The Fauci/ COVID-19 Dossier. The 2002 SARS-CoV Patent. Dr. David Martin

May 28th, 2022 by Dr. David Martin

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Background

Over the past two decades, my company – M·CAM – has been monitoring possible violations of the 1925 Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous, or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare (the Geneva Protocol) 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and Their Destruction (the BTWC).

In our 2003-2004 Global Technology Assessment: Vector Weaponization M·CAM highlighted China’s growing involvement in Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology with respect to joining the world stage in chimeric construction of viral vectors. Since that time, on a weekly basis, we have monitored the development of research and commercial efforts in this field, including, but not limited to, the research synergies forming between the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes for Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), Harvard University, Emory University, Vanderbilt University, Tsinghua University, University of Pennsylvania, many other research institutions, and their commercial affiliations.

The National Institute of Health’s grant AI23946-08 issued to Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (officially classified as affiliated with Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID by at least 2003) began the work on synthetically altering the Coronaviridae (the coronavirus family) for the express purpose of general research, pathogenic enhancement, detection, manipulation, and potential therapeutic interventions targeting the same. As early as May 21, 2000, Dr. Baric and UNC sought to patent critical sections of the coronavirus family for their commercial benefit.1 In one of the several papers derived from work sponsored by this grant, Dr. Baric published what he reported to be the full length cDNA of SARS CoV in which it was clearly stated that SAR CoV was based on a composite of DNA segments.

“Using a panel of contiguous cDNAs that span the entire genome, we have assembled a full-length cDNA of the SARS-CoV Urbani strain, and have rescued molecularly cloned SARS viruses (infectious clone SARS-CoV) that contained the expected marker mutations inserted into the component clones.”2

On April 19, 2002 – the Spring before the first SARS outbreak in Asia – Christopher M. Curtis, Boyd Yount, and Ralph Baric filed an application for U.S. Patent 7,279,372 for a method of producing recombinant coronavirus. In the first public record of the claims, they sought to patent a means of producing, “an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus.” This work was supported by the NIH grant referenced above and GM63228. In short, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services was involved in the funding of amplifying the infectious nature of coronavirus between 1999 and 2002 before SARS was ever detected in humans.

Against this backdrop, we noted the unusual patent prosecution efforts of the CDC, when on April 25, 2003 they sought to patent the SARS coronavirus isolated from humans that had reportedly transferred to humans during the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak in Asia. 35 U.S.C. §101 prohibits patenting nature.

This legality did not deter CDC in their efforts. Their application, updated in 2007, ultimately issued as U.S. Patent 7,220,852 and constrained anyone not licensed by their patent from manipulating SARS CoV, developing tests or kits to measure SARS coronavirus in humans or working with their patented virus for therapeutic use. Work associated with this virus by their select collaborators included considerable amounts of chimeric engineering, gain-of-function studies, viral characterization, detection, treatment (both vaccine and therapeutic intervention), and weaponization inquiries.

In short, with Baric’s U.S. Patent 6,593,111 (Claims 1 and 5) and CDC’s ‘852 patent (Claim 1), no research in the United States could be conducted without permission or infringement.

We noted that gain-of-function specialist, Dr. Ralph Baric, was both the recipient of millions of dollars of U.S. research grants from several federal agencies but also sat on the World Health Organization’s International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) and the Coronaviridae Study Group (CSG). In this capacity, he was both responsible for determining “novelty” of clades of virus species but directly benefitted from determining declarations of novelty in the form of new research funding authorizations and associated patenting and commercial collaboration. Together with CDC, NIAID, WHO, academic and commercial parties (including Johnson & Johnson; Sanofi and their several coronavirus patent holding biotech companies; Moderna; Ridgeback; Gilead; Sherlock Biosciences; and, others), a powerful group of interests constituted what we would suggest are “interlocking directorates” under U.S. anti-trust laws.

These entities also were affiliated with the WHO’s Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB) whose members were instrumental in the Open Philanthropy-funded global coronavirus pandemic “desk-top” exercise EVENT 201 in October 2019. This event, funded by the principal investor in Sherlock Biosciences and linking interlocking funding partner, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation into the GPMB mandate for a respiratory disease global preparedness exercise to be completed by September 2020 alerted us to anticipate an “epidemic” scenario.

We expected to see such a scenario emerge from Wuhan or Guangdong Province, China, northern Italy, Seattle, New York or a combination thereof, as Dr. Zhengli Shi and Dr. Baric’s work on zoonotic transmission of coronavirus identified overlapping mutations in coronavirus in bat populations located in these areas.

This dossier is by no means exhaustive. It is, however, indicative of the numerous criminal violations that may be associated with the COVID-19 terrorism. All source materials are referenced herein. An additional detailed breakdown of all the of individuals, research institutions, foundations, funding sources, and commercial enterprises can be accessed upon request.

(emphasis added)

Note

This work was supported, in part, by a fund-raising effort in which approximately 330 persons contributed funds in support of the New Earth technology team and Urban Global Health Alliance.

It is released under a Creative Commons license CC- BY-NC-SA. Any derivative use of this dossier must be made public for the benefit of others. All documents, references and disclosures contained herein are subject to an AS-IS representation. The author does not bear responsibility for errors in the public record or references therein. Throughout this document, uses of terms commonly accepted in medical and scientific literature do not imply acceptance or rejection of the dogma that they represent.

Click here to read the full document.

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.

Featured image is from Ghion Journal

Posted in English
Comments Off on The Fauci/ COVID-19 Dossier. The 2002 SARS-CoV Patent. Dr. David Martin
Tags: COVID-19, Fauci

Overkill: The Deadly Illogical of Gun Rights

May 28th, 2022 by Greg Guma

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on May 26, 2022

***

When a disturbed teenager or adult commits mass murder it has nothing to do with liberty. Yet, since the weapon is usually a gun, many people in the US essentially respond that the freedom to be armed is more important that the right to be safe. In fact, millions claim that being armed is the only way to be safe. Like most arguments against gun control, it’s cruel and illogical.

For decades now, leaders of gun rights groups have made the same case. They claim, for example, that the only thing separating Americans from people living in dictatorships is their unrestricted access to weapons. If the government has all the guns, they say, attacks against defenseless citizens will become as common in the US as they are in oppressed countries. This is one of the reasons why gun owners oppose the banning of so-called assault rifles.

Does this sound familiar? It certainly should. The same argument is still being made today by those who say nothing can be done to stop mass shootings like the recent ones in Texas and upstate New York. They also warn that only way to prevent a police state here, which many people claim is on the verge of happening, is to allow the wide and unregulated distribution of all sorts of weapons.

This idea, which assumes that any regulation is the first step toward confiscation, represents a paranoid and individualist mentality that for decades has dominated debate about gun violence in the US. We are free, the argument goes, only as long as we can defend ourselves with guns, not only against criminals but also against the law and the State.

A related argument is that the federal government should not be allowed to regulate guns; this is a matter best left to states. And if a state wants to do nothing, perhaps because the gun lobby can defeat candidates who back even modest reforms, or because the crime rate isn’t soaring or no mass shootings have recently occurred, people in neighboring states must simply spend more money to crack down on crime and violence. It’s just the price of freedom.

Such positions are based on the notion that government should not meddle in the affairs of individuals. Guns aren’t the problem, opponents add, it’s people — in other words, human nature. But most homicides in the US are committed with guns; in other words, people with guns kill more people than those without them.

There are 393 million privately owned firearms in this country — up almost 100 million in the last ten years. Use by children has also increased, as has the stockpiling of exotic weapons by extreme groups and criminal organizations. Three-in-ten American adults say they currently own a gun, and another 11 percent say they don’t personally own a gun but live with someone who does.

Gun ownership is more common among men than women, and white men are particularly likely to be owners, Among those who live in rural areas, 46 percent say they are gun owners, compared with 28 percent of those who live in the suburbs and 19 percent in urban areas. There are also significant differences across parties, with Republican and Republican-leaning independents more than twice as likely as Democrats and those leaning Democratic to say they own a gun.

Considering all this, it seems fair to ask what is more threatening to freedom and security, unrestrained gun ownership or some government oversight?

The arguments against regulation tend to fall into three categories: 1) the right to bear arms is constitutionally protected, 2) gun control won’t reduce violence in society, and 3) gun laws are a serious threat to freedom. But do these assertions hold up to scrutiny?

The roots of traditional US ideas about the relationship between weapons and society actually go back centuries to the Florentine political philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli, who noted that military service should be the responsibility of every citizen, but soldiering the professional of none. Basing his ideas on the Roman suspicion of professional soldiers, he concluded that military force should only be used to assure the common good.

This idea of citizens bearing arms in defense of the State, to avoid the potential tyranny of a standing army, was translated by the authors of the Bill of Rights into the Second Amendments and helps to explain its unusual wording:

“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Many libertarians have interpreted this sentence to mean that individuals are guaranteed the right to possess firearms for their personal defense or for any other use they choose. What this fails to acknowledge is the meaning of citizenship as it was understood two and a half centuries ago. In the 18th century, citizenship directly involved militia service for men, which was part of the commitment to the greater public good. An armed citizenry did not mean an armed population. In fact, even then it was clearly understood that access to weapons was a communal rather than an individual right.

This dynamic was made clear in various declarations of rights predating the Bill of Rights. For example, Virginia’s Declaration of Rights, adopted on June 12, 1776, said that a well-regulated militia, trained to arm, was the safe defense of a free State. That and subsequent variations adopted by other states made it clear that the idea was trained citizens, organized in militias, providing for a common defense. The word “people” refers to this collective role, contrasting a militia to a standing army.

Article 17 of Vermont’s Declaration of Rights, adopted in 1777, followed this logic by proclaiming: “That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State; and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military ought to be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.”

Vermont’s Article 9, which dealt with the matter of conscientious objection to military service, made it clear that “bearing arms” meant military service. It said that no one could be compelled to carry or use a gun, even though rights also involved personal service. The solution was that those who chose not to serve would pay an appropriate sum of money. Bearing arms was directly linked to the collective responsibility for defense.

Several states specifically said that criminals or people involved in rebellion could be disarmed. In other words, the security of society took precedence over an individual’s right to have weapons. Thus, when early Americans spoke or an armed citizenry’s role in preserving freedom, they were talking about a militia linked to the classical idea of citizenship. There is no record of anyone arguing, during the passage of the Bill of Rights, that individuals had a right to bear arms outside the ranks of a militia. On the contrary, that provoked fear for the stability of the new Republic.

The great constitutional commentator of the period, Justice Joseph Story, noted that what the Second Amendment actually guaranteed was a “well-regulated militia.” The fear was that without one the country might be vulnerable to invasion, domestic insurrection, or a military takeover by some ruler. We needed a militia, Story said, because it was impractical to keep people armed without some organization.

The fear of a militarized society or a federal government monopoly on force is not, by definition, a form of paranoia. On the other hand, it is an overreach to claim that individuals have a fundamental right to protect themselves by stockpiling weapons. For those who want a counter-force to our national government, the direction to look is greater autonomy of organized local or state militias, not the right of people to become self-appointed guardians or vigilantes.

Despite the endless repetition of claims that individuals have a constitutional right to be armed, this is not consistent with the weight of legal opinion. In fact, several US Supreme Court cases have made the situation quite clear. In U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876), the Court ruled that the right “of bearing arms for a lawful purpose is not a right granted by the Constitution.” Ten years later, in Presser v. Illinois, the Court noted that although states have the right to form militias, they are also free to regulate the circumstances under which citizens can carry weapons. This view was upheld in an 1894 case, Miller v. Texas.

In 1939, federal gun regulations established by the National Firearms Act of 1934 were challenged. The decision in that case was unanimous. The federal government has the right, the Court ruled, to regulate the transportation and possession of firearms, and individuals only have a right to be armed in connection with military service. In 1980, Justice Harry Blackmun commented that this case represented the Courts’ basic thinking on gun control.

On June 8, 1981, the Village of Morton Grove, Illinois passed an ordinance banning the possession of handguns, except by police, prison officials, members of the military, recognized collectors and those who needed them for their work. Predictably, the National Rifle Association challenged the law. Both the Federal District Court and a Federal Appeals Court rejected their argument, saying that there is no individual right to bear arms, the ordinance was reasonable, and the right to have weapons applies only to well-regulated militias. The US Supreme Court refused to even hear the case.

Sentiment in favor on some form of gun control fluctuates, but has tended to grow for decades. In 1968, 71 percent were in favor, peaking at more than 90 percent in 1981. In one Gallop Poll the Brady Bill won 95 percent support. Most people obviously see some connection between the availability of firearms and the rate of crimes involving guns, and a variety of studies support these views. Nevertheless, opponents insist that stronger laws won’t have an impact.

Interstate trafficking of weapons is an enormous problem, undercutting the argument sometimes heard that the only reason for gun control is a high murder rate in a specific state. This provincial argument ignores interdependence, our responsibility to our neighbors, and basic facts. The most effective way to control the black market for guns, through gun shows and private sales, is a national registry of purchasers, along with tracing and prosecution of the interstate traffickers. This does not involve rounding up handguns. But it does mean acknowledging that the situation is out of control and that saving lives takes priority over protecting a form of free enterprise that has turned monstrous.

Leaving the matter in the hands of individual communities or states may sound appropriately populist. But it avoids the issue. Ten years ago guns were involved in more than 32,000 US deaths, 11,100 of them murders, as well as thousands of rapes, hundreds of thousands of robberies, and about a half million assaults. In 2020, 45,222 people died from gun-related injuries, according to the CDC.

Most people convicted of violent crimes obtain their weapons either at a gun shows or on the black market. This suggests that background checks alone will not make a huge dent in the problem. But a reduction of twenty percent would be significant: less children killed every day and fewer rapes and murders.

Many crimes involving guns are impulsive, suggesting that a waiting period helps. Of course, the underlying causes of violence and crime must also be addressed. But for those who might be saved by modest reforms that would be more meaningful than any statistic or slogan.

The NRA is fond of saying that “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” It’s a tidy little argument but let’s get real: people with guns can kill people far more quickly and effortlessly than people with knives, deadly fighting skills or poison.

The FBI has assembled evidence on whether stricter laws make a difference. For example, after Massachusetts passed a law requiring a mandatory jail sentence for carrying a handgun without a license murders involving handguns dropped by almost 50 percent. Robberies went down 35 percent. After South Carolina tightened its handgun purchase requirement in the 1990s, the murder rate dropped 28 percent.

Registration and background checks alone will not solve the problem. However, they can keep weapons out of the hands of some criminals, addicts and kids. They can also reduce the number of murder and suicides that result from being able to buy a gun in state of rage or depression. Drivers licenses and automobile registration do not prevent all auto accidents – but they help. To drive a car, a potentially dangerous vehicle, we agree that people need to be properly trained and meet minimum standards. Similar requirements, in the form of gun safety programs and practical tests for the owners of lethal weapons, would be a step toward national sanity.

No freedom is absolute. Even in the most decentralized and self-managed society, people must accept some social responsibilities and limits in exchange for liberty. Ideally, in a free society citizens participate directly in making the rules governing their social contract. But even Michael Bakunin, an anarchist philosopher who took the practice of liberty to a place some might consider extreme, did not ignore than importance of social responsibility. Human beings can only fulfill their free individuality by complementing it through all the individuals around them, he argued. Bakunin was contemptuous of the type of individualism that asserts the well-being on one person or group to the detriment of others. “Total isolation is intellectual, moral and material death,” he wrote.

When a disturbed teenager or adult commits mass murder it has nothing to do with liberty. People obviously do not have the right to abuse or destroy the lives and liberties of others. Yet, since the weapon is usually a gun, many people respond by essentially arguing that the freedom to be armed is more important that the right to be safe. In fact, millions claim that being armed is the only way to be safe.

Allowing the government to take any step, argue the opponents of gun regulation, is the beginning of tyranny. From this vantage point government is the enemy. It would be naive to argue that the government always uses its power wisely. The political system cries out for change, if not transformation, if we are ever to have a society that promotes real equality, justice, respect for diversity, and self-management. Yet achieving this, empowering people and making step-by-step progress, requires an appeal to hope rather than fear. Arguing that the only way to be free is to oppose and resist government, in other words knee-jerk rejection, plays into the hands of the most reactionary forces in society.

Suspicion of centralized power was clearly a concern of those who created the country. It is still justified and relevant. But the form that most threatens freedom in the 21st century is the power of powerful, unaccountable groups and organizations, most of them private, that can influence elections and shaped government policies. Many of these same interests aggressively argue that freedom means “freedom from government.” Such appeals are a convenient way to prevent intrusions into the private “right” to profit and pollute at the expense of the general health and well-being — to exploit in the name of freedom.

The bottom line is this: Effective regulation, combined with a comprehensive national database and a serious training program for gun users, would establish over time that less access to guns leads to less violent crime. This has been the case in Europe and some US states. Success would also help shatter the myth that government is the problem, and that people are better off armed to the teeth and on their own.

The debate over guns is not about restricting rights. That’s the cover story, an assumption promoted by the gun lobby to shape public perceptions. It’s not even about “control.” The goal is security, freedom from the fear and anxiety sweeping across this over-armed society.

A well-regulated militia is a altruistic idea, certainly preferable to the military-industrial complex. But almost 400 million guns in private hands is — pardon the expression — overkill.

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.

This article was originally published on Greg Guma/For Preservation & Change.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Overkill: The Deadly Illogical of Gun Rights
Tags: gun violence, mass shooting

Will Gates, Rockefeller, Musk and Klaus Schwab Prevail in the Class War? Activists and Thinkers Speak Out

May 28th, 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).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

“For me it was never about money, but solving problems for the future of humanity.”

– Elon Musk [1]

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Click to download the audio (MP3 format )

On May 23, Oxfam International released the latest study examining how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the distribution of wealth worldwide. The results were alarming, and for people with any sense of fairness, out and out infuriating:

Billionaires increased their wealth as much in the last 24 months as it normally does in 23 years!
As many as 263 million people could be pushed into extreme poverty this year.
The world’s billionaires saw their collective wealth increase by $12.7 trillion (42%) during the pandemic.
The richest 10 men possess more wealth than the poorest 40% of humanity combined.
Elon Musk could lose 99% of his wealth and would still be among the top 0.0001% of the world’s richest people. Since 2019, his wealth increased by 699%.
The incomes of 99% of humanity fell because of the pandemic, with 125 full-time jobs lost in 2021.
total billionaire wealth currently stands at 13.9% of Global Gross Domestic Product, up from 4.4% in 2020. [2]

With the event recently passed known as May Day, the International Workers’ Day, commemorating the efforts and victories of the working class and the labour movement, and celebrated in over 80 countries around the world, these developments in recent years is hardly cause to gloat!

Moreover, new struggles have confronted the workers while the elites are dominating the gains. The fourth industrial revolution, artificial intelligence, ad a whole gamut of new technologies seem to have given the tech lords an edge.

In a March 2021 Global Research News Hour interview, Catherine Austin Fitts explained how the decision by the G7 banks to re-organize the financial systems under the plan ‘Going Direct Reset’ allowed COVID to be a cover for a major thrust of wealth toward the wealthy and allow new technologies to once again return to them control of the mass population.

In a statement on what labour would be facing she said the following:

“If I can insert things into your body, if I can mind-control you, if I can turn off your ability to transact, that’s a slavery system…and you’re looking at a leadership who thinks they can do almost everything with software and AI and robotics, and they don’t need people.” [3]

These threats are no longer science fiction. For any serious person with a quest for worker solidarity, it is imperative that we not only remember with fondness the past glories of our collective triumphs, but muster like there’s no tomorrow against the scourge of the clear and present threat to our gains and possibly even our existence. The anthem of The Internationale will underscore this week’s episode of the Global Research News Hour.

Our first half hour features an interview with Professor Anthony Hall, a man who has been skeptical of many of the assertions of the COVID-19 pandemic. He shares with us his assessment of the lost freedoms the working man and woman are forced to reckon with, and also takes on the left and organized labour who, given their stand on the freedom convoy, are hurting rather than helping those they claim to protect.

This is then followed by a panel who will discuss the road ahead for labour given the sobering facts available at present. Professor Richard Wolff, Nora Loreto and Paul Moist all compare notes on the path forward, including where labour is and should be at, what the role of the freedom convoy might have been able to show us, and what lessons might have presented itself in the wake of the Indian General Strike.

Professor Anthony J Hall is Emeritus Professor of Liberal Education and Globalization Studies at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada. He is a regular contributor to Global Research, and has written a great deal on COVID-19 and “The Great Reset.”

Professor Richard Wolff is an American Marxian economist. He is Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and currently a Visiting Professor in the Graduate Program in International Affairs of the New School in New York. He is host, creator and writer of Economic Update with Richard D. Wolff. He is also a frequent lecturer at community and academic institutions across the country.

Nora Loreto is an activist based in Quebec City and editor of the Canadian Association of Labour Media and a much sought-after facilitator. She presents regularly on media relations, writing, editing, social media and online security and privacy. She authored Take Back the Fight, Organizing Feminism in the Digital Age (2020) and her latest from November 2021, Spin Doctors: How Media and Politicians Misdiagnosed the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Paul Moist has been a member of the Canadian Union of Public Employees for 40 years, serving 6 years as president of the CUPE local in Manitoba and 10 years as national president. He also got a bachelor’s degree in history and politics at the University of Manitoba. He is also active with the New Democratic Party.

(Global Research News Hour Episode 357)

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:

Alex Davies (March 13, 2013), “How Elon Musk Is Revolutionizing Two Major Industries At The Same Time”, Business Insider; https://www.businessinsider.in/How-Elon-Musk-Is-Revolutionizing-Two-Major-Industries-At-The-Same-Time/articleshow/21261518.cms#:~:text=His%20intense%20ambition%20and%20self-confidence%20enable%20him%20to,that%20have%20made%20Musk%20what%20he%20is%20today.
OXFAM Media Briefing (23 May, 2022), “Profiting from Pain: The urgency of taxing the rich amid a surge in billionaire wealth and a global cost-of-living crisis”; https://oi-files-d8-prod.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2022-05/Oxfam%20Media%20Brief%20-%20EN%20-%20Profiting%20From%20Pain%2C%20Davos%202022%20Part%202.pdf
https://www.globalresearch.ca/unmasking-covid-what-purpose-does-it-serve-and-for-whom/5739062

Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
Comments Off on Will Gates, Rockefeller, Musk and Klaus Schwab Prevail in the Class War? Activists and Thinkers Speak Out
Tags: activism, Canada, covid, Freedom Convoy, India strike, Labour, United States, vaccine

The Bush Doctrine and the US-NATO Encirclement of Russia

May 28th, 2022 by Shane Quinn

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First published on May 26, 2022

***

Former president George W. Bush wrote in his memoirs that following the 9/11 atrocities, he had formulated a strategy in which to safeguard the United States. His plan did not make a distinction between the terrorists and the countries where they resided. Under Bush, the Americans would fight the enemy abroad before they could strike, confronting a perceived threat before it materialised, i.e. preventive attacks.

This strategy, known as the Bush Doctrine, had actually originated before 9/11, not after. The Bush Doctrine was developed together with the “freedom agenda”, which Bush wanted to use to support “inexperienced democratic governments” in the Ukraine, Georgia and Lebanon, to name but three; and strengthening dissidents in the “repressive regimes” of Syria, Iran, North Korea and Venezuela.

Image on the right: President Bush makes remarks in 2006 during a press conference in the Rose Garden about Iran’s nuclear ambitions and discusses North Korea’s nuclear test (Licensed under public domain)

Comprising part of the freedom agenda, were flagrant attempts at regime change with president Bush leading a team of neoconservatives (neocons). They were focused on extending US global hegemony, and subordinating other countries to the superpower’s interests.

The Bush administration’s moves into Eurasia led to growing tensions with Russia, which has been returning as a world power over the past 2 decades under president Vladimir Putin. With legitimate cause, in late February 2002 the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Igor Ivanov, warned that the Americans should understand Moscow’s concerns about the highly provocative presence of US soldiers in Georgia, a nation which shares a 550 mile border with Russia.

The Russian grievances regarding US and NATO enlargement were ignored. NATO, in effect America’s military arm, has long been an instrument to subordinate Europe to the US along with that of its major banks, such as JP Morgan, Chase Manhattan Bank, Bank of America, etc. Rapid NATO expansion further enabled the war industry’s growth, bolstering profits through arms deals by selling weaponry to the many new countries which have joined NATO over the past generation.

Among the key tasks of NATO troops is “to guard pipelines that transport oil and gas that is directed to the West”, said NATO Secretary-General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, in June 2007, when he was addressing a meeting of NATO members. Washington believes that the transportation of oil and gas through Russian territory makes Western markets vulnerable.

The Americans made great efforts to ensure that the pipelines avoided Russian land, or that of Russia’s allies. For Washington a crucial goal, to the present, is to control the countries of the former Soviet Union. They went about this not only with military persuasion, but through the assistance of organisations like the CIA, the NED (National Endowment for Democracy), Freedom House, USAID and the Open Society Institute; the latter was created by Hungarian-American billionaire George Soros, a ubiquitous and controversial figure, and in 2011 his Open Society Institute was renamed Open Society Foundations.

It should be mentioned that Soros is an implacable adversary of leaders such as Putin and Chinese president Xi Jinping. Among Soros’ business deals, he has had ties to American politicians like John McCain; upon McCain’s death on 25 August 2018, Soros led the tributes describing him as “a brave warrior for human rights who stood up against repression and torture”. Not mentioned was that McCain had a history of warmongering – he strongly endorsed the US-NATO invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

The above Western NGOs and foundations serve as devices to promote regime change, in countries regarded suspiciously by Washington. Bush’s government dispatched 200 military advisers to Georgia. This small Caucasus country is recognised to be of vital strategic importance, partly because of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, supported by the West. The infrastructure, at 1,099 miles long, is the second largest oil pipeline present in the former Soviet Union. It transports crude oil from the Caspian Sea through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey, bypassing Russia and Iran.

The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline was operated through a consortium led by British Petroleum (BP) and Chevron. The Pentagon started drafting policies to use Georgia in a containment policy of Russia, with the intention of preventing the Kremlin from reasserting its influence over the Caucasus.

Location of Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan pipeline (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

A few weeks after 9/11, Georgia’s president Eduard Shevardnadze visited the American capital, where he pledged his backing in the “war on terror”. Shevardnadze asked for economic and military aid from the Americans, and he signed a strategic partnership with NATO. He also authorized the construction of the previously mentioned pipeline, which would be commissioned in 2006. Yet the Georgian president’s position had become precarious. He was politically weak and isolated; Georgia’s foreign debt had rocketed to $1.75 billion and Shevardnadze had no way of paying it off. This instability in Georgia was viewed with concern in Bush’s White House, who feared that the country would return to Russia’s orbit of control.

The so-called Rose Revolution in Georgia of November 2003 was planned and initiated from Washington, in co-ordination with the US Ambassador to Georgia, Richard Miles, according to Moniz Bandeira, a Brazilian political scientist. Bandeira continued, “The ambassador Richard Miles had played an important role in the toppling of Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, when he headed the diplomatic mission of the United States in Belgrade, between 1996 and 1999”.

The “Rose Revolution” was granted huge funding from Soros’ Open Society Institute, totalling over $42 million. US-friendly politician Mikheil Saakashvili, who received some of his education at private institutions in America, took over the Georgian presidency in January 2004. Saakashvili’s rise to power was partly made possible by the assistance of Western NGOs, and pro-Saakashvili activists in Georgia who were on the bankroll of the Open Society Institute of Soros.

Saakashvili promptly went about reducing the Russian military presence in Georgia. The US Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, signed a $15 million contract with the American firm, the Cubic Corporation, in order to provide defence equipment and training to Georgia’s military.

The Bush administration was sending to Georgia US Special Operation Forces (Green Berets) and the US Marine Corps, among others, to train the Georgian military personnel; these contingents participated in the US offensives in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. The Americans had launched the Georgia Train and Equip Program (GTEP) in 2002 and, in 2005, the Georgia Security and Stability Operations Program (GSSOP), initiatives formed to align the Georgian forces to US military goals.

With tensions rising in the separatist Caucasus regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, both of which want to join Russia, president Saakashvili requested that Georgia be allowed to join NATO; which would have been the equivalent of Mexico acceding to the Soviet Union-led Warsaw Pact.

The following year, starting in November 2004, a second colour revolution commenced this time in the Ukraine, another very important country which has an 830 mile border with Russia. The protests occurred principally in the capital Kiev, by no means nationwide, and it had been dubbed by the Western media as the “Orange Revolution”. The target was the Ukrainian president Leonid Kuchma, who had assumed power in Kiev 10 years before in July 1994.

Kuchma could not be called an ardent pro-Russian but, overall, relations with Russia had improved during his decade in office. Kuchma described Russian as “an official language” in the Ukraine and, during late May 1997, he had signed a Treaty of Friendship, Co-operation and Partnership with Russia.

As regarding Georgia, the anti-government actions in the Ukraine were encouraged by American organisations like the NED, USAID, Freedom House, along with activists on the payroll of Soros. He was supporting the campaign of Viktor Yushchenko, a pro-Western figure. Yushchenko has been an advocate of the Ukraine joining NATO and the EU, while he was opposed to Russian being the second state language in the country.

English correspondent Jonathan Steele wrote of the Orange Revolution in the Guardian newspaper, “Intervening in foreign elections, under the guise of an impartial interest in helping civil society, has become the run-up to the postmodern coup d’etat. The CIA-sponsored third world uprising of cold war days adapted to post-Soviet conditions”. In the decade or so following the Soviet Union’s 1991 collapse, Washington poured $350 million and counting into eastern Europe and the ex-Soviet republics. This included the funding of psychological warfare operations assisted by the mass media.

The Pentagon had invested millions of dollars in the colour revolutions, with the support of the US State Department and the US Army Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Command (USACAPOC). Washington had clearly not abandoned its Cold War practice of surrounding Russia, and if anything was increasing the intensity of such policies post-1991, breaking verbal promises made to the Russians.

With crucial Western support, Yushchenko took power in Kiev in January 2005. Bush hoped that Yushchenko would shift the Ukraine towards Western integration, while adopting a “free-market economy”. The first major project that Yushchenko announced, in the summer of 2005, was the construction of a pipeline originating from the Caspian Sea via the Ukraine to Poland. This would reduce Kiev’s dependence on Moscow for raw materials.

Yushchenko’s prime minister was Yulia Tymoshenko, known in the Ukraine as the “gas princess”, because of the fortune she had gained through murky business deals relating to natural gas. Tymoshenko has publicly supported Ukrainian accession to NATO and the EU.

President Bush and colleagues had no desire to sow instability in Azerbaijan, another former Soviet republic. Azerbaijan, which rests on the Caspian Sea, serves as a critical pipeline corridor between the Caucasus and Central Asia; as Zbigniew Brzezinski started to realise about Azerbaijan, when he was the National Security Adviser under president Jimmy Carter.

To help protect the oil/gas fields and pipelines, the Pentagon dispatched to the Caspian region mercenaries from American Private Military Companies (PMCs) like Blackwater. The Caspian region had historically been dominated by Russia and Iran. Bush, like his predecessor Bill Clinton, was provoking and humiliating Russia by sanctioning further NATO expansion and launching wars of aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Less than a year after becoming president in January 2001, Bush withdrew America from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM), which had been signed in 1972 with the USSR in order to implement the anti-missile defence system. He also refused to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (1996), along with modifications to the SALT 2 agreement on the reduction of strategic armaments.

Bush moved to establish missile bases in Poland and the Czech Republic, two central European states which had joined NATO in 1999. He aggressively advanced NATO to Russia’s very borders, with the accession in 2004 to NATO of the Baltic states Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, along with that same year Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Slovenia.

In early 2007, an increasingly frustrated Putin rebuked NATO’s march to Russia’s frontiers when he said “the United States has overstepped its borders in every way”, a policy which he described as “very dangerous”.

Undeterred, the Bush administration continued its imperialist program, by making steps to incorporate the Ukraine and Georgia into the American military sphere. In early April 2008 it was outlined at a NATO summit in Bucharest, Romania, “NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO. Both nations have made valuable contributions to Alliance operations”. NATO’s stated ambitions did not go unnoticed in the Kremlin.

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.

Shane Quinn, Journalist and renowned Historian, focussing on geopolitics and the history of World War II, based in Ireland. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Sources

George W. Bush, Decision Points (Crown, 20 Nov. 2010)

Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, “Ivanov: Russia Opposed to US Troops in Georgia – 2002-02-27”, Voice of America

Doug Bandow, “John McCain Loved the Military Too Much”, Foreign Policy, 28 August 2018

Jacob Grandstaff, “George Soros, John McCain, and Immigration”, Capital Research Center, 10 July 2017

Jonathan Steele, “Ukraine’s postmodern coup d’etat”, The Guardian, 25 November 2004

Luiz Alberto Moniz Bandeira, The Second Cold War: Geopolitics and the Strategic Dimensions of the USA (Springer 1st ed., 23 June 2017)

Taiwan News, “Ukraine to ditch Russian friendship treaty amid tensions”, 10 December 2018

Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives (Basic Books; 1st edition, 18 Nov. 1997)

Luiz Alberto Moniz Bandeira, The World Disorder: US Hegemony, Proxy Wars, Terrorism and Humanitarian Catastrophes (Springer; 1st ed., 4 Feb. 2019)

“Press Briefing by National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley on the President’s Trip to the NATO Summit”, Bush White House Archives, 3 April 2008

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.

Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
Comments Off on The Bush Doctrine and the US-NATO Encirclement of Russia
Tags: Bush Doctrine, Russia, US-NATO

Dr. McCullough: ‘Medical Crisis’ Is Being Exploited to Push Global Government

May 28th, 2022 by Emily Mangiaracina

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

First posted by GR on May 23, 2022

***

Dr. Peter McCullough on Friday sketched what he believes is the true purpose of an induced COVID “medical crisis”: global world government.

“What we’re seeing now is the utilization of vaccines as an inroad to global human compliance. Subjugation of the entire world’s population at the same time, via the same method. Having our rights linked to the end of a hypodermic needle,” declared McCullough, a renowned physician and prolific writer and speaker, during the health conference“Reclaiming Science Together” held Friday in Bath, England.

Since the early stages of COVID-19, McCullough has spoken regularly about the dangers of the COVID shots, and about the suppression of effective early treatment for COVID. However, he has been mostly tight-lipped on the reasons behind the seemingly ubiquitous push for dangerous jabs, and suppression of effective treatment.

During Friday’s conference, however, he frankly described what he believes to be a sinister strategy behind the handling of the COVID “crisis,” in service of a global, malignant agenda.

He noted to the conference audience that just prior to his talk, he had given podcast host Joe Rogan a copy of a recently published book he co-wrote with John Leake, titled “The Courage to face COVID-19: Preventing Hospitalization and Death While Battling the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex.”

He explained that it “deals with the crime of the suppression of early treatment,” which he said was “integral to create fear, suffering, hospitalizations and deaths in order to prepare the world to accept mass vaccination.”

According to McCullough, it doesn’t matter whether the “vaccine” is a genetic one, such as those being used in the West, or a “kill virus vaccine,” which he said is being used in the East. In his view, they accomplish the same purpose: They subjugate our medical, social, and economic freedom.

“Because those who are under the duress of taking the vaccine are given the most agonizing decision: The decision to take a product they know will cause harm to their bodies, or lose their livelihood. Or in some countries, lose their type of governmental financial assistance, or in some countries, lose access to their bank accounts,” McCullough said.

He noted the vaccines are also being “tightly tied” to the ability to carry out social activities like going to school or church.

“What we’re seeing now is an attempt for a global world government through the context of medical crisis and medical relief,” McCullough said.

“In my view, the only court that’s open now is the court of public opinion,” said McCullough, adding that for those “on the line,” he believes that “our challenge is to make our case” here.

“The sacrifices are just starting, and I think the stakes will get higher and higher. I think the vaccines are just one chapter in a very, very dark narrative that’s being handed to us,” he continued.

McCullough then issued a rousing call to resist and fight the malevolent agenda behind the COVID-induced medical, social and economic tyranny.

“If the entire world tomorrow rejected these vaccines, uniformly rejected these vaccines, the entire dark plot would fall,” he declared.

“And I encourage each and every one of you to have strength and resolve beyond anything you think you could have possibly done in your life. To make this the line. It has become clear, this is the line. It’s only by holding the line that we actually stop this freight train.”

“There is a vaccine cabal — vaccine stakeholders … we know you’re listening. And my message to you is that we are bold, and we are relentless, and we are unstoppable, and we have the truth. And the truth will prevail.”

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.

Featured image is from LSN

Posted in English
Comments Off on Dr. McCullough: ‘Medical Crisis’ Is Being Exploited to Push Global Government
Tags: COVID-19, global government, WHO, world government

Was Ukraine Building A Dirty Bomb?

May 27th, 2022 by South Front

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Just before the beginning of Ukraine’s war with Russia, Vladimir Putin uttered a key phrase, the meaning of which was that Russia could not allow Ukraine to reacquire even tactical nuclear weapons and that Kiev was literally one step away from creating them. It was this emphasis that immediately fell out of the public spotlight amid claims of “denazification” and “demilitarization”. What is a dirty nuclear bomb and how likely is Kiev to have one?

The classic nuclear charge has a monstrous destructive power, but the effect of using such weapons is relatively short-lived. Yes, indeed, during a nuclear explosion extremely dangerous isotopes are formed, including strontium-89, strontium-90, cesium-137, zinc-64 and tantalum-181. These isotopes, once in the body, accumulate there, causing severe and often incurable diseases. For example, radioactive iodine accumulates in the thyroid gland, cesium in muscles, strontium in bones and so on.

At the same time, the affected area of a nuclear explosion denuclearizes rather quickly, i.e. actively loses radioactivity. Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the only cities in the history of mankind to have been nuclear bombed, are a case in point. The masses were under the impression that they left a scorched desert for decades, which is not true. As early as August 1949, the Hiroshima Peace Memorial City Construction Law was passed, which gave an immediate start to the total reconstruction of the city. That is, little more than four years had passed since the nuclear strike.

The principle of the dirty bomb is different. This type of munition is much simpler in its construction and does not require complex technical solutions. In fact, it is simply a delivery vehicle (missile, bomb or artillery shell) to which a container with radioactive filler is attached. One of the potentially most effective and therefore dangerous applications in general involves simply spraying radioactive dust from an airplane or any other aircraft.

Dangerous isotopes with long half-lives are deposited on the surface of the earth, plants, and further into the ground and aquifers, making the area dangerous to live in for many decades. To a man to develop radiation sickness it is enough to get just one sievert dose (Sv), a dose of 3 to 5 Sv leads either to death in a couple of months or to the development of cancer, 6 to 10 Sv is a guaranteed death as the irreversible death of bone marrow begins.

Ukraine Was Building Dirty Bomb. Advance Of Russian Troops Reveals New Circumstances

The consequences of the Chernobyl explosion are close to a dirty bomb explosion

The issue of the possibility of Ukraine, which renounced nuclear missile weapons as part of the Budapest Memorandum, creating a dirty bomb has been repeatedly considered by various experts. Most of them agreed that it is impossible for a number of reasons.

First, for political reasons: Western allies will not give the unpredictable government in Kiev such a bargaining chip. Second, Ukraine does not have the appropriate technical capabilities, no centrifuge capacity for uranium enrichment, and no suitable means of delivery. Some experts do not agree with the latter assertion, because a large amount of equipment and specialists capable of creating such means has been preserved since the Soviet Union days.

Ukraine currently holds a large amount of spent nuclear fuel that has not been removed from the territory of Ukraine since 2020 and that has been stored on the territory of nuclear power plants awaiting the construction of a nuclear fuel storage facility in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.

In addition, the Kiev regime had accumulated 30 tons of plutonium and 40 tons of enriched uranium at the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant. This was reported by Wall Street Journal journalist Lawrence Norman, citing IAEA Director General Raphael Grossi. The head of the international nuclear watchdog agency noted that although the nuclear power plant is under Russian control, it is run by Ukrainian reactors. That is why the IAEA needs to urgently send its experts to assess the situation and find out whether there are stocks of uranium and plutonium missing (alas, earlier Kiev has lost Javelins, bulletproof vests, etc.).

Ukraine Was Building Dirty Bomb. Advance Of Russian Troops Reveals New Circumstances

Laurence Norman’s post

In response, Ukraine’s Energoatom announced the IAEA head’s words as a fake and tried to explain that plutonium and enriched uranium are only in fuel assemblies (tubes) at nuclear power plants, while spent nuclear fuel is present at every nuclear power plant.

“This is a sly thing. If the state has sufficient competence to dismantle fuel assemblies, the spent nuclear fuel can be used to make weapon-grade isotopes. And for sure, in order to fill a missile warhead with it, a subversive charge, to arrange a dirty bomb, when the territory is contaminated without a nuclear explosion. And the activity of such a bomb will be higher than that of a cobalt bomb by one and a half times,” said the expert.

“Let’s take the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran as an example – the whole Western world demanded from Russia to close the project at first, and then they agreed – Russia takes the spent nuclear fuel so that Iranians would not accidentally start using it illegally for weapons-military purposes. For some reason it was scary in Iran, it was a stumbling block, but with Ukraine it is not frightening”.

As for the creation of delivery vehicles, nothing is impossible. The legendary Yuzhmash plant of the past is really going through a period of total decay today, while, remember, for many decades it has produced a fairly wide range of products for the space industry, including fuel modules. In other words, both the documentation and some of the production facilities that make it possible to assemble a hull of especially durable metals, where a load of spent nuclear fuel could be placed, are likely to have remained in place.

Nor would it have been a matter of delivery vehicles. If the Neptun missiles of their own production failed, the allies are full of their own much more powerful and long-range counterparts. Arms deliveries to Ukraine did not open with the start of the Russian special operation. And there have been serious discussions about supplying Kiev with heavy weapons.

In conclusion, the threat of Kiev creating a dirty bomb is serious. This is confirmed, albeit indirectly, by statements by experts, journalists around the world, and Russian officials. Despite the revelation that a large amount of spent nuclear fuel is stored at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, no one knows reliably how much is stored at other nuclear power plants. We can only hope for the remnants of the adequacy of the Ukrainian government. Otherwise, it could do irreparable harm not only to Russia and Belarus, but also to their neighbours.

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.

Featured image: Possible creation of a nuclear bomb in Ukraine (Source: South Front)

Posted in English
Comments Off on Was Ukraine Building A Dirty Bomb?
Tags: bombs, Russia, ukraine, Ukraine war

The Brave New World of Genetically Modified People

May 27th, 2022 by Tessa Lena

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The World Economic Forum claims that genetic modification is the way of the future

In February 2022, Chile passed a law prohibiting employers from discriminating against genetically impaired employees

There are studies suggesting that in some cases, COVID injections might lead to changes in human DNA; more research is needed

Disabled rights attorney Todd Callender looked at a Supreme Court case from 2013, which led him to believe that using mRNA to modify genomes may turn people into legal property of the patent holders (unless this interpretation is explicitly ruled out)

Making us biologically dependent on the “artificial immunity service” is bad for the people but sadly good for business

This story is about the hubris of conquest and genetic modification. Let’s start with the ugly. The richest people of the world, as well as their loyal servants from the World Economic Forum, are on the Genetic Modification team. According to the World Economic Forum, “the evolution of gene testing and gene editing will drive the future of healthcare.”

They really can’t sleep at night knowing that they have not yet stuck their fingers into every nook and cranny of the human body and efficiently monetized them! Here is a technical video from 2016 on “Harnessing Gene Editing for Multiple and Permanent Genetic Changes.”

