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 War of Economic Corridors is now proceeding full speed ahead, with the game-changing first cargo flow of goods from Russia to India via the International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) already in effect.

Very few, both in the east and west, are aware of how this actually has long been in the making: the Russia-Iran-India agreement for implementing a shorter and cheaper Eurasian trade route via the Caspian Sea (compared to the Suez Canal), was first signed in 2000, in the pre-9/11 era.

The INSTC in full operational mode signals a powerful hallmark of Eurasian integration – alongside the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and last but not least, what I described as “Pipelineistan” two decades ago.

Caspian is key

Let’s have a first look on how these vectors are interacting.

The genesis of the current acceleration lies in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent visit to Ashgabat, Turkmenistan’s capital, for the 6th Caspian Summit. This event not only brought the evolving Russia-Iran strategic partnership to a deeper level, but crucially, all five Caspian Sea littoral states agreed that no NATO warships or bases will be allowed on site.

That essentially configures the Caspian as a virtual Russian lake, and in a minor sense, Iranian – without compromising the interests of the three “stans,” Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. For all practical purposes, Moscow has tightened its grip on Central Asia a notch.

As the Caspian Sea is connected to the Black Sea by canals off the Volga built by the former USSR, Moscow can always count on a reserve navy of small vessels – invariably equipped with powerful missiles – that may be transferred to the Black Sea in no time if necessary.

Stronger trade and financial links with Iran now proceed in tandem with binding the three “stans” to the Russian matrix. Gas-rich republic Turkmenistan for its part has been historically idiosyncratic – apart from committing most of its exports to China.

Under an arguably more pragmatic young new leader, President Serdar Berdimuhamedow, Ashgabat may eventually opt to become a member of the SCO and/or the EAEU.

Caspian littoral state Azerbaijan on the other hand presents a complex case: an oil and gas producer eyed by the European Union (EU) to become an alternative energy supplier to Russia – although this is not happening anytime soon.

The West Asia connection

Iran’s foreign policy under President Ebrahim Raisi is clearly on a Eurasian and Global South trajectory. Tehran will be formally incorporated into the SCO as a full member in the upcoming summit in Samarkand in September, while its formal application to join the BRICS has been filed.

Purnima Anand, head of the BRICS International Forum, has stated that Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt are also very much keen on joining BRICS. Should that happen, by 2024 we could be on our way to a powerful West Asia, North Africa hub firmly installed inside one of the key institutions of the multipolar world.

As Putin heads to Tehran next week for trilateral Russia, Iran, Turkey talks, ostensibly about Syria, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is bound to bring up the subject of BRICS.

Tehran is operating on two parallel vectors. In the event the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is revived – a quite dim possibility as it stands, considering the latest shenanigans in Vienna and Doha – that would represent a tactical victory. Yet moving towards Eurasia is on a whole new strategic level.

In the INSTC framework, Iran will make maximum good use of the geostrategically crucial port of Bandar Abbas – straddling the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, at the crossroads of Asia, Africa and the Indian subcontinent.

Yet as much as it may be portrayed as a major diplomatic victory, it’s clear that Tehran will not be able to make full use of BRICS membership if western – especially US – sanctions are not totally lifted.

Pipelines and the “stans”

A compelling argument can be made that Russia and China might eventually fill the western technology void in the Iranian development process. But there’s a lot more that platforms such as the INSTC, the EAEU and even BRICS can accomplish.

Across “Pipelineistan,” the War of Economic Corridors gets even more complex. Western propaganda simply cannot admit that Azerbaijan, Algeria, Libya, Russia’s allies at OPEC, and even Kazakhstan are not exactly keen on increasing their oil production to help Europe.

Kazakhstan is a tricky case: it is the largest oil producer in Central Asia and set to be a major natural gas supplier, right after Russia and Turkmenistan. More than 250 oil and gas fields are operated in Kazakhstan by 104 companies, including western energy giants such as Chevron, Total, ExxonMobil and Royal Dutch Shell.

While exports of oil, natural gas and petroleum products comprise 57 percent of Kazakhstan’s exports, natural gas is responsible for 85 percent of Turkmenistan’s budget (with 80 percent of exports committed to China). Interestingly, Galkynysh is the second largest gas field on the planet.

Compared to the other “stans,” Azerbaijan is a relatively minor producer (despite oil accounting for 86 percent of its total exports) and basically a transit nation. Baku’s super-wealth aspirations center on the Southern Gas Corridor, which includes no less than three pipelines: Baku-Tblisi-Erzurum (BTE); the Turkish-driven Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP); and the Trans-Adriatic (TAP).

The problem with this acronym festival – BTE, TANAP, TAP – is that they all need massive foreign investment to increase capacity, which the EU sorely lacks because every single euro is committed by unelected Brussels Eurocrats to “support” the black hole that is Ukraine. The same financial woes apply to a possible Trans-Caspian Pipeline which would further link to both TANAP and TAP.

In the War of Economic Corridors – the “Pipelineistan” chapter – a crucial aspect is that most Kazakh oil exports to the EU go through Russia, via the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC). As an alternative, the Europeans are mulling on a still fuzzy Trans-Caspian International Transport Route, also known as the Middle Corridor (Kazakhstan-Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan-Georgia-Turkey). They actively discussed it in Brussels last month.

The bottom line is that Russia remains in full control of the Eurasia pipeline chessboard (and we’re not even talking about the Gazprom-operated pipelines Power of Siberia 1 and 2 leading to China).

Gazprom executives know all too well that a fast increase of energy exports to the EU is out of the question. They also factor the Tehran Convention – that helps prevent and control pollution and maintain the environmental integrity of the Caspian Sea, signed by all five littoral members.

Breaking BRI in Russia

China, for its part, is confident that one of its prime strategic nightmares may eventually disappear. The notorious “escape from Malacca” is bound to materialize, in cooperation with Russia, via the Northern Sea Route, which will shorten the trade and connectivity corridor from East Asia to Northern Europe from 11,200 nautical miles to only 6,500 nautical miles. Call it the polar twin of the INSTC.

This also explains why Russia has been busy building a vast array of state-of-the-art icebreakers.

So here we have an interconnection of New Silk Roads (the INSTC proceeds in parallel with BRI and the EAEU), Pipelineistan, and the Northern Sea Route on the way to turn western trade domination completely upside down.

Of course, the Chinese have had it planned for quite a while. The first White Paper on China’s Arctic policy, in January 2018, already showed how Beijing is aiming, “jointly with other states” (that means Russia), to implement sea trade routes in the Arctic within the framework of the Polar Silk Road.

And like clockwork, Putin subsequently confirmed that the Northern Sea Route should interact and complement the Chinese Maritime Silk Road.

Russia-China Economic cooperation is evolving on so many complex, convergent levels that just to keep track of it all is a dizzying experience.

A more detailed analysis will reveal some of the finer points, for instance how BRI and SCO interact, and how BRI projects will have to adapt to the heady consequences of Moscow’s Operation Z in Ukraine, with more emphasis being placed on developing Central and West Asian corridors.

It’s always crucial to consider that one of Washington’s key strategic objectives in the relentless hybrid war against Russia was always to break BRI corridors that crisscross Russian territory.

As it stands, it’s important to realize that dozens of BRI projects in industry and investment and cross-border inter-regional cooperation will end up consolidating the Russian concept of the Greater Eurasia Partnership – which essentially revolves around establishing multilateral cooperation with a vast range of nations belonging to organizations such as the EAEU, the SCO, BRICS and ASEAN.

Welcome to the new Eurasian mantra: Make Economic Corridors, Not War.

*

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 Cradle.

Pepe Escobar, born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from The Cradle

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.

***

“A 60 Minutes team [should] actually come to Nicaragua to interview the people that live here whose lives have improved amazingly since 2007 with free universal education and health care.”

*

Dear 60 Minutes:

I was appalled to see your program on Nicaragua of June 19, 2022.

I have enjoyed many other 60 Minutes programs, but this one was totally one-sided and false. I have lived in Nicaragua since 2004, and traveled here many times in the 1980’s and 1990’s. So I have lived among people with a totally different reality than those you interviewed.

The two women you interviewed are the wives of Juan Sebastián Chamorro and Felix Maradiaga, from among the wealthy, closely connected with the U.S. government, who studied in U.S. universities and who speak English. Berta Valle, wife of Maradiaga, happens to be from the family down the block from me in Ciudad Dario, Matagalpa, Nicaragua.

The Chamorro and Maradiaga non-profits (IEEPP and FUNIDES respectively) were funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), founded to do overtly what the CIA has done covertly and also by other U.S. organizations like the International Republican Institute (IRI) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), U.S. foundations, and similar European organizations.

The USAID has given more than half a billion dollars to Nicaraguan nonprofits like these since the Sandinistas regained the presidency in 2007. The USAID also organized and funded a destabilization plan known as RAIN (Responsive Action in Nicaragua) for the pre and post November 2021 election periods which is likely still functioning.

In August 2021 the Public Prosecutor’s office accused Maradiaga and Chamorro of being part of a major group conspiring with the U.S. against Nicaragua continually since 2009 and headed by Manuel Orozco Ramírez. Orozco is an associate of Creative Associates International (CAI), a global agency funded by USAID to “engineer political transitions” with over US$2 billion in U.S. government contracts as reported by Mintpress.

According to the Prosecutor’s Office, Orozco was in charge of triangulating resources from international organizations to Nicaraguan pro-coup foundations, among them IEEPP, Fundación Violeta Barrios de Chamorro, FUNIDES, CINCO and Movimiento Puente por Nicaragua. In turn, these organizations channeled resources to armed groups, and to gangs of communication assassins (call centers of people paid to spread lies that would favor the destabilization of Nicaragua), coordinated to overthrow the constitutional government of Nicaragua.

Fundación Violeta Barrios de Chamorro suspende operaciones por Ley de Agentes Extranjeros

Violetta Chamorro speaks before foundation. [Source: radio-corporacion.com]

Orozco formed a criminal group with the accused José Pallais Arana, Felix Maradiaga Blandón, José Adán Aguerri Chamorro, Juan Sebastián Chamorro García, Arturo Cruz Sequeira, Violeta Granera Padilla, Tamara Dávila Rivas and others under investigation, who received money to manage U.S. aggression against the State of Nicaragua. Likewise, they incited foreign interference in the country’s internal affairs, the destabilization of the country with foreign financing and actions to discredit the legitimately elected Government of Nicaragua.

The nonprofits funded by the U.S. also include pro-U.S. media that the United States not only funds but helped to found; these are used to attempt to destabilize Nicaragua with constant disinformation and lies then picked up by the U.S. corporate media.

Maradiaga and Chamorro’s nonprofits were involved in channeling funds for the 2018 U.S.-directed coup attempt against Nicaragua. This was a very violent three-month long attempt to get the democratically elected Sandinista government out of power—many people were kidnapped, tortured and killed by U.S.-paid thugs, people’s homes and government buildings were burned. People in Nicaragua are still terribly traumatized by the level of violence that took place.

The reason these men were arrested in 2021 is because they committed treason and fraud and laundered money to try to overthrow the Nicaraguan government. That is a crime in any country. It is a lie that they were pre-candidates for the November 2021 election. They represented no party and had no followers or platform, so could not register to run.

No one here would vote for them, because they were part of the attempted coup in April-July 2018, which not only tried to remove President Ortega, but attempted to ruin the economy by setting up road blocks everywhere that prohibited travel to school, work, hospitals, anywhere—to get past, you had to “pay”; Many people were captured, kidnapped, torturing, robbed and killed at these roadblocks. There is a video of Maradiaga with gun-toting thugs at a university in Nicaragua, the Universidad Politécnica (UPOLI), taken over in April 2018 and used as one of the headquarters for those carrying out the coup attempt.

The U.S. government has, since the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, tried to control all of Latin America, but especially Nicaragua: William Walker in the 1850’s, the U.S. Marines who occupied and ran Nicaragua, including most elections between 1909 and 1933, the U.S. backed Somoza dictatorship from 1936-79, the Contra War (Nicaraguans call it Reagan’s war) of the 1980’s, and the neo-liberal governments in favor of the wealthy and U.S. interests from 1990 to 2007.

U.S. Marines who occupied Niaragua in 1932. They are holding the flag of captured nationalist Augusto César Sandino. [Source: wikipedia.org]

Then we had the attempted coup, previously planned according to Gene Sharp’s theories and carried out by his disciples, U.S. agents, including Felix Maradiaga and Juan Sebastian Chamorro.

Chamorro, nephew of U.S.-backed president Violeta Barrios de Chamorro (1990 – 1997), was chosen by the U.S. to head the Millennium Challenge Corporation under President Bolaños where he was known for giving contracts to his friends.

The correction of this travesty of reporting from 60 Minutes requires a 60 Minutes team to actually come to Nicaragua to interview the people that live here whose lives have improved amazingly since 2007 with free universal education and health care; 99.2% of homes have electricity; about 90% have running water; the best roads in the region; housing programs; more than half a million people have received a registered title to their land. The primary goal of the Government of Reconciliation and National Unity is the elimination of poverty.

A picture containing text, outdoor, building Description automatically generated

Photo of new hospitals built recently from Nicaragua Sandino.[Source: facebook.com]

Your team needs to see with your own eyes the truth and reality here, that this government of Daniel Ortega was elected by over 75% of voters in a legal election, with six other parties participating and nearly 300,000 people involved in making sure the election was free and fair. Why? Because the population sees that he cares about the future of the country and the well-being of its citizens.

I bet U.S. citizens would prefer a government that uses their taxes for housing, health care and education, instead of starting conflicts all over the globe, spending more than half of the national budget on weapons and war, for the benefit of corporations who make weapons.

*

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.

Susan Lagos worked as a Spanish and ESL teacher for 30 years. She has lived in Ciudad Dario, Matagalpa, Nicaragua, for 18 years; and also lived in other Latin American nations for 16 years. Susan can be reached at [email protected].

Featured image is from havanatimes.org

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Bogus Report on Nicaragua by “60 Minutes” Exposed as Propaganda from CIA-linked National Endowment for Democracy
  • Tags: , ,

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.

***

Peace advocates on Tuesday derided a New York City public service announcement meant to prepare residents for a nuclear attack as a 21st-century version of the absurd Duck and Cover civil defense film of the early Cold War era.

“So, there’s been a nuclear attack,” the narrator of the NYC Emergency Management video begins. “Don’t ask me how or why, just know the big one has hit.”

“So what do we do?” she continues before instructing viewers to “get inside, fast,” “stay inside… and get clean immediately,” and “stay tuned; follow media for more information.”

“All right? You’ve got this,” the woman assures viewers.

While New York City Mayor Eric Adams called the PSA a “great idea,” some critics accused officials of unwarranted fearmongering amid increased nuclear tensions with Russia over its invasion of Ukraine and NATO’s response.

Others lambasted the PSA as latest in a line of nuclear war informationals like the U.S. Civil Defense Administration’s Duck and Cover and the British government’s Protect and Survive films that offer little more than delusive contentment for millions of people who likely would not survive a full-scale thermonuclear attack.

“The reality is, if this comes to pass, you don’t ‘got this,'” tweeted the International Campaign to Ban Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), which was awarded the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize for its work leading to a landmark treaty outlawing nukes.

Calling the PSA “outrageously misguided,” ICAN said it’s difficult to get inside fast during a nuclear explosion “when, in a matter of seconds, houses up to 175 kilometers away from the epicenter crumble like they are made of cards.”

“The PSA goes on to advise to ‘stay inside, remove clothing, and shower,'” ICAN added. “As if taking a shower will be feasible during a nuclear attack, or effective to protect you against radioactive ash. And ‘stay tuned’—as if communications infrastructure will be functional.”

The United States and Russia have over 11,000 nuclear warheads in their combined arsenals. China, France, and Britain have hundreds of warheads each, while India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea each have between 50-165 nukes.

According to NukeMap, a single Russian 800 kiloton warhead airburst over midtown Manhattan would destroy or severely damage much of New York City and cause an estimated 4.5 million casualties.

A higher-yield weapon, like the five-megaton warheads atop China’s Dong Feng-5 intercontinental ballistic missiles, would destroy most of the city while killing or wounding around eight million people. In an actual full-scale nuclear war, multiple warheads would likely be launched against a target as important as New York.

Millions of people not instantly incinerated or obliterated by the fireball—which is hotter than the sun’s core—and immense blast wave of a nuclear explosion would suffer severe burns, blinding, lacerations, blunt-force injuries, and, for many, the slow death of radiation poisoning.

“The living,” Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev reputedly said, “will envy the dead.”

From Common Dreams: Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

*

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: “You’ve got this,” the narrator of a New York City Emergency Management public service announcement assures residents facing a hypothetical nuclear attack. (Photo: YouTube screen grab)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on ‘You Don’t Got This’: Peace Group Blasts NYC’s New Nuclear Survival PSA
  • Tags: ,

Could Russia Avoid Sanctions with Its Own Oil Benchmark?

July 17th, 2022 by Tsvetana Paraskova

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.

***

Russia plans to create its own national oil benchmark in 2023 as a means to protect its oil export revenue while the West is stepping up sanctions against Russian oil, a document seen by Bloomberg News showed on Friday.

Russia’s oil producers, its central bank, and relevant ministries are working to launch a national trading platform for Russian oil in October this year. The goal would be to attract enough foreign partners to buy Russia’s crude and generate enough volumes so as to set up a national oil benchmark at some point between March and July next year, according to the document Bloomberg News has seen.

Russia’s efforts to create a national oil benchmark come as the Western allies are looking at ways to impose a price cap on Russian oil traded globally. The price cap is expected to hurt the huge oil revenues Vladimir Putin is currently getting from energy exports.

Russia, for its part, is looking to protect its oil revenues, and one of the ways it has come up with is a national oil benchmark.

After their summit in Germany last month, the leaders of the G7 group of the world’s leading industrial nations invited all importing countries to consider a cap on the price of Russian oil.

“We will consider a range of approaches, including options for a possible comprehensive prohibition of all services, which enable transportation of Russian seaborne crude oil and petroleum products globally, unless the oil is purchased at or below a price to be agreed in consultation with international partners,” the G7 leaders said in their final communique.

“We invite all like-minded countries to consider joining us in our actions,” they added.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is on a tour of Asia with stops in Japan, South Korea, and Indonesia this week to seek support for the U.S. idea of capping Russian export crude oil prices.

Secretary Yellen even pitched China the idea of capping the price of Russian oil during a virtual meeting last week.

A price cap on Russian oil will “aid in maintaining the global supply of oil, helping put downward pressure on prices for consumers in America and globally at a time when energy prices are spiking,” Secretary Yellen said on Thursday at the Group of 20 finance ministers and central bank governors meeting in Bali, Indonesia.

*

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.

Tsvetana is a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing for news outlets such as iNVEZZ and SeeNews. 

Featured image is from OilPrice.com

Macron’s Minority Government Defeated on Vaccine Passports

July 17th, 2022 by Paul Joseph Watson

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.

***

French President Emmanuel Macron suffered a humiliating setback in parliament after his vaccine passport scheme was defeated.

Macron’s minority government wanted to extend the policy whereby anyone entering France has to show proof of vaccination or a negative Covid test.

However, the right-wing populist National Rally (RN), the hard-left La France Insoumise (LFI) and the right-wing Republicains (LR) all united to vote against the policy.

Macron’s government lost the vote by a margin of 219 votes to 195.

“The bill’s defeat was met with wild cheering and a standing ovation from opposition lawmakers, in footage that was widely circulated on social media,” reports the Telegraph.

The bill was one of the first put to parliament by the new minority government, highlighting how Macron will find it incredibly difficult to get new laws passed in the country.

Elisabeth Borne, the French Prime Minister, condemned the vote.

“The situation is serious. By joining together to vote against the measures to protect the French against Covid, LFI, LR and RN prevent any border control against the virus. After the disbelief on this vote, I will fight so that the spirit of responsibility wins in the Senate,” she tweeted.

As we previously highlighted, the French Minister of Health admitted that vaccine passports are a “disguised” form of mandatory vaccines, despite President Macron claiming vaccine mandates “will not be compulsory.”

On the first day the new program was in place, police in Paris were visibly patrolling bars and cafes demanding customers show proof they’ve had the jab.

It later emerged that many businesses were refusing to enforce the scheme.

*

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.

Video: NATO and Global Empire

July 16th, 2022 by Michael Welch

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 InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

At the summit we will strengthen our forward defences. We will enhance our battle-groups in the East in part of the Alliance, up to brigade levels. We will transform the NATO response force and increase the number of our high readiness forces to well over 300,000…Together, this constitutes the biggest overhaul to our collective defence and deterrence since the Cold War.

Jens Stoltenberg, NATO Secretary General speaking at the NATO Summit in Madrid. (June 27, 2022) [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW


Click to download the audio (MP3 format) 

Following the talks of the NATO leaders in Madrid, in late June, there was a lot more agreed to than mobilizing the troops in preparation for warfare, with increased costs to individual NATO members. There was also the endorsement of a new Strategic Concept giving direction to the Alliance not only during this new phase of battle with Russia. They have highlighted a special approach for dealing with terrorism, cyber and hybrid. And for the first time, it also mentions the challenges posed by China! [2]

A more and more dynamic and destructive military device, directed by former colonial nations. Nations with a hand in, for example, dismantling of Haiti from the time it overthrow slavery more than 200 years ago and has since continued undermining governance of the people, by the people, for the people. [3]

This beast, revved up with hundreds of billions in resources, would potentially run amok around the globe. Like Frankenstein’s monster, it could cut its own puppet strings and be a concern even to some of its members with short term aims it set out to resolve. Like a cancer, it would continue to absorb critical financial resources better needed to advance various social and environmental aims.

But there are many people living in NATO countries who are signaling their opposition to the NATO agenda. On July 1, several of the more articulate opponents were guests on a special edition of the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute. In a Zoom discussion moderated by director Bianca Mugyenyi, the team addressed the topic of NATO, its relationship to wars, colonial violence and structural white supremacy, and efforts at resistance.

See the unabridged discussion here:

&nbsp
Janine Solanki, an activist from Vancouver, BC discussed the record of NATO and its absurd claim of being a defensive (not offensive) organization. Danny Haiphong follows with a review of NATO’s provocative actions directed toward not only Russia, but China. Djibo Sobukwe follows with an account of past and ongoing violence directed toward Africa. Finally, Tamara Lorincz chimes in with an optimistic summary of current mobilization against NATO, all while the summit in Madrid was underway.

See the unabridged discussion here.

Janine Solanki is an executive member of Mobilization Against War and occupation and an editorial board member of FIRE THIS TIME newspaper. She also writes on social justice causes including CUBA solidarity and a variety of antiwar issues.

Danny Haiphong is a contributor to the Black Agenda Report, and co-editor of Friends of Socialist China. He hosts a Youtube show, The Left Lens. His work can be followed on twitter at Spirit of Ho. And on telegram at the Haiphong Press.

Djibo Sobukwe is on the research and political education team of Black Alliance for Peace. He is also a former central Committee member of the all-African People’s Revolutionary Party who worked with Kuame Ture on the political education committee.

Tamara Lorincz is a PhD candidate at the Balsillie School for International Affairs. She is a member of Canadian Voice of Women for Peace, the Womens International League for Peace and Freedom , the Canadian Pugwash Group, and the No to NATO Network. She is also on the international advisory council of World Beyond War and the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space.

Bianca Mugyenyi is an activist, a journalist and the director of the Canadian Foreign Policy Institute.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW


Click to download the audio (MP3 format) 

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

Other stations airing the show:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Notes:

  1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1Kf9PpUt3I
  2. https://menafn.com/1104469051/Madrid-Summit-Ends-With-Far-Reaching-Decisions-To-Transform-NATO
  3. https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-coup-against-president-aristide-15-years-later-the-clintons-the-canadians-and-western-ngos-all-complicit-in-a-never-ending-tragedy/5670262

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

First published on October 10, 2021

***

Coincidence? The Key Word 

Several months ago, we expressed at least “theoretical reservations” about vaccinating cancer patients or former patients who had been cured, because of the underlying mechanism of the gene injection on immunity.

Several geneticists had also expressed their concerns about the possible interference between active or dormant cancer cells and the activity of gene therapy on lymphocytes in particular.

Months have passed, and the vaccine madness has amplified, leading to the refusal of patients without a passport in hospitals (which, as is well known, are intended to receive only healthy people) and to the demand that patients be vaccinated  before receiving any treatment, including cancer patients.

We are in a world gone mad and yet these stories are multiplying, such as this young man of 22 years who had a chronic cough leading to an X-ray discovering a mediastinal mass. The two big Paris hospitals that received him refused to start the treatment (without it being explained in detail) if the patient refused the experimental injection, of absolutely unknown effects on the development of cancers.

The doctors’ justification? None: “that’s the way it is”, and we have accepted it!

Silence on the colleagues suspended for lack of obedience and even more on the objective reasons that made them prefer to lose their jobs, their remuneration, their houses, their families intolerant to these decisions as well, rather than submit to the presidential ukase to accept experimental drugs…

Would more than three hundred thousand caregivers (a figure that is probably highly underestimated given the number of hospitals and clinics currently forced to close beds and postpone interventions due to lack of personnel) be crazy, conspiratorial or delusional to the point of putting themselves in great personal, social, family, professional and psychological danger?

Have the doctors who claim that vaccination is safe taken the time to look at the statistics of the effects reported and accepted by the official agencies? Are the FDA, EMA, MHRA also “conspiratorial” when they release statistics as in the case of VAERS, which is entity of the CDC:

VAERS as of September 26, 2021

More than 726,000 Covid vaccine-related adverse events reported to VAERS as CDC and FDA overturn advisory committee recommendations on Pfizer’s third vaccine.

VAERS data released by the CDC included a total of 726,965 adverse event reports from all age groups following Covid vaccines, including 15,386 deaths and 99,410 serious complications between December 14, 2020, and September 17, 2021.[1]

Or Eudra Vigilance pharmacovigilance body of the European Medicines Agency

Or even the ANSM, our French agency, which shows more than 1200 deaths accepted as at least possibly related to these experimental injections.

All therapeutic trials for fifty years were stopped after a few deaths for investigation (53 deaths stopped the H1N1 vaccine). Here, thousands of deaths throughout the world and children are shamelessly attacked[2]. How can we continue to believe that this is a health policy?

Why this denial of the most solid sects on the part of theoretically educated doctors, capable of obtaining information directly from reliable sources and equipped with a brain?

Fear of the boss, of the director, who in a few months’ time will inevitably be called into question, since many countries are backtracking and even Germany wants to get out of vaccine terrorism, perhaps on the occasion of Mrs Merkel’s departure[3].

“The leading organizations of contracted physicians in Germany are demanding an immediate end to the “anti-corona” measures and an end to the “horror rhetoric and panic politics”. Obviously, French hospital doctors in Paris and elsewhere do not read German newspapers and are terrorized by the threats of their professional association, their minister, and become kapos[4] and terrorize their patients.

More and More Testimonies are Coming In 

Whatever their unacceptable reasons, testimonies are multiplying.

A young girl accompanies her friend to her mother’s funeral… such a mother, mother of a high school friend, 34 years old, in remission from breast cancer for two years, who is injected with the vaccine and collapses a few days later in a coma and dies after three days of hospitalization… Politically correct explanation: the cancer exploded and took her away. Close the chapter and the coffin.

What would Maigret have said? [Historic Police Investigator] 

But too many coincidences shock the police investigators in front of a corpse. Only doctors would not have the right to think about coincidences of time, for example: “temporality” is their key word…

Like the misleading slogan, “the numbers are always right”. Yes, if they are true and observed in the real world.

But how much confidence can we have in the rigged simulations that the government and the media feed us without ever specifying that they are only predictions or estimates? 5] But one can do what one wants with the figures, when one chooses them, or creates them to justify the chosen hypothesis, and the the results are totally blurred.

In any case, as far as “cancer and gene injection” is concerned, the vagueness unfortunately dissipates in front of the multitude of terrible stories.

From the colleague who sees multiple “balls” appearing under her armpits, which the check-ups in the hospital do not explain… Obviously no possible link with the vax. And yet the ganglions that appear some time after the injection are a frequent observation after these vax.

So clearly there seems to be three situations:

  • The appearance of a cancer rapidly after the injection (two weeks to a few months) and very progressive, in a person who was previously free of known carcinological pathologies.
  • The resumption of cancer in a patient who has been in complete remission for several months or years.
  • The rapid, even explosive, evolution of a cancer that is not yet controlled.

Beyond the testimonies that are pouring in from relatives and friends and on social networks, a Swiss newspaper has finally addressed the subject in a broader way.

Here are some excerpts from their article[6] and their references[7]:

“Can covid vaccines cause cancer?

In some cases, the answer seems to be yes. Certainly, there is no evidence that the covid vaccines themselves are carcinogenic. However, it has been shown that in up to 50% of vaccinees, covid vaccines can induce temporary immunosuppression or immune dysregulation (lymphocytopenia) that can last for about a week or possibly longer.

Furthermore, covid mRNA vaccines have been shown to “reprogram” (i.e., influence) adaptive and innate immune responses and, in particular, to downregulate the so-called TLR4 pathway, which is known to play an important role in the immune response to infections and cancer cells.”

Thus the authors conclude that it is quite possible that these immune changes could have unintended consequences on the condition of the recipient of the gene injection. A matter of common sense indeed!

“Thus, if there is already a tumor somewhere – known or unknown – or if there is a predisposition to a certain type of cancer, such a state of vaccine-induced immune suppression or immune dysregulation could potentially trigger sudden tumor growth and cancer within weeks of vaccination. It should be noted that lymphocytopenia was also frequently observed in cases of severe covid.

Post-vaccination reactivation of latent viral infections, including shingles virus, EBV (Epstein-Barr) and hepatitis virus, has also been observed.

“Vaccine-induced temporary immunosuppression is also a factor that may contribute to the post-vaccination spike in coronavirus infections seen in many countries.”

Frequency of Vaccine Related Adverse Event in Cancer 

There are already a few thousand observations in official adverse event reporting and online patient groups. There are certainly true coincidences or diagnostic delays due to delayed diagnosis related to containment. But we should not dismiss the huge problems that these real people affected in their daily lives and even more the responsibility that cancer doctors take by imposing the injection before any treatment or protocol continuation. Their main argument: “we did it right, without discussion” does not seem worthy of a once thoughtful profession.

In August 2021, Dr. Ryan Cole,[8] an American pathologist for many years, described a significant increase in certain types of cancer (e.g. endometrial cancer, uterine cancer) since the beginning of the covid mass vaccination campaign. More recently, German pathologists have also noted the problem of post-vaccination immune dysregulation and sudden tumor growth in some patients.

On the French networks, several testimonies coincide with the reappearance of vaginal hemorrhages in women over 85 years of age leading to the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and rapid death… The spike protein produced by the body following the injection is particularly attracted to the genitals, and this would be a new demonstration of this.

So until we know more, let’s be careful, both doctors and caregivers, and not play the sorcerer’s apprentice!

Caution is required with all experimental treatments and even more so when they are the result of a technique never used before in infectious pathology. First, do no harm must guide the decisions of any physician faithful to his Hippocratic oath.

 

Dr. Nicole Delépine: Pediatrician, oncologist, former head of the pediatric oncology department at the R Poincaré Garches Hospital APHP France

Website www.docteurnicoledelepine.fr and ametist.org for the defense of children with cancer

 

Featured image: cancer cells. Source: Flickr.com

Notes:

[1] More Than 726,000 COVID Vaccine Injuries Reported to VAERS as CDC, FDA Overrule Advisory Committees’ Recommandations on Third Pfizer Shot • Children’s Health Defense (childrenshealthdefense.org)

[2] Les simulations, alibi truqué de la vaccination extorquée aux enfants — Docteur Nicole Delépine

[3] Les médecins libéraux allemands pour la fin de « la politique de la panique »
le 27/09/2021 Dr Stephan Hofmeister, Dr Andreas Gassen, Dr Thomas Kriedel
KBV Lopata/axentis.de     France-Soir
Les principales organisations de médecins conventionnés en Allemagne exigent la fin immédiate des mesures « anti-corona » et la fin de « la rhétorique de l’horreur et la politique de la panique ».
Lors de la convention des délégués des médecins conventionnés allemands, le directeur adjoint de la Kassenärztlichen Bundesvereinigung (KBV, association nationale des médecins de l’assurance maladie) le Dr Stephan Hofmeister, et le président, le Dr Andreas Gassen, ont exigé la fin des mesures dites « anti-Corona » en Allemagne et la fin de la « politique de la panique et la rhétorique de l’horreur ».
Le communiqué de presse de la KBV déclare : « tous ceux qui souhaitent se faire vacciner ont la possibilité de le faire. Désormais ce n’est plus une décision qui revient à l’État : chacun doit décider à titre individuel pour lui-même. » Selon le Dr Hofmeister les sondages indiquent que plus insistantes se font les pressions politiques, plus les gens refusent toute vaccination en signe de protestation. « C’est une confusion malsaine », a-t-il dit en exigeant que l’on arrête cette politique de la peur.

[4] Ainsi étaient appelés les déportés qui, en échange de quelques avantages, devenaient complices des nazis et se montraient parfois aussi inhumains que leurs bourreaux.

[5] RETOUR SUR LA MANIPULATION VIA DES SIMULATIONS AU COURS DE LA « PLANDEMIE » COVID – Docteur Nicole Delépine

[6] Covid Vaccines and Cancer – Swiss Policy Research (swprs.org)

[7] The Testimonies Project – Israeli Jab Victims Speak Out [VIDEO] | Europe Reloaded

[8] Dr Ryan Cole sur le cancer post-vaccination :
Le docteur Ryan Cole constate une recrudescence de cas de cancers comme jamais auparavant. Vidéo. | Pro Fide Catholica

The original source of this article is Nouveau Monde

Also published by mondialisation.ca. Translated from French by Global Research

Copyright © Dr Nicole Delépine, Nouveau Monde, 2021

 

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on The Incidence of Cancer, Triggered by the Covid 19 “Vaccine”

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published by GR on August 10, 2021

Hell is Empty and the Devils are All Here, William Shakespeare, The Tempest, 1610- 1611

 

Introduction

There is a sequence of outright lies and fabrications used to justify far-reaching policy decisions which in the course of the last 18 months are literally destroying people’s lives Worldwide. 

“Fake science” is used to justify confinement, social distancing, the face mask, the prohibition of social gatherings,  cultural and sports events, the closure of economic activity, all of which are upheld as a means to repealing the “killer virus”. 

Who is this “Killer Virus” which has been personified by both the media and our governments, held responsible for triggering economic and social chaos Worldwide? 

You might recall that at the height of the February 2020 financial collapse, “V the Virus” was held responsible for the largest stock market crash since 1929. 

Has the “Killer Virus” been Identified. Has SARS-CoV-2 been Isolated?

This article will review this contentious issue starting at the outset of the crisis in January 2020. Part of this analysis is based on research conducted in early 2020. 

The central question raised in this review is the following: is there reliable evidence provided by the WHO and national  health authorities that the alleged SARS-CoV-2  virus has been isolated/purified  from an “unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient”? 

While the alleged virus was initially defined as the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in January 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) did not have in its possession details regarding the isolation/purification and identity of  2019-nCoV.

And because details concerning isolation / purification were not available, the WHO decided to “customize” The Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) Test using the alleged “similar” 2003 SARS virus (subsequently renamed SARS-1) as “a point of reference” for detecting genetic fragments of the novel 2019-nCoV. 

What this decision entails is that novel 2019-CoV-2 is NOT a novel virus. It was categorized by the Chinese authorities and the WHO as “similar” to the 2003 SARS-CoV as well as to MERS. 

2003 SARS-CoV was subsequently renamed SARS-CoV-1.

History: Isolation of the Virus 

Chinese Health Authorities

The Chinese authorities announced on January 7, 2020 that “a new type of virus”  had been identified  “similar to the one associated with SARS and MERS” (related report , not original Chinese government source).  The underlying method is described below:

We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing.

Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records. (emphasis added)

The  following article entitled A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China(Nature, February 3, 2021) was among the first to report on China’s novel coronavirus:

…[We] collected bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and performed deep meta-transcriptomic sequencing. The clinical specimen was handled in a biosafety level 3 laboratory at Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center. Total RNA was extracted from 200 μl of BALF and a meta-transcriptomic library was constructed for pair-end (150-bp reads) sequencing using an Illumina MiniSeq as previously described 4,6,7,8.
 .
In total, we generated 56,565,928 sequence reads that were de novo-assembled and screened for potential aetiological agents. 
.
The genome sequence of this virus, as well as its termini, were determined and confirmed by reverse-transcription PCR (RT–PCR)10 and 5′/3′ rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE), respectively. This virus strain was designated as WH-Human 1 coronavirus (WHCV) (and has also been referred to as ‘2019-nCoV’) and its whole genome sequence (29,903 nt) has been assigned GenBank accession number MN908947.
 .
The viral genome organization of WHCV was determined by sequence alignment to two representative members of the genus Betacoronavirus: a coronavirus associated with humans (SARS-CoV Tor2, GenBank accession number AY274119) [2003] and a coronavirus associated with bats (bat SL-CoVZC45, GenBank accession number MG772933) . (Nature, February 3, 2020)
 .

It is unclear from the above quotations as well as from the documents consulted, whether the Chinese health authorities undertook an isolation / purification of  a patient’s specimen.

US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

Following the Chinese announcement  on the 28th of January 2020, the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated that the novel corona virus had been isolated.  The CDC statement dated January 28th, 2020 (updated December 2020) is unequivocal:

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was isolated in the laboratory and is available for research by the scientific and medical community.

….

Timeline:

  • On January 20, 2020, CDC received a clinical specimen collected from the first reported U.S. patient infected with SARS-CoV-2. CDC immediately placed the specimen into cell culture to grow a sufficient amount of virus for study.
  • On February 2, 2020, CDC generated enough SARS-CoV-2 grown in cell culture to distribute to medical and scientific researchers.
  • On February 4, 2020, CDC shipped SARS-CoV-2 to the BEI Resources Repository.
  • An article discussing the isolation and characterization of this virus specimen is available in Emerging Infectious Diseases.

One important way that CDC has supported global efforts to study and learn about SARS-CoV-2 in the laboratory was by growing the virus in cell culture and ensuring that it was widely available. Researchers in the scientific and medical community can use virus obtained from this work in their studies.

SARS-CoV-2 strains supplied by CDC and other researchers can be requested, free, from the Biodefense and Emerging Infections Research (BEI) Resources Repositoryexternal icon by established institutions that meet BEI requirements. These requirements include maintaining appropriate facilities and safety programs, as well as having the appropriate expertise. BEI supplies organisms and reagents to the broader community of microbiology and infectious disease researchers.  (Emphasis added).

See also related study which was posted on the CDC website.

The CDC Acknowledges that SARS-CoV-2 has not been  Isolated.

 

The official CDC document, (dated July 21, 2021) entitled “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel reads as follows:

Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed [January 2020] and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. (emphasis added, page 40)

Compare the above statement to the CDC January 28th, 2020 advisory confirming the isolation of SARS-CoV-2:

On January 20, 2020, CDC received a clinical specimen collected from the first reported U.S. patient infected with SARS-CoV-2. CDC immediately placed the specimen into cell culture to grow a sufficient amount of virus for study.

***

See the analysis of CDC responses in the section below on Freedom of Information Requests initiated by Christine Massey.

The World Health Organization (WHO) Did Not Undertake The Isolation / Purification of a Specimen

From the documents quoted below, the Chinese authorities did not provide the WHO with a specimen of isolated /  purified  SARS-CoV-2.

And because details concerning isolation were not available, the WHO  decided to “customize” its Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR)  test using a so-called isolate of the “similar” 2003 SARS corona virus (subsequently renamed SARS-CoV-1) as “a point of reference” (or proxy) for detecting genetic fragments of the 2019 SARS-CoV-2.

The WHO sought the advice of   Victor M. Corman, Christian Drosten, et al  of the Berlin Virology Institute at Charité Hospital. The study entitled “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR” ) was subsequently submitted to the WHO. 

While Corman, Drosten et al’s study confirmed that “several viral genome sequences had been released”, in the case of 2019-nCoV, “virus isolates or samples from infected patients were not available …

The recommendations to the WHO were as follows:

“The genome sequences suggest presence of a virus closely related to the members of a viral species termed severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-related CoV, a species defined by the agent of the 2002/03 outbreak of SARS in humans [3,4].

 We report on the the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation [using the RT-PCR test], designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens. Design and validation were enabled by the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV, and aided by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.”  (Eurosurveillance, January 23, 2020, emphasis added).

What this bold statement suggests is that the isolation / purification of 2019-nCoV was not required and that “validation” would be enabled by “the close genetic relatedness to the 2003-SARS-CoV.”

The recommendations of the Corman- Drosten study (supported and financed by the Gates Foundation) pertaining to the use of the RT-PCR test applied to 2019-nCoV were then firmly endorsed by the Director General of the WHO, Dr. Tedros Adhanom. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, E-Book, Chapter II).

Freedom of Information: No Record of SARS-CoV-2 Isolation-Purification. Christine Massey

An important ongoing and detailed investigative project by Christine Massey, M.Sc. of Ontario, Canada is entitled:

Freedom of Information Requests: Health/ Science Institutions Worldwide “Have No Record” of SARS-COV-2 Isolation/Purification  (work in progress since 2020)

by Fluoride Free Peel, August 04, 2021

A related text shows the list of institutions contacted

90 Health/Science Institutions Globally All Failed to Cite Even 1 Record of “SARS-COV-2” Purification, by Anyone, Anywhere, Ever 

By Fluoride Free Peel, August 04, 2021

The investigative report provides detailed documentation based on Freedom of Information (FOI) requests addressed to ninety Health /Science institutions in a large number of countries.

The responses to these requests confirm that there is no record of isolation / purification of SARS-CoV-2 “having been performed by anyone, anywhere, ever.”

“The 90 Health /Science institutions that have responded thus far have provided and/or cited, in total, zero such records:

Our requests [under “freedom of information”] have not been limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, or limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to any records describing “COVID-19 virus” (aka “SARS-COV-2”) isolation/purification performed by anyone, ever, anywhere on the planet.”

 

 

The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

The CDC was contacted by the author of this report in the form of four separate requests: November 2, 2020, March 1, 2021, March 3, 2021, which are reviewed below:

 

On November 2, 2020.

The CDC admitted they have no records of actual isolation/purification by anyone, anywhere, ever, by any method” :

The CDC again made clear that they still have no records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation performed by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever… just not in so many words. Instead, the CDC absurdly implied that isolation/purification of “SARS-COV-2” would require the replication of a “virus” without host cells and thus is impossible.  (The request had nothing to do with replication.)
..

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/CDC-March-1-2021-SARS-COV-2-Isolation-Response-Redacted.pdf

CDC again failed to provide/cite any records describing “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification by anyone anywhere ever… but would no longer simply say so (as they did on November 2nd); instead they gave song and dance citing the study by Harcourt et al. which is the same one posted on CDC’s website:

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/CDC-March-3-2021-SARS-COV-2-purification-FOI-response.pdf

June 7, 2021:

CDC admitted they have no record of “SARS-COV-2” purification from a patient sample via maceration, filtration and use of an ultracentrifuge, by anyone, anywhere, ever:

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CDC-FOIA-request-response-no-records-SARS-COV-2-purification.pdf

Conclusive Results of the Investigation

What the author of this incisive and detailed report has confirmed is that:

Every institution has failed to provide even 1 record describing the isolation aka purification of any “COVID-19 virus” directly from a patient sample that was not first adulterated with other sources of genetic material. (Those other sources are typically monkey kidney aka “Vero” cells and fetal bovine serum).

Here are 5 compilation pdfs containing FOI responses from 79 institutions in 22 countries/jurisdictions, re the isolation/purification/existence of “SARS-COV-2”, as well as emails from authors of studies that claimed to have “isolated the virus” and an email from the Head of the Consultant Laboratory for Diagnostic Electron Microscopy of Infectious Pathogens at Germany’s Robert Koch Institut, last updated July 13, 2021

Screenshot of a selected responses are provided below : New Zealand, Canada, UK.

Consult the full archive of letters and responses. This work was undertaken over a period of more than 12 months.

Response Public Health England

It follows from the above detailed study that there is no evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated/purified from a patient’s sample, as  evidenced by the responses “under freedom of information” (FOI) from some 90 health / science institutions Worldwide.  

Thus far (July 9, 2021) 27 Canadian institutions have provided their responses. (click to access list)

Republic of Ireland:  “The Virus does not Exist”

“⁣Gemma O’Doherty is an Investigative Journalist in Ireland.

“This Irish Investigation into Covid shows that The Department of Health refuses to confirm the existence of a “virus” in writing. Confirmation that the virus was never isolated.”

VIDEO

“As part of our legal action we had been demanding the evidence that this virus actually exists [as well as] evidence that lock downs actually have any impact on the spread of viruses; that face-masks are safe, and do deter the spread of viruses – They don’t. No such studies exist; that social distancing is based in science – It isn’t. it’s made up; that contact tracing has any bearing on the spread of a virus – of course it doesn’t. This organization here – is making it up as they go along.” – Gemma O’Doherty 

 

Isolation of the Virus. The Legal Battle in Alberta. Patrick King

Patrick King. The Virus Has Not Been Isolated! “No I Did Not Win The Court Case”. “They Do Not Have the Evidence”.

The following video features Patrick King in his legal Battle against the Alberta Government.

There are a lot of people in Alberta and around the World who are Fighting against the Big Lie. 
.
Video:  Patrick King embodies the Truth. 

WATCH ON ➜ ODYSEE , WATCH ON ➜ BITCHUTE , WATCH ON ➜ RUMBLE 

Concluding Remarks: “Biggest Medical Fraud in World History”

SARS-CoV-2 has not been isolated. Does the virus Exist?

Neither the Chinese authorities nor the CDC, the WHO, national governments, scientific /  health authorities have provided evidence that SARS-CoV-2 has been  isolated /purified.

Based on the investigative research of Christine Massey we have access to the responses of numerous governments and health authorities, including that provided by the Republic of Ireland to journalist Gemma O’Doherty.

What this means is that the entire covid narrative falls flat.

We have been systematically misled.

Everything you have been told by your governments is a lie, a complexity of lies and falsehoods.

There is no pandemic. The isolation / purification of the virus has not been undertaken.

All the policies adopted by governments worldwide allegedly to “save lives” are illegal, socially destructive and in violation of fundamental human rights.

These policies have been instrumental in “destroying people’s lives”.

Dr. Stephen Frost  refers to the alleged “Covid pandemic” as The Biggest Medical Fraud in World History”.

