in the days of depression – they care not! Because, aside from the ordinary loans which they make to ordinary citizens, they still continue to make money on the interest-bearing government bonds which they possess. At least $20-billion of these bonds are in the bankers’ vaults.
And many of those bonds where were issued by the government to dress the boys of 1916 in khaki, to pump murder into their hearts, to feed them hardtack, and to prepare them to become fodder on the battlefields of France.
Bloody bonds which were used for destructive purposes! Criminal bonds which they expect you and me to redeem for the privilege of their having made a slaughter house of this world!
What care they for depressions as long as these bloody bonds continue to drip their malignant poison upon the prosperity of a misunderstanding people!
We are subject to panics, to man-made panics, the greatest of all occurring after the establishment of the privately owned Federal Reserve Banking system which, in the preamble of its charter, practically guaranteed this nation freedom from panics.
They made their runs on the people and captured the real wealth of the nation!
Shall we permit this system to continue, this system of private banking which creates depressions and cashes in on bloody bonds?
*
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 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.
An entire generation of new human beings have been born, grew up and are now entering the work force, university and college – all without ever knowing the age before the war on terrorism. The Patriot Act, anti-terrorism legislation, and the threat of attacks is part of daily life. Like taxes and death.
This incisive article by William Arkin summarizes the key elements of America’s nuclear doctrine, formulated both before and in the immediate wake of September 11, 2001.
On September 11, 1973, Salvador Allende’s democratic government in Chile was ousted by United States-backed forces in one of the Cold War’s defining moments. Allende himself was killed during the coup while his presidential palace, La Moneda, was extensively bombed. Many thousands of Chileans were either murdered, “disappeared”, imprisoned, and coerced to emigrate or enter exile. Allende’s widow and family were forced to go into hiding in Mexico for many years.
Osama bin Laden’s whereabouts on September 10, 2001 were confirmed by a CBS News Report. Osama had been hospitalized on September 10th, 2001, one day before the 9/11 attacks. How on earth could he have coordinated the attacks from his hospital bed in a heavily guarded Pakistani military hospital located in Rawalpindi.
On the evening of May 1, 2011, President Barack Obama declared that the CIA, on his personal order, successfully killed Al-Qaeda “mastermind” Osama bin Laden. In a conveniently scheduled Sunday evening telecast, Obama shamelessly wielded tired lies and 9/11 propaganda, while congratulating himself and the CIA. In classic lying George W. Bush fashion, Obama announced “mission accomplished”.
Watching the twin towers being struck, Putin immediately phoned President Bush to offer his condolences and understanding. When his call couldn’t reach Bush because he was on Airforce One, Putin immediately spoke to Condoleezza Rice, asking her to pass his message to Bush. The next morning, Putin reached Bush and assured him that “in this struggle, we will stand together.”
Distinguished 9/11 scholar Graeme MacQueen joins host Andy Steele to talk about the soon-to-be-published paper he co-authored with Ted Walter entitled “The Triumph of the Official Narrative: How the TV Networks Hid the Twin Towers’ Explosive Demolition on 9/11.” In that paper, they reviewed 70 hours of news coverage and found that the “explosion hypothesis” was the dominant hypothesis among reporters on the ground. In this new paper, using the same 70 hours of news coverage, they examine how the official narrative supplanted what journalists on the ground were reporting.
Western heads of state, UN officials and military spokespersons will invariably praise the humanitarian dimension of the October 2001 US-NATO led invasion of Afghanistan, which allegedly was to fight religious fundamentalists, help little girls go to school, liberate women subjected to the yoke of the Taliban.
We bring to the attention of our readers the following text of Osama bin Laden’s interview with Ummat, a Pakistani daily, published in Karachi on September 28, 2001. It was translated into English by the BBC World Monitoring Service and made public on September 29, 2001.
This text was first published in August 2012. It provides a detailed introduction and overview as well as a collection of articles by Global Research authors on 9/11 and the “Global War on Terrorism”.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
“…. the decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq—I mean of Ukraine.” — George W. Bush
“Kick ass. … If someone tries to stop the march to democracy, we will seek them out and kill them. … Kill them! Be confident! Prevail! We are going to wipe them out! We are not blinking!” — George W. Bush to his generals
“This is a farewell kiss from the Iraqi people, you dog,” — Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi, while throwing his shoes at George W. Bush
It is beginning to seem as if there will never be any meaningful accountability for the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. George W. Bush, now a personal friend of the Obamas, is being rehabilitated among the political elite, his crimes forgotten (except by his victims’ families). These disastrous wars have destabilized the Middle East and caused hundreds of thousands of deaths; the cases for both wars were built on mountains of lies; and they both involved unspeakable criminal violence (from the use of horrific white phosphorous in Fallujah to the bombing of a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Afghanistan that burned patients alive in their beds).Yet these wars are receding in Americans’ memories. The sheer amount of death and deprivation unleashed is difficult to even begin to come to grips with. The bipartisan consensus position in the U.S. appears to be that we are just not going to talk about it anymore, that while scores of Iraqis and Afghans will grow up orphaned, maimed, or both, there will be no investigations and no trials for some of the worst crimes committed in the 21st century.
There are still those who think the invasion of Afghanistan was a morally justifiable “good war,” since it was conducted with the explicit purpose of rooting out Al-Qaeda after the 9/11 attacks. It is hard to maintain this conclusion after reading the U.S. government’s own internal accounts of the war, as revealed in Washington Post reporter Craig Whitlock’s 2021 book The Afghanistan Papers. We have evidence that the Taliban might have been willing to strike a deal to end the war quickly; the Guardian reported in October 2001 that “President George Bush rejected as ‘non-negotiable’ an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan.” In fact, as Whitlock shows, the Bush administration conflated the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, thus turning what should have been a narrow operation to round up a small criminal gang into an all-out war that toppled the country’s government and replaced it with an unstable, corrupt, and unpopular alternative. For 20 years, successive administrations were unwilling to admit that the war was squandering vast amounts of lives and money and achieving almost nothing. As in Vietnam, Whitlock says, U.S. officials were consistently “making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and hiding unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable.” Whitlock documents almost unbelievable examples of ignorant policymaking, from trying to win “hearts and minds” by giving children soccer balls with Koran verses on them (utterly offensive) to destroying poppy fields in the name of the War on Drugs, thus encouraging enraged, impoverished farmers to join the Taliban. The Costs of War project at Brown University has summarized the harm done to the country:
The war in Afghanistan continues destroying lives, due to the direct consequences of violence and the war-induced breakdown of public health, security, and infrastructure. Civilians have been killed by crossfire, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), assassinations, bombings, and night raids into houses of suspected insurgents. The United States military in 2017 relaxed its rules of engagement for airstrikes in Afghanistan, which resulted in a massive increase in civilian casualties. From the last year of the Obama administration to the last full year of recorded data during the Trump administration, the number of civilians killed by U.S.-led airstrikes in Afghanistan increased by 330 percent. The CIA has armed Afghan militia groups to fight Islamist militants and these militias are responsible for serious human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings of civilians. Even in the absence of fighting, unexploded ordnance from this war and landmines from previous wars continue to kill, injure, and maim civilians. Fields, roads, and school buildings are contaminated by ordnance, which often harms children as they go about chores like gathering wood. The war has also inflicted invisible wounds. In 2009, the Afghan Ministry of Public Health reported that fully two-thirds of Afghans suffer from mental health problems. Prior wars and civil conflict in the country have made Afghan society extremely vulnerable to the reverberating effects of the current war. Those war effects include elevated rates of disease due to lack of clean drinking water, malnutrition, and reduced access to health care. Nearly every factor associated with premature death—poverty, malnutrition, poor sanitation, lack of access to health care, environmental degradation—is exacerbated by the current war. About 241,000 people have been killed in the Afghanistan and Pakistan war zone since 2001. More than 71,000 of those killed have been civilians.