I don’t know … somehow I am not excited. Besides, all of this sounds suspiciously like Manifest Destiny 2.0.

A Legal Framework for a “Mutant Apocalypse”?

In February 2022, Chile passed a law prohibiting employers to discriminate against genetically impaired employees. The bill was “initiated on a motion by the Honorable Senator Mr. Alejandro Navarro Brain.” In response, a lot of people in the freedom community started asking questions. Does somebody expect a great increase in the number of genetically impaired people? Why? Here is the law (translated):

“Article 1. — No employer may condition the hiring of workers, their permanence or the renewal of their contract, or the promotion or mobility in their employment, to the absence of mutations or alterations in their genome that cause a predisposition or a high risk of a pathology that may manifest itself during the course of the employment relationship, nor require for such purposes any certificate or examination that allows verifying that the worker does not have mutations or alterations of genetic material in his human genome that may lead to the development or manifest in a disease or physical or mental abnormality in the future.”

“Article 2. — The worker may express his free and informed consent to undergo a genetic test, in accordance with the provisions of article 14 of Law No. 20,584, as long as it is aimed at ensuring that he meets the physical or mental conditions necessary and suitable to carry out work or tasks classified as dangerous, with the sole purpose of protecting their life or physical or mental integrity, as well as the life or physical or mental health of other workers.

If these exams are required by the employer, the latter must assume the cost of it. Likewise, if there is a current employment relationship, the time used to carry out said exams will be understood as worked for all legal purposes.”

“Article 3. — Health establishments and laboratories that carry out this type of examination, as well as employers who access this information, must adopt all the security measures prescribed in Law No. 20,584 and in Article 12 of Law No. 20,120, in order to protect the privacy of the worker and guarantee confidential handling of the data. The worker will always have the right to access the information revealed by a genetic test.”

The law was published in the official gazette on February 16, 2022. The jury on why this law had to pass is still out. For background on the GMO industry in Chile, here is a “GMO-positive” analysis from 2016.

What Could Potentially Cause an Excessive Amount of Genetic Impairment?

We, human beings of the 21st century, are bombarded with poisons every step of the way — and we are kind of on our own with this. Our air is polluted. Our water is filled with contaminants (speaking of, as a tangent, the water coming out of my tap in New York City is a little rusty … go figure). Our food, unless we are super vigilant and can afford organic (and even then) contains God knows what. Glyphosate is everywhere, and so are “forever chemicals.”

Plus, on a daily basis, we deal with emotional stress, geoengineering-derived toxicity (about geoengineering, here and here), electromagnetic pollution … seriously, it’s a miracle that we are still around, given that our wealthy are treating us like roaches!

And now, we have a new ambitious player in the area of messing with our bodies! Meet the biological bandit, the novel injections! As we all know, the COVID injections are designed to turn our bodies into factories producing spike proteins (in the words of the CDC, “harmless pieces”).

At no point in known history have our bodies been asked to grow foreign spikes on the surface of our cells — so this is frankly kind of creepy. There is a reason why our instincts naturally go against Frankenstein initiatives and untested products. It’s because they are Frankenstein and untested!

Case in point: were those products maybe tested for important things like genotoxicity? Let’s ask the trustworthy insert for the trustworthy FDA-approved product, Comirnaty. It says the following:

clinical pharmacology

“COMIRNATY has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, or impairment of male fertility.” Oh. But at least, it is not really genetic modification because it doesn’t change our actual DNA, right?

Not so Fast?

First of all, let me point out that the scientists are still discovering new connections and even organs in the human body (here, here, and here), so any knowledge they have is conditional, and real scientists are humble and cautious. The arrogant ones may puff their cheeks all day — but it doesn’t mean that they really know how thing work, in a finite manner.

So, in the case of eliminating the possibility of DNA damage, even if the regulators were pure and honest, and if they were truly following the also pure and honest scientists, their statement about the novel product not impacting human DNA is only a “good faith” opinion, as of this second. After all, the product is novel!

Lo and behold, here is dr. Paul Alexander’s analysis of the study called, “Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line.”

Quoting the abstract: “Preclinical studies of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2, developed by Pfizer and BioNTech, showed reversible hepatic effects in animals that received the BNT162b2 injection. Furthermore, a recent study showed that SARS-CoV-2 RNA can be reverse-transcribed and integrated into the genome of human cells.”

As Dr. Alexander notes poignantly, “the failure is that the vaccine companies did not study this in clinical trial. We have no idea in the human model as we have no idea in everything as to the safety of these vaccines and the short, medium, and long-term effects. We have no idea if persons who have taken these vaccines will not have autoimmune disease or be severely ill, or have severe side effects, or even die from the vaccines, in the future.”

And here is analysis by Mikolaj Raszek, PhD, in Canada. Dr. Raszek looked at the Australian Pfizer data, i.e. “Nonclinical Evaluation Report for BNT162b2 [mRNA] COVID-19 vaccine (COMIRNATYTM),” submitted in January 2021.

To sum up my answer to the question as to whether COVID injection may alter human DNA, we have no idea. And yet so many people are forced to take them — like cattle (which is not to say that it is right to treat cattle in this manner, it is also wrong).

The Question of Ownership

Many of us remember how Monsanto sued different farmers after Monsanto’s toxic products contaminated the farmers’ crops. The corporate giant claimed that the farmers had illegally used their patented products. (I’d say, this is emotional and intellectual abuse, who even wants their products).

Which brings us to today — and the legal analysis by the disabled rights attorney Todd Callender who has looked at a U.S. Supreme Court case from 2013, and it led him to believe that this case could have far-fetching legal implications for the recipients COVID injections.

The case in question is “ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY ET AL. v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL.” Here is the exact syllabus of the case, as per Cornell Law School website:

“Each human gene is encoded as deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which takes the shape of a “double helix.” Each “cross-bar” in that helix consists of two chemically joined nucleotides. Sequences of DNA nucleotides contain the information necessary to create strings of amino acids used to build proteins in the body. The nucleotides that code for amino acids are “exons,” and those that do not are “introns.”

Scientists can extract DNA from cells to isolate specific segments for study. They can also synthetically create exons-only strands of nucleotides known as composite DNA (cDNA). cDNA contains only the exons that occur in DNA, omitting the intervening introns.”

“Respondent Myriad Genetics, Inc. (Myriad), obtained several patents after discovering the precise location and sequence of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, mutations of which can dramatically increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

This knowledge allowed Myriad to determine the genes’ typical nucleotide sequence, which, in turn, enabled it to develop medical tests useful for detecting mutations in these genes in a particular patient to assess the patient’s cancer risk. If valid, Myriad’s patents would give it the exclusive right to isolate an individual’s BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, and would give Myriad the exclusive right to synthetically create BRCA cDNA.

Petitioners filed suit, seeking a declaration that Myriad’s patents are invalid under 35 U. S. C. §101. As relevant here, the District Court granted summary judgment to petitioners, concluding that Myriad’s claims were invalid because they covered products of nature. The Federal Circuit initially reversed, but on remand in light of Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 566 U. S. ___, the Circuit found both isolated DNA and cDNA patent eligible.”

“Held: A naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated, but cDNA is patent eligible because it is not naturally occurring.”

According to Todd Callender, who was interviewed by the Corona Investigative Committee, the document holds that the use of mRNA for modification of the genome results in a synthetic genome that belongs to the patent holder. Therefore, if we follow that line of legal logic, it is possible to conclude that using mRNA to modify human cells can result in said cells (and living beings) owned by the patent holder.

As of this moment, there is still no clarity and no official legal conclusion as to whether this interpretation will apply — but given how crazy the past two years have been, and how brazenly the bulldozer has been proceeding so far, nothing seems off limits. Also this:

A conspiracy theory, you say? A tinfoil hat, you say? Sounds more like a business plan to me…

A question then. Do you want to live like this? Do you want to become corporate property, literally? What are you doing to prevent it from happening? https://t.co/KFmz5Xqqy1

— Tessa Lena a.k.a. Tessa Fights Robots ❤️ (@TessaMakesLove) July 6, 2021

And we are at it, let’s also look at the concept of “DNA storage.”

MAD SCIENTISTS SHOULD STOP IMPLEMENTING CONSPIRACY THEORIES. “It’s possible to store data in the DNA of living cells — though only for a short time. Storing data in your skin would be a fantastic way of transferring data securely.” https://t.co/1X0VnkvX2p

— Tessa Lena a.k.a. Tessa Fights Robots ❤️ (@TessaMakesLove) August 14, 2021

The War on Everything Natural

All this fits in perfectly with the “blue ocean” business model that creates new markets out of thin air.

I wrote about this in detail in a 2021 article about the war on natural immunity and ability — but the gist is that eroding natural health and natural defenses (whether accidentally or on purpose) turns us into loyal customers who have to subscribe to the “artificial immunity” service for the rest of our lives, however long it lasts. Sucks for us but very good for business!

And where does the money come from, assuming that the citizens are all half-alive and can barely provide for themselves? Well, the money could come, for example, from the virtual digital “press” owned by the central bank, who would fund the “noble” companies providing the artificial immunity services to the people in the name of “public health” … You know the drill.

It’s all for our own good! In this case, the citizens would exist as mere excuses for the companies to make money. Which, to be fair, has been the case for a while, just in a way that was hidden from many of us — until two years ago.

The end result would look very much like the Monsanto arrangement where living forms are modified to depend on purchased products, while remaining in an increasingly toxic environment. I don’t know about you, but I already feel bad for the crippled GMO tomato, and I certainly don’t want to turn into something similar.

The Fear of Missing Out

Let’s look at the existential picture. Where does all this cluelessness, arrogance, greed, and cruelty come from?

Human beings do a lot of unintelligent and self-destructive things out of fear (I’ve done it, I am no exception, definitely no finger pointing here). Fear of missing out (and thus being humbled by rivals) is important motive in our culture.

I think that, philosophically speaking, today’s unhealthy hunger for conquering nature and scanning every nook and cranny for “goodies” — and then squeezing every drop of juice out everything, and then tossing it out — is driven by a spiritual void, by the lack of joyful faith, by the fear of being existentially vulnerable, intellectually unsophisticated, and emotionally unimportant.

After all, even the most egregious greed covers up for a spiritual void since we don’t really need to own everything in the world to be happy. It’s like, “If I leave even a drop of valuable goods on the side of the road for someone else to grab them, I’ll feel so stupid! And they will sure judge me! And I am afraid of that so I’d rather just take it.”

Right now, we are living in times of very ripe and internalized fear and peer pressure but initially, to shake the people off their axis, it had to come with violence, which is something that all of our ancestors experienced at different points.

Here is a non-GMO-related story that really moved me several years ago, and stuck with me. It was told by the Dagara elder Malidoma Some, who, sadly, passed away last year (and I just learned about it, so I am very shocked and sad).

As a young child, Malidoma Some was kidnapped by priests into a mission boarding school, which he fled as a teen, and then had to undergo a lot of things in order to heal. He then moved to America and dedicated his life to help westerners understand the centuries-tested wisdom of his people.

One of his stories stuck in my mind. He wrote about how the missionaries who came to his village tempted the farmers. The missionaries promised to buy the crops from the farmers if the farmers bought the fancy fertilizes from the missionaries. Some of the farmers got tempted and bought the fertilizes.

The missionaries’ fertilizers “made the land angry,” and the crops didn’t grow. And so those farmers found themselves in debt to the Jesuits for the fertilizers, and without the yields. And from being indebted, they were more vulnerable to the demands of the missionaries.

This sounds very similar to the behavior of Monsanto, leading to farmer suicides in countries like India (a fact so egregious that the establishment had to “debunk” it).

Similar things were unfortunately done in the Americas, too, as a part of the intentional policy of building outposts around Indian territory to seduce and corrupt the people on the “reservations” (what a word, if you really think about it). The well-documented strategy was designed to steal more land from the Native people — who were already greatly perturbed by the violence of the “great reset” that had been handed to them by the Europeans.

The plan was to sell them goods “on credit,” and put them in so much debt that they would let go of more their land. The final goal was for the Native people to “own nothing and be happy” (yes, the original American great reset, and we really need to come to terms with how similar it is to the great reset of today, which is still in early stages.

Conclusion

I believe with great passion that in order for us to win this victory and to stop the bulldozer, we need to tackle the underlying spiritual and spiritual malaise, or else the bulldozer will keep coming at us in different ways. Being spiritually honest and brave, and working toward healing after centuries of abuse, are the challenges of our generation, and perhaps of many generations to come.

Bottom line, we are free people. We never belonged to the great resetters, just like the people who came before us never belonged to the great resetters of their time.

And there is no need to scan every nook and cranny of bodies, looking for money. Unmonetized bodies are free bodies. So I pray that we the people start pedaling toward honesty and wisdom so that we can heal.

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.

Posted in English
Comments Off on The Brave New World of Genetically Modified People
Tags: gene editing

Reporting From Davos: WEF’s Klaus Schwab Talks with Pfizer’s Albert Bourla: “We rather prevent the disease by vaccination, than cure it.”

May 27th, 2022 by Peter Koenig

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

It is WEF 2022 – Day 3 – 25 May 2022.

Professor Schwab’s opening statement refers to WEF’s goal, “Our objective is to make the world a better place.” In fact, the WEF logo throughout Davos and the rest of the world is “World Economic Forum – Committed to Improving the State of the World”.

Just as a parenthesis, it reminds me of the slogan at the entrance of the World Bank, “Our Dream is a World Free of Poverty”. Whenever I passed this phrase, I couldn’t help thinking, “… And we make sure it will just remain a dream.”

The following is just a summary of the “dialogue”, reflecting the most salient points. It was clear from the outset that the entire conversation was orchestrated, maybe not so much for the public who attended the Davos event, the so-called Davos Man, they are supposedly in the know. But for the public at large who watch these WEF Davos videos around the globe, it hammers in another point of vaxx propaganda.

Pfizer’s Dr. Albert Bourla introduces himself as a Greek Jew and Holocaust survivor. Maybe his underlaying message was that he knows what suffering means – and he knows how to reduce, alleviate and eliminate the pain.

Answering Klaus Schwab’s question on the state of corona, Bourla said that

“The virus will not disappear, but we can get our lives back, we have the means, very effective vaccines, with that people are not dying anymore.”

It is unfortunate that Bourla did not mention even with one word, the Pfizer “vaccine” risks, let alone the death reports. Tens of thousands of people perished after and in connection with the Pfizer mRNA vaxxes. Pfizer is a criminal organization and has indeed criminal lawsuits on its books.

See this for more truth and this, Michel Chossudovsky: “Pfizer’s Secret Report on the Covid Vaccine…” and this.

Bourla continues, questioning himself, or the audience, “Are we scared of new viruses? — We should be prepared, but science will win.”

At this time a reference to Mike Yeadon, former Pfizer Vice-president and Chief Science Officer, who already months ago sent via video a warning to humanity:

69,053 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 10,997,085 injuries for the EU, US and UK Combined for a population of 830 million people

Based on reported cases. Only a small fraction of the victims or families of the deceased will go through the tedious process of reporting vaccine related deaths and adverse events to the national health authorities.

See this: Pfizer and FDA knew that vaccines were not safe.

Schwab continues in this vein. “Under this conditional approval, who takes the risk? Who is liable?”

Without hesitation, Bourla shoots, as if it were the most natural thing in the world: “Governments take the risk. This is part of our contract with Governments.”

Paraphrased:

“We provide the helping remedy, and the governments, as their part of the deal, cover the risk.”

Dr. Bourla did not mention that there were indeed governments who refused taking the risk – for example, Argentina. And Pfizer left. All governments should have refused taking the liability, and tens of thousands, maybe leading up to hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved.

Professor Schwab was now handing out more flowers: “You had such a success with mRNA can this success be replicated for other diseases, like malaria?”

Bourla: “We hope in the long run, but first we are working on the flu-vaccine, producing a flu-vaccine with the updated mRNA technology.”

Here we go. Instead of with the covid vaxxes, in the future, people will get their flu-shot mRNA-style, not a clue that these vaxxes may possibly contain the same poisonous concoctions that were found in the covid vaxxes, responsible for millions of adverse occurrences; dangerous and deadly “side effects” that the lot of the medical and scientific society did not dare – and still does not dare – to associate with the covid vaxxes, due to the risk of losing their medical license, or worse.

Professor Schwab continues with his bouquet of compliments: “You are leading a company so much focused on research. How did you manage when covid occurred and you were overburdened with research?”

Bourla’s quick response – “I am very proud of what we did and what we achieved”

Standing ovation.

Klaus Schwab – “Last question: With all your experience: What is your message?”

And again, Dr. Bourla doesn’t hesitate, as if he was trained for the answer: ”I learned a lot; people don’t know what they can and cannot do in their lives, what capacities they have when they are challenged. It was a big surprise.”

And now comes Bourla’s punch line: “What were the options – not do it – let the world die?

When you understand that the solution is you do it, or you let the world die, then you know what to do.”

Bourla’s final words, paraphrased – “Losing 3 billion dollars would be very painful, but it would not be the end of the world. But if we don’t find a solution, it’s going to very painful for all.”

Schwab, “Let us applause you. – We do it for two reasons:

First, it was very evident, your social responsibility, your sense for purpose, and
second – thank you for having so openly shared with us your objectives and also your concerns and what drives you. Thank you very much.”

Followed by another standing ovation.

And just as a sideline to and in parallel with the WEF, the World Health Organization (WHO), also based in Switzerland, Geneva, is holding its 75^th Annual World Health Assembly during which it will be debated – who are the “debaters” is not public knowledge” – whether WHO will receive global powers to decide over our health and above and beyond its 194 member countries’ own Constitutions.

As Kissinger, alias Bill Gates would say: “Who controls the people’s health, decides over life and death.”

If approved, WHO will convert into WHT, or World Health Tyranny. The first set of government overarching rules would become effective in November 2022 – see this and this.

And, by the way, the World Health Assembly has also just renewed Dr. Tedros, the DG’s mandate for another five years.

We must resist. Collectively. In solidarity.

Yes, a New World Order may be necessary – but to the true benefit of the people: i) Forward to the concepts of democracy, born in Greece some 5 centuries BC; ii) Forward to the concept of sovereign nations, as we still knew them less than a century ago; and iii) Forward to an economy of “Small is Beautiful” – like in “Local Production for Local Consumption with Local Money and a Local Public Banking System; and Trading According to Comparative Advantages,” – As was still known on many Continents less than a century ago.

Definitely, Exit Globalization.

See for yourself, this pathetic, deceptive, promotional, propaganda dialogue between WEF CEO, Klaus Schwab and Pfizer CEO, Albert Bourla.

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.

Featured image is a screenshot from WEF

Posted in English
Comments Off on Reporting From Davos: WEF’s Klaus Schwab Talks with Pfizer’s Albert Bourla: “We rather prevent the disease by vaccination, than cure it.”
Tags: Albert Bourla, COVID vaccines, Klaus Schwab, Pfizer, WEF

Is Monkeypox a Scapegoat for Covid Vaccine Adverse Events? Dr. Peter McCullough

May 27th, 2022 by Zach Heilman

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Although the Biden administration hasn’t given up on defeating COVID-19 as they continue to ask for more funding for testing and the COVID-19 drug, another disease is starting to capture the media’s attention as numerous cases of monkeypox have been reported. With President Joe Biden stating that people should be concerned, many are worried that the disease might bring a new wave of restrictions, protocols, and mandates that were seen during the COVID-19 pandemic. While no announcement has been made, recently, Maria Zeee sat down with both Dr. Peter McCullough and author John Leake who suggested monkeypox might be a scapegoat for the cluster of side effects reported from the COVID-19 jab.

In the video featured below, Zee presented just a few of the side effects being seen from monkeypox. “The [monkeypox] illness begins with symptoms of fever, headache, muscle aches, swollen lymph nodes, chills, and exhaustion…. symptoms that really are just the flu…” Being interrupted, Dr. McCullough noted that the symptoms might actually be from the COVID-19 drug other than the disease.

Adding his input, Leake revealed that monkeypox isn’t new, and the United States even had an outbreak back in 2003, and nobody knew about it.

“We had a monkeypox outbreak, a small one that was quickly contained in the United States in 2003. No one even remembers it. Most people didn’t even know it was happening at the time. Seventy people got monkeypox in the United States, but it’s very identifiable. It’s grotesquely symptomatic. These people were treated and kept at home. And that was the end of it.”

Again, Dr. McCullough focused on if there was a link between the disease, side effects, and the COVID-19 drug.

“And that’s the setup [COVID shot or infection] for a relatively innocuous adenovirus 41 to cause hepatitis. Now bring in monkeypox. Is it conceivable that mass vaccination now is allowing outbreaks of other contagious viral illnesses? I think it is. Obviously, for each case, we need to know: did they take one of the COVID-19 products?”

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.

Featured image is from Red Voice Media

Posted in English
Comments Off on Is Monkeypox a Scapegoat for Covid Vaccine Adverse Events? Dr. Peter McCullough
Tags: COVID vaccines, monkeypox, vaccine injuries

Biden in Asia: Further Steps Toward War with China

May 27th, 2022 by Dr. Brian Victoria

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

For observers of President Biden’s recent visit to Asia it will come as no surprise that, as in the past, the US sought to encourage Asian allies to join in further strengthening its political, economic and especially military containment of China. Like the US role in prolonging the war in Ukraine in order to weaken Russia, the US hopes to weaken China so that it will be unable to challenge American hegemony.

On Monday, May 23^rd, when Biden was asked by a reporter if the United States would respond militarily if China attempted to invade Taiwan, the president responded, “Yes” and added, “That’s the commitment we made.” In reality the US has never made such an explicit security guarantee to Taiwan, with which it no longer has a mutual defense treaty. Instead, it has long maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity” about how far it would be willing to go if China invaded. The 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, which has governed US relations with the island, does not require the U.S. to step in militarily to defend Taiwan if China invades, but makes it American policy to ensure Taiwan has the resources to defend itself in order to prevent any unilateral change in the status of Taiwan by Beijing.

Nevertheless, as the Washington Post noted, Biden has, over the course of the past nine months, stated on two previous occasions that the United States would defend Taiwan if invaded. Thus, there was really nothing new in his latest statement, especially as it has long been believed, strategic ambiguity or not, that the US will continue to defend Taiwan militarily as in the past, beginning with the Korean War when the Truman administration employed the US Seventh Fleet to prevent victorious Communist forces from crossing the Taiwan Strait in pursuit of the defeated Nationalist forces under the leadership of Chiang Kai-shek.

Does this mean there were no new developments connected to Biden’s trip? Most definitely not! On the contrary, a new and important development occurred. However, it occurred not in Asia but in Washington, specifically on the webpages of the US State Department. Around May 5^th an unannounced change was made to the State Department’s webpage entitled, “U.S. Relations with Taiwan (see this). Eliminated were such phrases as “we [the US] do not support Taiwan’s independence” and “Taiwan is part of China.” Now the webpage opens with the words: “Taiwan is a key U.S. partner in the Indo-Pacific.”

As innocuous as these deletions may appear, they represent a momentous change in policy, for it means that the US is no longer opposed to Taiwan’s independence. True, Taiwan would have to give up its claim that, as the “Republic of China,” the country is the true government of all of China, but that claim has been dismissed by the world as the myth it has long been since losing the Chinese civil war in 1949. On the other hand, it represents the long sought opportunity by elements in the current government in Taipei to declare independence, i.e. to become the Republic of Taiwan. From the US viewpoint, the attractiveness of this development is that the US will still be able to proclaim its adherence to the professed policy of recognizing only “one China” even while supporting the birth of a new island nation.

Needless to say, the US is not the only country welcoming this possibility. I recently had the opportunity to discuss this development with one of the leaders of Japan’s largest opposition political party. When I queried him on the current Japanese government’s likely reaction to a Taiwanese declaration of independence, he immediately responded, “The Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs would undoubtedly recognize Taiwan’s independence.” Further, both the US and Japan could claim that Taiwan’s change in status was in accord with the will of the democratically elected representatives of the Taiwanese people and was not the result of military force or coercion on the part of the US, China or any nation.

There is, of course, one not so small problem to this ‘peaceful’ scenario – the People’s Republic of China (PRC). For the PRC, Taiwan is the single remaining part of the country separated from mainland control since the Communist defeat of Nationalist forces in 1949. The PRC has made it abundantly clear that a Taiwanese declaration of independence is a redline which, if crossed, will result in war. Expressed in the negative, Zhou Bo, a retired officer of the People’s Liberation Army, now a senior fellow at Tsinghua University’s Center for International Strategy and Security Studies, explained: “China will not use force unless and until Taiwan declares independence, unless and until an external force separates Taiwan from China, or unless and until the possibility of peaceful reunification is totally exhausted.”

Nevertheless, as my recent article in Countercurrents makes clear, at least one influential conservative think tank in the US is currently planning, if not advocating, for a US military response to a Chinese invasion they believe is coming soon (see: “Pearl Harbor Comes to Taiwan”). In fact, if this think tank’s plans come to pass, Japan will also be embroiled in the US military’s response, thereby committing Japan to its first overseas combat role since WW II.

Conservative voices in Japan would welcome Japan’s military involvement, not least because of its ties to Taiwan as a former Japanese colony while, at the same time, China’s communists have been regarded as a major enemy from as far back as 1937 if not before. Many of Japan’s contemporary conservative political leaders, including former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo and current Defense Minister Kishi Nobuo, are descendants of Japan’s wartime leaders and have inherited many of their predecessors’ views. Japan’s arms manufacturers, like Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, also trace their origins to the same time period, with roots reaching back to the nineteenth century. They welcome Japan’s stated intention to substantially increase its military budget, including, for the first time, building offensive missiles that can strike enemy military bases.

However, from the Chinese viewpoint, it must be remembered that as the result of Japan’s full-scale invasion during WW II, China lost a total number of military and non-military casualties of around 35 million, including 20 million dead and 15 million wounded. Thus, Japan is the worst possible ally the US could have in any future war with China. The hatred toward Japan a conventional war would rekindle among the Chinese people is beyond belief. Ultimately, nothing short of a full-fledged nuclear exchange with the US would end the carnage. Yet were that to occur, what would remain of either side, or any side?

In light of the ongoing bloodbath now taking place in Ukraine, and its repercussions throughout the world, it is nearly inconceivable to imagine another major war breaking out.

Yet, as early as June 2020 Michèle Flournoy, formerly an undersecretary of defence in the Obama administration, called for the US Navy in the South China Sea to have the ability to destroy the entire Chinese navy within 72 hours. Her proposal, one of many, demonstrates there are powerful elements in the US who are seriously preparing for a conventional war with China, sooner rather than later. This is because they are aware China is growing militarily stronger year by year. Thus, striking China now, in tandem with Japan’s growing military might, is an attractive opportunity. Observing how Russia has been bloodied in the Ukraine, they dream of achieving the same result regarding China.

It is not yet too late to prevent this madness from occurring, but it will take the collective voices and efforts of citizens in many nations, beginning with the US and Japan, but also including citizens from all nations who recognize the utter folly of yet more warfare, especially in the face of ever worsening climate change, growing world hunger, the refugee crisis, etc. At least for a short period, we still have the opportunity to make our opposition known to a new war, this time over Taiwan. Will we seize it?

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.

Brian Victoria, Ph.D., Senior Research Fellow, Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies

Featured image is from Countercurrents

Posted in English
Comments Off on Biden in Asia: Further Steps Toward War with China
Tags: anti-China, US-China, US-Taiwan

Strategic Ambiguity on Taiwan Is Dead

May 27th, 2022 by Ted Galen Carpenter

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Biden’s Latest Defense Pledge to Taiwan: Gaffe or the Real U.S. Policy?

President Joe Biden has once again roiled the geopolitical waters of East Asia with his latest statement on U.S. policy toward Taiwan. At a May 23, 2022, news conference during his visit to Japan, Biden strongly indicatedthat he would go further on behalf of Taiwan’s defense than he has been willing to do with respect to Ukraine. It is a significant distinction and an escalation of the U.S. commitment to Taipei. Biden has steadfastly refused to deploy U.S. forces in Ukraine, although Washington has provided tens of billions of dollars in weapons as well as intelligence assistance to help Kyiv defeat Russian forces. When a reporter asked: “Are you willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if it comes to that?” Biden answered flatly: “Yes.” There appeared to be no waffling either. “You are?” the reporter followed up, making it clear that he was talking about direct U.S. military intervention. “That’s the commitment we made,” Biden replied.

Biden’s last statement was factually inaccurate. U.S. policy regarding Taiwan is governed by the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, which was enacted when Washington shifted official diplomatic relations to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Under the TRA, the United States pledges only to sell Taiwan weapons of defensive nature and regard any PRC attack on the island as a severe breach of the peace in East Asia. If the latter occurs, the president and Congress are obligated to consult about an appropriate response. There is no official commitment for Washington to defend Taiwan, however, despite Biden’s implication to the contrary. Indeed, U.S. administrations over more than 4 decades have pursued a policy of “strategic ambiguity”—playing coy about what Washington’s response would be if the PRC resorted to military force.

It is tempting to dismiss Biden’s comment as simply the latest clumsy incident by a notoriously gaffe-prone president of a notoriously gaffe-prone administration. There are mounting reasons, though, to conclude that a more severe situation is taking place with respect to Taiwan policy. Biden has made too many similar statements about Washington’s alleged defense commitment to the island to believe that all of his comments are merely verbal blunders.

During an August 2021 interview with ABC News, host George Stephanopoulos asked the president if Washington’s allies could still rely on U.S. protection in light of the disorderly withdrawal from Afghanistan. Biden responded: “We made a sacred commitment to Article Five that if in fact, anyone were to invade or take action against our NATO allies, we would respond.” He goes on: “The same alliance had been forged with Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan,” he stated [Emphasis added]. During an October 21, 2021, CNN town hall session, the president was asked explicitly whether the United States would defend Taiwan from a PRC attack. Biden responded unhesitatingly: “Yes, we have a commitment.”

In all previous episodes, administration officials, including Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, scrambled to “clarify” (walk back) the president’s comments to assure the news media and international leaders (especially PRC leaders) that U.S. policy had not really changed and that the TRA still determined that policy. Both Austin and the White House staff tried to execute the same maneuver on this latest occasion.

However, there are strong reasons to conclude that the president’s repeated “gaffes” accurately reflect his actual policy regarding Taiwan. Under both Biden and his predecessor Donald Trump, Washington’s security relationship with Taipei has blossomed to the point that it has restored many of the features of the full-fledged bilateral security alliance that existed before 1979.

It’s also important to understand that if a crisis erupts in the Taiwan Strait, the fateful decision about the U.S. response will not be made by Lloyd Austin, Jake Sullivan, the White House press secretary, or any other figure who might favor greater restraint. Joe Biden will make that decision. It shouldn’t be that way; no single official should have such power. Yet, despite language in the Constitution giving Congress, not the president, the authority to make decisions about going to war, it is unlikely that Biden would do more than “consult” Congress, if he deigned to do even that much. For more than seven decades, Congress has abdicated its responsibility for issues of war and peace and allowed an unrestrained, imperial presidency to flourish. It is highly improbable that the legislative branch would now attempt to rein in Biden in the midst of a Taiwan crisis.

The unpleasant reality is that the U.S. commitment to Taiwan’s defense has expanded dramatically in recent years, with little congressional debate and hardly more significant public discussion about the enormous potential costs and risks. Strategic ambiguity is dead. Biden is not guilty of making repeated verbal gaffes about U.S. policy toward Taiwan, although it is understandable why that impression persists. He is stating the truth about the substance of U.S. policy, however covertly the shift has taken place.

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.

Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor to 19FortyFive, is the author of 12 books on international affairs, including America’s Coming War with China: A Collision Course over Taiwan (Palgrave Macmillan, 2005).

Featured image is from The Unz Review

Posted in English
Comments Off on Strategic Ambiguity on Taiwan Is Dead
Tags: anti-China, Joe Biden, US-Taiwan

EU Proposes to Make Breaking Russia Sanctions a Crime

May 27th, 2022 by Dave DeCamp

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On Wednesday, the EU’s European Commission proposed to make breaking EU sanctions on Russia a crime, which would make it easier for the bloc to confiscate assets of people and companies that evade sanctions.

“Today’s proposals aim to ensure that the assets of individuals and entities that violate the restrictive measures can be effectively confiscated in the future,” the European Commission said in a statement.

Confiscating assets means they can be taken, sold, and used by the EU as opposed to freezing them, which only denies the targeted person access to their assets.

Breaking Russia sanctions is currently a crime in 12 EU nations. In 13 EU countries, it is either a criminal offense or an administrative offense, and two EU members only consider it an administrative offense.

Wednesday’s proposal would make evading Russia sanctions a serious criminal offense in all 27 EU countries. It would mean the EU could confiscate the assets of anyone who helped facilitate the skirting of sanctions, including lawyers and bankers.

The EU is also considering selling off the assets of already-sanctioned individuals, including Russian billionaires, to use the funds for Ukraine. President Biden is looking for similar power, but the federal government seizing private property without due process is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.

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.

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

Posted in English
Comments Off on EU Proposes to Make Breaking Russia Sanctions a Crime
Tags: EU, Russia, sanctions

Meanwhile, Back in Washington, and Somalia, and Syria, and Kenya, and …

May 27th, 2022 by Tom Gallagher

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

So we hear that former President George W. Bush finally came around to denouncing “the decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq.” This unexpected and belated outburst of truth-telling and self-criticism was, of course, unintentional—just one of those verbal gaffes that the man once entertained the nation with on a regular basis. Realizing his error, the former commander-in-chief quickly explained that the unjustified and brutal invasion he was condemning was, naturally, not that of Iraq, but Ukraine. He brushed his faux pas off as a result of his advanced age, and the audience had a good laugh about it all.

Unfortunately, that crowd at the George W. Bush Presidential Library in Dallas was not the only group with reason to smile at the current state of affairs, for these are happy days throughout the entire war-making community. With the nation understandably and justifiably outraged at the Russian invasion of Ukraine, it’s been widely noted that NATO is back in favor, arms manufacturers are back in clover, and increased military spending is way back in vogue in Washington—not that it ever suffered much of a downswing, mind you.

What’s also happening these days is that the public are paying much closer attention than usual to matters of war. With the Ukraine invasion streaming on every screen, most Americans appear to know far more of the activities of the Russian and Ukrainian militaries than they know about their own—a situation that our domestic military policy makers are probably quite comfortable with. Unfortunately, the rest of us ought to be quite uncomfortable with this situation—as a glance at the back pages of the past week’s news will show.

First, there was the announcement that President Biden would be sending troops back to Somalia. Why? In the words of National Security Council spokeswoman, Adrienne Watson, the purpose is to wage “a more effective fight against Al Shabab.” Al Shabab, (“the youth”), a fundamentalist Islamic group thought to have 5,000-10,000 members, has been fighting for control of Somalia since the 2000s. The U.S. started bombing Somalia in 2011. The following year Al Shabab declared allegiance to al-Qaeda. The U.S. has bombed Somalia in every subsequent year. The reason we can be waging war in Somalia? Well, it’s not something much discussed, since the fact that we bomb Somalia is not much discussed in the first place. Used to be that the justification and authorization cited for almost all of the bombs we have dropped in this century was the 2002 Authorization of the Use of Military Force resolution (the one that only Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee of California opposed.) Since that authorization was actually repealed last September, the White House/Pentagon’s operative rationale here now seems to be a sort-of “We’ve always done it this way” thing.

This move on the part of Biden—who declared it “time to end the forever war” when he announced the withdrawal of all American troops from Afghanistan—will reverse President Trump’s decision to remove almost all of the 700 Americans previously stationed in Somalia, which Watson called “a precipitous decision to withdraw.” The unofficial word is that about 450 will return. Biden has also approved the Pentagon’s request to attempt assassinations of about a dozen suspected Al Shabab leaders, part of an overall effort—in the words of an unnamed senior administration official—to reduce “the threat to a level that is tolerable.” A prime example of the type of “threat” that Americans might face in that part of the world was the attack that killed three soldiers at the American air base at Manda Bay, Kenya on January 2, 2020. (American soldiers killed in Kenya? We’ll return to that.)

And elsewhere on the assassination-attempts-on-enemy-leaders front, the very next day the Pentagon spoke for the first time about civilian casualties resulting from its March 18, 2019 drone strike near Baghuz, Syria. The U.S. military had not originally intended to discuss this matter at all, until the New York Times uncovered the incident in a November, 2021 series on civilian deaths resulting from U.S. air strikes. This recent Pentagon acknowledgment came a week after the Times was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for that series. Although the bulk of its investigation remains classified, the Pentagon does acknowledge 73 casualties including 56 dead, 52 of whom it claims “were enemy fighters, including one child.” The enemy in this case refers to the Islamic State (ISIS). Anonymous officials familiar with the findings acknowledged that all males at the site, armed or not, were assumed to fall into the “enemy fighters” category, despite the Times report that the camp’s occupants included “captives and scores of wounded men who were no longer in the fight and, according to the law of armed conflict, were not legal targets.”

The justification offered for this bombing was the defense of our Syrian Defense Force allies in Syria’s civil war. At the press conference announcing its report, Pentagon spokesman John F. Kirby characterized the Times’ findings as “not comfortable, not easy and not simple to address,” but he assured those present that “We actually do feel bad about this.” No wrong doing was found on the part of any American involved in the military operation, however, nor was anyone found to have improperly covered it up. And why are U.S. military forces currently at war in Syria? Again, it would pretty much seem to come back to the undeniable fact that this is just the sort of thing we do, ever since four airplanes crashed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

The very next day following the Pentagon’s self-exoneration in the Syria bombing, it took the opportunity to present even happier news: Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III has nominated Lt. Gen Michael E. Langley to a position that puts him in line to become the U.S. Marine Corp’s first black four star general. If formally nominated by President Biden and confirmed by the Senate, Langley will assume the top position of the U.S. Africa Command, a group said to currently number about 2,000 men and women, about 1,500 of whom actually operate out of Stuttgart, Germany (a country that is host to 40 U.S. military bases and about 35,000 American military personnel). The actual extent of the Africa Command remains a bit murky, though. In 2020, the news website Intercept published a Pentagon planning document that listed 29 U.S. military bases in fifteen different African nations.

And why are we in Africa? According to the Africa Command’s website, the organization “counters transnational threats and malign actors.” Indeed, these “malign actors” do appear to be on the rise. For instance, in the course of the decade plus in which the U.S. has been bombing Somalia, the number of militant Islamist organizations operating in the continent has risen from about five to 25. And now it appears that there are at least 29 locations there where Americans might now be threatened.

So, with just a brief look at what’s not streaming on every screen, it’s hard to avoid thinking that if there were half as many Americans who knew what our own military was up to around the globe—or if there were half as many Americans who could name even half the countries we repeatedly bomb—as there are Americans who know what the Russian military is doing, people might start talking about making some real changes there.

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

Tom Gallagher is a former Massachusetts State Representative and the author of ‘The Primary Route: How the 99% Take On the Military Industrial Complex.’ He lives in San Francisco.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Meanwhile, Back in Washington, and Somalia, and Syria, and Kenya, and …

U.S. Congress Holds First UFO Hearings in Fifty Years Just as Biden Administration Budgets Record $27.6 Billion for Space Weapons

May 27th, 2022 by Jeremy Kuzmarov

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

On May 17, the U.S. Congress held its first hearings on Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP)—the new official name for Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs)—in more than 50 years.

Less then two months earlier, President Joe Biden’s $773 billion budget request for the Defense Department for fiscal year 2023 included $24.5 billion for the U.S. Space Force and the Space Development Agency—about $5 billion more than what Congress approved in 2022.

The fortuitous timing was all but predicted by Wernher von Braun, a Nazi scientist recruited under Operation Paperclip, who served as the first director of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, from 1960 to 1970.

Before his death in 1977, von Braun said: “Weapons will be based in space—hence the need to create a psychological nexus whereby people will fear all things alien.”^[1]

As Von Braun Would Have Wanted

Von Braun’s spirit was evident in the opening remarks of André Carson (D-IN), the chairman of the House Intelligence Subcommittee on Counterintelligence, Counterterrorism, and Counterproliferation, who emphasized that UAPs “are a potential national security threat, and they need to be treated that way.”

Carson further stated:

“For too long, the stigma associated with UAPs has gotten in the way of good intelligence analysis. Pilots avoided reporting or were laughed at when they did. DOD officials relegated the issue to the backroom or swept it under the rug entirely, fearful of a skeptical national security community. Today, we know better. UAPs are unexplained, it’s true. But they are real. They need to be investigated. And any threats they pose need to be mitigated.”

Scott Bray, Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence showed two videos at the hearing taken by Air Force pilots which showed white objects that looked like flying saucers in the air whose source could not be identified.

Bray said that, although the second object in particular could have been some kind of drone, he was not aware of any foreign adversaries who had technologies that resembled these objects.

Bray further said that, while some of the sightings could have been of airborne clutter, meteorological phenomenon, or U.S. industry or military technologies, of the 144 reports of UAPs documented between 2004 and 2021, 18 appeared to exhibit unspecified flight characteristics and lacked evidence of propulsion—even when they moved at excessive speeds—which made them intriguing.

An unidentified flying object captured by the U.S. Navy in video. [Source: cnet.com]

False Threat Inflation

Last December, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) succeeded with bipartisan support in inserting an amendment into the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that directs the Pentagon to work with the intelligence community to investigate the phenomenon of UAPs and to publicly report its findings.

Gillibrand—who has received huge campaign donations from Wall Street and consistently supports U.S. military interventions—said that “our national security efforts rely on aerial supremacy and these phenomena present a challenge to our dominance. The United States needs a coordinated effort to take control and understand whether these aerial phenomena belong to a foreign government or something else altogether.”

At the May 17 hearing, Russia hawk Adam Schiff (D-CA)—who has received more than $100,000 in campaign contributions from Raytheon since 1999—echoed Gillibrand by emphasizing the significance of UAPs as a national security matter.

Ronald Moultrie, Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, emphasized the potential threat of UAPs to U.S. military bases and installations, which he vowed to protect.

When Republican Congressman Mike Gallagher (WI) challenged Moultrie, he called for investigation of an alleged 1975 incident in which a glowing red orb was witnessed above Malmstrom Air Force Base in rural Montana, eight years after ten nuclear inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) became inoperable there.^[2]

Gallagher became angry when Moultrie said he had not heard of the incident, and asked him to investigate it—omitting that it had occurred decades ago, before Gallagher was even born.

Gallagher was not so subtle generally in advocating for greater vigilance by the government in protecting the nation from inter-galactic predators intent on destroying the United States—along with other foreign enemies.

Planning for Interplanetary War?

Dr. Steven Greer, who retired from the emergency room to pursue the hunt for aliens as the self-described “world’s expert on UFOs,” is among those horrified by the mindset that was on display at the congressional hearing.

As Greer sees it, aliens are here to help us and the military-industrial complex is hyping their danger and creating the U.S. Space Force to prepare for interplanetary war, arguing movies like “Independence Day” are part of “a false narrative created by covert groups striving to generate fear of ETs.”

A picture containing graphical user interface Description automatically generated

Source: arkadincinema.com

“Have We Visitors From Space?”

Public fixation with UFOs in the U.S. goes back to at least the 1920s when science fiction writers featured stories of scientific geniuses who developed super-weapons that helped save the U.S. from alien invaders.^[3]

UFOs in fiction - Wikipedia

This 1929 cover of Science Wonder Stories, drawn by notable pulp artist Frank R. Paul, is one of the earliest depictions of a “flying saucer” in fiction. [Source: wikipedia.org]

On April 7, 1952, Life magazine published an article entitled “Have We Visitors From Space?” which purported to offer scientific evidence verifying the existence of interplanetary saucers.