From the outset in January 2020, the flawed and invalid RT-PCR test was used to “detect” the alleged 2019 SARS-CoV-2 virus,  despite the fact that details regarding the isolation/purification of the original virus were not available.

All far-reaching policy decisions imposed on people Worlwide were based on a data bank of fake  case positives coupled with false mortality data pertaining to Covid-19 related deaths.

Curbing the alleged SARS-CoV-2 pandemic through the imposition of face masks, social distancing, closing down of national economies has absolutely no validity,

The original strain of SARS-CoV-2 has not be isolated /purified: How does that affect the process of so-called “detection” of the “deadly variants” of the original virus?

Mortality and Morbidity: While there is “No Killer Virus”, there is a “Killer Vaccine”.

While the SARS-CoV-2 virus is presented by the media and the governments as a “killer virus” (when in fact the WHO and CDC describe it as “similar to seasonal influenza”), a totally invalid and dysfunctional Covid -19 vaccine is currently being imposed on the entire population of Planet Earth: 7.9 billion people.

It’s a multibillion dollar endeavour with Pfizer in the lead, establishing a near Worldwide monopoly for the sale and distribution of the mRNA killer vaccine.

Important Question: 

How did Big Pharma manage to develop a vaccine (sponsored by the WHO, GAVI, the Gates Foundation, et al) with a mandate “to protect people” against a virus which has not been isolated/ purified  from an “unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient”?

Vaccine in relation to What? The virus has not been identified.

Moreover, 2019 SARS-CoV-2 has been categorized as similar to the 2003 SARS-CoV which means that the 2019 SARS-CoV-2 is not a novel virus. 

The legitimacy of the Covid vaccine project hinges upon the validity of hundreds of thousands of RT-PCR fake positive cases Worldwide combined with fake Covid related mortality data.

Big Pharma’s mRNA vaccine has resulted in countless deaths and injuries Worldwide which are barely reported by the mainstream media. 

While we do not have figures for the entire Planet, the latest official figures for the European Union and the U.S are revealing. Bear in mind they vastly underestimate the real trends in vaccin related mortality and morbidity:

EU/EEA/Switzerland to 31 July 2021 – 20,595 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.94 million injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.

UK to 21 July 2021 – 1,517 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.1 million injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.

USA to 23 July 2021 – 11,940 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 2.4 million injuries, per VAERS database.

TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 34,052 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 5.46 million injuries reported as at 1 August 2021

Nota Bene: It is important to be aware that the official figures above (reported to the health authorities) are but a small percentage of the actual figures. Furthermore, people continue to die (and suffer injury) from the injections with every day which passes.  (D4CE

So why are governments pressuring people to get vaccinated?

Heads of State and heads of government Worldwide are being pressured, bribed, coopted and/or threatened by powerful financial interests into accepting the Covid vaccine consensus. The vaccine passport is the endgame, which constitutes a transition towards digital tyranny.

The study and reports analyzed in this article should be used to confront politicians as well as inform and sensitize people in towns and villages, across the land, nationally and internationally.

At this stage in our history, solidarity is absolutely fundamental. 

Does the Virus Exist?

The governments and the WHO do not have a Leg to Stand On. And neither does Bill Gates.

What we must seek is to confront a very fragile covid-19 consensus, which is based on fraud and deceit.

***

See also Michel Chossudovsky’s E-book (10 chapters) entitled:

The 2020-22 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky,

***

Author’s Note. I remain indebted to Christine Massey for her extensive research and investigation on the issue of isolation /purification.


 

About the Author

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.

He has undertaken field research in Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific and has written extensively on the economies of developing countries with a focus on poverty and social inequality. He has also undertaken research in Health Economics (UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC),  UNFPA, CIDA, WHO, Government of Venezuela, John Hopkins International Journal of Health Services (1979, 1983)

He is the author of twelve books including The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003), America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005),  The Globalization of War, America’s Long War against Humanity (2015).

He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.  His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. In 2014, he was awarded the Gold Medal for Merit of the Republic of Serbia for his writings on NATO’s war of aggression against Yugoslavia. He can be reached at [email protected]

See Michel Chossudovsky, Biographical Note

Michel Chossudovsky’s Articles on Global Research

  • Posted in English, Mobile
  • Comments Off on Does the Virus Exist? SARS-CoV-2 Has Not Been Isolated? “Biggest Fraud in Medical History”

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 InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on June 16, 2022

***

When Henry Kissinger surprised the world with his address at the recent World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos (22-26 May 2022), by telling Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy, he had to make some concession in return for Peace, he was right.

The Master of “Realpolitik”, Nixon’s Chief Diplomat with the reputation of “opening up” China for the US and the rest of the world in the early 1970s, this very Henry Kissinger, Peace Nobel Prize winner – and let’s not forget, one of the world’s most notorious war criminals still alive – yes, this Henry Kissinger, surprised the world, but he had foresight. There is no Peace without Zelenskyy’s concessions. See this.

There is so much wrong with Ukraine, crime and corruption at all levels, plus MSM-unreported direct NATO interference, plus US funded war-degree (Grade 3) bio-labs throughout Ukraine, Russia would never give in. The war would become either a never-ending war of attrition (à la Afghanistan), or develop into a (nuclear?) WWIII scenario.

At this point, nobody is interested in a WW, let alone a nuclear WW. There would be no winners, as President Putin said many times. It would most probably become a Reset, far, very far, from Klaus Schwab’s dream.

So, yes, addressing the WEF’s keynote speaker, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, whom Klaus Schwab invited to give the Forum’s opening speech, Kissinger said in no mistaken words, that Ukraine has to make some concessions, in return for Peace. He didn’t specify. But looking at the Big Picture, it is pretty clear what type of concession Kissinger was thinking about.

What is more surprising a few days later, President Joe Biden, used almost exactly the same words, addressing Zelenskyy’s relentless requests for more money – billions not millions, and more weapons, always more weapons. Paraphrasing Biden’s words, “Ukraine has to make some concessions for Peace”.

By now, almost everybody knows that Ukraine has no trained military to handle the sophisticated weaponry coming from the US and from NATO countries. Most of these weapons may – or will rather – end up in the hands of criminal mafiosi gangs, so-called terrorist groups.

The billions of dollars of cash Ukraine gets from the west, let alone the 40 billion from the Biden Administration, can under no circumstances be absorbed by a country as bankrupt and corrupt as is Ukraine. The West knows that. Yet, they keep funding the Ukraine’s “fighting” against Russia. The flow of funds is kept alive, with intense lie-propaganda, that Ukraine will win the war against Russia.

All these billions are accumulating as debt, somewhere, especially in the US Treasury and the European Central Bank. But don’t forget, in the US and the EU, debt doesn’t count. Debt will never be paid back. The western monetary system is an enormous, debt-based pyramid system.

How ludicrous is the propaganda assertion that Ukraine will win the war against Russia!  If not stopped, it will become a hopeless and endless war – with tens or hundreds of thousands mostly Ukrainians killed.

Maybe the economic support and weapons money doesn’t even leave the US and NATO countries’ treasuries, but goes straight into selective bank accounts, including of the military industrial complex on both sides of the Atlantic.

Just a few days ago, Jens Stoltenberg, NATO Secretary General, said at the Kultaranta Talks in Finland, following a meeting with Finnish President Sauli Niinisto, that the US-led bloc [NATO] aims to strengthen Ukraine’s position at the negotiating table, but added that any peace deal would involve compromises, including on territory. See this.

Is it Kissinger’s Realpolitik observation at the WEF Davos Conference in May that prompted key “decision-makers” like Biden and Stoltenberg, to come to their senses and tell Zelenskyy that Peace has a price?

Or is it the other way around? The US / NATO military controllers, Biden and Stoltenberg, sent Kissinger as a messenger to tell Zelenskyy just that? In which case it looks like a plan that integrates fully into the Great Reset. A war that kills some tens of thousands of people, destroys vital infrastructure of a country, called Ukraine – however corrupt – in the end the people have to pay the price in lives and money.

Maybe Ukraine can be rebuilt as a country of integrity, with a new non-corrupt leadership?

Independently of who does the bidding, Kissinger or the Biden / Stoltenberg hawks, Russia will be able to control not only the Russian speaking and inhabited Donbas area, but also cut Ukraine virtually off sea and waterways access, as Russia controls the Port of Mariupol, the Sea of Azov, the Kerch Straight, linking Crimea with mainland Russia via a newly built bridge. (See Michel Chossudovsky, Black Sea Geopolitics and Russia’s Control of Strategic Waterways: The Kerch Strait and the Sea of Azov)

Russia may also have much influence over the control of the Dnieper River – a huge navigable water way – that runs from Belarus through Ukraine to the port of Kherson, Ukraine, at the Black Sea.

 

The Black Sea is virtually controlled by Russia, as Odessa, Ukraine’s largest port, for the time being is practically non-operable, because it has been mined by Ukraine’s own forces, preventing Ukraine from exporting up to 75 million tons of grains this year.

Russia has already said, they would demine the Black Sea to assist Ukraine shipping her grain to the Middle East and Europe.

Maybe that’s not what the West wants, because the plan is to bring about a tremendous famine to North Africa the Middle East and Europe.

Sadly, this is part of the Great Reset’s and the UN Agenda 2030’s agenda of depopulation and mental submission to the emerging One World Order (OWO). Many people may die. The survivors will suffer various degrees of famine, famine-related diseases and will be weakened, not only physically, but also in mind and spirit. They won’t have the energy to resist, thus become vulnerable for manipulations by the Dark Cult, or the Deep State, whatever term suits you best.

If Kissinger was indeed only a messenger, it would confirm that the Ukraine war – the NATO provocation of crossing Russia’s Red Line – was but an instrument to:

(i) allow Russia to save the population of the Donbass Region from Kiev’s and the Nazi-Azov Battalions’ atrocities. Since the US-instigated Maidan Coup in February 2014, more than 14,000 civilians, the majority women and children, were killed by Ukrainian (Kiev) forces and the infamous Nazi-Azov Battalions; and

(ii) to draw the world’s attention on the US – Russia proxy-war, so that the seamless continuation of UN Agenda 2030, alias the Great Reset, could be planned and implemented undisturbed behind the noise of bombs and canons.

An important element of this plan is to convert the World Health Organization (WHO) into an all-overarching, tyrannical world health-dictator, abolishing individual nations’ health sovereignty, by pushing through the infamous “Pandemic Treaty”. The first attempt, the first vote at the World Health Assembly (WHA) a couple of weeks ago, failed thanks to a block of 47 African countries, voting vehemently against it.

Incidentally, the WHA conference took place in Geneva, in parallel with the WEF. Strangely, Switzerland is hosting both, the WEF and the WHO. No questions asked about their criminal, world-destructive plans.

While no war is ever justified, ever – it maybe important to illustrate what may have led to this armed conflict in Ukraine. From the very beginning, and after the US instigated Maidan Coup in February 2014, Kiev did not adhere to the Ukraine France Germany Russia Belarus February 2015 Minsk 2 Agreement which, inter-alia, guaranteed autonomy within Ukraine to the Donbas Provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk.

 

 February 2015, Minsk 2 Agreement

In addition, after months of lies and denials, the US Department of Defense finally admitted having funded and built 46 military-grade (grade 3) bio-labs in Ukraine. See this.

These bio-labs were a national security threat for Russia. Neutralizing them was a priority for Moscow.

What’s next?

This morning – 16 June 2022 – the three principal leaders (sic) of Europe, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, and Italy’s Prime Minister Mario Draghi, arrived in Kiev by train from Poland for “talks” with President Zelenskyy and supposedly other high-ranking government officials. An official agenda is not known. But it could very well go into the same direction of Biden’s, Stoltenberg’s and Kissinger’s verdict: Peace has a price. Concessions, including territorial concessions are a must.

They may also want to know, totally legitimate, where all the billions, (dollars and euros) go; and by whom and how the weapons were dealt with.

There are forces within the Dark Cult pulling in different directions. While those behind the WEF, mostly the banking and financial giants, seem to cling to their “globalization” mantra, there are those, like the military and “real-politicians”, who realize that globalization is going nowhere, that globalization has alienated the public to a degree that massive peoples’ upheavals may derail their plan of shifting and controlling capital from the bottom and center to the top.

So, a loosening of the grip on society – if only temporary in their minds – may be in order. This is the opportunity for the public at large, for We, The People, to wake up and take matters – responsibility for freedom, people’s and national autonomy and cultural sovereignty – in our own hands.

It is high time and not too late.

Remember – We Shall Overcome!

*

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.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he worked for over 30 years around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020).

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG). He is also is a non-resident Senior Fellow of the Chongyang Institute of Renmin University, Beijing.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Kissinger and the War in Ukraine: The Messenger and the Master
  • Tags: ,

This article was originally published on November 9. 2020

OK, here we go. Smoking gun. Jackpot.

Right from the horse’s mouth. Right from the man we’re told is the number-one COVID expert in the nation. What Fauci says is golden truth.

Well, how about THIS?

July 16, 2020, podcast, “This Week in Virology”: Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.

Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at about the 4-minute mark [1]):

“…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-confident [aka accurate] are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”

Each “cycle” of the test is a quantum leap in amplification and magnification of the test specimen taken from the patient.

Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.

That’s called a false positive.

What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.

Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because…

Millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and…

The total number of COVID cases in America—which is based on the test—is a gross falsity.

The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers.

Let me back up and run that by you again. Fauci says the test is useless when it’s run at 35 cycles or higher. The FDA says run the test up to 40 cycles, in order to determine whether the virus is there. This is the crime in a nutshell.

If anyone in the White House has a few brain cells to rub together, pick up a giant bullhorn and start revealing the truth to the American people.

“Hello, America, you’ve been tricked, lied to, conned, and taken for a devastating ride. On the basis of fake science, the country was locked down.”

If anyone in the Congress has a few brain cells operating, pull Fauci into a televised hearing and, in ten minutes, make mincemeat out of the fake science that has driven this whole foul, stench-ridden assault on the US economy and its citizens.

All right, here are two chunks of evidence for what I’ve written above. First, we have a CDC quote on the FDA website, in a document titled [2]: “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only.” See page 35. This document is marked, “Effective: 07/13/20.” That means, even though the virus is being referred to by its older name, the document is still relevant as of July 2020. “For Emergency Use Only” refers to the fact that the FDA has certified the PCR test under a traditional category called “Emergency Use Authorization.”

FDA: “…a specimen is considered positive for 2019-nCoV [virus] if all 2019-nCoV marker (N1, N2) cycle threshold growth curves cross the threshold line within 40.00 cycles (< 40.00 Ct).”

Naturally, MANY testing labs reading this guideline would conclude, “Well, to see if the virus is there in a patient, we should run the test all the way to 40 cycles. That’s the official advice.”

Then we have a New York Times article (August 29/updated September 17) headlined: “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.” [3] Here are money quotes:

“Most tests set the limit at 40 [cycles]. A few at 37.”

“Set the limit” would usually mean, “We’re going to look all the way to 40 cycles, to see if the virus is there.”

The Times: “This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients…”

Boom. That’s the capper, the grand finale. Labs don’t or won’t reveal their collusion in this crime.

Get the picture?

I hope so.

If a lawyer won’t go to court with all this, or if a judge won’t pay attention and see the light, they should be stripped of their jobs and sent to the Arctic to sell snow.

*

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.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Notes

[1] https://youtu.be/a_Vy6fgaBPE?t=260

[2] https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

[3] nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Smoking Gun: Dr. Fauci States COVID Test Has Fatal Flaw; Confession from the “Beloved” Expert of Experts
  • Tags: , ,

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.

 

First published on June 9, 2022

 

***

When is the last time you were outside in the morning to experience a glorious dawn? Or sat watching the sun set across the ocean horizon?

How do you feel when you touch the skin of someone you love? A grandparent, parent, lover or child?

Have you ever seen a spider’s web full of morning dew, or after the rain, when the sun is shining through the droplets in the web to reveal the flashing diamonds, sapphires, rubies and emeralds hidden within?

Have you ever stood in a natural environment – a beach, desert, rainforest… – far from a city and noticed that strange and subtle feeling of freedom tremor through your body?

Have you ever marveled at the breathe of wind that cools your face on a hot Summer’s day? Or been intoxicated by the smell of blossom in Spring?

Have you gaped in wonder at the birth of new life: a chick pecking out of its shell, a seed germinating or a baby being born?

Or paused to ponder the sheer magic of being alive yourself?

Or do you find life in the real physical world too constricting, painful, frightening and demanding: something from which you seek to escape, with some distraction or another (work, television, sport, a novel, a drug…), as often as you can?

Well, very soon now, we are promised, you will be able to escape reality far more effectively than those primitive means of distraction made possible previously. And far more effectively than even the outcomes promised in those dystopian novels.

So the fundamental questions we must ask ourselves are simple:

  • Do you want real life, with all of the pains, sorrows, fear and fury that go along with beauty, freedom and love?
  • Or do you believe what they tell us and want everything unpleasant to go away? Permanently. And to live in delusion thereafter, given synthetic versions of all of the pleasant feelings and experiences described above?

Remember the dialogue between the Savage and Mustapha Mond during the closing stages of Aldous Huxley’s dystopian novel Brave New World?

‘But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.’

‘In fact,’ said Mustapha Mond, ‘you’re claiming the right to be unhappy.’

‘All right then,’ said the Savage defiantly, ‘I’m claiming the right to be unhappy.’

‘Not to mention the right to grow old and ugly and impotent; the right to have syphilis and cancer; the right to have too little to eat; the right to be lousy; the right to live in constant apprehension of what may happen to-morrow; the right to catch typhoid; the right to be tortured by unspeakable pains of every kind.’

There was a long silence.

‘I claim them all,’ said the Savage at last.

Well, after nearly one hundred years, the dystopian future described by Huxley is almost upon us and, if we are to defeat it, we need a lot more ‘savages’ willing to forego the promised ‘comforts’.

Because if those who see themselves as our global masters get their way, we are about to enter a virtual world that will become more complete by the day and from which there will be no escape.

The Metaverse

Based on many years of effort, the World Economic Forum (WEF) has recently launched its plan to create our new all-digital world, called the ‘metaverse’. See ‘Defining and Building the Metaverse’.

So if you find natural phenomena – ranging from rainforests, beaches and weather variations to ill-health, danger and unhappiness – annoying, you will soon be able to escape them, compliments of the metaverse. Or so we are promised. And you won’t be troubled by anything resembling what might be called ‘free will’ either. You will be content to do as you are told, even more than you are content to do already.

See ‘Terrified of Freedom: Why Most Human Beings are Embracing the Global Elite’s Technotyranny’.

After all, your mind will no longer be your own.

And while the usual descriptions, written by elite agents, fail to mention it, a quick flash of metaverse-induced fear will make sure that you comply, whatever you are required to do.

The point is this: You won’t be escaping all of those unpleasant feelings after all. They can just be used to control you more directly, to fulfill an elite-determined purpose. But that is a fact they are not advertising.

In their iconic hit song ‘In the Year 2525’, written in 1964 by Rick Evans and later recorded by he and Denny Zager to become a No.1. hit around the world in 1969, Evans captured key elements of what is already upon us somewhat ahead of the schedule mapped out in the song.

[Chorus 2]

In the year 3535
Ain’t gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lies
Everything you think, do, and say
Is in the pills you took today

[Chorus 3]

In the year 4545
Ain’t gonna need your teeth, won’t need your eyes
You won’t find a thing to chew
Nobody’s gonna look at you

[Chorus 4]

In the year 5555
Your arms are hanging limp at your sides
Your legs got nothing to do
Some machine’s doing that for you

[Chorus 5]

In the year 6565
Ain’t gonna need no husband, won’t need no wife
You’ll pick your sons, pick your daughters too
From the bottom of a long glass tube
Whoa-oh-oh

So what is the Metaverse?

According to the WEF:

‘The metaverse is a future persistent and interconnected virtual environment where social and economic elements mirror reality. Users can interact with it and each other simultaneously across devices and immersive technologies while engaging with digital assets and property.’ See ‘Defining and Building the Metaverse’.

Moreover, ‘if technologists are right that 2022 will separate thinkers from builders, then last years’ technical advances will produce this year’s first steps towards making the metaverse a reality….

‘But from the perspective of the human experience, one development stands out above all others: extended reality (XR) technologies. These include virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and brain-computer interfaces (BCI), which together position themselves as the next computing platforms in their own right.’

Nevertheless, it is clear that a precise definition of the term ‘metaverse’ (for a start: is it a product, service, place or moment in time?), upon which there is broad agreement even among those who routinely use the term, is yet to emerge. See ‘3 technologies that will shape the future of the metaverse – and the human experience’.

Having written that, here is one definition elaborated in the article above that reveals just how far some of those heavily involved in this work have become disconnected from any sense of themselves and, hence, reality: ‘Specifically, the metaverse is the moment at which our digital lives – our online identities, experiences, relationships, and assets – become more meaningful to us than our physical lives.’ The original quotation can be read here:

‘Spheres of Self: Performativity and Parasociality in the Metaverse’.

And, as Cathy Li describes it, the metaverse is ‘most useful as a lens through which to view ongoing digital transformation. The belief is that virtual worlds, incorporating connected devices, blockchain and other tech, will be so commonplace that the metaverse will become an extension of reality itself.’ See ‘Who will govern the metaverse?’

Let me reiterate two points from the paragraphs immediately above: ‘our digital lives… become more meaningful to us than our physical lives.’ And ‘the metaverse will become an extension of reality itself.’

Really?

While statements such as these reveal the breathtaking level of insanity that underpins this entire enterprise – see ‘The Global Elite is Insane Revisited’ – it does not mean that we are not under enormous threat. Just as vast arsenals of nuclear weapons, by some insane ‘logic’, are supposed to provide us with ‘security’ while actually threatening the existence of all life on Earth, the metaverse is part of a substantial package of measures that will reduce human life to one not worth living.

Why? Well, as noted by authors such as Tom Valovic: The metaverse is one element in the path to implementing technocratic governance over all of humanity.

‘As Planet Earth and our physical world continue to experience massive biospheric degradation and disruption, the elites that are now in many cases pulling the strings of governance at the country level are heading for the exit doors. Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are exploring the realm of space and Musk has a Mars mission planned. Globally oriented elites… looked out for themselves which is what they do best….

‘Paralleling the notion of space flight as a form of existential escapism is the metaverse. So what if our cities are crumbling, infrastructures falling apart, and the biosphere is seriously degrading? So what if our wasteful consumer-driven lifestyle has created unprecedented levels of pollution so extensive that it’s now the number one cause of health problems globally? No problem… we’ll just kick back and don our Meta headsets (or worse get a brain implant) and escape into an artificially fabricated world that lets us turn our back on the massive ecological and environmental problems we now face.’ See ‘Why We Should Reject Mark Zuckerberg’s Dehumanizing Vision of a “Metaverse”’.

‘Education’ in the Metaverse

Of course, the metaverse is deeply interwoven with other components of their plan, such as those in relation to what they call ‘education’, which is more accurately described as the process by which young transhuman slaves are programmed to perform their function in the technocratic economy that is being imposed upon us. Of course, ‘education’ sounds better than ‘virtual programming of young transhuman slaves’ so, in the interests of not raising obvious concerns, the word ‘education’ has been used.

As noted by Dr. Michael Nevradakis, discussions on this subject at the recent gathering of the World Economic Forum emphasized the importance of virtual reality (VR) and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies with participants touting the purported educational and economic benefits that would derive from use of these technologies in the classroom by helping, according to Dr. Ali Saeed Bin Harmal Al Dhaheri & Dr. Mohamad Ali Hamade, to ‘increase accessibility, enhance quality and improve the affordability of education globally’.

See Experiential learning and VR will reshape the future of education.

However, as Nevradakis also noted, these discussions had ‘little to say about the need to protect children’s data or digital identities – or, for that matter, providing the types of early-life experiences children require as part of their socialization.’

See ‘Future of Education? WEF’s Vision – Heavy on Virtual Reality and AI Technologies, Light on Privacy Concerns’.

Of course, there is no need for concern about the ‘early-life experiences’ of those young transhumans who are being programmed for decades of servitude prior to being terminated when they are no longer functional.

Beyond claimed educational and economic benefits, however, some authors argue that digitalizing education can play a role in easing pressures on the environment and climate. How so? Nevradakis again: ‘Indeed, the WEF said the use of “textbooks, notebooks and pencils as critical learning tools” is on the way out, due to “environmental pressures and COP26 goals (from the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference),” which “will drive the digitalizing of education streams.”’

See ‘Future of Education? WEF’s Vision – Heavy on Virtual Reality and AI Technologies, Light on Privacy Concerns’.

But it is clearly delusional to suggest that the use of textbooks, notebooks and pencils has greater adverse impact on the environment and climate than the environmental cost and climate impact of producing sophisticated technology for each student. And despite claims of ‘improved affordability’ it is equally delusional to ignore the economic and social cost, for example, to the child ‘laborers’ in the Congo working in appalling conditions to extract strategic minerals to produce this technology.

See ‘Humanity’s “Dirty Little Secret”: Starving, Enslaving, Raping, Torturing and Killing our Children’.

Besides, as touched on below, education is already a monstrous experience, destroying the Selfhood of the child so that they become submissively obedient. Removing the bulk of education’s remaining social component by technologizing it can only make it even worse.

Babies in the Metaverse

Then again, maybe ‘children’ will no longer be put through school. It simply won’t be necessary because children, for transhuman slaves at least, will no longer exist.

By 2070, the metaverse will offer you virtual babies, ‘environmentally-friendly digital children’, according to UK artificial intelligence (AI) expert Catriona Campbell. ‘Parents will see and interact with their offspring through next-generation AR [augmented reality] glasses and haptic gloves.’ The latter devices enable users to experience ‘a realistic sense of touch when handling virtual or holographic objects’. As a bonus, these children take up no space, cost nothing to feed and remain healthy, if that is what you want, for as long as they are programmed to ‘live’. A subscription might cost as little as $25 each month.

And if this seems like a monumental leap out of reality to you, Campbell also believes that ‘within 50 years technology will have advanced to such an extent that babies which exist in the metaverse are indistinct from those in the real world…. As the metaverse evolves, I can see virtual children becoming an accepted and fully embraced part of society in much of the developed world.’

See ‘“Virtual babies” who grow up in real time will be commonplace by 2070, expert predicts’.

That’s right, Campbell is claiming that ‘within 50 years… babies which exist in the metaverse are indistinct from those in the real world’! Pause a moment. How does that sound to you?

Just in case you cannot wait, you are welcome to start using early versions now. See, for example, Virtual Baby, Adopt a Virtual Baby and My Virtual Child.

Oh, and by the way, you won’t be having sex either, whether for reproductive purposes or otherwise. You will prefer virtual sex.

See Sex And Pornography Aim To Strike Gold In The Metaverse.

Critiquing the Metaverse

Beyond the criticisms already noted above, there are a great many other criticisms of the metaverse and the role it will play in the overall elite program being implemented under what the WEF calls its ‘Great Reset’. This comprehensive program will transform human society and human life for those people left alive after the eugenics component has been fully implemented.

See ‘The Final Battle for Humanity: It is “Now or Never” in the Long War Against Homo Sapiens’.

If you like, you can read a little more about what the masters of this metaverse intend for us, as well as critiques of it, by authors such as these.

Derrick Broze: While some people ‘

may not intend for The Metaverse to become an all encompassing reality that supersedes physical reality, for the Zuckerbergs, Microsofts, and WEFs of the world, that is exactly what they intend for The Metaverse…. For the billionaire class and their puppet organizations, such as the WEF and the United Nations, the Metaverse offers up the potential to commandeer all life into digital prisons where the people can be charged for services and products in the digital realm…. With the people of the world safely tucked into their digital beds, the Technocrats could complete their total takeover of natural resources, the economy, and humanity itself.’ See ‘The Great Narrative And The Metaverse, Part 2: Will The Metaverse End Human Freedom?’

Dr. Michael Nevradakis:

‘Who will govern the ‘metaverse’?… According to the WEF, “real-world governance models” represent one possible option for metaverse governance. However, far from referring to constitutionally defined institutions of governance, with checks and balances, the WEF cites Facebook’s “Oversight Board” as an example of such a “real-world governance model.”’ See ‘WEF Launches “Metaverse” Initiative, Predicts Digital Lives Will Become “More Meaningful to Us Than Our Physical Lives”’.

But an earlier World Economic Forum report from its Global Redesign Initiative was more blunt:

‘The report postulates that a globalized world is best managed by a coalition of multinational corporations, governments (including through the UN system) and select civil society organizations (CSOs).’ See Sustainable Development Goals and Human Rights p. 209, citing Everybody’s Business: Strengthening International Cooperation in a More Interdependent World’.

So if you believe that you and I are destined to have a say in the metaverse that is unfolding, you would be wise to keep investigating. Elite proposals are invariably very distant from the type of governance models usually considered by ‘ordinary’ people in a multiplicity of contexts, where the emphasis is on facilitating widespread grassroots participation, not rule by technocrats.

You can read considerably more about what our technocratic overlords have in mind – including the existing trade in such things as virtual real estate, virtual clothing and virtual art – and what is wrong with it, in the articles on the metaverse published by Patrick Wood on ‘Technocracy News & Trends’: ‘Metaverse’. And there is more in articles such as these:

‘The Top 10 Creepiest and Most Dystopian Things Pushed by the World Economic Forum (WEF)’ and

‘“How Our Lives Could Soon Look”: The World Economic Forum Posts An Insane Dystopian Video’.

And here’s another simple issue to ponder. Remember how I mentioned above that a quick flash of metaverse-induced fear would ensure that you complied with an elite-determined directive, how does the idea of eating bugs, processed sewage and human flesh appeal? Well, given that your mind will no longer be your own, what appeals now, or doesn’t, will be irrelevant once the metaverse is determining how you perceive things.

See ‘Canadian Company Pledges To Produce TWO BILLION BUGS Per Year For Human Consumption’ and ‘Will You Eat Cultured Meat Grown From Human Cells?’

You will eat ‘Soylent Green’ because that is what the program tells you.

So why are people embracing the Metaverse?

In a recent article in which he described taking his son to watch a film through 3D glasses, Charles Eisenstein noted ‘The on-screen reality was so vivid, stimulating and intense that it made the real world seem boring by comparison.’ See ‘Transhumanism and the Metaverse’.

How can this happen?

Because we terrorize our children into submissive obedience, devoid of the unique and powerful individual Self they were gifted by evolution at birth. See Why Violence?, Fearless Psychology and Fearful Psychology: Principles and Practiceand ‘Do We Want School or Education?’ Why? Essentially to keep them performing tasks that bore them senseless throughout their school and working life.

Fundamentally, this terrorization works because it compels our children into suppressing awareness of how they feel. As a result, only the most intense experiences register emotionally: The capacity to experience a subtle feeling has been lost. And without this capacity, they cannot develop into the powerful, courageous Self-willed individuals that evolution intended. They are human relics. Ready and willing to be turned into a transhuman slave in the unconscious hope they will be finally able to experience, in the metaverse, what was taken from them in the real world as a child.

But they won’t get that experience, even in the metaverse. It is not what the elite has in mind for us.

Resisting the Metaverse

Of course, the metaverse is just one feature of the Global Elite agenda that is being imposed upon us. And it is not enough to resist individual features of the ‘Great Reset’ program. We must strategically resist its most fundamental elements so that the entire agenda is defeated.

If you are inclined to join those strategically resisting the ‘Great Reset’ and its related agendas, you are welcome to participate in the ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ campaign which identifies a list of 30 strategic goals for doing so.

In addition and more simply, you can download a one-page flyer that identifies a short series of crucial nonviolent actions that anyone can take. This flyer, now available in 16 languages (Czech, Danish, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Polish, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Spanish & Slovak) with more languages in the pipeline, can be downloaded from here: ‘The 7 Days Campaign to Resist the Great Reset’.

If strategically resisting the ‘Great Reset’ (and related agendas) appeals to you, consider joining the ‘We Are Human, We Are Free’ Telegram group (with a link accessible from the website).

And if you want a child who is powerfully able to perceive the dysfunctional lure of the metaverse, and is able to join you in resisting it, consider making ‘My Promise to Children’.

Conclusion

So, for just a little longer, the choice is yours.

You can live your life with all its challenges and problems, joys and achievements. Or you can live the virtual life that someone else programmed for you, including whatever comes with it that they didn’t tell you about.

In short, like Neo in the film ‘The Matrix’, you have a choice. You can choose the Blue Pill and proceed to live in a synthesized, fictional, computer-generated world. Or you take the Red Pill and, in this case, join the fight with those of us determined to defend the real world and avert descent into the metaverse.

But you must make that choice while you still have free will.

So you must make that choice soon.

*

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.

Robert J. Burrowes has a lifetime commitment to understanding and ending human violence. He has done extensive research since 1966 in an effort to understand why human beings are violent and has been a nonviolent activist since 1981. He is the author of Why Violence? His email address is [email protected] and his website is here. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from WEF

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Do We Want Real Life? Or Live in the Delusion of a Dystopian Future: Virtual Beauty”, “Virtual Freedom”, “Virtual Love”… Is the WEF’s “All-Digital Metaverse Reality” Our Future?
  • Tags: ,

“Inizia la produzione della bomba nucleare B61-12”: lo annunciano dagli Stati Uniti i Sandia National Laboratories. La B61-12, che sostituisce la precedente B61 dislocata dagli USA ad Aviano e Ghedi e in altre basi europee, è un’arma di nuovo tipo. Ha una testata nucleare con quattro opzioni di potenza, selezionabili a seconda dell’obiettivo da distruggere. Non viene sganciata in verticale, ma a distanza dall’obiettivo su cui si dirige guidata da un sistema satellitare. Può penetrare nel sottosuolo, esplodendo in profondità per distruggere i bunker dei centri di comando in un first strike nucleare. Le B61-12, classificate come “armi nucleari non-strategiche”, vengono schierate in Europa — in Italia, Germania, Belgio, Olanda, Gran Bretagna e probabilmente in altri paesi — a distanze tali da poter colpire la Russia. Hanno quindi capacità offensive analoghe a quelle delle armi strategiche.

 

Un altro sistema d’arma nucleare, che gli Stati Uniti si preparano a installare in Europa contro la Russia, è costituito da missili a raggio intermedio con base a terra. Possono essere lanciati anche dalle installazioni dello “scudo anti-missile”, dislocate dagli USA nelle basi di Deveselu in Romania e di Redzikowo in Polonia, e a bordo di cinque navi da guerra che incrociano nel Mediterraneo, Mar Nero e Mar Baltico a ridosso della Russia. Che tali installazioni abbiano capacità offensive lo conferma la stessa Lockheed Martin. Illustrando le caratteristiche del sistema di lancio verticale Mk 41, usato sia nelle installazioni terrestri che in quelle navali, specifica che esso è in grado di lanciare “missili per tutte le missioni, sia per la difesa sia per l’attacco a lungo raggio, compresi missili da crociera Tomahawk”. Questi possono essere armati di testate nucleari. 

L’Europa viene così trasformata dagli USA in prima linea di un confronto nucleare con la Russia, ancora più pericoloso di quello della Guerra fredda.

Manlio Dinucci

  • Posted in Italiano
  • Comments Off on Ttra poco. In Italia le nuove bombe nucleari made in USA.

First published on March 20, 2022

***

Video Caroline Mailloux interviews Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

Destabilizing the social, political and economic structure of 190 sovereign countries cannot constitute  a “solution” to combating the virus. But that was the imposed “solution” which was implemented in several stages from the very outset of the corona crisis in January 2020.  It’s the destruction of people’s  lives. It is the destabilization of civil society.

Fake science was supportive of this devastating agenda. The lies were sustained by a massive media disinformation campaign. 24/7, Incessant and Repetitive “Covid alerts” in the course of the last two years.

The  historic March 11, 2020 lockdown triggered economic and social chaos Worldwide. It was an act of “economic warfare”: a war against humanity. 

This diabolical agenda has undermined the sovereignty of nation states. It has contributed  to a wave of bankruptcies. It has impoverished people Worldwide.

It has led to a spiralling dollar denominated global debt. 

The powerful structures of global capitalism, Big Money coupled with its intelligence and military apparatus are the driving force. Using advanced digital and communications technologies, the lockdown and “closure” of the global economy is unprecedented in World history.

Video Interview: Caroline Mailloux and Michel Chossudovsky

Click  here or screen to view video

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published by GR on September 30, 2021

***

This is the crisis of my lifetime. Even before the pandemic hit, I realized that we were in a revolutionary moment where what would be impossible or even inconceivable in normal times had become not only possible, but probably absolutely necessary…We will not go back to where we were when the pandemic started. That is pretty certain…” – George Soros 

***

The whole world is under the power of an evil spell. The specters of the past are rapidly converging across the globe and hurling us towards a true prison planet where authoritarian rule is commonplace.

None of this would have been possible without State of Emergency declarations being implemented in countries worldwide to stop the so-called coronavirus “pandemic.” Authoritarian governments love emergency powers and executive orders because they provide cover to implement all manner of draconian dictates essentially destroying free speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of the press all in the name of keeping people safe.

What if the pretext for declaring a pandemic and locking down billions of people was all just a ruse?

What if all that’s happened over the past 18 months had nothing to do with a global health crisis?

What if many of the deaths attributed to COVID-19 could have stemmed from other causes?

What if the reason for declaring a pandemic was destroy the current world system and institute a “new normal” New World Order?

There is an abundance of evidence suggesting that the coronavirus “pandemic” is nothing but a global social engineering project meant to get people used to obeying mandates and dictates from local, state, federal, and even international powers.

The following statement from World Economic Forum leader Klaus Schwab seems to indicate there is indeed another purpose for the crisis:

 

If it can be proven that there was never a real pandemic, then all instituted measures including lockdowns, masking, social distancing, contact tracing, vaccination, and vaccine passports are totally unnecessary, unethical, unlawful, and must be stopped immediately!

There have been thousands of articles written about the devastating repercussions each one of these “safety” measures has wrought against humanity. This two-part article will tie together many facts that when considered together, will destroy the illusion that humanity ever faced a dire “pandemic.” The list is in no particular order and links to source material are included for reference and further investigation.

Much of this research could not have been achieved without the work of so many independent journalists and alternative media outlets. Now, let’s begin the journey and delve into the first twenty reasons why a COVID-19 pandemic never existed.

#1 – COVID-19 symptoms are largely indistinguishable from symptoms of other common illnesses.

The CDC’s official list of COVID-19 symptoms do nothing to differentiate COVID-19 from illnesses such as influenza, the common cold, allergies, and pneumonia. Potentially, millions of people diagnosed with COVID-19 likely had one of these other illnesses.

#2 – Early test kits developed by the CDC were severely flawed.

A March 2020 article in Business Insider revealed CDC test kits could not distinguish between the coronavirus and water. The CDC had to recall over 32,000 test kits that had been shipped to state public health labs. In April 2020, CDC officials confirmed that COVID-19 test kits sent out to states in February were tainted with the coronavirus. It was determined that sloppy laboratory practices at two of three CDC labs involved in the tests’ creation led to contamination and uninterpretable results. Though it’s said that the tests did not spread coronavirus to people, how do we know this for sure given the multitude of other lies that were told? If you think this was just an issue in the U.S., please see also here, here, and here.

#3 – The RT-PCR test used to diagnose COVID-19 is fraudulent.

The late Nobel Prize winning inventor Kary Mullis said that PCRs should never be used for medical diagnosis. The PCR test was never intended to diagnose illness from viruses and current versions cannot distinguish between different coronaviruses or other virus types. The test can only detect the presence of genetic material having a variety of origins. Positivity levels for COVID-19 depend largely on what cycle threshold tests are set for. Anything above 30-35 cycles is likely to produce false positive results. Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted this in an interview from July 2020. According to the New York Times, most U.S. labs set the cycle threshold at 40, meaning test results are highly likely to indicate false positive results.

The CDC is abandoning the current PCR test as of Dec. 31, 2021 citing that a new test will “facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses.” This admission implies that the current PCR test cannot make these distinctions! The CDC even admitted that a positive PCR test result does not necessarily indicate that COVID-19 is the definitive cause of disease and may be other bacterial infections or co-infection with other viruses. See also here, here, and here.

#4 – Results from widespread PCR testing led to an increase in false positive “cases” giving the illusion of a pandemic.

After death rates were proven to be minimal, the fearmongering campaign focused on the rise of positive “cases”resulting from fraudulent PCR tests. Thousands and potentially millions of people tested positive for COVID-19 though they had no symptoms. Officials and the media were complicit in creating a “casedemic” where healthy people were told they were sick because of a positive test! See also here, here, here, here, here, and here.

#5 – The Delta and all other COVID-19 variants are a sham.

The current PCR test can’t differentiate between SARS-CoV-2 and the “Delta” variant (or any variant for that matter). According to the Texas Department of Health and Human Services, “Detecting the Delta variant, or other variants, requires a special type of testing called genomic sequencing. Due to the volume of COVID-19 cases, sequencing is not performed on all viral samples. However, because the Delta variant now accounts for the majority of COVID-19 cases in the United States, there is a strong likelihood that a positive test result indicates infection with the Delta variant.” (Emphasis added).

According to Business Insider, you aren’t legally allowed to know which variant gave you COVID-19 in the U.S., even if it’s Delta. Armed with these facts, how can there be an epidemic of “Delta” variant infections when the PCR test can’t detect it and the required genomic sequencing tests aren’t being performed and haven’t yet been federally approved?

Finally, the supposed Delta variant is no deadlier than the original “SARS-Cov-2” strain. According to a Public Health England report (page 8) from June 18, 2021, the case fatality rate for the Delta variant was 0.1%, about the same rate as the flu.

#6 – Asymptomatic transmission is a myth.

Before the current state of scientific lunacy, you had to actually have symptoms to be diagnosed as being sick from a disease or virus. The COVID-19 “pandemic” turned things around 180 degrees where you could test positive for the virus, but never show any symptoms. A December 2020 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) revealed: 

  • Symptomatic people infect someone else in the house 18% of the time.
  • Asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic people only infected someone else 0.7% of the time.

The study concluded that “these findings are consistent with other household studies reporting asymptomatic index cases as having limited role in household transmission.” If it’s virtually impossible to contract COVID-19 from someone without symptoms you live with, how is it possible to contract it from interacting with asymptomatic people in public places?

A study by Chinese researchers published by the NIHs National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) revealed that none of the 455 individuals exposed to asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers for 4-5 days later tested positive for the disease. The study’s conclusion states:

“In summary, all the 455 contacts were excluded from SARS-CoV-2 infection and we conclude that the infectivity of some asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers might be weak.”

In June 2020, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO’s Emerging Diseases and Zoonosis unit publicly stated that asymptomatic carriers very rarely transmit the coronavirus. As this admission began to make major news, Dr. Van Kerkhove and the WHO quickly backtracked, “reassuring” everyone that asymptomatic people can spread the virus. So, which is true? Perhaps the words of Dr. Anthony Fauci (in one of the rare times he’s told the truth) will help clear the confusion, see here. Case closed!

#7 – Over 80% of people who were diagnosed with COVID-19 and placed on ventilators died.

Last year Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell sparked controversy with a viral video stating that patients being put on ventilators were dying at an alarming rate. Data from China and NYC indicated that over 80% of people placed on ventilators died. USA Today ran a story stating that most COVID-19 patients put on ventilators die. A Journal of the American Medical Association study from April, 2020 revealed that 88% of New Yorkers placed on a ventilator did not survive. These examples prove that it was medical malpractice that killed thousands of people, not COVID-19.

#8 – Nursing homes and long-term care facilities comprised a large portion of COVID-19 deaths worldwide.

Many of the deaths that created the initial “pandemic” panic were elderly patients in nursing homes and long-term care facilities. In June 2020, USA Today documented 40,600 deaths among nursing home residents and believed this number to be an undercount. The Atlantic corroborated this total and also pointed out that “state and federal officials seem to be doing little to protect the elderly from further devastation.” Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo should have been held personally responsible for many of these deaths after issuing an executive order allowing COVID-19 positive and infectious patients to be moved to nursing homes for treatment. A May 2020 Guardian article revealed that “90% of the 3,700 people who have died from coronavirus in Sweden were over 70, and half were living in care homes.” In Belgium, more than half of coronavirus deaths were those in care homes. Spain and Italy also had similar numbers.

How many elderly patients truly died from COVID and not some other underlying cause like cancer? Even worse, how many may have been deliberately killed? A damning NHS document revealed that many nursing and care facility patients were potentially given a fatal dose of Midazolam, a drug used for sedation therapy in critically ill patients. See also here.

Were the elderly sacrificed to spark fear and create the illusion that death was imminent if one contracted COVID-19?

#9 – Some COVID-19 patients were denied life-saving medical treatments.

NYC hospitals (at one time the epicenter of the “pandemic” in the U.S.) issued “Do Not Resuscitate (DNR)” orders for dying coronavirus patients. Just as insidious, these DNR orders were also being recommended for those with disabilities. Being denied life-saving treatment goes against the Hippocratic Oath! See also here, here, here, and here.

#10 – Doctors and hospitals were paid more to diagnose patients with COVID-19.

The corruption in our health care system cannot be overstated. According to S. Senator Dr. Scott Jensen, hospitals were given $13,000 for every COVID-19 diagnosis (up from $5,000 for a typical lump sum payment) and $39,000 for every COVID-19 patient using a ventilator by the NIH. Even a USA Today fact check article verified that this was true. This is easily verifiable because the CARES Act authorized increased Medicare payments to hospitals treating COVID-19 victims. Dr. Jensen, who would not go along with the scam was threatened with having his medical license revoked for exposing this truth. In August 2020, former CDC Director Robert Redfield also admitted that hospitals have a monetary incentive to overcount coronavirus deaths. 

#11 – The CDC dishonestly mixed in mortality data from pneumonia, influenza or COVID-19 (PIC) to tally death rates.

This overt data manipulation does not present an accurate picture of the death rate for COVID-19 alone. Further evidence can be found in the fact that the flu virtually disappeared. How is this possible? According to a Healthlinereport, “the flu has resulted in 3 million to 49 million illnesseseach year in the United States since 2010. Each year, on average, five to 20 percent of the United States population gets the flu.” Creating the PIC category allowed the CDC to hide the flu and relabel it as COVID-19! See also here and here.

#12 – COVID-19 death numbers were inflated.

A CDC memo dated March 24, 2020 from Steven Schwartz, PhD and Director – Division of Vital Statistics advised coroners and medical examiners to report COVID-19 fatalities for those who did not receive a positive test result as long as it was assumed it caused or contributed to the death.