George W. Bush said in 2002 that “the history of military conflict in Afghanistan [has] been one of initial success, followed by long years of floundering and ultimate failure. We’re not going to repeat that mistake.” Whitlock shows that that is precisely what happened, and that it was the Afghan people who suffered the most. The Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations all lied to the U.S. public about how the war was going. After the U.S. finally withdrew (with one final horrifying drone strike on civilians for good measure, plus a coverup), the Taliban predictably returned to power. The U.S., not content to wreck the country with 20 years of war, froze Afghanistan’s assets and halted aid out of a purported concern with “human rights.” As a result, millions of Afghans are now on the brink of starvation. As the Washington Post notes in a report on the crisis, this is squarely the fault of the Biden administration, since “it was [Biden’s] decision to halt aid in response to the Taliban takeover that put the country on the brink of catastrophe.”
“We were outside of [an Iraqi city] watching as bombs were dropping on the town. … We were talking. And Pat said, ‘You know, this war is so fucking illegal.’” —Army Spec. Russell Baer, speaking of Pat Tillman, NFL football player and Army Ranger killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan
The Iraq war was completely indefensible from the start. The Bush administration knew that the intelligence it was relying on was shaky, but deliberately eliminated any possibility of doubt. It tried to terrify the American public into supporting the war by warning that proof of Saddam Hussein’s secret arsenal of world-ending weapons would come in the form of a “mushroom cloud.”
Saddam Hussein, interviewed in February of 2003 by Dan Rather, made protestations that turned out be quite true, and accused the Bush administration of delusion:
Hussein:
The inspection teams have been here. They have inspected every place. … I think the U.S. and the world know that Iraq no longer has the weapons. There are no missiles that are contrary to the prescription of the United Nations in Iraq … .
Dan Rather:
Mr. President, Americans are very much concerned about anyone’s connections to Osama bin Laden. Do you have, have you had, any connections to Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden?
Hussein:
Is this the basis of the anxiety in the minds of U.S. officials? Or is it the basis of anxiety in the minds of the people of the United States? … This topic did not appear amongst the concerns of U.S. officials—that is, about any relationship between Iraq and Osama bin Laden—until recently. That is when they realized that what they had been saying about Iraq—that Iraq was probably in possession of proscribed weapons of mass destruction—or that Iraq might have manufactured some of those weapons … if that was the case, then that would be an embarrassment to the United Nations.
The elimination of Hussein, a homicidal psychopath, as Iraq’s leader, could have been a worthy goal in and of itself. Indeed, “bringing democracy to Iraq” swiftly became one of the major public justifications for the war (after it became apparent that the other reasons were nonsense). Yet at every stage the war and occupation were conducted without regard to the well-being or desires of the people of Iraq. After Hussein’s ouster, Bush installed a nincompoop named L. Paul Bremer (a Harvard MBA who spoke no Arabic and had never set foot in Iraq), who ruled over the country like an imperial viceroy. Bremer made disastrous, ignorant decisions that plunged the country into hideous violence, most infamously by disbanding the Iraqi Army, thus instantly creating anarchy. “We created half a million angry, armed, unemployed Iraqis in 48 hours,” commented Bremer’s predecessor. Bremer may have been a bit of a scapegoat for the administration’s failures—some Republicans blame Bremer in order to exonerate Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld—but he did fine out of it. After destroying Iraq, Bremer went on to serve as chairman of the advisory board for Global Secure Corporation, a company that focuses “on securing the homeland with integrated products and services for the critical incident response community worldwide,” as well as on the board of BlastGard International, a “Florida-based company that manufactures materials to mitigate the impact of explosions.” When he’s not doing that, he lives a pleasant life as a ski instructor in Vermont.
Let us review the damage: 500,000 Iraqis died as a result of the U.S. war. Nearly 200,000 of those were violent deaths—people who were blown to pieces by coalition airstrikes or suicide bombers from the insurgency the U.S. occupation unleashed. Others died as a result of the collapse of the medical system—doctors fled the country in droves, since their colleagues were being killed or abducted. Childhood mortality and infant mortality in the country rose, and so did malnutrition and starvation. Millions of people were displaced, and toxins (such as depleted uranium, which is toxic when ingested or inhaled and, like other radioactive substances, confers a risk of cancer) introduced by American bombardment have been suspected of causing a range of public health effects including “increase[s] in Fallujah of congenital malformations, sterility, and infertility.” A “generation of orphans” was created; hundreds of thousands of children lost parents with many left to wander the streets homeless. The country’s infrastructure collapsed, its libraries and museums were looted, and its university system was decimated, its professors assassinated. For years, residents of Baghdad had to deal with suicide bombings as a daily feature of life, and of course, for every violent death, scores more people were left injured or traumatized for life. In 2007 the Red Cross said that there were “mothers appealing for someone to pick up the bodies on the street so their children will be spared the horror of looking at them on their way to school.” The amount of death, misery, suffering, and trauma is almost inconceivable. In many places, we created a kind of hell on earth.