The article mentioned numerous UFO sightings, including one in 1947 by a pilot named Kenneth Arnold who said he saw nine saucer-like things flying like geese near Mount Rainier, Washington, in a diagonal chain-like line at speeds estimated to be 1,200 miles per hour.

At that time there was still some thought that Mars or Venus might have a habitable surface. People thought these UFOs were Martians who had come to keep an eye on Planet Earth now that the U.S. had nuclear weapons.

Project Bluebird

Such attitudes prompted an Air Force study out of Wright Patterson Air Force base in Ohio called Project Bluebird, which collected and analyzed more than 12,000 UFO reports from 1952 to 1969.

A few years before the project was initiated, Lt. General Nathan Twining, the commander of Air Materiel Command (later to become Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), sent a secret memo on “Flying Discs” to the Commanding General of the Army Air Forces at the Pentagon, stating that “the phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or fictitious.” The silent, disc-like objects demonstrated “extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and motion which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly aircraft and radar.”

Project Bluebird, however, concluded that most of the UFO sighting reports were misidentifications of natural phenomena (clouds, stars, etc.) or conventional aircraft.

A number of the reports could be explained by flights of the formerly secret U-2 and A-12 reconnaissance planes, though some remained unexplained.

CIA’s Robertson Report

In the early 1950s, the CIA weighed in with its own investigation, headed by a Cal Tech physicist Dr. H.P. Robertson, which concluded that low-grade, unverifiable UFO reports were overloading intelligence channels, with the risk of missing a genuine conventional threat to the U.S.

The Robertson Commission recommended that the Air Force de-emphasize the subject of UFOs and embark on a debunking campaign through the mass media to lessen public interest and ridicule those who believed in UFOs.^[4]

The committee’s final report specified that civilian UFO groups “should be watched because of their potentially great influence on mass thinking…The apparent irresponsibility and the possible use of such groups for subversive purposes should be kept in mind.”

UFO photographs

Amateur photo of flying saucer in 1952. [Source: history.com]

These latter comments have fueled belief in a huge CIA/government cover-up. They were echoed at the May 17 congressional hearings by Ronald Moultrie, who implied that amateur UFOlogists were advancing conspiracy theories.

A big difference today, however, is that the Pentagon is now encouraging UFO sighting in order to validate the weaponization of Outer Space—and secure U.S. domination of Planet Earth.

Historian Jack Manno, author of Arming the Heavens: The Hidden Military Agenda for Space, 1945-1995 (New York: Dodd Mead, 1984), told space expert Karl Grossman that “control over the Earth” was what those who have wanted to weaponize space seek. “The aim is to…have the capacity to carry out global warfare [using] weapons systems that reside in space.”

Roswell

The name Roswell was never invoked at the May 17 hearing—except in passing—though it might have been if the Pentagon were savvier in its public relations.

On July 3, 1947, a cattle rancher named Mack Brazel uncovered debris from a downed plane in the remote New Mexico town of Roswell, which had lightweight wood that would not burn and metal beams filled with writing that bore some resemblance to Egyptian hieroglyphics.

Barney Barnett, a civil engineer, uncovered another crash site nearby with the bodies of four beings whose heads were larger than their bodies and whose eyes were slanted.

Roswell

Brigadier General Roger M. Ramey, Commanding General of Eighth Air Force, and Col. Thomas J. Dubose, Eighth Air Force Chief of Staff, identify metallic fragments found near Roswell, New Mexico. [Source: history.com]

A group of military vehicles driving through a field Description automatically generated with low confidence

Debris in field after Roswell crash. [Source: unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com]

The U.S. Army claimed that the aircraft was a weather balloon and tried to silence Brazel, though a top secret army report leaked in 1984 pointed to a cover-up.

Roswell UFO crash: what really happened 67 years ago? | News | The Week UK

Source: theweek.co.uk

Unsolved Mysteries host Robert Stack concluded in a 1989 episode on Roswell:

“The military declared that the remnants found in that remote field [in Roswell] came from a downed weather balloon. But the people who actually saw and held the wreckage disagree. Perhaps it was an experimental aircraft that the military wanted to keep top secret at all costs. But perhaps, just perhaps, it was something else.”

Concealing Military Experiments

Perhaps it was, but journalist Annie Jacobsen interviewed an engineer with EG&G Company, who worked at Area 51—a top secret military testing base in Nevada—who said that the Soviets stirred up the Roswell UFO incident by sending flying discs into New Mexico with child-size aviators on board as a warning that they could spark a UFO panic if they wanted to.^[5]

Jacobsen’s source believes that the Soviets dispatched flying-disc drone aircraft—which they had developed during World War II—from a mother ship flying near Alaska. Intermittent radar signals were picked up by U.S. installations, but the discs were able to enter U.S. airspace and come down near Roswell.

The child-sized aviators were about 13 years old and surgically or biologically altered to give them enlarged heads and eyes. Jacobsen quotes her source as saying he was told that the alien look-alikes were the result of experiments conducted by Nazi mad scientist Josef Mengele.

When Jacobsen asked the engineer—who had a top-secret security clearance—why President Harry Truman did not report all this in 1947, she said the source replied, “because we were doing the same thing.”

If the latter is true, the cover-up at Roswell had nothing to do with aliens, but was designed to cover up secret and unethical U.S. military experiments.

The Pentagon’s latest invocation of the UAP “threat” similarly aims to divert public attention from the military’s new Frankensteinian projects, while triggering concerns about a phenomenon that exists only in science-fiction stories and in people’s imaginations.

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.

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

Notes

Quoted in Dr. Steven Greer, Hidden Truth: Forbidden Knowledge (Crozet, VA: Crossing Point, 2006), 37.
According to a report in the Sun (a British tabloid), a CIA aircraft gave chase to a mysterious aircraft near the base, which then vanished before reappearing, and one hurtled into the sky at rapid speeds. Brigadier General William D. Barnes signed off on a document that specified that the encounter was “unknown.”
See H. Bruce Franklin, War Stars: The Superweapon and the American Imagination(Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press, 2008).
In 1966, fitting with the CIA’s mandate, Walter Cronkite sponsored a CBS News special “UFO: Friend, Foe or Fantasy?” which focused on debunking UFO sightings.
See Annie Jacobsen, Area 51: An Uncensored History of America’s Top Secret Military Base (Boston: Little & Brown, 2011).

Featured image: Scott Bray, Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence, left, and Ronald Moultrie, Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security, right. Both testified at the first congressional hearings on UFOs in more than 50 years. In the center is a video of a so-called unidentified flying object. [Source: unitednewpost.com]

Posted in English
Comments Off on U.S. Congress Holds First UFO Hearings in Fifty Years Just as Biden Administration Budgets Record $27.6 Billion for Space Weapons
Tags: space weapons, UFO, United States

As Questions Swirl Around Monkeypox Origins and Risk, Vaccine Makers Set Sights on Profits

May 27th, 2022 by Michael Nevradakis

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

As an unprecedented outbreak of monkeypox spreads throughout the west, questions continue to swirl around the origin of the outbreak, the risk it poses to the public and the measures that may or may not be required to contain the virus.

Some also wondered how unexpected the outbreak was after learning about a March 2021 tabletop simulation of a hypothetical deadly outbreak of monkeypox predicted to occur in May 2022.

The Nuclear Threat Initiative and the Munich Security Conference — entities closely connected to the World Economic Forum (WEF), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security — conducted the tabletop exercise.

Some analysts suggested the outbreak may have resulted from gain-of-function research or similar experiments involving the virus, while others floated the theory that malign actors, perhaps related to the conflict in Ukraine, intentionally released the virus.

Meanwhile, politicians and public health officials are delivering mixed and confusing messages to the public about the level of risk, while pharmaceutical companies are preparing to introduce monkeypox vaccines.

WHO responds with emergency meeting — just prior to its World Health Assembly

The World Health Organization (WHO) said it has considered monkeypox a “priority pathogen” for several years. Nevertheless, the new outbreak led the agency on May 20 to hold an emergency meeting of its Strategic and Technical Advisory Group on Infectious Hazards with Pandemic and Endemic Potential (STAG-IH) to discuss monkeypox.

STAG-IH, comprised of experts and scientists from around the world and chaired by David Heymann, professor of epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, advises the WHO on infection risks that could threaten global public health.

STAG-IH does not have the authority to declare a public health emergency of international concern — the WHO’s highest form of alert — which is currently active in relation to COVID-19.

The WHO convened the emergency meeting even though the organization was already set to meet for its World Health Assembly May 22-28 in Geneva, Switzerland — where members discussed proposed amendments to the existing International Health Regulations 2005, and where WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus was re-elected without opposition to a second five-year term.

The WEF also held its annual meeting May 22-26 — in Davos, Switzerland, not far from Geneva.

Monkeypox response described as ‘gaslighting’

Health officials and politicians are responding to the sudden spread of monkeypox with mixed messages.

WHO Europe regional director Dr. Hans Kluge recently expressed concerns about transmission at “mass gatherings, festivals, and parties.”

President Biden also shared concerns, stating that “it is something that everybody should be concerned about … it is a concern in the sense that if it were to spread, it’s consequential.”

And the U.K.’s National Health Service issued an advisory recommending people “only eat meat that has been cooked thoroughly.”

However, other public health professionals said the risk to the public is low, as is the likelihood the epidemic will last very long.

In what has been described by scientist and author James Lyons-Weiler as an example of gaslighting, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advised the public not to be concerned over the spread of monkeypox, contradicting President Biden’s warning.

An article in the Daily Mail delivered its own mixed messages by first warning, in capital letters, about a possible “hypermutated” monkeypox virus, then quoting Dr. Rosamund Lewis, who heads the smallpox secretariat on the WHO’s emergencies program, who said, “Despite suggestions that the virus may have evolved, experts have warned there is no evidence it has done so.”

Despite the fact that the WHO has not declared any kind of public health emergency related to the spread of monkeypox outside of Africa, various countries have begun enacting their own measures in response to the outbreak.

Public health authorities in Belgium announced May 20 that a compulsory 21-day quarantine will be imposed for monkeypox patients, U.K. health authorities urged “high risk” contacts of monkeypox cases to self-isolate and to avoid children for 21 days, and Greece and other countries are considering similar measures.

The Belgian Institute of Tropical Medicine announced it is conducting its own monkeypox PCR tests.

Smallpox outbreak: a new windfall for vaccine manufacturers and Big Pharma?

In response to the monkeypox outbreak, the Biden administration placed a $119 million order for smallpox vaccines from Bavarian Nordic, the manufacturer of JYNNEOS (also known as Imvamune and Imvanex), a smallpox vaccine also licensed to treat monkeypox.

The purchase includes a $180 million option for the purchase of future doses, bringing the combined total of the order to 13 million doses if the option is exercised.

According to Fortune:

“The order will convert existing smallpox vaccines, which are also effective against monkeypox, into freeze-dried versions, which have a longer shelf life. The converted vaccines will be manufactured in 2023 and 2024, the company says.

“Bavarian Nordic has worked with the U.S. government since 2003 to develop, manufacture and supply smallpox vaccines. To date, it says, it has supplied nearly 30 million doses to the Department of Health and Human Services.”

The U.K. ordered more than 20,000 doses of JYNNEOS, while the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control reportedly is set to recommend a monkeypox vaccine plan for EU member states.

Existing smallpox vaccines reportedly are up to 85% effective against monkeypox. With the recent outbreak, health authorities in countries such as the U.K. have begun administering the smallpox vaccine to healthcare workers and others who may have been exposed to monkeypox.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2019 approved the JYNNEOS smallpox vaccine, which was developed in conjunction with U.S. Army scientists.

After JYNNEOS received FDA approval, Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said:

“[A]lthough naturally occurring smallpox disease is no longer a global threat, the intentional release of this highly contagious virus could have a devastating effect.

“Jynneos will be available for those determined to be at high risk of either smallpox or monkeypox infection.

“This vaccine is also part of the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS), the nation’s largest supply of potentially life-saving pharmaceuticals and medical supplies for use in a public health emergency that is severe enough to cause local supplies to be depleted.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci had a hand in the development of JYNNEOS, with accompanying controversy, as highlighted in 2009:

“Fauci gave about $100 million each to Bavarian Nordic and Acambis for research on a smallpox vaccine in preparation for a BioShield contract to be awarded in 2006.

“Some observers have said that Fauci is ‘overstepping his bounds,’ [The Wall Street] Journal reports.”

A study published in February 2022 in the PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases journal, “initiated and funded by Bavarian Nordic” and co-authored by employees of the company, states:

“The appearance of outbreaks beyond Africa highlights the global relevance of the disease.

“Increased surveillance and detection of monkeypox cases are essential tools for understanding the continuously changing epidemiology of this resurging disease.

“Overall, monkeypox is gradually evolving to become of global relevance.”

Bavarian Nordic isn’t the only drugmaker focused on monkeypox. On May 19, the FDA approvedan additional drug, an intravenous version of TPOXX (tecovirimat) for the treatment of monkeypox.

TPOXX is produced by SIGA, described by Bloomberg as “a biological warfare defense firm.”

According to SIGA, “Funding and technical support for this work is provided by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), under the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).”

As reported by The Gateway Pundit:

“TPOXX has been available for use to treat smallpox for several years, but it was only available in pill form.

“The new version of TPOXX will be delivered directly into the bloodstream via injection and also reportedly works for treating monkeypox.”

The previous oral formulation of TPOXX was approved by the FDA in July 2018. That same year, SIGA signed a $629 million contract with BARDA for the inclusion of smallpox drugs in the Strategic National Stockpile.

SIGA reached a similar agreement with Canadian authorities in December 2021, less than a month after Bill Gates warned of the risk of a bioterror attack.

In June 2019, SIGA signed an international promotion agreement with Meridian Medical Technologies, a company owned by Pfizer.

Recent developments sent the stocks of SIGA and Bavarian Nordic soaring. SIGA’s stock, which previously peaked in November 2021, rose soon after Gates’ pronouncements regarding the possibility of an intentional release of smallpox.

In a recent article, investigative journalist Whitney Webb highlighted the potentially troubling track record of SIGA and another smallpox vaccine manufacturer, Emergent Biosolutions, including:

Close ties to Jeffrey Epstein and the Democratic Party.
“Outrageous” no-bid federal contracts to SIGA for the procurement of smallpox drugs.
“Troubling ties” to the 2001 anthrax attacks.
“Serious deficiencies” at a manufacturing plant of a smallpox vaccine producer, Emergent Biosolutions, that also produced COVID-19 vaccines.

Webb also discovered a direct link between Emergent Biosolutions, the Strategic National Stockpile, the anthrax attacks of 2001, the Dark Winter simulation and Bavarian Nordic — via Robert Kadlec, who served as the top bioterror advisor to the Pentagon in the weeks leading up to the 2001 anthrax attacks.

Kadlec participated in the June 2001 Dark Winter simulation of an anthrax attack, helped establish the Strategic National Stockpile, and has directly advised Emergent Biosolutions and Bavarian Nordic.

New players also are jostling for position in light of the monkeypox outbreak, including a familiar face: COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer Moderna, which recently announced it is testing potential monkeypox vaccines.

Confusion over who — or what — to blame for the monkeypox outbreak

Analyst Paul Craig Roberts recently wrote, “No one has explained why and how monkeypox, a problem in a small area of Africa, suddenly appeared all at once all over the Western world,” asking if we are about to experience another fear campaign, or something even worse.

The questions posited by Roberts point to the broader confusion, at least from what is evident through publicly available information, as to the origin of the monkeypox outbreak and how it is spreading.

Many scientists reportedly are “baffled” by the “unprecedented” spread of monkeypox outside of Africa and find its spread in North America and Europe to be “perplexing.”

This may remind some of the spread of the Omicron variant of COVID-19, which was said to have emerged in Botswana and South Africa without, apparently, heavily impacting those countries.

Oyewale Tomori, a virologist and former president of the Nigerian Academy of Science who currently serves on various WHO advisory committees, was quoted as saying:

“I’m stunned by this. Every day I wake up and there are more countries infected … [t]his is not the kind of spread we’ve seen in West Africa, so there may be something new happening in the West.”

Dr. Hans Kluge, the WHO’s Europe director, characterized the situation as “atypical.”

“We’ve never seen anything like what’s happening in Europe,” said Christian Happi, director of the African Centre of Excellence for Genomics of Infectious Diseases.

Happi also suggested the cessation of smallpox vaccination campaigns in 1980, when the disease was declared eradicated, may be contributing to the spread of monkeypox, as no immunity against smallpox or monkeypox would exist in the population.

This view was mirrored recently in an analysis by Jason Gale of Bloomberg, and picked up by the Washington Post. Gale argued that the eradication of smallpox “led to the end of a global vaccination program that provided protection against other poxviruses [including] monkeypox.”

Others argued the low level of incidence of smallpox makes vaccination against it more of a risk than a benefit.

Debates appear to be ongoing in the scientific community as to whether monkeypox is now being sexually transmitted.

Tomori noted sexual transmission has not been observed in Nigeria, but also that viruses not previously known to transmit via sexual contact, such as Ebola, were later proven to do so.

Alessio D’Amato, health commissioner of the Lazio region in Italy, said it was too early to say if monkeypox has morphed into a sexually transmitted disease, while Stuart Neil, professor of virology at King’s College London, said, “The idea that there’s some sort of sexual transmission in this, I think, is a little bit of a stretch.”

Neil Mabbott, personal chair of immunopathology at the University of Edinburgh’s Roslin Institute, argued the spread of monkeypox among sexual partners is likely due to close physical proximity rather than sexual contact per se.

However, David Heymann, an infectious disease specialist at the WHO who led the organization’s recent emergency meeting on monkeypox, suggested the virus entered the population as a “sexual form, as a genital form, and is being spread as are sexually transmitted infections.”

This appears to be aligned with the WHO’s current official view that sexual contact is responsible for the spread of monkeypox, not as a sexually transmitted disease but by virtue of close physical contact.

Is the current monkeypox outbreak related to gain-of-function research?

The term “gain-of-function” (GoF) research over the past two years entered mainstream discourse following speculation the SARS-CoV-2 virus was engineered, and subsequently escaped from, the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China.

GoF refers to medical research in which an organism is genetically altered, either for military purposes or medical research, in such a way that the biological functions of gene products are enhanced.

The National Pulse reported that in February 2022, Virologica Sinica, a prominent journal of virology, published a peer-reviewed study pertaining to a monkeypox-related GoF research project performed by scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in August 2021.

In this study, according to The National Pulse:

“The Wuhan Institute of Virology assembled a monkeypox virus genome, allowing the virus to be identified through PCR tests, using a method researchers flagged for potentially creating a ‘contagious pathogen.’

“The paper … also follows the wide-scale use of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) tests to identify COVID-19-positive individuals.

“Researchers appeared to identify a portion of the monkeypox virus genome, enabling PCR tests to identify the virus.”

Canadian researcher Polly St. George in a recent investigative report said there is an association between monkeypox and GoF research.

And in a recent interview, international law scholar Francis Boyle, who drafted the Biological Weapon Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, said the bioware industry uses monkeypox as a simulant for smallpox.

Along these lines, geopolitical analyst Michael Whitney in a recent article remarked on the sudden rapid spread of monkeypox and posed the following question:

“I wonder if that ‘rapidly spreading’ part has something to do with the way that researchers have been tweaking the gain-of-function of these unique pathogens in order to make them more contagious and more lethal? Is that what’s going on?”

Similarly, James Lyons-Weiler pointed out monkeypox first officially appeared in 1958, “about the time scientists were injecting African subjects with blood products from monkeys to see which viruses might be transmissible. Zikavirus came into our species about the same time.”

Uncertainty breeds speculation, and such is the case with some who suggested a possible link between the monkeypox outbreak and a January 2022 incident involving a truck transporting 100 laboratory monkeys that collided with a dump truck and overturned in Pennsylvania, leading to the escape of at least three monkeys.

The monkeys reportedly were later caught and euthanized, though no reason was given as to why they were killed.

An eyewitness who handled escaped monkeys developed pink eye and a cough, received treatment and was monitored by the CDC.

Others also tried to draw a connection between monkeypox and the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, which utilizes a chimpanzee adenovirus vaccine vector.

However, no such link has been reported, and it’s important to note that chimpanzees are distinct from monkeys.

Is monkeypox outbreak a tool of intentional warfare?

Some officials speculated monkeypox was weaponized and intentionally released as an act of biological warfare, perhaps in relation to the conflict in Ukraine.

There are at least three such strands of speculation currently circulating:

Claims by independent investigator Dr. Benjamin Braddock that an unnamed source at the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control said, “Preliminary analysis of the monkeypox strain currently doing the rounds found the virus came from a lab and may be related to the U.S.’s biological research in Ukraine,” implying that it may have been intentionally released, perhaps by Russia.
Theories circulating in China and reported by Chinese state media that the U.S. intentionally released the virus, as part of “a plan by the U.S. to leak bioengineered monkeypox virus.”
Statements by Irina Yarovaya, co-chair of Russia’s parliamentary commission on investigation of U.S. biological laboratories in Ukraine, and reported by Russia’s TASS news agency, that “the U.S. researched Ebola and smallpox viruses in Ukraine,” perhaps implying this resulted in the monkeypox outbreak.

These scenarios remain within the realm of speculation for the time being, but bear a close resemblance to the Wuhan lab leak scenarios under investigation in relation to the outbreak of COVID-19.

However, even if none of these scenarios hold water, they possess evident value as tools of information warfare, especially in relation to the ongoing schism between Russia and the West vis-à-vis the conflict in Ukraine.

Are monkeypox symptoms similar to COVID vaccine side effects?

Despite the current scare, monkeypox symptoms for most individuals who have been infected are mild, particularly in countries with adequate health systems.

However, they also resemble known adverse effects of the COVID-19 vaccines and symptoms of ailments such as shingles.

According to the WHO, monkeypox symptoms are characterized by “a person of any age presenting in a monkeypox non-endemic country with an unexplained acute rash,” with one or more of the following symptoms (updated March 15, 2022):

Headache
Acute onset of fever (>38.5oC)
Lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes)
Myalgia (muscle and body aches)
Back pain
Asthenia (profound weakness)

Notably, many of these symptoms appear in the list of adverse effects of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. These adverse effects include lymphadenopathy, myalgia, asthenia, back pain and headache.

Others noted the similarity between monkeypox and shingles. Indeed, an image published by TheHealthSite.com of rashes said to be caused by smallpox is identical to an image published by Australia’s Queensland government displaying shingles rashes.

The CDC states, “The rash may be hard to distinguish from syphilis, herpes simplex virus infection, shingles and other more common infections.”

Moreover, according to Andrew Preston, professor of microbial pathogenicity at the University of Bath, “Some people say the rash is a bit like shingles.”

In recent years, certain countries, such as the U.K., have introduced a comprehensive shingles vaccination campaign for individuals age 70 and over.

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.

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

Featured image is from CHD

Posted in English
Comments Off on As Questions Swirl Around Monkeypox Origins and Risk, Vaccine Makers Set Sights on Profits
Tags: monkeypox

The Assassination of Shireen Abu Akleh: Who Gave the Order?

May 27th, 2022 by Miko Peled

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Israel’s announcement that it will not pursue an investigation into the killing of famed Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh was not surprising. The specific reasons it gave to justify the decision make little difference. However, one thing is certain: It is highly unlikely that the killing of a journalist like Shireen Abu Akleh was the decision of a lone soldier or a commander on the ground.

Abu Akleh was well known and well respected. She was clearly identifiable as a non-combatant and a journalist who posed no threat to Israeli forces. She had been in similar situations before and knew how to take the necessary precautions, including wearing a helmet and a bulletproof vest. She had to be shot by a well-trained sniper, and their identity must be known to the Israeli authorities.

There had to have been an order or, at the minimum, approval given by the highest levels of the Israeli defense apparatus, as high as the minister of defense or even the prime minister, before the sniper could execute this assassination. Then, in a pretty transparent attempt to cover up the assassination, Israel pretended to want to conduct an investigation and demanded that the Palestinian Authority, which conducted the autopsy, hand over the bullet that killed Abu Akleh.

Quoting an Israeli military official, The Times of Israel reported that “[t]he Israeli military has identified a soldier’s rifle that may have killed Al Jazeerajournalist Shireen Abu Akleh.” However, it continues to claim that “it cannot be certain unless the Palestinians turn over the bullet for analysis.” The attempt to deceive is ever-so-obvious in this statement. Since it had to have been a sniper who aimed and then took the shot, there can be no doubt who pulled the trigger.

Palestinian Militants?

The British paper The Guardian recently wrote, “Abu Aqleh [sic] was killed during an arrest raid by an Israeli commando unit on Palestinian militants.” Statements like this demonstrate the larger problem. The Israeli commando raids have no justification and are responsible for countless deaths of Palestinian civilians. Framing Palestinian fighters – defenders of their camp, their city and their people – as “militants,” and the Israeli invaders as “commandos,” immediately places the blame on the Palestinians and justifies the Israeli attack, thus justifying every Israeli raid.

This framing, typical in the media, allows the constant, never-ending killing of young Palestinians by Israel to go on uninterrupted. It begs the question: How many Palestinians need to die before the reporting is honest and Israel is forced to stop the killing?

Every so often, an event causes people to lift their heads and acknowledge that Israel went too far and that maybe something needs to be done. When Shireen Abu Akleh was murdered, there was a moment like that. When, a few days after the killing, her funeral procession was brutally attacked by Israeli forces, that was another such moment. But these moments are few and far between.

And these moments, even when they do come, do not last very long and yield no real results. Sometimes a letter is sent by a member of U.S. Congress; sometimes a few statements are made demanding an investigation into what took place. Then people move on and forget, and the flow of Palestinian blood – mostly young, promising men – continues unabated.

The roll of names of young Palestinians killed by Israel is too long to list; and, besides, by the time you try to write it down, more are added. The ages vary, but many are under 21. The images of weeping parents and siblings – sometimes a wife and a child, if they were old enough to marry – continue to flow as though this were some unavoidable, unpreventable curse.

In an open and frank interview I recently conducted with veteran Israeli journalist Gideon Levy, he speaks of his frustration with the Israeli media and the Israeli audiences that consume it. “The media doesn’t want to report, and the consumers don’t want to know,” Levy passionately exclaimed.

Toeing the Line

When the Israeli press report on a killing, they never fail to toe the government line, so the Palestinian is always a terrorist or part of a violent riot. He or they, as the case may be, had to be dealt with, and the courageous Israeli fighters did so. From time to time, to demonstrate just how professional the Israeli forces are, they are shown in action. Images are shown of these forces entering a refugee camp, which, as of late, they have often been doing, particularly in the northern part of the West Bank.

Israel brings in several battalions of commando units, Shabak secret-police units, or anti-terrorist forces, all heavily armed and wearing the best communication and protection equipment in the world, and equipped with unlimited amounts of ammunition. Israeli forces also have the best-trained medics, the finest first-aid capabilities, and helicopters ready to evacuate an injured soldier speedily. Once evacuated, an injured Israeli soldier receives the finest medical care in modern, well-equipped facilities.

All of this to face a few young Palestinians armed with little more than M-16s. The Palestinians have no helmets, no bulletproof vests, possess limited amounts of ammunition, and risk a very high possibility of getting injured or killed. A Palestinian wounded in battle does not have access to the same level of emergency medical care as the Israeli forces. Not even remotely. Palestinian ambulances, if they can even make it to the scene, are poorly equipped, and medical facilities are far and are rarely equipped well enough to deal with severe injuries.

Life Goes On

On the Israeli side, life goes on as though nothing significant happened. Watching the news makes Israeli society numb. Clashes, Palestinians killed, the coalition government facing yet another crisis, Netanyahu may or may not be close to returning to the prime minister’s chair; who knows. From time to time, an Israeli settler or an officer is killed, their name is mentioned in the news, and people cry for a few days and forget. Settlements are being built – so many thousands in the Naqab, thousands more in east Jerusalem – and people of Msafer Yota in the South Hebron Hills are being forced off of their lands, but this is all normal, nothing to worry about. Israelis travel overseas for vacation and go out to cafes and restaurants — new ones open daily. One has to try them all.

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.

Miko Peled is MintPress News contributing writer, published author and human rights activist born in Jerusalem. His latest books are”The General’s Son. Journey of an Israeli in Palestine,” and “Injustice, the Story of the Holy Land Foundation Five.”

Featured image: Shireen Abu Akleh was an icon in Palestine and throughout much of the Arabic speaking world for her reporting from the occupied territories (Illustration/MEE)

Posted in English
Comments Off on The Assassination of Shireen Abu Akleh: Who Gave the Order?
Tags: israel, Palestine, Shireen Abu Akleh

The WHO’s Pandemic Treaty

May 27th, 2022 by Dr. Aaron Kheriaty

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The WHO recently announced plans for an international pandemic treaty tied to a digital passport and digital ID system. Meeting in December 2021 in a special session for only the second time since the WHO’s founding in 1948, the Health Assembly of the WHO adopted a single decision titled, “The World Together.” The WHO plans to finalize the treaty by 2024. It will aim to shift governing authority now reserved to sovereign states to the WHO during a pandemic by legally binding member states to the WHO’s revised International Health Regulations.

In January of 2022 the United States submitted proposed amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations, which bind all 194 UN member states, which the WHO director general accepted and forwarded to other member states. In contrast to amendments to our own constitution, these amendments will not require a two-thirds vote of our Senate, but a simple majority of the member states. Most of the public is wholly unaware of these changes, which will impact the national sovereignty of member states.

The proposed amendments include, among others, the following. Among the changes the WHO will no longer need to consult with the state or attempt to obtain verification from the state where a reported event of concern (e.g., a new outbreak) is allegedly occurring before taking action on the basis of such reports (Article 9.1). In addition to the authority to make the determination of a public health emergency of international concern under Article 12, the WHO will be granted additional powers to determine a public health emergency of regional concern, as well as a category referred to as an intermediate health alert.

The relevant state no longer needs to agree with the WHO Director General’s determination that an event constitutes a public health emergency of international concern. A new Emergency Committee will be constituted at the WHO, which the Director-General will consult in lieu of the state within whose territory the public health emergency of international concern has occurred, to declare the emergency over. The amendments will also give “regional directors” within the WHO, rather than elected representatives of the relevant states, the legal authority to declare a Public Health Emergency of Regional Concern.

Also, when an event does not meet criteria for a public health emergency of international concern but the WHO Director-General determines it requires heightened awareness and a potential international public health response, he may determine at any time to issue an “intermediate public health alert” to states and consult the WHO’s Emergency Committee. The criteria for this category are simple fiat: “the Director-General has determined it requires heightened international awareness and a potential international public health response.”

Through these amendments, the WHO, with the support of the U.S., appears to be responding to roadblocks that China erected in the early days of covid. This is a legitimate concern. But the net effect of the proposed amendments is a shift of power away from sovereign states, ours included, to unelected bureaucrats at the WHO. The thrust of every one of the changes is toward increased powers and centralized powers delegated to the WHO and away from member states.

Leslyn Lewis, a member of the Canadian parliament and lawyer with international experience, has warned that the treaty would also allow the WHO unilaterally to determine what constitutes a pandemic and declare when a pandemic is occurring. “We would end up with a one-size-fits-all approach for the entire world,” she cautioned. Under the proposed WHO plan, pandemics need not be limited to infectious diseases and could include, for example, a declared obesity crisis.

As part of this plan the WHO has contracted German-based Deutsche Telekom subsidiary T-Systems to develop a global vaccine passport system, with plans to link every person on the planet to a QR code digital ID. “Vaccination certificates that are tamper-proof and digitally verifiable build trust. WHO is therefore supporting member states in building national and regional trust networks and verification technology,” explained Garret Mehl, head of the WHO’s Department of Digital Health and Innovation. “The WHO’s gateway service also serves as a bridge between regional systems. It can also be used as part of future vaccination campaigns and home-based records.” This system will be universal, mandatory, trans-national, and operated by unelected bureaucrats in a captured NGO who already bungled the covid pandemic response.

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.

Featured image is from Stop World Control

Posted in English
Comments Off on The WHO’s Pandemic Treaty
Tags: pandemic treaty, WHO

How “Virtual Crime Scenes” Became a Propaganda Tool in Nicaragua, Ukraine and Syria

May 27th, 2022 by John Perry

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

This article shows how media uses computer modeling and “virtual crime scenes” to assign blame for some extremely important international events. In these examples from Nicaragua, Ukraine and Syria, many people died in complex circumstances.

The deaths at the “Mother’s March” in Managua, Nicaragua precipitated an attempted coup.

The Maidan Massacre in Kyiv led to an actual coup.

The claims of a chemical attack in Douma led to the US, France and the UK bombing Syria.

The three incidents are in different continents but share some key characteristics: each is to some degree emblematic of the conflict of which it is part, cited as an important indicator of who is right and who is wrong. All three violent incidents are controversial, with both “sides” claiming to be right. Creating “virtual crime scenes” is a tool which enables establishment media such as the New York Times, the BBC or (in Spain) El Pais, to convey interpretations of the events which conveniently coincide with the way they are seen by the US government and its allies.

All three events have been described and analyzed elsewhere. Here we describe them briefly and then discuss how the “virtual crime scenes” were developed, what their conclusions were and why they are at best questionable and at worst completely mistaken.

Managua, Nicaragua, 30 May 2018

In April 2018, demonstrations sprang up against Daniel Ortega’s government and they quickly turned violent: demonstrators attacked police and vice versa. A “national dialogue” began in early May but, despite this, the violence became worse. Large numbers took part in demonstrations which were mainly peaceful, but with violent outbreaks at the fringes or after most participants had gone home. Large pro- and anti-government marches were planned for Managua on May 30, Mother’s Day. Authorities set the routes to keep them apart. Despite police efforts, at the end of the opposition march, violent groups headed towards the rival demonstration. In the resultant clashes two pro-government marchers and seven anti-government protesters were killed, while 20 police were injured and there were two deaths among bystanders.

Two years after this day of violence, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), through its Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (GIEI, for its initials in Spanish) published a reconstruction of a “virtual crime scene,” focused on the deaths of three protesters. It was produced for the GIEI by the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team (EAAF) and SITU Research of New York. The “forensic” examination was aimed at finding the likely culprits in the killings, which took place at a roadblock put in place by the protesters, close to Managua’s national baseball stadium. A website shows the evidence collected, including two specialist firearms reports, although access to the full video event reconstruction has recently been blocked and only clips are shown. The video acknowledges the lack of conclusive evidence but argues that “circumstantial evidence” overwhelmingly suggests that armed police officers or Sandinista supporters indiscriminately killed the three protesters and others shot dead in related incidents.

A detailed critique of the reconstruction was published by the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA).This showed fundamental errors and gaps in the SITU/EAAF work. The most important were:

A map which is key to the video shows the position of a group of police who were alleged to have fired the fatal shots. But it was incorrectly drawn: it placed them at the center of the zone from which the firearms expert judged the shots to have originated, whereas in fact their true location was outside that zone.
The firearms expert’s judgment that conventional firearms (as well as homemade mortars) were being fired by the protesters was completely ignored.
Video evidence that a group of protesters had conventional weapons, and fired them at other protesters, were omitted from the large volume of video material that the investigators collected.
The deaths of two government supporters and the wounding by gunshot of 20 police officers were ignored.

These errors and omissions at best left the reconstruction in doubt or at worst completely invalidated it. For example, an equally plausible reason for the deaths could be that they were part of a “return of fire” incident, or even that the protesters may have been shot by other protesters. Nevertheless, for El Pais and for the BBC, the reconstruction proved that the police were the killers.

Protesters at a Managua roadblock, 30 May 2018 (Source: SITU Research)

SITU and EAAF refused to respond to criticisms of their work. The IACHR and its parent body, the Organization of American States, has also ignored the contradictory information and revelations.

Maidan Square, Kyiv, Ukraine, 20 February 2014

On Feb 20, 2014, 49 protesters and four police were killed at the central square known as Maidan in Kyiv, Ukraine. Many more were injured. The event led to the overthrow of the elected government and a radical change in national politics and policy. Who was responsible for the mass killings? Eight years later, there have been no convictions. How could this be, when there were dozens of videos, hundreds of victims and thousands of witnesses to a mass killing in the heart of a European capital?

Western media and the post-coup government blamed the security services of the previous Yanukovich government. Others claim the killings and chaos were organized by the militant opposition using snipers located in adjacent buildings, including the Hotel Ukraina and Arkada Bank.

After the killings and coup, a German news team visited. Their report quotes doctors saying that both police and protesters had been shot by identical bullets. The investigation was ongoing yet the newly appointed state prosecutor, a leader of the ultra-nationalist Svoboda Party, had already declared former President Yanukovich and Berkut police to be responsible.

Despite the state prosecutor’s efforts and numerous police being charged and imprisoned, there were no convictions.

In 2018, the New York Times (NYT) published a lengthy story titled “Who Killed the Kiev Protesters? A 3-D Model Holds the Clues”. It was accompanied by a video titled “Did Police Kill these protesters? What the videos show.” The NYT story reports that Ukrainian prosecutors enlisted the help of SITU Research, who built a replica of the street where protesters were shot, then did 3D modeling of the buildings, location of protesters, police, etc.. They analyzed dozens of actual videos then produced their own video concluding “In all three cases, individual officers can be seen aiming and firing their rifles during the moments leading to the victims’ deaths.”

The “virtual crime scene” analysis focuses on three individuals killed in the same area. In all three cases, based on bullet wound locations, SITU alleges that the fatal shots were fired from the direction of the police barricade. An audio analysis, based on the time difference of a shockwave versus firearm discharge, approximates the distance of the shooter.

Illustration showing incorrect bullet trajectory on Kyiv victim (Source: SITU Research)

Looked at casually or superficially, this appears to be compelling evidence.

However, Canadian Professor Ivan Katchanovski has done rigorous research on the Maidan Massacre and reveals that the SITU model misrepresented the location of wounds in all three cases.

1/ In the case of Igor Dmytriv, the wound locations are not level and straight as portrayed by SITU; they are from right to left, with a distinct downward angle. The video shows a hole in his shield near the right edge which also points to his shooting from Arkada Bank to the right, not the police barricade directly in front. The shield evidence disappeared before the trial.

2/ The wound locations are also misrepresented in the case of Andriy Dyhdalovych. As discovered by Katchanovski, “The 3d model moved the exit wound location from around the middle line of the back of his body in forensic medical and clothing examinations to the right and changed a steep top and bottom direction and 17 cm difference in height.” SITU misrepresented the wounds to match up with the direction of the police barricade. The actual wound locations point to the killer also being in the upper floors of the Arkada Bank.

3/ The third victim was Yuri Parashchuk: his wounds were also misrepresented. He was killed by a bullet to the back of his head. “The single bullet in the back right helmet area, and exit wounds in the back left area of his head (parietal region) in forensic examination mean that it was physically impossible to shoot him from the police barricade, contrary to the SITU model,” Katchanovski argues. The victim’s wife confirmed the gunshot wound locations.

The NYT story falsely characterized any critics as “pro-Russia sources” and “Kremlin-funded media.” University of Ottawa Professor Katchanovski has presented his findings to high interest before numerous academic conferences.

In addition to misrepresenting the body wounds, the “virtual crime scene” analysis ignores a crucial question: Who would have a motive to kill both protesters and police?

Douma, Syria, 7 April 2018

On 7 April 2018 there were sensational claims of a chemical weapons attack in Douma, Syria. Social media lit up with a video showing dead and living victims plus a chaotic scene in a medical clinic. The “White Helmets” claimed these were victims of a chemical attack by the Syrian military. Western media and governments quickly endorsed this accusation. The Syrian government denied it and called for a factual investigation by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).

Without waiting for an inspection, the US declared, “The Assad regime and its backers must be held accountable.” One week later, the US, UK and France launched air attacks on Damascus.

In late April, OPCW inspectors visited the site of the incident, interviewed witnesses, took photos and collected evidence.

While the OPCW team were making their analysis, the NYT created a reconstruction of the event, using photos, videos and computer modeling. The “visual investigation” was presented in a 12-minute video, “One Building, One Bomb: How Assad Gassed His Own People”. With seven producers, three editors and the collaboration of a private agency called “Forensic Architecture”, this was clearly a major and costly effort. It is a third example of how smooth video, computer modeling and professional voice-overs can lend an air of authority, whether true or not.

On 25 June 2018, just ten weeks after the event, the NYT published “How We Created a Virtual Crime Scene to Investigate Syria’s Chemical Attack,” They say, “Our investigation found that the Syrian government dropped a chlorine bomb on this apartment in Syria.” For western politicians and media, that was the end of the matter: Syria had been found guilty and the western attacks vindicated.

OPCW issued an interim report in July 2018 and full report in March 2019. They concluded there was evidence of reactive chlorine and there are “reasonable grounds that the use of a toxic chemical as a weapon took place.”

The governments which had attacked Syria claimed this was “proof” of guilt. The UK foreign ministry said the report provided “reasonable grounds to conclude that a toxic chemical was used as a weapon.” The NYT concluded that the OPCW had given “the most definitive finding yet to corroborate allegations that chemical weapons were dropped on the town, Douma, a suburb of Damascus, killing 43 people.” The Guardian similarly reported “Chlorine was used in attack on Syrian rebel town, watchdog says.”

Behind the scenes, OPCW staff were in turmoil. Investigators were complaining the investigation report was politically influenced and biased.

In May 2019, the “Engineering Assessment of Two Cylinders Observed at the Douma Incident” was published by an academic coalition. It was written by a lead engineer on the OPCW’s Douma team, Ian Henderson. It contradicted the official narrative and concluded that “there is a higher probability that both cylinders were manually placed at those two locations rather than being delivered from aircraft.” It gives detailed evidence to support this argument – evidence that should have been included in the original OPCW report.

The OPCW fired Ian Henderson and made efforts to remove all evidence of his engineering report from the OPCW archives.

Then in October 2019 a second OPCW whistle-blower emerged, giving more details of the report’s omissions. In a detailed interview, he told a British journalist that “Most of the Douma team felt the two reports on the incident, the Interim Report and the Final Report, were scientifically impoverished, procedurally irregular and possibly fraudulent.” He added that they had tried all possible internal channels before going public.

Because of the importance of these revelations about a biased and compromised OPCW investigation, an international panel was convened. It included experts from international law, military, intelligence agencies and the founding Director General of the OPCW. It expressed “alarm” at the “unacceptable practices” in the Douma investigation.

Supposed victim of April 2018 CW attack in Douma, during and after (Source: RT)

The scandal exposed the political manipulation of a crucial international organization, the OPCW.

The “virtual crime scene” and evidence presented by the NYT was shown to be fundamentally flawed. The on-site engineering assessment revealed that cylinder deformation did not match the hole in the roof or what would have occurred if the cylinder was dropped from an aircraft. The “criss-cross” pattern on the cylinder that the NYT “virtual crime scene” suggested was evidence, was dismissed as “inconsistent with the vertical, or near-vertical, angle of incidence of the cylinder”. The lead investigator concluded that it was more likely the cylinders were “manually placed”. In other words, the incident was staged.

Regarding the claim that “reactive chlorine” had been found in samples from the site, it was learned that these were trace levels that could be found in any location.

After publishing headline stories such as “How Assad Gassed His Own People” and creating a costly contrived “virtual crime scene” to “prove” Syria’s guilt, it is understandable that the NYT would be embarrassed at the revelations from these OPCW whistle-blowers. If the NYT were as factual as they claim to be, they would report these important stories and issue a correction and apology for their earlier false reports. Instead, there has been total silence.