Montana physician Dr. Annie Bukacek, said “The CDC counts both true COVID-19 cases and speculative guesses of COVID-19 the same. They call it death by COVID-19. They automatically overestimate the real death numbers, by their own admission.”

Dr. Deborah Birx stated that if someone died after testing positive for COVID-19, the death will be counted as COVID-19 even if they died from other causes.

A report showed up to 88% of Italy’s alleged COVID-19 deaths could have been misattributed.

In April 2020, CDC began counting coronavirus cases and deaths not confirmed by lab testing, allowing numbers to be falsely inflated. A U.S. News & World Report article stated that as a result in the change in guidance from the CDC, “There was already a big rise in New York City, where officials this week started counting people who had never tested positive for the coronavirus. That caused the city’s death count to jump by more than 3,700 on Tuesday.”

COVID-19 deaths have been greatly exaggerated from the outset. The CDC has admitted that people who have died from “COVID-19” have had an average of 4 comorbidities, including conditions such as heart failure, diabetes, and cancer. Doesn’t it make sense that one or a combination of these other health conditions led to their death?

The CDC data also reveals that only over 5% of deaths recorded on official death certificates were attributed solely to COVID-19 as of Sept. 5, 2021. This means that around 95% of recorded deaths were not from COVID-19! See also here, here, here, here, here, herehere, here, here, and here.

Project Veritas exposed the accounts of several directors and workers at New York funeral homes, who admitted that COVID-19 was being written on the death certificate (when it was not the true cause of death) for political and monetary reasons.

The real death rate published by the CDC back in May 2020 is .004% for all ages. This indicates that the survival rate is 99.96% according to their current best estimate at the time. The breakdown is as follows:

  • 0-49: 0.0005
  • 50-64: 0.002
  • 65+: 0.013
  • Overall: 0.04

The overall survival rate jumped to 99.98% as indicated in the September 10 version of this data. As of this date, the current best estimate for death rates in all age groups was further defined as:

  • 0-19 years: 0.00003
  • 20-49 years: 0.0002
  • 50-69 years: 0.005
  • 70+ years: 0.054
  • Overall: 0.02 

#13 – Excess deaths in 2020 were beyond those explainable by COVID-19.

In a March 2021 study, JAMA concluded that “the provisional leading cause-of-death rankings for 2020 indicate that COVID-19 was the third leading cause of death in the U.S. behind heart disease and cancer.” So, with all of the hype and hoopla about a pandemic, more people died from heart disease and cancer as is typical of any other year.

In an article from the BMJ, Dr. John Ioannidis indicated there were several other causes for excess deaths stating, “Under lockdown conditions many patients with acute, treatable conditions (such as coronary syndromes) avoid seeking care. This disruption may be seen in the excess deaths accruing so far in the COVID-19 lockdown. Patients with cancer whose treatment is delayed have worse outcomes. And when patients avoid hospitals many health systems suffer financially, furlough personnel, and cut services. COVID-19 overwhelmed a few dozen hospitals, but COVID-19 Countermeasures have already jeopardized thousands of them.”

The Center for Evidence Based Medicine came to the conclusion that “the total amount of excess mortality [attributed to COVID-19] will also depend on the age structure of a population. Countries with age structures weighted towards an older population will experience higher mortality than a country with an age structure weighted towards a younger population.”

In June 2020, a study revealed that nearly one-third of excess deaths in the early stages of the coronavirus pandemic in the United States were linked to causes other than COVID-19. Study author Dr. Steven Woolf stated, “People who never had the virus may have died from other causes because of the spillover effects of the pandemic, such as delayed medical care, economic hardship or emotional distress.” 

Official figures showed there were 2,703 excess deaths across England and Wales as of September 2020, but coronavirus was not even in the top 10 leading causes of fatality. The leading cause of death in September for both countries was dementia and Alzheimer’s disease.

And finally, an article published on Nov. 22 in The Johns Hopkins Newsletter (but deleted a few days later) revealed some startling information about COVID-19 death rates including:

  • There is no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers
  • The total decrease in deaths by other causes almost exactly equals the increase in deaths by COVID-19
  • Deaths due to heart diseases, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia may instead be recategorized as being due to COVID-19
  • The CDC classified all deaths that are related to COVID-19 simply as COVID-19 deaths. Even patients dying from other underlying diseases but are infected with COVID-19 count as COVID-19 deaths.

The original article was retracted with an editor’s note on Nov. 27 and made available by PDF.

#14 – In 2009, the corrupt World Health Organization (WHO) changed the definition of a pandemic.

The WHO altered the pandemic definition by deleting “severity of illness” and focusing on the number of cases rather than the number of deaths. Some WHO scientists responsible for creating pandemic policies were being paid by the very pharmaceutical companies creating the vaccines and antivirals that would be used if a pandemic was declared.

The 2009 pandemic definition.

An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in several, simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.

See also herehere, here, here, here, and here.

#15 – WHO deleted the references to naturally acquired immunity from its website.

Once known as a basic staple in virology, the definition of herd immunity, also called naturally acquired immunity, was completely redefined by the WHO in a matter of months. No longer did natural immunity mean that a person could be protected from a viral infection because of previous exposure or vaccination; the new definition only emphasized protection from vaccination! The new definition serves to benefit vaccine makers and pigeonholes humanity into seeking protection from vaccines only. See here, here, and here.

Previous WHO definition of Herd Immunity

Current WHO definition of Herd Immunity

Current WHO definition of Herd Immunity

#16 – WHO Director General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the person who declared a worldwide pandemic on March 11, 2020, is not even a medical doctor!

 

#17 – WHO, CDC, and many public health officials confirmed COVID-19 is no more dangerous than the flu.

During a special session of the WHO’s 34-member executive board on October 5, 2020, WHO officials (inadvertently) revealed that 10% of the world population had been infected with coronavirus. This totaled to about 780 million cases. At the time, the global death toll attributed to COVID-19 was 1,061,539. This would equate to a fatality rate of 0.14%, about the same rate as seasonal flu deaths.

On January 31, 2020, Time published an article entitled “Want to Protect Yourself from Coronavirus? Do the Same Things You Do Every Winter” in which the author wrote, “While 2019-nCoV has never been seen before, it’s part of a family of viruses that are well-known both to doctors and the public; the common cold, for example, can be caused by certain coronaviruses. And while influenza is not a coronavirus, it isn’t so different from 2019-nCoV, either… The things we take for granted actually do work. It doesn’t matter what the virus is. The routine things work.”

On February 1, 2020, USA Today published an article entitled “Coronavirus is scary, but the flu is deadlier, more widespread” in which the author stated, “So far, there have been an estimated 19 million cases of flu, 180,000 hospitalizations and 10,000 deaths in the U.S. this influenza season – including 68 children.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci and former CDC Director Robert Redfield stated, “the overall clinical consequences of COVID-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively” in a published statement by the New England Journal of Medicine on February 28, 2020. 

As early as March 19, 2020, Public Health England (PHE) downgraded COVID-19 from the status of a High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID). This is significant because according to the definition of a HCID, COVID-19 was not acutely infectious, did not typically have a high case fatality rate, or require an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it was managed effectively, efficiently and safely.

During a press conference on April 30, 2020, British Chief Medical Officer Chris Witty, stated, “the great majority of people will not die from this… Of those who get symptoms, the great majority, probably 80%, will have a mild or moderate disease. Might be bad enough for them to have to go to bed for a few days, not bad enough for them to have to go to the doctor.”

One could argue that these statements were made early on before the COVID fatality rate was properly understood. However, the death rate has remained consistent throughout the entire “pandemic” and proves that it has always been more flu like than anything else.

#18 – Predictions based on false pandemic models led to lockdowns and harsh measures to “stop the spread” of the “virus.”

On March 16, 2020 the Bill Gates’ funded Imperial College of London model predicted 2 million U.S. deaths and 510,000 in the U.K. In May 2020, this prediction went up in smoke as the mathematical code was deemed sh*tcode. Neil Ferguson, the author of the code/report resigned his position as it was revealed he violated the lockdown by having his married lover visit his home. Governments around the world including the U.S. used this fake computer model to justify strict lockdowns that caused extreme economic hardship, depression, unemployment, and “unintended” negative medical consequences.

#19 – Deborah Birx, former White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator, backed another fraudulent coronavirus model.

The IHME (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation) coronavirus model (also funded by Bill Gates) used data from New York and New Jersey (where some of the heaviest concentration of COVID-19 cases were occurring at the time) and applied it to the rest of the U.S., creating a completely false and unrealistic outcome. This prediction was used to further instill fear that death tolls and hospitalizations would drastically rise, further justifying the continuation of lockdowns.

The same IHME predicted that up to 2,800 daily deaths within 11 days and a final death total as high as 75,000 would occur if Sweden didn’t enact strict social distancing measures. For Sweden, the daily death peak was actually 75% lower than the baseline prediction and 96% lower than the worst-case prediction.

#20 – The SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated, only sequenced by a computer.

No government or health agency has proof SARS-CoV-2 exists. FOIA requests from CDC reveal this to be true (FOIA request #21-01075-FOIA). Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Thomas Cowan, and Sally Fallon Morell have gone on record stating “the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated or purified. As a result, no confirmation of the virus’ existence can be found.” See also here, here and here, and here.

It’s a global scheme, we’ve been had!

There is no doubt that there was sickness and death occurring throughout the past 18 months that seemed to defy the norm. But can all it be attributed to a virus that in the eyes of many scientists and medical professionals cannot even be proven to exist?

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from Truth Unmuted

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Destroying the Narrative: 20 Reasons Why a COVID-19 Pandemic Never Existed
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

Guest is Gaby Weber, a romance philologist, journalist and publicist. She has lived in Uruguay for 17 years. She:

  • Has been suing for years for access to the files that are locked away with party-affiliated foundations and thus out of the reach of the federal archives and the and the population.
  • Stated in 2020 in the aftermath of the trial for the liberation of the Kohl files before the Berlin Administrative Court:
    “We are […] all disenfranchised. […] No legal recourse, no rule of law.”

This session is about:

1a) The Uruguayan court has now decided to suspend vaccinations for children under 13 and to stop the discrimination against the unvaccinated persons.

1b) Uruguay, as a small country in  South America, took a common sense, non-repressive approach to the pandemic.

2a) Argentina: to their recent film about the WHO human trials during the Alfonsín government.

2b) Argentina: chose the repressive path in the Pandemic which can be retrospectively said as without success. The country was already in crisis at the beginning of the pandemic. Measures have given the country the rest.

*

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 the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Uruguay’s Decision to Suspend COVID Vaccination for Kids Under 13 Years. Corona Investigative Committee with Gaby Weber.

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.

***

Kiev is now employing the High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) provided by Washington to strike Moscow-controlled areas. Such missiles hit warehouses in Nova Kakhovka – in the Kherson region – containing saltpetre, a chemical compound that is used to make gunpowder and fertilizers.

Ukraine claims the target was an ammunition dump. The strike caused a major explosion and fires. Shops, gas stations, pharmacies, a church, and other civilian buildings were also hit. At least seven people were killed and 60 have been wounded, according to Vladimir Leontyev, head of the Russian-controlled Kakhovka District military-civilian administration.

The first M142 HIMARS arrived in Ukraine at the end of June and have been linked to explosions in the Donbass region and southern Ukraine. In its counter-offensive, the Ukrainian authorities are indiscriminately attacking the areas whose control they lost and are basically shelling the very population they consider to be their own people – using American weapons for that. City districts have been leveled, with civilian infrastructure destroyed  and many civilians killed in the process.

Last week, Alexandr Shulguin, Moscow’s permanent representative at the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), warned that Kiev is preparing provocations with chemical weapons at the Nikolaevka thermal power plant and also at other locations in Kharkiv. He told Rossiya 24 channel that a note was sent to the  technical secretariat of the OPCW.

Kiev was in control of the Azot chemical factory in Severodonetsk (now taken by the Russians forces), and, on June 25, Ukrainian shelling forced Russian forces to suspend the evacuation of civilians from the plant. Hundreds of people had taken shelter there. Ukrainian troops also shelled the Yasinovka coking chemical plant in the Kirovsky district of Makiivka in the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) on June 19.

Already in May there were reports that Ukrainian nationalist battalions were plotting provocations at the chemical facilities in the so-called “chemical industry triangle” (Severodonetsk, Lisichansk, and Rubezhnoye), which is home to over 30 chemical factories. On May 6, Mikhail Mizintsev, chief of Russia’s National Defense Management Center, had already warned about Kiev’s plans to deploy “heavy weapons” against chemical plants in the region. In fact, the Ukrainian military has been gathering information about chemical facilities in the Donbass, both in the DPR and the Luhansk People’s Republic (LPR).

Thus, the Ukrainian strategy that is unfolding now seems to involve attacking chemical plants and facilities. And US-provided missile systems might be used for that very purpose. The environmental hazards of this are quite obvious, not to mention the humanitarian disaster and the potential long-term health effects on the population even after the end of the conflict for many years to come (due to soil and water contamination). A lot of chemicals are stored in Donbass, which is a heavily industrialized region. It is also home to a number of mines which are currently closed. If a dam is broken, mercury and sulfur from the flooded mines could end up in the Sea of Azov.

Currently, eight American HIMARs are in Ukraine and four more are expected to arrive by the end of July. Even though Kiev claims this new development is a game changer, it can only protract the conflict and in fact cannot ensure Ukrainians will retake terrain. Last week, on July 6, the Russian defense ministry announced Moscow had destroyed two Ukrainian HIMARS and their ammunition depots in a village south of Kramatorsk in the Donetsk region.

If Kiev keeps targeting chemical facilities, a Russian offensive is sure to follow, and it will include an aerial onslaught. In this scenario, the HIMARs batteries will be helpless, according to a Ukrainian military official quoted by  Jack Detsch, a Pentagon correspondent writing for Foreign Policy.

The proxy war the US-led West is waging against Moscow in Ukraine does not seem to have a way out or an exit strategy right now. Even with all the heavy weaponry provided, Russia and its artillery machine cannot be defeated. In fact, the Russian Federation controls three-quarters of the Donbass and still has five times more artillery than Ukraine. Ukrainian officials say there are 10 Russian canons for every Ukrainian one.

Kiev’s other weaknesses are well known, such as its lack of skilled infantry – not to mention the bad shape of its economy. Moreover, there are no real diplomatic endeavors toward peace or a compromise. So, the Western strategy apparently consists in keeping the flow of weapons to Ukraine to prolong an already disastrous conflict, at an enormous humanitarian, environmental and economic cost.

*

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.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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 article “America’s New ‘Angels of Death’: Inject Humanity with a Gene-altering Death-dealing Technology. Medical Professionals Cannot Claim Ignorance” in “Global Research” of 11 July 2022 begins with a remarkable quote attributed to former SS Obersturmbannführer Adolf Eichmann at the 1961 trial in Israel – and involuntarily conjures up parallels with the political situation in the world today. Eichmann was regarded by the international public as one of the main perpetrators of the “Final Solution” of the Jews in Europe:

“The guilt me for the mass murder is solely that of the political leaders…. I accuse the leaders of abusing my obedience. At that time obedience was demanded, just as in the future it will also be demanded of the subordinate. Obedience is commended as a virtue.” (1)

For the German philosopher and professor of political theory Hannah Arendt, Eichmann’s defining motive, apart from personal ambition, lay in a “misguided fulfilment of duty and a bureaucratic obedience to the cadre”(2). To a certain extent, it was the “sheer thoughtlessness” of the desk criminal that predisposed him to become one of the greatest criminals of that time without “diabolical-demonic depth” (3).

In the National Socialist genocide, on the other hand, Arendt saw an “administrative mass murder” (administrative massacres) (4) and – looking far ahead – “the vision of a highly mechanised and bureaucratic world in which genocide and the extermination of “superfluous” (or “useless”) population groups would become commonplace silently and without moral outrage from the public” (5).

For Arendt, a scholar of totalitarianism, the mechanism of totalitarian rule consists both in a “state-mandated reassessment of values” (6) and in an “inexorable intensification of terror that immobilises people” (7).

According to the historian Hans Mommsen, Arendt’s personal response to the National Socialist “crime against humanity” was to professrebelliousness“, an ethically justified denial of the individual. In an introductory essay to Arendt’s book “Eichmann in Jerusalem. An Account of the Banality of Evil”, Mommsen writes:

“She demanded of the individual what she herself tried to practise, to dare the existentially philosophically founded jump into the empire of freedom; (…) and to dare a real new beginning.” (8)

This text from 1986 has lost none of its analytical sharpness and explosiveness to this day.

In her book, Arendt herself speaks of a fundamental question that was touched upon in all the post-war trials and which concerns the nature and functioning of human judgement:

“What we are asking for in these trials is that people should still be able to distinguish right from wrong even when they really have nothing else to fall back on but their own judgement, which, moreover, in such circumstances is in screaming contrast to what they must believe to be the unanimous opinion of their entire environment”. (9)

*

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 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) https://www.globalresearch.ca/america-new-angels-death/5786216

(2) Arendt, Hannah (1964). (8th ed. November 2013). Eichmann in Jerusalem. An account of the banality of evil. Munich, p. 25

(3) op. cit., p. 57

(4) op. cit., p. 58

(5) op. cit., p. 18

(6) op. cit., p. 57

(7) op. cit., p. 26 f.

(8) op. cit., p. 43

(9) op. cit., p. 69

Featured image is licensed under the public domain

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Dare to Jump into the “Empire of Freedom”. Hannah Arendt’s Confession of the Ethically Justified Denial of the Individual

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.

***

A disturbing new analysis has revealed that over 40 percent of the world’s rivers may now contain harmful levels of pollution from pharmaceutical drugs. Published in the Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry journal, the study found that around 461 of 1,052 sites monitored across 104 countries had drug concentrations considered to be of concern. Concluding that pharmaceutical pollution is a global problem, the researchers say that work is urgently needed to reduce concentrations in rivers down to acceptable levels.

To assess the effects in rivers across the world, the analysis utilizes the results of a global monitoring study of 61 active pharmaceutical ingredients examined alongside available ecotoxicological and pharmaceutical data. Worryingly, not only did 43.5 percent of the sites sampled have drug concentrations considered to be of concern, but 23 of the substances measured occurred in concentrations exceeding those currently claimed to be “safe”. Such substances included drugs from the antidepressant, antimicrobial, antihistamine, beta-blocker, anticonvulsant, antihyperglycemic, antimalarial, antifungal, calcium channel blocker, benzodiazepine, painkiller, and progestin classes. The drugs most frequently detected were carbamazepine (an anticonvulsant) and metformin (a diabetes medication).

The global ecotoxicological effects of drugs

Pointing out that there are now over 1,900 pharmaceutical compounds in use in human and veterinary medicine, the researchers say it is inevitable that these will be emitted to the natural environment during their manufacture, use, and disposal. Summarizing the growing evidence that pharmaceutical compounds can negatively affect the health of ecosystems, the paper cites a notable decline in vulture populations on the Indian subcontinent, effects on the behavior of fish, and a rise in drug-resistant bacteria as examples of the damage that is occurring. The highest cumulative concentrations of pharmaceuticals in surface waters were found in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and South America, with Lahore in Pakistan being the most polluted system.

The researchers say that while their study provides a major step forward in our understanding of the potential global ecotoxicological effects of pharmaceuticals, there is still much to do. Given the sheer number of drugs now being used in so-called ‘modern medicine’, and the fact that the study only looked at 61 of them, the researchers recognize that their analysis may well be underestimating the actual impacts on aquatic systems around the world. They additionally note that the rivers that were monitored will contain not just pharmaceuticals but also other pollutants such as industrial chemicals, pesticides, and metals. These too will inevitably be having ecotoxicological effects.

An environmentally unsustainable industry

In the conclusion to their study, the researchers point out that current ecotoxicological risk assessments have mainly been carried out using single-compound approaches. In other words, they essentially ignore the negative synergistic effects that drugs and chemicals have when present in combinations. This approach clearly has to change. Research from Denmark has already confirmed the dangers of chemical cocktails in foods. As a result, for example, we now know that even small doses of pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) can amplify each other’s negative effects when present in combinations. The same will undoubtedly also be true for the numerous drugs and chemicals that are polluting the environment.

Even prior to the publication of this latest study it was already clear that the pharmaceutical ‘business with disease’ is both scientifically and economically unsustainable. Through deliberately developing drugs that only treat the symptoms of diseases and avoid addressing their root causes, the pharmaceutical industry’s annual global income is forecast to reach $1.8 trillion by 2026. Illustrating how this business model has the potential to bankrupt entire economies, research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) recently estimated that close to half of all new brand-name prescription drugs launched in the United States in 2020 and 2021 came with an original price tag of at least $150,000 a year.

But as if even this wasn’t bad enough, evidence of the ecotoxicological damage that pharmaceutical companies are wreaking on the planet clearly shows that drug-based medicine is environmentally unsustainable as well. Replacing the pharmaceutical ‘business with disease’ with natural systems of healthcare based on nutritional and Cellular Medicine approaches will therefore not only benefit the health of humanity, but that of the environment also. It is time for environmentalists and ‘green’ campaign organizations worldwide to recognize this and join together with natural health advocates in working for healthcare reform.

*

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 Dr. Rath Health Foundation.

Executive Director of the Dr. Rath Health Foundation and one of the coauthors of our explosive book, “The Nazi Roots of the ‘Brussels EU’”, Paul is also our expert on the Codex Alimentarius Commission and has had eye-witness experience, as an official observer delegate, at its meetings. You can find Paul on Twitter at @paulanthtaylor

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Dr. Rath Health Foundation

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Over 40 Percent of World’s Rivers Contain Harmful Levels of Pharmaceutical Drug Pollution
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

 

Democrats in Congress and their globalist billionaire backers are lobbying the Biden Administration to deploy hundreds of billions of dollars into the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The initiative is being advertised to “save Ukraine” and impoverished nations, but it acts as an instrument to further centralize monetary power.

In a letter this week that was signed by almost 50 democrat members of Congress, the politicians pressed the Biden Administration to infuse the IMF with $650 billion worth of Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), bringing the international institution an enormous amount of capital to increase its lending and borrowing capacity.

Last year, citing the economic pain caused by their own COVID policies, Congress passed a bill resulting in the IMF approving a $650 billion SDR package. Now, it is being rebranded to “help Ukraine.” According to the letter, Biden can approve an additional $650 billion in liquidity without any new legislation from Congress. With the stroke of a pen, Joe Biden can instruct the Treasury to send $650 billion into a black hole.

The legislators describe the proposed money creation as “a simple, rapid, and cost-free way to enable Ukraine, its neighboring allies, and developing countries to respond to, and build back better from, these combined international crises.”

Yes, they labeled it cost-free.

The below IMF infographic provides the “official” explanation for what an SDR is, and what it is based upon. In short, it empowers the IMF’s largest stakeholders with a centralized reserve token with which to lend and borrow money as it sees fit. As the infographic explains, new SDRs are allocated to member countries in proportion to their relative share in the IMF, bringing more credit power to already powerful states.

Of course, there is no benefit to the average citizen, as SDRs are controlled by the people in charge, and it can potentially increase monetary debasement.

Moreover, there is a much more nefarious agenda in play here. The real purpose of an SDR, as outlined in IMF literature, is the continuing centralization of fiat currency systems, to the point that the SDR becomes the only game in town.

As the Mises Institute explains:

“The short-term plan, therefore, is to remove any remaining checks on fiat inflation at an international level, and to allow the deficits of sovereign debtors to soar. The long-term plan … is to make SDR the global paper money.”

In the words of the late Austrian economist Murray Rothbard, the plan amounts to this reality:

“An internationally coordinated and controlled world-wide, paper-money inflation, a fine-tuned inflation that would proceed unchecked upon its merry way until, whoops!, it landed the entire world smack into the middle of the untold horrors of global runaway hyperinflation.”

This extra liquidity would allow select IMF member states to move around hundreds of billions of dollars with no oversight. The creation of more SDRs makes for an even more centralized monetary environment, in which allocations of capital are made not according to market forces, but based on the whims of unaccountable bureaucrats.

The Soros machine and the International Chamber of Commerce, which would be some of the biggest beneficiaries of the funding, are leveraging their enormous wealth and influence to make a big push to convince Biden to sign off on the new disbursement.

Notably, the IMF chair is in D.C. this week echoing the calls for more liquidity, citing the risk of a monetary crisis in impoverished nations.

Advocates for this plan may label the move “cost-free,” but it is clearly anything but cost-free. And it comes coupled with a cloaked agenda of centralized power consolidation. The SDR push is the creation of a launching pad that can manifest the conditions for a global central bank digital currency.

*

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.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey Could Join BRICS

July 15th, 2022 by Lucas Leiroz de Almeida

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 BRICS seem really close to expanding. Now, according to information from the group’s International Forum, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey have expressed interest in applying for membership. Previously, Iran and Argentina had already asked to join the alliance. With this, it is evident that emerging countries around the world see in the BRICS a way to improve their international relations and contribute to the construction of a new world order.

Purnima Anand, president of the BRICS International Forum, said July 14, that three more countries could join “very soon” the group that is currently made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. According to her, representatives of the Saudi, Egyptian and Turkish governments have shown interest in entering the BRICS and are already forwarding the procedural requirements to formalize the candidacy.

“All these countries have shown an interest in joining and are preparing to apply for membership. I think this is a good step, because expansion is always positively perceived; this will clearly increase the influence of BRICS in the world (…) I hope that the accession of countries to BRICS will happen very quickly, because now all representatives of the core of the association are interested in enlargement. So, it will be very soon”, she said.

At another point of her speech, Anand also stated that the access may not occur “all at once”. In this sense, it is expected that one or two accessions will occur each time if the countries are actually accepted to join the group in the future.

In fact, Anand’s words confirm some previous expectations that emerged in recent similar pronouncements made by other authorities of the group. For example, the head of the Department of International Economic Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China, Li Kexin, had stated on one occasion that not only these countries but even Indonesia had expressed interest in joining the BRICS:

There are several countries currently ‘at the door,’ for example, Indonesia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Argentina (…) I believe there is a shared understanding that we [the BRICS] need to enlarge, get ‘new faces”.

Indeed, the explanation for why so many countries are interested in the BRICS is simple and can be seen in the words of Argentina’s Ambassador to China, Sabino Vaca Narvaja, during a recent interview:

“We are interested in joining the BRICS because it is a cooperation mechanism composed entirely of emerging economies. There are no strings attached and all cooperation is mutually beneficial”.

While the economic blocs and political alliances led by the countries of the “geopolitical north” are almost always ruled by rigid ideological principles, linked to agendas such as neoliberalism, eco-capitalism and the western model of “democracy”, the BRICS, being a strategic and pragmatic group for the cooperation among emerging nations, is in no way interested in the political agendas followed by its members or in the ideological principles of their governments. What matters in the BRICS is to strengthen the multilateral partnership in order to reach more advanced levels of development, without political interventionism or ideological requirements.

This is undoubtedly of interest to countries that are somehow “disapproved” by the West for the way they manage their domestic politics, suffering boycotts, sanctions or simply reprisals for accessing some benefits in international society. In the BRICS, what is found is a path focused only on non-ideological cooperation – or, in other words, “no strings attached”, as said by Narbaja.

This non-ideological aspect has an essential strategic advantage: allowing rival nations to join the BRICS simultaneously, despite their conflicts of interests. The group makes it possible for states with divergent interests to overcome their disagreements in favor of a greater common good. This is precisely the case for China and India, for example – and it will also be the case for Iran and Saudi Arabia, if their applications are accepted.

It is necessary to note how the expansion promises to increase the importance of the BRICS in international decision-making processes. Currently, the group already houses 42% of the world’s population and holds 24% of the global gross product. With the possible joining of new members, these numbers will also increase and consequently the group will become even more relevant. Most of the world’s consumer middle classes will be within the BRICS or in some way integrated into it – considering the economic blocs of which the group’s members are part.

In practice, this major economic relevance means bargaining power in the international scenario – which undoubtedly interests emerging states and contributes to the formation of a multipolar world order.

*

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.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

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.

***

If you were holding out hope that the media and military analysts predicting the imminent collapse of Russia because of the failed invasion of Ukraine would get a grip on reality, think again. I take the New York Times as the leading indicator of the establishment mindset and the Times published a piece that reveals the delusion and confusion about the war in Ukraine that infects the Washington/New York Swamps.

Put simply, the article–Ukraine’s Demands for More Weapons Clash With U.S. Concerns–tacitly concedes Russia is winning but holds out hope for a dramatic Ukrainian come back. Here are the highlights (and lowlights) of the piece tapped out by CIA mouthpiece, Eric Schmitt, and Julian Barnes:

The Ukrainians say they need faster shipments of long-range artillery and other sophisticated weapons to blunt Russia’s steady advance. The United States and the Europeans insist more are on the way but are wary of sending too much equipment before Ukrainian soldiers can be trained. The Pentagon is concerned about potentially depleting its stockpiles in the coming months.

Got that? Russia is advancing steadily. The weapon systems the US and NATO want to send outnumbers the Ukrainians trained to operate them. And the trillion dollar U.S. defense budget is running out of missiles and shells and cannot keep pace with the anemically funded Russians. Hilarious.

Now for the delusional parts of the Schmitt/Barnes article:

U.S. officials say Ukraine could mount a counterattack and claw back some — though not all — of the territory it has lost if it can continue to exact a bloody toll on Russia until new weapons can flow in from the West.

And if a frog had wings it could fly. The reason Ukraine is begging for new tanks, planes, artillery units and multiple launch rocket systems is because Russia has destroyed over 80% of Ukraine’s assets. And in the process of destroying tanks and planes and artillery pieces, Russia also has killed the best of Ukraine’s troops.

But that fact escapes Schmitt and Barnes. They happily peddle the DOD/CIA bullshit that Russia has suffered staggering losses and is scraping the bottom of the barrel to fill ostensibly depleted military units:

The nearly five-month war is at a critical moment, U.S. officials and others familiar with the intelligence assessments say. As many as 100 to 200 Ukrainian soldiers have died every day since Russia shifted its military campaign in the spring to focus on eastern Ukraine. But overall, about 20,000 Russians have been killed. Injuries have taken about 60,000 more off the battlefield. Nearly a third of Russia’s equipment has been destroyed in the war, according to Western officials, including several who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information.

To replenish its military, Russia would have to mobilize more of its population, by making a declaration of war — officially the conflict remains a “special military operation” — or by moving troops and equipment from Russia’s Far North or Far East to Ukraine.

Let me do the math for you. Russia started Phase 2–i.e., focusing on Donbass–on 1 April 2022. As of today, that is 104 days. If Ukraine was losing 100 a day that means only 10,400 have died. If the number is 200, that means 20,800. So let me get this straight. Ukraine, which is in a defensive crouch since April 1, has lost the Luhansk Republic and is being methodically pushed out of Donetsk, and has, under the worse case presented by US intelligence, suffered the same number of casualties as Russia?

If the Russian army actually suffered the kinds of losses claimed by Ukraine and the New York Times and anonymous US officials, then how in the hell did those sneaky Russians beat the crap out of the well entrenched Ukrainians? Russia started the “Special Military Operation” with approximately 200,000 troops. Yet the folks talking to Schmitt and Barnes insist that 80,000 Russians are casualties. In other words, 40% of the Russian force has been lost.

So, if that is true, those Russians must be incredible warriors. Ukraine has not taken back and defended a single hectare of territory it once held. This despite having a three to one numerical advantage over Russia. What the hell? Ukraine started the war with 600,000 soldiers against Russia’s paltry 200,000 and it is Russia that is, according to the Times, “steadily advancing.”

The real question that Schmitt and Barnes should have asked, how long can US officials continue to bullshit themselves and pour expensive weapon systems into a rat hole? The speed of Russia’s advance appears to be accelerating. There are reports today that Russian forces are entering the outskirts of Seversk, one of the key strong points of the new Ukrainian defensive line. If true, the Russians are likely to achieve a strategic breakthrough in the Donetsk.

What the gullible reporters and the morons who staff the CIA and DIA fail to comprehend is that Russia’s tactic of systematically destroying the air, armor and artillery assets over the past three months appears to have achieved Clausewitz’s culminating point–i.e., the point at which a military force is no longer able to perform its operations.

Ukraine, notwithstanding it numerical advantage in personnel, has yet to mount a significant offensive that has pushed the Russians back and kept them at bay. That is reality. The reality for Ukrainian troops is a nightmare. Here is a video of Russia attacking three columns of Ukrainian troops trying to launch an attack on Kherson in southern Ukraine:

At some point, the American public will awaken to this reality and realize they have supported a program of unilateral disarmament. We sent many of our best weapons to Ukraine and the Russians are blowing them to hell.

*

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 South Front

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Western Media and Military Analysts Still Dazed and Confused About the War in Ukraine
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

This month’s release of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine documents by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration reveals three more reports of deaths among vaccine trial participants and more instances of Pfizer listing injuries as “not related” to the vaccine.

This month’s release of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine documents by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reveals three more reports of deaths among vaccine trial participants and further instances of Pfizer downplaying serious adverse events sustained by participants and listing the injuries as “not related” to the vaccine.

Of the approximately 80,000 pages released this month, the most revelatory is a 3,611-page “confidential” document with no title — only the file name “fa_interim_narrative_sensitive.”

The document contains information about vaccine trial participants who died, who sustained adverse events during the trial or who contracted COVID-19 during the trial.

All participants listed in the document received the 30 μg dose of the BNT162b2 candidate vaccine, which the FDA in August 2021 granted Emergency Use Authorization.

The FDA on July 1 released the documents as part of a court-ordered disclosure schedule stemming from an expedited Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed in August 2021.

Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, a group of doctors and public health professionals, initially submitted the FOIA request.

Document details deaths of three trial participants

The “interim narrative” document contains reports of three clinical trial participants who died — and in all cases, the investigator ruled out the possibility the deaths were related to Pfizer’s vaccines.

One instance pertains to a 56-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID C4591001 1007 10071101), who suffered cardiac arrest on Oct. 18, 2021, and died three days later. She was vaccinated on July 30, 2020, and Aug. 20, 2020.

The “narrative comments” accompanying the report on the woman’s death stated her death could not have been related to the vaccine, due to the amount of time that had elapsed following her second dose:

“In the opinion of the investigator, there was no reasonable possibility that the cardiac arrest was related to the study intervention or clinical trial procedures, as the death occurred 2 months after receiving Dose 2.”

The woman’s medical history did not indicate any cardiovascular problems, although ongoing obesity, gastroesophageal reflux disease and sleep apnea syndrome were listed.

The second report of a death was that of a 60-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID C4591001 1162 11621327), who received one dose of the vaccine (on Sept. 10, 2020) and died sometime in the following three days of atherosclerotic disease.

According to the document:

“The study site received a police report indicating that the police visited the subject’s home to perform a welfare check on 13 Sep 2020 (Day 4) and found him dead.”

The participant’s medical history indicated ongoing autoimmune thyroiditis, obesity and depression, and a prior craniocerebral injury and prior hip arthroplasty.

According to the report:

“It was reported that the subject’s body was cold and had visible lividity. According to the medical examiner, the probable cause of death was progression of atherosclerotic disease. Relevant tests were unknown. Autopsy results were not available at the time of this report.

“In the opinion of the investigator, there was no reasonable possibility that the arteriosclerosis was related to the study intervention, concomitant medications, or clinical trial procedures, but rather it was related to suspected [emphasis added] underlying disease. Pfizer concurred with the investigator’s causality assessment.”

In other words, the participant’s death was attributed to a “suspected” cause, while the possibility that it was vaccine-related in any way, was dismissed.

The third death listed in the “fa_interim_narrative_sensitive” documents was listed under the section in the document listing reports from trial participants who withdrew, not those who died.

The report pertained to a 72-year-old Hispanic/Latino male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1152 11521497) who received one dose of the vaccine, on Oct. 7, 2020.

The subject sustained vasovagal syncope (a fainting incident) on Oct. 26, 2020, and was admitted to the hospital, causing him to miss his scheduled follow-up vaccination appointment on Oct. 28, 2020.

According to the document:

“The subject was transferred to the intensive care unit. Family medical history relevant to the syncope was unknown.

“On an unspecified date, the syncope resolved and the subject was discharged from the hospital.”

He was withdrawn from the study on Nov. 6, 2020. However, according to the subject’s sister, he died of “unknown” causes on Nov. 11, 2020.

As stated by the document (dated Nov. 22, 2020):

“The cause of death was reported as unknown. It was not reported if an autopsy was performed. A death certificate might be available at a later date.”

Nevertheless, this lack of information did not prevent the study investigator or Pfizer from dismissing the possibility that the participant’s death was vaccine-related. The document states:

“In the opinion of the investigator, there was no reasonable possibility that the syncope was related to the study intervention, concomitant medications, or clinical trial procedures.

“Pfizer concurred with the investigator’s causality assessment. Per Pfizer, the syncope was most likely coincidental and associated with underlying clinical conditions.”

The document contained no reports of deaths among trial participants who received the placebo.

Investigators attribute 4 serious adverse events to vaccine, Pfizer disagrees

According to the latest document release, investigators attributed the vaccine to serious adverse events in four cases, however, Pfizer disagreed with the investigators’ conclusions in three out of the four cases.

The incidents are:

• A 53-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1018 10181159), who developed “lower back pain and bilateral lower extremity pain with radicular paresthesia” on Oct. 20, 2020, which was ongoing as of the date of the document (Nov. 22, 2020).

She was vaccinated on Aug. 14 and Sept. 4, 2020.

The woman’s medical history did not indicate lower back or lower extremity pain, just ongoing migraines and a prior history including a right shoulder dislocation, fibrocystic breast disease and Vitamin D deficiency.

The study investigator and Pfizer disagreed on whether the serious adverse event she experienced was related to the vaccination. As stated in the document:

“In the opinion of the investigator, there was a reasonable possibility that the lower back pain and bilateral lower extremity pain with radicular paresthesia were related to the study intervention, but not related to concomitant medications or clinical trial procedures.

“Pfizer did not concur with the investigator’s causality assessment and considered that there is not enough evidence to establish a causal relationship with the study vaccine apart from a chronological association at this time of the report.

“Based on the information currently available, it was more likely that the lower back pain and bilateral lower extremity pain with radicular paresthesia was associated with the subject’s underlying known neurological condition.”

• A 71-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1142 11421247) sustained ventricular arrhythmias on Oct. 14, 2020 — the same day she received the second dose of the vaccine — and which continued until Oct. 21, 2020.

The woman received her first dose on Sept. 21, 2020. Her medical history indicated she was wearing a cardiac pacemaker and was experiencing ongoing atrioventricular block (complete), atrial fibrillation and supraventricular tachycardia.

Again, the study investigator and Pfizer could not agree as to whether this adverse event was related to the vaccination. The document states:

“In the opinion of the investigator, there was a reasonable possibility that the ventricular arrhythmia was related to the study intervention based on the temporal relationship since the arrhythmias began within 24 hours of Dose 2, but not related to concomitant medications or clinical trial procedures.

“Pfizer did not concur with the investigator’s causality assessment. Additionally, Pfizer commented that there was not enough evidence to establish a causal relationship with the study intervention apart from a chronological association at this time of the report.

“In absence of evidence for an inflammatory response to study intervention, it was more likely that the ventricular arrhythmia was associated with the subject’s underlying known cardiac conditions.”

Pfizer dismissed the possibility that the vaccine may have exacerbated the subject’s existing cardiac conditions.

• A 48-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1178 11781107), who received one dose of the vaccine on Sept. 4, 2020, and withdrew from the study on Sept. 25, 2020.

In the interim, the participant sustained right axilla lymphadenopathy, with “at least four enlarged lymph nodes” — a condition that was still ongoing as of the document date of Nov. 22, 2020.

Her medical history indicated ongoing positional vertigo, osteoarthritis, eczema, sinus headaches, seasonal allergies and a Pitocin allergy, as well as prior menorrhagia, uterine fibroids and a past hysterectomy. In addition, her body mass index (BMI) was listed as being 36.9.

Pfizer also in this case did not agree with the study investigator’s assessment:

“In the opinion of the investigator, there was a reasonable possibility that the lymphadenopathy was related to the study intervention. Pfizer did not concur with the investigator’s causality assessment.”

• A 30-year-old Asian female in the U.S. sustained a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA).

The documents did not list any severe adverse events occurring in anyone outside the U.S., even though the documents contain reports from trials in Argentina, Brazil and South Africa.

‘Unrelated’ adverse event reports habitually dismiss possibility injuries were vaccine-related

The documents reveal a large discrepancy between the number of adverse events deemed to be related to the vaccination (four) compared to those reported to be “not related” (113 non-placebo participants).

The reports associated with each incident reveal an ongoing tendency to dismiss any possibility injuries were vaccine-related — even in instances where no alternative cause was identified or where patients had no relevant prior medical history.

In still other instances, the cause of the adverse event was attributed to itself, while in several other cases, pre-existing conditions worsened following vaccination.

A significant number of accidents and falls — and subsequent injuries — also were reported.

Instances where severe adverse events were brushed over as being “not related” to the vaccination, despite no relevant medical history, include:

• A 75-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1013 10131176), who was vaccinated on Aug. 13 and Oct. 7, 2020, sustained 13 adverse events between Aug. 29 and Sept. 16, 2020, many of which were ongoing as of the document date of Nov. 22, 2020.

These adverse events included congestive heart failure, acute hypoxic respiratory failure, acute renal failure, aspiration pneumonia, anemia, hypokalemia, hyponatremia, leukopenia, sepsis, small bowel obstruction and mild concentric left ventricular hypertrophy.

The participant had ongoing gastroesophageal reflux disease, hiatus hernia, hypercholesterolemia, hypertension and constipation, in addition to prior small intestinal and knee surgery.

The report attributed the patient’s adverse events to his prior surgical history. The document stated:

“In the opinion of the investigator, there was no reasonable possibility that the abdominal adhesions, small intestinal obstruction, pneumonia aspiration, and acute respiratory failure were related to the study intervention, concomitant medications, or clinical trial procedures, but were rather likely related to subject’s previous surgery.

“Pfizer concurred with the investigator’s causality assessment.”

 • A 73-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1079 10791246) sustained a “cerebrovascular accident” (stroke), as well as expressive aphasia, on Oct. 22, 2020. She was vaccinated on Sept. 4 and Sept. 25, 2020.

Her medical history listed osteoarthritis, seasonal allergies and being postmenopausal. Nevertheless, her stroke and aphasia were deemed to be “not related” to the vaccine, although no cause was listed. Instead, the document stated, “pending medical records” with regard to the cause of her adverse events.

• A 66-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique subject ID: C4591001 1021 10211190) suffered a stroke on Nov. 2, 2020, with ongoing symptoms as of the document date on Nov. 22, 2020. She was vaccinated on Sept. 10 and Oct. 1, 2020.

Her medical history indicated ongoing gastroesophageal reflux disease, seasonal allergies and postmenopause, as well as a BMI of 28.5.

Her stroke was dismissed as being “not related” to the vaccine, although no alternative cause was listed.

• A 68-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1092 10921015) sustained arrhythmia atrial fibrillation and elevated troponin on Aug. 26, 2020. He received his first dose on Aug. 19, 2020, and his second dose on Oct. 6, 2020, as it required “clearance from his cardiologist.”

His medical history did not specifically indicate heart conditions. Instead, it indicated ongoing basal cell carcinoma on his nose, as well as hypersensitivity, seasonal allergies, myopia, dyslipidemia, hypertension, actinic keratosis and gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Although the study investigator wrote, in reference to the cause of his injuries, that “medical records [are] being reviewed not able to answer at this time,” the report dismissed possibility that his adverse events were related to the vaccine.

• A 45-year-old Black male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1156 11561006) with ongoing Type 1 diabetes sustained deep vein thrombosis and a pulmonary embolism on Aug. 31, 2020. He received one dose of the vaccine, on Aug. 20, 2020, and was discontinued from the study on Sept. 8, 2020, “because he no longer met the eligibility criteria.”

Both adverse events were deemed as being “not related” to his vaccination, and were instead indicated as being “related to medical history of Type 1 diabetes mellitus.”

• A 67-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1178 11781015) sustained several adverse events on Oct. 10-11, 2020, including ascending aorta ectasia, diastolic dysfunction of the left ventricle and transient global amnesia. These conditions were ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020. He was vaccinated on Aug. 25 and Sept. 15, 2020.

The patient’s medical record indicated ongoing depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, hypertension, insomnia and neck pain.

While the cause of his adverse events was deemed as being “not related” to the vaccination, the study did state a cause, listing it as “possibly” having been hypertension.

• A 58-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12313674) sustained adverse events including panlobular emphysema, pneumonitis, and left submaxillary sialadenitis beginning on Sept. 29, 2020. The first two conditions were indicated as continuing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.

She was vaccinated on Aug. 24 and Sept. 13, 2020. Her medical record indicated ongoing Sjogren’s syndrome and insomnia.

The cause of these adverse events was deemed as being “not related” to the vaccines, although for the first two adverse events, the stated cause was listed as “unknown,” while for the third, the cause was listed as Sjogren’s syndrome.

• A 56-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12314001) was diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome on Nov. 8, 2020, which was still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020. She was vaccinated on Aug. 25 and Sept. 15, 2020.

Her medical history consisted of ongoing hypothyroidism, allergic rhinitis and asthma — but no coronary troubles.

Nevertheless, according to the study investigator, her condition was determined to be “not related” to the vaccination, although the cause was listed as “unknown.”

‘Cause unknown’ but no chance the vaccine was to blame

In other examples, adverse events were assigned no specific cause or only a “probable” cause, but investigators dismissed the possibility the vaccines may have caused the injuries.

For example:

• A 34-year-old Hispanic/Latino male from Brazil (unique subject ID: C4591001 1226 12261745) developed a Leydig cell tumor in his left testicle on Sept. 23, 2020. He received the first dose of the vaccine on Sept. 16, 2020, and second dose on Oct. 7, 2020.

His medical history listed only ongoing allergic rhinitis.

While the study investigator claimed that the adverse event was “not related” to the vaccination, the cause was listed as “unknown.”

• A 19-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Brazil (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12311281) with no indicated medical history was diagnosed with acute appendicitis and QT interval prolongation — a heart condition — on Sept. 18, 2020. She was vaccinated on Aug. 15 and Sept. 4, 2020.

These conditions were deemed to be “not related” to the vaccination, although the causes were indicated as “unknown.”

• A 41-year-old Hispanic/Latino female from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12311315) was diagnosed with anemia and malignant melanoma on Sept. 25, 2020, with symptoms continuing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.

She was vaccinated on Aug. 15 and Sept. 3, 2020.