U.S. forces were not trained to deal with Iraqis as human beings. They solved problems with violence, and had little understanding of the culture. Houses were ransacked or destroyed in searches; people were shot for making sudden movements. The U.S. had absolutely no idea how to make Iraq into a functional country after destroying its government, and didn’t care to put in much effort. Testimonies from Iraq Veterans Against The War’s “Winter Soldier” interviews offering a disturbing look at how casual the dehumanization and violence toward Iraqis was:
“I remember one woman walking by. … She was carrying a huge bag, and she looked like she was heading toward us, so we lit her up with the Mark 19, which is an automatic grenade launcher, and when the dust settled, we realized that the bag was full of groceries. She had been trying to bring us food, and we blew her to pieces.” — Jason Washburn, a corporal in the U.S. Marines who served three tours in Iraq.
“By the time we got to Baghdad … I was explicitly told by my chain of command that I could shoot anyone who came closer to me than I felt comfortable with, if that person did not immediately move when I ordered them to do so, keeping in mind I don’t speak Arabic. My chain of command’s general attitude was ‘better them than us,’ and we were given guidance that reinforced that attitude across the ranks. I watched that attitude intensify throughout my three tours. … [At one point our commander] ordered that everyone on the streets was an enemy combatant. I can remember one instance that afternoon when we came around a corner and an unarmed Iraqi man stepped out of a doorway. I remember the marine directly in front of me raising his rifle and aiming at the unarmed man. Then I think, due to some psychological reason, my brain blocked out the actual shots, because the next thing I remember is stepping over the dead man’s body to clear the room that he came out of. It was a storage room and it was full of some Arabic version of Cheetos. There weren’t any weapons in the area except ours. The commander told us a couple of weeks later that over a hundred enemies “had been killed,” and to the best of my knowledge that number includes the people who were shot for simply walking down the street in their own city. — Jason Wayne Lemieux, sergeant, U.S. Marine Corps
“One time they said to fire on all taxicabs because the enemy was using them for transportation. In Iraq, any car can be a taxi cab; you just paint it white and orange. One of the snipers replied back, “Excuse me? Did I hear that right? Fire on all taxi cabs?” The lieutenant colonel responded, “You heard me, trooper, fire on all taxi cabs.” After that, the town lit up, with all the units firing on cars. This was my first experience with war, and that kind of set the tone for the rest of the deployment.” — Hart Viges, U.S. Army Infantry specialist, 82nd airborne
Very little of this was reported in the U.S. press. As Ashleigh Banfield of MSNBC, who was punished by the network for being publicly critical of the war, said: “There are horrors that were completely left out of this war” by the media. Not that exposure made much difference. The practice of torturing detainees at Abu Ghraib prison and CIA black sites was eventually exposed to the public, but when Barack Obama came into office, he made it clear that there would be complete impunity for misconduct. As Karen Greenberg of the NYU Center on Law and Security noted, Obama “refused to clamp down on [torture] in a way that would make it hard for people in the future to do it.” Obama said that he wanted to “look forward, not backward,” a bizarre phrase that would sound laughable applied to any other serious crime.
Iraqis of all sects and backgrounds made it clear from early on that they did not want to be occupied—public opinion polling consistently showed that the majority wanted the U.S. to leave, despite American rhetoric about bringing “democracy” to Iraq. (In a sign of how much the U.S. respected Iraqi democracy, when the Iraqi parliament voted to expel U.S. troops in 2020, Donald Trump responded by threatening the country with sanctions.) One Iraqi quoted by a Winter Soldier testimonial likely spoke for many when he summarized: “Before America invaded, we didn’t have to worry about car bombs in our neighborhoods. We didn’t have to worry about the safety of our own children before they walked to school, and we didn’t have to worry about U.S. soldiers shooting at us as we drive up and down our own streets.”
When Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine, American politicians were almost unanimous in correctly declaring the war a hideous crime against humanity. But hardly any wished to discuss the difficult question: With what moral credibility can this country condemn aggressive warfare? We have long claimed the right to invade wherever and whenever we please in order to protect what we see as our national interests. We have wrecked countries and done nothing to make amends for our crimes. On what grounds do we claim Vladimir Putin is not allowed to do the same thing? Having undermined international law repeatedly, we are hardly in a position now to invoke it.
Joe Biden has publicly announced that he believes Vladimir Putin should be tried in the International Criminal Court for the invasion of Ukraine. He should. But shouldn’t George W. Bush? The United States declines to be bound by the jurisdiction of the ICC, and even claims the right to militarily rescue U.S. citizens who find themselves on trial there. (We have a law that has been dubbed the “Hague Invasion Act.”) If we believe that Vladimir Putin should be prosecuted, do we also believe in holding our own war criminals to account? Or do they get a free pass? If they do get a free pass, then the United States makes clear that it believes Putin should be bound by rules that we should be exempt from. And why should Putin be expected to accept such a setup? Asked in a 2003 press conference whether his Iraq policy was a violation of international law, George W. Bush joked: “International law? I better call my lawyer; he didn’t bring that up to me.” If Putin replied like this, we would consider it evidence of his depravity.
The invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan have caused decades-long human misery. Our lack of concern for the Iraqi people caused hundreds of thousands of them to die gruesomely, and gave the world the barbaric Islamic State. Afghanistan is now back under Taliban rule, but its people are starving to death. Few in the United States seem inclined to discuss what our country’s government did in our names. Supposedly there is no statute of limitations on murder. But if you are a U.S. official, the statute of limitations is “whenever public attention moves on to the next thing.” Usually that’s about five minutes. Then you are scot-free. Are we truly willing to accept 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.
Le sanzioni alla Russia impediscono alla Gazprom di far funzionare il North Stream 1, l’unico che porta in Germania il gas russo dopo la chiusura forzata del gasdotto gemello, il North Stream 2.Il Cremlino comunica che “Le sanzioni imposte da UE, Regno Unito, Stati Uniti e Canada hanno interrotto il sistema di manutenzione tecnica dei componenti della turbina che assicurava il pompaggio”.
La strategia USA-UE è chiara: impedire all’Europa di ricevere il gas russo a basso prezzo grazie agli accordi a lungo termine precedentemente stipulati con la Russia, obbligando i consumatori europei ad acquistarlo sul mercato spot a prezzi estremamente più alti fissati in base a meccanismi speculativi e politici dalla Borsa di Amsterdam, che fa parte oggi di una grande società finanziaria statunitense.
L’unico gasdotto che trasporta regolarmente gas russo in Europa è il TurkStream, attraverso il Mar Nero e i Balcani. L’Ungheria, che si oppone alle sanzioni UE (nonostante faccia parte della UE e della NATO), ha firmato un accordo a lungo termine con la Gazprom per ricevere dalla Russia attraverso questo gasdotto l’80% del gas di cui ha bisogno.
Vi sono però nei Balcani, soprattutto contro la Serbia da cui passa il TurkStream, crescenti tensioni provocate dalle lunghe mani della NATO, che potrebbero portare al blocco anche di questo ultimo gasdotto dalla Russia.