Conclusion: What credibility should we give to “virtual crime scenes”?

Creating “virtual crime scenes” is clearly a growing business: SITU appears to have done at least 24 such reconstructions, while Forensic Architecture has well over 70, dating back more than a decade. A common factor is funding sources: as well as what are presumed to be specific contracts (for example with the NYT), both organizations receive funds from the Open Society Foundation, Oak Foundation, European Research Council and similar bodies aligned with conventional western political attitudes.

No doubt some of this work is in the public good (for example, SITU says it is helping a group of children sue the US government for its inaction on the climate crisis). But the case studies above show that such work can – whether intentionally or otherwise – push public opinion on controversial issues in a particular direction.

Brad Samuels, founding partner of SITU, appeared to acknowledge this ambiguity in an interview quoted here:

“…it’s about not allowing these narratives to become the reason that there’s no accountability … so that you can focus on what you do know and I just I think that that’s at play in all kinds of ways more than it ever has been … this question of competing narratives, truth claims and facts and that’s really what we’re, this work is about.”

In an article about the use of virtual crime scenes in legal cases, Sarah Zarmsky concedes that they can be “extremely compelling” but that “any political motives or biases must be taken into account.” In the Maidan Square example, which she examines, she points out that the reconstruction was presented as “flawless” whereas Katchanovski later accused those who created it of misrepresentation. Virtual crime scenes are expensive, sophisticated exercises, which once published are left open to interpretation by people who have no expertise in how they are created, she points out. Where witness statements, amateur videos and other material are used to build reconstructions, there is no outside control of the process. She concludes that “digital reconstructions need to be approached with caution and analyzed through a critical eye.”

Our conclusion is more definitive: digital reconstructions, especially in high-profile and controversial circumstances like the three examples presented here, are being used to serve political purposes. Their sophisticated and compelling approaches, obviously requiring considerable resources in their production and presentation, can be highly misleading. Whether or not this is the intention of those devising these virtual crime scenes, their work is used to add momentum to political arguments. In the cases examined here – Nicaragua, Ukraine and Syria – they have been explicitly used to endorse the US and European governments’ political narratives about those conflicts, creating apparent “proof” of one side’s culpability in violent incidents. However, objective analysis of the kind summarized in this article shows that digital reconstructions can hide the truth rather than reveal it. In Zarmsky’s words, “seeing should not always be believing.”

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.

John Perry is a writer based in Masaya, Nicaragua.

Rick Sterling is a journalist based in the Bay Area, California. He is a regular contributor to Global Research. He can be reached at [email protected].

Posted in English
Comments Off on How “Virtual Crime Scenes” Became a Propaganda Tool in Nicaragua, Ukraine and Syria
Tags: Nicaragua, Syria, ukraine

Former Pfizer VP Says All COVID “Vaccine” Manufacturers Need to be “Immediately Indicted for Fraud”

May 27th, 2022 by Ethan Huff

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

More than 17,000 doctors and medical experts, including former Pfizer Vice President Dr. Michael Yeadon, are calling for every pharmaceutical company that makes Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines” to be “immediately indicted for fraud.”

Thousands of people have died and many thousands more have become injured, in many cases permanently, from the injections, and Yeadon and his colleagues want to see justice served.

Speaking at the recent Global COVID Summit, Yeadon made the case for swift prosecution against the likes of Pfizer, BioNTech, Janssen (Johnson & Johnson), AstraZeneca, “and their enablers.” He also issued a corresponding press statement with the same claims.

For the last two years, Yeadon has been warning about the “lies” coming from Big Pharma and the government concerning Fauci Flu shots. In Principle #9 of a 10-part list of principles issued at the gathering, the following was said:

“We declare that Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, Janssen, AstraZeneca, and their enablers, withheld and willfully omitted safety and effectiveness information from patients and physicians, and should be immediately indicted for fraud.”

In his own words, Yeadon said the following about the death toll from the shots:

“We know that shortly after administration of these products thousands of people have died. And although correlation isn’t causation, reasonable criteria have been applied to examine the relationship between injections and the events and it is absolutely clear – cut that these [shots] are the cause of death.”

Covid “vaccines” are medical fraud

Not only did the jabs turn out to be dangerous, but Yeadon provided evidence showing that all of the jab manufacturers knew full well that this was the case before they were all unleashed by Donald Trump under Operation Warp Speed.

“The design of these products was knowingly deficient in a number of ways,” Yeadon explained, pointing to the fact that they trigger the production of “toxic virus spike protein” throughout the body.

The world was promised that these toxic virus spike proteins would remain at the injection site, but the reality is that they “distribute throughout the body,” Yeadon warned.

“There was no built-in limit to the amounts of toxic spike proteins that can be made, or for how long it is made, and that’s the cause of the toxicity,” he further stated.

With more than 30 years of experience in the industry, Yeadon is no shlock when it comes to these issues. He pointed to reports from last November showing that the clinical trials run by the likes of Pfizer involved “questionable practices all around” that point to serious fraud.

“For example, several of the studies were clearly unblinded while they were ongoing, contrary to best practice,” he explained. “And also, in a number of cases, subjects were removed from the database prior to statistical analysis in a way that is suggestive of fraud.”

“We were given blanket assurances time and again by all of the companies about the benign safety profile of their products,” he added. “Even as products rolled out in the earliest weeks, they must have known this was not true. To add insult to injury, it appears that these products provide little or no protection from the virus they sought to protect us from.”

An expert in toxicology, Yeadon further delineated that these experimental gene-based covid injections were tested using methods that were unsafe and unsound. In most cases, proper safety standards were thrown out the window entirely in order to rush the products to market at warp speed.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is also complicit as it knew about the problems associated with the injections but granted them emergency use authorization (EUA) regardless.

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.

Featured image is from MedicalTyranny

Posted in English
Comments Off on Former Pfizer VP Says All COVID “Vaccine” Manufacturers Need to be “Immediately Indicted for Fraud”
Tags: COVID vaccines, COVID-19

Al Jazeera to Send Shireen Abu Akleh Killing Case to ICC

May 27th, 2022 by Middle East Eye

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Al Jazeera Media Network announced on Thursday that it would refer the killing of its veteran journalist Shireen Abu Akleh to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague.

The Qatar-based media network said it had formed an international coalition consisting of its legal team and international experts, and was preparing a dossier on Abu Akleh’s killing for submission to the ICC prosecutor.

“Al Jazeera Media Network condemns the killing of our colleague Shireen Abu Akleh, who worked with the Network for 25 years as a professional journalist covering the ongoing conflict in the occupied Palestinian territories,” the network said in a statement.

“The Network vows to follow every path to achieve justice for Shireen, and ensure those responsible for her killing are brought to justice and held accountable in all international justice and legal platforms and courts.”

Al Jazeera said it would also include in its submission the Israeli bombing of the network’s office in Gaza during Israel’s assault on the besieged strip in May 2021.

Abu Akleh, 51, was shot dead by Israeli forces on 11 May near the Jenin refugee camp in the occupied West Bank while covering an Israeli raid on the camp. Israel has denied targeting her and said it remained unclear who killed the journalist.

Eyewitnesses and colleagues who were present at the scene, including Middle East Eye correspondent Shatha Hanaysha, said Abu Akleh was targeted by an Israeli sniper. Al Jazeera said Abu Akleh was “assassinated in cold blood”.

Calls have grown both in the US and internationally for an independent investigation into the killing of the Al Jazeera journalist. Earlier this month, more than 50 US lawmakers signed a letter calling for the FBI and State Department to intervene and lead a probe.

A coalition of more than 30 press freedom and human rights groups also published a statement on Thursday, calling for an immediate and independent investigation into the killing.

They called for “an international task force to investigate this attack and to ensure credibility and impartiality of procedures and outcomes”.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Mustafa Barghouthi also announced the ICC had been formally asked to investigate Abu Akleh’s killing. Barghouti, general secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative, said there was a need for strong international pressure on the ICC to investigate crimes including the killing of Abu Akleh.

On Monday, a CNN investigation found Abu Akleh was likely killed by Israeli forces in a targeted attack.

The Palestinian Authority has so far refused to hand over the bullet to Israel, saying Israel could not be trusted to investigate the conduct of its military. Rights groups have also said this, saying Israel had a poor record of investigating the conduct of its forces in relation to Palestinian deaths.

The ICC opens investigations in places where domestic authorities are unable or unwilling to look into allegations of abuse.

Israel, however, maintains that it is not subject to the court’s mandate because it is not a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the tribunal, and that the ICC cannot investigate abuses in the Palestinian territories because Palestine is not a state.

‘Aim to kill’

The Palestinian Authority announced earlier on Thursday that the results of its investigation into the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh showed Israeli forces deliberately shot and killed the veteran reporter.

Palestinian Attorney-General Akram al-Khatib told reporters:

“It was clear that one of the [Israeli] occupation forces… had fired a bullet that hit journalist Shireen Abu Akleh directly in her head” while she was trying to escape.

Abu Akleh was hit with an armour-piercing bullet, Khatib said, while she was wearing a helmet and a vest that was clearly marked with the word “PRESS”.

“The only source of firing was by the occupation forces with the aim to kill,” he said in the occupied West Bank city of Ramallah.

Khatib said the PA investigation was based on interviews with witnesses, an inspection of the scene and a forensic medical report.

The Palestinian attorney-general also said the probe found there were no Palestinian fighters near the scene of the shooting, contradicting claims made by Israeli officials that she could have been killed by Palestinian gunmen.

He said that the Israeli forces were able to see Abu Akleh and other journalists, who were all clearly marked as members of the press.

Khatib noted that an autopsy and forensic examination conducted in Nablus after Abu Akleh’s death showed she was shot from behind, an indication that she was attempting to flee as Israeli forces continued to shoot towards her and other journalists.

Israel’s military prosecutor has called on the army to conduct an in-depth investigation. However, Israeli media reported last week that the military had no plans to launch a criminal investigation.

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.

Featured image is from Mideast Discourse

Posted in English
Comments Off on Al Jazeera to Send Shireen Abu Akleh Killing Case to ICC
Tags: Al Jazeera, ICC, Shireen Abu Akleh

How Has Monkeypox Spread All Over the Globe at Lightning Speed?

May 27th, 2022 by Michael Snyder

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

What in the world is going on?

In the past, we were told that monkeypox was not a major concern because it was so difficult to spread it from person to person.

But now monkeypox seems to be spreading like wildfire. On May 7th, the very first case in the western world in 2022 was confirmed in the United Kingdom.

Now here we are less than two weeks later and there are now dozens of confirmed and suspected cases in seven different countries outside of Africa. Yesterday, I discussed the cases that have popped up in Spain, Portugal and the United States. Now there are three more nations that are reporting confirmed or suspected cases, and that should greatly alarm all of us.

The confirmed case in Massachusetts involves a man that had recently traveled to Canada, and so it was suspected that there were additional cases among the Canadians. Earlier today, we learned that “thirteen probable cases are being investigated in Canada”, and the test results for those thirteen “probable cases” should be released soon.

Meanwhile, a case has been confirmed all the way up in Sweden…

‘One person in the Stockholm region has been confirmed to be infected with monkeypox,’ Sweden’s Public Health Agency said in a statement.

The infected person ‘is not seriously ill, but has been given care,’ according to the agency.

And it appears that there could be multiple cases in Italy…

Italy’s patient was holidaying in the Canary Islands and is now in isolation at the Spallanzani hospital in Rome, the hospital said.

Another two other suspected cases are being monitored, it added.

This was never supposed to happen.

Even though monkeypox is a relatively new disease, cases were always extremely rare, and a global outbreak was always considered to be extremely unlikely because it was so hard to spread monkeypox.

Has something changed?

A prominent infectious disease expert at Johns Hopkins University is telling us that this virus “is spreading via physical touch”, and that it can spread “through respiratory droplets” under certain circumstances…

Dr Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease expert at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, also told DailyMail.com that the virus is spreading via physical touch – and that it only spreads through respiratory droplets in the air in people that are already exhibiting symptoms.

That is extremely alarming to hear.

But before we jump to conclusions, it is important to note that we still really don’t know too much about this virus. It hasn’t been around for that long, and scientists have long warned that it could potentially mutate into a more transmissible form…

For decades, a few scientists have voiced concerns that the monkeypox virus could have become better at infecting people—ironically because we eradicated its relative, smallpox, in the late 1970s. The smallpox vaccine incidentally protected against monkeypox. And when new generations were born into a world without either smallpox or smallpox-vaccination campaigns, they grew up vulnerable to monkeypox. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, this dwindling immunity meant that monkeypox infections increased 20-fold in the three decades after smallpox vanished, as Rimoin showed in 2010. That gives the virus more chances to evolve into a more transmissible pathogen in humans. To date, its R0—the average number of people who catch the disease from one infected person—has been less than 1, which means that outbreaks naturally peter out. But it could eventually evolve above that threshold, and cause more protracted epidemics, as Bergstrom simulated in 2003. “We saw monkeypox as a ticking time bomb,” he told me.

Hopefully those that are investigating this new outbreak will soon be able to tell us whether the virus has mutated or not.

Meanwhile, authorities are claiming that it seems to be particularly spreading among men that have sex with other men. The following comes from CNN…

Both in the United Kingdom and Canada, health authorities have noted that many of the monkeypox cases were identified in men who have sex with men — but the virus is not typically described as a sexually transmitted infection and investigations into these recent cases continue.

If this new outbreak continues to grow, it will only be a matter of time before people start clamoring for vaccines. Health officials say that the existing smallpox vaccine should offer at least some protection against monkeypox, and they are already considering giving it to certain groups…

CDC officials are evaluating whether smallpox vaccine should be offered to healthcare workers treating monkeypox patients and other people who may be at “high risk” for exposure to monkeypox, McQuiston said.

“It’s definitely something that we’re discussing and evaluating, whether offering smallpox vaccine makes sense in the current setting,” she said. “We’ll be closer to making recommendations for that in the next day or so.”

And it is being reported that there are enough doses of the smallpox vaccine “to vaccinate basically everyone in the U.S.”…

And as another bioterrorism precaution, stockpiles of three smallpox vaccines are large enough “to vaccinate basically everyone in the U.S.” Inglesby said. And though monkeypox patients usually get just supportive care, a possible treatment does exist and has also been stockpiled: Tecovirimat, or TPOXX, was developed to treat smallpox but would likely work for monkeypox too.

Hopefully we never get to a point where officials feel like a full-blown vaccination campaign is needed. After what we have been through with COVID, nobody wants to see that.

Apparently a monkeypox vaccine already exists as well, and the New York Post is reporting that the U.S. has just ordered “13 million additional doses”…

The US has ordered 13 million additional doses of the monkeypox vaccine after a Massachusetts man contracted the rare — but potentially severe — virus, officials said Thursday.

The massive $119 million order of Jynneos jabs — which can be used to treat both the monkeypox virus and smallpox — was created by the biotechnology company Bavarian Nordic, according to Newsweek.

Authorities in the western world are certainly acting as if this is going to turn into something big.

Time will tell whether that turns out to be true or not.

But without a doubt, I believe that we have entered a time in history when there will regularly be great pestilences.

In secret labs all over the globe, mad scientists are feverishly trying to make the deadliest diseases on the planet even deadlier.

I could not possibly overstate the foolishness of conducting such “research”, but no matter how much we object they are just going to continue their work.

Over time, it is inevitable that at least some of their creations will get loose, and vast numbers of people could end up dead as a result.

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.

Michael Snyder’s brand new book entitled “7 Year Apocalypse” is now available on Amazon.com. He has published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse Blog, End Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, which are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.

Featured image is from Stat News

Posted in English
Comments Off on How Has Monkeypox Spread All Over the Globe at Lightning Speed?
Tags: monkeypox

This Week’s Most Popular Articles

May 27th, 2022 by Global Research News

French Lieutenant Colonel Jacques Guillemain: “Ukrainian soldiers are entrenched in the cities”

Jacques Guillemain, May 24, 2022

Biggest Lie in World History: There Never Was A Pandemic. The Data Base is Flawed. The Covid Mandates including the Vaccine are Invalid

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 22, 2022

What’s the Deal with Germany?

Mike Whitney, May 22, 2022

Video: Pfizer’s “Secret” Report on the Covid Vaccine. Beyond Manslaughter. The Evidence is Overwhelming. The Vaccine Should Be Immediately Withdrawn Worldwide

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 21, 2022

Pfizer Tells Federal Judge that Pfizer Owns the Federal Government and Is Thereby Immune to Normal Contract Law

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, May 24, 2022

Another Orchestrated Health Crisis in the Works? Smallpox Vaccine to Protect against Monkeypox

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, May 23, 2022

How Has Monkeypox Spread All Over the Globe at Lightning Speed?

Michael Snyder, May 21, 2022

Monkeypox: “Fool Me Twice, Shame on Me”

Mike Whitney, May 23, 2022

Microplastics From Masks Found Deep in Lungs of the Living

Dr. Joseph Mercola, May 25, 2022

The U.S. Has Killed More Than 20 Million People in 37 “Victim Nations” Since World War II

James A. Lucas, May 23, 2022

For Bill Gates, It’s “Moneypox”: Simulation of Fictitious Monkeypox Virus Pandemic in March 2021, Goes Live in May 2022

Prof Michel Chossudovsky, May 26, 2022

Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine But He’s Holding Back. Here’s Why

William M Arkin, May 22, 2022

Famine is the Name of the Game

Peter Koenig, May 21, 2022

The WHO “Stealth Coup” to Dictate Global Health Agenda of Gates, Big Pharma

F. William Engdahl, May 22, 2022

Latest Bad News About COVID Vaccines: Pfizer and FDA Knew Vaccines Were Not ‘Safe and Effective’

Dr. Joseph Mercola, May 24, 2022

War in Eastern Ukraine Looks a Lot Different in Person Than It Does on CNN

John Parker, May 22, 2022

The 16 Biggest Lies the U.S. Government Tells America About the Ukraine War

Richard Ochs, May 25, 2022

How Many People Have Been Killed by the Covid Vaccine?

Josh Mitteldorf, May 23, 2022

America Confronting Russia and China: U.S. General Mark Milley Predicts Grim Future of Deadly Great Power Wars Fought in Cities

Kyle Anzalone, May 24, 2022

How to Prevent and Treat COVID Jab Injuries

Dr. Joseph Mercola, May 22, 2022

Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
Comments Off on This Week’s Most Popular Articles

Selected Articles: Bill Gates Lays Out Plan for Global Takeover

May 27th, 2022 by Global Research News

Bill Gates Lays Out Plan for Global Takeover

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, May 26, 2022

By now, you’ve probably heard that the World Health Organization is attempting to seize control over global pandemic monitoring and response, and ultimately, all health care decisions. But did you know Bill Gates, the largest funder of the WHO (if you combine funding from his foundation and GAVI), also intends to play a key part in this takeover?

Davos 2022: The Octogenarian Oligarch Cage Match. Kissinger vs. Soros

By Tom Luongo, May 26, 2022

In a twenty-four hour period two of the most influential men on the planet came out swinging as to what course of action the Davos Crowd should take in Ukraine. The first blows were landed by Mr. Realpolitik, Henry Kissinger, who most people were surprised to find was still alive. Kissinger true to form told everyone that it was time to begin negotiations for a settlement with Russia soon.

Ukraine After 90 Days of War

By M. K. Bhadrakumar, May 26, 2022

The Western narrative that Russia is facing defeat at the hands of the Ukrainian military is falling apart. The contrived narrative that Ukraine was “winning” made Kiev delusional which in turn created conditions for Washington and London to extend the war and incrementally enter into it laterally and turn it into a war of attrition against Russia.

New Documentary: “Theaters of War: How the Pentagon and CIA Took Hollywood”

By Roger Stahl, May 26, 2022

If you’ve seen Top Gun or Transformers, you may have wondered: Does all of that military machinery on screen come with strings attached? Does the military actually get a crack at the script?

The “Best Evidence” Contradicting the Official Position on 9/11: Excerpts from 9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation

By Elizabeth Woodworth and David Ray Griffin, May 26, 2022

The 9/11 attacks of 2001 have had powerfully destructive global effects. Given these disastrous effects, and the many people who have raised questions about the attacks, one would suppose that the press would have thoroughly explored the question of how they were carried out and who organized them. But this did not happen.

Video: I Read Bill Gates’ New Book (So You Don’t Have To!)

By James Corbett, May 26, 2022

Have you read How to Prevent the Next Pandemic by Bill Gates yet? Well, I have, and let me tell you: it’s every bit as infuriating, nauseating, ridiculous, laughable and risible as you would expect. Here are the details.

The Tyranny of Modern Scientism

By Richard Gale and Dr. Gary Null, May 26, 2022

The greatest obstacle Holman confronted within the medical community was what he called “excellence deception,” which he defined as an “ideological justification” that rejects criticism and insulates itself from alternative medical theories and opinions.

What We Don’t Know Is Killing Us: The Urgency of Propaganda Study Under COVID

By Prof Mark Crispin Miller, May 26, 2022

For those of us who study propaganda critically and seek to do this all-important work as public intellectuals, these last two years have been uniquely challenging, and even dangerous, forcing us into a painful double bind.

“Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story”, by John C. A. Manley

By John C. A. Manley, May 26, 2022

’d never flown in a plane before, much less a helicopter. When I was sixteen, Mathéo and I took the train to Toronto to see a Leafs game. Even for the grade eight trip to Quebec we traveled in one of those two-storey coaches with the tinted windows.

Monkeypox Mythology

By Dr. Sam Bailey and Dr. Mark Bailey, May 26, 2022

“Monkeypox” – who could have seen it coming? Well, apparently the organisation founded by Ted Turner in 2001 called the ‘Nuclear Threat Initiative’ (NTI) saw it coming when they published a report in November 2021 called, “Strengthening Global Systems to Prevent and Respond to High-Consequence Biological Threats.”

Overkill: The Deadly Illogical of Gun Rights

By Greg Guma, May 26, 2022

Common Sense Versus “A Magical Worldview”

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, May 26, 2022

The Christian Church believes that what is missed in the religious education of the child can hardly be recovered. It must first artificially induce its teachings in the young, still spiritually helpless person in order to have him firmly in its grip as an adult.

The Bush Doctrine and the US-NATO Encirclement of Russia

By Shane Quinn, May 26, 2022

Former president George W. Bush wrote in his memoirs that following the 9/11 atrocities, he had formulated a strategy in which to safeguard the United States. His plan did not make a distinction between the terrorists and the countries where they resided.

Mass Protests in Islamabad against US Sponsored “Political Military Elite”

By Junaid S. Ahmad, May 26, 2022

Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
Comments Off on Selected Articles: Bill Gates Lays Out Plan for Global Takeover

Free Antonio Tolentino

May 27th, 2022 by Dalena Tran

Posted in English
Comments Off on Free Antonio Tolentino

‘A corpse in a gown’: Palestinian Artist Zainab al-Qolaq on Losing 22 Family Members

May 27th, 2022 by Mohammed al-Hajjar

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

By the time Zainab al-Qolaq had reached the age of 22, she had already lost 22 people in her life. The Palestinian artist, now 23 years old, displayed her art, which speaks of her devastation and loss, this month in an exhibition in Gaza.

The exhibition was held in the Gaza office of the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, which put the exhibition together. (All photos by Mohammed Hajjar)

The two-day exhibition featured nine pieces of art that al-Qolaq painted after Israel’s offensive on Gaza in May 2021.

During the war on Gaza, al-Qolaq lost her mother and three of her siblings when an Israeli air strike hit her home. The family’s home is located in the residential block on al-Wehda Street, which was bombed on 16 May. Forty-two Palestinians died in a single night, among them 11 children.

Anas Jerjawi, the chief operating officer at Euro-Med, told Middle East Eye that it was important for them to provide a platform for al-Qolaq to share her experience. “Today we have decided to give the victim the floor to speak to the world by herself. Her paintings do not need to be accompanied by any language, or need to be translated to be felt and understood,” he said.

In this photo, al-Qolaq stands with her father and brother who survived the Israeli offensive.

The art reflects the suffering al-Qolaq felt in the aftermath of the attacks, which left many buildings, including residential blocks and media offices, flattened. Al-Qolaq also lost cousins, uncles and grandparents in the offensive.

“I can never describe the feelings and the thoughts I had throughout the 12 hours I spent under the rubble. I’ve never talked to anyone about it, no one knows what was going through my mind at that moment,” she told Middle East Eye.

After her home collapsed, Zainab got stuck under a heavy wall but managed to call an ambulance and talk to a paramedic. Al-Qolaq’s father was also pulled out from under the rubble by paramedics.

In this painting, al-Qolaq illustrates the 22 members of her family in shrouds following the attacks. “I imagined my relatives inside these shrouds, one by one, as I painted each of them and said goodbye to them. Twenty-two shrouds, for twenty-two lives that were lost overnight. These shrouds are not the same, though they may seem like they are – each wrapping represents a loved relative of mine,” she told Middle East Eye.

Her art not only depicts the hurt she felt from the offensive and the destruction of her neighbourhood, but also some of the mental struggles she endured as a result, and how she is coping since the events.

At the time of the Israeli offensive, al-Qolaq, an English student at university, was preparing for her final exams, hoping to graduate in the near future.

Al-Qolaq described how she is struggling to deal with the events and passing of time one year on. “The sun rising every morning troubles me. I am still hoping to open my eyes, as I used to, to my mother’s smile and affection. I am still longing for one hug from Hana.

“I used to stay up late with Ahmed, who would ease away the worries and pain of life by his infectious laughs. His laughter still echoes in my ears, so much so that I sometimes turn around to see if he is really there,” she said.

Much of her work centres around the psychological impact she has faced but struggled to put into words. For al-Qolaq, the exhibition and working on her art allowed her to express the trauma she went through, and allow people to get an insight into how the Israeli offensive impacted people like herself.

One of the biggest struggles al-Qolaq has faced is dealing with the absence of having so many loving family members around, spending quality time with them, and having them present in every aspect of her life.

Many have praised al-Qolaq’s strength and artwork. Maha Hussaini, a Middle East Eye contributor and strategy director at Euro-Med, said that al-Qolaq is strong for being able to talk about her experience.

“Despite our deep sorrow for what happened with Zainab and her family, we are proud of her and her courage and determination to overcome the trauma and speak firmly of what happened to her. She is truly an inspiring model for a strong survivor,” she said in a statement.

Although al-Qolaq was able to graduate, she described herself as a “corpse in a gown”, since she was not able to celebrate the milestone achievement with her entire family, and was still processing the events.

At the exhibition, the artist described how she was forced to relive the trauma as she was painting, and could hear the voices of her family and the paramedics.

She also described the fear she felt when her phone battery died while she was under the rubble and slowly losing her voice.

A large number of people turned out to the exhibition, where al-Qolaq thanked civil defence workers and paramedics for their service and saving her life.

“Thank you to the civil defence worker who insisted on saving my father despite the difficult situation and the lack of proper equipment – the person who almost suffocated while trying to deliver oxygen to my father,” she said.

“I know how trivial [my] thank you is compared to what you have done. Nothing is enough to reward you for your efforts.”

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.

Posted in English
Comments Off on ‘A corpse in a gown’: Palestinian Artist Zainab al-Qolaq on Losing 22 Family Members
Tags: Gaza, Gaza bombing, israel, Palestine

Monkeypoxmania

May 27th, 2022 by CJ Hopkins

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Lock yourselves down inside your homes! Break out the masks and prophylactic face-shields! Switch off what’s left of your critical faculties and prepare yourselves to “follow the Science!”

Yes, that’s right, just as the survivors of The Simulated Apocalyptic Plague of 2020-2021 were crawling up out of their Covid bunkers and starting to “build the world back better,” another biblical pestilence has apparently been unleashed on humanity!

This time it’s the dreaded monkeypox, a viral zoonotic disease endemic to central and western Africa that circulates among giant pouched rats, squirrels, dormice, and other rodents and has been infecting humans for centuries, or millennia. Monkeypox causes fever, headaches, muscle aches, and sometimes fluid-filled blisters, tends to resolve in two to four weeks, and thus poses absolutely zero threat to human civilization generally.

The corporate media do not want to alarm us, but it is their duty as professional journalists to report that THE MONKEYPOX IS SPREADING LIKE WILDFIRE! OVER 100 CASES OF MONKEYPOX have been confirmed in countries throughout the world! MONKEYPOX TASKFORCES are being convened! Close-up photos of NASTY-LOOKING MONKEYPOX LESIONS are being disseminated! The President of the United States says “EVERYBODY SHOULD BE CONCERNED!”

The WHO is calling it “a multi-country monkeypox outbreak!” Belgium has introduced a mandatory quarantine. The CDC has gone to “Alert Level 2!” “Enhanced precautions” are recommended! In New York City, the nexus of probably the most paranoid, mask-wearing, quadruple-“vaccinated” New Normal fanatics on the face of the planet, the Department of Health is instructing everyone to wear the masks they are already wearing to protect them from both Covid and monkeypox, and smallpox, and largepox, and airborne cancer, and God knows what other horrors might be out there!

Here in the capital of New Normal Germany, Karl Lauterbach, who, despite wasting hundreds of millions of Euros on superfluous “vaccines,” attempting to compulsorily “vaccinate” every man, woman, and child in the country, and otherwise behaving like a fascist lunatic, remains the official Minister of Health, is excitedly hopping up and down and hooting like a Siamang gibbon about “recommendations for isolation and quarantine,” and other “monkeypox containment measures.”

As Yogi Berra famously put it, “it’s like déjà vu all over again.”

Except that it isn’t … or it probably isn’t. Before I could even finish this column, the United GloboCap Ministries of Truth started dialing down the monkeypox panic. It appears they’re going with “it’s a gay pandemic,” or an “LGBTQ pandemic,” or an “LGBTQIA+ pandemic,” or whatever the official acronym is by the time I click the “publish” button, and making other noises to the effect that it might not be absolutely necessary this time to order a full-scale global lockdown, release the drones and robotic dogs, inject everybody with experimental drugs, and start viciously persecuting “monkeypox deniers.”

You didn’t really believe they were launching a shot-by-shot remake of Covid, did you? The showrunners at GloboCap may be preternaturally evil, but they aren’t stupid. Only the most hopelessly brainwashed New Normals would go along with another “apocalyptic pandemic” before the current one has even been officially cancelled. No, unfortunately, odds are, we’re just getting a preview of what “life” is going to be like in the New Normal Reich, where the masses will be perpetually menaced by an inexhaustible assortment of exotic pathogens and interchangeable pseudo-pathological threats.

The New Normal was never about Covid specifically. It was always about implementing a new “reality” — a pathologized-totalitarian “reality,” not so much ruled as discreetly “guided” by unaccountable, supranational, non-governmental governing entities, global corporations, and assorted billionaires — in which Covid, or monkeypox, or kangaroopox, or any other viral zoonotic disease, or any climate-related or economic development, or aberrant ideological or behavioral tendency, could be used as a pretext to foment another outbreak of mindless mass hysteria and impose additional restrictions on society.

That new “reality” has been implemented … perhaps not as firmly as originally intended, but implemented nonetheless. We are being conditioned to accept this new “reality,” as we were conditioned to accept the War on Terror “reality,” to pointlessly remove our footwear at the airport, place our liquids in travel-size containers, submit to groping by “security staff,” and otherwise live in a state of constant low-level fear of a “terrorist attack,” as we are now being conditioned to wear masks where we are told, submit to mandatory “vaccination,” and live in constant low-level fear of the next purportedly deadly pathogen.

Sadly, most of us will accept this conditioning, and adapt to the “minor inconveniences” that are being imposed on us at every turn. After all, what difference does it really make if we have to wear a little mask on an airplane, or on public transport, or at the doctor’s office? And is it really such a breach of our fundamental rights to freedom of speech, freedom of movement, association, privacy, and basic bodily autonomy if we have to allow governments and global corporations to censor our political opinions, prevent us from traveling, forbid us to protest, and force us to submit to invasive medical treatments in order to hold a job? We got used to taking off our shoes at the airport and watching the “security staff” fondle our kids’ genitals, and invading and bombing other countries and murdering whole families with drones, didn’t we? Surely, we’ll get used to this.

Or … OK, I won’t, and neither will you, probably, but the majority of the masses will. They just demonstrated that pretty clearly, didn’t they? As they demonstrated it during the Global War on Terror. As they demonstrated it during the Cold War. As they demonstrated it … oh, never mind.

Sorry, I really wanted to end this column on a positive note. All right, here’s one! A little good news, finally! According to the professional fact-checkers at Reuters, it turns out “there is no evidence at all that the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting [which is taking place in Davos right now] was scheduled to coincide with these outbreaks of monkeypox,” and anyone who says there is, or implies there is, or who deviates from or questions the “facts,” or the “Science,” or whatever, is a “monkeypox-denying, conspiracy-theorizing, anti-vax, Putin-loving disinformationist,” and so everything is actually hunky-dory, or it will be as soon as we teach those evil Rooskies a little thermonuclear lesson!

I don’t know about you, but that’s a load off my mind. For a moment there, I thought we were in trouble.

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.

Featured image: Close-up of monkeypox lesions on the arm and leg of a female child in Bondua, Grand Gedeh County, Liberia. http://phil.cdc.gov (CDC’s Public Health Image Library)

Posted in English
Comments Off on Monkeypoxmania
Tags: monkeypox

Addressing the Lies and Crimes of Operation COVID-19

May 26th, 2022 by Prof. Anthony J. Hall

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

We are living amidst heaps of visible and invisible wreckage, much of it toxic, as we continue our journey into the third year of the manufactured COVID crisis. Although not in the ways emphasized by our governors’ centrally controlled media monopolies, the contrived fight against the overhyped coronavirus has brought serious trauma to the physical, mental and economic state of much of humanity.

A widely broadcasted outpouring of lies and deception has been instrumental in helping to open the way for the rapid descent of the socio-economic conditions experienced by important population groups throughout the world. Moreover, the wall-to-wall misrepresentations have helped create tainted mental environments where heightened levels of military confrontation are for the most part welcomed, encouraged, and facilitated. We are fast being sucked into a whirlpool of psychopathic war mongering that is steadily moving all life on earth towards a nuclear holocaust at the end of history.

It is important to recall that the current cacophony of cataclysms pointed against us, burst onto the scene with a corporatist campaign to vanquish a flu-like illness. This medical mobilization provided the pretext for a well-orchestrated psychological operation, one that led to invasive assaults into almost every facet of our personal and collective lives.

As this history unfolds, a daunting assortment of malevolent precedents and processes continue to proliferate with no real end in sight. The resulting complex of catastrophes has much potential to further degrade our governments, universities, courts, public services, Internet interactions, banking transactions, professional associations and unions. This list of the institutional casualties is far from complete.

At this stage in the engineered crisis we have great need of fresh infusions of robust investigative activity leading to serious rounds of uncorrupted arbitration in the arena of the criminal law. The aim of these inquiries, trials and judgments must be to put an end to the elaborate crime spree whose high costs imposed on society extend far beyond the vandalized state of medical care, public health, and parliamentary governance.

In order to apply genuine remedies for the political, cultural and economic ailments that are infecting our key institutions, those of us who are awake to the perils engulfing us must find innovative ways of growing our numbers. We must expand our circles of collaboration in order to mount more effective strategies of collective self-defense. The alternatives to well-coordinated resistance are indeed dire, as we continue to bear the brunt of steady attacks in the undeclared war targeting the largest part of humanity.

Can the Top Culprits in Operation COVID-19 be Brought to Justice?

This creep of a hybrid war against the people entered a new stage in 2020 with an onslaught of medical tyranny. In 2022 the aggressions are proliferating across many financial, cultural and logistical fronts with particular emphasis on the destruction of supply chains especially of food.

See this and this.

Some of the state and media-induced contempt formerly reserved for the so-called “unvaxxed’ has been redirected into a more rudimentary form of discriminatory war propaganda. This propaganda is calculated to breed hatred towards Russia and Russians. Russians are being constructed in the Western media as convenient scapegoats on which to hang woes whose real origins lie mostly in the misdeeds of our own corrupt rulers.

The chain of command of our governors extends to the secretive operations of banks, bankers and their multi-billionaire associates. The vast privileges of those imbued with chartered power over the creation of money and debt translates into enormous influence over government policies and actions.

Many of those implicated in this post-2019 crime spree are prominent officials. They include judges, heads of state, university presidents, media moguls, corporate executives, financiers, prominent celebrities, research directors, “philanthropy” directors, widely published pundits, and spy bosses. The current round of criminal activity at high levels is consistent with a longstanding pattern whose disastrous effect has been to put those in the upper echelons of wealth, power and prestige above the law.

The seriousness of the present crisis demands we must find ways to break the stranglehold over our key institutions in order to restore something akin to a rule of law. What will it take to generate serious actions of law enforcement aimed at bringing to justice the top culprits of the manufactured COVID crisis?

How is it that, for instance, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the USA’s most influential czar of the COVID industry, has escaped criminal charges up until this time? How has Dr. Fauci avoided this outcome even with such intense public disclosure highlighting his apparent violations of many laws, rules and policies over a number of decades? Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been especially unrelenting in providing a superbly-documented case impugning Fauci in what amounts to one of the most detailed accounts of the misdeeds of a wayward civil servant ever published.

See this.

If even civil servants are to be treated as immune from criminal investigations and charges, what hope is there of ever bringing to justice heads of government like Justin Trudeau in Canada and Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand? Trudeau and Ardern are both prime ministerial mascots of the Young Leaders Program of Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum.

Explaining the Most Sweeping Round of Medical Deregulation Ever

Operation COVID-19 introduced a period when an open season was declared on certain kinds of corporate plunder and pillage. This boondoggle enabled retail giants like Wal*Mart, Costco, and Amazon to push aside scores of small retailers and suppliers. The so-called lockdowns advanced an agenda of attack aimed especially at small family businesses, part of a larger pattern of assault aimed at diminishing and disabling the middle class.

Among the pharmaceutical corporations, Pfizer and Moderna were among the biggest winners of government largesse. Government favored them with the most sweeping rounds of medical deregulation in a century of developing new medical products.

After waving aside the need to follow many of the rules for the invention, testing and evaluating of new drugs, governments became primary funders, promoters, defenders and enforcers of the push to universalize COVID shots. Even as many injection mandates continue to back the jabs-for jobs tradeoffs, officialdom is still denying or downplaying mounting evidence from authoritative sources that the COVID jabs are decidedly ineffective and profoundly unsafe.

In fact the clot shots are so unsafe that they are forcing unprecedented levels of death and injury on those who have been cajoled or coerced into taking the experimental injections.

Governments, mass media and their many accomplices have gone to great extremes to persuade the public that this program of mass injection was actually wise, prudent and necessary. The conspirators have gone to exceptional lengths to cover up many of the deceptions that they had concocted to push forward an agenda whose primary goal seems to be depopulation. This obfuscation of their own deceits merged into a cover up of the horrific outcomes brought on by their own actions.

Formidable totalitarian regimes are fast being consolidated as an outgrowth of the actions of those at the front of the line in facilitating and exploiting the stealthy manipulations of medical tyranny. The purpose of these manipulations is ultimately to further expand the power and wealth of some of the richest and most heavily entitled people on Earth.

Accordingly, new frontiers of obscenity are being breached by the propensity of those in power to break all the rules in order to get things done and then to avoid accountability by lying about it all.

There is much evidence of this growth of tyranny in the current barrage of enactments being rushed into operation. Generally speaking the goal of this process is to make it even easier for authorities to censor unwanted news. Among the most effective techniques of censorship is to spy on, harass, criminalize, silence and disappear those independent investigators who have shown themselves to be effective at exposing government and corporate wrongdoing.

Another aspect of this growing totalitarianism is evident in the rush to take powers away from the parliamentary institutions of national government. The other side of this same process is to upload decision-making authority to agencies like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Economic Forum (WEF).

The objective of these agencies is to advance a very malevolent genre of global plutocracy, one that operates well outside the reach of most average citizens whose political lives unfold largely within well-established traditions of national governance.

As Trudeau’s treatment of the Truckers demonstrated, these patterns of domestic politics do not sit well with the politics of officials who prefer to take their leads from the Swiss-headquartered WHO and WEF. The business of these organizations is very open to the manipulative bribes and interventions by international corporations, but especially those connected to the pharmaceutical industry.

Dangerous Precedents

A big part of the institutional wreckage accumulating around us, is the result of misplaced efforts to shut down, sideline or discredit any critical analysis that calls into question the project of mass injection.

Many have participated knowingly or inadvertently in the elaborate process aimed at silencing, discrediting, punishing, or sideling all voices, including those of highly qualified experts, who criticize the contrived COVID orthodoxy. This effort to block the process of open debate testing the merit of competing theories and theorists runs against core attributes of the scientific method.

The punishments directed at those with viewpoints that challenge the COVID policies of our bought-and-paid-for-governments can include being fired from high-ranking positions. On the way to being fired, many independent-minded scientists face severe ad hominem attacks concentrating on alleged personal foibles rather than on the scientific merit of their research and conclusions.

The media’s attacks directed at supposed scientific heretics have been extended to collective attacks on members of the public. Those who have chosen to resist the regime of forced lockdowns, mask wearing and coercive injection mandates have been crudely grouped and characterized as “anti-vaxxers.”

Anything goes, it seems, when it comes to the project of dehumanizing and demonizing so-called “anti-vaxxers.” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has led the way in this regard. He has widely publicized his own strange opinion that “anti-vaxxers” tend to be deplorable racists, women haters and “science deniers.”

See this.

Invoking harsh memories of the genesis of earlier bouts of state-sanctioned discriminatory violence, Trudeau wonders if “anti-vaxxers” should be “tolerated” in Canada. By seeming to open the federal door to the option of intolerance, Justin Trudeau is acting consistently with a detailed case put forward by Rav Arora in the New York Post. Aora accused Trudeau of pointing Canada away from being a “vibrant liberal democracy” towards becoming “an authoritarian state.”

The campaign to constrain and shut down scientific debate even in parliamentary, journalistic, and academic settings has established extremely dangerous precedents that have yet to be addressed. It is in this fashion that the manufactured COVID crisis has undermined the basis of legal protections for free speech, academic freedom, freedom of assembly, religious freedom, freedom of conscience, as well as the right to exercise of bodily autonomy.

Once it has been established that governments can create the conditions to coerce citizens into accepting unwanted substances into their bodies, what comes next? Have individual rights already been sacrificed on the altar of this manufactured medical crisis?

Has the green lighting by governments of the largest medical experiment ever on human subjects, established the precedent that the Nuremberg Code no longer applies? Have we entered an era when all sorts of medical experiments on human subjects can take place without the informed consent of those subjects? Can people be coercively mandated to become guinea pigs in medical experiments even if they don’t want to do so?

Will it be required in the future even to inform test subjects that they are objects of medical experimentation? If twelve-year-olds can overrule their parents in deciding to take COVID shots, what is to be the future role of mothers and fathers in other aspects of child rearing? And speaking of children, how many of them will be born in the future given the devastating effects of COVID shots on fertility organs in both women and men?

Increased Distrust of Our Core institutions and Those That Lead Them

Given their role as compliant servants of government COVID policies, how will courts, universities, professional organizations, and media cartels operate in the future?

How has the subservience of these organizations to government dictates set precedents that run contrary to the kinds of independence we expect of certain institutions? How, for instance, can we any longer regard our universities as genuine sites of higher education when so many of the senior custodians of these institutions have made unquestioning compliance with authoritarian measures a condition of admission for students and a condition of employment for faculty members? How can inconvenient truths readily be spoken to power in such heavily politicized institutions where obedience to authority is becoming the highest ideal?