The adverse events were indicated as being “not related” to the vaccination, but instead due to a “probable relationship with [a] vaginal tumor under study.”

• A 44-year-old Hispanic/Latino male from Argentina (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1231 12312854) was diagnosed with supraventricular arrhythmia on Sept. 17, 2020. He received the two vaccine doses on Aug. 21 and Sept. 11, 2020.

His medical history listed only ongoing sleep apnea syndrome and a BMI of 50.4.

According to the study investigator, the arrhythmia was “not related” to the vaccines, but instead “probably” corresponded “to an accessory intraventricular line.”

• A 56-year-old mixed-race male from Brazil (unique subject ID: C4591001 1241 12411825) was diagnosed with acute pyelonephritis on Nov. 2, 2020, and hypochromic anemia two days later. Both conditions were still listed as ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.

The participant was vaccinated on Sept. 17 and Oct. 8, 2020. His medical history listed ongoing hypertension.

According to the study investigator, these adverse events were “not related” to the vaccination. Instead, his acute pyelonephritis was due to a “possible” bacterial urinary tract infection, while the hypochromic anemia cause was “to be clarified.”

Worsening of pre-existing conditions ‘not related’ to vaccine

In other instances, participants experienced a worsening of pre-existing conditions. However, in all instances, no relation to the COVID-19 vaccine was determined.

For instance:

• A 72-year-old white male in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1092 10921187) sustained congestive heart failure on Oct. 1, 2020. He received his first dose of the vaccine on Sept. 15, 2020, and his second dose on Oct. 6, 2020.

The participant’s medical history included ongoing coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, type 2 diabetes, asthma, obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, insomnia and seasonal allergies. Moreover, he had previously had a defibrillator installed.

The cause of his adverse event was simply indicated as “progression of cardiovascular disease” unrelated to the vaccine. The possibility that the vaccine may potentially have precipitated the worsening of his heart condition was not considered.

• A 73-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1111 11111095) was reported as having sustained an “undiagnosed mental disorder” on Sept. 25, 2020, which was still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020. She was vaccinated on Aug.11 and Sept. 1, 2020.

The participant’s medical history did not indicate any prior mental disorders or conditions. Nevertheless, the cause of the adverse event was indicated by the study indicator as being “not related” to the vaccination and instead simply due to “mental instability.”

• A 58-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1109 11091387), who sustained worsening osteoarthritis of the right knee on Oct. 14, 2020, and later also experienced deep vein thrombosis on Oct. 20, 2020, which was still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.

The participant’s medical history indicated ongoing osteoarthritis, ongoing hypercholesterolemia, hypothyroidism, sleep apnea syndrome, rosacea and an enlarged prostate. A prior knee surgery was also listed.

Both adverse events were deemed to be “not related” to the vaccination and instead attributed to the patient’s prior knee surgery and “previous medical history.”

• A 70-year-old white female from the U.S. (unique subject ID: C4591001 1127 11271023) experienced a worsening of her asthma on Oct.1, 2020. She later also developed malignant invasive ductal carcinoma in her left breast, on Nov. 5, 2020. Both cases were still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.

She received her two doses of the vaccine on July 30 and Aug. 18, 2020. Her medical history, aside from ongoing asthma, also indicated a recurrent urinary tract infection and ongoing bronchitis, seasonal allergies, myopia, migraines, hypothyroidism, hypertension, insomnia, hyperlipidemia, osteoarthritis, bilateral deafness and postmenopause.

According to the document, both adverse events were “not related” to the vaccination, and instead were attributed to an “allergy” and to a “malignancy,” respectively.

Reports of multiple adverse events ignored

Other examples include cases where patients sustained multiple adverse events, many of which were entirely ignored by the study investigators’ assessments.

These include:

• A 61-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1114 1114108), who sustained 10 vaccine injuries beginning on Sept. 12, 2020, after he received the first dose of the vaccine on Aug. 24, 2020, and his second dose on Sept. 30, 2020.

The adverse events he experienced included acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, chest pain, left ventricular hypertrophy, mitral valve regurgitation, bilateral hand pain, pulmonary hypertension, skin avulsion on his left finger, a Staphylococcal infection and tricuspid regurgitation. Several of these conditions were still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020.

The patient’s medical history indicated ongoing peripheral neuropathy, type 2 diabetes, anxiety, depression, asthma, Staphylococcal infection, hypertension, hyperlipidemia and a prior leg amputation.

According to the study investigator, “the staphylococcal infection” was “not related” to the vaccine, but instead was connected to the patient’s hypertension, musculoskeletal causes and an “infection.” No mention was made in this assessment as to the probable causes of the other adverse events.

Some adverse events ‘caused’ by … the adverse event

In still other cases, the “cause” of participants’ adverse events was indicated as being the same as the adverse event itself.

Examples include:

• A 68-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1095 10951204), who was diagnosed with bladder cancer on Nov. 2, 2020. He was vaccinated on Sept. 2 and Sept. 21, 2020.

According to the document, the participant’s ongoing medical history included hypertension, benign prostatic hyperplasia, hypercholesterolemia, angina pectoris, coronary arterial stent insertion, coronary artery disease, erectile dysfunction and osteoarthritis.

However, the cause of his bladder cancer was attributed as “cancer” and deemed to be “not related” to the vaccination and “most likely coincidental and associated with the underlying clinical conditions.”

• A 48-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1124 11241106) sustained an acute myocardial infarction on Sept. 27, 2020. He previously received two doses of the vaccine, on Aug. 26 and Sept. 16, 2020.

His medical history indicated ongoing high cholesterol, gastroesophageal reflux disease and back pain.

According to the study investigator, the adverse event sustained by the participant was “not related” to the vaccination, but instead “related to cardiovascular risk,” with no further elaboration provided.

• A 73-year-old white female in the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1223 12231159) was found to have a pancreatic mass on Nov. 5, 2020. She was vaccinated on Sept. 10 and Oct. 1, 2020.

Her medical records indicated ongoing osteoarthritis, menopause, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hypertension, dyslipidemia, hypothyroidism, Eustachian tube dysfunction, prophylaxis, irritable bowel syndrome, osteoporosis and benign monoclonal hypergammaglobulinemia.

The cause of her adverse event, which was indicated to be “not related” to the vaccination, was listed as “new development of pancreatic mass” without any elaboration as to the factors that may have caused it to appear.

Other explanations for participants’ vaccine injuries include:

• A 78-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1097 10971011), who suffered from pneumonia between Sept. 20 and Oct. 5, 2020. He had previously received two doses of the vaccine, on Aug. 20 and Sept. 9, 2020.

According to the document, the cause of his pneumonia was “not related” to the vaccines. Instead, the listed cause was “pt [patient] contracted pneumonia from somewhere.”

• An 84-year-old white male from the U.S. (unique Subject ID: C4591001 1097 10971084) contracted pneumonia on Oct. 7, 2020, symptoms of which were still ongoing as of the document date of Dec. 4, 2020. He had previously been vaccinated on Sept. 1 and Sept. 23, 2020.

Similar to the patient above, the cause of the participant’s pneumonia was indicated as being “not related” to the vaccination. The narrative comment instead stated that “Pt [patient] contracted pneumonia from unknown source.”

Very few severe adverse events — and no deaths — were reported in other countries, although Argentina, for instance, was home to the largest of the Pfizer vaccine trials in 2020.

The next 80,000-page cache of FDA documents pertaining to the FDA’s authorization of the vaccine is set to be released on Aug. 1.

*

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.

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Athens, Greece.

All images in this article are from CHD

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.

***

Armenians citizens are rising up in their millions against a ruling class determined to take away their rights. There is chaos in the streets as Armenians, frustrated with the government and its close links to the World Economic Forum, have begun protesting against the authoritarian agenda.

The World Economic Forum has been bragging about “shaping the future of democracy in Armenia” since 2019, one year after the Velvet Revolution in Armenia and the ascension of Nikol Pashinyan, a close Schwab ally, who emerged from political obscurity to be installed as Prime Minister in 2018.

Armenia listened to the World Economic Forum, adopted their agenda, and the nation time traveled to 2030. It looks like ordinary Armenians don’t like living in Agenda 2030. Who could have predicted that?

REVOLUTION begins IN ARMENIA as the people HUNT down GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS pic.twitter.com/8jy8L5rznR

— Vivian (@ViviNMtl) July 12, 2022

Now there is anarchy on the streets of capital city Yerevan, and the mainstream media continues to collude with the establishment to cover up the scale of events and suppress the movement.

Pashinyan was the editor of Armenia’s best-selling daily liberal newspaper, The Armenian Times, which has always been highly critical of conservative governments.

Pashinyan’s new liberal government wasted no time partnering with the World Economic Forum and has served a testing ground for some of Schwab’s more adventurous plans for humanity, including a ban on cash.

Eurasia.net reported on Armenia’s move to ban cash in June:

Under a new law all big purchases will have to be made electronically, either through a mobile payment app or via a wire transfer at a bank.

And for now, at least, that will come with a steep fee: Banks charge between 1.5 and 3 percent for the transactions.

The new law, passed by parliament on June 9, affects business transactions of more than 300,000 drams (about $720) and transactions between individuals of more than 500,000 drams ($1,200). That limit for individuals will be reduced to 300,000 drams in July 2023.

The law also prohibits local and central government bodies from making or taking any payments in cash. Some institutions like hospitals, universities, and notaries will go completely cashless. Pensions and salaries will have to be paid via banks – even pawnshop loans, as well. And transactions made illicitly in cash can be annulled.

“Let no one think that we want to complicate people’s lives, on the contrary, we want to simplify people’s lives,” Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said in a June 2 cabinet meeting where the bill was discussed. “There are also fiscal and anti-corruption effects here.”

Meanwhile, there have been rolling protests in Yerevan to warn the government against concessions to neighboring Azerbaijan over the long-disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region.

Opposition parties have accused the Prime Minister of treason, accusing him of planning to give away all of Karabakh to Azerbaijan after he told lawmakers last month that the “international community calls on Armenia to scale down demands on Karabakh”.

What are the odds that the “international community” referred to by Pashinyan is actually Klaus Schwab and the WEF?

*

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.

Baxter Dmitry is a writer at News Punch. He covers politics, business and entertainment. Speaking truth to power since he learned to talk, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one. Live without fear.
Email: [email protected]

Featured image is from News Punch

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 Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov announced in Moscow on Tuesday that President Vladimir Putin will travel to Tehran on July 19, to take part in a tripartite meeting with his Iranian and Turkish counterparts as part of the Astana peace process to end the war in Syria as well as hold a bilateral meeting with Turkish President Recep Erdogan. 

Such a summit was long expected but the pandemic and the Ukraine conflict  delayed matters. The current impasse in Syria is fraught with risks. Turkey has plans to launch another military incursion into Syria’s northern border regions that are under the control of Kurdish groups, who, Ankara alleges, are linked to the separatist PKK and also happen to be Pentagon’s inseparable allies. 

Damascus, Moscow and Tehran — and Washington — disfavour the Turkish move as potentially destabilising, but Erdogan is keeping plans in a state of suspended animation, while tactfully dialling down the threatening rhetoric and acknowledging he’s “in no rush.”

For want of green lights from its Astana partners, presumably, Erdogan is unlikely to launch the military incursion, but Russia and Iran are wary that the incursion could complicate their presence and political influence in Syria and risk confrontation between Turkish troops and Syrian government forces. 

However, Syria apart, Putin’s trip has much wider ramifications. What transpires in his bilateral meetings with Erdogan and Iranian leaders are certainly the more important templates to watch. Clearly, Turkey and Iran are emerging as two of the most consequential relationships of Russian foreign policies and diplomacy. And Putin’s visit comes at a highly transformative period in the US’ approach toward both Turkey and Iran. 

Erdogan’s hopes of a rapprochement with the US have been dashed as Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis told reporters on June 30 that Athens had submitted a letter of request “in recent days” to the US government for a squadron of 20 F-35s, with options to buy an additional squadron. The Greek announcement came just a day after President Joe Biden had assured Erdogan on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Madrid that he backed the latter’s pending request for F-16s to Turkey. 

Erdogan should have known that Biden’s long, successful career has been inextricably linked with the powerful Greek lobby in America, which is a big source of election funding for aspiring politicians. Therefore, Greece’s F-35 deal is certain to be approved and it could further drive a wedge between the already strained relationship of the US and Turkey — and will only reinforce Ankara’s suspicion that Washington is using Greece as a pawn to control Turkey. Conceivably, the deal could change the military balance in Eastern Mediterranean, taking into account Greece’s alliance with Cyprus and Israel as well. 

Suffice to say, Putin’s conversation with Erdogan comes at a time of uncertainties in Turkish-American relations. In immediate terms, therefore, the circumstances are most conducive for establishing a Black Sea naval corridor to export grain from Ukraine. There is a strategic convergence between Moscow’s keenness to prove it has not caused the global grain crisis, and Turkey’s desire to project its strategic autonomy, although a NATO member country.

Turkish defence minister Akar announced on July 13 that a consensus has been reached on the establishment of a coordination centre in Istanbul with the participation of all the parties, and the Russian and Ukrainian sides also agreed on joint control of the ships in both entering and exiting the ports as well as on maritime security. It is a signal victory for Turkish mediation. In the process, we may trust the strong relationship between Erdogan and Putin to harness fresh energy for deepening Turkish-Russian political-economic relations. Turkey has a unique role to play, as Moscow navigates its way around the western sanctions. 

Equally, Putin’s talks with the Iranian leadership also has a big geopolitical setting. The US President Joe Biden would have just finished his trip to Saudi Arabia, an event that impacts Iran’s core interests at a crucial juncture when the nuclear negotiations are adrift and Teheran-Riyadh normalisation talks have made progress. 

The US National Security Advisor Jack Sullivan’s theatrical disclosure on Monday of Iran supplying “several hundred UAVs, including weapons-capable UAVs on an expedited timeline” and of Russian personnel undergoing training in Iran in this connection, etc. appear to have been timed carefully.

The important thing to be noted here is that Sullivan’s story overlaps secret parleys reportedly between Riyadh and Jerusalem on defence technology exchanges, specifically related to Saudi concerns about Iranian drones!  

Furthermore, Sullivan’s loose talk comes against the backdrop of the announcement by Israel last month of the formation of a mutual air defence coalition that is expected to involve, among others, the UAE and Saudi Arabia. 

To be sure, Sullivan’s revelation right before Biden’s trip to Riyadh comes with a political aspect, as it puts pressure on Saudi Arabia to rethink both its blossoming relationship with Russia as well as its normalisation talks with Iran. 

Moscow understands that Biden’s primary purpose in the Middle eastern tour is to put together a front against Russia and China. Indeed, Biden wrote in an op-Ed in the Washington Post last week on his Middle East tour, “We need to counter Russian aggression, be in a better position to win the competition with China, and work to strengthen stability in an important region of the world. To do this, we need to interact directly with countries that can influence the results of such work. Saudi Arabia is one of those countries.” 

Biden hopes to bring Saudi Arabia into some sort of format with Israel beneath an overarching binding strategic defence cooperation pact that goes beyond anything the US has agreed to before. This, inevitably, requires the demonising of Iran as a common threat. Simply put, Biden is reviving a failed American strategy — namely, organising the region around the goal of isolating and containing Iran.      

Indeed, if history is any guide, Biden’s idea of creating a collective security system is doomed to fail. Such attempts previously met with fierce resistance from regional states. Also, Russia has certain advantages here, having pursued a diplomacy with the regional states that is firmly anchored in mutual respect and mutual benefit, and predictability and reliability. During Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s recent visit to Saudi Arabia, a certain understanding was reached, which Riyadh is unlikely to disown. 

Indeed, Saudi Arabia and Russia have a convergence of interests with regard to the oil market. At any rate, expert opinion is that both Saudi Arabia and the UAE have very limited spare capacity. The expectation is that Saudi Arabia will most likely agree to loosen the oil taps on the back of the Biden visit, but the leadership will still strive to find a way to do it within the context of the current OPEC+ agreement (with Russia) that extends through December by, say, compensating for the production underperformance of struggling OPEC states such as Nigeria and Angola. (The OPEC+ capacity is already well below the level implied in the agreement.)

Fundamentally, as the executive president of Quincy Institute Trista Parsi noted recently, “any reduction in tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran is a threat to the durability of the Abraham Accords… That means in order for Israel and Saudi Arabia and the UAE to continue to have enough strategic incentives to collaborate and have relations and all jointly forget about Palestinian suffering, there needs to be a threat from Iran. Otherwise the whole house of cards falls apart.” 

Iran understands that the JCPOA talks are neither dead nor alive but in a comatose state, which may perish soon unless salvaged — depending on the degree of success or failure of Biden’s talks in Saudi Arabia. But all signs are that Tehran is pressing the pedal on strengthening the ties with Moscow. Its SCO membership is through, while it is now seeking BRICS membership. The compass for Iran’s foreign policy trajectory is set. Surely, from such a perspective, Putin has a lot to discuss in Tehran with the Iranian leadership as the new world order is taking shape.

Even with regard to Sullivan’s drone story, although Iran has issued a pro forma rebuttal, we may not have heard the last word.  The fact of the matter is that Iran is among the top five world leaders in the development and production of UAVs that may  interest Russia — Shahed strike systems, Mohajer tactical drones, various versions of Karrar reconnaissance and strike UAVs with range of 500-1000 kms, Arash kamikaze drones, etc. Interestingly, Iran’s MFA spokesman alluded to the existing framework of Iran-Russia military-technical cooperation that predates the war in Ukraine.

*

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: Iran’s underground base for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (popularly known as Drone) at an undisclosed location (File photo) 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Putin’s Summits Next Week Will Strengthen Ties with Iran, Turkey
  • Tags: , ,

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 peace movement needs to break the new “taboo” around criticism of Nato, activists heard at the launch of the Stop the War Coalition’s updated pamphlet Nato: a war alliance on Tuesday night.

“Nato is central to so much of what is going on in the world today,” the coalition’s Andrew Murray pointed out, “but we’re in a situation where in conventional and parliamentary politics it’s been removed as a topic.

“Questioning Nato and its role is forbidden not only in the Tory Party, which has more or less always been the case, but now in the Labour Party under Keir Starmer. Where Labour MPs might in the past have been speaking at a meeting like this, now they cannot criticise Nato for fear of losing the whip.”

A Stop the War statement issued as Russia invaded Ukraine in February, condemning the invasion but also the Nato expansion to Russia’s borders which had helped provoke it, was originally signed by 11 Labour MPs but all withdrew their signatures after being threatened with loss of the whip.

“So in publishing this, Stop the War is shining a light on what Nato is.”

Murray shredded claims that Nato is a defensive alliance.

“The illegal war against Yugoslavia in 1999, the 20-year occupation of Afghanistan — and we just saw the revelations about SAS soldiers reportedly murdering people in Afghanistan in cold blood — were Nato operations.

“The war on Libya in 2011 was also done under Nato auspices — it destroyed Libya, leading to immense suffering and a refugee crisis that we live with today.”

Stop the War remained clear that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine cannot be justified and that it should withdraw its troops immediately, he continued, but that did not mean it could not be explained.

“In the litany of Russian grievances, fear about Nato expansion is not irrational. If you look at the record, promises that were given to the Soviet government at the end of the cold war were broken, Nato has relentlessly pushed forward into eastern Europe.”

The idea that Nato was an alliance of democracies was also a myth, he argued, with the Salazar dictatorship in Portugal being a founding member and it currently including the authoritarian Polish and Hungarian governments as well as Erdogan’s Turkey, “hardly a democracy at all now.”

Even its status as a “north Atlantic” organisation was looking dubious given its role in the Afghan war in central Asia and the expansion of the US, British and French military presence in the China seas.

“What Nato is is an instrument, ultimately, of US power. It is designed to entrench that power globally at a time when by many other metrics, the US is losing ground, economically and diplomatically.

“Britain has been core to it from the beginning and we are trying to prop up by force a unipolar world where only the voice of the US really counts.

“The dangers of going along with this are apparent, we are seeing the normalisation of the idea of nuclear war, now being talked about quite casually as one way the Ukraine war might escalate.

“And we are certainly going to pay for it. Candidates for the next prime minister talk about spending going up from 2 to 3 per cent of GDP — an increase of £35-40 billion in military spending, which will all come out of no doubt much more useful areas of state.”

In recent months Nato and the US’s main economic and technological rival, China, have dropped their official neutrality towards each other.

China explicitly condemned Nato expansion as a factor in the outbreak of the Ukraine war, and has stated its opposition to Sweden and Finland joining.

At its recent Madrid summit Nato identified China as a “strategic challenge” — Britain and the US had reportedly backed the even more confrontational status of “threat,” but were apparently unable to convince continental European members this was wise — while China issued a diplomatic broadside last week accusing Nato of “creating conflicts …arbitrarily launching wars and killing civilians,” adding for good measure that when Western powers talked about the “rules-based international order” they meant their own right to dictate to others but ignored international law themselves whenever they wished.

China expert Jenny Clegg told the meeting that the Madrid summit had seen a “major escalation against China,” and that while war in Ukraine was raging Nato was not just “elevating the militarisation of Europe to an entirely new level” but “without any idea of the end game, turning the sights of its blunderbuss on China.”

The day after the summit, she noted, the US organised the biggest ever military exercises in the Pacific off Hawaii, with Britain taking part. Nato members made up almost half the 26 countries involved.

“What is an Atlantic alliance, designed as we’re told for the defence of Europe, doing in the Pacific?” she challenged.

“China is America’s priority and Joe Biden’s backers have realised that the US is not strong enough now to tackle China on its own, it needs its allies. The opportunity of Russia’s invasion to bring US allies around the world together was too good to be true.”

Clegg said we were rapidly descending into a new cold war with “those 300,000 forces on high alert across Europe are not only to keep Russia out, they sever Europe from Asia, lest, as [US strategist Zbigniew] Brzezinski warned, the two parts of Eurasia become the centre of world power.

“Why? Because the US is in decline, and now China is rising. China is forecast to overtake the US in economic size by 2030, but not only that, India and Brazil are also rising, co-ordinating with Russia and South Africa. The Brics could well eclipse the G7 [in economic clout] by the end of the decade.

“So the US is fighting for its dominance using the war in Ukraine to leverage its restoration as number one.”

The situation was extremely volatile, she argued, as there were numerous flashpoints for conflict in Asia, from the China-India border dispute to island disputes between Japan, Russia and China and the status of Taiwan. All were manageable by dialogue and negotiation, but all had the potential to spark conflict in an atmosphere of military brinkmanship and mutual mistrust.

The meeting saw a lively debate on the way forward, with speakers arguing that collective security should not involve confrontation of some blocs against others but needed to address everyone’s security.

This was key to addressing claims that Ukraine had a “right” to join Nato, for example, since countries do not have a right to threaten or destabilise their neighbours — though speakers agreed on Ukraine’s right to self-determination which was brutally violated by the Russian attack.

Members of the audience pointed to the need to build a campaign against the deployment of US nuclear weapons at Lakenheath, as well as the danger of pouring arms into Ukraine given the existence of fascist military formations there.

The first print run of 600 copies of Nato: A War Alliance has already sold out and another run is underway, with Stop the War urging activists to pre-order the pamphlet and to hold local meetings at which the issues it raises can be promoted throughout the movement, with a need to reassert the importance of peace and de-escalation through the labour movement given the Westminster ban on discussion.

*

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 Morning Star

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on ‘Break the Taboo – We Need to Talk About NATO’
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

A group of 19 firefighters forced off the job for choosing not to get the experimental COVID vaccines are suing the city and the Calgary Fire Department (CFD) for a combined $38 million in damages, saying the city’s injection mandate “violated” their basic “human rights.”

“There’s something tyrannical about these mandates. We can’t identity everybody behind it, but what we can do is hold people accountable, like the fire chief, politicians, city managers. Those people are responsible for their actions,” Stephen Dabbagh, the leader of the lawsuit, told LifeSiteNews.

Dabbagh, a devout Catholic father of four, worked for 20 years as a firefighter for the CFD, most recently as a fire captain. He resigned under duress on December 8, 2021, over the department’s COVID vaccine policy.

He told LifeSiteNews that the lawsuit came about because it was time to stand up to the “political and ideology tyranny of these mandates.”

“It’s about trying to hold people (politicians, bureaucrats) accountable for their actions,” Dabbagh said.

The City of Calgary and the CFD were served with the Statement of Claim on July 7 in the Court of Queens Bench of Alberta. The firefighters are seeking $2 million in damages for mental duress, violations of their Charter rights, violations under the Criminal Code, and “Punitive and exemplary damages.”

“By forcing its loyal employees to take experimental injections as a requisite to employment, the City has breached its legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to its Employees contrary to section 217.1 of the Criminal Code of Canada,” the lawsuit reads.

“The Plaintiffs have suffered measurable damages, including mental distress, anxiety, and, in particular, injury to dignity and self-respect. The Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to significant damages due to the manner in which the City suspended their employment, including a claim for punitive aggravated damages arising from flagrant human rights and Charter violations.”

The City of Calgary in the fall of 2021 mandated jabs for all city employees, with the mandate for firefighters coming into force in early October. All city employees had to show proof of vaccination status, submit to invasive and frequent COVID tests, provide a reason for an exemption, or risk being placed on unpaid leave.

“The law says we have these rights (to refuse the jabs via Canada’s Charter) even if they are not being upheld by the courts,” Dabbagh said.

“For me, it is using every avenue to fight against the political and ideology tyranny of these mandates. … These medications, or whatever they are called, are not safe and did not work.”

Most of the firefighters named in the lawsuit are long-serving employees. These include those who resigned under duress or went on leave due the mandates, a 25-year CFD employee who served as an acting chief for three years and retired under duress, and one who was fired for showing support for the Freedom Convoy.

A few of the firefighters are now working again for the CFD but under duress.

The firefighters are being represented by Alberta lawyer Leighton Grey, who is also behind other high-profile lawsuits in Canada concerning employee vaccine mandates, in particular those from WestJet employees.

Grey told LifeSiteNews regarding the lawsuit that all of the firefighters have had “their human rights impacted, even people who were on leave at the time have still suffered human rights violations.”

“The city of Calgary through its vaccine mandate has violated the human rights of the workers by discriminating against them on the basis of religion, and arbitrary discrimination against one’s medical choice,” Grey said.

“We are seeking a declaration from the court that this (jab mandates) violates their human rights as per the charter.  We are asking the court to recognize that these vaccine mandates violate, rights.”

Grey noted that the lawsuit seeks mainly two things from the court. They are “a declaration that these vaccine mandates violate human rights, so we are talking about freedom of religion, rights as a human person, informed consent,” and monetary compensation.

Grey is involved with jab mandate lawsuits for CP workers, CN workers, Canadian postal workers, as well as Atco Gas, CNRL, and some Manitoba healthcare workers.

He was also involved in other high-profile Canadian COVID litigation for the past few years, helping on the cases of Alberta Pastors James Coates and Tim Stephens, who were jailed for breaking virus rules.

He told LifeSiteNews that all these lawsuits have “one thing in common” in that they are “all based upon discrimination against Canadian workers, and the target seems to be against skilled Canadian workers.”

“It’s against the glue of people that are holding society together,” he said.

Grey told LifeSiteNews that the “attack on the Canadian worker, I think, is really clear now, is part of a global agenda.”

“When you look at these vaccine mandates, they seem to only attack the Canadian working class. In most cases, these are unionized workers, and they are coming to me as the union is not doing their job,” Grey said.

Grey noted that Canadians are “living through a period of Canada of intense corruption, and the reason why is we have a very corrupt leader (Prime Minister).”

“When you import this heinous ideology of socialisms into trade unions what you have is corruption, and what you have is all the calamities as a result,” Grey said.

“We know from the Pfizer dump, and anecdotal evidence, that these vaccines have dangers and can cause bodily harm.”

Firefighter: If courts don’t uphold the Charter, it says a lot about ‘where we stand as a society’

Dabbagh told LifeSiteNews that the lawsuit seemed like the right thing to do “to fight back” and see “whether or not the courts will uphold the law or not.”

“If they don’t, we kind of know where we stand as a society,” he said.

Dabbagh noted how Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms is “supposed to be the highest law of the land.”

“If it’s not going to be upheld in the courts, then what does that say about where we live,” Dabbagh said.

Dabbagh and a group of around 100 other Calgary first responders last September drew the ire of the city after holding a silent protest against COVID jab mandates in front of city hall.

He noted that the first protest served as the catalyst for fellow and former co-workers to fight against the city’s COVID vaccine policy.

At the time, Calgary Fire Chief Steve Dongworth called those employees protesting COVID jab mandates a small group of people “in the process of advancing their agenda.”

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney called protesters at hospitals and other areas an “outrageous small minority” and threatened to bring the full extent of the law on them should they block roadways.

Kenney will soon be replaced as premier and leader of the United Conservative Party of Canada (UCP) after announcing he will step down due to lack of support, no doubt due to his going along with COVID mandates.

Danielle Smith, who is running in the UCP leadership, has promised if she becomes Premier that there will never again be lockdowns or jab mandates in Alberta, and she would not “enforce” any federal mandates imposed on the province.

Virtually all Canadian provinces had in place COVID mandates for healthcare workers. While these mandates have been dropped except for British Columbia, many provinces are desperately now looking to re-hire the un-jabbed workers.

Under Kenney, Alberta also mandated a COVID vaccine passport system for a time, despite the fact the leader promised he would never bring such a program to light.

Lawyer: The new concept of ‘an involuntary unpaid absence’ is nothing more than ‘dismissal’

Grey noted to LifeSiteNews that as the firefighters’ union, Firefighters Association IAFF 255, did not stand up for their rights, it left them with no choice but to fight back with a lawsuit geared around Charter rights.

“Never have we had an involuntary unpaid absence … this amounts to constructive dismissal,” Grey noted.

“The Calgary Firefighters cannot sue their employer directory due to union collective bargaining agreement,” he said. “Their only recourse is to grieve through the union.”

As the union did nothing to help with the grievance over the vaccine mandates due to a collective bargaining agreement, the firefighters had to sue the CFD and city for “violations of human rights,” Grey noted.

“Time will tell. We are in early days, this is uncharted territory,” Grey said.

“I’m very proud these guys and honored to help them.”

Grey pointed out that “corruption” within the union comes into play “in every single case” due to the unions having “received an independent legal assessment that their COVID jab mandates are fine, so they cannot be sued.”

The COVID-19 injections approved for emergency use in Canada, and which are still in an experimental trial phase, including the Pfizer jab for ages 12 and up, all have connections to cells derived from aborted babies.

All four have also been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men.

*

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

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 assassination of Shinzo Abe may have been not just the act of a crazy man with a self-made gun. See the analysis of Emanuel Pastreich

There may have been a more profound agenda behind it – an agenda that permeates just about everything that we are seeing and experiencing in our convoluted, chaotic and un-transparent world.

An agenda with three major objectives:

  • Globalization, i.e. total control through a One World Order (OWO) by a small but extremely wealthy financial elite;
  • Digitization of everything – to facilitate total control; and
  • Massive Depopulation, elimination of the “useless eaters” (Yuval Noah Hariri, Klaus Schwab’s close personal adviser), so that Mother Earth’s generous but limited resources will be available for the few self-designated rulers.

Former Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, leader of Japan’s Conservative Liberal Democrats Party, was a nationalist – a non-globalist. He campaigned for his party to win a two thirds majority in the upcoming Parliamentary elections.

Non-globalists, those who stand and fight for their countries and peoples’ sovereignty are not well seen by the globalists, to put it benignly.

There are other renown personalities who enter this category. For example, former President Trump, Presidents Putin and Xi Jinping, as well as former Pakistani Prime Minister, Imran Khan, who was thrown out of office on 10 April this year by a US instigated and bought Parliamentary “Vote of Confidence”. And, not to forget Muammar Gaddafi, who was captured and atrociously killed on 20 October 2011.

Gaddafi’s assassination was instigated and organized by the US and France, because Gaddafi wanted to free Africa from the monetary and economic dependency, or better called “enslavement”, on Europe particularly France (West and Central Africa) and the US, by introducing a gold and petrol based African Dinar.

An earlier champion of independence and sovereign nations, was the late President John F. Kennedy.

*

Back to Japan. A two thirds majority is needed to amend the Constitution to render Japan the military autonomy and political sovereignty that she was promised at the signing of the San Francisco Peace Agreement after WWII in 1951.

The enactment of the San Francisco Peace Agreement on April 28, 1952, returned a certain sovereignty to Japan. The Treaty was signed by 48 nations. However, the Treaty limited Japan’s sovereignty, in as much as it stipulated that Japan may not have a full military. Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution prohibits Japan from establishing a military force or solving international conflicts through violence.  

There is some similarity with Germany which, as of this day, has only an Armistice Agreement with the WWII victors, but no Peace Agreement. Under this arrangement Germany may not have an offensive army and no nuclear weapons on her territory.

Never mind that the US Air Base at Ramstein near Frankfurt – one of the largest outside the US – stores countless nuclear warheads. Here is one of those flagrant contradictions of the mighty in today’s power games.

Article 9 is interpreted as meaning that armed forces are legitimate for passive self-defense only.This is a severe limitation to Japan’s defense strategy. Seen from a Japanese media-influenced perspective, this is especially true in the light of China’s ever greater and more visible military ascent.

The rules under Article 9 implied that the United States would guarantee Japan’s security by stationing US military personnel in Japan. In fact, there are at least 7 US military bases with more than 80,000 military personnel, making Japan worldwide the country with most US military presence. Altogether, close to half of all US military stationed abroad are based in Japan.

This is seen by many if not most Japanese as a severe limitation of their country’s sovereignty.

In May 2017, then Japanese Prime Minister Abe set a 2020 deadline for revising Article 9, which would legitimize the Japanese Self Defense Forces (JSDF) as a true military defense system, with preventive capabilities, in Japan’s Constitution. PM Abe retired in 2020, officially due to health problems, without revising Article 9. 

When he was shot on July 8, 2022, former PM Abe campaigned for his Conservative Liberal Democrats to win a two-thirds majority, so that the Constitution could be amended, by either removing or modifying Article 9. It would also have given Parliament power to decide over foreign military presence in Japan.

All of this is clearly a move away from globalism. Certainly, a disturbing factor for those who still defend the One World Order (OWO) dogma, especially the World Economic Forum (WEF) and its financial masters, the amalgamation of the world’s financial giants BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street. In the case of the US, PM Abe’s attempt at full sovereignty was a ”threat” to the US strategic military position at China’s doorsteps.

Japan is also the world’s third-largest economy with assets valued at US$ 12 trillion equivalent, close to 9% of the world’s GDP, with more than 50 of the Fortune Global 500 companies based in Japan. And most, if not all of them are controlled by the financial oligarchy, led by – you guessed it – BlackRock-Vanguard-State Street.

Would it therefore be surprising, that a decisive majority of Shinzo Abe’s Conservative Liberal Democrats, would not be desirable by the world’s political, as well as financial empires?

Nevertheless, de-globalization is in full swing, worldwide, as most countries – and especially the people of both the Global South as well as the Global North – have suffered under globalization and desperately want to get their countries’ sovereignty back.

For now, it looks like a losing battle for the OWO gnomes, but the war is not over by any means.

People around the world have to remain vigilant and actively defend their sovereign rights, human rights as well as societal rights. The trend looks positive so far, as the OWO structure seems to be falling apart and giving way to a multipolar world, possibly led by China and Russia – both politically and economically, with commodity-backed currencies – and – foremost – preserving each nation’s autonomy and own sovereign monetary system.

Shinzo Abe’s assassination may have been more than a threat for Japan’s Parliament, but an outright warning to the anti-globalist movement around the globe.

No fear.

People’s Power will Prevail.

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Japan: Shinzo Abe’s Assassination – A Hidden Agenda? Enforce a One World Order (OWO)
  • Tags: , ,

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.

***

 

 

 

 

Introductory note by John Philpot

I would like to comment on the discipline of Mr. Ngirabatware. He was held alone in Arusha for two years. This is an admirable piece of work by a man who was unjustly imprisoned and was able to surmount the difficulties of the prison and produce this important work.

It is also reminiscent of the discipline of the late Jerome Bicamumpaka who spent so many years in prison. At his funeral on June 11, a family member or his lawyer Philippe Larochelle explained that Mr. Bicamumpaka would get up every day in prison and go to work as if he were free.

John Philpot

*

What did inspire me to write the book ‘Rwanda. Understanding the Growth of an Economy at War during the Last Thirty Years’

The growth of the Rwandan Economy is my focus of research as an economist since 1986 when I obtained a PhD in Economics and started to work in the Rwandan Ministry in charge of Economic Policy. What prompted me to write this book is a kind of propaganda from all sides which makes the world believe that Rwandan leaders have made miracles and practise managerial methods unknown by leaders of other African countries.

The Rwandan government is often accused of manipulation of statistics on poverty reduction, even by its own partners in Europe and the United States. I wanted to assess and to examine myself the statistics from the government and compare with what is said outside Rwanda in order to confirm or to deny the accusations.

Summary

Rwanda has been in a state of almost perpetual war during the last thirty years, whether through internal conflict or through wars in Democratic Republic of Congo, conducted directly or through proxies and militias. Thus, one would expect very low economic growth rates and this is not the situation in Rwanda. It is crystal clear, Rwandan economy declined and the real economy collapsed in 1994. Since 1996 up to June 2022, those wars have not ceased, but there are high annual growth rates of global GDP and Rwanda remains a country of marked poverty and inequalities among rural and urban population and among social classes.

General subject and Central concepts

  • Diagnosis of the macroeconomic environment at the threshold of the October 1990 war, during the war 1990-1994 and during the Kagame tenure (1994-2019)
  • Disproportionate Growth of GDP among economic sectors what I call “Intersectoral revolutions” and social inequalities.

Place

The phenomenon examined takes place in Rwanda. Foreign countries intervene either as public donors (UK, USA, etc.) or battle field and where plundering of natural resources is carried out (Democratic Republic of Congo).

Interest

Very few research is made on Economies at war. In general, while the impact of war on the macroeconomic management of a country is considerable, research on the relationship between an economy and defence is still in its infancy. The sector involves more of an underground economy and the flows of financial resources are not recorded by the institutions normally in charge. This succinctly describes the situation in Rwanda.

Three particulars are pointed out in the book:

  • Rwandan leaders are champion to fight against corruption when the beneficiary is not the political party on power (RPF);
  • Population is distributed among sectors of economic activities depending of ethnic groups. Very high GDP growth rates have been accompanied by an increase in social inequalities between urban Rwandans and rural Rwandans. Rwanda is on the list of 14 out of 189 countries with the highest coefficient of income inequalities within its population over the period 2010-2019.
  • The destination of bank loans and foreign direct investments in recent years demonstrates partially how capital accumulation is distributed among economic sectors, agriculture being almost abandoned. The share of GDP of agriculture, forestry and fishing for two decades, varied between 40% around 2000 and 28.0% in 2019.

Attractiveness of the book

The book is a mix of economic policy in theory and practice within an economy at wars or quasi-wars.  I avoided as much as I could writing in the book anything similar to pure politics although I was perfectly capable to set out information on bad governance in Rwanda. I want to be objectively reliable since my great wish is to be read in several circles including economic policy makers, scholars, students, NGO involved in development, in Africa and in other continents.

How did I discover the subject ?

Reflections on Rwandan Economy started in 1986 when I obtained a PhD in Economics from University of Fribourg in Switzerland and a Diploma Troisième Cycle in Management from Universities of French Speaking States of Switzerland. My former credentials as Director General of Promotion of investments in industry in Rwanda for two years and as a Minister in charge of economic planning in Rwanda for four years keep alive my reflections on Rwandan Economy. I observe and analyse with the greatest attention the Rwandan macroeconomic aggregates.

Click here to order the book.

*

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.

Augustin Ngirabatware was born in Rwanda on 12 January 1957. He was part-time Lecturer of Economics at Université Nationale du Rwanda. From 1987 to 1990, he was member of Board of Governors of Banque Rwandaise de Développement in Rwanda. From 1990 to 1994, he was Minister of Economic Planning and Minister of Planning and International Cooperation. For two terms in 1991-1992, he was Chairman of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP) Council of Ministers having its headquarters in Brussels (Belgium). In 1994-1998 he taught at Université Omar Bongo/IST and at Institut d’Economie et des Finances, Libreville (Gabon) and was for a short time Director of Institute of Advanced Studies in Economics and Management (ISEM), Libreville, (Gabon). And from 1998 to 1999, he was Researcher-Consultant at Development Center of OECD in Paris, (France).

Featured image is from Barnes and Noble

 

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Rwanda. Understanding the Growth of an Economy at War During the Last Thirty Years
  • Tags:

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

July 15th, 2022 by Global Research News

Pfizer Crimes against our Children: Cardiac Arrest of Two Month Old Baby an Hour after Experimental Vaccine

Ranit Feinberg, July 6, 2022

COVID-19 Vaccines: Proof of Lethality. Over One Thousand Scientific Studies

SUN, July 9, 2022

What Was Covid Really About? Triggering A Multi-Trillion Dollar Global Debt Crisis. “Ramping up an Imperialist Strategy”?

Colin Todhunter, July 12, 2022

Will the Tragic Fate of World Stars like Celine Dion and Justin Bieber Open the Eyes of their Fans? Impacts of Covid-19 Vaccine

Dr. Nicole Delépine, July 9, 2022

Global Planned Financial Tsunami Has Just Begun

F. William Engdahl, July 8, 2022

The United Nations Scrubbed this Article Heralding ‘The Benefits of World Hunger’ from Its Website After It Went Viral

Alicia Powe, July 8, 2022

America’s New “Angels of Death”: Inject Humanity with a Gene-altering Death-dealing Technology. Medical Professionals Cannot Claim Ignorance

Prof. Bill Willers, July 11, 2022

European Union Finally Admits COVID-19 Vaccines Destroy Your Immune System

Arsenio Toledo, July 13, 2022

Video: European Farmers Fight Back Against the Globalist Scheme to Destroy the World’s Food Supply

Amy Mek, July 10, 2022

Bombshell Document Dump on Pfizer Vaccine Data

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 8, 2022

The Cult of Globalism: The Great Reset and Its “Final Solution” for “Useless People”

Timothy Alexander Guzman, July 9, 2022

Beware of the QR Code, Remember Agenda ID2020?

Peter Koenig, July 11, 2022

75,322 Dead 5,938,318 Injured Recorded in Europe and USA Following COVID Vaccines – Babies and Toddlers Hallucinating and Having Seizures After Shots

Brian Shilhavy, July 9, 2022

The Shanghai “Covid Zero Tolerance Mandate”. Engineered Depression of China’s Economy?

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 14, 2022

Dear Friends, Sorry to Announce a Genocide: Dr. Naomi Wolf on the Pfizer “Confidential Report”

Dr. Naomi Wolf, July 9, 2022

Video: Swedish Study: Pfizer Jab Installs DNA into the Human Genome

Alexandra Bruce, July 12, 2022

Video: Infertility and “Depopulation”: A Diabolical Agenda

Dr. Joseph Mercola, July 10, 2022

The West Is Abandoning Ukraine?

Eric Zuesse, July 11, 2022

What the Leaked EMA Emails and Docs Reveal: Major Concerns with Pfizer C-19 Vaccine Batch Integrity and the Race to Authorize

Sonia Elijah, July 12, 2022

Dr. Anthony Fauci: COVID-19 “May Turn Out to be Like a Bad Flu Season”. His Peer Reviewed Article Versus His Public Statements

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, July 13, 2022

Toxicology vs Virology: The Rockefeller Institute and the Criminal Polio Fraud

By F. William Engdahl, July 14, 2022

One of the outcomes of the alleged new SARS Covid virus that publicly emerged in 2019 is that the medical specialization of virology has been raised to a stature almost Godlike in the media. Few understand the origins of virology and its elevation into a leading role in today’s medicine practice. For this we need to look at the origins and politics of America’s first medical research institute, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, today Rockefeller University, and their work on what they claimed was a polio virus.

New Zealand: A Study Finds a 10% Rise in Excess Mortality in Age Groups Who Have Had Booster COVID Injections

By Rhoda Wilson, July 14, 2022

Using weekly data on excess mortality in New Zealand, a study published last week set out to analyse the impacts of rolling out booster doses of Covid injections. It found that age groups most likely to have had booster Covid injections had 7-10% more excess mortality than the age groups most likely not to have taken up a booster dose.

Neocon John Bolton Admits that America “Plans Coups d’état”

By Drago Bosnic, July 14, 2022

John Bolton is one of the most prominent neoconservative politicians in recent US history. He has been described as so hawkish that it made the late John McCain look like Dalai Lama. One of the very first things Bolton did while serving as the US National Security Advisor in the Trump administration was to make sure the US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal (officially JCPOA).

June 14, 2022 Is the Tenth Anniversary of Rosalie Bertell’s Passing. The Planetary Movement for Mother Earth (PBME) Commemorates Her with Respect, Appreciation and Gratitude!

By Prof. Claudia von Werlhof, July 14, 2022

As a pioneer of a new science, Rosalie certainly would have welcomed the increasing number of analyses of military geo-engineering world-wide. It would have consoled and atoned her to see that this topic is now on the map and can no longer be denied, with the ever-increasing evidence that is now provided. Because the entire development of this technology is now partially already beyond of what Rosalie was able to observe.

Whilst You Were Distracted by Boris Resigning, the UK Gov. Published a Report Confirming Fully Vaccinated Children Are 13,633% More Likely to Die of COVID Than Unvaccinated Children

By The Expose, July 14, 2022

A report quietly published by the UK Government, just hours before Boris Johnson announced he was resigning as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, reveals the Covid-19 injections are proving to have negative effectiveness against death among children in England.

Tanks Deployed Near Parliament and State of Emergency Declared in Sri Lanka

By Countercurrents.org, July 14, 2022

On Thursday, the Sri Lanka government announced a curfew in the capital Colombo and its suburbs that would run until 5am on Friday. To stop demonstrators from accessing the Parliament on Thursday, the Sri Lankan Army stationed tanks close to the building. Troops in green military uniforms and camouflage vests arrived by armored personnel carriers on Thursday to reinforce barricades around the parliament.

Russia and the World. History and Geopolitical Analysis. “What Would Happen to Russia Without the United States and Europe?”

By Kester Kenn Klomegah, July 14, 2022

The United States corporate business engagement is simply not comparable to Russia’s economic footprints in the United States. On April 29, 2021, President Vladimir Putin held videoconference with leaders of several corporate French companies-members of the Franco-Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (CCI France-Russia) to discuss some aspects of Russian-French trade, economic and investment cooperation, including the implementation of large joint projects as well as the prospects for collaborative work in the Russian Federation.