Tale situazione si inserisce in uno scenario politico-militare sempre più esplosivo. La nuova premier britannica Liz Truss si dichiara “pronta a usare le armi nucleari”.
Un ulteriore pericolo è provocato dal fatto che le forze ucraine – armate, addestrate e di fatto comandate dalla NATO – sparano con i cannoni forniti loro da NATO e UE sulla centrale nucleare di Zaparozhye atttualmente sotto controllo russo, esponendo l’Italia e l’Europa al gravissimo rischio di una nuova Cernobyl.
L’Agenzia Internazionale per l’Energia Atomica avverte: “Con la centrale mucleare di Zaporizhzhya giochiamo col fuoco e potrebbe accadere qualcosa di molto, molto catastrofico” .
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
First published on June 29, 2022
***
The German-French Nobel Peace Prize winner, pacifist and “jungle doctor” Albert Schweitzer was one of the most important thinkers of the 20th century. His philosophical thinking was based on the assumption that when people reflect on themselves and their limits, they mutually recognise each other as brothers who reflect on themselves and their limits. In the course of the process of civilisation, solidarity, which was originally only related to one’s own tribe, would gradually be transferred to all, including unknown people. In the 1950s, Schweitzer’s doctrine of “reverence for life” was a moral authority, a guiding principle in the struggle against the nuclear armament of nations.
Image on the right: Albert Schweitzer (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 de)
But the general consciousness of individuals and peoples has not yet found an answer to the “Cain question” from biblical prehistory: “Am I my brother’s keeper? Once again, the catastrophe of a nuclear war threatens us as it did in Albert Schweitzer’s time almost 70 years ago. That is why his “Appeal to Humanity” – which can be read in the collection of writings “Peace or Nuclear War” (1) – has lost none of its topicality.
Bertha von Suttner: “Lay Down Your Arms!”
Never before could the problems of peoples be solved by the method of violence, war. This is no different today than in the history of mankind so far. The backslide into war is a backslide into barbarism, which makes itself felt in all areas of social life: it causes unspeakable suffering in the lives of individuals as well as peoples. The daily TV images of the war in Ukraine give us a lasting impression of this suffering.
Today’s wars are no longer responsible, they have become obsolete. Even the First World War was no longer a conventional war, it was genocide. Since then, the illegal wars of aggression have become even more murderous, more insidious, more widespread, more genocidal.
For the Austrian cultural historian Friedrich Heer, these wars are preparations for the “final solution of the human question” or, as Bertha von Suttner prophesies in her novel “Lay down your arms!”: “The downfall for all” (2). This is certainly true for a universally feared war with nuclear weapons.
Mahatma Gandhi wrote in a letter to Bertha von Suttner after the publication of the novel:
“God grant that the abolition of war may follow your works.” (3)
Alfred Nobel was inspired by Bertha von Suttner to endow the Nobel Peace Prize in his will (4).
History – a work of man
We know today that war is a calamity. We also know that its cause is not “human nature” but the injustice and inhumanity of our social order. This fact must not make us forget that history is a work of man and that man must be changed if the world is to be changed. Accordingly, enlightenment and education are the most important measures that can be taken against war.
We cannot yet say when the conscience of humanity, whose cry of admonition goes through the centuries, will finally make itself heard. But we have no doubt that the existence of the human race hangs on the question of whether people will profess all-human solidarity to a far greater extent than they have done up to now.
*
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a teacher (retired headmaster), doctor of education (Dr. paed.) and graduate psychologist (specialising in clinical, educational and media psychology). As a retiree, he worked for many years as a psychotherapist in his own practice. In his books and educational-psychological articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral values education and an education for public spirit and peace.
He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Notes
(1) Schweitzer, A. (1984). Peace or nuclear war. Munich
(2) Heer, F. In: Von Suttner, B. (1977). Lay down your arms! Introduction, p. VII
I happen to know a thing or two about masks and safety. Why? Because for 25 years I was the editor of an award-winning trade magazine called HazMat Management that covered such topics as pollution prevention and compliance with health & safety laws. We routinely published articles on masks, gloves, respirators and other forms of personal protective equipment (PPE). Now let me tell you a few things about that mask you’re wearing. And please note that what I’m about to share was also stated in the most recent edition of Del Bigtree’s program The Highwire when two OSHA mask experts spoke to the fact that the kinds of masks people are wearing were never (never!) designed to be worn for long periods and doing so is very harmful.
The blue typical mask depicted in the photograph contain Teflon and other chemicals.
A Facebook friend reminds us:
1. Masks are “sterilized” with Ethylene Oxide — a known carcinogen.
Many teachers in various school boards have been experiencing significant symptoms as a direct result of the effects of this chemical.
2. The masks contain (not sprayed with) PTFE which makes up Teflon along with other chemicals.
I found and have posted the US patent to allow manufacturers to use PTFE as a filter in commercial masks… “breathing these for extended periods can lead to lung cancer.”
Don’t agree? Argue with the experts at OSHA, which is the main US agency, i.e., its Occupational Health & Safety Agency. These masks are meant to be worn only for short periods, like say if you’re sanding a table for an hour and don’t want to inhale sawdust.
They don’t do anything whatsoever to stop the spread of any virus, and the emerging science of virology now understands that viruses aren’t even passed person to person.
I know that sounds incredible, but it’s the case that the virus is in the air, you breath it in, there’s no way to prevent that short of living in an oxygen tent, and if you have a strong immune system you’ll be fine, and if you have a weak immune system you may have to deal with the effects of your immune system working to restore balance within your metabolism.
So let’s say you don’t wear the blue packaged masks, and instead wear a homemade cloth mask — the kind people wear over and over and hang on their rearview mirror and so on. Those masks are completely useless against a virus, and are also very dangerous. OSHA would never condone a person wearing a mask of this kind for anything more than the shortest time.
Re-breathing your own viral debris is dangerous to health, and the oxygen deprivation children suffer wearing such masks all day will certainly cause brain damage. I’m not making this up. Again, you might say, well, Guy, you’re not a doctor. True, but I did edit that magazine for 25 years. That’s a long time and many articles on masks and PPE. I’ve attended numerous OH&S conferences and listened to experts discussing these matters.
You may hear people saying that surgeons and nurses wear masks like this all day. Um, no. No they don’t. They’re trained in the proper use of masks, which is to wear them in the OR, then dispose of the mask when they leave that room.