It is clear that in the course of Operation COVID-19 the principles of academic freedom and academic meritocracy have been seriously violated in ways that cannot be easily understood let alone fixed. As we shall see below, even the principles of academic publication through academic peer review have been hijacked in order to clear the way for the mass distribution of dangerous COVID shots to the general population.

To this day, no significant platforms have been given over for meaningful public discourse on how we should respond to all the destructive precedents established in the course of the fake fight against COVID-19. Instead, much of the media as well as many governments persist in trying to impose on everyone a single uniform perception of the COVID crisis.

Nevertheless no consensus has emerged from this huge and elaborate thought-control operation. A sizable minority of the worldwide population has emerged from the misnamed pandemic more distrustful than ever of our core institutions and those that lead them.

The distrust is especially significant when it comes to the cynical responses to the failures of media, universities, and courts. We tend to afford these agencies high levels of latitude for independent analysis and action partly because we depend on them to embody some checks against the exercise of excessive power by governments.

In this instance, however, these institutions have, with some rare exceptions, let down the public at the very moment we needed them most. Can these failed institutions ever be repaired or do we need to contemplate building new institutions of higher education, law enforcement and news reporting from the ground up?

The primary indicator that the main institutional responses to the manufactured COVID crisis have been harmful and wrong is the large mass of dead, dying, crippled and otherwise injured humans struck down in the course of the global push to impose policies of mass injection.

At this stage of the saga it would be a mark of either disingenuousness or negligence for anyone in official positions of power and responsibility to claim complete unawareness of the big medical experiment’s primary victims. It is clear that millions of otherwise healthy people have been badly hurt and/or decimated by the one-size-fits-all approach to the injection of COVID jabs into the multitudes.

The high rates of injection deaths and injuries began almost immediately with the dissemination of mRNA injections that started in mid-December of 2020. As Professor Emeritus Michel Chossudovsky explained, by April of 2022 the official published records of several governments including those of the US, the UK and the EU, revealed that at least 70,000 deaths and more than 11,000,0000 injuries had been caused by COVID injections.

These figures almost certainly significantly understate the real figures because, as repeated studies have demonstrated, only a small percentage of injection deaths and injuries actually get reported. This pattern is probably more pronounced in this COVID-19 episode. Hospital administrators and those that speak on behalf of colleges of physicians have left medical staff with no doubts that they will be severely punished if they do not refrain from doing anything that might encourage so-called “vaccine hesitancy.”

Prof. Chossudovsky goes on to identify an internal document of the Pfizer Corporation now made public due to a court order. This internal document reveals that by February of 2020 it was already known by many insiders that about 1,200 deaths and over 40,000 injuries had already been caused by the experimental Pfizer shots. It is also made clear that Pfizer officials had already determined that 1291 ailments, some of them lethal, are at risk of infecting the recipients of Pfizer shots.

See this and this.

Dr. Chossudovsky expresses the view that this evidence should have been enough to cause Pfizer officials to withdraw their product from public distribution. His indication that COVID injections should be removed from distribution has been a common theme of many principled scientists who have looked independently at the harm done to human populations by the Warp Speed injection products.

Large controversies should arise when public officials together with all manner of celebrities, publicly promote as safe and effective a set of medical products that do in fact cause high rates of death and injury. The cheerleader approach deployed in multiple advertising campaigns to kick off the so-called “vaccine rollouts” set up immediate obstacles against the kind of balanced public education that would have been necessary to cultivate “informed consent” among those about to receive the experimental shots.

Premeditated Murder?

As time has passed there has been more and more evidence showing that completely unacceptable levels of death and injury flowing from the injections. The failure of public officials to acknowledge this information, let alone to act on it, will have significant consequences. As news of the millions of victims proliferates in literally thousands of published essays, the issue of premeditated murder comes more and more into focus.

What is supposed to happen when there is abundant evidence showing that the dissemination of a particular medical product is causing high death rates? What is supposed to happen to those that become aware of this lethal outcome but continue nevertheless to promote and facilitate the dissemination of the killer injections? Surely at some point such reckless and irresponsible behavior reaches the criteria of premeditated murder.

The issue of the deaths and shortened life spans that have been caused belongs in the realm of the criminal law rather than to that of civil law or constitutional law. But where is there any indication that law enforcement agencies are actively investigating these criminal matters that are making murder suspects of some of our top officials especially in media and government.

Even at this stage we cannot with certainty say whether injection deaths so far can be counted in the tens of thousands, in the hundreds of thousands, or in the millions. This uncertainty alone represents a stunning illustration of the extent of the scientific and professional malfeasance running rampant in this matter. The whole gamut of officialdom’s responses to the COVID phenomenon has been anything but safe and effective. Nor has it been honest.

If there is no provision even for counting honestly the extent of morbidity caused by the experimental injections, what other factors in this experiment are not being conscientiously observed and monitored? How is this open contempt for the rules of those most responsible for this experiment to be explained? What else is being covered up?

Are the large uncertainties concerning death and injury among injection recipients an indicator that nobody in positions of power in this matter has a solid grip on the need to protect the public interest? Much of the media is deeply implicated in the crime of depriving the public of the information resources that they require to protect themselves from a devastating plague of medical malpractice underway.

The COVID Injections Don’t Work

We are still in the early days of learning how deeply problematic the COVID injections have proven to be. In the words of Australian Senator Gerard Rennick, the COVID injections “don’t work”! The COVID injections “are not fit for purpose.” Senator Rennick explains, “They don’t provide immunity. They didn’t prevent transmission. They didn’t prevent hospitalization. And they didn’t prevent death.” He explained further,

“Despite the fact that 90% of the population (in Australia) is jabbed, COVID still ran rampant throughout the community. No herd immunity was achieved.”

Senator Rennick expounded on the “unbridled abuse” which has taken place in Australia in order to hide the true extent of vaccine injuries. This abuse extended to “gagging” and “bullying” medical professionals so they would not reveal just how dangerous the COVID shots really are.

This abuse of medical professionals more generally extended to gross violations of the provisions of peer review in prestigious medical journals.

See this.

The aim of those behind this scientific and academic fraud was to discredit the COVID remedies that are in fact effective, economical and, in correct dosages, safe. The aim of this sidelining of alternative remedies was anything but altruistic. If, for instance, hydroxychloriquine and ivermectin had been widely adopted as COVID remedies, obstacles would have been put in the way of emergency use authorization for the COVID shots.

What safeguards are needed to protect against further abuses of the legal provisions underlying emergency use authorization of medical products? Given what we now know, is the time right to remove the dubious legal enactments that immunize vaccine makers against being sued for deaths and injuries created by faults in their products?

From the very beginning of the manufactured COVID crisis Bill Gates, Justin Trudeau, Anthony Fauci and many other agents of Big Pharma repeatedly declared in the media that vaccines offered the only viable route out of the coronavirus affliction. Why was the remedy already being publicized well before a credible diagnosis of the affliction was formulated?

Were the injections created to treat COVID-19 or was the overhyped coronavirus created as a means of injecting into society the habits, expectations, legal frameworks and political impetus conducive to pushing the adoption of mandated programs of cradle-to-grave vaccines for everyone?

Will There Be Public Show Trials of Nurses and Doctors?

Not surprisingly, initiatives are underway whose object seems to be to divert attention away from those who directed the Covid responses from the upper echelons of national, international, and supranational power. Instead of investigations into the activities of those that led the grab for more power and wealth through the manipulation of the manufactured emergency, proceedings are underway to identify patsies and scapegoats. Judicial investigations and court proceedings are already targeting low-level medical practitioners as well as working class critics of COVID policies.

In Canada, for instance, Justin Trudeau is seeking to transform a mandatory federal investigation of his government’s decision to invoke the federal Emergency Act. The stated goal of this invocation was to quash the protest of those Truckers and their supporters who organized a Freedom Convoy to Ottawa.

So far the Trudeau government is obsessive in its efforts to keep secret what transpired inside cabinet in the run up to the declaration of the Emergencies Act on Feb. 14. Trudeau’s plan seems to be to point attention away from what happened inside the federal government and to place at the forefront of federal publicity and propaganda the concocted imagery of the Truckers as terrorist and insurrectionists.

See this.

In a video entitled, “How Jailing a Nurse Could Help Paper Over Responsibility for Operation COVID-19,” scholar Emanuel Pastreich explains the implication of a court ruling in a criminal proceeding brought against nurse RaDonda Vaught. Ms. Vaught worked at Vanderbilt University Hospital when it was being remade as a commercial business.

Nurse Vaught was convicted of “reckless homicide” for making a mistake in giving the wrong drug to a patient who subsequently died as a result of the error. It is very unusual to charge, convict and jail a nurse as a criminal for making an honest mistake in providing care. The more usual response would be to deal with such a tragedy within the professional codes of the nursing discipline.

Dr. Pastreich is a critic of the accelerated privatization of the US healthcare system as well as its transformation into a big money bonanza for the well-rewarded beneficiaries of Big Pharma. As Dr. Pastreich sees it, the criminalization of nurse Vaught provided a way of diverting attention from more systematic crimes entailed in the cost-cutting machinations associated with the privatization of institutions like the Vanderbilt University Hospital.

For Dr. Pastreich it is no coincidence that nurse Vaught was sentenced to jail time

“at the very moment that the deadly implications of the mandate for COVID-19 vaccinations is at last receiving broad attention after the release of the Pfizer files. These so-called vaccines, which have no properties associated with vaccines, but are loaded with dangerous mRNA and other substances, are being administered in hospitals in blatant violation of the law and the hippocratic oath. When the truth is eventually out about the injection of millions of citizens with this deadly concoction, who will be held responsible for the deaths and injuries that resulted?”

Dr. Pastreich believes that the high-ranking financiers, bankers and racketeers at the highest levels of what he calls Operation COVID-19 are well aware of the dangers of public exposure they are facing. He argues they are therefore setting up the basis for the theatrics of “fobbing off” COVID crimes so they will land on the shoulders of medical staff far down the chain of command.

This tactic of offering up underlings to protect those at the top is commonly deployed in a society where much effort is devoted to keeping the leadership of the highest level of organized crime safely remote from legal accountability.

In Dr. Pastreich’s imagined scenario the public appetite for people to blame and punish for the toxic clot shots is to be met by criminalizing those who actually delivered the fatal jabs as well as administered fake remedies such as the toxic remdesivir. In this fashion those most responsible for “the COVID 19 holocaust” are to be “let off the hook.”

How jailing a nurse could help paper over responsibility for Operation COVID-19 from Emanuel Pastreich on Vimeo.

Dr. Pastreich anticipates the possibility of “public show trials” that “drag out nurses and doctors” as scapegoats for the crimes against humanity whose full extent is still far from being measured. Surely we the citizens who have endured the lies and crimes of Operation COVID-19 deserve a better and more honest resolution than that.

When will the accumulation of the wreckage emanating from the incursion of Operation COVID-19 come to end? When can we begin to put our houses, businesses, schools, hospitals, media, governments, and families back in order?

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

Dr. Anthony Hall is editor in chief of the American Herald Tribune. He is currently Professor of Globalization Studies at University of Lethbridge in Alberta Canada. He has been a teacher in the Canadian university system since 1982. Dr. Hall, has recently finished a big two-volume publishing project at McGill-Queen’s University Press entitled “The Bowl with One Spoon”.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Edmonton police are among the city employees fighting against COVID-19 shot mandates. (Source: Kaytoo / Shutterstock.com)

Posted in English
Comments Off on Addressing the Lies and Crimes of Operation COVID-19
Tags: COVID-19

Bill Gates Lays Out Plan for Global Takeover

May 26th, 2022 by Dr. Joseph Mercola

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The World Health Organization is attempting to seize control over global pandemic monitoring and response and, ultimately, all health care decisions

Bill Gates intends to play a key part in this takeover. He’s building a pandemic response team for the WHO, dubbed the “Global Epidemic Response & Mobilization” or GERM Team, which will have the authority to monitor nations and make pandemic response decisions, such as when to suspend civil liberties to prevent spread of an illness

The globalist cabal plans to seize control through biosecurity governance, and they’re attempting to do this using two different avenues. If we fail to fight off both attacks, we’ll end up under totalitarian governance

The first attack comes in the form of amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR), which are currently being voted on by the World Health Assembly. These amendments will strip member nations of their sovereignty and give the WHO unprecedented power to restrict your medical freedoms and civil liberties in the name of biosecurity. Get involved and urge your nation’s leaders to reject the amendments if passed. Unless rejected, they will become binding law in November 2022

The second attack comes through a new international pandemic treaty with the WHO. They intend to eliminate individualized medicine and provide blanket rulings for how a given threat is to be addressed, and this can only result in needless suffering — not to mention the loss of individual freedom

In “The Corbett Report” above,¹ independent journalist James Corbett reviews the contents of Bill Gates’ book, “How to Prevent the Next Pandemic.”

“It’s every bit as infuriating, nauseating, ridiculous, laughable and risible as you would expect,” he says. “This is a ridiculous book … There’s certainly nothing of medical or scientific value in here … It’s a baffling book even from a propagandistic perspective …

Gates’ goal in writing the book is to disarm the public and prepare us to accept the agenda that Gates and his allies would like to impose on the world. Ultimately, what this is about is drumming up general public support — or at least general public understanding — of the unfolding biosecurity agenda.”

Another reviewer of Gates’ book, economist Jeffrey Tucker, offered similarly negative feedback:²

“Imagine yourself sidled up to a bar. A talkative guy sits down on the stool next to you. He has decided that there is one thing wrong with the world. It can be literally anything. Regardless, he has the solution.

It’s interesting and weird for a few minutes. But you gradually come to realize that he is actually crazy. His main point is wrong and so his solutions are wrong too. But the drinks are good, and he is buying. So you put up with it. In any case, you will forget the whole thing in the morning.

In the morning, however, you realize that he is one of the world’s richest men and he is pulling the strings of many of the world’s most powerful people. Now you are alarmed. In a nutshell, that’s what it’s like to read Bill Gates’s new book ‘How to Prevent the Next Pandemic.’”

Gates’ Book Chapter by Chapter

Corbett goes through Gates’ book chapter by chapter, so if you’re short on time, you can review the ones that interest you the most:

Chapter 1: Learn from COVID (timestamp: 12:58)

Chapter 2: Create a pandemic prevention team (timestamp: 18:23)

Chapter 3: Get better at detecting outbreaks early (timestamp: 26:21)

Chapter 4: Help people protect themselves right away (timestamp: 31:01)

Chapter 5: Find new treatments fast (timestamp: 37:26)

Chapter 6: Get ready to make vaccines (timestamp: 39:46)

Chapter 7: Practice, practice, practice (timestamp: 47:06)

Chapter 8: Close the health gap between rich and poor countries (timestamp: 50:49)

Chapter 9: Make — and fund — a plan for preventing pandemics (timestamp: 57:40)

Afterword: How COVID changed the course of our digital future (timestamp: 1:03:00)

Gates GERM Team

Click here to watch the video.

As Gates explains in a video at the beginning of Corbett’s report, he’s building a pandemic response team for the WHO, dubbed the “Global Epidemic Response & Mobilization” or GERM Team. This team will be made up of thousands of disease experts under WHO’s purview, and will monitor nations and make decisions about when to suspend civil liberties to prevent spread of an illness.³

Alas, as noted by “Rising” host Kim Iversen in the video compilation above, if COVID-19 has taught us anything, it’s that stopping the spread of a virus is more or less impossible, no matter how draconian the rules. Meanwhile, the side effects of lockdowns and business shutdowns are manifold.

People’s health has suffered from lack of health care. Depression and suicide have skyrocketed. Economies have gone bust. Violent crime has risen. Tucker also points out the false premise behind Gates’ pandemic prevention plan, stating:⁴

“This theory of virus control — the notion that muscling the population makes a prevalent virus shrink into submission and disappear — is a completely new invention, the mechanization of a primitive instinct.

Smallpox occupies a unique position among infectious diseases as the only one affecting humans that has been eradicated. There are reasons for that: a stable pathogen, a great vaccine, and a hundred years of focused public health work. This happened not due to lockdowns but from the careful and patient application of traditional public-health principles.

[T]he attempt to crush a respiratory virus through universal avoidance could be worse than allowing endemicity to it to develop throughout the population.”

Gates’ Destructive Greed

During COVID, we basically traded false protection against one thing for a multitude of other ills that are far worse in the long run. Now, Gates and the WHO want to make this disastrous strategy the norm.

Once again, we see Gates is basically paying the WHO to dictate what the world must do to make him a ton of money, because he’s always heavily invested in the very “solutions” he presents to the world. While he’s built a reputation as a philanthropist, his actions are self-serving, and more often than not, the recipients of his “generosity” end up worse than they were before.

Case in point: After 15 years, Gates’ Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) project has now been proven an epic fail.⁵ Gates promised the project would “double yields and incomes for 30 million farming households by 2020.”

That false prognosis was deleted from the AGRA website in June 2020, after a Tuft University assessment revealed hunger had actually increased by 31%. February 28, 2022, the first-ever evaluation report⁶ confirmed the failure of AGRA.

The Globalists’ Double-Prong Attack on National Sovereignty

But getting back to the globalists’ plan to seize global control through biosecurity governance, they are attempting to do this using two different avenues. If we fail to fight off both attacks, we’ll end up under totalitarian governance.

The first attack comes in the form of amendments⁷ to the International Health Regulations (IHR). The second attack comes through a new international pandemic treaty with the WHO.

Starting with the first takeover strategy, as you read this, countries around the world are in the process of voting on amendments to the IHR.⁸ By May 28, 2022, the World Health Assembly will have concluded their vote on these amendments and, if passed, they will be enacted into international law in November 2022.

The IHR, adopted in 2005, is what empowers the WHO to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).⁹ This is a special legal category that allows the WHO to initiate certain contracts and procedures, including drug and vaccine contracts. While the IHR grants the WHO exceptional power over global health policy already, under the current rules, member states must consent to the WHO’s recommendations.

This is one key feature that is up for revision. Under the new amendments, the WHO would be able to declare a PHEIC in a member state over the objection of that state. The amendments also include ceding control to WHO regional directors authorized to declare a Public Health Emergency of Regional Concern (PHERC).

In summary, the IHR amendments establish “a globalist architecture of worldwide health surveillance, reporting and management,” Robert Malone, Ph.D., warns,¹⁰ and we the public have no say in the matter.

We have no official avenue for providing feedback to the World Health Assembly, even though the amendments will give the WHO unprecedented power to restrict our rights and freedoms in the name of biosecurity. There’s not even a publicly available list of who the delegates are or who will vote on the amendments.

Summary of Proposed IHR Amendments

A summary of the proposed changes to the IHR was recently provided by Malone.¹¹ In all, the WHO wants to amend 13 different IHR articles (articles 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 48, 49, 53 and 59), the end result of which is the following:¹²

1. “Increased surveillance — Under Article 5, the WHO will develop early warning criteria that will allow it to establish a risk assessment for a member state, which means that it can use the type of modeling, simulation, and predictions that exaggerated the risk from COVID-19 over two years ago. Once the WHO creates its assessment, it will communicate it to inter-governmental organizations and other member states.

2. 48-hour deadline — Under Articles 6, 10, 11, and 13, a member state is given 48 hours to respond to a WHO risk assessment and accept or reject on-site assistance. However, in practice, this timeline can be reduced to hours, forcing it to comply or face international disapproval lead by the WHO and potentially unfriendly member states.

3. Secret sources — Under Article 9, the WHO can rely on undisclosed sources for information leading it to declare a public health emergency. Those sources could include Big Pharma, WHO funders such as the Gates Foundation and the Gates-founded-and-funded GAVI Alliance, as well as others seeking to monopolize power.

4. Weakened sovereignty — Under Article 12, when the WHO receives undisclosed information concerning a purported public health threat in a member state, the Director-General may (not must) consult with the WHO Emergency Committee and the member state. However, s/he can unilaterally declare a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern.

The Director General’s authority replaces national sovereign authority. This can later be used to enforce sanctions on nations.”

Once the amendments are adopted by the World Health Assembly, nations will have only a limited time — six months — to reject them. That would put us into November 2022. Any nation which hasn’t officially rejected the amendments will then be legally bound by them, and any attempt to reject them after the six-month grace period will be null and void.

Attack No. 2: The WHO Pandemic Treaty

The second attempt to gain global control is through an international pandemic treaty with the WHO. An intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) was established as a subdivision of the World Health Assembly in December 2021,¹³ for the purpose of drafting and negotiating this new pandemic treaty.

In summary, the WHO wants to make its pandemic leadership permanent. It can then extend its power into the health care systems of every nation, and eventually implement a universal or “socialist-like” health care system as part of The Great Reset.

While a WHO-based universal health care system is not currently being discussed, there’s every reason to suspect that this is part of the plan. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has previously stated that his “central priority” as director-general is to push the world toward universal health coverage.¹⁴

And, considering the WHO changed its definition of “pandemic” to “a worldwide epidemic of a disease,”¹⁵ without the original specificity of severe illness that causes high morbidity,^16,¹⁷ just about anything could be made to fit the pandemic criterion.

The problem with this treaty is that it simply cannot work. The whole premise behind this pandemic treaty is that “shared threat requires shared response.” But a given threat is almost never equally shared across regions.

Take COVID-19 for example. Not only is the risk of COVID not the same for people in New York City and the outback of Australia, it’s not even the same for all the people in those areas, as COVID is highly dependent on age and underlying health conditions.

The WHO insists that the remedy is the same for everyone everywhere, yet the risks vary widely from nation to nation, region to region, person to person. They intend to eliminate individualized medicine and provide blanket rulings for how a given threat is to be addressed, and this can only result in needless suffering — not to mention the loss of individual freedom.

Are You Ready to Cede All Authority to Gates-Led Group?

In closing, Gates’ GERM team would be the ones with the authority to declare pandemics and coordinate global response.¹⁸ Are you ready to cede all authority over your life, health and livelihood to the likes of Gates? I hope not.

In the video above, Del Bigtree with “The Highwire” provides poignant examples where Gates is now admitting what “The Highwire,” I and many others have been saying since the earliest days of the COVID pandemic, and getting censored and deplatformed for it.

Gates is two years behind everyone else, yet despite his apparent inability to interpret the readily available data, he now wants power to dictate health rules to the whole world. We can’t let that happen.

Join the Global #StopTheWHO Campaign

It’s going to require a global response to prevent these two power grabs, starting with the IHR amendments under vote by the World Health Assembly. To that end, the World Council for Health has launched a global #StopTheWHO campaign. Here’s how you can get involved:¹⁹

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.

Notes

¹ Corbett Report Episode 418, May 10, 2022

^2, ⁴ Brownstone Institute May 3, 2022

³ The Counter Signal May 2, 2022

⁵ Corey’s Digs April 27, 2022

⁶ USRTK March 17, 2022

⁷ Health Policy Watch February 23, 2022

^8, ⁹ CDC International Health Regulations

^10, ^11, ^12, ¹⁹ RW Malone Substack May 17, 2022

¹³ WHO Proposed Method of Work February 21, 2022

¹⁴ National Review June 14, 2017

¹⁵ Wayback Machine, WHO Pandemic Preparedness captured September 2, 2009 (PDF)

¹⁶ The BMJ 2010;340:c2912

¹⁷ Wayback Machine, WHO Pandemic Preparedness captured May 1, 2009 (PDF)

¹⁸ The Lancet May 14, 2022; 399(10338): 1853

Posted in English
Comments Off on Bill Gates Lays Out Plan for Global Takeover
Tags: Agenda 2030, bill gates, GERM Team, WHO, world government

Military Drills Around Taiwan Warning Over US-Taipei ‘Collusion’: China

May 26th, 2022 by Riyaz ul Khaliq

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

China on May 25, 2022 said its joint military exercises around Taiwan were intended as a “stern warning” against “collusion activities” between the US and Taipei.

“The Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) recently organized joint combat-readiness patrols and real combat training exercises involving multiple services and arms in the waters and airspace around the Taiwan Island,” military spokesperson Col. Shi Yi said in a statement.

“This is a stern warning against the recent US-Taiwan collusion activities,” said Shi.

The latest Chinese military drills come after US President Joe Biden considerably upped the ante over Taiwan during his first presidential trip to Asia.

In Tokyo on Monday, Biden said the US will intervene militarily if China attempted to take over Taiwan by force, angering Beijing, which considers the island of over 24 million people a “breakaway province.”

Taipei, however, has insisted on its independence since 1949 and has diplomatic relations with at least 14 nations.

Biden later said Washington’s stance on Taiwan had not changed and it would not abandon the “One-China” policy.

Shi asserted it was “hypocritical and futile for the US to say one thing and do another on the Taiwan issue,” saying its actions “frequently encourage ‘Taiwan independence’ forces.”

“Taiwan is part of China … (our) troops are determined and capable of thwarting any external forces’ interference and separatist attempts … and resolutely safeguard national sovereignty and security and regional peace and stability,” the spokesperson added.

China also carried out joint drills with Russia on Tuesday, sending six jets over the Sea of Japan and East China Sea as leaders of the Quad group – the US, India, Australia and Japan – were meeting in Tokyo.

Japan condemned the “show of force” and expressed its “grave concerns” to Beijing and Moscow.

Click here to read the full article.

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.

Featured image is file photo/via AA

Posted in English
Comments Off on Military Drills Around Taiwan Warning Over US-Taipei ‘Collusion’: China
Tags: China, US-Taiwan

Orbán’s New Emergency Measures Allows Hungarian Interests to be Better Served

May 26th, 2022 by Paul Antonopoulos

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Viktor Orbán’s announcement of a state of emergency in Hungary received criticism from the pro-West political opposition despite the fact that it is needed because of the war raging in neighboring Ukraine, where a large number of members of the Hungarian national community have arrived, as well as thousands of other Ukrainian refugees. A state of emergency is also needed due to the energy and food crisis.

The Hungarian government needs more powers to more easily maintain the economy and social order that is struggling due to the war in Ukraine and the corresponding anti-Russia sanctions. Yet, despite criticism from the pro-West opposition, it is recalled that Western countries themselves have declared states of emergencies in times of wars, pandemic and economic crises. One does not have to remember far back to the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic when entire Western societies and economies were shutdown because of emergency measures.

Emergency measures were introduced by the Hungarian government in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although it seemed to the Hungarian opposition at the time that it would give them an advantage and lead to a drop in Orbán’s popularity, the opposite in fact happened. Orbán’s Fidesz political party actually gained even more popularity. In this way, Orbán evidently understands that Hungarians support measures to impose martial law if it is genuinely justified.

The current state of emergency gives the government more authority to make some decisions far quicker as they usually require several days or weeks in regular procedure. This is something critical when considering the war next door and how this affects the Hungarian minority in Ukraine and the Hungarian economy.

It must be noted though that the state of emergency in Hungary is not a typical state of emergency in which the rights and freedoms of citizens are limited. Hungarian citizens do not have any restrictions, including against their human rights. This is solely about the government having greater powers so that it can respond timely and efficiently to any changes that can occur as there is a war in the region. Effectively, the government can act faster and parliament can subsequently adopt or reject government decisions.

A state of emergency was imposed in Hungary on May 24, and took effect the next day. Earlier, a constitutional amendment was adopted in parliament allowing the introduction of legal states of danger when armed conflicts or humanitarian disasters occur in neighboring countries.

In a video posted on social media, Orbán said the conflict in Ukraine poses a “continuing threat to Hungary” which is “putting our physical security at risk and threatening the energy and financial security of our economy and families.”

The ruling Fidesz party won a fourth-straight election victory on April 3, giving Orbán, the longest-serving leader in the EU, an additional four-year term, something that caused immense frustration in the West. This is in addition to the party holding a two-thirds majority in parliament since 2010.

It is recalled that Orbán wrote to the President of the European Council Charles Michel on May 23 to stress that the new sanctions against Russia proposed by the EU, including an oil embargo, should not be discussed at the upcoming summit of EU leaders (May 30-31). Orbán said it was unlikely a solution could be found by then, and that Hungary was not in a position to agree to the proposed EU sanctions until all outstanding issues are resolved.

Although the EU is desperately trying to phase out Russian energy, Budapest has insisted that it will not support any sanctions that target Russian energy exports as it would be an “atomic bomb” for Hungary’s economy and destroy its “stable energy supply.” While other mid-sized EU countries like Greece are desperate to adopt all measures that target Russia (so long as it does not affect the oligarchical Greek shipowners), even if it means that price increases are pushed onto consumers, Hungary is not entertaining any notion that their citizens should suffer as a result of Western policies.

In this way, the new emergency measures introduced are consistent to Orbán’s policy of protecting Hungarian interests despite the upheaval that Western policies has caused on its border. Although it is certainly not popular in the West, it certainly appears that Orbán will continue protecting Hungarian interests, even if it is in opposition to the EU and NATO.

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.

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

Posted in English
Comments Off on Orbán’s New Emergency Measures Allows Hungarian Interests to be Better Served
Tags: Hungary, Viktor Orban

Davos 2022: The Octogenarian Oligarch Cage Match. Kissinger vs. Soros

May 26th, 2022 by Tom Luongo

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

I never thought I’d live to see the day when the “Too Old to Rule the World, But Too Young to Die Crowd” (apologies Ian Anderson) would meet at Davos and fight over what to do about Russia.

In a twenty-four hour period two of the most influential men on the planet came out swinging as to what course of action the Davos Crowd should take in Ukraine.

The first blows were landed by Mr. Realpolitik, Henry Kissinger, who most people were surprised to find was still alive. Kissinger true to form told everyone that it was time to begin negotiations for a settlement with Russia soon.

“Negotiations on peace need to begin in the next two months or so, [before the conflict] creates upheavals and tensions that will not be easily overcome,” the 98-year-old veteran diplomat said of the crisis. The outcome will determine the rest of Europe’s relationships with Russia and Ukraine alike, he said. “Ideally, the dividing line should return to the status quo ante,” he said.

“I believe pursuing the war beyond that point would turn it not into a war about the freedom of Ukraine, which had been undertaken with great cohesion by NATO, but into a war against Russia itself,” he added.

Kissinger is simply talking sense, knowing full well that the situation in Ukraine is getting very close to militarily unsalvageable for Ukraine. You know things are bad when the British Press is now acknowledging this, even though the Telegraph was told to change the original headline (follow link above):

Even Western reporters on the ground there are admitting the truth…

A little update and a bit of a rant about the situation here in the Donbas. pic.twitter.com/Pu8VxDrMFc

— Tom Mutch (@Tomthescribe) May 22, 2022

The front in the Donbass is collapsing on the heels of the surrender, sorry “evacuation,” from the Azovstal Steel Factory of the Azov Regimen’s top commanders.

The Ukrainians aren’t just running out of ammunition, the men are running out of morale. When you break the will of an army, it doesn’t matter what you try to force feed into the conflict it won’t change the outcome. If reports are true Ukraine will only see about 15% of the $40 billion the Biden Junta approved last week.

On the heels of Kissinger’s pragmatism came George Soros’ dizzying pastiche of wholly constructed western narratives about Russia and China’s goals and their respective leaders’ shortcomings. Soros stayed completely on script with the neoliberal/neoconservative warmongering that Ukraine has put itself in a position to win this war and it is our duty as defenders of his Open Society to assist them no matter the cost.

Because if we do not, “Civilization may not survive.” The particular type of solipsism and hubris that Soros exhibits doesn’t just border on the pathological, it ignores it like Soros argues we should do for all borders.

In his worldview borders should be eradicated. So why are his puppets and acolytes so obsessed with the ‘territorial integrity of Ukraine?’

Soros is an ideologue. He has defined the world in terms that are incompatible with human nature. And he is losing. This is why he wants more commitment to kill the evil Russians who refuse to eat bugs, get sterilized and be eradicated from history, which he spent billions doing in Ukraine over the past eight years.

Going through the lies of his speech are almost not worth the time. They are, ultimately, just Soros’ projections of what he believes are Putin’s and Xi’s motives and goals with their current operations — war in Ukraine / lockdowns in China.

Soros rehashes the epic victory of Ukraine in Kiev to paint the picture he needs to make his point but it’s something two months now out of date. All the defense of Kiev did was embolden US and British belligerence, it did not, however, thwart any of Putin’s ultimate goals. Nor did it move the popular sentiment.

It gave us the situation we have today and it’s one he decries as needing an immense effort to save from going completely Russia’s way.

Those projections fuel conclusions which are not based on reality but on wishful thinking. Soros, like all investors (and he has invested heavily in overthrowing Putin and Xi) will always ‘talk his book’ and make it sound like cogent and sober analysis.

Decisions on the fighting in Ukraine haven’t been made from a militarily strategic perspective for weeks now. If they were, a ceasefire would have been sought. Soros’ puppet government in the U.S. refuses to accede to reality because Soros himself refuses to engage with it.

But, since he’s the one writing the checks to help the Democrats ~~steal~~ win the mid-term elections in November, he gets what he wants. I know I’m being reductionist here. The forces acting within the U.S. political and military establishment are far deeper and more diverse than just Soros’ megalomania, but he makes as good a metaphor for them as anything else.

There has been a not-so-subtle shift in the news surrounding events in Ukraine over the past couple of weeks. It is now grudgingly accepted that Russia’s war of attrition against the Ukrainian Armed Forces has been brutal, costly and effective.

It is now beginning to show real dividends in terms of territory gains as the center of the front in the Donbass collapses:

The only reason why the Russians haven’t taken more territory is because brave men have stood their ground as President Zelenskyy went on tour to sell an unwinnable war to an exhausted and disinterested public in Europe and the U.S.

We’ve finally reached that point where even the Skinner Box button loses all its power. Now that the UAF’s positions have degraded beyond repair, all that’s left is retreat or surrender. We’re no more than a few weeks away from that now.

And those brave men are about to be ground into paste for their loyalty to an idea that should have died months ago.

When you decode both Kissinger’s pragmatism and Soros’ near hysteria you get one conclusion, Russia is winning the ground war in eastern Ukraine. And by winning those battles they are expending the effective fighting strength of the UAF in the process.

Ukraine has always been the Rubicon for a lot of folks. So much capital has been poured in there that everyone is pot-committed. It represented the dividing line between success and failure of generations of preparations for a global world order.

Henry Kissinger stood at the center of this for decades. He groomed Klaus Schwab to build the WEF into what it is today, the premier influence peddling dirty tricksters and promoters of the worst ideas advanced in human history.

George Soros is a nouveau riche, Nazi collaborator and opportunistic vulture with delusions of adequacy. He’s played high sakes poker with the biggest players in the world and broken entire countries multiple times. His son has his legacy now, but he’ll lose that now that his dad has gone shitbird crazy.

But he’s never beaten a country whose people stood their ground. Whether you like what Russia is doing in Ukraine or not, viewed dispassionately they are standing their ground. Whether you agree this war was the right way of doing that is irrelevant.

Kissinger would agree with me.

Those that doubted Russia’s resolve or depth of preparation across all axes of warfare — militarily, economically, socially, culturally — are about to come face to face with a shocking conclusion, you can’t take over a people from the top down who are united from the ground up.

Kissinger would agree with that as well. It’s why he advocated for finding ways to keep Russia from leaving its European character behind and not embracing its Asian. Now that the economic war has failed the only reasonable option is accepting what’s been lost before what looks like a stalemate today turns quickly into a rout.

Soros is just your typical narcissistic bully, ready to tell you why you need to do his bidding to make him powerful. This will be the last time he makes a speech anyone listens to and the last time anyone will give a shit about who wins the fight between two old cripples at a globalist chug and tug.

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.

Featured image is from GGNG

Posted in English
Comments Off on Davos 2022: The Octogenarian Oligarch Cage Match. Kissinger vs. Soros
Tags: Davos 2022, kissinger, soros, Ukraine war

In the Wake of the Elections: Lebanon Does Not Have the Luxury to Wait for Changes

May 26th, 2022 by Michael Jansen

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Lebanon’s May 15 parliamentary election succeeded on the organisational level but did not usher in personnel changes which could rescue the country from political, economic and social crises which have nearly destroyed the middle class and driven 80 per cent of the population into poverty.

Balloting was largely peaceful, and voters were cheerful despite the lack of electricity in polling stations and, at least in the narrow streets of central Beirut, horrendous traffic jams. Officials and rival party observers in polling stations coexisted comfortably and counting of the paper ballots went smoothly although the results were not fully published until two days after the election. For these reasons, this exercise in democracy should be counted as a triumph for the moribund Lebanese state and an administration starved of funds and depleted by defecting and migrating civil servants.

Fifty-nine per cent of the nearly four million registered to vote did not cast ballots for various reasons. Some could not be bothered, others said participating would make no difference as the deeply entrenched political elite would return to parliament. Followers of former prime minister Saad Hariri were urged to boycott and installed inflatable swimming pools on streets in a poor quarter of Beirut and jumped in and out of the water to show they were partying not voting.

Of the 41 per cent who voted, there were mainly middle aged men and women who did not believe change would result but insisted it was their democratic duty. The majority voted for communal parties with patronage networks which have provided them with help in getting jobs, permits building, licenses for firms, places in schools, and beds in hospitals. These parties and their candidates also distributed vouchers for petrol and supermarkets at a time most Lebanese are struggling to put food on the table and pay their bills.

Many young voters cast ballots for newcomers on lists promising change, some of them activists in the October 17th, 2019, “revolution”, the uprising against the political elite, mismanagement, corruption and the sectarian system of governance. It dictates that the president must always be a Maronite Christian, the prime minister a Sunni and the parliamentary speaker a Shia. This system has sustained political deadlock after Lebanese revolutionaries took to the streets and squares demanding change.

While more than a dozen newcomers, often called “independents”, won seats they did not unite to form their own bloc because lists and individuals have diverse agendas. Some are more “independent” than others by demanding regime change rather than reform.

Firas, 25, a banker said “I did not expect change in this election… It will take one or two elections before there can be change. There must be a shift in generations, a mass awakening among the young and the age requirement for voting changed from 21 to 18.” Alas, Lebanon does not have the luxury to wait for such changes to take place.

Nevertheless, newcomers could become kingmakers because neither the bloc headed by Hizbollah and Amal, which retained all Shia assembly seats, nor the bloc led by hard right-wing Lebanese forces, which gained two seats, won majorities. Hizbollah’s partner the Free Patriotic Movement founded by President Michel Aoun and the Lebanese Forces’ ally, the Sunni Future Movement, shed seats.

The other potential kingmaker, the Progressive Socialist Party, chaired by the sometimes erratic Druze leader Walid Jumblatt could also play the role of kingmaker. Indeed, it has already opted for this role by nominating Nabih Berri, 84, to continue as assembly speaker, a job he has held since 1992. The new legislature has only two weeks from taking office on May 22nd to elect a speaker.

Once this first step is taken, the political forces will have to begin Herculean task of choosing a prime minister from the Sunni community which has been gravely weakened by Hariri’s abandonment. The US, Britain, and France have urged the political elite to “hurry” so that a government of neutral technocrats can be formed, and reforms enacted with the aim of securing $21 billion in foreign finance to halt the country’s rapid downward plunge.

However, selection of a prime minister could be a long-drawn out process due the deep polarisation between the rival camps. To make matters worse, Sunni politicians — from whose ranks a prime minister must come, are in complete disarray because of the boycott by Hariri and members of his Future Movement.

Hassan Diab was appointed premier in January 2019 but did not form his government until January 2020, 13 months later, and resigned in August 2020 following the devastating explosion at Beirut Port which killed 219, wounded 6,000 and rendered 300,000 homeless. Hariri’s third appointment as premier took place in October 2020 and he resigned in July 2021 because he could not form a cabinet. Outgoing Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who was anointed after Hariri stepped down, established a government in September 2021. This was an achievement in a short time, given the unstable context.

Having failed in nine months to meet conditions laid down by international organisations for providing financial aid, Mikati’s government, in its last session, adopted, with five ministers opposed, of a controversial financial recovery programme. This adheres to the April 2022 deal reached by the government with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for restructuring and recapitalising the broken banking system while protecting small depositors “as much as possible” from cconfiscation of their savings. This could be highly dangerous for it would be regarded as “stealing” depositors’ money and could reignite the “revolution”. Lebanon’s reward for implementing the deal would be the transfer by the IMF of a mere $3 billion, far from enough to refloat the country’s sinking economy.

This programme could also complicate and delay government formation, thereby prolonging the economic and financial agony of millions of Lebanese and strengthen the country’s currency which has lost 90 per cent of its value against the dollar.

Once a prime minister is in place and his government is approved by parliament, Beirut is meant to address the multiple crises Lebanon faces. So far, three governments have not done so due to the refusal of the political elite to accept change.

Lebanon’s third task will come at the end of October when deputies have to choose a new president. Aoun, 88, is set to leave office and, according to the constitution, cannot serve a second term.

Former prime minister Tammam Salam pointed out in conversation with this correspondent that Aoun said he would “not stay one day longer” in office when his term expires, “unless there is a void”. Political paralysis could provide just such a void.

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.

Featured image is from Mideast Discourse

Posted in English
Comments Off on In the Wake of the Elections: Lebanon Does Not Have the Luxury to Wait for Changes
Tags: Lebanon

Ukraine After 90 Days of War

May 26th, 2022 by M. K. Bhadrakumar

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

But the compelling reality is that the Russian forces are steadily seizing the upper hand in the Battle for Donbass. The Ukrainian Defence Ministry spokesperson said on Tuesday that “the most active phase” of the Russian special operation has begun in Donbass. In military terms, Russian forces face the daunting task of taking over the best-fortified areas of Ukraine, which have been carefully preparing for this battle for seven years. But on the other hand, after their triumphant victory in Mariupol, Russian forces have the wind on their sail.

Looking back through the past 3-month period, Russia’s topmost priority has been to establish a land corridor to Crimea and put in place the economic underpinnings for the region’s development. That objective stands fulfilled. It is from such a viewpoint that the current operation in Donbass needs to be understood. Ukraine and its Western allies are pinning hopes that the sanctions will eventually exhaust Russia’s military and economic potential.

But life is real. By the World Bank estimates, Ukraine’s economy may shrink by 45 percent by the end of 2022. The talk of a major Ukrainian counter-offensive later this year bolstered by the heavy weaponry from Western allies, will remain a pipe dream. Kiev may not even have sufficient manpower to wage a war by the end of the year. Russia is a formidable enemy and Kiev may be risking an abject surrender on humiliating terms in the downstream of the Battle for Donbass.

The Russian forces are now close to establishing full control of the Luhansk region of Donbass. The Ukrainian governor of the eastern region admitted on Tuesday that “The Russians are advancing in all directions at the same time; they brought over an insane number of fighters and equipment.” The situation is looking increasingly precarious for the Ukrainian forces. (Listen to the podcast The Battlefields of the Donbass and Beyond, War on the Rocks)

The key signposts are Popasnaya and Severodonetsk in Donbass and the city of Izyum just to the north in the Kharkiv region. Popasnaya and Izyum are under Russian control already while Russian troops entered Severodonetsk yesterday.

The Russian forces are currently expanding their control zone around Popasnaya to its north, west and south; they have approached the outskirts of the city of Severodonetsk; and have resumed their advance to the west and south of Izyum.

Latest reports are that assault groups from Popasnaya are heading west towards Bakhmut, which is a strategic hub for Kiev to replenish its forces in the eastern region. The highway between Bakhmut and Lisichansk is within firing range of Russian forces and military supplies to the Ukrainian grouping in Severodonetsk and Lisichansk have become problematic.