Russia and China Haven’t Even Started to Ratchet Up the Pain Dial. Pepe Escobar

By Pepe Escobar, July 14, 2022

To call it the Biden-von Der Leyen-Blinken West or so would be too reductionist: after all these are puny politico/functionaries merely parroting orders. This is a historical process: physical, psychic and moral cognitive degeneration embedded in NATOstan’s manifest desperation in trying to contain Eurasia, allowing occasional tragicomic sketches such as a NATO summit proclaiming Woke War against virtually the whole non-West.

The Passing of Angolan President Jose Eduardo dos Santos (1979-2017). From a Wartime President to Leading Energy Producer

By Abayomi Azikiwe, July 14, 2022

One of the most important heads-of-state in the struggle to end Portuguese domination in Africa died in a Spanish hospital on July 8. Jose Eduardo dos Santos served as president of the Republic of Angola from 1979 to 2017 as well as the Secretary General of the ruling Popular Movement for Liberation of Angola (MPLA-Worker’s Party).

“The Conspiratorial Movement in Quebec”, Published by the UNESCO Chair in the Prevention of Radicalization and Violent Extremism.

By Guy Boulianne, July 14, 2022

The research report was presented to Pierre Fitzgibbon, Minister of Economy and Innovation of Quebec as part of the call for Solutions to COVID-19. It contains data obtained by survey on the members of this movement as well as a list of 45 “conspiracy leaders” from Quebec and Canada, including Stéphane Blais, Alexis Cossette-Trudel, Samuel Grenier, Amélie Paul, Daniel Pilon, Daniel Tadros , Maxime Ouimet, Jean-Jacques Crèvecoeur, Lucie Laurier, Mel Goyer and Jonas Colin (The Colin Show).

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Toxicology vs Virology: The Rockefeller Institute and the Criminal Polio Fraud

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.

***

 

 

There is indication that the P5+1 (US, UK, Russia, China, France and Germany) will agree to a new nuclear deal. The EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell traveled to Tehran and succeeded in gaining a resumption of indirect talks between the US and Iran in Qatar. Trade between Iran and the EU reached $5.07 billion in 2021, up 9 percent compared to the previous year. The war in Ukraine has caused the EU to urgently seek the Iran nuclear deal. Borrell said in May, “We Europeans will be very much beneficiaries from this (nuclear) deal, the situation has changed now.

For us it was something… ‘well, we don’t need it (Iranian crude).’ Now it would be very much interesting for us to have another supplier.” The Biden administration wants to sign a new deal as a campaign promise delivered, as well as an alternative to a military conflict with Iran, which would not be supported by the American people who are suffering in an economic crisis. Steven Sahiounie of MidEastDiscourse interviewed Mohammad Hatami Milanlou, who is an expert in international political science affairs, with an emphasis on Europe and the US. The interview covers the Iran deal, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Qatar.

*

Steven Sahiounie (SS): Recently, the French President Macron said a new Iran nuclear deal must be signed. In your opinion, do you see any progress towards a new nuclear deal?

Mohammad Hatami Milanlou (MHM): Considering that the process of nuclear negotiations between Iran and the West is slow and also considering that the main problem of the negotiations is the direct negotiation between Iran and the United States, these two should negotiate face to face and solve the main problems, of course, until the negotiations between Iran and the United States take place, especially the American side is willing to make demands, but not lift sanctions.

SS: The Israeli occupation is working on building an Arab-Israeli alliance against the Islamic Republic of Iran. How do feel Iran might react?

MHM: There are two factors that have made Iran more isolated and weaker in front of Israel and the Arab countries. The first is the death of Qassem Soleimani and the second is the internal riots caused by Iran’s wrong nuclear policies. This incident has caused Israel’s role in the region to become more prominent, and the United States, through the fear it has created for the Arabs, can strengthen this agreement through Iran.

SS: Iraq is working on reestablishing the relationship between Tehran and Riyadh. In your opinion, will this attempt be successful and what impact it will have on the region?

MHM: On the one hand, Iraq is the scene of conflicts between parties and groups, and on the other hand, it is the scene of the proxy battle of the country. Regarding the issue of Iraq, it must be said that Iraq was a single country before the fall of Saddam Hussein, but now is several parts after the fall of Saddam and the establishment of inefficient pro-American governments. Saudi Arabia and Iran, as well as groups of parties such as Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds, as well as Iraq and its people, and it is also the source of Shiite taqilid, but in relation to the influence of Saudi Arabia and its position in Iraq, it should be said that Iran, as I said, with the death of Qassem Soleimani and the sharp decrease in the influence of Iran, Saudi Arabia was able to increase its influence in Iraq by attracting Iraqi proxy groups, whether Shiites, Sunnis, or Kurds to support armed groups.

SS: Russia is engaged in a military operation in Ukraine. Russia and Iran are allies. In your opinion, will this relationship remain strong, and how will America react to their alliance?

MHM: No, the relationship between Iran and Russia is not permanent, because it has happened many times that Russia has betrayed Iran, and this relationship is more from the side of Iran, which is looking towards the East and is constantly trying to keep the support of both Russia and China, but the United States is also aware of this issue. The US knows that Iran is Russia’s toy.

SS: Recently, the Qatari foreign minister visited Tehran. Was he delivering a message from the US, and what was the response?

MHM: The message of the Qatari leader regarding the nuclear negotiations was that Iran should be soft towards the negotiations and stop its unreasonable demands, and the US wants Iran to return to the negotiation table.

*

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 Mideast Discourse.

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

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

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

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

***

The following text is chapter XIV of Michel Chossudovsky’s E-book

The 2020-22 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

 

***

The Storming of the Bastille occurred in Paris on the afternoon of July 14, 1789. The Bastille was a medieval armory, fortress, and political prison. It was the symbol of Royal Authority under the reign of King Louis XVI. 

The French monarchy was obliged to accept the authority of the newly proclaimed National Assembly as well endorse the Fundamental Rights contained in the “Declaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen” (Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen), formulated in early August 1789.   

More than 230 years later, these Fundamental Rights (Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité) are now being contravened by corrupt  governments around the World on behalf of a totalitarian and illusive financial establishment.

Bastille 2022

Bastille 2022 pertains not only to the restoration of these fundamental rights. It seeks to reverse and disable the criminal COVID-19 agenda which in the course of more than two years has triggered economic, social and political chaos Worldwide in 193 member states of the United Nations, coupled with bankruptcies, unemployment, mass poverty and despair. Famines have been reported in more than 25 countries.

Starting in November 2020, an experimental mRNA vaccine launched by our governments (allegedly with a view to combating the spread of the virus) has resulted in an ascending Worldwide trend of vaccine related deaths and injuries. It’s a killer vaccine. It’s a crime against humanity.

Bastille 2022 is not a “protest” movement narrowly defined.

We do not seek to negotiate with corrupt government officials. We question their legitimacy. They are liars.

Our intent is to confront the powerful actors behind this criminal endeavor which is literally destroying people’s lives Worldwide, while creating divisions within society. The impacts on mental health on population groups Worldwide are devastating.

The numerous lockdowns documented in previous chapters (stay at home of the work force), fear campaigns, COVID-19 policy mandates imposed on 193 member states of the United Nations have also contributed to undermining and destabilizing:

  1. The very fabric of civil society and its institutions including education, culture and the arts, social gatherings, sports, entertainment, etc.
  2. All public sector activities including physical and social infrastructure, social services, law enforcement, etc.
  3. All major private sector activities which characterize national, regional and local economies including small, medium and large corporate enterprises, family farms, industry, wholesale and retail trade, the urban services economy, transport companies, airlines, hotel chains, etc.
  4. The structures of the global economy including international commodity trade, investment, import and export relations between countries, etc. The entire landscape of the global economy has been chattered.

In turn, a process of enrichment by the elite billionaires together with widening social inequalities has unfolded.(See Chapter V).

The massive debts incurred by the Nation-State resulting from corruption as well fiscal collapse have skyrocketed. Increasingly national governments are in a straitjacket, under the brunt of powerful creditor institutions. Mounting debts at all levels of society are the driving force. (See Chapter !V).

The Creation of a Mass Movement 

What is at stake is the creation of a mass movement (Nationally and Worldwide) which questions the legitimacy and authority of the architects of this insidious project which broadly speaking emanates from:

Big Money, Big Pharma, the Information Technology Conglomerates, the Security Apparatus, Intelligence, the Military Industrial Complex, Big Energy, the Corporate Media.

Ironically, the architects of the COVID-19 “pandemic” are now actively involved in formulating the “Solution”. The World Economic Forum’sGreat Reset consists in installing a Worldwide totalitarian regime. What is contemplated is a system of “Global Governance” (see Chapter XIII).

 

 

A 190+ UN member nation states are slated to be weakened and undermined. They are under the grip of the most serious debt crisis in World history. Under the Great Reset, the institutions of parliamentary democracy and the Welfare State are to be replaced by an unelected “public-private partnership” dominated by the upper echelons of the financial establishment.

Restoring Real Democracy

We will seek all avenues through peaceful means to disable and undermine this totalitarian project including dialogue with and within public and private institutions, law enforcement officials, members of the military and the judicial.

What is required is to break down the structures of corruption, hierarchy and abusive authority, namely to pursue what might be described as:

“the democratization of decision-making within our institutions”.

The Art of Deception

We must nonetheless understand the limitations of conducting effective judicial procedures against national governments. The judges are often pressured, threatened and corrupt, aligned with both dominant financial interests and politicians.

Moreover, inasmuch as this insidious project is enforced by national governments Worldwide, the International Criminal Court (ICC) which is officially “independent” in regards to the UN Security Council, has a longstanding record of side-stepping US-NATO war crimes. The ICC is controlled by the same financial elites which control the governments.

We must also understand the complexities of  this carefully designed and coordinated totalitarian project, namely the role of various fraudulent financial institutions, corporate advisory and lobby groups, consultants, “scientific advisors’, etc. acting as intermediaries on behalf of Big Pharma and the financial elites.

There is a hierarchy in the structures of authority. This complex and intricate decision making process is used to co-opt, bribe and manipulate government officials. Almost identical policy mandates (emanating from higher authority) are implemented simultaneously in numerous countries, requiring active coordination.   The same powerful lobby firms are acting at one and the same time in different countries (e.g. in North America and the European Union).

The legitimacy of politicians and their powerful Big Money sponsors must be challenged, including the police state measures adopted to enforce the imposition of a digital vaccine passport as well as the wearing of the face mask, social distancing, etc.

What are our Priorities? Counter Propaganda 

More than 7 billion people Worldwide are directly or indirectly affected by the corona crisis. Several billion people have already been vaccinated by an “unapproved” experimental mRNA “vaccine”, which has resulted in a Worldwide wave of mortality and morbidity.

While this tendency is confirmed by official figures pertaining to vaccine-related deaths and adverse events, the mainstream media and the governments are in a state of denial.

The devastating health impacts of the COVID-19 vaccine are rarely acknowledged. It’s the same catch phrase (which is an outright lie) repeated ad nauseam: “the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine”.

“we actually have more safety data on the vaccine than the virus, and already see that the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine.(Intercare)

Dr. Alan Schroeder thinks it’s very natural for parents to worry, but said for teens, the virus is more dangerous than the vaccine. (NBC)

Doctors are on the lookout for it in children, but the bottom line remains that the virus is far more dangerous than the vaccine.

“The mutations in the omicron variant make it [the virus] more prolific, dangerous, and elusive

etc.

This propaganda consensus must be broken. With regard to the vaccine, informing people across the land regarding the data on deaths and adverse events is the first step.

The COVID Crisis initiated in January 2020 is unprecedented in World History. Propaganda under Nuremberg is a Crime. (See Chapter XII).

Dismantling the propaganda apparatus is crucial.  Counter-propaganda plays a key role in revealing the lies used to justify the policy mandates.

Without persistent media disinformation, the official COVID narrative falls flat.

First and foremost we must forcefully challenge the mainstream media, without specifically targeting mainstream journalists, who have been instructed to abide by the official narrative. We should in this regard favor dialogue with individual (independent) journalists.

We must ensure that people Worldwide achieve an understanding of the history and devastating impacts of the COVID crisis supported by scientific concepts, analysis, testimonies and data.  This endeavor will require a parallel process at the grassroots level, of sensitizing fellow citizens and establishing dialogue on the nature of  the alleged pandemic, the mRNA vaccine, the RT-PCR test, as well as the devastating economic and social impacts of the lockdowns.

While we must put an end to the fear campaign, we must nonetheless inform our fellow citizens regarding the dangers of the mRNA vaccine as well as the engineered chaos of this totalitarian agenda of “global governance” on the very structures of civil society.

The “fear campaign” is to be replaced by  “information, concepts, analysis and data” as well as “strategies” to confront Big Pharma, corrupt officials in high office as well as their Big Money sponsors.

We must also ensure the conduct of dialogue and debate at the grassroots of society.

Putting an End to The “Killer Vaccine”

Our first task is to immediately halt and cancel the so-called COVID-19 “vaccine” which has triggered a wave of mortality and morbidity Worldwide.

According to Dr. Thomas Binder

“The gene injections are unsafe. They can cause anaphylactic reactions, thromboembolism, thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, and myocarditis in the short term.

There is possible immunosuppression and antibody-dependent enhancement, ADE, in the medium-term.

And in the long term there are possible autoimmune diseases, cancer and infertility, risks that have not been ruled out yet.”

According to Doctors for COVID Ethics, in the EU, UK and US the data respectively tabulated by EudraVigilance, MHRA (UK) and VAERS (US):

“have now recorded many more deaths and injuries from the COVID-19 “vaccine” roll-out than from all previous vaccines combined since records began”

With regard to the mRNA “vaccine”, the catastrophic number of injection related deaths has NOT been reported by the mainstream media, despite the official figures being publicly available.

“The signal of harm is now indisputably overwhelming, and, in line with universally accepted ethical standards for clinical trials, we demand that the COVID-19 “vaccination” programme be halted immediately worldwide.

Continuation of the programme, in the full knowledge of ongoing serious harm and death to both adults and children, constitutes Crimes Against Humanity/Genocide, for which those found to be responsible or complicit will ultimately be held personally liable”

The Pfizer “Confidential Report”

It is worth noting that a Confidential Pfizer Report released as part of a Freedom of Information (FOI) procedure provides data on deaths and adverse events recorded by Pfizer from the outset of the vaccine project in December 2020 to the end of February 2021, namely a very short period (at most two and a half months):  

In a twisted irony, the data revealed in this “insider report” refutes the official vaccine narrative peddled by the governments and the WHO. It also confirms the analysis of numerous medical doctors and scientists who have revealed the devastating consequences of the mRNA “vaccine”.

What is contained in  Pfizer’s “confidential” report is detailed evidence on the impacts of the “vaccine” on mortality and morbidity. This data which emanates from the “Horse’s Mouth” can now be used to confront as well formulate legal procedures against Big Pharma, the governments, the WHO and the media.

In a Court of Law, the evidence contained in this Big Pharma confidential report (coupled with the data on deaths and adverse events compiled by the national authorities in the EU, UK and US) is irrefutable: because it is their data and their estimates and not ours. (Analysis  of Pfizer Confidential Report)

It is an admission on the part of both the governments and Big Pharma that the COVID-19 vaccine is a criminal undertaking: Pfizer knew from the outset that it was a killer vaccine. No attempt has been made by the governments to call for the withdrawal of the killer vaccine.

As outlined in Chapter VII, Pfizer has a criminal record (2009) with the US  Department of Justice on charges of “fraudulent marketing”.

As part of the 2009 DoJ settlement, Pfizer was put on parole:

“Pfizer also has agreed to enter into an expansive corporate integrity agreement … [which] provides for procedures and reviews to be put in place to avoid and promptly detect conduct similar to that which gave rise to this matter.”

But we are no longer dealing with “fraudulent marketing”:

“Killing is Good for Business”: The vaccine is a multibillion dollar operation worldwide. It’s manslaughter.

Once the “vaccine” has been halted, the criminality of Big Pharma will be fully revealed and understood. In turn, the legitimacy of the official COVID narrative based on lies and fake science will inevitably be impaired. This is the first step towards breaking the “official” COVID narrative.

The Truth is an important peaceful weapon. Without propaganda and media disinformation, the architects of this project do not have a leg to stand on.

Let us break the “official” COVID-19 consensus and the propaganda apparatus which provides “legitimacy” to a criminal agenda.

Once it collapses, it will open up the road towards reversing the broader process of economic, social and political chaos generated in the course of the last two years.

 

The Geopolitical Dimension

What is unfolding is a new and destructive phase of US imperialism. It’s a totalitarian project of economic and social engineering.

The Biden administration has endorsed the COVID Agenda, which has been used to destabilize and weaken national economies including those of “enemy nations”.

We cannot divorce our understanding of the COVID Crisis from that of US foreign policy and America’s hegemonic agenda: e.g.  US-NATO confrontation with Russia in Eastern Europe, the militarization of the South China Sea directed against China, Iran and the geopolitics of the Middle East, the ongoing sanctions regimes against Venezuela and Cuba, etc. (see Chapter XIII)

Integrating All Sectors of Society

It should be noted that organized opposition in many Western countries is weak. Why? Because “progressive forces” including left intellectuals, NGO leaders, trade union and labor leaders both in Western Europe and North America have  from the outset endorsed the official COVID narrative. Many of these progressive movements are supported by corporate foundations.

The same billionaire foundations which are the unspoken architects of the “Great Reset” and “Global Governance” are also involved in (generously) financing various social movements. “They control the opposition”.

What this means is that  grassroots activists are often misled and betrayed by their leaders who are routinely coopted by their billionaire sponsors.

It is essential that these grassroots activists be integrated into the mainstay of the movement against the COVID-19 consensus.

The Road Ahead

What is required is the development of a broad based grassroots network which confronts both the architects of this crisis all well as all levels of government (i.e. national, states, provinces, municipalities, etc.) involved in imposing the vaccine as well carrying out the lockdown and closure of economic activity.

This network would be established (nationally and internationally) at all levels of society, in towns and villages, work places, parishes. Trade unions, farmers organizations, professional associations, business associations, student unions, veterans associations. Church groups would be called upon to integrate this movement.

“Spreading the word” through social media and independent online media outlets will be undertaken bearing in mind that Google as well as Facebook are instruments of censorship.

Legal procedures and protests are unfolding in all major regions of the World. As part of a Worldwide network of initiatives, it is important to establish mechanisms of communication, dialogue and exchange within and between countries.

The creation of such a movement, which forcefully challenges the legitimacy of the financial elites, Big Pharma, et al., as well as the structures of political authority at the national level, is no easy task.

It will require a degree of solidarity, unity and commitment unparalleled in World history.

What is required is the breaking down of political and ideological barriers within society (i.e. between political parties) and acting with a single voice towards Building a Worldwide Consensus against Tyranny. 

Worldwide Solidarity and Human Dignity is the Driving Force.

***

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa, Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal, Editor of Global Research.

He has undertaken field research in Latin America, Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific and has written extensively on the economies of developing countries with a focus on poverty and social inequality. He has also undertaken research in Health Economics (UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC),  UNFPA, CIDA, WHO, Government of Venezuela, John Hopkins International Journal of Health Services (1979, 1983)

He is the author of 13 books including The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003), America’s “War on Terrorism” (2005),  The Globalization of War, America’s Long War against Humanity (2015).

He is a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica.  His writings have been published in more than twenty languages. In 2014, he was awarded the Gold Medal for Merit of the Republic of Serbia for his writings on NATO’s war of aggression against Yugoslavia. He can be reached at [email protected]

See Michel Chossudovsky, Biographical Note

Michel Chossudovsky’s Articles on Global Research

  • Posted in Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Bastille 2022: Building a Worldwide Movement Against “Corona Tyranny”

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.

***

John Bolton is one of the most prominent neoconservative politicians in recent US history. He has been described as so hawkish that it made the late John McCain look like Dalai Lama. One of the very first things Bolton did while serving as the US National Security Advisor in the Trump administration was to make sure the US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal (officially JCPOA). Immediately after, Bolton focused all of his political power and influence on pushing for a Venezuela invasion.

After Russia intervened, the Trump administration decided this was not a very good idea. Bolton then refocused on advocating for invasions or at least regime change in Iran, Syria, Libya, Venezuela, Cuba, Yemen, North Korea, etc. His warmongering became too much of a liability for the Trump administration and a major point of contention between Bolton and the then president himself, so much so that he was eventually fired after approximately a year and a half in office.

There is virtually no positive thing one might say about Bolton. However, there is one major aspect of his otherwise deeply unlikable personality. John Bolton is unambiguously direct. He seldom sugarcoats the message he is trying to convey. Unlike his neoliberal counterparts and political rivals, certain of their own “moral high ground” over everyone else, but who support the exact same US foreign policy as Bolton himself does, the neoconservative politician at least never tried masking US intentions with worthless rhetoric. Precisely this happened during an interview with Jake Tapper of CNN’s “The Lead” on Tuesday, where Bolton discussed US involvement in (geo)political shenanigans around the world, during which he admitted directly taking part in organizing coups to further US interests.

Speaking to Tapper right after the January 6 House Select Committee completed its seventh hearing about the breach of the US Capitol, Bolton claimed that the former commander-in-chief [Donald Trump] could not have pulled off a carefully planned coup d’etat. “One doesn’t have to be brilliant to attempt a coup,” Tapper argued. “I disagree with that,” Bolton retorted and then continued:

“As someone who has helped plan coup d’etats – not here but, you know, other places – it takes a lot of work. And that’s not what [Trump] did. It was just stumbling around from one idea to another.”

Tapper tried to press Bolton to provide further details regarding his claims about coup involvement, but Bolton refused to provide any additional information, adding that he was “not going to get into the specifics”, although he did mention Venezuela. In 2020, the US launched “Operation Gideon”, a coordinated insurrection involving Venezuelan assets aided by an American private military company, Silvercorp USA. The goal was to spread the conflict across the country and ultimately overthrow Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro. The insurrection failed miserably, with at least two US operatives arrested, along with dozens of their Venezuelan collaborators. The two were identified as Luke Denman and Airan Berry, both former US special forces operatives and were coordinated by Florida-based ex-Green Beret Jordan Goudreau in a mission to kidnap Maduro and “liberate” Venezuela.

Maduro directly pointed out this was attempted aggression, aided by neighboring Colombia, but both the US and its South American client state denied involvement. In 2019, a year before the botched coup, Bolton, in his capacity as US National Security Advisor, had announced support for Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido and his attempts to involve the Venezuelan military in ousting Maduro. Bolton claimed that the Venezuelan leader’s reelection was allegedly “illegitimate”, although it’s unclear who authorized Bolton (or the US itself for that matter) to make such statements, let alone enforce whatever he thought was “legitimate”. Luckily, the Venezuelan people pushed back and the (genuinely) legitimate President Maduro remained in office, although in no small part thanks to Russia, which armed Venezuela to the teeth, preventing what was then an almost imminent US attack on the country.

“It turned out not to be successful,” Bolton said. “Not that we had all that much to do with it but I saw what it took for an opposition to try and overturn an illegally elected president and they failed. The notion that Donald Trump was half as confident as the Venezuelan opposition is laughable,” he added, to which Tapper responded: “I feel like there’s other stuff you’re not telling me.” Bolton declined to give further details and just replied: “I’m sure there is.”

Although many were appalled by Bolton’s admission, what’s truly shocking is that there are still those who are shocked by the notion that the US has been conducting such belligerent operations against dozens of countries around the globe, resulting in anything from temporary political turmoil and instability to brutal decades-long wars which cause a domino effect of further instability. It’s quite clear the bellicose power in decline will continue to conduct this blatant aggression against the world. What the world can do about it is arm itself and try to dilute US power as much as possible, because as long as the “Pax Americana” exists, the hope for global peace will remain just that – false hope.

*

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.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

Featured image: John Bolton (Christopher Halloran via Shutterstock)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Neocon John Bolton Admits that America “Plans Coups d’état”
  • Tags:

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.

***

President Joe Biden’s visit to the Middle East culminates months of diplomatic and military meetings between American and Israeli officials preparing Israel’s “Shopping List” for Biden’s trip.

In parallel, the Administration sent several envoys to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia negotiating quietly the political price the Saudi Crown Prince, Mohamed bin Salman (MbS) is willing to pay to exculpate him from Biden’s “pariah’s” list.

After insisting he would not meet MbS, Biden relented once he secured a gathering of local leaders to sign on an Israeli custom design plan, “Regional Defense System, RDS.”

Besides the irony of including Israel, the country that introduced the sin of nuclear power to the region, to oppose nuclear expansion in the Middle East, the misnomer RDS is only a subtle catalyst to integrate Israeli in the region under the guise of a hyperbolic Iranian nuclear ambitions.

Biden’s Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, reiterated this on July 12 when he explained that a main objective for the President’s visit is “to deepen Israel’s integration into the region.” In fact, Biden has pointed earlier to the Israeli factor as one reason he would meet MbS.

It’s not the US economy, not the 80-year strategic partnership with Saudi Arabia, not mutual interest that took President Biden to Saudi Arabia. But it is how Biden can surpass Trump’s servitude to Israeli lobby. A foreign lobby with an irrational grip on American politicians, and hence the obsession of US political leaders, especially presidential hopefuls, to placate Israeli firsters and deliver to Israel before Country.

Then, President Donald Trump, and the highest-level Israeli insider in the White House, Jared Kushner, willfully jettisoned the main pillars of the US constitution such as democratic values, human rights, and self-determination to deliver to Israel. US agreed to bailout a military dictatorship, denied the people of Western Sahara the right to determine their future, agreed to sell the most sophisticated fighters to an authoritarian Arab dictator, and provided cover for the murder of a journalist, and an American resident, all as a reward for establishing relationship with Israel.

Israel thrives on conflict; it is how it builds alliance; it’s how it achieves acceptance. This explains why Israel opposes all peaceful efforts to control Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

When in 2015 president Barak Obama secured an agreement to stop Iran from developing nuclear power, the Israeli prime minister, and for the first time in American history, a foreign leader was afforded a national platform to challenge the President’s leadership.

Israel’s amen corner in Congress invited Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to speak directly to US Congress demanding American elected officials to reject an agreement negotiated by their own president. In a rare occurrence in Washington, even the president Party’s most Senior Senator, Charles Schumer, supported the call from a foreign country leader to defeat his Party leader, and president.

Schumer, boasts, albeit falsely that his name is derived from a Hebrew word, shomer meaning “guard.” He believes god gave him the role of guarding Israel’s interests in the US Senate. When in fact his name came from a North German word meaning good-for-nothing, vagabond. But for the real meaning of his name, Schumer came close to helping a foreign leader defeat a US president, from his own Party, in US Congress.

It begs to ask, what do the obsequious toady politicians get in return for the unprecedented American political servitude to a foreign entity?

At the start of the Russian invasion, Ukrainian officials expressed interest in acquiring the Israeli-US Iron Dome missile defense system, Israel blocked the request so as not to ire Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In February 2022, the US requested non-voting allied countries, like Israel, to endorse a Security Council (SC) resolution condemning Russia. While more than 50 countries signed on, Israel refused to co-sponsor the United States-backed resolution. Then, Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid explained Israel’s refusal not to undermine “our mechanism of cooperation with (Russian) them . . .” in Syria.

In May 2022, Israel turned down a U.S. request to allow Germany supply Ukraine with anti-tank missiles manufactured in Germany under an Israeli license. Israel’s excuse the anti-tank Spike missiles―a technology most likely financed by American tax payers―could harm Russian soldiers and hurt regional security with Russia.

“Only Permanent Interest,” Israel perfected Nicholas Machiavel rule. In addition to signing the largest financial aid package for Israel — over $4 billion ahead of his trip, Israel’s Shopping List includes delivering Saudi Arabia, at least in small steps, like RDS, toward eventual normalization.

This week Israeli Prime Minister called for open relations with Saudi Arabia to change the “history for our children.” This is at the same time when the Israeli government approved to displace, change the history, for one of the largest Palestinian children from their homes in Masafer Yatta and make room for another Jewish-only colony.

Israel is not even willing to grant Biden a mere fig leave before his meeting with Arab royals. It continues to block Biden’s efforts to open the US Consulate in occupied East Jerusalem. This time using the same tired ruse, requesting the US to wait until after the election. It’s worth noting, after the last election, Israel denied the same request claiming it could collapse the elected government.

Israel is out for what it can get for self, even if it means creating perpetual conflicts. History has shown that Israel has nothing to offer the US, a “shomer,” vagabond, good-for-nothing milking its US welfare cow.

*

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.

Jamal Kanj (www.jamalkanj.com) is the author of “Children of Catastrophe,” Journey from a Palestinian Refugee Camp to America, and other books. He writes frequently on Arab world issues for various national and international commentaries.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: The Israeli and American flags displayed on the walls of the Old City in Jerusalem (Photo: Yonatan Sindel)

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.

***

Using weekly data on excess mortality in New Zealand, a study published last week set out to analyse the impacts of rolling out booster doses of Covid injections. It found that age groups most likely to have had booster Covid injections had 7-10% more excess mortality than the age groups most likely not to have taken up a booster dose.

“The results suggest 16 (95% CI: 5 to 27) excess deaths per 100,000 booster doses, amounting to over 400 excess deaths in New Zealand given the booster doses administered to date. If this rate of excess deaths is extrapolated to other countries, it amounts to over 300,000 excess deaths worldwide,” Professor John Gibson, the study’s author, wrote.

The study was published in EconPapers, the world’s largest collection of on-line economics working papers, journal articles and software, and authored by John Gibson, Professor in the Department of Economics at the  University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.

In his paper, ‘The Rollout of COVID-19 Booster Vaccines is Associated with Rising Excess Mortality in New Zealand’, Prof. Gibson stated:

“The ratio of vaccine risk to benefits likely has swung more towards risk than during the original randomised trials, due to dose-dependent adverse events and to fixation of immune responses on a variant no longer circulating.

“In light of an unsatisfactory risk-evidence situation, aggregate weekly data on excess mortality in New Zealand are used here to study the impacts of rolling out booster doses.

“The age groups most likely to use boosters had 7-10 percentage point rises in excess mortality rates as boosters were rolled out while the age group that is mostly too young for boosters saw no rise in excess mortality.”

Excess mortality is the number of deaths from all causes during a crisis above and beyond what we would have expected to see under “normal” conditions.  In other words, Prof. Gibson found more people who had, likely, received a booster injection died than normally expected.

In September 2021 an advisory panel of experts outside of the US Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) voted 16-2 against the widespread use of Covid injection boosters due to a lack of safety data and doubts about the benefits of mass boosting over targeted approaches, Gibson noted.

After this vote was ignored and the FDA approved boosters for the general population, the top two officials in the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review resigned and criticised decision-making about the mass rollout of boosters.

This critique noted that if unnecessary boosting causes significant adverse reactions it may increase vaccine hesitancy more generally; a concern raised elsewhere that the potentially low benefits of Covid-19 vaccines relative to the costs borne by vaccinees (such as exposure to breakthrough infections and to vaccine adverse events) may undermine public confidence in other vaccination efforts (Godlee, 2020; Gibson, 2022a). Even the World Health Organisation argue that a vaccination strategy based on repeated booster doses of the original vaccine composition is unlikely to be appropriate or sustainable (WHO, 2022).

Several European countries have already restricted some mRNA vaccines to only those aged over 30 years due to these safety concerns.

Given this shift in the risk-benefit ratio, stronger evidence should underpin mass use of boosters but the opposite holds.

The Rollout of COVID-19 Booster Vaccines is Associated with Rising Excess Mortality in New Zealand, EconPapers, John Gibson, 28 June 2022

The primary Covid “vaccine” used in New Zealand is Pfizer.  Weekly data on all deaths in New Zealand, from 2011 through the end of March 2022, was used to calculate excess mortality during the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines.

On 21 December 2021, New Zealand’s Covid Response Minister Chris Hipkins announced that the interval between the second dose and the booster shot would be reduced from six months to four months; making 82% of vaccinated New Zealanders eligible for a booster by late February 2022. By then, before having any experience with Covid, Prof. Gibson noted, “8.2 million original protocol Pfizer doses and 2.2 million booster doses had been administered. In other words, about half of the population were both ‘fully vaccinated’ and ‘boosted’.”

As can be seen in the graph below, Prof. Gibson’s analysis found that the sustained rise in excess mortality from December coincides with the booster rollout.

The Rollout of COVID-19 Booster Vaccines is Associated with Rising Excess Mortality in New Zealand, John Gibson, June 2022

And the rise in excess mortality in the last four months was experienced by all ages except the 0-29 years group, who are mostly ineligible for boosters.

The Rollout of COVID-19 Booster Vaccines is Associated with Rising Excess Mortality in New Zealand, John Gibson, June 2022

The visual evidence of 400 cumulative excess deaths while boosters went from zero to over two million is suggestive, especially as the age-disaggregated data show no rise in excess deaths for the one group (0-29 years) mostly ineligible for boosters.

The regression results show statistical associations between booster rollout and excess deaths using observational data, not randomised data.

Secondary analysis of serious adverse events reported in the mRNA vaccine [randomised control trials] RCTs shows higher risks with Moderna than with Pfizer (Fraiman et al, 2022), perhaps from dosage differences (100mg for Moderna versus 30mg for Pfizer). The use of the Pfizer booster raises the accumulated dosage, which may then make these vaccine adverse events more likely.

The Rollout of COVID-19 Booster Vaccines is Associated with Rising Excess Mortality in New Zealand, EconPapers, John Gibson, 28 June 2022

Prof. Gibson concluded that there is a close relationship between booster rollout and rising excess mortality. And that this relationship was not seen with the rollout of the original protocol vaccine doses.

“The age groups most likely to use boosters had 7–10 percentage point rises in excess mortality rates as boosters were rolled out while the age group that is mostly too young for boosters saw no rise in excess mortality. Instrumental variables estimates that exploit a plausible source of exogenous variation in the rate of administering booster doses suggest 16 excess deaths per 100,000 booster doses given, amounting to over 400 excess deaths from New Zealand’s booster rollout. Value of statistical life of these excess deaths is over $1.6 billion. Even a small fraction of this (say, one per cent) would have been sufficient to fund robust evidence on the impacts of rolling out Covid-19 booster vaccines,” Prof. Gibson 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 from The Expose

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.

***

 

 

 

Am 14. Juni 2022 ist der 10. Todestag von Rosalie Bertell. Die PBME – Planetare Bewegung für Mutter Erde – gedenkt ihrer mit Hochachtung, Wertschätzung und großer Dankbarkeit! Was hätte Rosalie wohl zu alldem gesagt, was seitdem weltweit geschehen ist? Sie hatte nach Erscheinen ihres Buches «Planet Earth. The Latest Weapon of War», das erstmals zur Jahrtausendwende im Jahre 2000 veröffentlicht wurde, bis 2011 viele Ergänzungen zu ihrer bahnbrechenden Arbeit verfasst, die seither in die deutsche Ausgabe ihres Werks sowie in allen anderen, die darauf folgen sollten, eingingen – die spanische, italienische, französische und schließlich die neue, überarbeitete englische Ausgabe, über die sich Rosalie vermutlich ungeheuer gefreut hätte.

Sie war nämlich nach 2000 zu der Auffassung gelangt, dass ihre Analyse noch entschieden verschärft werden musste. Dies war ein Ausdruck der Tatsache, dass ihr relativer Optimismus, den sie den großen sozialen Bewegungen der 1980-1990er Jahre verdankte, inzwischen verschwunden war. Denn diese Bewegungen hatten sich angepasst, waren von der «Gegenseite» übernommen worden oder hatten sich thematisch nicht weiterentwickelt, um das, was sie, Rosalie, zu sagen hatte, auch aufzunehmen. Vor allem die UNO, für die Rosalie ihr Leben lang gearbeitet hatte, war nun immer mehr zur Vorreiterin dieser neuen, politischen Tendenzen geworden, die das weltweite Zerstörungswerk am Planeten Erde als unser aller Lebenssphäre nicht aufhalten, im Gegenteil. Das zeigt sich heute, zehn Jahre später, in einem erschütternden Ausmaß, das für Rosalie früher wohl unvorstellbar gewesen wäre. Auch Rosalies Hoffnung auf die Gründung eines Internationalen Gerichtshofs, der sich der Frage des Schutzes der Erde vor dem Angriff des militärischen Geoengineerings annehmen könnte, dürfte inzwischen so weit in die Ferne gerückt sein wie nie zuvor.

Kurzum, ich vermute, Rosalie wäre heute geradezu entsetzt über das, was nach ihrem Tod geschah:

  • von der ständigen Erweiterung von Maßnahmen des militärischen Geoengineerings zur öffentlichen Anerkennung eines sog. zivilen Geoengineerings und seine universitäre Verankerung als Beitrag zur Bekämpfung des so genannten menschengemachten Klimawandels – jenseits seiner militärischen Ursprünge und damit eine Neudefinition, Besetzung, Unkenntlichmachung und Verkehrung des Begriffs, zur öffentlich nicht wahrgenommenen Integration des militärischen Geoengineerings in die neue, die sog. 4. Industrielle Revolution, die nun als Modernisierung durch Digitalisierung und Künstliche Intelligenz, Biotechnologie, Nanotechnik und einen den freien und autonomen Menschen abzuschaffen versuchenden «Transhumanismus» propagiert wird,
  • von der Corona-Krise, den medizinischen Experimenten, den Forschungen und Entwicklungen von im Labor hergestellten «Viren» als neue, unsichtbare Super-Waffen, dem im Zuge eines globalen Laborversuchs weltweiten Einsatz dieser neuen Methoden der Beschädigung des menschlichen Leibes samt der so genannten Massen-«Impfungen» mit noch unbekannten Langfrist-Folgen, die bereits kurzfristig zu schwerwiegendsten Folgeschäden und Todesfällen, vor allem auch aufgrund einer vermutlichen Störung oder gar Zerstörung der natürlichen Immunabwehr, führten. Diese experimentellen Stoffe, die insbesondere auch giftige, womöglich krebserregende sowie genveränderte oder gar genverändernde Elemente enthalten könnten, werden ausgerechnet von der WHO als UNO-Sonderorganisation, die nun sogar offensichtlich nach einer Art Weltherrschaft über das Gesundheitswesen aller Länder zu greifen scheint, nicht nur als angebliche Schutzmaßnahme gegen eine angebliche weitreichende Gefahr für die Gesundheit der gesamten Menschheit propagiert. Sondern sie wurden als angebliche «Eintrittskarte» in die Teilhabe am gesellschaftlichen Leben installiert. Dadurch scheinen sich die geradezu teuflischen Pläne einer auf die Durchsetzung einer systematischen Beschädigung des menschlichen Leibes bis hin zu seiner Tötung als eine Art «Kollateralschaden» zielenden Politik zu offenbaren und für die Überlebenden eine «Verschmelzung» mit der digitalen Mega-Maschine vorzubereiten, die sogar als «Verbesserung» des Menschseins durch den sog. «Transhumanismus» propagiert wird,
  • über eine «Klima»-Politik, die auf der Basis von falschen Daten einer korrupten Wissenschaft, dem Weltklimarat der UNO, IPCC, durchgesetzt wird, nämlich mittels des «Green Deal» der USA und der EU sowie des Weltwirtschaftsforums, WEF, in Davos – einer Politik, welche wohl nichts Geringeres als die zivilisatorischen Grundlagen der Moderne in einer «großen Transformation», inklusive der corona-erprobten Installation diktatorischer Verhältnisse mittels Aushöhlung der Rechtsstaatlichkeit, Freiheitsberaubung und Entzug der Meinungsfreiheit, einem immer wieder offen deklarierten Depopulationsprojekt und dem offensichtlich generellen Verlust der Menschenrechte, unterziehen will,
  • bis hin zum neuen Militarismus anlässlich des von der UNO nicht verhinderten Ukraine-Krieges, der sogar zum 3. Welt-, ja zu einem ausgedehnten Atomkrieg werden könnte.

All dieser Horror ist das Gegenteil von dem, was Rosalie, die gerade auch zu den Risiken atomarer Strahlung gearbeitet hatte und dafür mit dem alternativen Nobelpreis ausgezeichnet wurde, erwartet hätte. Sie hätte vermutlich laut ihre Stimme dagegen erhoben. Umso mehr sind wir aufgerufen, in ihrem Sinne zu handeln.

Schließlich gehört zu diesem vergangenen Jahrzehnt auch, dass Rosalies Werk zwar endlich umfassend Verbreitung fand, so etwa allein durch fünf Auflagen der deutschen Fassung, und am Ende auch die englische Originalversion, nun in erweiterter Form, wieder verfügbar war. Aber die Resonanz in der Öffentlichkeit war gering, ja in der Wissenschaft quasi nicht vorhanden, was allerdings inzwischen für die Resultate einer nach wie vor kritischen Wissenschaft insgesamt gilt. Und die gegenwärtigen sozialen Bewegungen sowie die Reste der früheren lehnten eine eingehendere Befassung mit Rosalies Themen trotz ihrer eigenen Betroffenheit bis heute ab.

Die Einbindung ihres Werks in den Ansatz der Kritischen Patriarchatstheorie, den Rosalie sich gewünscht hatte, traf nicht überall auf Verständnis, was sich zuletzt auch bei der Verfassung eines neuen, von mir herausgegebenen Buches, in dem auch Rosalie über einen Beitrag präsent ist: «Global WAR-NING! Geoengineering is Wrecking our Planet and Humanity», Global Research 2021, (Globale Warnung! Geoengineering ruiniert unseren Planeten und die Menschheit, Zeitgeist 2022) zeigte. Aber sie wäre ansonsten sehr zufrieden mit dem Buch gewesen, weil es ihre Arbeit in neuen Zusammenhängen präsentiert und weiterführende Analysen von Frauen aus der ganzen Welt sowie ihrem Freund Michel Chossudovsky von Global Research in Kanada leistet, zu einem Zeitpunkt, an dem die allgemeine Verwirrung über das, was im globalen Patriarchat der Fall ist, seinem Höhepunkt zustrebt. Als Ökofeministin wäre ihr das genau jetzt sehr recht gewesen, und der Zusammenhang ihrer Analyse mit der des globalen Patriarchats heute wird gerade so klar wie nie zuvor. Unser Begriff der «Militäralchemie» war für sie der Gesamtausdruck dafür geworden

Was Rosalie als Pionierin einer neuen Forschung im Übrigen sehr begrüßt hätte, ist die bedeutende Zunahme von kritischen Analysen des militärischen Geoengineerings in aller Welt. Es wären ein Trost und eine Genugtuung für sie zu sehen, dass das Thema nun nicht mehr vom Tisch zu bekommen ist und immer umfassendere Erkenntnisse darüber vorgelegt werden. Denn die Gesamtentwicklung dieser Technologie geht zum Teil bereits über das hinaus, was Rosalie beobachten konnte. Ja, die US-Luftwaffe will schon in drei Jahren, in 2025, ihr Ziel der weltweiten Wetterkontrolle realisiert haben.  (Col. Tamzy J. House et al., für die US Air Force, 1996: On Weather as a Force Multiplier. Owning the Weather in 2025).

In der Tat: der «Klimawandel» ist «Menschen»-gemacht!

Mit der Planetaren Bewegung für Mutter Erde, die wir angeregt durch Rosalies Wirken im Jahren 2010 gründeten, hoffen wir, das Bestmögliche getan zu haben, um ihre Erkenntnisse in die Welt zu bringen und weiter mit ihnen zu arbeiten. Das gilt auch für ihr Vermächtnis in den letzten beiden Interviews, die sie in ihrem Leben gegeben hatte, und die so lange verschollen waren, bis wir sie allerdings erst nach ihrem Tod wiederentdeckt haben: «Sind wir die letzten Generationen?» und «Planet ohne Zukunft?»

Wir halten in diesen Tagen inne und gedenken ihrer, der mutigen, unermüdlichen, engagierten, klugen, klarsichtigen, hellsichtigen und liebevollen Rosalie Bertell! Ihr «planetares Bewusstsein» wird uns ein Vorbild sein.

Und wir widmen ihr eine Erkenntnis von Hannah Arendt, die für den Informationskrieg unserer Zeit – und dabei auch den gegen Rosalie Bertell – gilt, und zwar so wie vielleicht nie zuvor, und die Rosalie wohl vorbehaltlos geteilt hätte: «Denn das Resultat ist keineswegs, dass die Lüge nur als wahr akzeptiert und die Wahrheit als Lüge diffamiert wird, sondern dass der menschliche Orientierungs-Sinn im Bereich des Wirklichen, der OHNE die Unterscheidung von Wahrheit und Unwahrheit nicht funktionieren kann, VERNICHTET WIRD». Solchem werden wir nach wie vor und gemeinsam mit Rosalie einiges entgegenhalten!

*

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. Claudia von Werlhof is Prof. Emerita of Political Science and Women’s Studies at the University of Innsbruck in Austria. She is the author of many books and has worked hard to make Rosalie Bertell’s important book Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War on Geoengineering available in German, Spanish, Italian, French and English again. Claudia was the founder of the Planetary Movement for Mother Earth (PMME) in 2010.

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


Global WAR-NING! Geoengineering Is Wrecking Our Planet and Humanity

Edited by Prof. Claudia von Werlhof

After more than one year of “lockdowns” all over the world, the issue of “global warming” and “climate change” is back on the table of the international debate.

It seems that natural catastrophes have started to surround us everywhere – from the animal world next to us as well as from the sky above us. Is “nature” the enemy that has to be combatted today, be it by vaccinating humanity against the coronavirus that allegedly jumped out of the wilderness attacking us, be it by tearing down industrial production and consumption in order to avoid the alleged greenhouse gas CO2 emissions, being officially identified as the sole culprit of a so-called global warming? Or be it by applying methods of an alleged civil “geoengineering” against an ongoing climate change that seems to threaten the world?

Click here to read the e-Book.

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.

***

 

 

 

We are wondering about what Rosalie Bertell might have had to say about what has happened in the meantime. Her trailblazing book «Planet Earth – The Latest Weapon of War» was first published in 2000, but remained unknown as the publisher went bankrupt. Until 2011, she has written several adenda which since then were included in the German version of her book as well as in all other editions of her work, i.e. in Spanish, Italian, French and eventually, in the new and enhanced English version as well. Bertell would have been delighted about this.