Are you aware that operating rooms are actually supplied extra oxygen, to compensate for the reduction in oxygen flow from mask wearing? To my mind, it’s criminal (not hyperbole) to force children to wear masks all day. Setting aside the very real psychological effects, we’re going to have a generation of brain damaged children. Ever heard the expression, “Not enough oxygen at birth?” That’s a joke at the expense of a mentally challenged person, but that’s literally what we’re doing. And we’re told it’s to “keep us safe”! We’re told this by doctors who actually don’t know about PPE and laypeople who have no clue.
So, you can choose to believe me or not, but I was the editor for a quarter century of a magazine that had a strong occupational health and safety mandate, and I can tell you that the mask wearing currently mandated by governments and private businesses offers no health benefit whatsoever, in no way protects you or anyone else from any virus, and actually does you damage beyond wearing it for a few minutes. Got that? Good.
Now please share this message and get the conversation going with parents, who must end this masking of children immediately. This is a very serious matter. And related to that, let me just state this doesn’t end for me when the lockdown ends or the masking ends.
No, this ends for me when every politician and bureaucrat who inflicted this travesty, this crime against humanity, on the population of Canada (and other affected countries) is in the dock, and faces their misdeeds in a court of law.
And as for those of you who have put masks on young children, I will have a long memory on that score. A very long memory.
END NOTE: The CDC and WHO have acknowledged that asymptomatic people do not spread the virus, so the case for masks for such people is moot in the first place.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), U.K.
The Australian Health Regulation Agency, AHPRA, Australia
Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), Australia
Medsafe, New Zealand
Federation of Medical Regulatory Authorities (FMRAC), Canada
***
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We, the survivors of the atrocities committed against humanity during the Second World War, feel bound to follow our conscience and write this letter.
It is obvious to us that another holocaust of greater magnitude is taking place before our eyes. The majority of the world’s populace do not yet realize what is happening, for magnitude of an organized crime such as this is beyond their scope of experience.
We, however, know. We remember the name Josef Mengele. Some of us have personal memories. We experience a déjà vu that is so horrifying that we rise to shield our poor fellow humans. The threatened innocents now include children, and even infants. In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013—a period of 15.5 years. And people affected worst are between 18 and 64 years old – the group which was not in the Covid statistics.
We call upon you to stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately. What you call “vaccination” against SARS-Cov-2 is in truth a blasphemic encroachment into nature. Never before has immunization of the entire planet been accomplished by delivering a synthetic mRNA into the human body. It is a medical experiment to which the Nuremberg Code must be applied. The 10 ethical principles in this document represents a foundational code of medical ethics that was formulated during the Nuremberg Doctors Trial to ensure that human beings will never again be subjected to involuntary medical experimentation & procedures.
Principle 1 of the Nuremberg Codex:
(a) “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.
(b) This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
(c)The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
Re (a): There is no question of a free decision. Mass media spread fear and panic and use the rule of Goebbels’propaganda by repeating untruths until they are believed. For weeks now they have been calling for the ostracism of the unvaccinated. If 80 years ago it was the Jews who were demonized as spreaders of infectious diseases, today it is the unvaccinated who are being accused of spreading the virus. Physical integrity, freedom to travel, freedom to work, all coexistence has been taken away from people in order to force vaccination upon them. Children are being enticed to get vaccinated against their parents’ judgement.
Re (b): The 22 terrible side effects already listed in the FDA emergency use authorization were not disclosed to the subjects of the experimental trial. We list those below to the benefit of the world public.
By definition, there has never been informed consent. In the meantime,thousands of side effects recorded in numerous databases are on record. While the so-called case numbers are being bleeped in 30-min-intervals by all mass media, there is neither any mentioning of the serious adverse side effects nor how and where the side effects are to be reported. As far as we know, even recorded damages have been deleted on a large scale in every database.
Principle 6 of the Nuremberg Code requires:
“The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment”.
“Vaccination” against Covid has proven to be more dangerous than Covid for approximately 99% of all humans. As documented by Johns Hopkins, in a study of 48,000 children, children are at zero risk from the virus.
Your own data shows that children who are at no risk from the virus, have had heart attacks following vaccination; more than 15,000 have suffered adverse events –including more than 900 serious events. At least 16 adolescents have died following vaccination in the USA. As you are aware, just around 1% are being reported. And the numbers are increasing rapidly as we write. With your knowledge.
Principle 10 of the Nuremberg Code:
“During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.”
Allegedly around 52% of the world population has received at least one shot. Honest disclosure of the true number of “vaccine” injured, terminally injured as well as deceased worldwide is long overdue. These are millions in the meantime. Provide us with the true numbers of Covid vaccine casualties now.
How many will be enough to awaken your conscience?
List of adverse effects being known to FDA before the emergency approval:
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
In a rare gesture of political realism, the US government refused to consider Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. President Joe Biden stressed that the measure would bring many problems and damages, being firm in his negative response. The matter had been discussed for a long time in the country, with several congressmen supporting that the measure should be implemented. Until then, responses from top government officials had been ambiguous and evasive, but Biden finally appears to have eliminated any doubts on the topic.
On September 5, Joe Biden was asked by journalists about the possibility of including Russia in the list of states sponsoring terrorism. He replied with a simple “no”, practically ending the discussion on the topic. The next day, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said that using the term “terrorism” is not the most effective way to hold Russia accountable for the situation in Ukraine. She noted that such a designation could obstruct the supply of aid to conflict-affected areas or even prevent aid groups and companies from participating in an eventual deal to export grain from blocked ports in Ukraine.
“This designation could have unintended consequences to Ukraine, and the world (…) For example, according to humanitarian experts and NGOs we have spoken to, it could seriously affect the ability to deliver assistance in areas of Ukraine. Another one is it could drive critical humanitarian and commercial actors away from facilitating food exports to help mitigate the global food crisis and jeopardize the Black Sea ports deal that has already led to over a million tons of Ukrainian food exports reaching the world, including those in Horn of Africa”.
As expected, the US government’s stance was heavily criticized by Kiev. President Volodymyr Zelensky recorded videos stating that Russia should be considered a terrorist state due to the alleged bombings that would be being made by Moscow against the Zaporizhye nuclear power plant facilities. On several occasions, Russian state officials presented clear and irrefutable evidence that the side that is bombing the plant is the Ukrainian one, and the matter was even discussed at the UNSC. However, Zelensky insists on his narrative and uses it as an argument to demand that Russia to be considered “terrorist” by other countries.
Within the American political scenario, there were also criticisms against Biden’s stance. Lawmakers who were interested in passing the measure responded harshly to Biden Administration’s officials. In all, 100 lawmakers formed a bipartisan group to demand that the government consider Russia a sponsor of terrorism. These politicians wrote a parliamentary resolution setting out their point of view.