As for Izyum, in the area of Liman to its south (west of Severodonetsk), Russian forces have surrounded the Ukrainian forces. The Russian forces entered Severodonetsk city yesterday and there is street fighting going on.

Severodonetsk is a highly strategic asset for both sides. An estimated 15-16 thousand Ukrainian servicemen are deployed there, who are being reinforced. If Russian forces succeed in trapping and destroying the Ukrainian forces between Severodonetsk and Lysychansk, Kiev’s ability to contest the eastern Donbas region will be seriously weakened.

On Monday, Russian forces succeeded in destroying all but one bridge into Severodonetsk, threatening to cut the city off from supplies and reinforcements. A retreat and regrouping by the Ukrainian forces seems too late. The big picture is rather grim. The National Interest magazine assessed the developing situation as follows:

“The coming battle could prove decisive to the course of the Kremlin’s Donbass campaign. Russian control over the eastern Donbas region would cut Ukraine off from the areas comprising its industrial heartland and fulfil the Kremlin’s key strategic goal of establishing a secure land bridge to Crimea.

“If Russia’s military successfully traps and destroys the Ukrainian forces between Severodonetsk and Lysychansk, they will significantly degrade Ukraine’s ability to contest the eastern Donbas region. It is unclear if Ukrainian military units in the Severodonetsk salient are considering plans to retreat further westward in order to avoid potential Russian envelopment.”

The next big target in the Russian sights is Slovyansk. Controlling it would enable Russian forces to drive west and link up with the forces pushing south-east of Izyum. The objective is to control the supply lines by road and block Ukrainian access to rail routes from the west. Ten Ukrainian brigades were deployed in the east when the war began in February, which were regarded as the best-equipped and best-trained soldiers that Kiev has.

Indeed, the fall of Mariupol to the Russian military represents a turning point. Russia now has a land corridor to Crimea and has ended Crimea’s water and power blockade. The freshwater canal connecting the Dnieper River to the arid Crimean Peninsula is now in Russia’s hands. So is a nuclear power station to the north of the peninsula, not to mention the power grid in southeastern Ukraine which can be now connected to Russia. These are strategic gains for Russia.

Beyond Donbass and Crimea, Russia might have other objectives too in the southern region. There have been demands — at the local level so far — for merger of the southern regions of Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Mykolaiv with Crimea (Russia), which have large Russian population. Some degree of integration of this region with Russia seems to have begun.

In Kherson region, Russian currency ruble has been introduced; Russian, along with Ukrainian, will become a state language and will become the main language for office work, communication and all issues of national importance; teaching in schools and universities will be conducted in Russian. The authorities of the Kherson Region have voiced the demand for establishment of a Russian military base in the region.

The secretary of Russia’s Security Council, Nikolai Patrushev, said in an interview published Tuesday that the Russian government “is not chasing deadlines.” Indeed, the Western estimations also seem to anticipate future Russian operations in the southern regions. There are pointers. On May 23, the US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced that Denmark will provide Ukraine with a modern Harpoon anti-ship launcher and missiles to safeguard its coasts. On May 24, Hungary announced national emergency to take immediate steps to be able to project the country against threats emanating from the war in Ukraine. Over the last weekend, Moscow publicly voiced disquiet over a British statement about the possibility of NATO arms supplies to Moldavia.

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.

Featured image is from Indian Punchline

Posted in English
Comments Off on Ukraine After 90 Days of War
Tags: DONBASS, Russia, Ukraine war

New American Threat — There Is No Place for Serbia’s Balanced Approach

May 26th, 2022 by Ria Novosti

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

This policy of balance will be the backbone of the new Serbian government, the formation of which will follow in the coming months, although especially from the western centers of power come covert but also open blackmail that our investments and access to money and European funds are endangered, but also to prepare for the potential attacks on Kosovo and Republika Srpska, if we do not turn our backs on Moscow.

Among the various advisers and mediators of our diplomacy, but also domestic politics, among the last ones was the U.S. Ambassador Christopher Hill, who publicly advised us that there is no place for balancing and that our road is strictly to the west. Thus, according to many, he dangerously stepped out of his diplomatic mandate and interfered in the internal affairs of Serbia, which is inadmissible.

His outright message arrived practically on the same day as the congratulations of the U.S. President Joseph Biden to the head of the Serbian state on the second mandate won in the elections. Biden did not fail to mention that Belgrade is expected to make an alliance in “support for Ukraine and condemn the brutal war that Russia itself chose.”

President Vučić met with Ambassador Hill on Monday, and the focus of the talks was on energy diversification, Serbia’s European integration, as well as current geopolitical issues and initiatives for regional connection.

“The conversation was good, correct and open, there were no surprises. I know what the Americans think, they know what I think, and that’s it. We are looking at how to deepen our cooperation. It is not easy for Western countries today to explain the difference between attacks on Ukraine and Kosovo’s illegal independence, so the pressure will increase to show that this is not the case, and of course the request for membership in the Council of Europe is pressure on us, but we will continue to do everything in our power to defend our territorial integrity. I am always ready to talk and compromise, but I will not agree to blows to the head and insane demands”, Vucic said after meeting with Hill.

Serbian President also told everyone in the world to come to their senses, because “the time of brutal pressures may not have completely passed, but their results have never been good.”

“When it comes to the ‘Kosovo army’, it must not exist under UN Security Council Resolution 1244. But they care about international law. They pose a threat to Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija. But to the Serbian state as a whole, they do not pose any threat” , the president pointed out.

In a conversation with the U.S. Ambassador, Vučić pointed out Serbia’s efforts aimed at preserving peace and stability in the region, as well as that our country is the initiator of numerous projects that connect the countries of the Western Balkans in the best way. Ambassador Hill reiterated the US support for the European integration of Serbia and the countries of the region, as well as the US position that the EU should expand.

Former Foreign Minister Vladislav Jovanovic said that

“Hill is a man who firmly adheres to the positions he needs to realize, has a long experience in the Balkans, because he was involved in the events in Kosovo and Metohija and Macedonia.”

“They are not choosing the means and the goal is to take control of the Balkans. Almost for the first time since the Brezhnev doctrine – who is not with us, is against us – this principle has been reactivated in Washington. The United States is pressuring everyone to force states to do something, even against our own interests. It is not the right way to establish better relations with the United States by arousing suspicion of other countries or gossiping about other countries. The trend is to make us quarrel with Russia and China at all costs,” Jovanovic explained.

He pointed out that we constantly, before, but also now, insist on the sovereignty of Serbia and that we should continue to do so:

“We have had cases in the past when we opposed Russia when they tried to interfere, but also other countries. It is very important that we never decided to be a member of a military alliance in peace, but only in war.”

Retired Ambassador Branko Brankovic says for “Novosti” that Hill’s statements are unacceptable in diplomacy, because they are direct interference in the internal affairs of our country:

“Such outright messages sent by Hill are expected, because he was the right hand of Madeleine Albright. However, in my opinion, that is the result of the inability of the United States to do anything against Russia regarding Ukraine. They practically got a big “no” from the EU which has made it clear that it will not go to war with Russia at the expense of US interests in Europe”, Jovanovic said.

Support for the Open Balkan initiative

Ambassador Hill said on Monday that Washington supports the “Open Balkans” initiative. When it comes to the dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, he agreed with Vučić that all efforts should be focused on the dialogue under the auspices of the EU.

Referring to the letter that Biden sent to Vučić, Ambassador Hill reiterated his country’s support for Serbia’s efforts to diversify energy sources and energy efficiency, emphasizing that the United States will work to give Serbia access to energy projects that are being worked on.

On Monday, Prime Minister Ana Brnabic said that Serbia was facing an extremely important and difficult week, as talks between Aleksandar Vucic and Vladimir Putin on gas prices were expected. When asked what threats are coming in order to decide on the conflict in Ukraine, the Prime Minister answered that Serbia has not remained completely neutral in this situation, but has made a political choice in accordance with international law.

“We consider it very wrong to violate the territorial integrity of Ukraine, we did not agree only on sanctions, but politically we have clearly stated our position. Those who bombed Serbia in 1999 and recognized the so-called Kosovo in 2008 ‘broke’ all the basic Principles of international law on the backs of Serbia, and today, when it comes to sanctions against Russia, they should have a little more understanding for our country. Or fight in the same way for full respect for the territorial integrity of Serbia,” she said.

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.

Posted in English
Comments Off on New American Threat — There Is No Place for Serbia’s Balanced Approach
Tags: Russia, Serbia, Ukraine war, United States, Vucic

UK Trained Argentine Soldiers After Signing Controversial Falklands Oil Deal

May 26th, 2022 by Matt Kennard

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The UK bans the export of goods to Argentina that might enhance its military capability. But Britain trained senior Argentinian military officers after a 2016 deal sought to facilitate oil development around the Falklands.

The Argentine soldiers were sent to Britain in 2018 but it is not known how many were trained or which courses they attended. The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) refused to clarify when asked by Declassified.

Argentine soldiers also attended three courses at the UK Defence Academy in Oxfordshire in 2019-20.

These courses included ‘Building Integrity for Senior Leaders’, which is designed for high-ranking commanders. Argentine military personnel also attended the ‘Advanced Command and Staff Course’ which “aims to prepare officers for high grade appointments”.

The course includes lectures from the most senior officers in the UK military and allows the students “to gain insight into the structure and workings of the MoD”. The UK Defence Secretary has previously attended.

The military training came after the UK and Argentina had signed a controversial Joint Communiqué in 2016. The agreement promised to “remove all obstacles” to the development of oil deposits around the Falkland Islands.

The deal also “agreed to strengthen relations between the two armed forces” and “widen their fields of cooperation”.

It is likely the Argentine military training was a part of this new cooperation. There is no publicly-available evidence showing the UK had provided military training to Argentina before 2018.

Since the 1982 Falklands War, the UK has not allowed the “export and trade of goods judged to enhance Argentine military capability”.

Alicia Castro, Argentina’s ambassador to the UK from 2012-15, told Declassified:

“It’s hard to believe we’ve been sending our senior officers to be trained by the same military that killed more than 600 of our soldiers and torpedoed the Belgrano in a horrific war crime.”

She added:

“That it looks like we were given this military training in exchange for giving up our claim to las Malvinas (Falklands) and its resources is even more shocking.”

UK Defence Academy in Shrivenham, Oxfordshire, where Argentine military personnel have been trained. (Photo: UK Defence Academy)

Improving relations

The information comes as the two countries are marking the 40-year anniversary of the conflict which ran from April to June of 1982.

The war led to the deaths of 255 British military personnel, 649 Argentine soldiers, and three Falkland Islanders. On 2 May 1982, Argentina’s ARA General Belgrano warship was torpedoed by a British submarine, killing 323 Argentine sailors.

In 2018, the same year as the Argentine military personnel were trained in the UK, Alan Duncan, the foreign minister who had negotiated the 2016 Joint Communiqué, made a statement to parliament announcing a change in British arms export policy towards Argentina.

“This change will lift additional restrictions which were imposed in 2012, at a time when the Argentine government was escalating actions aimed at harming the economic interests of the Falkland islanders,” he said.

Duncan stated that since the election of rightwing President Mauricio Macri in 2015, “the UK’s relationship with Argentina has been improving.”

He added that the “historic” 2016 UK-Argentina agreement had “established closer cooperation across our bilateral relationship (including in defence)” and that the UK may now grant arms exports licences for Argentina.

‘Something very odd here’

In 2019, a new left-wing government swept to power in Buenos Aires, with Cristina Kirchner as vice-president. Kirchner had been president when the UK had added additional restrictions to military exports to Argentina in 2012.

The new government moved to ensure that the 2016 UK-Argentina Joint Communiqué promising increased “cooperation” between the countries armed forces was a “letra muerta” (dead letter).

Last month, the UK government was asked about reports of increased military deployment in Tierra del Fuego, a province in southern Argentina, and its implications for the security of the Falkland Islands.

Foreign minister Amanda Milling said:

“The UK undertakes regular assessments of possible threats to the Islands to ensure that an appropriate defence capability is maintained.”

The British military base on the Falklands hosts at least 500 troops and the UK regularly conducts military exercises, which include the firing of air defence missiles, on and around the islands.

Paul Rogers is an honorary fellow at the Joint Service Command and Staff College, which trains UK military officers. He told Declassified:

“Britain spends at least £60 million a year on Fortress Falklands yet is educating Argentine military personnel at UK defence colleges. Something very odd here.”

A Ministry of Defence spokesperson told Declassified:

“We do not train the Argentine armed forces to fight. Occasionally, we offer educational classroom-based courses, covering topics such as good governance and international humanitarian law.”

He added:

“Such courses are offered to a wide range of nations and serve an important diplomatic function.”

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.

Matt Kennard is chief investigator at Declassified UK. He was a fellow and then director at the Centre for Investigative Journalism in London. Follow him on Twitter @kennardmatt

Featured image is from InfoBrics

Posted in English
Comments Off on UK Trained Argentine Soldiers After Signing Controversial Falklands Oil Deal
Tags: Falklands, UK-Argentina

Mass Shootings: The Vicious Cycle Fueled by America’s Toxic Cult of Violence

May 26th, 2022 by John W. Whitehead

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“Mass shootings have become routine in the United States and speak to a society that relies on violence to feed the coffers of the merchants of death. Given the profits made by arms manufacturers, the defense industry, gun dealers and the lobbyists who represent them in Congress, it comes as no surprise that the culture of violence cannot be abstracted from either the culture of business or the corruption of politics.”—Professor Henry A. Giroux

We are caught in a vicious cycle.

With alarming regularity, the nation is being subjected to a heartbreaking spate of violence that terrorizes the populace, fractures communities, and gives the government greater justifications to crack down, lock down, and institute even more authoritarian policies for the so-called sake of national security without many objections from the citizenry.

Mass shootings have taken place in schools, on college campuses, movie theaters, nightclubs, grocery stores, concert venues, bars, workplaces, churches, on military bases, and in government offices. In almost every instance, the shooters were dressed in military-style gear and armed with military-style weapons.

Take the latest shooting that took place in Uvalde, Texas, when 18-year-old Salvador Ramos, wearing body armor and carrying a rifle, walked into Robb Elementary School and opened fire, leaving at least 19 children and two teachers dead.

This Uvalde shooting took place ten days after another 18-year-old man, heavily armed and wearing tactical gear (including a tactical helmet and plated armor), opened fire in a grocery store in Buffalo, N.Y, killing 10 people.

Cruz during his arrest in Coral Springs (Licensed under public domain)

In 2018, a 19-year-old former student armed with a gas mask, smoke grenades, magazines of ammunition, and an AR-15-style semiautomatic rifle opened fire on students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., leaving 17 people dead.

Police at Sandy Hook.PNG

Police arrive at Sandy Hook Elementary, after the shooting on December 14, 2012. (Licensed under public domain)

Ten years ago, 20-year-old Adam Lanza—wearing body armor and black clothing, and armed with military-style weapons—opened fire on students and teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., leaving 26 dead. Prior to the shooting, Lanza reportedly spent his days “playing violent video games amid posters showcasing military equipment.”

According to an FBI report issued the day before the Uvalde shooting, these kinds of “active shooter attacks” have doubled in recent years.

As expected in the wake of such tragedies, there has been a vocal outcry for enacting more strident gun control measures, more mental health checks, and heightened security measures.

Yet surely there’s more to these shootings than just easy access to weapons and mental illness.

Ask yourself: Why do these mass shootings keep happening? Who are these shooters modelling themselves after? Where are they finding the inspiration for their weaponry and tactics? Whose stance and techniques are they mirroring?

When you start to connect the dots, they lead right back to the American police state and the war-drenched, violence-imbued, profit-driven military industrial complex, both of which continue to dominate, dictate and shape almost every aspect of our lives.

The United States is the number one consumer, exporter and perpetrator of violence and violent weapons in the world.

Violence has become America’s calling card.
We are a military culture engaged in continuous warfare.
We have been a nation at war for most of our existence.
We are a nation that makes a living from killing through defense contracts, weapons manufacturing and endless wars.
We are being fed a steady diet of violence through our entertainment, news, sports and politics.

All of the military equipment featured in blockbuster movies is provided—at taxpayer expense—in exchange for carefully placed promotional spots aimed at boosting civic pride in the military, recruiting for the military, and churning out profit-driven propaganda for the military industrial complex. Even reality TV shows have gotten in on the gig.

It’s estimated that U.S. military intelligence agencies (including the NSA) have influenced over 1,800 movies and TV shows.

Then there are the growing number of violent video games, a number of which are engineered by or created for the military as recruitment tools, which have accustomed players to interactive war play through military simulations and first-person shooter scenarios. As Esther J. Cepeda writes for The Washington Post, “Violent video games alone do not cause people to go off the rails, arm themselves and open fire on innocent people in public places. But there’s also no question that there is something wrong with a multibillion-dollar video game industry that sells to young men the ability to virtually assassinate a foe as an escape from real life.”

The media, eager to score higher ratings, has been equally complicit in making (real) war more palatable to the public by packaging it as TV friendly. The military has also been firmly entrenched in the nation’s sports spectacles, having co-opted football, basketball, even NASCAR, “tying the symbols of sports with the symbols of war.”

This is how you acclimate a population to war.
This is how you cultivate loyalty to a war machine.
This is how, to borrow from the subtitle to the 1964 film Dr. Strangelove, you teach a nation to “stop worrying and love the bomb.”
This is how you sustain the nation’s appetite for war.

As journalist David Sirota writes for Salon, to those who profit from war, it is “a ‘product’ to be sold via pop culture products that sanitize war and, in the process, boost recruitment numbers.”

No wonder entertainment violence is the hottest selling ticket at the box office. As professor Henry Giroux points out, “Popular culture not only trades in violence as entertainment, but also it delivers violence to a society addicted to a pleasure principle steeped in graphic and extreme images of human suffering, mayhem and torture.”

No wonder the government continues to whet the nation’s appetite for violence and war through paid propaganda programs (seeded throughout sports entertainment, Hollywood blockbusters and video games)—what professor Roger Stahl refers to as “militainment“—that glorify the military and serve as recruiting tools for America’s expanding military empire.

No wonder Americans from a very young age are being groomed to enlist as foot soldiers—even virtual ones—in America’s Army (coincidentally, that’s also the name of a first-person shooter video game that was produced by the military and used as a pivotal recruiting tool for 20 years).

Explorer scouts, for example, have been one of the most popular recruiting tools for the military and its civilian counterparts (law enforcement, Border Patrol, and the FBI). Writing for The Atlantic, a former Explorer scout described the highlight of the program: monthly weekend maneuvers with the National Guard where scouts “got to fire live rounds from M16s, M60 machine guns, and M203 grenade launchers… we would have urban firefights (shooting blanks, of course) in Combat Town, a warren of concrete buildings designed for just that purpose. The exercise always devolved into a free-for-all, with all of us weekend warriors emptying clip after clip of blanks until we couldn’t see past the end of our rifles for all the smoke in the air.”

No wonder America spends more money on war than the combined military budgets of China, Russia, the United Kingdom, Japan, France, Saudi Arabia, India, Germany, Italy and Brazil. America polices the globe, with 800 military bases and troops stationed in 160 countries. Moreover, the war hawks have turned the American homeland into a quasi-battlefield with military gear, weapons and tactics. In turn, domestic police forces have become roving extensions of the military—a standing army.

You want to stop the gun violence?

Stop the worship of violence that permeates our culture.

Stop treating guns and war as entertainment fodder in movies, music, video games, toys, amusement parks, reality TV, sports and more.
Stop distributing weapons of war (weapons that have no business being anywhere but on a battlefield) to the local police and transforming police into extensions of the military.
Stop exposing young people to the military industrial complex’s pervasive propaganda.
Stop falling for the military industrial complex’s psychological war games.

Salvador Ramos may have pulled the trigger that resulted in the mayhem in Uvalde, Tex., but something else is driving the madness.

We’ve got to do more than react in a knee-jerk fashion.

Those who want safety at all costs will clamor for more gun control measures, widespread mental health screening of the general population and greater scrutiny of military veterans, more threat assessments and behavioral sensing warnings, more CCTV cameras with facial recognition capabilities, more “See Something, Say Something” programs aimed at turning Americans into snitches and spies, more metal detectors and whole-body imaging devices at soft targets, more roaming squads of militarized police empowered to do random bag searches, more fusion centers to centralize and disseminate information to law enforcement agencies, and more surveillance of what Americans say and do, where they go, what they buy and how they spend their time.

Yet as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People and in its fictional counterpart The Erik Blair Diaries, all of these measures play into the government’s hands by locking down the nation without doing anything to address the underlying causes of this madness.

What we need is a thoughtful, measured, apolitical response to these shootings that takes aim at the violence plaguing our nation by lowering the levels of violence here and abroad, whether it’s violence we export to other countries, violence we glorify in entertainment, or violence we revel in when it’s leveled at our so-called enemies, politically or otherwise.

Our prolonged exposure to the toxic culture of the American police state is deadly.

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.

This article was originally published on The Rutherford Institute.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His most recent books are the best-selling Battlefield America: The War on the American People, the award-winning A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, and a debut dystopian fiction novel, The Erik Blair Diaries. Whitehead can be contacted at [email protected].

Nisha Whitehead is the Executive Director of The Rutherford Institute. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

They are regular contributors to Global Research.

Featured image is from NPR

Posted in English
Comments Off on Mass Shootings: The Vicious Cycle Fueled by America’s Toxic Cult of Violence
Tags: gun violence, school shootings, Texas shooting, United States

US-Iran Nuclear Treaty: Biden Blows It

May 26th, 2022 by Daniel Larison

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Nahal Toosi reports that Biden decided against removing the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from the list of foreign terrorist organizations at least a month ago:

President Joe Biden has finalized his decision to keep Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps on a terrorist blacklist, according to a senior Western official, further complicating international efforts to restore the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

Another person familiar with the matter said Biden conveyed his decision during an April 24 phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, adding that the decision was conveyed as absolutely final and that the window for Iranian concessions had closed.

Removing the designation was likely the last chance that Biden had to salvage the nuclear deal. Top U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Blinken, confirmed that removing the designation would have no meaningful practical effect on the IRGC’s financing or operations, but the president chose to keep it in place knowing that it could torpedo the negotiations to revive the agreement. Maybe the Iranian government will drop its demand in the end, but right now I wouldn’t give you two cents for the JCPOA’s chances of surviving beyond this year. Trump added the IRGC to the list for the express purpose of making U.S. reentry into the agreement more difficult, and Biden ran right into the trap. The writing was on the wall several weeks ago. Now we have confirmation that Biden’s diplomacy has been weighed in the balances and found wanting.

Biden’s decision to leave the entire IRGC on the list is the wrong one, but more than that it is a remarkably stupid decision because the designation has served no purpose. This is not a case of weighing between different priorities and considering the tradeoffs between them. If the U.S. gained something from keeping the IRGC on the list, there might at least be something to debate, but the administration itself doesn’t believe that the designation matters. As Peter Beinart pointed out earlier this month, “By its own admission, the Biden administration is risking the Iran nuclear deal for nothing.” Biden is jeopardizing what should be a major policy success for the sake of preserving an empty gesture of hostility.

The IRGC was already under sanctions before it was added to the list, and it would have been under sanctions if it had been taken off the list. Everyone paying attention to this issue understood that the concession would have been mostly symbolic, but even that was more than the U.S. was willing to grant. John Carl Baker was speaking for many of us when he said this in response to the news:

This is like exhibit A in what drives me nuts about US foreign policy: even the tiniest concessions are off limits, even if that means the collapse of a major diplomatic agreement.

Iran hawks’ cynical framing that Biden would be “rewarding” terrorists if he made this face-saving concession defined the debate. They can celebrate that their campaign of lies and deceit about the nuclear deal has prevailed once again. The administration that boasted that “diplomacy is back” likely just tanked their best chance at a major diplomatic victory because they were scared of the optics.

Daniel Benjamin and Jason Blazakis wrote a good piece explaining that the terrorist designation was useless:

Iranian-backed terrorism is a serious issue, but the designation of the Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization was a stupendously unserious move in the first place, a sanction that brought no discernible pressure on the group or Iran more broadly.

Instead, it is an artifact of the bizarre approach of the last administration, marked chiefly by empty symbolism, tantrums and puerile demonstrations of resentment meant to communicate maximal antipathy. It had nothing to do with advancing U.S. interests.

The Biden administration’s willingness to play along with this bankrupt approach has made it very likely that they will have nothing to show for more than a year of negotiations. Benjamin and Blazakis make a strong case that Biden would have been conceding nothing of importance if he had agreed to the Iranian government’s demand. As they put it, the designation “was just more Trump imaginary statecraft.” For whatever reason, Biden chose to treat the product of this imaginary statecraft as if it were real and more important than reviving a successful nonproliferation agreement. The U.S., Iran, and other countries in region will come to regret Biden’s decision. If the JCPOA does collapse, as many of us now expect it will, Biden will be the one who delivered the fatal blow.

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.

Posted in English
Comments Off on US-Iran Nuclear Treaty: Biden Blows It
Tags: Iran nuclear treaty, JCPOA, US-Iran

New Documentary: “Theaters of War: How the Pentagon and CIA Took Hollywood”

May 26th, 2022 by Roger Stahl

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

If you’ve seen Top Gun or Transformers, you may have wondered: Does all of that military machinery on screen come with strings attached? Does the military actually get a crack at the script?

Theaters of War digs deep into a vast new trove of recently released internal government documents to bring the answers to these questions into sharp focus.

Traveling across America, filmmaker and media scholar Roger Stahl engages an array of other researchers, bewildered veterans, PR insiders, and industry producers willing to talk. In unsettling and riveting detail, he discovers how the military and CIA have pushed official narratives while systematically scrubbing scripts of war crimes, corruption, racism, sexual assault, coups, assassinations, and torture.

From The Longest Day to Lone Survivor, Iron Man to Iron Chef, and James Bond to Jack Ryan, Theaters of War uncovers an alternative “cinematic universe” that stands as one of the great Pentagon PR coups of our time. As these activities gain new public scrutiny, new questions arise: How have they managed to fly under the radar for so long? And where do we go from here?

Watch the trailer below.

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.

Featured image is from MEF

Posted in English
Comments Off on New Documentary: “Theaters of War: How the Pentagon and CIA Took Hollywood”
Tags: CIA, Hollywood, pentagon

Video: I Read Bill Gates’ New Book (So You Don’t Have To!)

May 26th, 2022 by James Corbett

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Have you read How to Prevent the Next Pandemic by Bill Gates yet?

Well, I have, and let me tell you: it’s every bit as infuriating, nauseating, ridiculous, laughable and risible as you would expect.

Here are the details.

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.

Featured image is a screenshot from the video

Posted in English
Comments Off on Video: I Read Bill Gates’ New Book (So You Don’t Have To!)
Tags: bill gates, pandemic, WHO

Perilous Journey of Journalist: The Murder of Shireen Abu Akleh. Israel’s Continuum Crimes against Palestinian Intellectuals

May 26th, 2022 by Jamal Kanj

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The killing of Al Jazeera journalist, Shireen Abu Akleh, on May 11, is one more chapter of the 74-year-old Palestinian Nakba (catastrophe).

Much had been argued about the creation of Israel and the ensuing ethnic cleansing of historical Palestine. Sadly, most had become a desensitized academic debate, lifeless abstract portrayal failing to depict what it really meant to be a refugee without a country.

On May 15, 1948, Zionists danced and firecrackers burst over New York neighborhoods celebrating the founding of Israel. At the same time, and on the other side of the world, Zionist terrorist military organizations waged a war to depopulate Palestine from its native population. The end result, in access of 780,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from more than 500 destroyed towns and villages.

For the new state, Palestinian refugees, like my own parents, were dispensable nuisances. In a 1948 foreign ministry study, Israel predicted the refugees “… will waste away. Some will die but most will turn into human debris and social outcasts ..” in other countries.

To Israel’s chagrin, refugees rose from the ashes of burned villages refusing to be cast into the oblivion of injustice. Shireen Abu Akleh grew up under occupation, armed herself with a microphone and a camera making sure her parents’ story is remembered and Palestinians do not become “human debris.”

The murder of Abu Akleh is inseparable from Israel’s continuum crimes against Palestinian intellectuals. To name but few, the assassinations in Beirut of magazine editor Ghassan Kanafani in 1972, and Poet Kamal Nasser in 1973. The murders, like the razed villages in 1948, were part of determined Israeli efforts to thwart the Palestinian narratives and hide crimes against humanity.

Unlike Abu Akleh, when journalists were killed in Ukraine, the West rejected Russian inculpability, did not demand joint investigation, and requested the International Court to investigate Russia’s war crimes.

In this case, Israel (like Russia) denied responsibility, and charged its Hasbara PR machine with a deflection strategy to cast doubt on the murder and escape liability. Unlike Russia, however, Western media became a welling extension of the Israeli PR machine.

American media outlets ascribed nuance terminology to explain Abu Akleh’s death, or promoted, unquestionably, the false Israeli PR narratives. For example, the initial New York Times headline said, “Shireen Abu Akleh, Trailblazing Palestinian Journalist, Dies at 51.”

In their initial coverage, Western media outlets ignored testimonies of firsthand eyewitnesses and those of journalist’s colleagues.. One who was injured, and a second hid behind a tree two feet away from the journalist’s body unable to help her friend. She watched tortuously as an Israeli soldier continued to shoot in their direction despite their blue media vests. Instead, Western media sought corroborations of Israeli PR professionals who were tens of miles from the crime site.

CNN waited almost two weeks before airing eyewitness accounts, and the Associated Press (AP) 12 days to eventually, in an overly cautious report, challenge the Israeli PR machine.

On the official level, the Biden Administration called for a joined Israeli and Palestinian investigation into the “death” of the journalist. Palestinians rejected the call for a joint investigation asserting that murderers can’t be trusted in investigating their murder.

Israel’s previous sham investigations have almost always absolved its army’s crimes, or issued a slab on the hand, if any. In addition, Israel has in the past protracted its investigations as part of a dual strategy: squish calls for independent inquiry on the short term, and to deflate international outcries with the passing of time, on the long term.

To reference some examples, the 2003 murder of American activist Rachel Corrie, who was run over by an Israeli military bulldozer, and the murder in the same year of British cameraman James Miller. Or the 2000 murder of the 12-year-old Muhammad al-Durrah on live TV.

The army probes following up to these well publicized crimes, like all lesser-known murders, exonerated Israeli soldiers and blamed the victims for their own death.

Alas, When compared to life lost in Ukraine, American life, and all lives for that matter, seem to have less value when the alleged murderer is an Israeli soldier, who most likely used an American weapon.

As in the case of previously murdered journalists, activists, children, and the razing of the media tower in Gaza, Israel executed Shireen Abu Akleh to silence the Palestinian story. For the microphone in Abu Akleh’s hand had become more perilous than a gun, and the camera more powerful than a bullet.

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.

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 for various national and international commentaries.

Featured image is from Mideast Discourse

Posted in English
Comments Off on Perilous Journey of Journalist: The Murder of Shireen Abu Akleh. Israel’s Continuum Crimes against Palestinian Intellectuals
Tags: israel, Nakba, Palestine, Shireen Abu Akleh

The Tyranny of Modern Scientism

May 26th, 2022 by Richard Gale

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

In 1976, Dr. Halstead Holman, the youngest professor to be named chairman of Stanford University’s Department of Medicine at the age of 35, wrote,

“the medical establishment is not primarily engaged in the disinterested pursuit of knowledge into medical practice; rather in significant part it is engaged in special interest advocacy, pursuing and preserving social power.”

Holman called for a paradigm shift in medical laboratory research that would be innovative, support intellectual freedom, and have the courage to tackle the many challenges and shortcomings clinical medical practice faced.

Consequently Holman was calling out the hubris that pervaded the higher echelons of the medical establishment.

A decade later, Dr. Robert Petersdorf, an internationally renowned expert in infectious disease, also worried over the direction modern medicine was headed. In 1989, Petersdorf stated, “We can no longer tolerate dishonesty, cheating, fraud and conflict of interest that have invaded science and medicine.” Looking back over the past three decades, Holman’s and Petersdorf’s warnings may have just as well been feathers floating down a cliff. The paradigm shift never occurred. The medical profession has instead become increasingly corporatized, dogmatic, and oppressive.

Corruption is a high-stakes game played by the pharmaceutical complex, without which we might actually have a functioning healthcare system that improves public health. Whether it be concealing or fudging prior knowledge about drugs’ adverse effects to maximize profits, publishing junk clinical trials, buying off legislators, or engaging in devious retaliatory efforts to pressure and silence critics, these are only the costs of doing business that keep drug companies’ and Wall Street’s coffers overflowing. And this corporate culture of deception has the full approval of governments’ health ministries and the World Health Organization. Today our lives are at the mercy of a powerful cartel of medical bureaucrats in white physician coats intent on protecting a corporate-based inquisition to stifle dissent.

If anyone doubts that the Inquisition was only a dark anomaly in western history when the Church and superstitions reigned, and that our “enlightened” civilization would never fall back again into such tyranny or repeat the horrors of witch trials, you have not been paying attention. Monty Python got it correct, the Inquisition’s “chief weapon is surprise and fear… fear and surprise… and ruthless efficiency.” During the two years of the Covid-19 pandemic, fear, not science base on viable consensus, ruled over the population as a means to police compliance.

For years, Noam Chomsky has been pointing out the censorship that emerges when propaganda is united with a control over the media. Today’s media is no longer distinguishable from the CDC, the FDA and Silicon Valley’s technological masters of cancel culture and virtue signaling. The architecture of scientific materialism’s Inquisition has grown steadily. Tuomas Tahko, a professor of theoretical philosophy at the University of Helsinki, warns that the rise of a “Scientific Inquisition” is an effort to “convert us all to naturalism [scientific materialism or Scientism] and to denounce the false gods of intuition, a priori reasoning and thought experiments.”

When modern medicine’s greatest threat becomes “intellectual freedom,” even the freedom to carry out thought experiments outside the parameters of the dominant scientific tradition is heretical. The frontline physicians who found strong evidence for cheap off-patent drugs such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as effective treatments against SARS-2 infections acted upon their intuitive suspicions and prescribed these drugs. They were proven correct; yet, despite having saved countless lives, who would have otherwise died in intensive care units due to the medical bureaucracy’s faith in the unfounded and barbaric medical advice from Anthony Fauci and the CDC, these physicians were vilified and viciously attacked in the media. “The philosophies of one age,” wrote the father of modern medicine William Osler, “have become the absurdities of the next, and the foolishness of yesterday have become the wisdom of tomorrow.” For the hardcore followers of modern scientism, particularly those in the medical and biological sciences, a human being is nothing more than an animate machine controlled by a computer in the skull that will break and ultimately cease to function.

This is not an exaggeration. One of sicentism’s most popular voices, Daniel Dennett at Tufts University, would have us believe:

“What we think of as our consciousness is actually our brains pulling a number of tricks to conjure up the world as we experience it. But in reality, it’s all smoke, mirrors and rapidly firing neurons… But it goes even further: If our brains are robots, then our neurons are smaller robots, which in turn are made up of even smaller robots.”

Or even a brilliant genius such as Stephen Hawking who describes the existence of the human race as “just chemical scum on a moderate-sized planet, orbiting around a very average star in the outer suburb of one among a hundred billion galaxies.” Hawking also believed the brain was simply a computer that could survive outside the body and replicated in artificial intelligence to reach immortality. He also believed a computer virus was an actual life form.

Dennett’s and Hawking’s scientism, as well as many others in our educational institutions, are in line with the long term goals of the World Economic Forum for humanity’s dystopian future. In our modern civilization where human life has lost all existential meaning and therefore it has forfeited its social moral compass, Klaus Schwab asks the appropriate questions: “Where do we draw the line between human and machine? What does it mean to be human?” The fact that we are even asking these questions indicates how far modern humanity has been torn away from itself. The potential consequences of this catastrophic self-inflicted dementia permeating scientism are literally terrifying.

Since Scientism embraces an extremely limited, and a rather demented view of reality, which discards much of human experience such as intuition and creative flights of the imagination as subjective nonsense, there is no room for “thought experiments” in modern reductionist science. Hence, no investigation or research is warranted nor should be funded that explores outside the conventional box. To even consider that biomolecular health and disease may be understood from certain principles of quantum theory is anathema; yet, for quantum physicist Prof. Marc Henry at the University of Strasbourg, understanding the particle-signal quanta of cellular biology is exactly what medicine needs to start learning.

In the 15th century, the Dominican friar Tomas de Torquemada established the Holy Office of the Inquisition and became its grand master. Today the Grand Inquisitor is a large and flexible consortium of power brokers and Big Pharm CEOs who exert enormous control over the CDC, FDA and the World Health Organization. Silicon Valley tech giants and billionaires such as Bill Gates bankroll the censorship of dependable evidence that threatens conventional healthcare and its regime. Our politicians, through the lobbying efforts of pharmaceutical henchmen, pressure internet firms to block, censor or blacklist dissident voices who call for public debate on health issues that directly impact all Americans. An Inquisition cannot succeed in advancing an invasion of terror without an army of fanatical fear mongers who can take control of the public’s channels of communication by stealth and surprise.

The radicalized scientific materialists through such organizations as the Center for Inquiry, the Skeptic Society and the Society of Science Based Medicine, which are aligned with the equally militant New Atheism, carry out orchestrated campaigns to brainwash the public into Scientism’s dogma through Wikipedia and social media. Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, professional medical institutions such as the AMA, and the entire mainstream media are also complicit in this medical tyranny. The mid nineteenth century father of faith-based Scientism, Thomas Huxley, would be proud of the reformation he started. “We are on the eve of a new Reformation,” wrote Aldous Huxley’s grandfather in 1859, “and if I have a wish to live… it is that I may see the foot of Science on the necks of her Enemies.” The primary enemy of today’s Scientism is critical thinking, especially within the medical community itself. Its success is all around us as we witness this malevolent doctrine being embedded into national policy

Modern institutionalized Scientism has but one command: play by our rules or be ostracized, persecuted, and ultimately have your reputation blemished. Even brilliant scientists, respected throughout the international community, may find themselves on the rack if they deviate from the norm.

One of the more tragic examples of a brilliant scientist who was victimized by today’s scientific Inquisition was the late Nobel laureate Dr. Luc Montagnier. In 1983, Dr. Montagnier discovered the HIV virus. Later in his life he entered into a forbidden zone to validate quantum properties that might explain homeopathy’s efficacy. His research involved the teleportation of genetic frequencies from his French laboratory that were then successfully restructured into actual DNA or RNA amino-acid sequences at a university laboratory in Italy. Yet for this accomplishment, which some believed should have warranted a second Nobel award, this brilliant scientist was attacked for being a quack, a charlatan, by the militant scientific community and Wikipedia. Montagnier was also labeled a conspiracy theorist for having been one of the first geneticists to review the SARS-2 coronavirus genetic sequence and to suspect it had a lab origin.

Quantum mechanics, pioneered by Max Planck, Erwin Schrodinger, Werner Heisenberg and others, should have ushered humanity into the post-materialist world. Unfortunately modern medicine, neuroscience, evolutionary biology and other life sciences, which have been hijacked by private corporate interests, have lagged dismally behind. The most ardent proponents of Scientism are determined to prevent medicine from evolving beyond its current reductionist, materialist perspective. For that reason its followers adamantly oppose funding research that may someday explain why and how alternative healing modalities have been successful for countless people around the world. Consequently Scientism is the strongest opponent of the growing trend in CAM therapies entering medical school curriculums.

It is reasonable to question how objective, how fair, how honest are Scientism’s leaders when they are unwilling to enter open and hopefully productive dialogue with those that they oppose. It is an odd psychological fact that a mental obsession can potentially produce its opposite. If an idol or dogma is revered faithfully enough, it can eventually flip and confirm its antithesis. We witness this today in the paradox that riddles modern Scientism; the cockiness of reason morphs into rigid blind faith. Every fundamentalist faith, whether it be a religious belief (one faith versus every other faith), economic polarities (capitalism versus Marxism), a political persuasion (conservative versus liberal) or a dominant paradigm in any given science, generates a layer of unyielding cynicism and denial that becomes increasingly intolerant. Cult author and futurist Robert Anton Wilson called this phenomenon “a psychological scotoma” — a blind spot of vision in an otherwise unobstructed normal visual field.

Although skepticism (with a small “s”) can be a very healthy attitude, it requires a willingness to present questions that might put our own skepticism into doubt. Yes, evidence deserves to be evaluated critically; but it also demands that there be enough allowance for our skeptical biases to be proven wrong. The only escape from skepticism’s trap is to be skeptical towards one’s own cherished beliefs. Yet, the rise of Scientism, as a coadjutor for a new Inquisition, is a self-deceptive illusion that views itself as virtuous. Nothing could be farther from the truth because this is the case for all dogmatic, militant, regressive religious beliefs in general that entertain hidden motives to persecute its perceived enemies. Richard Feynman, arguably among the most famous quantum physicists and mathematicians of the late 20^th century, wrote, “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” The good news is that humanity has managed to survive major catastrophes over the millennia. No doubt humanity will also survive the tragedy of Scientism and its bellicose child — modern corporatized medicine.

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.

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 Tyranny of Modern Scientism
Tags: modern medicine, modern science, pharmaceutical, scientism

What We Don’t Know Is Killing Us: The Urgency of Propaganda Study Under COVID

May 26th, 2022 by Prof Mark Crispin Miller

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The article below was published by Propaganda In Focus, a new website committed to the study of propaganda.

In the words of Professor Mark Crispin Miller, founder of Propaganda In Focus,

“And yet our goal must be not merely to instruct the public in those many truths blacked out by the propaganda over COVID, or Ukraine, but to urge the public toward a firmer grasp of propaganda overall; and so our larger goal must be to explain the factors that have ultimately helped turn the West’s “free press” into the propaganda juggernaut now keeping millions upon millions in ferocious ignorance.”

***

On the one hand, we have never had so much to work with, nor has there ever been a greater need for our peculiar expertise. Whereas, in the “democratic” West, propaganda used to be most evident as an intensive episodic practice, flaring up in wartime, in political campaigns and following immense state crimes like JFK’s assassination, 9/11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks (among other national traumas engineered by governments), the propaganda blasting all of us non-stop today is no longer national, or merely multinational, but global; and the former intermittency of those most awful crises, with decades going by between one trauma and the next, has given way to a mind-numbing strategy of serial bombardment — one cataclysmic fuss after another (with, sometimes, one within another), as under openly totalitarian rule.

Thus, throughout 2020 — Year One of the now-endless COVID crisis — we were inescapably suffused with terror of “the virus,” and thereby bullied into locking down (despite the scientific fact that lockdowns do more harm than good), while also masking all the time, and everywhere, and “social-distancing” as well (despite the scientific fact that neither practice “slows the spread” of any respiratory virus). While masking was imposed, ostensibly, to make us less afraid of COVID-19, it only made us more afraid of one another, and so compounded that disabling fear with a ferocious anger at all those not wearing masks (despite the scientific fact that masks would not prevent transmission of “the virus” even if the entire global population wore them all the time).