As a result of her disappearing optimism for the great social movements of the 1980-1990’s, in the years after 2000, she arrived at the conclusion that her analysis should have been considerably sharper and more explicit. Because these movements had aligned themselves with, or were incorporated by the «opposing» side or, did not manage to develop their topics any further, after being unable to integrate Bertell’s findings and what she had to say. Most of all, the UN, the organization she had worked for all her life, did nothing to stop the global destruction process of planet earth and the entire sphere of life. On the contrary, the UN has increasingly become the leader of these new political tendencies. Ten years later, this becomes obvious to a degree that is rather unsettling and, most likely, would have been unimaginable to Rosalie. Also her hope for a foundation of an International Court of Justice, that would have been able to address the question of protection of the earth from military geo-engineering now seems to have become a rather remote idea.

In short, I suspect that Rosalie would be shocked about what has happened since her passing away:

  • beginning with the on-going extension of measures of military geo-enineering towards a public recognition of a so-called civil geo-engineering and its integration into the university system, where it is presented as a contribution in fighting against so-called «man-made» climate change – thus concealing its military origins, giving it a new meaning and definition, which results in a reversal of the term beyond recognition,
  • to the integration of military geo-engineering into the new, so-called 4. industrial revolution, now propagated as modernization via digitalization and artificial intelligence, biotechnology, nano- technology and transhumanism, which is designed to abolish a free and autonomous human being, none of which has yet reached critical public awareness,
  • from the Corona-crisis and medical experiments, the research and development of «viruses» in chemical laboratories all over the world as a new invisible super weapon, its application within a worldwide lab experiment that damages the human body with mass- »vaccinations» on a global scale, with unknown, long-term consequences, leading to serious vaccine-related injuries and high numbers of vaccine-related deaths, possibly caused by their ability to disturb and even destroy the natural human immune-system. These experimental substances may contain toxic compounds, able to cause cancer as well as possibly elements that may lead to genetic alterations, are propagated by the WHO, a UN-organization, which now seems to be reaching for a kind of global dominance and control of the healthcare systems of all countries. Reasons for this lie not only in alleged safety and health protective measures against a supposed severe health threat of all mankind. But these measures are being set into place as an alleged «entry-ticket» for participation in social life per se. In this way, the evil plans of a policy are becoming visible that are currently under way, which include the systemic and deliberate damage to the human body, risking even its annihilation and considering this a form of collateral damage, while preparing for those who survive this, a «merging» with the digital mega machine, propagating this as an «improvement of the human being» via so-called «transhumanism»
  • and a «climate» policy, implemented on the basis of false data produced by corrupted science, the world climate council of the UN , IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change), via the «Green Deal» of the USA and the EU, as well as the World Economic Forum, WEF, in Davos – a policy intended to achieve nothing less than the abolition of the foundational principles of our modern civilization, via a «Great Transformation», including the installation of dictatorial conditions by means of erosion of the rule of law, the general withdrawal of human rights, the right to free speech, the withdrawal of personal liberties as tested during the Corona crisis, as well as a repeatedly and openly declared depopulation project,
  • to the new militarization, as evidenced in the war in Ukraine, which was not prevented by the UN, and which could potentially lead to a Third World War, even a nuclear war.

All of this horror is the opposite of what Rosalie, whose research was especially on the numerous risks of nuclear radiation, for which she was awarded the alternative Nobel Peace Prize, would have expected. She would have raised her voice loud and clear against this. Now it is up to us to follow her lead in this matter.

During the last decade, the work of Rosalie found widespread distribution: five editions in Germany alone, and in the end, the original English version became available again in an enhanced edition. However, public resonance remained low, which, by the way, has now become almost common for the results of critical science in general. The current social movements as well as remnants of former social movements rejected a more in-depth analysis and discussion of Bertell’s topics, even though they themselves are effected by these.

The contextualisation of her works into the approach of Critical Theory of Patriarchy, which Rosalie desired, was not always met with understanding, as evidenced in the publication process of our new book «Global WAR-NING! Geoengineering is Wrecking our Planet and Humanity», Global Research 2021, (German version: Globale Warnung! Geoengineering ruiniert unseren Planeten und die Menschheit, Zeitgeist 2022) which contains a contribution of Rosalie Bertell.

She would have been pleased with this book, because it represents her work in new contexts and in the company of women from different parts of the world, investigating even further into her field of research, and also with a contribution from her friend Michel Chossudovsky from Global Research in Canada, at a moment in time, when the general confusion on what is actually truly going on in global patriarchy, seems to be reaching a climax.
As an eco-feminist, this would have been very much in her interest, especially now, when the relation of her analysis with the analysis of global patriarchy today has never become more obvious. For her, our term «military alchemy» had become the appropriate expression of this interrelationship.

As a pioneer of a new science, Rosalie certainly would have welcomed the increasing number of analyses of military geo-engineering world-wide.

It would have consoled and atoned her to see that this topic is now on the map and can no longer be denied, with the ever-increasing evidence that is now provided. Because the entire development of this technology is now partially already beyond of what Rosalie was able to observe.

Just imagine: In three years from now, in 2025, the US-Airforce hopes to succeed in the realization of its goal of achieving control over weather conditions world-wide. (Col. Tanzy J. House et al., for the US Air Force, 1996: On Weather as a Force Multiplier. Owning the Weather in 2025):

“Climate Change” is man-made, indeed!

Inspired by Rosalie Bertell, in 2010, we founded the Planetary Movement for Mother Earth, and we hope to have thus done our best to promote her ideas and findings and to build on her research. This also applies to the legacy of her last two interviews she gave in her life, which were lost for a long time, but eventually resurfaced after her death, with the titles: »Are we the last generations? » and «Planet without a future?»

These days we are pausing and commemorating her: the courageous, tireless, committed, intelligent, perceptive and deeply caring Rosalie Bertell! Her «planetary consciousness» shall be our model.

And we dedicate an insight by Hannah Arendt to her, that is applicable to the information war of our times – including also the one against the works of Rosalie Bertell – an insight that Rosalie would have shared without reservations:

“And the result is by no means that a lie is now accepted as the truth and the truth as a lie, but the human sense of orientation in the realm of the real, which cannot function WITHOUT the differentiation between truth and untruth, is being ANNIHILATED”.

On the basis of Rosalie’s insights and her research, we shall continue to resist 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.

Dr. Claudia von Werlhof is Prof. Emerita of Political Science and Women’s Studies at the University of Innsbruck in Austria. She is the author of many books and has worked hard to make Rosalie Bertell’s important book Planet Earth: The Latest Weapon of War on Geoengineering available in German, Spanish, Italian, French and English again. Claudia was the founder of the Planetary Movement for Mother Earth (PMME) in 2010.

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


Global WAR-NING! Geoengineering Is Wrecking Our Planet and Humanity

Edited by Prof. Claudia von Werlhof

After more than one year of “lockdowns” all over the world, the issue of “global warming” and “climate change” is back on the table of the international debate.

It seems that natural catastrophes have started to surround us everywhere – from the animal world next to us as well as from the sky above us. Is “nature” the enemy that has to be combatted today, be it by vaccinating humanity against the coronavirus that allegedly jumped out of the wilderness attacking us, be it by tearing down industrial production and consumption in order to avoid the alleged greenhouse gas CO2 emissions, being officially identified as the sole culprit of a so-called global warming? Or be it by applying methods of an alleged civil “geoengineering” against an ongoing climate change that seems to threaten the world?

Click here to read the e-Book.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on June 14, 2022 Is the Tenth Anniversary of Rosalie Bertell’s Passing. The Planetary Movement for Mother Earth (PBME) Commemorates Her with Respect, Appreciation and Gratitude!
  • Tags: , ,

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.

***

A report quietly published by the UK Government, just hours before Boris Johnson announced he was resigning as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, reveals the Covid-19 injections are proving to have negative effectiveness against death among children in England.

With the most recent figures showing triple vaccinated children aged 10 to 14 are a shocking 13,633.33% / 137.3x more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated children.

On the 7th July, Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, announced he was resigning. Since then the Mainstream Media in the UK have distracted the public with 24/7 news on that announcement and speculation on who could replace him.

It’s times like these that you ought to watch what bad news is being quietly published in the background in the hope that it won’t receive much attention.

It just so happens that hours before Boris announced his resignation, his Government published new data that is devastating for both parents and children.

A UK Government agency, known as the Office for National Statistics (ONS), has just published data on deaths by vaccination status in England.

The latest dataset from the ONS is titled ‘Deaths by Vaccination Status, England, 1 January 2021 to 31 May 2022‘, and it can be accessed on the ONS site here, and downloaded here.

Source

Table 6 of the dataset contains data on deaths involving Covid-19 by age group in England between 1st January 2021 and 31st May 2022, and it includes the number of deaths among children aged 10 to 14.

However, it is quite clear from the data that the ONS are not being as transparent as we would like to believe. This is because they fail to provide the death rate per 100,000 person-years among children, whereas they have provided it for all other age groups in every other table contained in the dataset.

For example, here’s a snapshot of the data from table 1 of the dataset showing the death rate per 100,000 person-years by vaccination status in April 2022 –

Source

Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on which way you choose to look at it, the ONS still provides enough information for us to calculate the COVID death rate among children ourselves, and it is horrific.

Here’s a snapshot of the ONS data on Covid-19 deaths among children aged 10 to 14 between 1st Jan 2021 and 31st May 2022 by vaccination status –

Source

The data above includes the number of deaths and the number of person-years among each vaccination group. Therefore, all we need to do is divide each vaccination group’s person-years by 100,000, and then divide the number of deaths among each vaccination group by the answer to the previous equation, to work out the COVID death rates.

e.g. Unvaccinated 2,881,265 Person-years / 100,000 = 28.81
Unvaccinated Covid-19 Deaths (9) / 28.81 = 0.3 Deaths per 100,000 person-years

The following chart shows the calculated Covid-19 death rate per 100,000 person-years among children aged 10 to 14 in England between 1st Jan 2021 and 31st May 2022 –

Source Data

As you can see the rates are horrendous. With a death rate of 3.2 among the partly vaccinated, and a death rate of 41.2 per 100k among the triple vaccinated, compared to just 0.3 per 100k among the unvaccinated.

Based on Pfizer’s vaccine efficacy formula, this data reveals that the Covid-19 injections are now proving to have negative effectiveness against death among children, with the real-world effectiveness between January 2021 and May 2022 being as follows –

Formula:
Unvaccinated Death Rate – Vaccinated Death Rate
/
Unvaccinated Death Rate x 100 =
Vaccine Effectiveness against Death

Put plain and simply, the above means vaccinated children are more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated children. Unfortunately, though, this increased risk of death is earth-shattering.

The Covid-19 injections are proving to have real-world negative effectiveness against death of minus-966.67% among partly vaccinated children, and a shocking real-world negative effectiveness against death of minus-13,633.33% among triple vaccinated children.

This isn’t anywhere near the claimed 95% effectiveness against death made by Pfizer, is it?

In other words, partly vaccinated children are 11x/966.67% more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated children, and triple vaccinated children are 137.3x/13,633.33% more likely to die of Covid-19 than unvaccinated children.

The ONS unfortunately still refuses to provide any data on children under the age of 10, despite 5 to 11 year-olds being offered the Covid-19 injection in England since at least January 2022. We dread to think what sort of numbers we would be seeing if they had the decency and nerve to provide it.

The release of this horrific data has also, unfortunately, followed the questionable decision made by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to authorise emergency use of the Covid-19 injection among infants as young as 6 months of age.

Source

Judging by this data that was quietly published by the UK Government just hours before Boris Johnson’s resignation as Prime Minister of the UK to ensure it was swept under the carpet, the people working for the FDA will live to regret that decision.

*

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

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Whilst You Were Distracted by Boris Resigning, the UK Gov. Published a Report Confirming Fully Vaccinated Children Are 13,633% More Likely to Die of COVID Than Unvaccinated Children
  • Tags: ,

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 video below is a satire on COVID vaccines administered in Canada.

*

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.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: Schizer – We Make Sh*t. Satire: “The Vaccines are Safe and Effective. They are Not of Course”
  • Tags: , ,
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Tanks Deployed Near Parliament and State of Emergency Declared in Sri Lanka
  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Sri Lanka: A Victory for a Non-violent People’s Movement

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.

***

Approximately a year ago, August 2021, Dr Andrey Kortunov, Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC) wrote an opinion article in which he rhetorically asked What Would Happen to the World Without the United States. That article was and still is an informative, thought provoking and food for thought. It offers an insight into the need for global cooperation, peace and solidarity. It brings into memory the Communist slogans: the world without nuclear, peace and development, friendship and international solidarity.

After the historic fall of the Soviet era, Russia really dreamed of raising its status by joining international organizations. Over the past three decades, it became a member of many global bodies, participating actively at the United Nations. In addition, Russia created the Greater Eurasia Union, BRICS – a group of states comprising Brazil, India, China and South Africa – and the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). With the current changes taking place, Russia has exited some of the foreign organizations including, Group of Eight (G-8), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). These have also generated hot debates whether to let it go out of the Group of Twenty (G-20).

Reports have categorically stressed that the course of geopolitical events is becoming irreversible. According to one report:

“Russia does not intend to tolerate the subversive actions carried out by the collective West towards setting up a rules-based order to replace international law trampled upon by the United States and its satellites.”

But today it seems we are almost close to the beginning of nuclear war. The world’s economy has been shattered, with skyrocketing prices, deficit in supplies of oil and gas to some parts of the world. The world has all the untapped natural resources to make people’ lives sustainable, but now an estimated half of the global population is under unbearable fear and deep strain, majority struggling to make a living.

This article seeks to focus specifically on Russia and the world. We attempt to imagine What Happens to Russia Without the United States and Europe. Unbelievably relations have soared these few years and almost at the verge of collapse completely. Another Cold war indeed, is at the door reminiscent of the previous ideological confrontation between the East and the West. We imagine Russia today without the two global powers; the United States and Europe.

What Would Happen to Russia Without the United States and Europe? In his article published on RIAC website last August 2021, Dr Andrey Kortunov, the Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC) offered the definition or the descrption of the United States as often referred to as an “indispensable nation.”

The term was first used in January 1997 by President Bill Clinton during his second inaugural address. And thereafter, Madeleine Albright would mention it in her speeches and writings on numerous occasions after that. The underlying idea of “indispensability” here is that it suggests it would simply be impossible to maintain even relative order in the world – let alone resolve fundamental global and regional issues – without the United States. “It is likely no coincidence that the coinage came about and gained traction at a time when we were living in an almost completely unipolar world, when U.S. influence and authority around the globe had risen to never-before-seen heights over an incredibly short period of time,” he wrote in his article.

The situation is now evolving differently and how indispensable are the United States and Europe. Can we do, due to some typical circumstances, without them today? Russia, over the past few months exited out of a number of international organizations, and therefore moving into self-isolation. Russia is globe-trotting to make alliances against the United States and Europe. It leads new alliance first for defeating unipolarism, and second for creating a new world political and economic order. But, what would happen to Russia if the Federation Council and the State Duma (both organs of the Russian Federation) legislate to prohibit the use of Western and European languages, for instance English and French, due to the absolute hatred for these two powers’ hegemony. What if Russia has to prohibit the use of English, especially in its educational institutions, halt English-taught programmes throughout the Russian Federation. What happens if the Skolkovo project, considered as Sillicon Valley, kick out all foreign residents there?

Russia-Europe-United States’ cultural and educational cooperation have ultimately collapsed. It has crippled and ridiculed the work with civil society. Russia has closed the British Council, the American Educational Council with its Future Leaders Exchange (FLEX) programme, and Alliance Française and Geothe Institute. These are the largest cultural networks of Britain, the United States, France and Germany. While Russia struggles with its own non-profit NGO Russkiy Mir primarily tasked to popularize Russian language, literature and Russian culture around the world, but on the contrary found it necessary to halt non-political and non-profit educational branches of western ones that operated under their diplomatic missions in the Russian Federation.

The FLEX programme, created as the best way to ensure long-lasting peace and mutual understanding between the U.S. and the countries of Eurasia, enables young people, over 35,000 students who compete annually, to learn about the United States, and to teach Americans about their countries, mostly from the former Soviet republics. These educational and cultural centers have practically helped thousands of Russian students, with government-sponsored grants, to acquire comparative knowledge in various academic fields abroad. While some, after the training programmes, still remain abroad, others returned to contribute their quota in sustainable development in Russia.

What Would Happen to Russia Without the United States and Europe?

The United States corporate business engagement is simply not comparable to Russia’s economic footprints in the United States. On April 29, 2021, President Vladimir Putin held videoconference with leaders of several corporate French companies-members of the Franco-Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (CCI France-Russia) to discuss some aspects of Russian-French trade, economic and investment cooperation, including the implementation of large joint projects as well as the prospects for collaborative work in the Russian Federation.

From the historical records, France was described as a key economic partner for Russia, holding the 6th place among the EU countries (European Union is made up of 27 member-countries) in the amount of accumulated investment in the Russian economy and 5th place in the volume of trade. Over 500 companies with French capital are operating in various sectors of the Russian economy. Despite a certain decline in mutual trade in 2020, the ultimate figure quite acceptable at US$13 billion. But French investment in Russia was hovering around US$17 billion, while Russian investment in France, very tiny at US$3 billion.

There are EU countries such as Britain, Germany, The Netherlands, Italy and Spain playing significant economic roles in Russia. Their level of business are far higher than that of Russia in the European Union. Undeniably, Russia is only an energy supplier, but its economic involvement is comparatively little. Many Western and EU companies are suspending their business operations. The Kremlin and Russian authorities say the United States and European Union bloc are taking systematic and well-thought-out measures to destabilize the economy of Russia. Several “systematic, very serious measures corresponding to the extraordinary unfriendly conditions that were placed upon us by unfriendly actions (of other countries), well thought out measures,” are being taken, Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said during one of his media conferences.

‘United Russia’ – the largest political party in Russia, which supports President Putin’s policies – has proposed to nationalization of the enterprises of those Western companies that refused to operate in the Russian Federation. On March 7, Secretary of United Russia’s General Council Andrey Turchak said that the state legislative commission approved the initiative providing for the possibility of nationalizing the property of foreign corporations leaving the Russian market.

On the other hand, Dr Andrey Kortunov proposed to take a thought experiment: imagine if the United States were to completely depart from world politics, break all the international agreements to which Washington is a party, renounce all the obligations the country has undertaken, withdraw from all global and regional organizations, close the borders, shut down the embassies and consulates, freeze immigration and put all communication with the outside world on hold until things are looking better, focusing all its attention on building its biblical shining city upon a hill.

Dr Andrey Kortunov’s question: “What Would Happen to the World if the United States were erased from the map?” To begin with, there would only be one nuclear superpower left in the world, and that would be Russia. Accordingly, the last foundations of bilateral U.S.–Russia strategic arms control will collapse. It is unlikely that other nuclear powers would be particularly interested in entering into negotiations with Moscow on nuclear weapons, as the gap between Russia and all the other players is simply too great. It is even less likely that Moscow will agree to relinquish its unique nuclear advantage over the rest of the world. However, unconditional nuclear superiority does not automatically mean that Moscow would be able to freely dictate its will in global politics. The nuclear arsenals of other countries would continue to be effective deterrence instruments, and a war between the members of the “nuclear club” would be just as implausible as it is today.

That said, nuclear proliferation is likely to significantly aggravate. In the absence of the “extended deterrence” of the United States, many of its former allies and partners would think about acquiring nuclear weapons of their own. This primarily implies countries in East Asia (Japan, South Korea and Taiwan) and the Middle East (Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt). The idea of building up a nuclear arsenal may also take hold in Germany. Some five or six new nuclear powers could appear in short order.

While it is unlikely that nuclear proliferation in East Asia would lead to a sharp escalation of military and political risks, the emergence of new nuclear states in the Middle East would be fraught with dire consequences – both for the region and for the international community as a whole. That said, we should acknowledge that the threat of nuclear proliferation exists even today, and this can in large part be put down to the approach of the United States to resolving issues related to the Iranian nuclear programme.

The question is: Would NATO be able to Survive in a World Without the United States? Theoretically, yes, but only if the European great powers – the United Kingdom, Germany and France – put the maximum political, economic and military effort into it.

The remaining countries in the bloc will have to increase their defence contributions by more than the two per cent on which Washington insists today to some four or five per cent. Even this, though, would not offset the losses that NATO would incur as a result of the U.S. withdrawal. Without American leadership, NATO would likely turn into a regional military and political instrument of the European Union – while London’s role in the organization would be unclear seeing as it is no longer in the EU – and NATO would have a far more modest role in world affairs than it has today. Without the United States, it is unlikely that NATO would continue to pursue its current global ambitions, and the remaining members may be rather reluctant to endlessly expand the organization’s zone of geographic responsibility.

In a world without the United States, China would almost automatically become the undisputed leader in global technology. Although Europe, Japan, India and Southeast Asian nations would likely have greater incentive to join forces to challenge China’s hegemony in this area. With this in mind, it is hard to say whether it would be possible to create a global technological ecosystem that would be independent of Beijing without the United States. This would largely depend on how rigid or flexible Beijing’s hegemony would actually turn out to be as well as on the extent to which China would manage to avoid monopolizing the new technologies that are fundamental to the global community at large.

Dr Andrey Kortunov wrote that the euro would inevitably become the main reserve currency once the dollar exits the global financial system. The Chinese yuan is not entirely convertible, which means that it would be a long time before China could compete with the European Union in the financial sphere. Other global currencies – such as the British pound, the Japanese yen and the Swiss franc – could gain in importance. European and Asian financial centres (London, Frankfurt, Shanghai, Singapore, etc.) would receive additional powerful incentives for development.

International financial institutions (the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Monetary Fund), where the United States has traditionally played a leading role, would undergo sweeping – and likely very painful – reforms. As a sidenote, we shall argue that the United Nations would also suffer a profound institutional crisis, losing both its current headquarters in New York and approximately 22 per cent of its base budget, as well as the U.S. contributions to individual UN departments and programmes. The Arctic Council would suffer less, as the American sector of the Arctic is far smaller than that of Russia and Canada. What is more, the United States has not yet ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which somewhat complicates Washington’s position in the Arctic Council.

The absence of the United States on the world’s energy markets could lead to a temporary revival of OPEC and a strengthening of Russia’s positions. The “green” and “shale” revolutions will continue unabated, however. Washington’s departure from the global arms and foodstuff markets would also result in a significant restructuring of these markets. Even with the joint efforts of the remaining players, the gap left by the United States in the arms market would be extremely difficult to fill.

With Hollywood no longer the centre of the global film industry, cities that used to hold that position -primarily Paris and Rome – would have the chance to revive their former cinematic glory. However, European filmmakers would face tough competition on the global entertainment market from filmmakers of Indian and, in particular, Chinese origin The disappearance of New York from world fashion would give a second wind to Paris and Milan, while the United Kingdom would probably become the centre of musical life for a long time to come.

According to Dr Andrey Kortunov, the departure of Apple – and its iPhones and MacBooks – from the portable electronics markets would create a vacuum that a dozen of the biggest electronics giants in China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan would fight to fill. America’s self-imposed isolation would send shockwaves through higher education and science markets globally to reverberate for decades to come.

Quite naturally, the world would not lapse. It would survive the departure of the United States just like it survived the extinction of the dinosaurs and woolly mammoths. It would be difficult and extremely uncomfortable at first, especially for those international players who have been hiding in the shadow of the American superpower for decades. The withdrawal of the United States would lead to a number of crises and conflicts and a long period of instability and uncertainty as the struggle for the “American legacy” would inevitably be long and tense. Somehow, we would still get through it! Plus, the world already had a preview of Washington as an unpredictable and unreliable partner during Donald Trump’s presidency. It will actually be easier to resolve certain problems without Washington, since the U.S. is often part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

According to Dr Andrey Kortunov, the world would miss the United States. “We would miss the American optimism, the American energy and the American drive. We would miss the high-rise buildings of Manhattan, the narrow streets of the French Quarter in New Orleans and the expansive prairies of the Great Plains. We would miss the country music, the Chicago-style steaks and the Californian nutmeg chardonnay. We would miss Halloween, Thanksgiving and, perhaps, Independence Day. Just like the entire world would miss Russia, Argentina, Ethiopia and New Zealand. Every single country is unique and indispensable in its own way. In this sense, the United States truly is an indispensable nation,” he asserted in his conclusion.

European Russia accounts for about 75% of Russia’s total population. But demographical documents further indicate that 1.8 million Russians live in the European Union (majority in Britain, Germany and France), 1.3 million Russians live in the United States (majority in New York and Washington) and in Canada. Both the United States and Canada, and European Union have provided better living conditions for Russians more than for American, Canadian and European citizens (in fact very small number) who live in the Russian Federation.

But then, the rhetorical questions are: What Would Really Happen to Russia Without the United States and Europe? Can Russia lead the emerging global economic order? Is Russia ready to support developing countries where the United States and Europe have failed? Is Moscow a financial hub and host to international organizations’ representation offices as in New York and Washington, and in Europe? Can Russia turn into superpower with hegemony characteristics, and provide the same conditions for foreigners as obtained in the United States and Europe? Is this the end of Russians’ American and European Dream?

Dr Andrey Kortunov’s distinctive question is: What Would Happen to the World Without the United States? Special gratitude for food-for-thought and thought-provoking question from Dr Andrey Kortunov, the Director General of RIAC. The Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC) is a non-profit academic and diplomatic think tank that was established in February 2010. The RIAC makes strengthening peace, friendship and solidarity its direction of activities, and works closely with the state, academic community, business, and civil society in an effort to find foreign policy solutions to complex diverse issues.

*

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

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

Featured image is from the author

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Russia and the World. History and Geopolitical Analysis. “What Would Happen to Russia Without the United States and Europe?”
  • Tags: , ,

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 Suicide Spectacular Summer Show, currently on screen across Europe, proceeds in full regalia, much to the astonishment of virtually the whole Global South: a trashy, woke Gotterdammerung remake, with Wagnerian grandeur replaced by twerking.

Decadent Roman Emperors at least exhibited some degree of pathos. Here we’re just faced by a toxic mix of hubris, abhorring mediocrity, delusion, crude ideological sheep-think and outright irrationality wallowing in white man’s burden racist/supremacist slush – all symptoms of a profound sickness of the soul.

To call it the Biden-von Der Leyen-Blinken West or so would be too reductionist: after all these are puny politico/functionaries merely parroting orders. This is a historical process: physical, psychic and moral cognitive degeneration embedded in NATOstan’s manifest desperation in trying to contain Eurasia, allowing occasional tragicomic sketches such as a NATO summit proclaiming Woke War against virtually the whole non-West.

So when President Putin addresses the collective West  in front of Duma leaders and heads of political parties, it does feel like a comet striking an inert planet. It’s not even a case of “lost in translation”. “They” simply aren’t equipped to get it.

The “You Ain’t Seen Nothin’ Yet” part was at least formulated to be understood even by simpletons:

“Today we hear that they want to defeat us on the battlefield, well, what can I say, let them try. We have heard many times that the West wants to fight us to the last Ukrainian – this is a tragedy for the Ukrainian people. But it looks like it’s all coming to this. But everyone should know that, by and large, we haven’t really started anything yet.”

Fact. On Operation Z, Russia is using a fraction of its military potential, resources and state of the art weapons.

Then we come to the most probable path ahead in the war theater:

“We do not refuse peace negotiations, but those who refuse should know that the longer it drags, the more difficult it will be for them to negotiate with us.”

As in the pain dial will be ratcheted up, slowly but surely, on all fronts.

Yet the meat of the matter had been delivered earlier in the speech: “ratcheting up the pain dial” applies in fact to dismantling the whole “rules-based international order” edifice. The geopolitical world has changed. Forever.

Here’s the arguably key passage:

“They should have understood that they have already lost from the very beginning of our special military operation, because its beginning means the beginning of a radical breakdown of the World Order in the American way. This is the beginning of the transition from liberal-globalist American egocentrism to a truly multipolar world – a world based not on selfish rules invented by someone for themselves, behind which there is nothing but the desire for hegemony, not on hypocritical double-standards, but on international law, on the true sovereignty of peoples and civilizations, on their will to live their historical destiny, their values and traditions and build cooperation on the basis of democracy, justice and equality. And we must understand that this process can no longer be stopped.”

Meet the trifecta

A case can be made that Putin and Russia’s Security Council are implementing a tactical trifecta that has reduced the collective West to an amorphous bunch of bio headless chickens.

The trifecta mixes the promise of negotiations – but only when considering Russia’s steady advances on the ground in Novorossiya; the fact that Russia’s global “isolation” has been proved in practice to be nonsense; and tweaking the most visible pain dial of them all: Europe’s dependence on Russian energy.

The main reason for the graphic, thundering failure of the G20 Foreign Ministers summit in Bali is that the G7 – or NATOstan plus American colony Japan – could not force the BRICS plus major Global South players to isolate, sanction and/or demonize Russia.

On the contrary: multiple interpolations outside of the G20 spell out even more Eurasia-wide integration. Here are a few examples.

The first transit of Russian products to India via the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) is now in effect, crisscrossing Eurasia from Mumbai to the Baltic via Iranian ports (Chabahar or Bandar Abbas), the Caspian Sea, and Southern and Central Russia. Crucially, the route is shorter and cheaper than going through the Suez Canal.

In parallel, the head of the Iranian Central Bank, Ali Salehabadi, confirmed that a memorandum of interbank cooperation was signed between Tehran and Moscow.

That means a viable alternative to SWIFT, and a direct consequence of Iran’s application to become a full BRICS member, announced at the recent summit in Beijing. The BRICS, since 2014, when the New Development Bank (NDB) was founded, have been busy building their own financial infrastructure, including the near future creation of a single reserve currency. As part of the process, the harmonization of Russian and Iranian banking systems is inevitable.

Iran is also about to become a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) at the upcoming summit in Samarkand in September.

In parallel, Russia and Kazakhstan are solidifying their strategic partnership: Kazakhstan is a key member of BRI, EAEU and SCO.

India gets even closer to Russia across the whole spectrum of trade – including energy.

And next Tuesday, Tehran will be the stage for a crucial face-to-face meeting between Putin and Erdogan.

Isolation? Really?

On the energy front, it’s only summer, but demented paranoia is already raging across multiple EU latitudes, especially Germany. Comic relief is provided by the fact that Gazprom can always point out to Berlin that eventual supplying problems on Nord Stream 1 – after the cliffhanger return of that notorious repaired turbine from Canada – can always be solved by implementing Nord Stream 2.

As the whole European Suicide Spectacular Summer Show is nothing but a tawdry self-inflicted torture ordered by His Master’s Voice, the only serious question is which pain dial level will force Berlin to actually sit down and negotiate on behalf of legitimate German industrial and social interests.

Rough and tumble will be the norm. Foreign Minister Lavrov summed it all up when commenting on the Declining Collective West Ministers striking poses like infantile brats in Bali to avoid being seen with him: that was up to “their understanding of the protocols and politeness.”

That’s diplo-talk for “bunch of jerks”. Or worse: cultural barbarians, as they were even unable to respect the hyper-polite Indonesian hosts, who abhor confrontation.

Lavrov preferred to extol the “joint strategic and constructive” Russian-Chinese work when faced with a very aggressive West. And that brings us to the prime masterpiece of shadowplay in Bali – complete with several layers of geopolitical fog.

Chinese media, always flirting with the opaque, tried to put its bravest face ever depicting the over 5-hour meeting  between Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Secretary Blinken as “constructive”.

What’s fascinating here is that the Chinese ended up letting something crucial out of the bag to slip into the final draft of their report – obviously approved by the powers that be.

Lu Xiang of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences went through previous readouts – especially of “Yoda” Yang Jiechi routinely turning Jake Sullivan into roasted duck – and stressed that this time Wang’s “warnings” to the Americans were “the sternest one in wording”.

That’s diplo-code for “You Better Watch Out”: Wang telling Little Blinkie, “just look at what the Russians did when they lost their patience with your antics.”

The expression ”dead end” was recurrent during the Wang-Blinken meeting. So in the end the Global Times had to tell it like it really is: “The two sides are close to a showdown.”

“Showdown” is what End of Days fanatic and Tony Soprano wannabe Mike Pompeo is fervently preaching from his hate pulpit, while the combo behind the senile “leader of the free world” who literally reads teleprompters actively work for the crashing of the EU – in more ways than one.

The combo in power in Washington actually “supports” the unification of Britain, Poland, Ukraine and The Three Baltic Midgets as a separate alliance from NATO/EU – aiming at “strengthening the defense potential.” That’s the official position of U.S. Ambassador to NATO Julian Smith.

So the real imperial aim is to split the already shattering EU into mini-union pieces, all of them quite fragile and evidently more “manageable”, as Brussels Eurocrats, blinded by boundless mediocrity, obviously can’t see it coming.

What the Global South is buying

Putin always makes it very clear that the decision to launch Operation Z – as a sort of pre-emptive “combined arms and police operation”, as defined by Andrei Martyanov – was carefully calculated, considering an array of material and socio-psychological vectors.

Anglo-American strategy, for its part, lasers on a single obsession: damn any possible reframing of the current “rules-based international order”. No holds are barred to ensure the perpetuity of this order. This is in fact Totalen Krieg – featuring several hybrid layers, and quite worrying, with only a few seconds to midnight.

And there’s the rub. Desolation Row is fast becoming Desperation Row, as the whole Russophobic matrix is shown to be naked, devoid of any extra ideological – and even financial – firepower to “win”, apart from shipping a collection of HIMARS to a black hole.

Geopolitically and geoeconomically, Russia and China are in the process of eating NATOstan alive – in more ways than one. Here, for instance, is a synthetic road map of how Beijing will address the next stage of high-quality development via capital-driven industrial upgrading, focused on optimization of supply chains, import substitution of hard technologies, and “invisible champions” of industry.

If the collective West is blinded by Russophobia, the governing success of the Chinese Communist Party – which in a matter of a few decades improved the lives of more people than anyone, anytime in History – drives it completely nuts.

All along the Russia-China watchtower, it’s been not such a long time coming. BRI was launched by Xi Jinping in 2013. After Maidan in 2014, Putin launched the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) in 2015. Crucially, in May 2015, a Russia-China joint statement sealed the cooperation between BRI and EAEU, with a significant role assigned to the SCO.

Closer integration advanced via the St. Petersburg forum in 2016 and the BRI forum in 2017. The overall target: to create a new order in Asia, and across Eurasia, according to international law while maintaining the individual development strategies of each concerned country and respecting their national sovereignty.

That, in essence, is what most of the Global South is buying. It’s as if there’s a cross-border instinctual understanding that Russia-China, against serious odds and facing serious challenges, proceeding by trial and error, are at the vanguard of the Shock of the New, while the collective West, naked, dazed and confused, their masses completely zombified, is sucked into the maelstrom of psychological, moral and material disintegration.

No question the pain deal will be ratcheted up, in more ways than one.

*

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.

Pepe Escobar, born in Brazil, is a correspondent and editor-at-large at Asia Times and columnist for Consortium News and Strategic Culture. Since the mid-1980s he’s lived and worked as a foreign correspondent in London, Paris, Milan, Los Angeles, Singapore, Bangkok. He has extensively covered Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia to China, Iran, Iraq and the wider Middle East. Pepe is the author of Globalistan – How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. He was contributing editor to The Empire and The Crescent and Tutto in Vendita in Italy. His last two books are Empire of Chaos and 2030. Pepe is also associated with the Paris-based European Academy of Geopolitics. When not on the road he lives between Paris and Bangkok.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

Feeding a Stalemate in Syria

July 14th, 2022 by Steven Sahiounie

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 UN Security Council has agreed to extend a system for cross-border aid to Idlib, Syria until January 2023.

The US and its allies had demanded a year-long extension, but Russia used its veto on Friday.

UN and other NGO aid delivery trucks will cross from Turkey into Syria at the Bab al Hawa crossing. The system has been in place since 2014, but expired on Sunday.

At stake are daily supplies for about 2 million people in the northwestern Idlib region of Syria. According to the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, more than 4,600 aid trucks, carrying mostly food, have crossed Bab al Hawa this year.

Dmitry Polyanski, Russia’s deputy ambassador to the UN, said Moscow would adopt the resolution with “a minimal modification.” At least nine of the 15 members must support a resolution to be adopted, and none of the permanent members can use their veto.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had emphasized the importance of extending the cross-border aid mechanism in Syria, in a conversation with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on Monday.

Since 2019, Russia has argued that the UN should work with Damascus on aid deliveries out of respect for Syria’s sovereignty. Moscow and Ankara signed a ceasefire agreement covering Idlib in 2019; however, Turkey has failed to uphold its end of the bargain.

The original UN mandate for cross-border aid to Syria in 2014 was devised thinking that rebel-controlled areas were temporary, but the situation in Idlib continues to exist in a stalemate, with no clear military or political resolution on the horizon.

Heated debates in late 2019 and mid-2020, during which Russia and China used their vetoes three times to block resolutions renewing the mandate, saw Moscow succeed in limiting the UN’s cross-border operations to a single crossing, at Bab al-Hawa, and Russia made clear that the mandate could not be renewed indefinitely.

Russia also demanded that the UN work harder on delivering aid into Idlib from government-held Syrian territory, and called for greater international funding for recovery projects in government-controlled parts of Syria.

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) in particular has played a pivotal role in cross-border aid delivery.

In 2014, Serena Shim, an American journalist was killed in Turkey just one day after she broadcast that the Turkish intelligence agency had threatened her and accused her of spying.

This accusation followed her original investigative reporting at the Turkish border of Syria in which she observed Islamic State terrorists crossing into Syria inside UN food trucks.

The terrorists and their weapons were flooding from Turkey into Syria through a US CIA program which President Trump cut off in 2017.

The US and its western allies have demonized Russia over the current Ukraine conflict.  However, the work that Russia is doing in Syria should not be conflated with Ukraine, as they are not connected.

The Russian Center for Negotiations in Syria has been responsible for brokering peace deals between armed terrorists and the Syrian government.  This has led to the peaceful resolution on conflicts across the country, and terrorists and their families and supporters were given the option of surrender or being bussed to Idlib.

The population today in Idlib is not the original civilians, who were mainly olive growers, but is displaced people coming from locations far removed from Idlib.  The common denominator of the majority of inhabitants in Idlib is their political ideology which is Radical Islam.  The various ‘rebel’ groups from the outset of 2011, have been aiming for an Islamic State in Syria.  Freedom and democracy is not their goal.

The Free Syrian Army ceased to exist and Jibhat al-Nusra became the fiercest fighting force on the battlefields by 2015, and was the Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria.  Because Jibhat al-Nusra is designated an outlawed terrorist organization by the US and UN, they changed their name to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) in an effort to clean up their image and keep US-EU support.

The HTS-backed ‘Salvation Government’ administers Idlib and rules with an iron fist.  HTS, Al Qaeda, ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood all have the same political platform: to establish an Islamic State, with the Koran as the only rule of law.

Idlib is just one small province in Syria, and most of the Syrian civilians in Aleppo, Homs, Latakia and Damascus don’t receive UN aid, or any charity aid.  This has led to a deep-seated resentment of the majority of Syrians, who are suffering from lack of electricity, lack of gasoline, and hyper-inflationary prices of basic food items, directed at the people living in Idlib who are living off free food and supplies.

In 2010, the Christian Science Monitor published an article “Syrian Secularism: a Model for the Middle East”.

Syria is a mixed population of Jews, Christians and Muslims.  The peaceful coexistence was maintained by the Syrian government embracing all religions and taking pride in a diverse heritage.

When the US-NATO attack on Syria began in 2011, they used Radical Islamic terrorists as foot soldiers, but their regime change goal was a failure because the Syrian population fought back against Radical Islam.  The Syrian people were determined to maintain their secular system.

Before 2011, about 10,000 Christians lived in the Idlib province, but their numbers started to decline in 2012, and by 2015 most of them had fled the Radical Islamic terrorists in control. Today, only about 200 Christians remain and are elderly.

In late January 2013, the Christian village of Al-Yacoubiyah in Idlib was captured by terrorists.

Between 2015-2018, up to 95% of Al-Yacoubiyah emigrated, as HTS took control and properties of the Christians were seized, churches were locked up and Christian people were denied to perform their religious rituals, church bells were prevented to ring and crosses were not allowed to be hung on churches.  HTS even takes 2.5% of the farmers crops per year as a tax on ‘heathens’, which HTS considers all Christians.

The US, EU and NATO have turned their backs on Syria and are involved with Ukraine. Experts have asked, “Who benefits from starving people in Idlib?”

Apparently, the US and its allies benefit from keeping the Idlib population as hostages to a political process which has no roadmap or movement.  Instead of convening a meeting of nations to solve the stalemate in Idlib, and free the civilians from an Islamic State in Idlib, the UN only haggles about how to deliver aid, to feed the stalemate.

*

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 Mideast Discourse.

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

Featured image is from MD

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.

***

One of the most important heads-of-state in the struggle to end Portuguese domination in Africa died in a Spanish hospital on July 8.

Jose Eduardo dos Santos served as president of the Republic of Angola from 1979 to 2017 as well as the Secretary General of the ruling Popular Movement for Liberation of Angola (MPLA-Worker’s Party).

The MPLA was the leading liberation movement which fought for the independence of Angola from Portugal. After the armed struggle against Lisbon and its NATO allies between 1961-1975, the MPLA became the target of the United States and the then racist apartheid regime in South Africa in their strategic aim of curtailing the genuine independence of the entire sub-continent. Rather than recognize the legitimacy of the MPLA, Washington and its cohorts backed two rival groupings, the FNLA (Front for the Liberation of Angola) and UNITA (Union for the Total Independence of Angola), which were funded and assisted by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the South African Defense Forces (SADF).

Image on the right: Angola MPLA founding President Agostino Neto (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

Angola founding President Agostino Neto, turned to the Republic of Cuba and other socialist and progressive forces across the continent and internationally in order to secure the independence of the state under MPLA rule. Cuban internationalist forces remained in Angola from late 1975 to 1989, when an agreement was reached with the apartheid rulers of Namibia and South Africa to withdraw from the country as well as neighboring Namibia, then known as Southwest Africa. Namibia won its independence in 1990 after 14 years of armed revolutionary warfare. The military defeat of the SADF in southern Angola also led to the release of political prisoners in Namibia and South Africa and the negotiated transition from apartheid to democratic rule in the Republic of South Africa in 1994.

Dos Santos and the MPLA

The deceased former president had joined the MPLA (founded in 1956) during its early years in 1961. He was granted a scholarship to study petroleum engineering in the Soviet Union during the 1960s. By 1970, Dos Santos had returned to the region to serve as a guerrilla soldier in the MPLA.

Dos Santos served in the Second Front of the MPLA military department known as the People’s Armed Forces for the Liberation of Angola (FAPLA). He was stationed in the oil-rich Cabinda province and often served as a representative for the MPLA in international forums. He was a member of the MPLA Executive Committee and after the independence of Angola on November 11, 1975, he was appointed as the first prime minister.

The UNITA rebel organization largely based in southern Angola continued with a civil war which lasted from 1975-2002, when the U.S. and apartheid-backed Jonas Savimbi was killed by FAPLA forces. During the administration of President Gerald Ford and later Jimmy Carter, clandestine support for the UNITA rebel grouping continued. During the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan championed Savimbi as a proponent of bourgeois democracy in opposition to the Soviet-Cuban aligned Marxist MPLA.

Founding President Dr. Agostino Neto died in 1979 resulting in the ascendancy of Dos Santos as head-of-state. He was elected on numerous occasions over a period of 38 years and oversaw the resolution of the civil war and the establishment of peace and stability in Angola.

In the aftermath of the defeat of the SADF in southern Angola in 1988, UNITA had committed to participating in multi-party elections. However, when the MPLA was victorious in the voting which took place in 1992, UNITA resumed the armed attacks against the Angolan government and people. Since the 2000s in the wake of the death of Savimbi, Angola has emerged as a major producer of oil internationally. There has been substantial growth in various sectors of the economy.

From a Wartime President to Leading Energy Producer

Dos Santos announced in 2017 that he was leaving the presidency while remaining as leader of the MPLA ruling party. His successor was Joao Lourenco who remains as president today. Lourenco later took over as leader of the party in 2018.

Image below: Angola oil rig (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

Africa News website reported that the Angolan president expressed his condolences on behalf of the government and people. The article notes that:

“Angolan President Joao Lourenco, who is seeking re-election in August, said the country had suffered a ‘big loss’. He declared five days of national mourning, starting Saturday (July 9). ‘This is very sad news… He has done a lot for the country,’ said Luanda resident Santos Camuenho, a 40-year-old mason. Dos Santos was admitted to a hospital in Spain and placed in intensive care after suffering a cardiac arrest on June 23. Namibia’s President Hage Geingob called dos Santos an ‘outstanding revolutionary’. ‘Another giant tree has fallen,’ Geingob said. Portugal’s President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa described him as a ‘decisive protagonist’ in the relations with Angola’s former colonial power. Former Portuguese prime minister and ex-head of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso recalled a leader of exceptional intelligence, who was able to guarantee Angolan national unity’.”

In neighboring South Africa under the ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), President Cyril Ramaphosa expressed his condolences and solidarity with the people of Angola during this time of loss and mourning. The ANC was a direct beneficiary of the solidarity extended by the MPLA and the Republic of Cuba during the 1970s and 1980s. The ANC armed wing, Um Khonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation), maintained training camps in Angola while the MPLA, the Southwest Africa People’s Organization (SWAPO) of Namibia were fighting to fully liberate the region from the occupation of the apartheid SADF.

Angola and South Africa are important members of the 16 member-states Southern African Development Community (SADC), which works towards greater cooperation and economic integration throughout the region. The SADC has been able to assist in the security needs of other member states such as Lesotho and Mozambique.

In a statement issued by the South African President’s Office, it stated:

“I offer, on behalf of our government and nation, our sincerest condolences to the Republic of Angola on the passing of an outstanding revolutionary and leader of a nation. President Dos Santos’ humble beginnings, his militancy, his exile from the country of his birth and his education in the then Soviet Union resonate profoundly with the journey many South Africans in our own liberation movement experienced. Indeed, José Eduardo dos Santos and the MPLA (Movimento Popular de Libertação de Angola) came to lead and extend their revolutionary solidarity and material and military support to our liberation movement. This support provoked the apartheid regime and its allies to violate the sovereign Republic of Angola by turning Angola into a battleground for preserving the apartheid regime. In the end, through the sacrifices of the Angolan people and the unwavering leadership of President Dos Santos, freedom dawned in a democratic South Africa. Today, our two nations are united in mourning as we were in struggle, and South Africa will continue to honor the contribution President Dos Santos made to building the Republic of Angola and bringing peace to our region. May his soul rest in peace.”

Over the last few years, Angola and the West African state of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, have contended as the largest oil-producers on the continent. Since May of this year, Angola has led Nigeria in the amounts of barrels per day being supplied to the international market.