Commenting on the case, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham stated:
“To the Biden administration: You have the complete unanimous support of the United States Senate to label Russia a state sponsor of terrorism. Do it. I didn’t think there was an issue under the sun that could get 100 Senate votes, but we found it: Russia is a state sponsor of terrorism”.
In the same vein, Democrat Richard Blumenthal, who also signed the resolution, argued in favor of including Russia on the list using “moral” arguments. In fact, Blumenthal came to sound offensive and racist in his statements, considering the enemy countries of the US as “pariahs” and “uncivilized”.
“The designation of state sponsorship of terrorism puts Russia in a very small club — it consists of nations like Syria, Iran and Cuba that are outside the bounds of civilized countries…”, he said.
In fact, the arguments of the signers of the resolution seem weak and reflect more the interests of Kiev than the ones of Washington. Considering Russia a sponsor of terrorism would be a delicate decision even if there were reasons to do so, but this is not the case. Moscow simply does not carry out or supports terrorist acts in any country. There are only unsubstantiated accusations in this regard on the part of the Ukrainian and Western sides.
More than that, the strategic value of such a decision would be extremely damaging to the US and the entire Western world. Diplomatic relations would be absolutely broken, the dialogue would be interrupted abruptly and tensions would rise irreversibly, harming everyone involved. The global security crisis resulting from this inclusion would be disastrous and its consequences would negatively affect the entire world.
Another interesting point is to observe the hypocrisy of those who are supporting the inclusion of Russia in the list, considering that the West insists on omitting that the Kiev regime is protected by neo-Nazi and extremist militias, whose acts are really terrorist. Apparently, “terrorism” for anti-Russian activists means being contrary to NATO-backed governments.
Despite having made several catastrophic decisions in recent times, Biden acted rationally, strategically and realistically in making it clear that he does not intend to consider Russia a sponsor of terrorism.
*
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.
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
According to promoters of The Great Reset, a traditional whole food diet is not only “unsustainable” but “environmentally destructive” and must be replaced with GMOs and protein alternatives made from insects, plants and synthetic biology. Life on earth cannot be sustained, they say, unless we transition to what amounts to an ultraprocessed and highly unnatural diet
A scientific review throws The Great Reset’s talking points in the proverbial trash, as ultraprocessed foods are “fundamentally unsustainable” and nutritionally nonessential. As such, the environmental impacts of ultraprocessed foods are indefensible, as they are wholly avoidable
Ultraprocessed foods account for 17% to 39% of total diet-related energy use; 36% to 45% of total diet-related biodiversity loss; up to one-third of total diet-related greenhouse gas emissions, land use and food waste; and up to one-quarter of total diet-related water-use among adults in high-income countries
The EAT Forum, cofounded by the Wellcome Trust and the Stockholm Resilience Centre in 2014, has developed a “Planetary Health Diet,” intended to be applied to the entire global population. It entails cutting meat and dairy intake by up to 90%, and working with biotech and fake meat companies to replace whole foods with lab-created alternatives — all in the name of climate change prevention and “sustainability”
Once corporations have a monopoly on meat, dairy, cereals and oils, they will be the ones profiting from and controlling the food supply. The companies that control the food supply will also end up controlling countries and entire populations
*
According to the World Economic Forum (WEF) and its allied Great Reset minions, a traditional whole food diet is not only “unsustainable” but “environmentally destructive.”
A recent “food analysis” in The Guardian1 took aim specifically at organic pasture-fed beef and lamb, lambasting such farming practices for their extravagant land use while underperforming in terms of yield:
“Arable crops, some of which are fed to farm animals, occupy 12% of the planet’s land surface. But far more land (about 26%) is used for grazing: in other words, for pasture-fed meat and milk. Yet across this vast area, farm animals that are entirely pasture-fed produce just 1% of the world’s protein.”
Animal foods in general, and organically produced ones in particular, The Great Resetters claim, must be replaced with produce genetically engineered for high yield and pest resistance, and protein alternatives made from insects, plants and synthetic biology. Overall, life on earth cannot be sustained, they say, unless we transition to what amounts to an ultraprocessed and highly unnatural diet.
A paper2 published in the September 25, 2022, issue of the Journal of Cleaner Production throws The Great Reset’s talking points in the proverbial trash, but before we get into that, let’s review some background material.
Global Cabal’s Goal: Wipe Out Good Food
In recent months, I’ve dedicated many articles to exposing the intentional destruction of our food system. The decision of the Dutch government to impose nitrogen pollution restrictions on farmers is only one recent example of this. This “green” policy will cut livestock production in the country by 30% in the next year, put farmers out of business and force them to sell their land.
Since The Netherlands is the largest meat exporter in the European Union,3 this plan will inevitably result in meat shortages around the world. Canada is now also implementing identical restrictions as part of its climate plan.4
Not to worry, though, because The Great Reset leaders around the world have a plan to build a new food system based on “micro livestock” like crickets, mealworms and cockroaches, along with cultured meat5 grown in petri dishes, and plant-based meat alternatives such as Beyond Meat, the primary ingredients6 of which are pea protein, canola oil and rice protein.
The Plan for a Planetary Health-Destroying Diet
The EAT Forum, cofounded by the Wellcome Trust and the Stockholm Resilience Centre in 2014,7has developed what they call “The Planetary Health Diet,”8 intended to be applied worldwide. It entails cutting meat and dairy intake by up to 90%, and replacing it with foods made in laboratories, along with cereals and oils, most of which are now genetically engineered (GE).
Their largest initiative is called FReSH, which aims to transform the food system by working with biotech and fake meat companies to replace whole foods with lab-created alternatives — all in the name of climate change prevention and “sustainability.”
Once tech giants have control of meat, dairy, cereals and oils, they will be the ones profiting from and controlling the food supply. Needless to say, the private companies that control the food supply will also end up controlling countries and entire populations. At the end of the day, that’s what this hoopla about “sustainable food systems” is all about.
Junk Food on Steroids
However, anyone who knows anything about nutrition can see that everything about this proposed new food system is a disaster in the making. For starters, synthetic biology — meat and dairy alternatives — is junk food on steroids.
They’re all highly processed, and ultraprocessed foods are associated with increased calorie intake, weight gain and chronic disease,9 including cognitive decline,10 while simultaneously promoting malnutrition.
One of the primary reasons why processed food is so bad for health is because it’s loaded with the omega-6 fat linoleic acid (LA) mostly from industrial seed oils. It’s important to realize that plant-based meat alternatives do not contain animal fats. All the fat comes from industrial seed oils like soy and canola oil, which are prescriptions for metabolic disaster.