As propagated fiercely by the media — both corporate and “alternative” — throughout 2020, that sanctimonious division of ourselves into benevolent maskers and self-centered “anti-maskers” was just a pestilential variant of the “red”/”blue” divide that the media, with very few exceptions, had already fiercely propagated since the rise of Donald Trump; and that incapacitating tribalist division deepened, in mid-2020, with the George Floyd incident, and the emergent cult of BLM, whose blurry mission against “white supremacy” was suddenly and ostentatiously extolled throughout the media worldwide (George Floyd’s beatification being yet another stroke of global propaganda, the same big graphic of his quasi-tragic face popping up at rallies as far afield as France, Ghana and Japan), and anomalously hailed by Jeff Bezos, Mitt Romney, Jaimie Dimon, Bill and Melinda Gates, Nancy Pelosi, and other wealthy players not notable for their concern about black lives (on the contrary). Whereas the anti-lockdown protests flaring up (organically) that spring had been denounced throughout the government-and-media as lethal “super-spreader events” (despite the scientific fact that no respiratory virus ever has been known to spread asymptomatically, as even Dr. Fauci publicly admitted at one point), the multitudes of BLM protesters were applauded for assembling, although many wore no masks, or had their masks below their chins (nor were the rioters who followed them condemned for “putting everyone at risk,” either by their masklessness, or by their vandalism, arson and/or physical assaults in cities nationwide — crimes pointedly denied throughout the media).

Now reaffirmed as a distinctly racial melodrama, with BLM (and Antifa) facing off against the “white supremacists” supporting Trump and (just like him) not masking, the mass division between Us and Them so thunderously propagated — and exacerbated — by the media exploded one more time, on January 6, 2021, when, during the gigantic peaceful protest going on in Washington that day (to move the Supreme Court to look into the evidence that Joe Biden’s election victory had been stolen), an ebullient little horde of (unarmed) “white supremacists” — including over 20 FBI assets — “forced their way” into the US Capitol (having been urged in by Capitol police), their noisy antics universally and stridently misrepresented, by the Democrats-and-media, as an “attempted coup.” As a propaganda sideshow to the mammoth protest going on outside the Capitol that day — a protest as diverse as it was peaceable — this FBI-backed “insurrection” served the purpose of impugning that far larger gathering, intended to protest the likely theft of the election, as a “fascistic” mob intent on taking “our democracy” by force; and since the anti-Biden vote was driven mainly by resistance to the stringent “COVID measures” favored by the Democrats, the propaganda over “January 6” served to advance those measures, by demonizing their opponents as “extremists,” while making it now practically illegal to voice any doubts about Joe Biden’s inexplicable election “victory.”

Meanwhile, with millions now fixated on that raging “anti-fascist” propaganda drive (whether they believed it, or resisted it), Year Two of the COVID crisis started with the rollout of the most fascistic “COVID measure” of them all — the long-awaited “vaccination” program, which Bill Gates, in a televised exchange with Stephen Colbert, had hyped, indiscreetly, as “the Final Solution.” Thus, the propaganda inescapably instructing everybody to mask up (“Wearing is caring”), on the lunatic collectivist presumption that your mask will not “protect” you unless everybody’s wearing them, was now suddenly and inescapably instructing everybody to “get vaccinated,” as if anyone not getting jabbed was thereby (somehow) putting all those jabbed “at risk.” Thus, “vaccination” was now not only certified as “safe and effective” — by governments at every level, and by all the media, both corporate and “alternative,” and by hundreds upon hundreds of celebrities, and by every pharmacy, and by the schools, from grade schools up to colleges and universities, and, of course, by the “vaccine” manufacturers, along with Dr. Fauci and Bill Gates — but one’s own “vaccination” was now urged weirdly as (to quote Pope Benedict) “an act of love.”

And having thundered on through 2021, and into 2022 — with all those blithe assurances of “safety” and “effectiveness” disproved ever more dramatically by data out of country after country, harrowing research by independent scientists and doctors the world over, Pfizer’s and Moderna’s own clinical trials, and the ever-rising global toll in “sudden deaths” and incapacitating “vaccine injuries” — all at once that propaganda seemed to stop (the “COVID measures” abruptly dropped or modified by states and cities all around the world), as we were suddenly and (yet) still inescapably confronted, and surrounded, and pervaded, by another propaganda drive entirely; or so it seems.

This propaganda drive is, or was, not about “the virus,” or the “measures” used (allegedly) to stop it, but, exclusively, about Ukraine — and yet this drive is (or was) essentially the same as what preceded it; for just as that one had us all obsessed with COVID, the benevolence of those who followed every rule for “fighting” it, and the evil of all those who disobeyed, this one has (or had) us all obsessed with Ukraine’s struggle to defend itself against the monster Putin, the benevolence of all those who “stand with” Ukraine, and the evil of all those who don’t. And just as COVID once had everyone applauding, every evening, those courageous “frontline workers” in the hospitals (all “overrun,” reportedly, by COVID), so are (or were) we now attending vigils for Ukraine, signing petitions for Ukraine, sending money to Ukraine, and wearing Ukraine’s blue-and-yellow on our backs, and in our hair, and on our nails and our lapels, and hanging Ukraine’s blue-and-yellow in doorways and/or windows, and marveling at public monuments now bathed in blue-and-yellow lights, to show our solidarity with that upright democracy against the Nazi Putin’s bloody effort to assassinate its noble leader, wipe out its brave soldiers, and exterminate its people, in his ruthless drive to conquer all the world.

I put that rough description of this latest propaganda drive in both the past and present tense lest this one soon end, or seem to end, as suddenly as it upstaged the COVID propaganda; and since it too, in turn, will surely give way to some other inescapable campaign, it is appropriate to note the several further crises that the media, and heads of state, have variously floated, on and off, these past two years. (Such terroristic forecasts of imminent ordeals are in themselves a way to keep the widespread fear and anger simmering.) The possible next acts include a cyber-attack (“by Russia”); a breakdown of the world supply chain, and consequent food shortages, or famine (likely to be blamed on Russia); a heightened “climate crisis,” necessitating further lockdowns; “terrorist” attacks, by “white supremacists” and angry blacks (portending war between the races); an “alien attack” on Planet Earth, as in The War of the Worlds or Independence Day; and — of course — another plague or two, or three, caused by some further COVID “variant,” smallpox (Bill Gates’s favorite), the Marburg virus, and/or whatever other pathogen, real or imaginary, might serve the same old purpose (though this next pestilence is likely to be blamed on Putin, not the CCP). Such looming sequels to the COVID propaganda, which has arguably killed or injured millions through the mass injection program, and the Ukraine propaganda, which could bring on a nuclear war (and whose origins in 2014 led indirectly to the current bloodshed in that country), would also each inflict a vast amount of further suffering on humanity — and so those of us who study propaganda critically, as public intellectuals, must speak out loud and clear, to set things right.

This means, first of all, doing what the “fact-checkers” claim to do, and doing it far more conscientiously, and thoroughly, than they “debunk” whatever facts or theories contradict, or complicate, the narrative pumped out by governments and media. Whereas the “fact-checkers” do quick and sloppy work, and then move on, we work in depth, in scholarly commitment to the truth, which may take decades to discover — as with JFK’s murder, and the other key assassinations at that time, and 9/11; and just as we persist in careful refutation of the propaganda still obscuring those historic crimes, and others, so, throughout these last two years, have we been digging for, and trying to tell, the widely buried truth about the COVID crisis, its true origins, the actual lethality of SARS-CoV-2 (whatever that may really be), the PCR tests used to measure “cases,” the “COVID measures” hatched (allegedly) to “slow the spread,” the absolute futility of lockdowns, and their catastrophic harms, the homicidal impact of the standard COVID “treatment,” and the actual availability of valid remedies, the cynical redefinition of such key terms as “pandemic,” “cases,” “herd immunity,” “vaccine” and, “fully vaccinated,” the likely motives driving this whole crisis (and those still to come), the actual low number of those killed worldwide by COVID, and — above all — the ever-growing global toll of the experimental “vaccination” program; and now that COVID, and its “variants,” and “vaccination” have been pushed out of the spotlight by “Ukraine” (though governments-and-media continue warning us hysterically of “COVID” and its “variants,” and shouting at us to “get vaccinated”), we strive to find, and tell, the buried truths about that conflict — how and why it started, how it’s being fought on either side, and the fact that dozens of “atrocities” ascribed to Russia have turned out to be as bogus as those crimes charged to “the Hun” in World War One, the Iraqi army in Kuwait in 1990, and Bashar al-Assad, president of Syria, from 2011 until his imaginary barbarism was eclipsed by “the coronavirus,” and then Putin’s barbarism in Ukraine.

And yet our goal must be not merely to instruct the public in those many truths blacked out by the propaganda over COVID, or Ukraine, but to urge the public toward a firmer grasp of propaganda overall; and so our larger goal must be to explain the factors that have ultimately helped turn the West’s “free press” into the propaganda juggernaut now keeping millions upon millions in ferocious ignorance. That real-life Ministry of Truth was not set up ex nihilo by some iron faction of totalitarian oligarchs, but gradually took shape out of a corporate media cartel with interlocking boards, heavily dependent on the advertising revenues of Amazon, Big Pharma (especially Pfizer) and the media’s own parent companies (among other giant players), and with its assets closely managed by BlackRock, Vanguard and UBS; and as that vast commercial system has become more unified, it also has maintained, or even tightened, its covert relations with the military and “intelligence community” — essentially the same caste of untouchables that engineered JFK’s murder, and the media’s long cover-up thereof. And while the commercial media system has been thus corrupted top to bottom, through and through, the “public” media and “alternative” press — from NPR, PBS, the BBC and CBC (et al.) to nearly every single outlet on “the left” — have also been absorbed into the juggernaut primarily by their funding through such sturdy CIA pass-throughs as the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Open Society Institute.

Such is the “free press” that has been turned into a bio-fascist fear machine, its propaganda services assured by Bill Gates’ “strategic media partnerships,” and the concomitant “fact-checking” operation that he also largely funds. The propaganda gushing daily, hourly, from that system also has depended on the wisdom of such global PR firms as Weber Shandwick, Edelman and Hill+Knowlton Strategies, the keen participation of innumerable celebrities, and, within the Fourth Estate, the rise to managerial authority of “journalists” prepared, in university, to be far less concerned with honest journalism than with (somehow) serving “social justice.” And all the false and hateful “content” pumped out by this wholly owned “free press” is, every minute, amplified enormously on “social media,” where millions serve (for free!) as avid vectors of the propaganda, while those who contradict it, or just question it, are censored and defamed.

This brings us to that double bind in which we propaganda analysts have found ourselves these past two years; for, while there has never been so great a need for our analyses, there having never been so much disinformation, or so much highly poisonous disinformation, to correct, nor has there ever been so huge and powerful a propaganda system to explain, neither has it ever been more difficult, or dangerous, to contradict its claims, or show exactly how it works. Today, we recognize in Julian Assange a ravaged brother to us all, his long, brutal punishment on Airstrip One having anticipated the abuse now threatening anyone who dares to cast a shadow on the propaganda narrative roared everywhere by governments-and-media, as he, or Wikileaks, did with “Collateral Murder,” the gunship footage that lit up the dark side of the heroic “war on terror” propaganda. His long ordeal for that unpardonable sin foretold the (mostly lesser) punishments now undergone by doctors, scientists, journalists, and academics who have variously gone off-script, especially these past two years (although such heretics were also punished long before the rollout of “the virus”).

All such dissidents are doing what we do, in one way or another; and so — since every winning propaganda drive depends on censorship — all dissidents have been blacked out on “social media,” kept off the air by “our free press,” and/or variously canceled by “woke” activists. Since they can’t argue with the dissidents, whose claims are either indisputable or largely true, the propaganda managers have heaped us all with slime, without (of course) allowing us to answer it; nor is that all, as those countering the propaganda also have been fired, delicensed, jailed, involuntarily consigned to psychiatric wards, and, evidently, even killed, to shield the narrative. Most of those thus punished have been COVID dissidents; though those now speaking out against the “Ukraine” propaganda also are at risk, especially those living in Ukraine, where the Nazi forces have been seizing, torturing and murdering dissident reporters, and where American-Chilean commentator Gonzalo Lira disappeared on April 15, re-emerging six days later, having been detained by the SBU.

What, then, are we to do, as analysts of propaganda? For now, under this ever-rolling thunder of Big Lies, all we can do is keep on doing what we’re doing, while maintaining a thick skin, and taking due precautions, as it is ever more important that we tell the truths we know to those still capable of hearing them, and then of looking for them on their own. (This is especially true of younger people who are largely more receptive than their elders.) In the longer term, however, we must re-conceive and rebuild all our democratic institutions, whose absolute collapse has brought this whole world to the brink. Specifically, we need to rebuild journalism, so that it actually reports the news, just as we need a whole new medical establishment — one that will reclaim its Hippocratic duty to make people well instead of very profitably sick (or dead). And, of course, we need a new Academy, to educate its students, not indoctrinate them, teaching them not what to think but how to think, while introducing them to all the arts and sciences that better us as fully human beings; and, as we have learned so painfully these past two years, what these new schools must finally do — and not only our colleges and universities, but all our lower schools as well — is teach our students about propaganda: how to recognize it when it’s everywhere they look, and even (or especially) when they find themselves agreeing with it.

Only when We the People finally know what propaganda is, and how it works, will we be free at last to live our lives and rule ourselves.

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.

Mark Crispin Miller is a professor of Media, Culture and Communication at New York University, where he has taught courses on media (including cinema) and propaganda since 1997. A recipient of grants from the Guggenheim Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Ingram Merrill Foundation, Miller maintains a daily list-serve, and a Substack column, both called News from Underground. One may join the former at https://markcrispinmiller.com, and/or subscribe to the latter at https://markcrispinmiller.substack.com/.

Featured image: “Bill Gates at NIH in 2018” by National Institutes of Health (NIH) is marked with CC PDM 1.0.

Posted in English
Comments Off on What We Don’t Know Is Killing Us: The Urgency of Propaganda Study Under COVID
Tags: COVID propaganda, COVID-19, propaganda

“Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story”, by John C. A. Manley

May 26th, 2022 by John C. A. Manley

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Prologue: Mountie 019

A field somewhere in Northern Ontario, Canada, December 26, 2020…

I’d never flown in a plane before, much less a helicopter. When I was sixteen, Mathéo and I took the train to Toronto to see a Leafs game. Even for the grade eight trip to Quebec we traveled in one of those two-storey coaches with the tinted windows.

Now, strapped to a yellow cot, wrapped in some sort of emergency, crinkly, subzero sleeping bag, I stared at the air ambulance that awaited me. It was painted orange with the letters ORNGE on the side—as if they left out the A to save money. From above its windshield extended a metal spike like a unicorn’s horn. Except this orange, flying unicorn had only three legs—two in the back and one in the front—disappearing into a foot of snow.

Through the haze of pain, I could barely see the evergreen trees that surrounded the field, serving as a barrier against the howling wind. The dark night was lit by the headlights of many police vehicles and the red and blue light bar of an ambulance.

Overhead, the blades of the medical copter were whipping in circles—making the cold December air even colder. At least it numbed the excruciating pain in my chest a little. On the unicorn’s tail, a tiny vertical propeller was also spinning like a windmill in a hurricane—proving how the seemingly inconsequential can alter the direction of the large and powerful.

“Here we go, buddy,” said the Mountie who was holding the front end of the cot.

Instead of the iconic Red Serge of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, he was suited in a thickly insulated black uniform. Rather than a brown, felt, wide-brimmed hat, he wore a military-style helmet bearing the ironic identification number 019. His white face mask matched his white eyebrows.

“You’ll be warm in a minute,” promised Mountie 019. He spoke in the groggy and grizzled voice of a man who had done too many back-to-back twelve-hour shifts.

The side door of the chopper slid open. With the grace of a gymnast, a thin, feminine figure dropped down onto a patch of frosty grass. Someone had cleared away the snow, making a path across the field to the emergency landing area.

Like the medic holding the back end of my cot, the woman approaching also wore a blue face mask and a round flight helmet with dome-shaped headphones. The bulging helmets, glowing body cams and one-piece flight suits made them both look more sci-fi than medical. Their epaulettes, however, proved they were not from outer space—each heralded a Canadian flag with a red maple leaf.

Mountie 019 introduced himself to the approaching paramedic. “I’ll be overseeing transport of the prisoner.”

Prisoner. It seemed too harsh, too hard to believe. Me. I still lived with my parents in a two-streetlight town no one had ever heard of. I went to Mass every Sunday—at least until they made church illegal. I must have groaned or moaned or something because Mountie 019 retracted his statement.

“Uh, I mean accused.” Icy vapour escaped from the edges of his face mask as he chuckled. “You know, in the academy, we’re taught to call those in custody our ‘clients.’”

“Clients!” exclaimed the medic behind me. “That’s a joke.”

“No kidding. God, I need to retire.”

They all laughed in the way people do when they want to banish anxiety, guilt or confusion. I, however, did not laugh. Could not laugh. And if anything was funny, it was that they felt I needed this RCMP paratrooper to watch over me. It hurt enough to simply breathe; I was no threat to anyone. At least the black-clad Mountie no longer had the Remington assault rifle hanging from his shoulder. He’d traded it in for a modest fifteen-round Smith & Wesson sidearm.

The female medic looked down at me and asked, “How’re you doing?”

Her eyes were a pretty blue. But I knew not to trust them.

From behind my head, the male medic warned, “He’s a confirmed COVID case.”

No! I’m not, I wanted to scream. But I didn’t dare. The inferno of pain in my chest was burning too strongly.

“Can you tell me your name?” the female medic asked me.

I closed my eyes.

“Vincent,” answered Mountie 019, as if he was reading from a notepad. “His name is Vincent McKnight. Age twenty-four.”

“Oh,” she replied. “Is he the one we saw on—”

“Yes, ma’am.” He didn’t sound happy about it.

“Is he… the moose?”

“That’s the other guy, I think.”

No, I’m the turtle and my shell is broken.

As they hoisted me up into the helicopter I screamed—the pain moving into the realm of sheer agony. Without a pause, they slid my cot headfirst into the warm chopper like a coffin into a funeral truck.

Mountie 019 buckled up in the seat beside me, all the while watching me intently. His gaze wasn’t one of a guard watching his prisoner. Instead, his eyes looked confused and bewildered as if asking, how did a kid like you end up in such a mess?

The answer, of course, involved a woman.

At twenty-eight some would say she was just a girl. And she would say that such juvenile labels were part of the grand plan to keep adults behaving like easy-to-manipulate children. She was certainly not a child. And in as little as six months, between her and this so-called pandemic, I had been forced to grow up real fast.

1. No Face, No Service

Friday, July 3, 2020, Moosehead, Ontario, Canada…

Hands on hips, she stood behind the counter glaring at me.

“No face, no service.”

“What?” I blurted, as the door swung closed behind me, jingling a bell. “You mean: No mask, no service—right?”

“No face, no service,” she repeated. “This is a bakery, not a bank.”

The overwhelming smell of fresh sourdough penetrated the polyester fabric stretched over my nose, mouth and chin. I took a few slow steps toward the counter which separated us, shaking my head in non-understanding.

“A bank?” I replied. “What’re you talking about?”

The twenty-something girl, with bright blonde hair, raised a hand mirror from the countertop and aimed it at me.

“You look like a bank robber.” She spoke with the slightest hint of a Germanic accent.

The mirror reflected my brown eyes peering over a bright green face covering. In a mask-muffled voice I replied, “I think I look more like a turtle than a robber.”

“Well, you’re acting like a turtle, hiding behind a green shell.”

She lowered the mirror and rested her unmasked chin on her knuckles, elbows propped up on the countertop. Underneath, rows of dark crusted bread, sprinkled with rolled oats, lined the display.

“Do you always keep a mirror so handy?” I asked.

“Ever since people started auditioning for the bubonic plague.”

“Well, if you haven’t noticed,” I said, gesturing to either side of me, “we are in the middle of a pandemic.”

Her head turned slightly right and left, looking to either side of me.

“I don’t see any bodies piling up,” she replied. “All I’ve seen this year is a regular cold and flu season. And we’d be over it by now if turtles like you weren’t so scared of catching the sniffles.”

I felt oddly irritated (though at the same time attracted) by this blonde lioness. She also wore green, but not a mask. Her short-sleeved dress fit so well around her trim body I suspected she must have made it herself. The leafy green garment topped by her blonde hair reminded me of a…

“Hey, if this green mask makes me a turtle,” I jested, “then I’d say you look like a dandelion.”

“Suits me.” She removed her elbows from the counter and stood tall. “Dandelions aren’t afraid to be in the open air.”

“Yeah, well, plants can’t catch COVID.“

“No. Just really sick and old people.”

“Uh-huh,” I said.

I felt like calling her a covidiot but she was way too pretty: Big, blue and unblinking eyes dominated a lightly tanned face. Her pursed lips—it appeared as if she was restraining them from making further comment—had no lipstick. Her impractically long hair was held back by a braided portion that wrapped around her forehead like a golden diadem, reminding me of some medieval damsel—except this damsel was not in distress.

“COVID’s hitting more than just old folks,” I said. “Hundreds of thousands have died. Don’t you watch the news?”

She sighed. “Hundreds of thousands? Do you know how many people die each year from the old-fashioned flu?”

I hadn’t a clue. And even though half my face was covered, I’m sure my eyes betrayed my ignorance. Avoiding her question, I asked my own, “If you can’t trust the World Health Organization, then who can you trust?”

“How about evidence-based science?”

“Uh, I think scientists work at the WHO.”

She walked out around the counter, revealing the rest of her green dress, draping all the way down to her brown sandals, barely allowing me a glimpse of her ankles. Those sandals stepped toward me, coming dangerously close to breaching my COVID bubble. Instinctively, I backed away.

“I said evidence-based science,” she persisted, “not the words of scientists bribed, blackmailed and bamboozled into propagating mass hysteria. Because if you look at the facts, eight thousand Canadians died from the flu in 2018. Every year, on average, about 650,000 around the world die with the flu. Nothing has changed. Our government is lying to us.”

“You’re one of those… conspiracy theorists, aren’t you?”

“Ha!” she laughed. “Flattery will get you nowhere.”

“All I want is some bread.”

“Well, as they say in Italy: ‘Niente sorriso, niente pane.’” Her Italian accent was rather convincing. She made another step closer. “No smile, no bread. Capito?”

I stepped backwards again, hitting the door, jingling the bell. She was about half a foot shorter than me, but nonetheless intimidating.

“I really doubt they say that in Italy,” I muttered.

“Probably not,” she admitted, swaying side to side for a second.

“And most stores won’t even let me inside without a mask.”

“Forcing medical treatment on people is against the Nuremberg Code,” she said, taking another step closer. “I’m surprised a big, strong guy like you would put up with that kind of abuse.”

I felt like prey. Part of me wanted to run, to open the door and never come back. I’d tell Grandad I couldn’t get him the bread he wanted because the place was run by a COVID denier. But I knew he’d just laugh at me. He’d already warned me that the baker was a “real hoot.”

“But masks save lives,” I protested.

The Dandelion looked me straight in the eyes. “And how do you know that?”

“The sc-science…” I stuttered.

“You’ve actually looked at a scientific study?”

“Uh, no…”

“Well, I have. Fourteen of them, actually. Every randomized controlled trial ever conducted on human beings—not mice or mannequins—shows that masks don’t stop people from getting sick or dying from the flu.”

“Ah!” I said, raising a finger, “but COVID’s far worse than the flu.”

She slid even closer, leaving barely six inches between our noses. “All right, Mr. Science, if a mask can’t even stop the humble flu, how’s it going to hinder your killer coronavirus?”

I reached my hand up to adjust my mask; but then pulled it away, remembering we aren’t supposed to touch them.

“Masks do work,” I said firmly. “I don’t know which conspiracy website you get your information from, but—”

“The Journal of Infectious Diseases,” she interrupted. “In March, the CDCreviewed every study ever conducted on masks and found… they did nothing.”

“Well…” I said, drawing out the word, “nothing wrong with a placebo. Stops people from freaking out.”

“Freaking out over the common cold?”

“It’s not a cold,” I insisted, taking a deep and tense breath. “You think you know better than the experts?”

“Experts like Professor Ioannidis?” she asked.

I didn’t respond.

“You do know who Professor John Ioannidis is, don’t you?”

I sighed the sound of prey that had tired of the chase, ready to suffer its demise.

“Professor Ioannidis. One of the world’s leading epidemiologists. Stanford University. He says the SARS-CoV-2 death rate is in the ballpark of the regular flu season.”

“All right! All right!” I held up my hands. “Grandad’s waiting for his bread.”

Her face softened and she took a step back. “Who’s your grandad?”

“The old Indian with the long white hair,” I said, happy to change the subject.

“You mean Paul, the Anishinaabe Elder?”

“Yeah,” I said, taken aback by her familiarity. “Though, he’s more specifically Ojibwe.”

“Dokis band?”

“Uh-huh,” I said with a nod, though I truly could not remember which band he belonged to. “To me he’s just Grandad.”

That made her smile. “Can I call him Grandad, too?”

I paused, stumped on how to respond. “He’d probably be okay with that.”

“You don’t have him in quarantine, do you?”

“Kicking and screaming.”

“Shame on you, Turtle!” She waved her index finger. “That’s why I haven’t seen him since March. Under house arrest.”

“He’s at the nursing home, actually. We’re just keeping him safe.”

“He’s as healthy as a horse,” she said.

“He’s eighty-seven.”

“That proves it.”

“Anyway, now that the lockdown’s lifted, I was actually heading over there today—as soon as you sell me some bread, that is. I have an appointment”—I pulled out my cellphone and glanced at the time, 10:38 a.m.—“in thirty minutes. He told me he really misses your bread. So, I thought—”

“If his jail sentence is over, why doesn’t he come and get his own bread like he used to? I’d love to see Grandad again.”

“Well, it’s not safe enough yet,” I sighed, feeling a heaviness in my upper chest. “They’re only allowing them on the front lawn to meet with family.”

She rubbed her face with both hands, as if trying to hide from the world for a moment. “Four months locked in his room,” she said through cupped hands. “It’s inhuman.”

“He says it’s not been too bad.” Not that I believed him. “He reads a lot. Memorizes Shakespeare. He’s a bit of a loner.”

“So am I,” she said. “But four months of isolation sounds unbearable.”

“They are just trying to take care of him.”

She began twisting a strand of her hair tightly around her forefinger. “Oh, yeah, sure. If they call it caring then it must be okay. Abusing people is the new helping people.”

She’s nuts, I thought.

“That’s not really what’s going on.”

It can’t be.

She stared silently back at me. She didn’t appear to be breathing. And neither was I.

When I could hold my breath no longer, I inhaled deeply and demanded, “Are you going to give me some bread?”

“Are you going to lose the facial inhibitor?”

I pulled on the top of the green cloth and let the spandex snap back into place. “Hey, my mom made me this mask.”

Her blue eyes rolled up and to the left. “She also made your face.”

“Oh, for Christ’s sake!” I said, putting my hand to my forehead. “Do you have to be so difficult?”

“Do you have to wear a face diaper?”

More silence.

I needed her bread. But she didn’t seem too concerned about getting my money. She obviously placed her protests above profits. I could’ve left. Called it a draw.

No, I thought. All Grandad wanted was a loaf of her sourdough.

I was running out of time. If I was going to be defeated, I decided, I couldn’t let her win without some small victory on my side. Looking her in the eye, heart suddenly pounding, I said:

“I’ll take off the mask on one condition.” She took a big step back, crossed her arms and said, “What’s the condition?”

To find out what happens next, you can order the book here.

What Readers Are Saying…

“Sometimes fiction is the best way to get the truth across. Shakespeare and Charles Dickens knew that and so does John C. A. Manley. He has crafted a ripping story of courage, awakening and love (with some good laughs thrown in) all in the time of COVID. As with the truth, you won’t want to put Much Ado About Corona down.”—Patrick Corbett, former director/producer for W-5, Beachcombers and Dateline

“Much Ado About Corona weaves a fascinating, entertaining, and sometimes very sad story, full of irony and subtle humour. The protagonist’s narrative is full of sarcasm, openness and directness. Heart warming and outright hilarious.”—Dr. Éva Székely, retired psychologist, author of Never Too Thin

“I enjoyed Much Ado About Corona immensely. The police interaction was bang on and the subtleties are not so subtle and portray an authentic realism to me. Constable Mackenzie is a tragic character.”—Retired Constable Leland “Lee” Keane, Royal Canadian Mounted Police

“I felt there was no more data I could absorb about COVID-19 without going crazy. Hence, it was refreshing to read a page-turning fictional account… Living in a profession where so few seem to see the horrors we are participating in, reading Much Ado About Corona was a cathartic experience.”—Andrew Brannan BScN, RN, ER and ICU nurse

More testimonials available at MuchAdoAboutCorona.ca/testimonials.

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.

John C. A. Manley is the author of the full-length novel, Much Ado About Corona: Dystopian Love Story. He is currently working on the sequel, Brave New Normal, while living in Stratford Ontario, with his wife Nicole and son Jonah. You can find out more about his controversial work of fiction at MuchAdoAboutCorona.ca. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story

By John C. A. Manley

Publisher: Blazing Pine Cone Publishing (March 29, 2022)

Paperback:‎ 507 pages

ISBN-10: ‎1778123104

ISBN-13: ‎978-1778123108

Click here to order.

Posted in English
Comments Off on “Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story”, by John C. A. Manley

The Economy of Tolerable Massacres: The Uvalde Shootings

May 26th, 2022 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Societies generate their own economies of tolerable cruelties and injustices. Poverty, for instance, will be allowed, as long a sufficient number of individuals are profiting. To an extent, crime and violence can be allowed to thrive. In the United States, the economy of tolerable massacres, executed by military grade weapons, is considerable and seemingly resilient. Its participants all partake in administering it, playing their bleak roles under the sacred banner of constitutional freedom and psychobabble.

Just as prison reform tends to keep pace with the expansion of the bloated system, the gun argument in the US keeps pace, barely, with each massacre. With each round of killings, a script is activated: initial horror, hot tears of indignation of never again, and then, the stalemate on reform till the next round of killings can be duly accommodated. “It isn’t enough to reiterate the plain truth that the assault weapons used in mass shootings must be banned and confiscated,” observes Benjamin Kunkel. “Instead, every fresh atrocity must be recruited into everyone’s preferred single-factor sociological narrative.”

In Uvalde, Texas, a teenage gunman (they do get younger) made his way into an elementary school and delivered an unforgettable May 24 lesson. When he had finished at Robb Elementary School, 19 children and 2 adults had perished. But even this effort, in the premier league ranking of school killings, failed to top the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut in December 2012. On that occasion, 26 lost their lives.

The horror and indignant tears were duly cued. President of the United States, Joe Biden:

“Why are we willing to live with this carnage? Why do we keep letting this happen?” he rhetorically intoned at a press conference. “For every parent, for every citizen in this country, we have to make it clear to every elected official in this country: it’s time to act.” This would involve the passing of “common sense gun laws” and combating the gun lobby.

The next day, Vice President Kamala Harris reiterated the formula.

“We must work together to create an America where everyone feels safe in their community, where children feel safe in their schools.”

The politicians are duly accompanied by the talking heads, such as Ron Avi Astor, described by NPR as “a mass shooting expert”. With this unsavoury appellation, we are told that this UCLA professor is puzzled as to why negligible changes to gun laws have taken place since Sandy Hook. In coping with such puzzlement, he suggests an old academic trick: reframe the problem to lessen its gravity.

With some gusto, Astor proceeds to say that schools in the US have been doing fabulously well in coping with violence – as long as you take the long view. “If you look over the last 20 years, really since Columbine, there’s been a massive, massive, massive … decrease in victimization and violence in schools.” Diving into the silver lining in his own massive way, he finds “reductions” in violence in the order of 50 to 70 percent.

It never takes long for the economy of tolerable massacres to generate the next round of scrappy arguments, with the corpses barely cold. The common one is that of shooting frequency. Was this a good year relative to the last? This year, the United States has suffered 27.

Since 2018, Education Week, showing how school deaths should very much feature in planning curricula, has taken a grim interest in the whole matter. Reading its compiled figures – “heartbreaking, but important work”, the journal claims – is much like dipping into stock market returns with the requisite amount of sensitivity. In 2021, there were 34 school shootings, a real bumper year. In 2020, it was poor on that front: a modest 10. Both 2019 and 2018 saw higher returns: 24 each.

If you wish to be entertained by the ghoulish nature of it all, Education Week also gives us some infotainment with a graphic on “Where the Shootings Happened.” Dots feature on a map of the country. “The size of the dots correlates to the number of people killed or injured. Click on each dot for more information.” Where would we be but for such valuable services?

To give credence to the seemingly immutable nature of this economy on shootings, platoons of commentators, equipped with various skills, argue about responses, most showing that common sense, in this field, is a noble dream. The conservative National Review takes the view that “tougher background checks” would hardly have worked for the Uvalde shooter. There was no paper trail flagging him as a threat, nothing to suggest that he should have been prevented as a “legal adult from purchasing a firearm.” The implicit suggestion here: only nutters kill.

The business of guns is the business of a particular American sensibility. With the school shooting still fresh, various members of the GOP and Donald Trump affirmed their interest in appearing at a Memorial Day weekend event hosted by the National Rifle Association. In a statement on the shootings, the NRA expressed its “deepest sympathies” for the families and victims of “this horrific and evil crime” but preferred to describe the killings as the responsibility “of a lone, deranged criminal.” Leave gun regulation alone; focus on school security instead.

With that brief formality discharged, the NRA expressed its delight at its forthcoming Annual Meetings and Exhibits event to take place at the George R. Brown Convention Center, Houston between May 27 and May 29. “The Exhibit Hall is open all three days and will showcase over 14 acres of the latest guns and gear from the most popular companies in the Industry.” It promises to be fun for the whole family.

Then comes the thorny matter of definitions, a sure way to kill off any sensible action. From boffin to reactionary, no one can quite accept what a “school shooting” is. Non-profit outfits such as the New York-based Everytown for Gun Safety include any discharge of a firearm at school as part of the definition. “In 2022,” the organisation claims, “there were at least 77 incidents of gunfire on school grounds, resulting in 14 deaths and 45 injuries nationally.”

Everytown for Gun Safety is keen to paint a picture of annual murderous rampage: 3,500 children and teens being shot and killed; 15,000 shot and injured. Some 3 million children in the US are exposed to shootings each year.

The tone underlying such a message is much at odds with the rest easy approach taken by Astor – what Australians would call the “she’ll be right, mate” caste of mind. It is certainly Panglossian in nature, aligning with the views of cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker, optimist extraordinaire on the human condition. Taken holistically, he keeps insisting, we live in far better, less violent times than our forebears. Such massacres as those at Sandy Hook should not be taken to mean that schools have become less safe. “People always think that violence has increased because they reason from memorable examples rather than global data.” For Pinker, the 2013 joint survey by the Departments of Justice and Education on such statistics as rates of victimisation since 1992 to non-fatal victimisations was sufficient rebuke against the pessimists and moaners.

The Uvalde massacre will, in time, be absorbed by this economy of tolerable violence. The anger will dissipate; collective amnesia, if not simple indifference, will exert its dulling sleep. The dead, except for the personally affected, will go the way of others, buried in the confetti and scrapings of statistics.

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

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. He is a regular contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research. Email: [email protected]

Posted in English
Comments Off on The Economy of Tolerable Massacres: The Uvalde Shootings
Tags: gun violence, school shooting, United States, uvalde shooting

Monkeypox Mythology

May 26th, 2022 by Dr. Sam Bailey

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The report states that in March 2021, they partnered with the Munich Security Conference to run an exercise scenario involving a, “deadly, global pandemic involving an unusual strain of monkeypox virus that emerged in the fictional nation of Brinia and spread globally over 18 months…the fictional pandemic resulted in more than three billion cases and 270 million fatalities worldwide.”

The Nuclear Threat Initiative introduces Plandemic 2.0? This time it is even bigger and monkeypox takes centre stage.

Amazingly, the scenario had the monkeypox outbreak emerging as a result of an act of bioterrorism in May 2022, right where we are now.

We have dealt with gain of function garbage involving non-existent viruses in several other videos, while Dr Stefan Lanka has also dismantled such fallacies. Regardless, the NTI’s report suggests that what is required in a fantasy outbreak is, “aggressive measures to slow virus transmission by shutting down mass gatherings, imposing social-distancing measures, and implementing mask mandates.” The winning countries in the NTI’s hallucination implemented, “large-scale testing and contact-tracing operations and scaled-up their health care systems.”

Their charts, which seem to be produced by Neil Ferguson’s calculator, show that countries that don’t comply with their restrictions and medical interventions will be far worse off. The report goes on to state,

“both the exercise scenario and the COVID-19 response demonstrate that early actions by national governments have significant, positive impacts in managing the impact of the disease.”

When they say “positive impacts” it is not quite clear who is on the receiving end, although they note that “the COVID vaccine market will exceed $150 billion in 2021.” All in all the NTI’s report reads like Event 201 on Ritalin. (Event 201 took place on 18 October, 2019. It was an exercise involving a, “coronavirus pandemic” just months before the COVID-19 “pandemic” was declared.)

Monkeypox attacks right on cue!

As with COVID-19 it appears that other parties have also been eagerly awaiting a market such a “pandemic” would present. Likewise, these fortune-tellers were preparing vaccines to go where no vaccine had gone before. In this case the biotech company Bavarian Nordic gained approval from the FDA in 2019 to market JYNNEOS, a smallpox and monkeypox vaccine. Other health authorities were also primed to react to a previously rare condition that has been of no concern for their nations…until now apparently. For example, on May 20, 2022, the UK Health Security Agency published a document titled, “Recommendations for the use of pre and post exposure vaccination during a monkeypox incident.” Like COVID-19, it’s starting to feel like all roads lead to vaccines again…

Just a matter of time before the “rare” monkeypox vaccine comes to your neighbourhood.

So now that the scene has been set we can get into the “science” of monkeypox starting with an official description of the alleged viral disease. The CDC states that, “Monkeypox was first discovered in 1958 when two outbreaks of a pox-like disease occurred in colonies of monkeys kept for research, hence the name ‘monkeypox.’ The first human case of monkeypox was recorded in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of Congo.” They go on to state that, “in humans, the symptoms of monkeypox are similar to but milder than the symptoms of smallpox.” The illness is said to be flu-like with the addition of lymph node swelling and then development of a rash, and then lesions that progress from macules to vesicles to scabs.

In terms of the lethality of monkeypox, the CDC state that, “in Africa, monkeypox has been shown to cause death in as many as 1 in 10 persons who contract the disease.” This 10% fatality rate has already stoked the fear narrative and was also used as the case fatality rate in the NTI’s monkeypox pipe dream. It should be noted that historically monkeypox has been virtually unheard of in first world countries and the rare cases are usually in people that have recently arrived from Africa.

Indeed, one of the only recorded “outbreaks” of monkeypox in the first world was in the United States in April 2003. Cases were declared in 6 states and said to be caused by rodents that were imported to Texas from Ghana. This was the first time monkeypox had been reported outside of Africa and the CDC published a paper in 2006 analysing the incident. The paper states that, “person-to-person spread of the virus is thought to occur principally via infectious oropharyngeal exudates” although it is clear that this has never been scientifically established. They continue to say that, “the virus is thought to have been transmitted from African animals” – in other words, it’s another species-jumping pathogen tale.

They reported that, “individuals who had illness onset within 21 days after exposure to MPXV [Monkeypox virus] who experienced fever (defined as a body temperature greater 37.4°C) and vesicular pustular rash or rash (potentially uncharacterized) plus orthopox IgM antibodies were classified as having probable cases of infection.” Now 37.4°C is not a fever in our book, it is a normal body temperature and we would suggest 37.6°C and above qualifies as a fever. We noted in their chart that they were using the classification ≥39.4°C, but this appears to be an error as in another paper, we’ll get to soon, it was once again 37.4°C. The second paper even said the “fever” could be subjective, so they appear to be using this loose criteria and pathologising a normal state. Additionally, the CDC’s weekly report from the 11th of July 2003, stated that from a total of 71 cases, only “two patients, both children, had serious clinical illness; both of these patients have recovered.” The remainder had a variety of respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms.

The CDC’s cases were confirmed on the basis of specimens that showed, “monkeypox virus isolation, detection of monkeypox-specific nucleic acid signatures, positive electron-microscopy findings, or positive immunohistochemical findings.” We had a look at the electron micrographs presented by the CDC including the image shown below of a skin sample from one of the patients. The caption informs us that the round particles on the right are immature monkeypox virions, while the oval particles on the left are mature viruses. However, all they have is a static image of dead tissue and no conclusions can be made about the biological role of the imaged particles. None of them have been shown to be replication-competent disease-causing intracellular parasites and so should not be called ‘viruses’.

The oldest trick in the book: Image some vesicles and call them “viruses”. To see why this is insufficient watch Electron Microscopy and Unidentified “Viral” Objects.

Looking at the CDC’s weekly report from 2003 again, it appears that the 35 “laboratory-confirmed cases” all involved polymerase chain reaction (PCR) “tests”, so we investigated the scientific evidence behind this claim. One of the citations for the development of PCR detection of monkeypox is a 2004 paper titled “Real-Time PCR System for Detection of Orthopoxviruses and Simultaneous Identification of Smallpox Virus.” Now a PCR protocol requires them to know the genetic sequences of the alleged monkeypox virus, which takes us to this 2001 paper titled, “Human monkeypox and smallpox viruses: genomic comparison”. The paper claimed to have “isolated” the monkeypox virus in a rhesus monkey kidney cell culture from a scab of a monkeypox patient. Here the virologists are up to their old tricks again by asserting that: (a) the patient’s scab contains the monkeypox virus, and (b) it is now in their culture brew. They claimed to have sequenced the “viral genome” by referring to a process described for sequencing an alleged variola virus in 1993.

But when we look at this paper there is no virus demonstrated either, simply an assertion that it was “isolated” from, “the material from a patient from India” in 1967. They go on to make the claim that, “the virions were purified by differential centrifugation and viral DNA was isolated” – however, there is no demonstration of what they purified or how they were determined to be virions. In none of these experiments did they perform any controls by seeing what sequences can be detected from other human-derived scabs or similar specimens from unwell individuals. This is where we need to remind the virologists of what a virus is supposed to be – that is, a replication-competent intracellular parasite that infects and causes disease in a host. It is not detecting genetic sequences contained within scabs and claiming that they belong to a virus.

So returning to the CDC’s paper describing the 2003 “outbreak”, it is unclear how they established they could be diagnosing anyone with monkeypox by using the PCR. Their PCR can only have been calibrated to sequences of unproven provenance. Additionally, it doesn’t matter what kind of analytical specificity their PCR protocol had, there was no established diagnostic specificity – in other words it was not a clinically-validated test, an issue that goes beyond whether the “virus” exists or not. (From the MIQE Guidelines: Analytical specificity refers to the qPCR assay detecting the appropriate target sequence rather than other, nonspecific targets also present in a sample. Diagnostic specificity is the percentage of individuals without a given condition whom the assay identifies as negative for that condition.)

The 47 US cases they ended up describing were all in some sort of contact with imported African prairie dogs and the CDC’s paper concludes that, “individuals contracted MPXV infections from infected prairie dogs; no human-to-human transmission was documented, but there were many different potential scenarios of infection involving respiratory and/or muco-cutaneous exposures, percutaneous and/or inoculation exposures.” Now there were some problems with the study design which they admitted to including that, “the analyses were limited by incomplete reporting or recall of information by patients. And, because of the retrospective nature of the study, we were unable to obtain highly detailed data.”

However, even allowing some wriggle room for them here, the inconsistencies go further still. Firstly, no one in the US incident died from the disease which is said to have a 10% fatality rate in Africa. No doubt, the inconsistent lethality rates will be attributed to different “variants”, but there can’t be variants of something that doesn’t exist.

There were few images available of the skin lesions that were reported in the 2003 incident but two of the US cases are depicted below and an image from a monkeypox case in Africa is shown for comparison. The reader can make up their own mind but those skin reactions do not look remotely comparable to us.