These developments are significant in light of the burgeoning energy crisis in Europe where the war in Ukraine has prompted unprecedented sanctions by the U.S. and the EU against the Russian Federation, one of the largest producers and exporters of oil and natural gas. Many countries in Eastern and Western Europe are highly dependent upon Russian energy resources.

One television network in Nigeria said of the current situation:

“New data released by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) on Tuesday (July 12) shows Angola produced more crude oil than Nigeria in June. This is despite Nigeria recording its biggest production jump in months by 134,000 barrels per barrel (bpd) to 1.158 million bpd in June from 1.024 million in May, based on direct communication. However, Angola’s oil production rose to 1.175 million bpd in June, up from 1.162 million bpd in May, based on direct communication.

IGBERETV had reported last month that Nigeria lost its status as Africa’s top oil producer to Angola as its output declined the most in May among its peers in OPEC.”

Amid an inflationary spike largely due to the precipitous rise in oil prices at the pump, the industry will be a central focus of many observers who are predicting a global recession. The 55-member-states African Union (AU) is already scheduled to hold a continent-wide summit with the Russian Federation beginning in November in Sochi. Undoubtedly, Angola will be an important player in the upcoming summit and the repositioning of the international energy markets.

*

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

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

Featured image: Angolan Presidents Dos Santos and Joao Laurenco (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

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.

***

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon is off to the fastest start for the first half of any year since 2008 according to government data published today.

Deforestation alert data from Brazil’s national space research institute INPE shows that 3,988 square kilometers of forest have been cleared within the Brazilian Amazon since January 1, a 17 percent rise over last year, when deforestation ultimately reached the highest annual total since 2006. The last time deforestation in the region topped 4,000 square kilometers in the first six months of a year was 2008.

DETER deforestation alerts for Jan 1 through Jun 30 since 2008. DETER in INPE's deforestation monitoring system.

DETER deforestation alerts for Jan 1 through Jun 30 since 2008. DETER in INPE’s deforestation monitoring system.

According to INPE’s deforestation alert system (DETER), 1,120 square kilometers of forest was cleared in June 2022, the highest for any June on record. INPE started publishing such data on a monthly basis in 2007.

The data comes as the Amazon heads into the height of its deforestation season, which typically run from May through September, when rain across much of the region is at a minimum. For the past 15 years, deforestation has normally peaked in July.

Average monthly deforestation detected by DETER, Apr 2007-Jun 2022

Average monthly deforestation detected by DETER, Apr 2007-Jun 2022

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon has been on an upward trend since 2012, reversing a near-decade-long decline in the rate of forest clearing. About 20% of the Brazilian Amazon’s rainforest has been lost since the 1970s.

Scientists have warned that the Amazon may be approaching a tipping point where rainfall declines precipitously, leading to large-scale die-off of the region’s rainforest.

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, 2006-2021 according to INPE. Data for 2021 is preliminary.

Annual deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, 2006-2021 according to INPE. 

*

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: Global Forest Watch forest cover change alerts near Porto Velho in the State of Rondônia, Brazil in 2022. (Source: Mongabay)

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.

***

One of the outcomes of the alleged new SARS Covid virus that publicly emerged in 2019 is that the medical specialization of virology has been raised to a stature almost Godlike in the media. Few understand the origins of virology and its elevation into a leading role in today’s medicine practice. For this we need to look at the origins and politics of America’s first medical research institute, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, today Rockefeller University, and their work on what they claimed was a polio virus.

In 1907 an outbreak of a sickness in New York City gave the director of the Rockefeller Institute, Simon Flexner, MD, a golden opportunity to lay claim to discovery of an invisible “virus” caused by what was arbitrarily called poliomyelitis. The word poliomyelitis simply means inflammation of the spinal cord’s grey matter. There were some 2,500 New Yorkers, mostly children, designated with some form of poliomyelitis, including paralysis and even death, that year.

Flexner’s Fraud

The most striking aspect of the entire polio saga in the USA during the first half of the 20th Century was the fact that every key phase of the business was controlled by people tied to what became the Rockefeller medical cabal. This fraud started with claims by the Director of the Rockefeller Institute, Simon Flexner, that he and his colleague, Paul A. Lewis, had “isolated” a pathogen, invisible to the eye, smaller even than bacteria, which they claimed caused the paralyzing sickness in a series of outbreaks in the US. How did they come to this idea?

In a paper published in 1909 in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Flexner claimed he and Lewis had isolated the poliomyelitis virus responsible. He reported they had successfully “passaged” poliomyelitis through several monkeys, from monkey to monkey. They began by injecting diseased human spinal cord tissue of a young boy who had died, presumably from the virus, into the brains of monkeys. After a monkey fell ill, a suspension of its diseased spinal cord tissue was injected into the brains of other monkeys who also fell ill.

They proclaimed that the Rockefeller Institute doctors had thus proven poliomyelitis virus causality for the mysterious disease. They hadn’t done anything of the sort. Flexner and Lewis even admitted that:

“We failed utterly to discover bacteria, either in film preparations or in cultures, that could account for the disease; and, since among our long series of propagations of the virus in monkeys not one animal showed, in the lesions, the cocci described by some previous investigators, and we had failed to obtain any such bacteria from the human material studied by us, we felt that they could be excluded from consideration.”

What they then did was to make a bizarre supposition, a leap of faith, not a scientific claim. They took their hypothesis of viral exogenous agency and made it fact, with no proof whatever. They asserted: Therefore, …the infecting agent of epidemic poliomyelitis belongs to the class of the minute and filterable viruses that have not thus far been demonstrated with certainty under the microscope. Therefore?

Simon Flexner simply asserted it “must” be a polio virus killing the monkeys, because they could find no other explanation. In fact he did not look for another source of the illnesses. This was not scientific isolation. It was wild speculation: “…not thus far been demonstrated with certainty under the microscope.” They admitted this in a December 18, 1909 follow up in JAMA, titled, THE NATURE OF THE VIRUS OF EPIDEMIC POLIOMYELITIS.

The so-called “virus” they were injecting into monkeys was hardly pure. It also contained an undetermined amount of contaminants. It included “pureed spinal cord, brain, fecal matter, even flies were ground up and injected into monkeys to induce paralysis.” Until Jonas Salk won approval from the US Government in April 1955 for a polio vaccine, no scientific proof of existence of a virus causing poliomyelitis, or infantile paralysis as it was commonly known, had been proven. That is the case to this day. The medical world all took Flexner’s word that it “must” be a virus.

Rockefeller Institute, Flexner and the American Medical Association

The Rockefeller Institute was founded from the Standard Oil fortune of John D. Rockefeller in 1901, to be America’s first biomedical institute. It was modelled on France’s Pasteur Institute (1888) and Germany’s Robert Koch Institute (1891). Its first Director, Simon Flexner, played a pivotal and most criminal role in the evolution of what became approved American medical practice. The Rockefeller goal was to completely control American medical practice and transform it into an instrument, at least initially, for promotion of medical drugs approved by the Rockefeller interests. By then they were looking to monopolize medical drugs produced from their petroleum refining, as they had done with oil.

Image on the right: Simon Flexner (Licensed under the public domain)

Picture of Simon Flexner.jpg

As Rockefeller Institute head, Simon Flexner, was publishing his inconclusive but highly acclaimed studies on polio, he arranged for his brother, Abraham Flexner, a school teacher with no medical background, to head a joint study by the American Medical Association (AMA), the Rockefeller General Education Board, and the Carnegie Foundation founded by Rockefeller’s close friend Andrew Carnegie.

The 1910 study was titled, The Flexner Report, and its ostensible purpose was to investigate the quality of all US medical schools. The outcome of the report was, however, predetermined. Ties between the well-endowed Rockefeller Institute and the AMA went through the corrupt AMA head, George H. Simmons.

Simmons was also the editor of the influential Journal of the American Medical Association, a publication delivered to some 80,000 doctors across America. He reportedly wielded absolute power over the doctors’ association. He controlled the rising ad revenues for drug companies to promote their drugs to AMA doctors in his journal, a highly lucrative business. He was a key part of the Rockefeller medical coup that was to completely redefine acceptable medical practice away from remedial or preventive treatment to use of often deadly drugs and expensive surgeries. As head of the AMA Simmons realized that the competition from a proliferation of medical schools, including then-recognized chiropractic, osteopathy, homeopathy and natural medicine, was lessening income of his AMA doctors, as the number of medical schools had increased from around 90 in 1880 to over 150 in 1903.

Abraham Flexner, former headmaster of a private school, toured various US medical schools in 1909 and recommended that fully half of the 165 medical schools be closed, as what he defined as “sub-standard.” This reduced competition from other approaches to healing diseases. They ruthlessly targeted then-widespread naturopathic medical schools, chiropractic ones, osteopaths as well as independent allopathic schools unwilling to join the AMA regime.

Then Rockefeller money went to the select schools with a proviso that professors be vetted by the Rockefeller Institute and the curriculum focus on drugs and surgery as treatment, not prevention, nor nutrition, nor toxicology as possible causes and solutions. They had to accept Pasteur’s germ theory of disease, which claims one germ to one disease reductionism. Rockefeller-controlled media launched a coordinated witch-hunt against all forms of alternative medicine, herbal remedies, natural vitamins and chiropractic–anything not controlled by Rockefeller patented drugs.

By 1919 the Rockefeller General Education Board and the Rockefeller Foundation had paid out more than $5,000,000 to Johns Hopkins, Yale and Washington University in St. Louis medical schools. In 1919 John D. Rockefeller granted another $20,000,000 in securities, “for the advancement of medical education in the United States.” That would be comparable to about $340 million today, a huge sum. In short the Rockefeller money interests had hijacked American medical education and medical researchby the 1920’s.

Creating Virology

This medical takeover, backed by the most influential doctors’ organization, the AMA, and its corrupt head, Simmons, allowed Simon Flexner to literally create modern virology under Rockefeller rules. The highly controversial Thomas Milton Rivers, as director of The Rockefeller Institute’s virology laboratory, established virology as an independent field, separate from bacteriology, during the 1920s. They realized they could manipulate far easier when they could claim deadly pathogens that were invisible germs or “viruses.” Ironically virus comes from Latin for poison.

Virology, a reductionist medical fraud, was a creation of the Rockefeller medical cabal. That highly important fact is buried in the annals of medicine today. Diseases such as smallpox or measles or poliomyelitis were declared caused by invisible pathogens called specific viruses. If scientists could “isolate” the invisible virus, theoretically they could find vaccines to protect people from harm. So their theory went. It was a huge boon for the Rockefeller cartel of pharmaceutical companies, which at the time included American Home Products which falsely promoted drugs with no proof of effect, such as Preparation H for Hemorrhoids, or Advil for pain relief; Sterling Drug,which took over the US assets including Aspirin of German Bayer AG after World War I; Winthrop Chemical; American Cyanamid and its subsidiary Lederle Laboratories; Squibb and Monsanto.

Soon virus researchers at the Rockefeller Institute, in addition to claiming discovery of the poliomyelitis virus, claimed to discover the viruses that caused smallpox, mumps, measles and yellow fever. Then they announced “discovery” of preventive vaccines for pneumonia and yellow fever. All of these “discoveries” announced by the Institute proved false. With the control of the research in the new area of virology, the Rockefeller Institute, in collusion with Simmons at AMA and his equally corrupt successor, Morris Fishbein, could promote new patented vaccines or drug “remedies” in the influential AMA journal that went to every member doctor in America. Drug companies refusing to pay for ads in the AMA journal were blackballed by the AMA.

Controlling Polio Research

Image below: Rockefeller University Main gates on York Avenue (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Simon Flexner and the highly-influential Rockefeller Institute succeeded in 1911 in having the symptoms that were being called poliomyelitis to be entered into the US Public Health Law as a “contagious, infectious disease caused by an air-borne virus.” Yet even they admitted they had not proven how the disease enters the body of humans. As one experienced doctor pointed out in a medical journal in 1911, “Our present knowledge of the possible methods of contagion is based almost entirely upon the work done in this city at the Rockefeller Institute.” In 1951 Dr. Ralph Scobey, a critic of the Rockefeller rush to judgment on polio contagion, noted, “This of course placed reliance on animal experiments rather than on clinical investigations…” Scobey also pointed to the lack of proof poliomyelitis was contagious: “…children afflicted with the disease were kept in general hospital wards and that not a single one of the other inmates of the wards of the hospital was affected with the disease.” The general attitude at that time was summed up in 1911: “It seems to us despite the lack of absolute proof, that the best interests of the community would be conserved by our regarding the disease from a contagious standpoint.(sic).

By having poliomyelitis symptoms classified as a highly contagious disease caused by an invisible, alleged exogenous or external virus, the Rockefeller Institute and the AMA were able to cut off any serious research for alternative explanations such as exposure to chemical pesticides or other toxins, to explain the seasonal outbreaks of illness and paralysis, even death, mostly in very young children. That was to have fatal consequences lasting to the present.

Enter DDT

In his 1952 statement to the US House of Representatives investigating the possible dangers of chemicals in food products, Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. noted,

“For almost half a century poliomyelitis investigations have been directed towards a supposed exogenous virus that enters the human body to cause the disease. The manner in which the Public Health Law is now stated, imposes only this type of investigation. No intensive studies have been made, on the other hand, to determine whether or not the so-called virus of poliomyelitis is an autochthonous chemical substance that does not enter the human body at all, but simply results from an exogenous factor or factors, for example, a food poison.”

Toxins as cause were not investigated, despite huge evidence.

During the 1930s with economic depression and then war, few new major outbreaks of poliomyelitis were noted. However, immediately after the end of World War II, notably, the polio drama exploded in dimension. Beginning 1945, every summer more and more children across America were diagnosed with poliomyelitis and hospitalized. Less than 1% of the cases were actually tested via blood or urine tests. Some 99% were diagnosed by merely the presence of symptoms such as acute pain in extremities, fever, upset stomach, diarrhea.

In 1938, with the support of presumed polio victim, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (March of Dimes) was founded to solicit tax-exempt donations to fund polio research. A German doctor and researcher, Dr Henry Kumm, came to the US and joined the Rockefeller Institute in 1928 where he stayed until joining the National Foundation in 1951 as Director of Polio Research. Kumm was joined at the National Foundation by another key Rockefeller Institute veteran, the so-called “father of virology,” Thomas M. Rivers, who chaired the foundation’s vaccine research advisory committee overseeing the research of Jonas Salk. These two Rockefeller Institute key figures thus controlled funds for polio research including developing a vaccine.

During the Second World War, while still at Rockefeller Institute, Henry Kumm was a consultant to the US Army where he oversaw field studies in Italy. There Kumm directed field studies for the use of DDT against typhus and malarial mosquitoes in the marshes near Rome and Naples. DDT had been patented as an insecticide by Swiss drug firm Geigy and their US branch in 1940, and first authorized for use on US Army soldiers in 1943 as a general disinfectant against head lice, mosquitoes and many other insects. Until war’s end almost all DDT production in the US went to the military. In 1945 the chemical companies looked eagerly for new markets. They found them.

Image on the right is from Beyond Pesticides

DDT Exposure During Early Life Associated with Increased Risk of Breast Cancer - Beyond Pesticides Daily News Blog

In early 1944, US newspapers triumphantly reported that typhus, “the dreaded plague that has followed in the wake of every great war in history,” was no longer a threat to American troops and their allies thanks to the army’s new “louse-killing” powder, DDT. In an experiment in Naples, American soldiers dusted more than a million Italians with DDT dissolved with kerosene (!), killing the body lice that spread typhus.

Rockefeller Institute’s Henry Kumm and the US Army knew that, as one researcher put it, “DDT was a poison, but it was safe enough for war. Any person harmed by DDT would be an accepted casualty of combat.” The US Government “restricted” a report on insecticides issued by the Office of Scientific Research and Development in 1944 that warned against the cumulative toxic effects of DDT in humans and animals. Dr Morris Biskind noted in a 1949 article, “As DDT is a cumulative poison, it is inevitable that large-scale intoxication of the American population would occur. In 1944, Smith and Stohlman of the National Institutes of Health, after an extensive study of the cumulative toxicity of DDT, pointed out, “The toxicity of DDT combined with its cumulative action and absorbability from the skin places a definite health hazard on its use.” Their warnings were ignored by higher officials.

Instead, after 1945, all across America DDT was promoted as the miracle new, “safe” pesticide, much like Monsanto’s Roundup with glyphosate three decades later. DDT was said to be harmless to humans. But no one in government was seriously scientifically testing that claim. One year later in 1945 as the war ended, US newspapers praised the new DDT as a “magic” substance, a “miracle.” Time called DDT “one of the great scientific discoveries of World War II.”

Despite isolated warnings of untested side effects, that it was a persistent, toxic chemical which easily accumulates in the food chain, the US Government approved DDT for general use in 1945. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), controlled by the Rockefeller-AMA-drug interests, established as “safe” a DDT content of up to 7 parts per million in foods, though no one had proven such. The DDT chemical companies fed the press with photos and anecdotes. Newspapers enthusiastically reported how the new miracle chemical, DDT, was being tested in the US against mosquitoes in the South believed carrying malaria, as well as “preserving Arizona vineyards, West Virginia orchards, Oregon potato fields, Illinois cornfields, and Iowa dairies.” DDT was everywhere in the USA in the late 1940s.

The US Government claimed DDT, unlike arsenic and other insecticides used before the war, was harmless to humans, even infants, and could be used liberally. Beginning 1945 cities like Chicago sprayed public beaches, parks, swimming pools. Housewives bought home aerosol spray DDT dispensers to spray the kitchen and especially childrens’ rooms, even their matrasses. Farmers were told to spray their crops and their animals, especially dairy cows, with DDT. In postwar America DDT was being promoted, above all by Rockefeller drug companies like American Home Products with its Black Flag aerosol DDT spray, and Monsanto. From 1945 through 1952 the US production of DDT increased tenfold.

As presumed cases of polio literally exploded across the USA after 1945 the theory was advanced, with no proof, that the crippling polio disease was transmitted, not by toxic pesticide chemicals like DDT, but by mosquitoes or flies to humans, most especially young children or infants. The message was that DDT can safely protect your family from the crippling polio. Officially listed polio cases went from some 25,000 in 1943 before US civilian use of DDT, to over 280,000 cases in 1952 at the peak, more than a tenfold increase.

In October 1945 DDT, which had been used by the US Army under supervision of Rockefeller Institute’s Henry Kumm as noted, was authorized by the US Government for general use as an insecticide against mosquitoes and flies. Dissenting scientists warning of toxic effects of DDT in humans and animals were silenced. Families were told DDT could save their children from the dreaded polio by killing the feared insects.

The US Department of Agriculture advised farmers to wash their dairy cows with a solution of DDT to combat mosquitoes and flies. Cornfields were aerial sprayed with DDT as well as fruit orchards. However it was incredibly persistent and its toxic effect on plants and vegetables were such it could not be washed off. Year-by-year from 1945 through 1952 the amount of DDT sprayed across the US increased. Notably, so too did the number of human cases of poliomyelitis.

Worst Polio Epidemic

By the beginning of the 1950s increasing attention was given in the US Congress and among farmers as to the possible dangers of such heavy pesticide use—not only DDT, but also the even more toxic BHC (benzene hexachloride). In 1951 Morton Biskind, a physician who had successfully treated several hundred patients with DDT poisoning, testified to the US House of Representatives on the possible link of paralytic polio to toxins, specifically DDT and BHC. He noted,

The introduction for uncontrolled general use by the public of the insecticide “DDT” (chlorophenothane) and the series of even more deadly substances that followed, has no previous counterpart in history. Beyond question, no other substance known to man was ever before developed so rapidly and spread indiscriminately over so large a portion of the earth in so short a time. This is the more surprising as, at the time DDT was released for public use, a large amount of data was already available in the medical literature showing that this agent was extremely toxic for many different species of animals, that it was cumulatively stored in the body fat and that it appeared in the milk. At this time a few cases of DDT poisoning in human beings had also been reported. These observations were almost completely ignored or misinterpreted.”

Biskind further testified to Congress in late 1950,

“Early last year I published a series of observations on DDT poisoning in man. Since shortly after the last war a large number of cases had been observed by physicians all over the country in which a group of symptoms occurred, the most prominent feature of which was gastroenteritis, persistently recurrent nervous symptoms, and extreme muscular weakness…”

He described several case examples of patients whose severe symptoms including paralysis disappeared when exposure to DDT and related toxins was eliminated:

“My original experience on more than 200 cases which I reported early last year has since been considerably extended. My subsequent observations have not only confirmed the view that DDT is responsible for a great deal of otherwise inexplicable human disability…”

Also noted was the fact that polio cases were always most in summer months when DDT spraying against insects was maximum.

The Rockefeller Institute operatives and the AMA, via their agents in the US Government, created the 1946-1952 USA health emergency called polio. They did so by knowingly promoting the highly toxic DDT as a safe way to control the mythical insect spreaders of the feared disease. Their propaganda campaign convinced the American population that DDT was the key to stop spread of poliomyelitis.

Polio Suddenly Declines

Under leadership of the two Rockefeller Institute doctors, Henry Kumm and Thomas Rivers, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (NFIP) rejected critics such as Biskind and Scobey. Natural remedial treatment, such as using intravenous Vitamin C for the infantile paralysis, were rejected out of hand as “quackery.” In April 1953, leading Rockefeller Institute DDT consultant, Dr Henry Kumm, became Director of Polio Research for NFIP. He funded the polio vaccine research of Jonas Salk.

One courageous doctor in North Carolina, Dr. Fred R. Klenner, who had also studied chemistry and physiology, had the idea to use large doses of intravenous ascorbic acid—Vitamin C—on the hypothesis that his patients were victims of toxin poisoning and that Vitamin C was a powerful detox. This was well before Dr Linus Pauling’s Nobel Prize research on Vitamin C. Klenner had remarkable success within days for more than 200 patients in the summer epidemics of 1949 to 1951. The Rockefeller Institute and the AMA had no interest in the remedial prospects. They and the Rockefeller-controlled National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis were only funding polio vaccine development, based on the unproven Flexner claim that polio was a contagious virus, not a result of environmental poison.

Then beginning sometime in 1951-1952, as polio cases were at an all-time high, something unexpected began to appear. The number of cases diagnosed as polio in the US began to decline. The decline in polio victims was dramatic, year by year until 1955, well before the National Foundation and Jonas Salk’s polio vaccine was approved for public use and was widespread.

About a year before the sudden decline in polio cases, farmers, whose dairy cows were suffering severe effects of the DDT, were advised by the US Department of Agriculture to reduce DDT use. Rising public concern about how safe DDT was for humans, including publicized US Senate hearings on DDT and Polio in 1951 also led to a significant decline in DDT exposure into 1955, even though DDT was not officially banned in the US until 1972.

So-called “polio” cases fell by some two-thirds in that 1952-1956 time, in a remarkable parallel to the decline in DDT use. It was well after that decline, in late 1955 and 1956, that the Rockefeller-developed Salk polio vaccine was first administered in large populations. Salk and the AMA gave all credit to the vaccine. Deaths and paralysis as a result of the Salk vaccine were papered over. The Government changed the definition of polio to further reduce official cases. Simultaneously, cases of similar polio-like spinal cord nerve diseases– acute flaccid paralysis, chronic fatigue syndrome, encephalitis, meningitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, muscular sclerosis—rose notably.

Why it Matters

Over a century ago the world’s richest man, oil baron John D. Rockefeller, and his circle of advisors set about to completely reorganize how medicine was practiced in the USA and the rest of the world. The role of the Rockefeller Institute and figures like Simon Flexner literally oversaw the invention of a colossal medical fraud around claims that an invisible contagious extraneous germ, the polio virus, caused acute paralysis and even death in young people. They politically banned any efforts to link the disease to toxin poisoning, whether from DDT or arsenic pesticides or even contaminated vaccine poisoning. Their criminal project included intimate cooperation with the leadership of the AMA and control of the emerging drug industry, as well as of medical education. The same Rockefeller group financed Nazi eugenics at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Germany in the 1930s as well as the American Eugenics Society. In the 1970s they financed the creation of patented GMO seeds which were all developed by the group of Rockefeller chemical pesticide companies—Monsanto, DuPont, Dow.

Today this control of public health and the medical industrial complex is exercised by David Rockefeller’s protegé and eugenics advocate, Bill Gates, self-appointed czar over the WHO and world vaccines. Dr Tony Fauci, head of NIAID, dictates vaccine mandates without evidence. The fraud behind the polio virus scandal after World War II has been refined with use of computer models and other ruses today, to advance one alleged deadly virus after the other, from Covid19 to Monkeypox to HIV. As with polio, none of those has been scientifically isolated and proven to cause the diseases claimed. None.

The same tax-free Rockefeller Foundation today, posing as a philanthropic charity, is at the heart of the global medical tyranny behind covid19 and the eugenics agenda of the World Economic Forum Great Reset.

Their poliomyelitis virus model helped them create this dystopian medical tyranny. We are told, “trust the science.”

*

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.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics.

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

Featured image is from NEO


Seeds of Destruction: Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation

Author Name: F. William Engdahl
ISBN Number: 978-0-9879389-2-3
Year: 2007
Product Type: PDF File

Price: $9.50

This skilfully researched book focuses on how a small socio-political American elite seeks to establish control over the very basis of human survival: the provision of our daily bread. “Control the food and you control the people.”

This is no ordinary book about the perils of GMO. Engdahl takes the reader inside the corridors of power, into the backrooms of the science labs, behind closed doors in the corporate boardrooms.

The author cogently reveals a diabolical world of profit-driven political intrigue, government corruption and coercion, where genetic manipulation and the patenting of life forms are used to gain worldwide control over food production. If the book often reads as a crime story, that should come as no surprise. For that is what it is.

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.

***

An interview with President Biden aired on Israeli TV Wednesday where he said the US would be willing to use force against Iran as a “last resort.”

The interview with Israel’s Channel 12 was conducted in Washington before Biden departed for Israel, and the broadcast aired the same day he arrived in the country. When asked if the US would use force against Iran’s nuclear program, Biden said, “as a last resort, yes.”

“Iran cannot get a nuclear weapon,” Biden said. While Iran has been stockpiling more uranium, none of it is enriched at the 90% needed for weapons-grade, and there is no indication Iran has decided to develop a bomb.

Israel often carries out covert attacks against Iran’s civilian nuclear program, but has been threatening to take more overt action lately and has held military drills simulating an attack on Iran. When asked if he received assurances from Israel that it wouldn’t act alone against Iran without notifying the US, Biden wouldn’t say. “I’m not going to discuss that,” he said.

A revival of the Iran nuclear deal, known as the JCPOA, should alleviate any US concerns about Iran developing a nuclear weapon as it would put Iran’s nuclear program under stringent restrictions, but Biden has taken a hard line on the issue.

Biden told Channel 12 that he wanted to revive the JCPOA but said he would walk away from the deal if its restoration was contingent on lifting the terrorist designation of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The Trump administration designated the IRGC as a terror organization after pulling out of the JCPOA. The sweeping designation means any person that was ever in the IRGC is subject to US sanctions, even if they were conscripts that served in a non-combat role.

Ahead of recent indirect JCPOA negotiations with the US in Doha, Iran reportedly dropped its demand to lift the IRGC designation. But talks made no progress, and the US still accused Iran of making demands not related to the nuclear deal. The Biden administration has taken the position that any sanctions not related to Iran’s nuclear program or the economic benefits Tehran is supposed to receive from the JCPOA cannot be lifted.

But the Trump administration imposed an enormous number of sanctions on Iran after pulling out of the JCPOA. And during President Trump’s final weeks in office, his administration added more sanctions with the goal of preventing Biden from being able to rejoin the JCPOA.

*

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.

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

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

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

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

***

Adam Tooze, a financial crisis historian and director of the European Institute at Columbia University, warns the world is facing a “polycrisis” — a perfect storm of multiple global socioeconomic influences

Polycrisis is not merely the presence of several crises at once. Rather, it refers to a situation where the whole is more dangerous than the sum of the parts, as each individual crisis escalates, compounds and worsens other simultaneous crises

Tooze predicts several crises may erupt and converge over the next six to 18 months, including a food crisis, pandemic outbreaks, stagflation, a Eurozone sovereign debt crisis and potential nuclear war

While a majority of economists are optimistic and predict only a mild and temporary recession to hit the United States in 2023, real-time evidence doesn’t look good. Consumer spending, domestic investments, mortgage applications, manufacturing and U.S. railroad cyclical cargo loads are all declining, while inflation and interest rates are rising. Consumer sentiment, an indication of people’s confidence in the economy and their willingness to spend, is also tanking at a record rate

Two strategies that can strengthen individual and local resilience to the stresses facing us are the creation of local food systems and the strengthening of neighborhood and community connections. Both reduce individuals’ reliance on government handouts, and by extension, they’re less likely to be forced into these new Great Reset slave systems

*

In a recent Substack article1 Adam Tooze, a financial crisis historian and director of the European Institute at Columbia University,2 reviews and explains what he calls the impending “polycrisis of doom” — a perfect storm of global socioeconomic influences that signal trouble ahead.

Big Picture Crisis Modeling

Using charts and “krisenbilder,” i.e., “crisis pictures,” Tooze illustrates the many interconnected stress patterns at play on the global scene. The first graphic below illustrated the situation as of January 21, 2022.

interconnected stress patterns

The second graphic below shows the complexity caused by the Russia-Ukraine conflict as of February 24, 2022. As noted by Tooze:3

“What was once a relatively legible map has become a tangled mess … The war has had the impact it has because it has exacerbated existing tensions. Food prices were already rising in 2021 and provoking warnings of a crisis to come.

Energy markets were stressed well before the war broke out. Now both stressors are knotted together with the war. I have highlighted in red what emerge as a series of macroscopic risks, all of which may come to a head in the next 6-18 months.”

complexity caused by the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Many Crises Are Hitting All at Once

As noted by Tooze, we now face a series of significant challenges, and a) they’re hitting us all at once, and b) several of them reinforce and worsen each other. Also notable is the fact that there’s great uncertainty associated with some of them.

What might be the pandemic potential of new COVID variants? Will the Russia-Ukraine conflict escalate into a nuclear war? There’s really no way to predict with any amount of accuracy how those scenarios will play out. On the other hand, some of these forces offset or ameliorate others but, again, it’s hard to predict the likelihood of them happening.

In the following chart, Tooze summarizes the major crisis points and their likely influence on each other. Note he refers to these interactions as “entirely provisional and highly debatable.”

Indeed, some of his readers point out several additional influences that could be added into the mix, such as the weaponization of the U.S. dollar, the deplatforming of Russia from the SWIFT system, U.S. meddling in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the push to expand NATO, allowing health agencies to dictate economic policy and much more.

Still, Tooze’s analysis — incomplete as it may be — can be useful for those willing to ponder the potential ramifications of global interactions that may be facing us over the next six to 18 months.

How do risks interact

Predictions for 2023-2024

As explained by Tooze, “polycrisis” is not merely the presence of several crises at once. Rather, it’s “a situation … where the whole is even more dangerous than the sum of the parts.”4

The reason why the whole ends up being more dangerous than any combination of crises put together is the way they escalate, compound and worsen each other in a symbiotic fashion. And, if Tooze is correct, we may find ourselves smack-dab in the middle of this polycrisis sometime in the next six to 18 months, or 2023 going into 2024. Tooze explains:5

“What this matrix helps us to do is to distinguish types of risk by the degree and type of their interconnectedness. The risk of nuclear escalation stands out for the fact that it is not significantly affected by any of the other risks.

It will be decided by the logic of the war and decision-making in Moscow and Washington. A food crisis does not make a nuclear escalation any more, or less likely. On the other hand, a nuclear escalation would, to say the least, dramatically escalate several of the other risks.

Continuing inflation will likely function as a driver of several other risks, but those risks in turn (COVID, recession, EZ sov debt crisis) will likely deescalate the risk of inflation.

I would not say that this is a forecast, but it does bias me towards thinking that inflation will be transitory. Most of the big shocks that we may expect, tend to be deflationary in their impact.

Conversely, a recession seems ever more likely in part because the effect of most of the bad shocks we may expect — from COVID, mounting inflation, or a fiscal deadlock in Congress — point in that direction.

The obvious next step is to ask whether the feedback loops in the matrix are positive or negative. So, for instance, a recession makes a Eurozone sovereign debt crisis more likely, which in turns would unleash serious deflationary pressures across Europe.

Conversely, inflation in fact seems self-calming. The effects it produces tend rather the dampen inflation than to feed an acceleration. At least as I have specified the matrix here.

A global hunger crisis seems alarmingly likely in part because all the other major risks will exacerbate that problem. A hunger crisis, however, will largely affect poor and powerless people in low-income countries, so it is unlikely to feedback in exacerbating any of the other major crises.

It is an effect of forces operating elsewhere, rather than itself a driver of escalation. To this extent the matrix becomes a way of charting the power hierarchy of uneven and combined development. Some people receive shocks. Others dish them out.”

Near-Term Outlook for the US Economy

In a July 1, 2022, Substack article,6 Tooze takes a deeper dive into the more near-term outlook for the United States specifically. The Federal reserve is now tightening its monetary policy “more steeply than at any time since the early 1980s,” while inflation remains “stubbornly high” at the same time.

The question on everyone’s mind is, are we in a recession, and might it worsen into a depression? Recession is when a country experiences a decline in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for two consecutive quarters, while a depression is characterized by more long-term reductions in economic activity.

According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the U.S. was officially in recession as of February 2020.7,8 When the economy grew 5.7% in 2021, a rebound was declared,9 but then the GDP dropped again, first by an annual rate of 1.6% in the first quarter of 2022, followed by a negative 2.1% in the second quarter,10 which technically placed the U.S. in recession territory yet again.

Tooze notes that a majority of economists are optimistic and predict only a mild and temporary recession to hit in 2023, but real-time evidence doesn’t look good. As of early July 2022, consumer spending, domestic investments, mortgage applications, manufacturing and U.S. railroad cyclical cargo loads are all declining, while inflation and interest rates are rising.11,12

Consumer sentiment, an indication of people’s confidence in the economy and their willingness to spend, is also tanking at a record rate.13 Tooze ends his review stating:

“All told, you might say that this is a gloomy outlook. And there are those who are increasingly skeptical of the possibility of a soft landing. But, it is surely far too early to tell.

If the aim of the game is to control inflation by bringing about a slowdown, then the evidence we are seeing, so far, is precisely what you would look for. What remains to be seen is how the different recessionary forces interact, and whether they brew up into really heavy weather.”

Two Strategies to Strengthen Your Resilience

While we may not be able to accurately predict just how bad the situation will get, it seems prudent to say that we’re all facing some hard times. One factor that Tooze does not include in any of his analyses is the now-apparent fact that some of these crises are intentionally manufactured, with the goal of breaking apart and dismantling current systems in order to justify the introduction of entirely new systems.

The financial system and the food system are two key examples where intentional deconstruction appears to be taking place. Basically, what the technocratic elitists who fancy themselves rulers of the world intend to argue is that because the systems are no longer working, they must be “built back better.”

However, the new systems will in no way, shape or form benefit the population at large. This is true globally, not just in the United States. These new systems, delineated under the flag of The Great Reset, are slave systems which, when networked together, will form a virtual digital prison.

Every person on the planet will be under their collective thumb, as the technocrats will own everything while the rest of humanity will be allocated resources such as food and energy based on obedience criteria.

The good news is that more and more people are waking up to what this “deep state” cabal is up to, and that’s another wild card that can upend things and, hopefully, lessen the impacts of some of these crises. Two strategies that can strengthen individual and local resilience to the stresses facing us are the creation of local food systems14 and the strengthening of neighborhood and community connections.

By building a strong local food system, you reduce food insecurity, and by building a community network of specialists, you reduce the effects of a crumbling financial system as you can simply barter goods and services.

Social cohesion also offers many psychological benefits.15 Local food systems and community networks both also reduce individuals’ reliance on government handouts, and by extension, they’re less likely to be forced into these new Great Reset slave systems.

How to Build a Local Food System

As explained by Brian Williams, a former local food planner in Columbus, Ohio, in a 2017 StrongTown article,16 building a strong local food system goes beyond community gardens, farmer’s markets and community-supported agriculture (CSA) shares.

While these are valuable gateways, they don’t go far enough. He provides several excellent suggestions for those willing to spearhead a local food movement in their own hometown, including the following. Williams includes several other suggestions, which you can read through in his article, but these are some of the central ones:17

Secure local-purchasing commitments from schools, hospitals, colleges, restaurants, local grocers and other institutions — Such commitments are crucial for developing the necessary infrastructure for a strong local food market.

When you have demand from large institutions, you can then bring farmers, food processors and distributors into a complete supply chain network, as the contracts will be large enough to support everyone and make the endeavor financially viable.

Enlist support from existing food processors and distributors — Many small-scale, family-run businesses struggle to make ends meet, and may be more than willing to become part of your local network. Two key components are slaughterhouses and trucking companies to distribute the food from one place to another. But you also need food processors that can wash, pack and dice or cut the food.

Build a network of local farmers willing to collaborate — Individual farmers may not be able to meet the demands of large contracts, but pooling the output from several farms might.

Build the economic infrastructure — If certain services are not available, determine what’s needed and put out a call out to the community. You never know who might be willing to start a company to fill a local need.

Keep in mind that financial productivity is key for making a local food system work. Everyone involved must benefit financially, or the system won’t be sustainable. The good news is that a local network keeps the money inside the community, and it’s easier to stay financially viable when nothing is being siphoned off to out-of-state players that don’t spend their earnings within your community.

Build relationships with local public health officials, economic development officials, legislative representatives and bankers — As noted by Williams, “Public health officials … regulate local food-related businesses. If their regulation seems too rigid or unrealistic, economic development experts can help iron out the details and look for other opportunities.

Food banks already have trucks and are possible partners in distribution challenges. Bankers have money to lend to farmers who want to expand, distributors who need another truck, and processors that are growing to meet demand.”

*

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.

Notes

1, 3, 4, 5 Adam Tooze Substack June 24, 2022

2 Institute for Economic Thinking, Adam Tooze Bio

6, 12, 13 Adam Tooze Substack July 1, 2022

7 HKS.Harvard.edu June 16, 2020

8 NPR June 8, 2020

9 MSN January 27, 2022

10, 11 CNBC July 1, 2022

14 Treehugger October 11, 2018

15 NPR January 3, 2013

16, 17 StrongTown August 7, 2017

Featured image is from Mercola

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Economy Expert Explains the Impending ‘Polycrisis of Doom’
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

AI translation from French. Reviewed by GR.

On June 22, 2022, the newspaper Le Devoir announced the release of a vast study entitled “The conspiratorial movement in Quebec”. However, this work was published barely a few days later within the “UNESCO Chair in the Prevention of Radicalization and Violent Extremism” (chaireunesco-prev).

The research report was presented to Pierre Fitzgibbon, Minister of Economy and Innovation of Quebec as part of the call for Solutions to COVID-19.

It contains data obtained by survey on the members of this movement as well as a list of 45 “conspiracy leaders” from Quebec and Canada, including Stéphane Blais, Alexis Cossette-Trudel, Samuel Grenier, Amélie Paul, Daniel Pilon, Daniel Tadros , Maxime Ouimet, Jean-Jacques Crèvecoeur, Lucie Laurier, Mel Goyer and Jonas Colin (The Colin Show).

According to the writers of the report,

“Most of the time, conspiratorial thinking is expressed in bits and pieces, in hints, in suspicions, in ‘proofs’ sometimes structured, sometimes scattered, sometimes even clearly fabricated from scratch. It is like a kind of restaurant “menu” from which individuals can make their choices, according to their preferences, and build their own conspiratorial meal.” 

It is true that some of them too often disseminate information that is incomplete, biased and without solid sources, while begging for multiple donations from their listeners who are often weakened by the “covid” crisis.

Unfortunately, they also regularly—whether consciously or not—disseminate false information, which greatly harms sincere whistleblowers.

On the other hand, in my opinion, Ezra Levant (Rebel News), the psychologist Lucie Mandeville and the lawyer Rocco Galati have no place in this work of the UNESCO Chair. And still in my opinion, Jo L’indigo (Jonathan Blanchette) should be placed in the category of “activists” and not that of “conspiracy theorists” as we generally understand.

But is this report published by the UNESCO-PREV Chair— headed by Concordia, Sherbrooke and Quebec Universities in Montreal—as credible as we are led to believe?

Isn’t it rather a kind of witch hunt with an underlying goal, that of discrediting those among the most honest who have an opinion different from that of the official narrative promoted by governments and the media? “mainstream” , knowing full well that the general public will not distinguish between the wheat and the chaff.

We must not forget that UNESCO is one of those globalist organizations whose ins and outs we already know.

Indeed, UNESCO is an international specialized agency of the United Nations (UN), created on November 16, 1945. Its first director general was Julian Huxley, grandson of eugenicist Thomas Henry Huxley and brother of Aldous Huxley, author of the dystopian sci-fi novel Brave New World . [PDF]

Julian Huxley was a proponent of eugenics as a means of improving the welfare of humanity. 

He saw in eugenics a means of eliminating unwanted variants from the human genetic heritage as a whole.

Following the terrifying results from the abuse of eugenics, Julian Huxley uses the term “transhumanism” to describe the view that man could improve himself through science and technology, especially with the help of eugenics. He writes in his book “ New Bottles for New Wine ”, published in 1957:

“The human species can, if it wishes, transcend itself – not only sporadically, an individual here in one way, an individual there in another way, but in its entirety, as humanity. We need a name for this new belief. Perhaps transhumanism will serve: man remaining man, but transcending himself, realizing new possibilities of and for his human nature. “I believe in transhumanism”: once there are enough people who can really say it, the human species will be on the threshold of a new kind of existence, as different from ours as ours is of that of Peking Man. He will finally consciously accomplish his true destiny.”

Do we not find here the transhumanist philosophy of Yuval Noah Harari, assiduous contributor to the agenda of the World Economic Forum and main adviser to psychopath Klaus Schwab?

It is not so easy to erase the foundations, the past and the spirit of these supranational institutions.

The journalist specializing in federal politics, Boris Proulx, reports that the study by the UNESCO-PREV Chair groups the “conspiracy leaders” into five major ideologies, by ideal type: far-right, anti-government, alterscience, religious, or even inspired. QAnon theories.

“For us, these are voices that give credibility to the movement, either by their previous status or because they are widely followed. […] We had long discussions to find out who we chose, but we are comfortable with each of the names we put there ,” explains study co-signer David Morin, professor at the School of Applied Policy from the University of Sherbrooke and holder of the UNESCO-PREV Chair.

This UNESCO-PREV Chair was created in the fall of 2017 in the wake of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and the report of the Action Plan for the Prevention of Violent Extremism published by the Secretary-General of the United Nations in 2016 . Besides the  “UNESCO Chair in the Prevention of Radicalization and Violent Extremism”works in partnership with the Research and Action on Social Polarizations (RAPS) team, the Canadian Network of Practitioners for the Prevention of Radicalization and Extremism violence (RPC-PREV) and the Center for the Prevention of Radicalization Leading to Violence (CPRLV). The chair is also positioned in line with the XVI Summit of La Francophonie in 2016, during which the Heads of State and Government adopted a resolution on the prevention of radicalization and violent extremism that can lead to terrorism.

Whether one likes the so-called “influencers” cited in the report or not, it’s distressing to see the editors making questionable conflations between dissent, radicalization, violent extremism, and even terrorism ( where exactly the name of the organization comes from). Contrary to what they assert in their preface, the report of the UNESCO-PREV Chair tends to discredit all those who might display an opinion different from the official politico-media narrative concerning current societal issues which are, for the most part , real and very well documented. Being funded among others by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Ministry of Economy and Innovation of Quebec (MÉI), the “UNESCO Chair in the Prevention of Radicalization and Violent Extremism” can in no way claim to be an independent and impartial organization. [Annual report 2021]

According to David Morin, it is important to speak in the media about the influencers of the grand conspiracy. “They’re pretty well-known people [on the internet], so it doesn’t make them any more famous than they already are.” The journalist Boris Proulx affirms that to publish their excesses – and the ideology behind – allows especially to better see the recovery of their ideas in the political speeches. A problem that would affect the Conservative Party of Canada.

“We have one of the two candidates [Pierre Poilievre] who does not hesitate from time to time to send signals to his potential electorate in connection with Davos, the new world order, cryptocurrency… We see that there are attempts of recoveries », laments the co-signer of the study. If the UNESCO-PREV Chair is truly impartial, then why is it specifically targeting the leader of the People’s Party of Canada, Maxime Bernier, as well as the candidate for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, Pierre Poilievre?

Why doesn’t she speak out against the constant misinformation and extremist actions of politicians like François Legault and Justin Trudeau? Much more balanced, columnist Jean-François Nadeau writes in the daily Le Devoir:

“Being together, being part of a society, supposes tolerating that there cannot be unanimity. This turns out to be demanding, more demanding than contenting oneself with affirming to all comers one’s intentions to impose unity on the spot rather than giving oneself, for everyone, the means to create it in the long term.”

I therefore leave it to my readers to read the report of the  UNESCO Chair in the Prevention of Radicalization and Violent Extremism  (chaireunesco-prev), entitled “The conspiratorial movement in Quebec”, and to form their own opinion about it.

For my part, I consider that this document is a propaganda tool like so many others and that its main purpose is to discredit and gag even the most serious independent journalists.

*

Commentary by Jean Tardy, systems engineer, former officer in the Canadian Navy

Here is a comment from Jean Tardy, former officer in the Canadian navy from 1973 to 1989, specialist in underwater weapons (sonar). Mr. Tardy is a systems engineer and researcher in Artificial Intelligence. He created the “Meca Sapiens” architecture to implement digital awareness and provides consulting services under the name of Sysjet inc. He is the author of the book “The Way of Dogma”, which calls on Christians to be aware of the spiritual battle raging around them.

Tuesday, July 5, 2022

That this text is published by UNESCO does not surprise me. This organization actively participates, through its publications, in the promotion of globalist agendas aimed at the imposition of radical transformations through the establishment of totalitarian social controls. I have already reviewed and commented on several of these.

After an initial shock, increasingly credible and well-researched alternative voices have risen to counter the health assault. We are currently (summer 22) experiencing a brief lull. The globalists are preparing the next offensive which will begin this fall. The surprise effect having passed, this one will be more muscular.

As part of these preparations, they are putting in place measures, laws and watchdogs to discredit, censor and penalize alternative media and their spokespersons as brutally as possible. The text of this collective participates in this operation by attempting to provide ideological justifications for this operation.