Sure, processed foods also contain high amounts of sugar, typically in the form of high fructose corn syrup, but as bad as that is, it doesn’t even come close to the damage caused by high LA intake, which acts as a metabolic poison. What’s worse, the LA stays put in your cell membranes for up to seven years, while sugar is rapidly used up and eliminated once you stop putting more in.
To be clear, LA is the one fat you absolutely want to minimize in your diet, not eat more of! Anything above 10 grams a day is likely to cause ill health, and most Americans consume far more than that already. To learn more about the harmful mechanisms of LA, see “How Linoleic Acid Wrecks Your Health.”
In my view, replacing real meat with fake substitutes, regardless of how they’re made, is going to further exacerbate the rapid decline in health the population has already experienced. Next week I will be posting a report on the record-breaking decrease in U.S. life expectancy that just had its sharpest two-year decline in 100 years.11
Simply put, there are no benefits in replacing real meat with fake substitutes. Not for the environment, climate, human nutrition or animal welfare. It’s only hazards and false claims. So, if you value your health, you would do well to stay clear of all meat substitutes.
Why Insect Protein Is a Bad Idea
Alright, but what about insect protein? According to The Great Reset minions, insect protein is as good as it gets, nutrition-wise, and will protect the planet by eliminating the need for livestock, cutting down on agricultural land use and reversing climate change.12
Not so fast. Perhaps someone didn’t think this through. (Or, they did, and any potential negative ramifications of an insect-based diet are actually their intended effects.) As it turns out, insects contain chitin,13,14 a highly inflammatory and allergy-inducing compound.15
Some human tissues do have a chitin-destroying enzyme called chitinase, but it doesn’t always work well, in which case the chitin may trigger an immune response, allergic reactions and inflammation, as it increases inflammatory cytokine production.
Edibleinsects.com, however, launched in 2022, describes chitin as “a valuable prebiotic fiber” with antifungal, antiviral and antibacterial properties,16 and eatcrickster.com claims it can reduce inflammation.17 A number of studies published in recent years have made similar claims.
I for one would recommend proceeding with great caution, as the food industry has, for decades, claimed that processed foods and artificial ingredients are safe and effective, just like the COVID jab, even when ample research shows otherwise.
Food Compass Designed to Destroy Nutrition Guidance
A perfect example of how unhealthy, ultraprocessed foods are being touted as superior to unprocessed animal foods is the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy’s Food Compass,18 unveiled in late 2021. Food Compass was created to:19
The problem is that Food Compass leads people AWAY from wholesome natural foods, and toward processed junk foods. For example, Frosted Mini Wheats scores three times higher than ground beef (87 out of 100, compared to 26), as illustrated in the graph below, posted on Twitter by independent journalist Nina Teicholz.20
Other high-scoring, highly processed foods include chocolate covered almonds, Honey Nut Cheerios, fries, egg substitute fried in vegetable oil, and Lucky Charms. Almond M&M’s even score higher than whole egg fried in butter, cheddar cheese and ground beef — all three of which are whole, unprocessed foods.
Who in their right mind can believe M&Ms are healthier than whole food — any whole food? According to Food Compass, anything with a score below 30 should be minimized, so based on this tool, you’ll be healthier if you replace whole egg, cheddar cheese and ground beef with candy, which is nothing short of insanity.
That’s how you know it’s serving a purpose other than actual nutrition guidance. It’s a Great Reset tool to miseducate people about what’s healthy and what’s not. Without false propaganda, they won’t be able to retool the food system the way they want to.
Interestingly, the top fruit, watermelon, is actually quite healthy for most and it is my absolute favorite fruit. Just be careful to avoid eating the seeds as they, like most seeds, are loaded with LA.
Ultraprocessed Foods Are NOT ‘Green’
Having reviewed why The Great Reset’s ideas for a new food system is a disaster for your health, let’s jump into the Journal of Cleaner Production paper21 I mentioned at the beginning.
The title of the paper is “A Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Environmental Impacts of Ultra-Processed Foods and Implications for Sustainable Food systems.” It explains why ultraprocessed foods are completely counterproductive to environmentally “green” and sustainable goals. For example, ultraprocessed foods (UPF) account for:
17% to 39% of total diet-related energy use
36% to 45% of total diet-related biodiversity loss
Up to one-third of total diet-related greenhouse gas emissions, land use and food waste
Up to one-quarter of total diet-related water-use among adults in high-income countries
Ultraprocessed food production and manufacturing also significantly contributes to the degradation of land, promotes herbicide use, and contributes to eutrophication (aka nutrient-induced increase in phytoplankton productivity).
And, for all the lip service paid to making sure there’s “equity” in all areas of life, increasing consumption of processed foods redirects finances away from smaller farmers and homesteaders, thereby contributing to “economic inequalities as some large transnational corporations responsible for UPF production rely on underpaid food system workers in poor conditions, resulting in an uneven distribution of wealth.” In other words, promoting consumption of processed foods:
Promotes financial inequity, the exact opposite of what The Great Reset supporters claim to be working toward
Promotes biodiversity loss and degrades both land and water, which is the opposite of environmental and planetary protection promised by Green New Deal supporters
Ultraprocessed Foods Are ‘Fundamentally Unsustainable’
As noted by the authors:22
“The findings highlight that environmental degradation associated with UPFs is of significant concern due to the substantial resources used in the production and processing of such products, and also because UPFs are superfluous to basic human needs …
UPFs utilize persuasive marketing and are usually mass-produced using inexpensive ingredients to enable overconsumption through availability, hyper-palatability, poor satiety and displacing wholefoods in diets.
A growing body of evidence reports that UPF consumption is associated with increased risk of overweight and obesity, cardiovascular diseases, type-2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, cancer, depression, and all-cause mortality, among others. It is plausible that this is caused by UPFs poor nutrient composition and degraded food matrices …
A detailed understanding of the environmental impacts of UPFs is key to informing food policies and dietary guidance. This is pertinent because UPFs are frequently excluded from global and national guidelines and policy documents on sustainable food systems and diets.
For example, the EAT-Lancet report, one of the most recognized reference documents on sustainable diets, does not mention UPFs, nor does the major FAO report on the biodiversity impacts of food and agriculture.
The few policy activities which consider the environmental sustainability of UPFs are based on conceptual evidence, rather than evidence from empirical studies …
Conclusion: Ultra-processed foods are fundamentally unsustainable products; they have been associated with poor health and social outcomes and require finite environmental resources for their production … UPFs are responsible for significant diet-related energy, [and] greenhouse gas emissions …”
The real take-home here is that the environmental impacts of ultraprocessed foods are AVOIDABLE, because these kinds of foods are NOT nutritionally essential. They could and should be eliminated altogether, if we actually want to protect the environment, our planet and our health.