I will not analyze the entire text here but draw readers’ attention to items 3.1 and 4.1 of the recommendations (page 129) in support of the above:

3.1: Increase access to psychological health care and psychosocial support for radicalized conspiratorial individuals and close victims of conspiracy, in particular by supporting existing structures in the field of radicalization (e.g., Social Polarization Team, CPRLV, InfoSect, etc.);

4.1: Set up an interministerial government structure on disinformation that could be housed at the level of the Ministry of Cybersecurity and Digital. In particular, its mandate would be to gather knowledge on the issue, carry out a strategic watch, guide public policies in this area and improve cooperation and coordination between the various ministries and other actors. It would also include a crisis unit that can be activated in the event of a mass disinformation campaign

*

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 images in this article are from Guy Boulianne

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “The Conspiratorial Movement in Quebec”, Published by the UNESCO Chair in the Prevention of Radicalization and Violent Extremism.
  • Tags: , ,

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 Biden administration said Tuesday it is developing a plan to allow all adults, including those under 50, to receive a second booster shot amid worries of waning immunity among those who were vaccinated and boosted six months ago.

The Biden administration on Tuesday announced a new strategy to manage Omicron subvariant BA.5, now responsible for the majority of COVID-19 cases in the U.S.

As part of its strategy, the White House is developing a plan to allow all adults, including those under 50, to receive a second booster shot amid worries of waning immunity among those who were vaccinated and boosted six months ago.

The announcement comes one week after the Biden administration revealed it had signed a $3.2 billion deal with Pfizer for 105 million additional vaccine doses — with an option for 300 million more — to include reformulated bivalent boosters targeting Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants.

Currently, people age 5 and older are eligible to receive a first COVID-19 vaccine booster dose. A second booster shot is available only to those 50 and older and immunocompromised individuals 12 and older.

The Biden administration hopes swiftly expanding access to booster shots will enable people who already received their first booster dose to receive reformulated shots — not yet authorized — this fall.

In addition, officials want to use up vaccine doses that are reaching their expiration dates and would otherwise be discarded, despite peer-reviewed research showing second and third doses of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine provide protection against the Omicron variant for only a few weeks

Expanding eligibility for booster doses within the next two weeks would allow the Biden administration to use up extra vaccine doses without “getting tangled up with the administration’s planned vaccination campaign” with reformulated boosters this fall, according to The Washington Post.

Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials privately signaled their openness to the strategy.

“This is a really complex decision, and there are pros and cons that need to be carefully weighed,” one official told The Post.

Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and vaccine adviser to the FDA, repeatedly criticized federal officials for what he characterized as “booster mania.”

“I do think [a second booster shot] does make sense for certain groups, but a universal boosting strategy doesn’t make sense,” Offit said.

Ruth Link-Gelles, an epidemiologist who leads the CDC’s task force on vaccine effectiveness, believes a fourth dose provides “substantial additional protection” among those with frail immune systems and healthy adults over 50. But it is “too early to draw conclusions” about a fourth dose in the broader population, she said.

According to CDC officials, there is no U.S. data showing whether a fourth booster would provide protection for people under 50.

While the booster plan still needs approval from regulators and health officials, it is backed by White House coronavirus coordinator Ashish Jha and quadruple-vaccinated Dr. Anthony Fauci, medical advisor to President Biden.

In an interview on Monday, Fauci, who recently had COVID-19 and developed rebound symptomsafter taking Pfizer’s Paxlovid, said he’s “leaning” toward allowing second booster shots for younger adults, pending authorization from the FDA and CDC.

Fauci admitted there was not enough clinical data to strongly recommend those under 50 receive a second booster shot, but said many in that age group received their last shot in November or December and protection against the virus is waning.

Persuading those who haven’t been vaccinated or fully vaccinated to “get the full regime” is “critical,” Fauci said.

“We also need to allow people who are under 50 to get their second booster shot, since it may have been months since many of them got their first booster.”

“The threat to you is now,” Fauci warned during Tuesday’s White House briefing. “Immunity wanes, whether that’s immunity following infection or immunity following the vaccine.”

“If you were infected with BA.1, you really don’t have a lot of good protection against BA.4/5,” — the two Omicron strains that now make up more than 80% of circulating variants as of last week, he added.

Contrary to Fauci’s statements, studies suggest natural immunity to COVID-19 yields better protection and stronger immunity than that provided by COVID-19 vaccines.

There is currently no data on the safety or efficacy of COVID-19 boosters targeting BA.4 and BA.5 variants, as they haven’t been developed yet.

White House bypasses regulatory agencies to push COVID vaccines

Although White House officials said the decision on whether to expand eligibility for a second booster dose lies with the FDA and CDC, the Biden administration has a history of circumventing the process and applying pressure to regulatory agencies to endorse its plans.

“I know that the [FDA] is considering this, looking at it,” Jha said during Tuesday’s White House briefing. “And I know [CDC] scientists are thinking about this and looking at the data as well. The decision is purely up to them.”

Fauci said conversations about booster eligibility have been going on for a while but said the final decision lies with the FDA and CDC.

“We always talked about it, it’s not something new, but we all recognize what the lines of authority are and that’s what we’ll be depending on,” he said.

Yet, Offit said in a recent interview with ZDoggMD that he believed the “fix was in” for modified COVID-19 boosters and felt the FDA’s advisory panel was led during a recent meeting to “vote yes” to reformulate boosters without critical data.

Offit said he believed modified boosters were desired by the Biden administration, which he suggested is politicizing the process.

In September 2021, two senior FDA officials stepped down after the Biden administration sidelined the agency when it announced a plan to begin offering a third booster dose to people who already received two doses of an mRNA vaccine beginning the week of Sept. 20.

At the time, booster doses for the general population had not been authorized by U.S. regulatory agencies and FDA advisors had not met to discuss data and provide recommendations to the agency on whether they should be authorized.

Dr. Marion Gruber, former director of the FDA’s vaccines office and her deputy, Dr. Philip Krause, stepped down because they were upset about the Biden administration’s announcement that adults should get a booster eight months after they received a second shot, people familiar with the decision told The New York Times.

Neither believed there was enough data to justify offering booster shots yet, the sources said, and both viewed the announcement, amplified by President Biden, as pressure on the FDA to quickly authorize them.

U.S. health regulators said there wasn’t enough data to recommend booster doses for the general population.

Yet, the White House moved forward with its plan to make Americans eligible for a third dose, even though the plan first required authorization from the FDA and CDC.

Following the controversy, both the FDA and CDC have bypassed their vaccine advisory panels to expand COVID-19 vaccines or authorize additional doses to broader age groups.

Push for second boosters motivated by fall booster campaign

As The Defender reported, the FDA on June 30 told COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers that any modifications to booster shots for fall would need to target Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5.

Original vaccines based on the Wuhan strain that is no longer circulating will be used for anyone getting their primary series of shots.

The FDA’s announcement came a day after the Biden administration said it had already entered into its $3.2 billion deal with Pfizer to secure additional vaccines and reformulated boosters for a fall booster campaign.

The Biden administration’s deal with Pfizer was announced on June 29, only one day after the FDA’s advisory panel met to discuss whether future COVID-19 booster doses should even be modified.

During the June 28 meeting of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), the committee voted to add an Omicron component to future booster shots but did not decide whether the new booster vaccines should target BA.1 or BA.4/BA.5 before the White House signed its deal with Pfizer.

VRBPAC said it would provide guidance to the FDA in making its decision, which was rendered after the White House made its announcement it had contracted with Pfizer to produce a specific type of modified vaccine targeting the subvariants.

Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said during the meeting he hoped changing the booster would “convince people to go get that booster,” adding the FDA already had plans in the works to begin a booster campaign in October.

Although there have been no clinical trials to date testing modified vaccines with Omicron subvariants in humans, Marks said manufacturers will be “asked to begin clinical trials with modified vaccines containing an omicron BA.4/5 component, as these data will be of use as the pandemic further evolves.”

The FDA did not publicly disclose what data it will need to see to authorize reformulated booster shots — which is a new product — but previous decisions on whether to authorize COVID-19 vaccines for the nation’s youngest age groups involved following a small number of clinical trial participants for only one month, which is not long enough to detect how quickly vaccine efficacy wanes or to discern any long-term adverse events.

*

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.

Megan Redshaw is a staff attorney for Children’s Health Defense and a reporter for The Defender.

Featured image is from CHD

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.

***

 

 

A federal appeals court has rejected a bid by Monsanto owner Bayer AG to head off claims brought by cancer victims alleging that Monsanto failed to warn them of the risks of Roundup.

In a decision handed down Tuesday, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a “failure to warn claim” brought against Monsanto in Georgia by Roundup user John Carson is not preempted by requirements under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (“FIFRA”) as lawyers for Monsanto, and its owner Bayer, have argued.

Bayer has sought – and now failed – in multiple courts to find backing for its argument that it should be protected from allegations that Monsanto failed to warn users of a cancer risk associated with its products. (Bayer bought Monsanto in 2018.)

The company asserts that if it had placed cancer risk warnings on product labels it would have conflicted with provisions of FIFRA that give the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 0versight of labeling language. The EPA has said in it assessment, the herbicides are “not likely” to be carcinogenic.

“It’s another resounding rejection of Monsanto’s preemption defense,” said attorney Brent Wisner, who served as co-counsel for the first trial to take place in the nationwide Roundup litigation, which resulted in a unanimous jury decision finding Monsanto had hidden the cancer risks of its weed killers.

“It is safe to say that their argument is dead.  Every court to consider this issue has sided with plaintiffs,” Wisner said.

Bayer said in a statement that it believes the federal appeals court erred in its ruling.

“We respectfully disagree with the Eleventh Circuit’s decision, as a cancer warning would deviate from Roundup’s EPA-approved labeling, render the product misbranded, and require the company to make a label change that would be contrary to the consistent conclusions of EPA’s scientific assessments for more than four decades. The court’s determination that the FIFRA’s statutory registration process is not sufficiently formal to trigger preemption is inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent, and the company will review its legal options regarding further proceedings. ‘

The company also said in the statement that it “continues to stand fully behind its Roundup products, as the weight of scientific evidence and the conclusions of expert regulators worldwide continue to support the safety of glyphosate-based herbicides and that they are not carcinogenic.”

Carson is one of tens of thousands of people across the United States who have sued Monsanto alleging that their use of, or exposure to, Roundup or other Monsanto herbicides made with a chemical called glyphosate caused them to develop cancer.

The litigation began in 2015 after the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, as a probable human carcinogen with a noted association to non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

According to court filings, Carson used Roundup to treat weeds in his yard for roughly 30 years until he was diagnosed with malignant fibrous histiocytoma. He filed suit against Monsanto in 2017.

Bayer scored a win with the Carson case when the US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia ruled that his failure to warn claim was preempted by FIFRA and a related claim was also preempted for the same reason.

The appeals court ruling Tuesday reverses the district court findings, citing multiple reasons, including the fact that Congress created wide latitude for state regulation in the context of FIFRA. The court also said that the “EPA’s registration process is not sufficiently formal to carry with it the force of law…”

Bayer had gone so far as to ask the US Supreme Court to consider the preemption issue through two other cases the company lost at trial, but the high court rejected the company’s requests.

The twin rejections by the Supreme Court came after another blow to Bayer by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. On June 17 the 9th Circuit panel of judges said in their ruling that the EPA’s 2020 assessment of glyphosate was so deeply flawed that the court was vacating the agency’s human health assessment of the weed killer.

The 9th Circuit panel found that the EPA failed to follow established guidelines for determining cancer risk, ignored important studies, and discounted expert advice from a scientific advisory panel in officially declaring that the weed killer glyphosate was “not likely to be carcinogenic.”

Bayer has been attempting to settle the Roundup litigation, earmarking more than $11 billion for settlements, but while several firms have accepted settlements for their clients,  many others have not and continue to press for trials. Several new trials are scheduled in the next few months.

*

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 Maui Independent

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.

***

What was once the Current Thing has become a massive liability.

Europe is staring down the potential for a continental “Dark Winter,” and as each month passes, fewer countries aligned with the Biden Administration seem willing to maintain the appetite for perpetual warfare over who gets to control Ukraine.

This ruling class squabble has devastated the lives of hundreds of millions of ordinary citizens, but that didn’t change the trajectory of the conflict. It was only when the war effort became deeply unpopular did this consensus change. Poll-testing politicians are keenly aware that in both America and Europe, there is no longer a steady support for delegating untold billions in taxpayer funds and rhetorical support to this campaign.

What does this mean for the war in Ukraine? Don’t be surprised for a conclusion to the Russia-Ukraine conflict sooner rather than later.

Two realities that are worth paying attention to moving forward:

Ukraine is losing, and there are no signs that they can turn the tide of the war

After being pushed back from Kiev in the early days of the war, filling the news media and US/EU politicians with large doses of hopium, the Russian military has narrowed its focus on strategically vital and resource rich areas of Eastern Ukraine. In doing so, Moscow has remained dominant on the battlefield, thanks in large part to its ability to overpower Ukrainian forces with its artillery arsenal. The Zelensky led government is losing, and NATO armies don’t want to continue depreciating their own arsenals to assist in the propping up of its failing client.

In addition to its continuing battlefield supremacy, Russia now has time on its side, thanks to the booming commodity market and Russia’s many willing energy buyers.

Ukraine is in the polar opposite situation. Kiev is becoming a massive financial liability for the West. Even as Western powers have already allocated over 100 billions dollars in weapons and aid to Ukraine, the Zelensky-led government continues to demand incredible sums to sustain the war effort.

In some underreported signal that surfaced over the weekend:

Germany (which largely controls the EU’s finances) has reportedly been blocking a $9 billion dollar tranche to the Zelensky regime, concerned over the country’s ability to remain solvent.

The U.S.-led sanctions regime is collapsing

The U.S.-led sanctions campaign against Russia is not working, and worse, it’s backfiring. The sanctions have transformed an already troubling global energy environment into a full blown crisis.

And nowhere is that crisis more imminent than in Europe.

Europe is in such bad shape right now that their ESG-approved, climate hoaxing eco justice warrior politicians are desperately trying to fire up coal (!) power plants before the lights go out across the continent.

Meanwhile, Russia continues to capitalize on Europe’s energy vulnerability.

The Kremlin is leveraging its energy dominance to put immense pressure on European powers. On Monday, the state-run Gazprom took down its Nord Stream 1 pipeline to Europe for a minimum 10 days, citing “maintenance.” Europe isn’t buying the rhetoric. Moscow’s intentions are crystal clear.

In hindsight, it should be clear by now that the sanctions never had a chance of achieving the stated objective of bankrupting the Russian economy and slowing its military. China, India, and dozens of other countries remained neutral and continued to trade openly with Moscow. Despite U.S. pressure, they did not even consider joining the sanctions effort.

As U.S. sanctions against Russia continue to collapse, the Biden Admin may find itself being able to count the remaining parties to the coalition on one hand.

With all of these continuing crises, coupled with a historic failure on the part of the Biden Administration, don’t be shocked if the war in Ukraine comes to an end sooner rather than later.

*

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 The Dossier

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Current Thing Chaos: Biden Sanctions Collapse, as Ukraine Piles Up Losses & Hemorrhages Cash
  • Tags: ,

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.

***

We delude ourselves at our own peril by wrongly believing that government policy makers and the captains of private finance and industry are older and wiser. Because these people have managed to reach the top of their game, we assume they possess the intellectual acumen to steer a nation past its economic and social ills. We falsely believe they have the comprehensive skills to tackle the dire challenges that lie ahead such as a warming planet, growing cultural divisions, and an economic system on the verge of total collapse.  But as the years go by, more and more Americans are mounting questions with no realistic answers in sight. People feel we are charging blindly towards unaffordable energy costs, food insecurity, out-of-control debt and runaway inflation.  We realize we can no longer rely upon our leading institutions and the mainstream media. Our politicians constantly voice promises that are never fulfilled.

We need to realize that the colonialist perspective, which has dominated American history since its founding, cannot be completely divorced from government efforts to manipulate and control factions within the population. A colonialist mindset can never offer constructive solutions to solve problems. Promoting common ground to simmer disharmony between seeming oppositional segments of society is counterintuitive to colonialism. Rather it must rely on instilling discord, conflict, and eventually violence, either psychological or physical, in order to keep conflicts alive, which in turn validate further control, surveillance and heavy-handed measures.  Our nation’s leaders and institutions believe they are the adults in the room and we their children deserve their tough love.

Consequently whatever can be weaponized in order to manipulate the sensitivities of others to keep conflicts alive is fair game. The emotions behind racial and gender tensions are weaponized to keep people divided. For example, Biden wants to criminalize parents who oppose school boards that seem determined to sexualize grammar school education. Religion has been weaponized whereby authentic religion barely exists in the American landscape anymore. Politicians on both sides of the aisle weaponize any issue contrary to their ideological goals. The Covid pandemic’s controversies are manipulated so that science is weaponized against itself. Physicians and medical professionals who disagree with the pandemic’s lockdowns, drug treatments, vaccine mandates and the wet market theory about the SARS-2 virus’ origins, are censored, demonized and threatened with the loss of their medical licenses. However there are always blowbacks and serious repercussions when others are weaponized in order to colonize a perceived enemy psychologically or by physical force.

A fundamental problem is that the average person expects very simple solutions to otherwise extremely complex problems. Regardless of the political divide, people expect instant transformation to be backed immediately by legislation. They want their emotional biases and self-righteous believes to written into law. And the easiest solution is to create a scapegoat and then keep the victim alive and wandering in the wasteland until the problem reaches its final solution. Nazis colonized the German psyche by scapegoating Jews, gypsies, and members of the LBGT community. But of course a final solution is never reached constructively and inevitably leaves catastrophic destruction in its wake.

Instead we are led to a more rapid breakdown of the remaining threads of democracy. The educational system, the nuclear family, and the very moral fabric that keeps a culture healthy and vital collapse. Inescapably, whoever is the aggressor generates its own negative and destructive identity. The new cancel culture, which has now been absorbed into the federal government, has become the very cancer of hatred and vitriol it tries to marginalize and eradicate. One party or the other becomes vehemently juxtaposed to the opposing party as an enemy to be abolished; eventually that party identifies subliminally with the very pernicious characteristics it blames on its enemy. The powerless seize power by demonizing those less powerful. What we are witnessing is American culture being displaced by a hyperactive Hollywood dystopia.  People are displaced by technological robotism. News porn displaces pragmatic inquiry. And as we look around, we no longer have a culture that is even capable of defining itself in any way other than a psychological tyranny bent on coercive control. It is as if we inhabit a haunted house of horrors while being completely oblivious to that fact.

Perhaps it is time to regard our nation’s politick as grievously and mentally unstable. For many people this is self evident. The US is the world’s most anxious, depressed and mentally disturbed nation. Despite the widespread use of psychiatric drugs to palliate symptoms and enormous resources spent to tackle the epidemic of mental disorders, Americans’ psychological health continues to worsen. Our ruling institutions believe they understand their own psychology but they are unquestionably clueless. The psychological fragmentation and creation of divisions in American culture are sometimes viewed as the Balkanization of American culture. This doesn’t suggest that the powers that be desire to carve up the nation into separate regions hostile and uncooperative with each other. That is counter-intuitive for any government or corporate ambition to strengthen political and economic control over a population. Nevertheless it has resulted in the red and blue factions becoming more distinctly divided and hostile. The Balkanization of the American psyche is the unwanted consequence of a mentally unsound political apparatus and an equally psychologically unstable media.

Perhaps it is more accurate to regard the belligerent quagmire of factional animosity towards the “other” as a fascist colonization of the American psyche. After Trump’s surprising 2016 electoral win, book sales dealing with fascism soared. Sales of Hannah Arendt’s Origins of Totalitarianism and Orwell’s 1984 skyrocketed.  However we should be very wary of our choice of words and the real life definitions we give them. Rather than assuming the reemergence of an early 20th century fascism on American shores, perhaps we might consider the term Americanism as a unique fascist ideology contrary and in opposition to the Constitution.

In 1938, a Yale Divinity School professor, Halford Luccock, gave a sermon at Manhattan’s Riverside Church. Luccock derogatorily coined the term Americanism.

“When and if fascism comes to America it will not be labeled “made in Germany’; it will not be marked with a swastika; it will not even be called fascism; it will be called, of course, ‘Americanism.”

Similar predictive warnings were not uncommon in the 1930s. The prominent social commentator H.L. Mencken gave a similar prediction. Writing for the Baltimore Sun, Mencken wrote:

“My own belief, more than once set afloat from this spot, is that it will take us, soon or late, into the stormy waters of fascism. To be sure, that fascism is not likely to be identical with the kinds on tap in Germany, Italy and Russia; indeed it is very apt to come in under the name of anti-fascism.”

In her 1939 Harper’s Magazine article, Lillian Symes wrote about Huey Long’s suspected prediction that “Fascism would come to America in the name of anti-fascism” (a quote often wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill)

“If a fascist movement ever triumphs in America it will undoubtedly triumph in the name of our most popular slogan – Democracy, and under the leadership of some such “friend of the common people” as the late Huey Long…. Whoever its angels and whatever their purpose, it will speak the language of a populist left.”

The fragmented Balkanization of the American psyche has certainly given rise to warring populist factions. The triumph of cancel culture, in groups such as Antifa, the radicalized factions in the race-based and gender movements, the White Fragility phenomena, and Silicon Valley social media censorship is evidence of a new emerging authoritarian Americanism growing within the ranks of the left’s liberal populism.

Roosevelt’s vice president Henry Wallace likewise observed signs that US’s weakness might flirt with fascism.  In April 1944, the New York Times quoted Wallace stating:

“The American fascist would prefer not to use violence. His method is to poison the channels of public information. With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power… They claim to be super-patriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution… Their final objective, toward which all their deceit is directed, is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.”

Wallace believed that the greatest weapon to prevent fascism was to prioritize the importance of human well being above dollars and profit. He saw evidence that ‘fascism in the postwar inevitably will push steadily for Anglo-Saxon imperialism and eventually war with Russia.” Although such a war would never erupt during America’s Cold War against the Soviet Union, Wallace’s warning now seems to be at our doorstep. “Already American fascists,” Wallace wrote, “are talking and writing about this conflict and using it as an excuse for their internal hatreds and intolerance toward certain races creeds and classes.”  If Wallace could hear the venom spewed by the neo-con cartel surrounding Biden in the Oval Office, he would certainly see America’s fascist moment on hand. However, domestically, the ultimate goal of American political conceit and elitism is to impose homogeneity across society. Thus we observe the government imposing an aberrant universal vanity not only on its own population but repeatedly upon other nations through electoral interference and military or intelligence intervention.

Another obstacle is that America’s attention skills are direly week. Most Americans emotionally react to wherever the headline of the day leads them. Their priorities about the nation’s most urgent challenges shift and change dramatically.  For example, when the economy is strong, global warming and the preservation of the environment are high on people’s lists. Today with rising popular uncertainty, confusion and aimlessness, the percentage of people who place climate change as the single most important threat barely reaches double figures. It is only the most conscientious among us who are aware of how our activities and habits contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and the depletion of the environment.  Our international climate change summits are utterly worthless. They are little more than weeklong seminars for world leaders to learn more platitudes and more talking points for political campaigns and press conferences. Since no nation is held legally accountable by international environmental treaties, everything is voluntary and nothing essential is done. It is all smoke and mirrors to cover over Washington’s guilt.

Fortunately distrust in government and the media is growing exponentially. Yet sadly this will not solve our population’s growing disorientation in US’s new no-mans-land. Similar to the warnings given seven decades ago, the American media has been fully captured by private and secretive national security interests. We hear the dreaded dirge of a single official mantra; that is, increase irrational hope, surrender your independence and individuality, leave your reason at the door and obey your elected leaders and the unelected cartels that keep them in office. Only a tiny percent of the US population actually controls the larger national dialogues and agendas, both domestic and foreign. But a new generation of technocrats, groomed in the halls of the culture wars of division, condemnation and conquest are now entering the halls of government, finance and corporate boardrooms.  These are new shock troops that are leading the assault to colonize the American psyche, the mass formation of a distinctly American hive mentality, that forebodes far worse things to come in the near future.

*

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.

Richard Gale is the Executive Producer of the Progressive Radio Network and a former Senior Research Analyst in the biotechnology and genomic industries.

Dr. Gary Null is host of the nation’s longest running public radio program on alternative and nutritional health and a multi-award-winning documentary film director, including his recent Last Call to Tomorrow

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Colonization of the American Psyche. The Manipulation of Sensitivities, Weaponizing Tensions to Keep Conflicts Alive
  • Tags:

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.

***

Guest is Karen Kingston, a Biotech Analyst and med-legal advisor with over 20 years of experience driving blockbuster commercialization efforts for medical devices and prescription therapies. She was once a Cardiovascular Sales Representative for the Northeast Region of New York at Pfizer.

This session is about the crossover study in which Pfizer injected as many infants and toddlers as parents would basically allow.
The results suggest devastating consequences of this study: stunningly few “subjects” aged 6 months to 4 years showed up for their first study visit, which was scheduled a week after the third dose.

According to the EUA document, many infants and toddlers suffered epilepticus, meaning multiple seizures per day, some of which were associated with permanent brain damage confirmed by EEG.

*

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 the video

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Video: The Devastating Effects of Pfizer COVID Vaccine on Toddlers and Infants. Corona Investigative Committee with Karen Kingston
  • Tags: ,

Five E-Books Now Available on Global Research!

July 14th, 2022 by The Global Research Team

Global Research is glad to announce our publication of five e-Books. 

They are made available free of charge with a view to reaching out to people worldwide.

We are envisaging a PDF version of these e-Books that can be downloaded straight to your devices; in the meantime, you can read them on our website, www.globalresearch.ca. They are accessible in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website drop down menu on the top banner of our homepage (desktop version only).

 

 

 


Global WAR-NING! Geoengineering Is Wrecking Our Planet and Humanity

Edited by Prof. Claudia von Werlhof

After more than one year of “lockdowns” all over the world, the issue of “global warming” and “climate change” is back on the table of the international debate.

It seems that natural catastrophes have started to surround us everywhere – from the animal world next to us as well as from the sky above us. Is “nature” the enemy that has to be combatted today, be it by vaccinating humanity against the coronavirus that allegedly jumped out of the wilderness attacking us, be it by tearing down industrial production and consumption in order to avoid the alleged greenhouse gas CO2 emissions, being officially identified as the sole culprit of a so-called global warming? Or be it by applying methods of an alleged civil “geoengineering” against an ongoing climate change that seems to threaten the world?

Click here to read the e-Book.


The 2020-22 Worldwide Corona Crisis: Destroying Civil Society, Engineered Economic Depression, Global Coup d’État and the “Great Reset”

By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

In the course of the last 22 months starting in early January 2020, I have analyzed almost on a daily basis the timeline and evolution of the COVID crisis. From the very outset in January 2020, people were led to believe and accept the existence of a rapidly progressing and dangerous epidemic.

I suggest you first read the Highlights, the Preface and Introduction before proceeding with Chapters II through XIII.

Each of the thirteen chapters provides factual information as well as analysis on the following topics:

  • What Is COVID-19, what is SARS-CoV-2, how is it identified, how is it estimated?
  • The timeline and historical evolution of the Corona Crisis,
  • The devastating economic and financial impacts,
  • The enrichment of a social minority of billionaires,
  • Social engineering and the destabilization of the institutions of civil society
  • How the lockdown policies trigger unemployment and mass poverty Worldwide,
  • The devastating impacts on mental health.

Click here to read the e-Book.


The US-NATO War of Aggression Against Yugoslavia

By Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

This e-Book is a retrospect. It takes the reader back in history. Several of the texts were written at the height of 1999 bombing campaign or shortly thereafter.

Twenty-two years ago in the early hours of March 24, 1999, NATO began the bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. “The operation was code-named “Allied Force ” – a cold, uninspired and perfectly descriptive moniker” according to Nebosja Malic.

In 1999, when Belgrade was bombed, the children’s hospital was the object of air attacks. It had been singled out by military planners as a strategic target.

NATO stated that to “save the lives” of the newly borne, they did not bomb the section of the hospital where the babies were residing, instead they targeted the building which housed the power generator, which meant no more power for the incubators. What this meant that was that the entire hospital was for all sakes and purposes destroyed and many of the children died.

I visited that hospital, one year after the bombing in June 2000 and saw with my own eyes how they did it with utmost accuracy. These are war crimes using NATO’s so-called smart bombs.

Click here to read the e-Book.


Our Species Is Being Genetically Modified. Are We Witnessing Humanity’s March Toward Extinction? Viruses Are Our Friends, Not Our Foes

By David Skripac

When the alleged “pandemic” was declared in March of 2020, I, like millions of other people around the world, was paying close attention to politicians and public health officials as well as to bureaucrats from the Rockefeller Foundation-created World Health Organization (WHO), all of whom announced, in almost perfect synchronicity, “This is the new normal until a vaccine can be developed.”

How odd, I thought. Why is it that the immediate default position is a vaccine? And why is it that a single coronavirus is being blamed for causing people to fall ill in every corner of the earth? Could something else—perhaps one or more toxins in the environment—be the real culprit?

Click here to read the e-Book.


History of World War II: Operation Barbarossa, the Allied Firebombing of German Cities and Japan’s Early Conquests

By Shane Quinn

The first two chapters focus on German preparations as they geared up to launch their 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union, called Operation Barbarossa, which began eight decades ago. It was named after King Frederick Barbarossa, a Prussian emperor who in the 12th century had waged war against the Slavic peoples. Analysed also in the opening two chapters are the Soviet Union’s preparations for a conflict with Nazi Germany.

The remaining chapters focus for the large part on the fighting itself, as the Nazis and their Axis allies, the Romanians and Finns at first, swarmed across Soviet frontiers in the early hours of 22 June 1941. The German-led invasion of the USSR was the largest military offensive in history, consisting of almost four million invading troops. Its outcome would decide whether the post-World War II landscape comprised of an American-German dominated globe, or an American-Soviet dominated globe. The Nazi-Soviet war was, as a consequence, a crucial event in modern history and its result was felt for decades afterward and, indeed, to the present day.

Click here to read the e-Book.


Please help us in this endeavor. Kindly forward to family, friends, colleagues, and your respective communities.

If you wish to make a donation to support the e-Book Project click below.

 

Click to donate:

Click to make a one-time or a recurring donation


Click to become a member (receive free books!):

Click to view our membership plans


Thank you for supporting independent media.

The Global Research Team

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Five E-Books Now Available on Global Research!

Video: Dutch Farmers Rise Up Against Food System ‘Reset’

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, July 13, 2022

The Netherlands intends to halve its nitrogen and ammonia pollution by 2030. To reach that goal, the Finance and Agriculture Ministry now wants to reduce the number of livestock by 30%. As a result, many farmers will be driven out of business. As with current energy shortages, the resulting reductions in farming are said to be an “unavoidable” part of the Green Agenda to improve air, soil and water quality.

Handling International Crises: From JFK to Biden

By Rick Sterling, July 13, 2022

Since Biden appointed the chief architect of the Ukraine coup, Victoria Nuland, to be the third top official at the State Department, one cannot realistically expect a change in policy from this administration.

Chris Hedges: NATO — The Most Dangerous Military Alliance on the Planet

By Chris Hedges, July 13, 2022

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and the arms industry that depends on it for billions in profits, has become the most aggressive and dangerous military alliance on the planet. Created in 1949 to thwart Soviet expansion into Eastern and Central Europe, it has evolved into a global war machine in Europe, the Middle East, Latin America, Africa and Asia.

Alert: New York State Sets Dangerous Precedent for Draconian Quarantine Regulations

By Sara Middleton, July 13, 2022

A sobering precedent is now in force in New York state.  Going far and beyond the official guidelines from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – that is, stay home and isolate for 5 to 10 days if you test positive for COVID-19 – the New York governor and those in her corner want to exert an unimaginable level of control over its free citizens.

Soaring Energy Exports Send Russia’s Account Surplus to Record High

By Julianne Geiger, July 13, 2022

Russia’s account surplus reached a new record for the second quarter, according to data released by the central bank cited by Bloomberg. The surplus, now more than $70 billion, comes on the back of surging oil and gas—and other commodities as well—exports, which outweighed the sanctions placed on the country by Western powers.

Akron, Ohio Declares State of Emergency After the Police Execution of Jayland Walker

By Abayomi Azikiwe, July 13, 2022

Protests have continued in Akron, Ohio after the June 27 police killing of Jayland Walker, 25, who had 90 bullets fired at him by officers, 60 of those rounds struck the victim. After the release of a police video of the shooting of Walker, who was unarmed, people poured into the streets to demand justice for the African American motorist.

Dismantling the U.S. Constitution: Police No Longer Have to Honor “The Right to Remain Silent”

By John W. Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead, July 13, 2022

Although the Supreme Court stopped short of overturning its 1966 ruling in Miranda v. Arizona, the conservative majority declared that individuals cannot hold police accountable for violating their Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.

Vicarious Zeal: Fighting to the Last Ukrainian

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, July 13, 2022

On May 1, after travelling to Kyiv, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi raised the colours.  “America,” she declared with earnestness, “stands with Ukraine until victory is won.”  She made little effort to expound on what this would entail, be it the expulsion of Russian forces from all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea, or the “meat grinder” solution, leaving Kyiv and Moscow to bleed, weakening the latter and strengthening NATO security over a dead generation.

European Union Finally Admits COVID-19 Vaccines Destroy Your Immune System

By Arsenio Toledo, July 13, 2022

The European Union (EU) has finally admitted that the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines destroy the immune system and make people more susceptible not just to COVID but to all diseases. According to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), taking booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccines every four months could weaken the immune system and tire people out.

Beware the Prophets of Doom – Organic Food, Fertilisers and Fossil Fuels

By Colin Todhunter, July 13, 2022

Much has been written in recent months about supply chain crises stemming from the conflict in Ukraine and the effects on gas and oil. Perhaps up to two thirds of the global population are reliant on nitrogen-based synthetic fertilisers for much of their food. As a result, alarm bells have been ringing over fertiliser and food shortages, which will hit the world’s poorest the worst.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Video: Dutch Farmers Rise Up Against Food System ‘Reset’

Handling International Crises: From JFK to Biden

July 13th, 2022 by Rick Sterling

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.

***

 

Since Biden appointed the chief architect of the Ukraine coup, Victoria Nuland, to be the third top official at the State Department, one cannot realistically expect a change in policy from this administration.

There are significant parallels between the international crises in Cuba in 1962 and Ukraine today. Both involved intense confrontations between the USA and the Soviet Union or Russia. Both involved third-party countries on the doorstep of a major power. The Cuban Missile Crisis threatened to lead to WW3, just as the Ukraine crisis does today.

Cuban Missile Crisis and  the current crisis in Ukraine 

In 1961, the US supported the “Bay of Pigs” invasion of Cuba. Although it failed, Washington’s hostile rhetoric and threats against Cuba continued, and the CIA conducted many failed assassination attempts against Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

Cuba, seeking to defend itself, or at least have a means of retaliating in case of another attack, sought missiles from the Soviet Union. The Soviets agreed and began secretly installing the missiles. As a sovereign nation having been attacked and under continuing threat, Cuba had the right to obtain these missiles.

US President John F. Kennedy thought otherwise. Invoking the Monroe Doctrine, he said the missiles endangered the US and must be removed. He imposed an air and sea quarantine on Cuba and threatened to destroy a Soviet ship traveling on the high seas to Cuba. The world was on edge, and there was global fear that World War 3 was about to erupt. In my homeland Canada, we went to bed seriously worried that nuclear war would break out overnight.

Fortunately for humanity, cooler heads prevailed, and there were negotiations. The Soviets agreed to withdraw the missiles in Cuba. In return, JFK agreed to withdraw US missiles in Turkey aimed at the Soviet Union. The Cubans were furious, thinking they had been betrayed and lost their means of defense. But the Soviets had the bigger picture in mind, along with a US commitment to not invade Cuba.

The situation now in Ukraine has similarities. Instead of missiles in Cuba being a threat to the US, NATO in Ukraine is seen as a threat to Russia. NATO has steadily expanded east and installed missiles in Poland and Romania. Since 2008, Russia has explicitly said that Ukrainian militarization by NATO was a red line for them. Kiev is much closer to Moscow than Havana is to Washington. If it was justifiable for JFK to give the ultimatum regarding missiles in Cuba, is it not justifiable for Russia to object to Ukraine being a part of a hostile military alliance?

Different Responses

In 1962, the US and the Soviet Union realized that escalating tensions and hostilities must be avoided, and they turned to negotiations. They found a mutually acceptable compromise.

The situation seems more dangerous today. Instead of seeking an end to the war, the US and NATO are pouring in weapons and encouraging more bloodshed. It appears to be a proxy war with the US prepared to fight to the last Ukrainian. There are calls to escalate the conflict.

Ukraine Background 

Knowing the background to the current crisis is essential to understanding Putin’s actions. Unknown to most Americans, a crucial event took place in 2014 when a violent US-supported coup overthrew the democratically elected Ukrainian government. US State Department official Victoria Nuland handed out cookies as Senator John McCain encouraged the anti-government protesters. In a secretly captured conversation with the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Nuland selected who would run the government after the pending coup. In the final days, opposition snipers killed 100 people on both sides to inflame the situation and “midwife” the coup. Oliver Stone’s video “Ukraine on Fire” describes the background and events.

On the first day in power, the coup government issued a decree that removed Russian as a state language.

Within weeks, Crimea organized a referendum. With 85% participation, 96% voted to leave Ukraine and reunite with Russia. Why did they do this? Because most Crimeans speak Russian as their first language, and Crimea had been part of Russia since 1783. When Soviet premier Khrushchev transferred Crimea from the Russian republic to the Ukrainian republic in 1954, they were all within the Soviet Union.

In Odessa, anti-coup protesters were attacked by ultra-nationalist thugs who killed 48, including many burned alive as they sought refuge in the Trade Unions Hall. In eastern Ukraine, known as the Donbass, the majority of the population also opposed the ultra-nationalist coup government. Civil war broke out, with thousands killed.

With the participation of France, Germany, the Kiev government, and eastern Ukraine rebels, an agreement was reached and approved by the United Nations Security Council. It was called the Minsk Agreement. Russia has repeatedly encouraged the implementation of this agreement. Instead of negotiations and peace, the Kiev government and NATO have done the opposite. Since 2015, there have been more weapons, more threats, more NATO training, more encouragement of ultra-nationalism plus NATO military exercises explicitly designed to threaten and antagonize Russia. This is not speculation; it is described in a 2019 Rand report about “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia.”

Endangering the world

The Biden administration appears to want to prolong the conflict in Ukraine. President Biden declared in a “gaffe” that Putin must be replaced. Defense Secretary Austin has said the US goal is to “weaken Russia”. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton thinks Afghanistan in the 1980s is a “model” to follow in Ukraine by bogging Russia down in a protracted war. Republican and Democratic senators Graham and Blumenthal visited Kiev on July 7 and called for sending even more weapons. There is evidence that the US and UK have been advising Ukrainian president Zelensky to NOT negotiate.

The Need for Courage and Compromise

With war and bloodshed happening now, we need cooler heads to prevail as in 1962. We can have a LOSE – LOSE situation, endangering the whole world, or a compromise that guarantees Ukrainian independence while providing security assurances to Russia.

JFK had the courage and wisdom to resist the CIA and military generals who wanted to escalate the crisis. Does Joe Biden? There is a huge difference between the two presidents. JFK knew war first hand. He was injured and his brother died in WW2. He became an advocate for peace. It may have cost him his life, but millions of people were saved. In contrast, Joe Biden has been a proponent of every US war of the past three decades.  Not only that, he was a major player in the 2014 Ukraine coup and aftermath.

Since Biden appointed the chief architect of the Ukraine coup, Victoria Nuland, to be the third top official at the State Department, one cannot realistically expect a change in policy from this administration. Neo-cons are in charge.

If we are to avoid disaster, others must speak up and demand negotiations and settlement before the situation spirals out of control.

*

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.

Rick Sterling is an investigative journalist in the SF Bay Area. He can be contacted at [email protected]. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Al Mayadeen English

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 the oldest liberal democracy in the World you can win elections with an unparalleled majority of votes and have the strong support of the MPs and party members.  You can survive a series of really serious crises, image gaps and real social and economic problems – but the position of the Prime Minister is decided upon by the Inner Party, responsible only to Big Money and the Plutocracy. 

Last minute coup

And that is not the end yet.  Forced resignation of Boris Johnson has already been hailed in some commentaries as “a triumph of British democracy” and even “success of the parliamentary control”, despite the fact that a month ago the Prime Minister clearly won a no-confidence vote, with support of 59% of Tory MPs.

He was also widely popular among party members remembering who led the Conservative Party to Thatcher-like election triumph.

However, BoJo’s resignation was wanted by the frontbenchers, the party elites understanding perfectly well that they have to either play zero-one now, or the Prime Minister will prevail.

This threat was confirmed when the favourite of Tory sponsors, then the Chancellor Rishi Sunak was hit by the news about his wife’s £20 million tax avoidance.  In April that affair effectively distracted the public from BoJo’s previous problems, and the entire black-PR campaign was evidently carried out with at least the Joy of No 10.

However, the war perspective was probably the key, as it is really difficult to recall the Prime Minister of the War Cabinet, and BoJo has already skillfully used the Ukrainian crisis to disarm the Partygate (Downing Street cheese & alcohol parties during the lockdown period).

So, this was the very last moment for an attack.  That was decisive in the realities of the British Plutocracy and as we can see Johnson’s dismissal had nothing to do with the semblance of liberal democracy, more and more outdated.  Let’s be honest, for the UK, Oligarchy is absolutely natural, … a traditional form of power, so there is no need to hide it anymore.

Long preparations

Candidates for Johnson’s successor have been prepared for months because that’s how long it has taken to grill the Prime Minister.

As we remember, attempts have been made to shoot him off by hunting down the former chief advisor (and now fierce enemy) Dominic Cummings,  called the Father of BREXIT, and discussing the impact of the “work event” with cheese and wine by Downing Street employees on the spread of the Coronavirus.

Johnson, however, has endured so far, though many say that as a Zombie who has not noticed his own death.  In fact, BoJo’s only chance was the war with Russia, and the growing UK military involvement in Ukraine, Baltic States and Poland indicated that Johnson was desperate to accomplish this scenario.  His departure does not mean, however, that there will be no war.

Too early for Joy

War hawks have their favourites, which can also count on the votes of tough BREXITers.  While the Foreign Secretary, Luz Truss already proved in the midst of a war crisis that she is certainly not the sharpest knife in a drawer, the hardliners still have the Secretary of State for Defence, Ben Wallace whose main achievement was to empty the canteen bar of the Scots Guards at a time when he was an officer of this formation.

Wallace has already ruled himself out, but still receives high support in the polls.  Johnson’s main opponents, Rishi Sunak and Sajid Javid were long considered favourites, but who enters the conclave as a papabile – leaves that as a cardinal,  and backbenchers can remember who tried to overthrow their own Cabinet.

But if the new UK Prime Minister supposed to be a representative of  minorities, so why not Nadhim Zahawi, Mr. Vaccine, who first received BoJo’s nomination for the new Chancellor and then shot the proponent in the back?

On the other hand, if the Tories would like to “Macronise” themselves (i.e. return to David Cameron’s style), then the ideal candidate of the centrist compromise and conservative coolness could be the highly promoted Penny Mordaunt, once a magician’s assistant, who has a skill valued not only in British politics.

Finally, to satisfy those who like when changes do not change anything, there are Jeremy Hunt or even Michael Gove.  The latter is likely to be the last hope of the Spitting Image creators, who lose with BoJo their inexhaustible source of sketches and inspiration.

Return to the 1980s?

Inflation in the UK has already reached 9.1%, what is the worst result since Margaret Thatcher’s first years.

A wave of strikes is sweeping throughout the country, including railroad and transport workers, airport personnel, postmen, even call-centre advisors.  While BREXIT supporters (especially farmers and fishermen) are disappointed in maintaining trade ties with European competitors, many service sectors suffer from restrictions that make economic immigration into lower-paid jobs practically impossible.

In addition, the Government of Scotland called for another independence referendum on the 19th October 2023, despite the disapproval already expressed by Johnson.  With all these problems war still seems to be an attractive form of “escaping forward”.

Of course not for ordinary Britons, who in all polls state that their main problem is the rising cost of living, not theRussian threat.

In fact, when asked directly by the European Council on Foreign Relations pollster, more English, Scottish and Welsh responded that they would support peace now and at all costs, than a peace called “justify” by western governments and the Kiev junta (22% to 21% with as much as 32% hesitating and 26% without a clear opinion). The war BoJo had no time to start can be then too politically expensive for his heir.

Second Crimean War?

However, Westminster’s involvement in sustaining and expanding the conflict with Russia continues to grow.

In Warsaw, Vilnius and Kiev we can notice strong confusion now: will the Eastern Europeans, having declared themselves on the side of the new, British form of Europe organisation of Europe – stay now with their hands in the Queen’s potty, with worthless British guarantees?  The commentators with faster reflexes, have already announced that Vladimir Putin must certainly be behind Johnson’s fall, because who else could?!

And only the most cautious ones point out that the dominant feature of the United Kingdom’s international strategies has always been their stability and consistency, which lasted despite Cabinet, parties and leadership changes, ignoring technical nuances and current small interests.

After all, the UK has neither permanent friends nor permanent enemies, because it has no friends at all, and the enemy is anyone who is assigned such a role by the Empire’s elite.

 

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.

 

Konrad Rękas is a renowned geopolitical analyst and a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

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

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

***

On Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin extended a fast-track process to obtaining Russian citizenship for all Ukrainians.

A decree signed by Putin says residents of Ukraine and the breakaway Donbas republics “are entitled to appeal for admission to citizenship of the Russian Federation via simplified procedure.”

The decree makes it so that Ukrainians no longer need to meet a series of preconditions to obtain Russian passports, such as taking a Russian language test and living in Russia for five years.

Russia first applied the simplified citizenship process to the Donestk and Luhansk oblasts in the Donbas in 2019. In May, Putin extended the waiver to the southeastern oblasts of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, both of which are now mostly controlled by Russia.

According to the UN, over 1.5 million Ukrainians have fled to Russia since Putin launched the invasion on February 24. The decree gives the Ukrainians that have fled to Russia the option of staying regardless of what region they came from.

Ukrainian officials slammed Putin’s move and have accused Russia of forcing Ukrainians to flee to Russian territory.

“The purpose of this criminal policy is not just to steal people, but to make those who are deported forget about Ukraine and unable to return,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said.

Putin’s decree is also being taken as a signal that the Russian leader is planning to annex Ukrainian territory. Russian-installed officials in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia have both said they’re considering holding a referendum on joining Russia.

*

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

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

Featured image is from rusi.org