What we need more of is organic, biodynamic and regenerative farming of everything from fruits and vegetables to animal foods. That’s what the world needs for optimal health, and it’s also what can preserve and improve our environment the best.
Reject The Great Reset Diet
As noted in a 2004 review in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,23 “many health disparities are linked to inequalities in education and income.” A nutrient-dense diet typically costs more than a calorie-dense but nutrient-deficient one.
One reason for this is because high-calorie processed foods contain ingredients subsidized by government, such as corn, wheat, sugar and various seed oils. Because they provide better profit margins for industrial farmers, there’s little incentive to grow crops that don’t make it into the processed food cycle. Back in 2016, the WEF published an article titled “What Will We Eat in 2030?”24
Taking note of the health and income disparity link just mentioned, the article proposes to improve the food system, not by reducing processed foods, but by processing foods which they claim are “ways that are better for our health,” such as “fortification (or biofortification) — where nutrients are engineered in, either in the biology or manufacture of food — and the significant reformulation of current foods for fewer calories and more nutrients.”
“‘Ultraprocessed’ foods need not be unhealthy,” the WEF goes on to claim. This is as big a lie as “Roundup is safe enough to drink,” “Smoking is safe for pregnant women,” “DDT is good for me” and “COVID vaccines are safe and effective.” There is no way to make ultraprocessed food healthy. Period.
Below is a graphic that has circulated on Twitter,25 showing the WEF’s plans for our dietary future. For the record, while it claims to have been sourced from the WEF, the clear sarcasm suggests it’s a spoof. It’s highly instructive, however, and right on the money, in terms of being factually correct.
This is indeed the kind of diet the WEF and its Great Reset allies want us to adopt, whether we want to or not. Even the most questionable inclusion of “upcycled citizens” is not wrong, as this cabal is, in fact, promoting the idea that cannibalism is, or can be, acceptable.
For solutions to this rapidly approaching dystopian future, review my previous article, “Why Food Prices Are Expected to Skyrocket,” and Corey Lynn’s article “Finding Sources of Fresh Food.”26
Part of the answer is to grow your own food, to the best of your ability. Another part is to support local growers by buying their produce, or else they’ll get pushed out. Starting local co-ops and community gardens can also go a long way toward creating food security in the long term.
At the same time, we also have to reject globalist solutions like fake meat, gene-edited beef, GMO foods, insect-based foods and all the rest of it. It’s time to recognize that none of their solutions are for our benefit. They’re for our detriment. The WEF has declared that by 2030, you will own nothing, and they really do mean it. They will take everything from us, including the right to grow our own food and to eat natural unprocessed, unadulterated foods — if we let them.
*
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.
All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
The statement by Poland that it needs to rearm its troops in preparation for a “war with Russia” in the next few years is intended to attract additional aid and weapons from NATO to strengthen its eastern borders and to modernise its arsenal after it supplied obsolete weapons to Ukraine. However, this comes at the price of destroying the economy and the quality of life of the average citizen.
Poland’s Deputy Defence Minister Marcin Ociepa said that Warsaw sees “the danger of war with Russia” in next three to ten years and needs to use this time to rearm, “no matter the cost”.
With war waging in Ukraine, Poland wants to show that it is on the front lines in the fight against a supposedly “aggressive Russia” and position itself as a major player in Europe and NATO. Poland in this light is stressing that the EU and NATO need to strengthen its eastern borders.
The Poles freed up their stockpile of obsolete weapons by sending them to Ukraine and now expects new weapons and preferential treatment from Western countries, primarily the United States. The Poles are wanting air defence systems, missile defence systems, potentially new ground forces, and heavy equipment, such as tanks and self-propelled artillery.
This also comes as Poland and the three Baltic states said on September 8 that they would temporarily restrict access for Russian citizens holding EU visas from entering by September 19. Supposedly, this is to address “public policy and security threats.”
The prime ministers of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland said in a statement they were concerned “about the substantial and growing influx of Russian citizens” into the EU, adding: “We believe that this is becoming a serious threat to our public security and to the overall shared Schengen area.”
The statement said they “agreed on a common regional approach and hereby express their political will and firm intention to introduce national temporary measures for Russian citizens holding visas”, with exceptions only made for “dissidents,” “humanitarian cases,” and family members and holders of residence permits in EU countries.
It is recalled that EU foreign ministers met in Prague last month and agreed to suspend a 2007 visa facilitation deal with Russia, stopping short of a wider visa ban. However, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said that countries bordering Russia could “take measures at a national level to restrict entry into the European Union.”
Effectively, in a cowardly way, Borrell allowed the Baltic states and Poland to put roadblocks on Russians from entering the EU. He emphasised that any measures would have to conform with rules for the EU’s Schengen common travel zone and members of Russian civil society should be able to travel to the EU. But clearly this is not the case.
With Poland closing its borders to Russian citizens and demanding the strengthening of its military, it is evident that Warsaw is preparing for an escalation in its relations with Moscow, something that will be enthusiastically backed by the US.
Poland is not an exception to the energy crisis gripping Europe, which is bringing great fears of recession once the winter arrives. US-led sanctions were imposed following the Russian military operation in Ukraine, forcing Moscow to insist that all purchases of energy must be made in the rouble, a demand that Warsaw has rejected. With Moscow’s decision to slash oil and natural gas exports, energy prices in Europe have gone through the roof and sent the cost-of-living soaring.
To deal with this, Poland has turned to Nigeria, already one of its gas suppliers, to increase its LNG shipments. This prompted Poland’s President Andrzej Duda to become the first leader from the Eastern European country to ever visit Nigeria since diplomatic relations were established 60 years ago. However, many remain sceptical that Nigeria, whose economy is badly battered, can meet the European and Polish demand, especially as unprecedented crude oil thefts by militants in the Niger Delta are affecting exports.
More importantly, Poland’s economy is slowing down. A GDP drop to 2.7% is expected in Q3 2022, the Polish Economic Institute (PIE) reported on August 31. This followed from a drop of 8.5 to 5.3% in Q2. The state-owned think tank believes that inflation by the end of Q4 will be at 14.5% but could rise to 15.6% in February 2023 due to rising energy prices.
In this way, Poland is prioritising US interests in pressuring Moscow in the false belief that Russia is preparing to invade the country. This not only highlights that Poland still does not fully understand the reasons for Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, but that it is also willing to destroy the economy and quality of life of the average citizen for the sake of having new weapons and strengthening its military.
*
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.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
The Worldwide Corona Crisis, Global Coup d’Etat Against Humanity