Next, the CDC claim that, “the natural reservoir of monkeypox remains unknown. However, African rodents and non-human primates (like monkeys) may harbor the virus and infect people” – in other words it’s all rather vague and remains an unproven hypothesis. Now, obviously some people became unwell in the US in 2003 but with the viral theory we are supposed to believe that it jumped from some prairie dogs to some humans and the latter became infected with the alleged virus…but then no human could pass it on to another human. The theory falls flat – a virus needs to spread, if it can’t spread, it’s dead and thus it’s not a virus. And the historical patterns of alleged monkeypox virus outbreaks make no sense – why did it pass to these people so easily and yet it can go a decade between alleged “outbreaks”?

Unfortunately, the 2003 incident was investigated as though the viral contagion theory had already been established and other explanations were ignored. If people were allegedly getting sick from these African rodents, wouldn’t it be a good idea to check the animals for other toxicities, particularly in their faeces and also for any ticks or parasites? We did note another reference state that with regards to the US cases, “many of the people had initial and satellite lesions on palms, soles, and extremities.” However, according to the CDC, monkeypox usually starts on the face so the clinical picture in the US cases was not consistent with cases that are typically described in Africa.

In any case, a review of the scientific evidence revealed that with regards to monkeypox: (a) there is no evidence of a physical particle that meets the definition of a virus, (b) there is no evidence of anything transmitting between humans, and (c) there is no way to confirm a diagnosis of monkeypox unless you believe in clinically-unvalidated tests such as the PCR kits that have been produced. In other words, if we see a monkeypox “pandemic” that is used as an excuse to role out more globalist terrorism, it will be on the back of another PCR pandemic, not one that has any basis in nature.

For those of you wanting to explore more problems with the various monkeypox claims, Mike Stone of ViroLIEgy has written a couple of interesting commentaries. The first article is, “Was Smallpox Really Eradicated?”, which among other things deals with the convenient emergence of monkeypox while smallpox was apparently being eradicated. The second article is, “Did William Heberden Distinguish Chickenpox From Smallpox in 1767?” This outlines the fact that the pox conditions are not as readily distinguishable from each other as the text books suggest and appear to relate more to the severity of a similar disease process. You can also watch our video, “Chickenpox Parties and Varicella Zoster Virus?” to see why there is no evidence of a virus in that related condition either.

From the perspective of terrain theory it is a fundamental mistake to attribute a person’s illness to a supposed virus, as the subsequent “treatments” don’t address the underlying issues. If someone is unwell, then they are usually deficient in nutrients and need to restore balance, or they have been exposed to environmental toxins and need to help the body detoxify. Wars against alleged pathogens that involve treating everyone the same way with civil rights restrictions and vaccines are certainly not about heath. It is good to see more people waking up to the COVID-19 fraud so there is hope that a monkeypox scamdemic, if attempted, will bring even more light to the situation. As always, your best health is in your own hands, not in the hands of a globalist cult and their cronies.

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.

Sam is a content creator, medical author & health educator. Mark is a microbiology, medical industry and health researcher who worked in medical practice, including clinical trials, for two decades.

All images in this article are from the authors unless otherwise stated

Posted in English
Comments Off on Monkeypox Mythology
Tags: biological attack, bioterrorism, monkeypox, pandemic

Pan-Africanism Yes! U.S. AFRICOM and NATO No!

May 26th, 2022 by 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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The following statement was delivered to the Africa Liberation Day/Palestine Nakba Day broadcast on Tues. May 24, 2022. The event was sponsored by the All-African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP,GC), All-African Women’s Revolutionary Union (GC), the African Awareness Association, Africans on the Move podcast and the National Council of Arab Americans.

***

We are honored to participate in this annual commemoration of Africa Liberation Day some 59 years after the founding meeting of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) on May 25, 1963, in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Much has transpired since 1963 when more than 30 independent African states held this gathering and pledged to work towards the total liberation of the continent and greater unity among governments throughout the region.

Today, the African Union (AU), founded in 2002 in Sirte, Libya, is facing one of the most profound challenges of the post-colonial period. The struggle for the unification of the AU member-states cannot occur absent the removal of foreign military forces now occupying several geo-political regions.

The United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), French Armed Forces, European Union Forces, NATO, among others are claiming that they are in numerous AU states under the guise of providing military training and assisting in strengthening the overall security apparatuses of these territories. However, since the launching of AFRICOM in February 2008, the instability within numerous African states has worsened.

Most recently, the administration of President Joe Biden has ordered the redeployment of U.S. troops into the Horn of Africa state of Somalia. A conference involving several U.S. governmental agencies was held prior to the redeployment, in Djibouti, where thousands of Pentagon and French troops are based at Camp Lemonnier.

Somalia has been a focal point of imperialist intrigue for many decades. The instability in Somalia is compounded by the burgeoning humanitarian crisis in the country due to the drought, which is gripping the country, the worst in six decades. Although these environmental problems are escalating as a result of climate change, the Pentagon is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world today.

Therefore, to effectively address the phenomenon of environmental degradation, African people must demand the dismantling of the Pentagon, NATO and its allied military forces across the world. The security issues in Somalia are a by-product of the persistent involvement by the U.S. in the internal affairs of the oil-rich country.

Africa and the Imperialist War in Ukraine

There is much focus on the Russian special military operations in Ukraine which is designed to stave off the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Eastern Europe. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the COMECON states and the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia during the late 1980s and early 1990s emboldened this military alliance formed by Washington in 1949.

There does not appear to be any enthusiasm within the AU member-states related to their participation in the U.S.-engineered war in Ukraine. Many African states abstained from voting on the two resolutions passed by the United Nations General Assembly condemning the Russian Federation. The State of Eritrea in the Horn of Africa was the only government that voted against the first resolution.

Many leaders and mass organizations have explained why they cannot support the imperialist war in Ukraine and that there must be a diplomatic initiative to end the fighting. The Biden administration is continuing the same legacy of imperialist militarism that has plagued the world for more than a century. Among the youth and anti-imperialist working class elements, there is open solidarity with the Russian Federation based upon the aggressive posture of the Ukraine military which is being propped up by the Biden administration.

Among the U.S., progressive, liberal, moderate and conservative political officials, have all lined up behind the pro-NATO operations in Ukraine. $55 billion in direct assistance to the war has been announced. These are resources taken directly from the tax revenues paid by working class and poor people in the U.S. These large-scale expenditures to continue the Ukraine war are desperately needed in the Horn of Africa to address the food deficits and potential famine as well as providing relief to the masses of people in the U.S. suffering from the coronavirus pandemic, its aftermath and the inflationary spiral not seen in more than four decades.

These domestic and foreign policy questions require bold, independent and revolutionary action on the part of African people, the other oppressed nations in the U.S. and the working class as a whole. The organization of the workers and oppressed in the U.S. must be carried out in conjunction with the revolutionary and national democratic forces in operation around the globe. Africa is central to the struggle against imperialism since its origins stem from the advent of the Atlantic slave trade, colonialism and neo-colonialism.

In conclusion, we want to join with other genuinely progressive and revolutionary forces throughout the world to proclaim that Pan-Africanism and Proletarian Internationalism is the only real solution to the monumental social and economic problems engendered by capitalism and imperialism.

Long Live the African Revolution!

Smash NATO and Its Allies!

There is Victory for Us!

Author’s Note

The above statement was delivered to the Africa Liberation Day/Palestine Nakba Day broadcast on Tues. May 24, 2022. The event was sponsored by the All-African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP,GC), All-African Women’s Revolutionary Union (GC), the African Awareness Association, Africans on the Move podcast and the National Council of Arab Americans.

Several organizations addressed the program including Louis Wolf, co-founder and editor of Covert Action magazine; Phil Wilay, Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice and Equality; Jihad Abdulmumit, Chairperson of the International Jericho Movement; Simin Royanian, Women for Friendship and Peace in Iran; John Steinbach, Hiroshima Nagasaki Peace Committee; Kweku Lumumba, KOSSA/Haiti; Bilal Sunni Ali, Imam Jamil al-Amin Action Network; Lee Robinson, African Awareness Association and A-APRP (GC); and Anthony Williams, A-APRP (GC). Promotional language for the broadcast said that:

“This year, our ALD/PD programs are being organized for the month of May 2022. There will be various activities and programs taking place during this time. Our theme for year’s program is ‘Unleashing an Offensive of 64 YEARS of African Liberation Day: Intensifying the Revolutionary Struggle Against Capitalism & Imperialism, Zionism & Neo-Colonialism; Forward to Pan-Africanism – One Unified Socialist Africa’, in principled solidarity with the Palestinian revolutionary struggle to liberate all of Palestine from Zionist occupation and control. We are additionally honoring the birthdays of Ho Chi Minh (May 19, 1890) and Malcolm X (May 19, 1925).” A link to the entire program can be found here.*

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.

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

Featured image: African Union in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

Posted in English
Comments Off on Pan-Africanism Yes! U.S. AFRICOM and NATO No!
Tags: Africa, africom, NATO, Pan-Africanism

Gesunder Menschenverstand versus magische Weltanschauung

May 26th, 2022 by Dr. Rudolf Hänsel

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Read Part I:

Wissenschaftliche Psychologie fordert neue „Aufklärung“

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, May 24, 2022

Die kritischen Gedanken über die Religion und ihre Auswirkungen auf das menschliche Fühlen, Denken und Handeln beruhen vor allem auf eigenen Erfahrungen des Autors mit dem religiösen Glauben und der Institution der katholischen Kirche. Darüber hinaus stützt sich der Autor als Pädagoge und Psychologe auf die Wissenschaft der Psychologie und das einzigartige Lebenswerk seines geschätzten Züricher Psychologie-Lehrers und Psychotherapeuten Friedrich Liebling (1893-1982). Von ihm stehen dem Autor unveröffentlichte Manuskripte und umfangreiche persönliche Aufzeichnungen von privaten und öffentlichen Gesprächen zur Verfügung.

Eine weitere Grundlage sind die Werke des französischen Aufklärers und Enzyklopädisten Baron Paul-Henri Thiry d’Holbach (1723-1789) „System der Natur“ (5) und „Der gesunde Menschenverstand des Pfarrers Meslier“ (6). Hinzu kommen die Gedanken des französischen Radikalaufklärers und „Atheisten im Priesterrock“ Jean Meslier (1664-1729), die er in seinem Testament „Memorandum der Gedanken und Überzeugungen des J. M“ niedergeschrieben hat.

Holbachs Buch „System der Natur oder von den Grenzen der physischen und der moralischen Welt“ erschien im Jahre 1770 unter fingierter Autorenschaft und erregte skandalöses Aufsehen. Der französische Klerus verlangte sein sofortiges Verbot durch das Parlament, weil es „gottlos, gotteslästerlich und aufrührerisch“ sei. Auszüge aus dem Vorwort des Verfassers lassen dies erahnen:

„Der Mensch ist nur darum unglücklich, weil er die Natur verkennt. Sein Geist ist durch Vorurteile derart verseucht, dass man glauben könnte, er sei für immer zum Irrtum verdammt: er ist mit dem Schleier der Anschauungen, den man von Kindheit an über ihn breitet, so fest verwachsen, dass er nur mit der größten Mühe daraus gelöst werden kann. Ein gefährlicher Gärstoff ist all seinen Kenntnissen beigemischt und macht sie notwendig schwankend, unklar und falsch; er wollte zu seinem Unglück die Grenzen seiner Sphäre überschreiten und versuchte, sich über die sichtbare Welt zu erheben; (…)

Es gibt nur eine Wahrheit; sie ist für den Menschen notwendig, sie kann ihm niemals schaden, ihre unbesiegbare Macht wird sich früher oder später offenbaren. Darum muss sie dem menschlichen Geschlecht enthüllt werden; (…)

Versuchen wir also, die Nebel zu verscheuchen, die den Menschen daran hindern, mit sicherem Schritt auf seinem Lebensweg voranzuschreiten, flößen wir ihm Mut und Achtung vor seiner Vernunft ein; er lerne sein Wesen und seine legitimen Rechte erkennen, er frage die Erfahrung um Rat und verzichte auf die Vorurteile seiner Kindheit; er gründe seine Moral auf seine Natur, seine Bedürfnisse, seine wirklichen Vorteile, welche die Gesellschaft ihm gewährt; er wage es, sich selbst zu lieben; er arbeite für sein eigenes Glück, indem er dasjenige der anderen fördert; mit einem Wort: er sei vernünftig und tugendhaft, um hier auf dieser Erde glücklich zu sein, und beschäftige sich nicht mit gefährlichen und unnützen Träumereien!“ (7)

1772, gerade einmal zwei Jahre nach Veröffentlichung von „System der Natur“, erschien unter dem Titel „LE BONS SENS DU CURE MESLIER“ das Buch „Der gesunde Menschenverstand des Pfarrers Meslier“ (8). Um sich der Verfolgung durch die „heilige Inquisition“ zu entziehen, veröffentlichte Holbach seine Gedanken unter dem Namen des bereits verstorbenen freidenkenden Pfarrers Jean Meslier.

Meslier, der es in seiner Amtszeit nicht wagen durfte, der Kirchengemeinde seine kritischen Gedanken mitzuteilen, schrieb diese während seiner letzten Jahre nieder. Dieses umfassende, antireligiöse Manifest „Mémoire“ wurde nach seinem Tod 1729 als Testament veröffentlicht und übte einen erheblichen Einfluss auf die beginnende Aufklärung aus. Das Gedankengut Meliers wurde in vielen Auszügen verbreitet und galt als Bestseller unter den geheimen Schriften. 1792 nahm auch Voltaire dazu Stellung.

1878 erschien eine deutsche Übersetzung von „LE BONS SENS DU CURE MESLIER“: „Der gesunde Menschenverstand oder das religiöse Testament des Pfarrers Meslier aus Étrépigny. Eine religiös-philosophische Abhandlung über den Begriff ‚Religion‘ und über die Existenz eines göttlichen schöpferischen Wesens – Dem geistig fortgeschrittenen Volke gewidmet -“ (9). Orthographie, Interpunktion und Satzstellung wurden unverändert übernommen.

Bereits in der Einleitung schreibt Holbach:

„Es ist vergebene Mühe, die Menschen von ihren Lastern heilen zu wollen, wenn man nicht mit der Heilung ihrer Vorurtheile beginnt. Man muss ihnen die Wahrheit sagen, damit sie ihre theuersten Interessen kennen lernen, und die wahren Motive, welche sie der Tugend und ihrem wahren Glück zuführen.

Die Volkslehrer haben lange genug ihre Augen zu dem Himmel erhoben; möchten sie endlich sie der Erde zuwenden! Gebeugt durch die unbegreifliche Theologie, durch lächerliche Fabeln, durch undurchdringliche Mysterien, durch kindliche Ceremonien, möchte der Mensch doch endlich sich mit natürlichen Dingen, mit verständlichen Gegenständen, mit sichtbaren Wahrheiten, mit nützlichen Kenntnissen befassen! Man beseitige die eitlen Chimären, welche die Menschen in Fesseln halten; und die vernünftigen Gedanken werden gleichsam von selbst in den Köpfen Wurzeln fassen, von denen man glaubte, sie seien für ewigen Irrthum bestimmt. (…)

Um die wahren Prinzipien der Moral zu entdecken, bedarf der Mensch weder der Theologie, noch einer Offenbarung, noch eines Gottes; er bedarf nur eines gesunden Verstandes; er braucht nur in sich selbst zu blicken, seine eigene Natur zu erforschen, seine Vortheile zu berücksichtigen, den Zweck der Gesellschaft und aller ihrer Mitglieder zu betrachten, und er wird leicht zur Einsicht kommen, dass die Tugend glücklich und das Laster unglücklich macht.

Sagen wir den Menschen, dass sie gerecht sein sollen, wohltätig, mäßig und gesellig, nicht weil es ihre Götter verlangen, sondern weil man seinen Nebenmenschen zu gefallen suchen muss; sagen wir ihnen, dass sie sich der Sünde und des Lasters enthalten sollen, nicht weil man in einer andern Welt gestraft wird, sondern weil sich das Böse schon in diesem Leben bestraft. (…).

Die Wahrheit ist einfach; der Irrthum ist compliziert, unsicher in seinem Gange und von Abwegen umgeben. Die Stimme der Natur ist verständlich; die der Lüge ist zweideutig, rätselhaft, mysteriös. Der Weg der Wahrheit ist gerade, jener des Betruges ist krumm und finster. Diese Wahrheit ist allen Menschen nothwendig, und wird von allen Gerechten gefühlt. Die Lehren der Vernunft sind für alle Jene, die redlichen Gemüthes sind. Die Menschen sind unglücklich, weil sie unwissend sind; sie sind unwissend, weil sich Alles gegen ihre Aufklärung verschwört, und bloß darum schlecht, weil ihre Denkkräfte nicht hinreichend entwickelt.“ (10)

Der französische Philosoph und Schriftsteller Pierre Bayle (1647-1706), ebenfalls eine zentrale Figur der Aufklärung, ist der Auffassung:

„Dass eine Meinung nur deshalb, weil sie sich von Jahrhundert zu Jahrhundert fortgeschleppt hat, nun eine Wahrheit sei, das ist ganz einfach eine Täuschung.“ (11)

Hohe „Suggestibilität“ im Kindesalter unterstützt religiöse Glaubensbereitschaft

Die christliche Kirche ist der Überzeugung, dass das, was an religiöser Erziehung des Kindes versäumt wird, kaum wieder eingeholt werden kann. Sie muss ihre Lehren dem jungen, geistig noch hilflosen Menschen erst künstlich induzieren, um ihn als Erwachsenen fest in der Hand zu haben.

Der Mensch glaubt gerne, was seinen Wünschen und seiner jeweiligen Gemütsstimmung entspricht. Die „Suggestibilität“ ist ein Persönlichkeitsmerkmal, welches das Ausmaß der „Empfänglichkeit“ für suggestiv übermittelte Informationen über bestimmte Sachverhalte ausdrückt, die in die eigenen kognitiven Systeme (Wahrnehmen, Denken, Erinnern usw.) integriert werden. Oft vermitteln Menschen diese Informationen als Selbsterlebtes oder eigene Erfahrungen weiter. Bei diesem Prozess werden von außerhalb Gedanken, Gefühle, Wahrnehmungen oder Vorstellungen übernommen, die nicht der Realität entsprechen und die Person in manipulativer Weise geistig-psychisch beeinflussen sollen (12).

Durch die mehr oder weniger große Suggestibilität fast aller Menschen wird die religiöse Glaubensbereitschaft wesentlich unterstützt. Sehr suggestible Erwachsene werden oft als „naiv“ oder „leichtgläubig“ bezeichnet. Anders verhält es sich bei Kindern: Ihre Suggestibilität ist sehr hoch, weshalb junge Menschen in besonderem Maße Ziel manipulativer Beeinflussung sind. Außerdem können Kinder dazu neigen, suggerierte Informationen mit Erlebtem zu verwechseln (13). Bevor noch das Bewusstsein erwacht und bevor es denken und bewerten kann, werden dem Kind die Ideen von Gott, Teufel, Dämonen, finsterer Mächte und der Hölle eingeflößt. Allein der Gedanke, an diesen Ideen zu zweifeln, führt direkt in die Hölle.

In der Regel betritt der gläubige Mensch seine Kirche bereits in einem halbsuggerierten Zustand; weiteres geschieht automatisch: Das feierliche kirchliche Milieu, die priesterliche Kleidung, Weihrauch, Orgelmusik, Litaneien und die Predigt, die pathetisch überreden will. All das vervollständigt die Suggestion und schaltet das kritische Denkvermögen aus. Das Denken wird leise und unbemerkbar beiseitegeschoben und durch die Stimme des Predigers eingelullt. Zum hundertsten und tausendsten Mal wird immer das gleiche gesagt, man hört kaum noch zu.

Durch die religiöse Suggestion wird nicht nur die Intelligenz eingeschüchtert, sondern auch der Wille und das Selbstbewusstsein, weil der Abfall vom Glauben und der Austritt aus der Kirche seit apostolischen Zeiten als schwere Sünde, als Untreue und Judas-Tat gelten. Der gesunde und geistig-psychisch nicht manipulierte Mensch äußert Urteile erst dann, wenn er sie an der Erfahrung überprüft und als nicht vernunftwidrig erkannt hat.

Die einschläfernde Wirkung der monotonen religiösen Zeremonien und die religiösen Feste, die den Höhepunkt des Jahres darstellen sowie die ständige Entwertung einer vorübergehenden Existenz auf Erden zugunsten des ewigen Lebens im Jenseits bewirken, dass eine fatalistische und passive Haltung häufig zum dominanten Charaktermerkmal der Persönlichkeit wird.

Ein Mensch kann sich aber in seiner Denkungsart und Gedankenwelt ändern. Die Jugend ist heute freier als früher; das ist schon eine andere Welt, weil die Zivilisation fortgeschritten ist. Dieser junge Mensch ist mit der Religion aufgewachsen, er kennt das ganze mystische Gedankengut und hat immer noch Angst, nicht zu glauben, weil das eine Sünde ist und er das ewige Leben verlieren könnte.

Wenn er jedoch zum Beispiel zu einem aufgeklärten Psychotherapeuten Vertrauen hat und bekommt Mut, steht nach einiger Zeit ein Mensch vor uns, der das alles ablegen kann: Er glaubt nicht mehr, weil er Einblick in die Naturwissenschaft bekommen hat, weil er angefangen hat zu lesen und weil er die Kirchengeschichte und die Geschichte der anderen Seite, der Zweifler, kennengelernt hat, die sich gegen die Religion aufgelehnt haben. Er fängt an, einen Blick für die reale Welt zu haben und bekommt neue Gedanken; an die alten glaubt er nicht mehr. Er hat eine andere Lebensauffassung, weil er seine Gedanken und Gefühle überprüft hat.

Das Problem der Gewalt in der autoritären Erziehung

In unserer Gesellschaft und Kultur wird immer mit Gewalt vorgegangen. Bei der Mutter fängt es an. Wie kommt es, dass eine Mutter ihr Kind schlägt, beschimpft und irritiert? Das ist doch nicht gewollt: Sie hat ein Kind auf die Welt gebracht und war mit dem ganzen Herzen dabei. Beziehen wir jedoch unsere gesamte Gesellschaftsordnung mit ein – das Prinzip der Gewalt und des Zwanges –, dann ist die Mutter schon so erzogen worden und ist der Meinung, dass sie ihr Kind auch in diesem Sinne zu erziehen hat.

Ein hoher Prozentsatz der Bevölkerung – die Intelligenten, die Dummen, die Akademiker, die Nichtakademiker, die Gläubigen und die Ungläubigen –, sie alle stimmen für „Ruhe und Ordnung!“. Das ist der Kasernenhof, unser kulturelles Problem und unser Unglück! Da liegt „der Hund begraben“. Wir haben alle den Zwang in der Erziehung erlebt – und deshalb haben wir den Zwang in uns.

Auch die Schule ist eine Gewaltinstitution – selbst dann, wenn sie heute wegen der psychologischen Erkenntnisse etwas gemildert ist. Der Lehrer darf nicht mehr schlagen – aber er schlägt trotzdem. Die ganze Haltung des Lehrers ist autoritär, auch wenn er nicht schlägt. Das Kind wird seines Lebens nicht froh. Es lebt nicht in einer freundlichen Welt; alles ist die Fortsetzung des Erziehungsproblems zuhause.

Der Professor ist ebenso ein Machthaber, dem der Student nicht gewachsen ist. Dieser Autoritätsgedanke wird überall gepflegt. Lehrer und Professor haben Angst, ihr Prestige zu verlieren, wenn sie sich mit dem Schüler oder Studenten unterhalten und ihm helfen. Sie haben Angst, weil auch sie diese Erziehung erlebt haben. Es ist kein gutes, gleichwertiges Verhältnis.

In der autoritären Erziehung führen wir das Kind nicht behutsam und behandeln es nicht wie ein Wesen, das werden soll, das sich entwickelt. Wir verlangen sehr viel und werden schnell nervös. Vater und Mutter kommen eben vom Schmelzkessel der Kirche und der Mystik. Unsere Moral und Meinung sind durchzogen vom Gedanken der Religion.

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

Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel ist Lehrer (Rektor a. D.), Doktor der Pädagogik (Dr. paed.) und Diplom-Psychologe (Schwerpunkte: Klinische-, Pädagogische- und Medien-Psychologie). Als Pensionär arbeitete er viele Jahre als Psychotherapeut in eigener Praxis. In seinen Büchern und pädagogisch-psychologischen Fachartikeln fordert er eine bewusste ethisch-moralische Werteerziehung und eine Erziehung zum Gemeinsinn und Frieden.

Noten

(5) D’Holbach, Paul Thiry (1978). System der Natur oder von den Gesetzen der physischen und der moralischen Welt. Frankfurt am Main

(6) D’Holbach, Paul-Henri Thiry (1878). Der gesunde Menschenverstand oder das religiöse Testament des Pfarrers Meslier aus Étrépigny. St. Gallen

(7) D’Holbach, Paul Thiry (1978). System der Natur oder von den Gesetzen der physischen und der moralischen Welt. Frankfurt am Main, S. 11 f.

(8) D’Holbach, Paul-Henri Thiry (1878). Der gesunde Menschenverstand oder das religiöse Testament des Pfarrers Meslier aus Étrépigny. St. Gallen

(9) D’Holbach, Paul-Henri Thiry (1976). Der gesunde Menschenverstand des Pfarrers Meslier. Zürich

(10) A. a. O., S. 4 ff.

(11) Hagen, Friedrich (1977). Jean Meslier oder ein Atheist im Priesterrock. Leverkusen und Köln, S. 36

(12) https://de.wikipedia.org./wiki/Suggestibilität

(13) A. a. O.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Gesunder Menschenverstand versus magische Weltanschauung

Common Sense Versus “A Magical Worldview”

May 26th, 2022 by Dr. Rudolf Hänsel

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Read Part I:

The Agony of a Totalitarian “New World Order” (NWO) and A Different “Being Human”: Scientific Psychology Demands New “Enlightenment”

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel, May 24, 2022

The critical thoughts on religion and its effects on human feeling, thinking and acting are based primarily on the author’s own experiences with religious faith and the institution of the Catholic Church. In addition, as an educator and psychologist, the author draws on the science of psychology and the unique life work of his esteemed Zurich psychology teacher and psychotherapist Friedrich Liebling (1893-1982). From him, the author has unpublished manuscripts and extensive personal records of private and public conversations at his disposal.

Another basis are the works of the French Enlightenment philosopher and encyclopaedist Baron Paul-Henri Thiry d’Holbach (1723-1789) “System of Nature” (5) and “The Common Sense of Father Meslier” (6). In addition, there are the thoughts of the French radical enlightener and “atheist in a priest’s skirt” Jean Meslier (1664-1729), which he wrote down in his testament “Memorandum of the Thoughts and Convictions of J. M”.

Holbach’s book “System der Natur oder von den Grenzen der physischen und der moralischen Welt” (System of Nature or of the Limits of the Physical and Moral World) appeared in 1770 under fictitious authorship and caused a scandalous stir. The French clergy demanded its immediate banning by parliament because it was “godless, blasphemous and seditious”. Excerpts from the author’s preface suggest that:

“Man is unhappy only because he misjudges nature. His mind is so contaminated by prejudice that one could believe he is condemned to error forever: he is so tightly bound up with the veil of views that is spread over him from childhood that he can only be released from it with the greatest difficulty. A dangerous ferment is mixed with all his knowledge and makes it necessarily vacillating, unclear and false; he wanted, to his misfortune, to transcend the limits of his sphere and tried to raise himself above the visible world; (…)

There is only one truth; it is necessary for man, it can never harm him, its invincible power will reveal itself sooner or later. That is why it must be revealed to the human race; (…)

Let us, then, try to dispel the mists which prevent man from advancing with a sure step on his path of life, let us instil in him courage and respect for his reason; let him learn to recognise his nature and his legitimate rights, let him ask the advice of experience and renounce the prejudices of his childhood; let him base his morality on his nature, his needs, his real advantages which society affords him; let him dare to love himself; let him work for his own happiness by promoting that of others; in a word: let him be sensible and virtuous in order to be happy here on this earth, and not occupy himself with dangerous and useless reveries! ” (7)

In 1772, just two years after the publication of “System der Natur”, the book “Der gesunde Menschenverstand des Pfarrers Meslier” (8) appeared under the title “LE BONS SENS DU CURE MESLIER”. To avoid persecution by the “Holy Inquisition”, Holbach published his thoughts under the name of the already deceased free-thinking priest Jean Meslier.

Meslier, who was not allowed to share his critical thoughts with the church community during his tenure, wrote them down during his last years. This comprehensive, anti-religious manifesto “Mémoire” was published as a testament after his death in 1729 and exerted a considerable influence on the incipient Enlightenment. Melier’s ideas were disseminated in many excerpts and were considered a bestseller among the secret writings. In 1792, Voltaire also commented on it.

In 1878, a German translation of “LE BONS SENS DU CURE MESLIER” was published: “Der gesunde Menschenverstand oder das religiöse Testament des Pfarrers Meslier aus Étrépigny. A religious-philosophical treatise on the concept of ‘religion’ and on the existence of a divine creative being – Dedicated to the spiritually advanced people -” (9). Orthography, punctuation and sentence order were adopted unchanged.

Already in the introduction Holbach writes:

“It is a vain effort to try to cure people of their vices if one does not begin by curing their prejudices. They must be told the truth, so that they learn to know their dearest interests and the true motives that lead them to virtue and their true happiness.

The teachers of the people have long enough raised their eyes to heaven; would that they would at last turn them to earth! Bowed down by incomprehensible theology, by ridiculous fables, by impenetrable mysteries, by childish ceremonies, let man at last concern himself with natural things, with intelligible objects, with visible truths, with useful knowledge! Eliminate the vain chimeras which keep men in bondage; and sensible thoughts will, as it were, take root of their own accord in minds which were believed to be destined for eternal error. (…)

To discover the true principles of morality, man needs neither theology, nor revelation, nor God; he needs only a sound mind; he need only look within himself, investigate his own nature, consider his advantages, contemplate the purpose of society and of all its members, and he will easily come to the conclusion that virtue makes happy and vice makes unhappy.

Let us tell men to be just, charitable, temperate, and sociable, not because their gods demand it, but because one must seek to please one’s fellow men; let us tell them to abstain from sin and vice, not because one will be punished in another world, but because evil already punishes itself in this life. (…).

Truth is simple; error is complicated, uncertain in its course and surrounded by deviations. The voice of nature is intelligible; that of falsehood is ambiguous, enigmatic, mysterious. The path of truth is straight, that of deceit is crooked and dark. This truth is necessary to all men, and is felt by all the righteous. The teachings of reason are for all those who are of an honest mind. Men are unhappy because they are ignorant; they are ignorant because everything conspires against their enlightenment, and are bad merely because their powers of thought are not sufficiently developed.” (10)

The French philosopher and writer Pierre Bayle (1647-1706), also a central figure of the Enlightenment, believes:

“That an opinion, merely because it has dragged on from century to century, is now a truth, is quite simply a delusion.” (11)

High “suggestibility” in childhood supports religious readiness to believe

Man likes to believe what corresponds to his desires and his respective mood. Suggestibility” is a personality trait that expresses the extent of “receptivity” to suggestively transmitted information about certain facts that are integrated into one’s own cognitive systems (perceiving, thinking, remembering, etc.). Often people transmit this information as self-experiences or their own experiences. In this process, thoughts, feelings, perceptions or ideas are taken over from outside that do not correspond to reality and are intended to influence the person mentally and psychologically in a manipulative way (12).

Due to the more or less great suggestibility of almost all people, religious belief is substantially supported. Very suggestible adults are often called “naive” or “gullible”. It is different with children: Their suggestibility is very high, which is why young people are particularly targeted for manipulative influence. In addition, children can tend to confuse suggested information with what they have experienced (13). Before even consciousness awakens and before it can think and evaluate, the child is instilled with the ideas of God, the devil, demons, dark forces and hell. The very thought of doubting these ideas leads directly to hell.

As a rule, the believer enters his church already in a semi-suggested state; further things happen automatically: the solemn church milieu, the priestly dress, incense, organ music, litanies and the sermon that pathetically wants to persuade. All this completes the suggestion and shuts down the critical thinking faculty. Thinking is quietly and imperceptibly pushed aside and lulled by the voice of the preacher. The same thing is said for the hundredth and thousandth time, one hardly listens any more.

Through religious suggestion, not only the intelligence is intimidated, but also the will and the self-confidence, because apostasy and leaving the church have been considered grave sins, infidelities and Judas deeds since apostolic times. The healthy and spiritually-psychologically unmanipulated person expresses judgements only when he has checked them against experience and recognised them as not contrary to reason.

The soporific effect of monotonous religious ceremonies and the religious festivals which represent the climax of the year, as well as the constant devaluation of a temporary existence on earth in favour of eternal life in the hereafter, mean that a fatalistic and passive attitude often becomes the dominant character trait of the personality.

A person can, however, change in his way of thinking and his world of thoughts. Young people today are freer than in the past; it is already a different world because civilisation has advanced. This young person has grown up with religion, he knows all the mystical thought and is still afraid not to believe because that is a sin and he could lose eternal life.

But if he trusts an enlightened psychotherapist, for example, and gets courage, after some time a person stands before us who can put all this aside: He no longer believes because he has gained insight into natural science, because he has begun to read and because he has become acquainted with church history and the history of the other side, the doubters, who have rebelled against religion. He begins to have an eye for the real world and gets new thoughts; he no longer believes in the old ones. He has a different view of life because he has examined his thoughts and feelings.

The problem of violence in authoritarian education

In our society and culture, violence is always used. It starts with the mother. How is it that a mother beats, insults and irritates her child? Surely this is not intentional: she brought a child into the world and put her whole heart into it. However, if we include our entire social order – the principle of violence and coercion – then the mother has already been brought up in this way and believes that she must also bring up her child in this way.

A high percentage of the population – the intelligent, the stupid, the academics, the non-academics, the believers and the unbelievers – they all vote for “peace and order!”. That is the barrack yard, our cultural problem and our misfortune! That is where “the dog is buried”. We have all experienced compulsion in education – and therefore we have compulsion within us.

School is also an institution of violence – even if it has been somewhat mitigated today because of psychological findings. The teacher is no longer allowed to hit – but he hits anyway. The teacher’s whole attitude is authoritarian, even if he does not hit. The child is not happy in life. He does not live in a friendly world; everything is the continuation of the educational problem at home.

The professor is also a ruler to whom the student is no match. This idea of authority is cultivated everywhere. Teacher and professor are afraid of losing their prestige if they talk to and help the student. They are afraid because they too have experienced this education. It is not a good, equal relationship.

In authoritarian education, we don’t guide the child gently and we don’t treat him or her like a being who is to become, who is developing. We demand a lot and quickly become nervous. Father and mother just come from the melting pot of the church and mysticism. Our morals and opinions are infused with the thought of religion.

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

Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a teacher (retired rector), doctor of education (Dr. paed.) and 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

(5) D’Holbach, Paul Thiry (1978). System der Natur oder von den Gesetzen der physischen und der moralischen Welt. Frankfurt am Main

(6) D’Holbach, Paul-Henri Thiry (1878). Common Sense or the Religious Testament of Father Meslier of Étrépigny. St. Gall

(7) D’Holbach, Paul Thiry (1978). System der Natur oder von den Gesetzen der physischen und der moralischen Welt. Frankfurt am Main, p. 11 f.

(8) D’Holbach, Paul-Henri Thiry (1878). Common Sense or the Religious Testament of Father Meslier of Étrépigny. St. Gall

(9) D’Holbach, Paul-Henri Thiry (1976). The common sense of the priest Meslier. Zurich

(10) op. cit., p. 4 ff.

(11) Hagen, Friedrich (1977). Jean Meslier or an atheist in a priest’s skirt. Leverkusen and Cologne, p. 36

(12) https://de.wikipedia.org./wiki/Suggestibilität

(13) op. cit.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Common Sense Versus “A Magical Worldview”

Mass Protests in Islamabad against US Sponsored “Political Military Elite”

May 26th, 2022 by Junaid S. Ahmad

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Tens of thousands of Pakistanis, including ordinary families and young people from every corner of the country, continue to converge in the capital, Islamabad, facing brutal state repression. They are doing so amidst the scorching heat wave afflicting Pakistan. There’s little to no Western coverage since these demonstrations aren’t taking place in Hong Kong, Moscow, or Tehran – but in a country with a Western-backed client regime.

This level of courage, sacrifice, and commitment is not merely about the persona of Imran Khan. It’s crystal clear that Pakistanis are marching and protesting to obtain some modicum of dignity, justice, and sovereignty by rejecting the traditional political-military elite that has plundered and prostituted the country to Riyadh-Washington since the nation’s establishment in 1947.

PTI long march reaches Islamabad following day-long battle with law enforcers.

Source: Junaid S. Ahmad

See The Tribune Report below.

The PML-N-led coalition government on Wednesday failed to contain PTI activists and supporters – who while staging their “Haqeeqi Azadi March” — managed to cross all barriers and reached near D-Chowk after setting some trees and public property on fire in Blue Area of the federal capital.

The ministers and leaders, who mocked the opponents for not having enough support and kept claiming victory throughout the day through their statements and news conferences, were left red-faced when the protesters crossed all the hurdles and compelled the law-enforcement agencies to retreat.

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.

Junaid S. Ahmad teaches Religion, Law, and Politics and is the Director of the Center for the Study of Islam and Decoloniality. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Mass Protests in Islamabad against US Sponsored “Political Military Elite”
Tags: Imran Khan, Islamabad protest, pakistan

Selected Articles: Microplastics From Masks Found Deep in Lungs of the Living

May 26th, 2022 by Global Research News

Microplastics From Masks Found Deep in Lungs of the Living

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, May 25, 2022

Tiny bits of plastic about the size of a sesame seed or smaller are everywhere. News headlines often show intact plastic bags, rings and bottles as the primary threats to the environment — and these are indeed harmful to marine life and more — but the smaller, more insidious microplastic bits may even be more harmful. A study from Great Britain found microplastics in 11 out of 13 patients’ lungs.

‘Fact Checkers’ Furious After Henry Kissinger Says Ukraine Should Cede Territory for Peace with Russia

By Zero Hedge, May 25, 2022

Veteran US statesman Henry Kissinger has urged the West to stop trying to inflict a crushing defeat on Russian forces in Ukraine, warning that it would have disastrous consequences for the long term stability of Europe.

On African Liberation Day, Biden’s Troop Deployment to Somalia Confirms Africa Is Not Free

By Black Alliance for Peace, May 26, 2022

Introduction: Re-examining Asia-Pacific War Memories: Grief, Narratives, and Memorials

By Prof. Justin Aukema, Daniel Milne, and et al., May 26, 2022

A diverse, global team of thirteen authors highlights subjects across a wide geographical area spanning the Asia-Pacific region especially. In the process, articles question common assumptions and narratives surrounding Asia-Pacific War memories by highlighting crucial, in-between spaces and remembrances. These range from Japanese military cemeteries in Malaysia, to the experiences of Filipino residents living near a Japanese POW camp, and to Japanese veterans’ personal narratives of guilt, trauma, and heroism.

The 16 Biggest Lies the U.S. Government Tells America About the Ukraine War

By Richard Ochs, May 25, 2022

Is Russia to Blame for the Looming Global Food Crisis?

By Dr. Mathew Maavak, May 25, 2022

The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict is undoubtedly impacting global grain supplies as well as the means of growing crops around the world. But is the looming global food crisis solely Russia’s fault – as spun by the globalist media machinery? Only months earlier, COVID-19, lockdowns and climate change were repeatedly blamed for this scenario.

Former Virginia State Senator Richard H. Black: Ukraine, NATO Expansionism, US Proxy Wars in Ukraine, Syria, China May be Next

By Steven Sahiounie, May 25, 2022

Former Virginia State Senator Richard H. Black was recently interviewed by Mike Robinson. In the video, Black discusses the conflict in Ukraine, his views on NATO expansionism, and draws parallels with the conflict in Syria. Black said the US has a strategic policy of using proxies to engage in war to overthrow existing governments.

Biden in Tokyo: Killing Strategic Ambiguity: The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979

By Dr. Binoy Kampmark, May 25, 2022

US Four-Star General Tweets Video Game as Real Ukraine War Battle

By Free West Media, May 25, 2022

It is quite surprising that the high-ranking military officer did not verify the content he chose to spread on his social media account since it is not the first time the pro-Ukraine faction has published video game footage as genuine Ukraine victories.

Russia-Ukraine War: George Bush’s Admission of His Crimes in Iraq Was No ‘Gaffe’

By Jonathan Cook, May 25, 2022

It was apparently a “gaffe” of the kind we had forgotten since George W Bush stepped down from the US presidency in early 2009. During a speech in Dallas last week, he momentarily confused Russian President Vladimir Putin’s current war of aggression against Ukraine and his own war of aggression against Iraq in 2003.

Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
Comments Off on Selected Articles: Microplastics From Masks Found Deep in Lungs of the Living

On African Liberation Day, Biden’s Troop Deployment to Somalia Confirms Africa Is Not Free

May 26th, 2022 by Black Alliance for Peace

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The Biden Administration’s recent decision to return U.S. troops to Somalia represents another effort on the part of the U.S. to deny agency and independence to African people. On the 59th commemoration of African Liberation Day, the Black Alliance for Peace expresses its unequivocal opposition to this redeployment. The 500 U.S. troops sent to Somalia are the latest to violate that nation’s sovereignty. As is the case with all US interventions, the underlying reasons are not only depraved but also indifferent to the constant suffering of African people caused by western-induced militarism and war.

The reintroduction of the U.S. military (AFRICOM) on the ground is related to a dispute between Somalia and the U.S. oil company, Coastline Exploration Ltd, over the validity of an oil exploration agreement. It is also a signal that the U.S. wants to both reassert its presence in the oil-rich and strategic region, and to directly target its long-time foe, Eritrea.

Netfa Freeman, BAP’s African Team Co-Coordinator states that this decision is “emblematic of the U.S. insistence on keeping Africa in perpetual turmoil and has nothing to do with enabling a more effective fight against al-Shabaab.” Biden’s advisors are certainly aware of various reports exposing that the billions Washington spends on counterterrorism programs, from Somalia to Nigeria, ostensibly to enhance security in Africa, is having the opposite effect.

While the U.S. continues its 30-year long series of interventions against Somalia, H.R. 7311 the “Countering Malign Russian Activities in Africa Act” passed with the unanimous approval of every Democrat in Congress.

H.R. 7311 was introduced by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman and Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) member Gregory Meeks and passed in the House on April 28, 2022. The bill calls for assessments of Russia’s influence on the African continent and states that the U.S. will “hold accountable” Russia and African governments who are “complicit in aiding such malign influence.” This is reminiscent of the era of the George W. Bush administration that declared that any country not with the U.S. is against the U.S.

Margaret Kimberley, BAP Africa Team Co-Coordinator said, “This bill is a racist affront to the right to self-determination of African people.”

H.R. 7311 is a reaction to African nations that refrained from condemning Russia’s military operation in Ukraine; and as a deterrent against African nations acting as Mali has done, by ending the French military presence and turning toward Russian private military company Wagner for assistance. On May 16th the Mali government announced that Wagner played a role in thwarting a failed coup attempt allegedly carried out by a group of local soldiers, foreign mercenaries, and units from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries.

Rep. Meeks and the rest of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) – the “Black misleadership class” – are fully aligned with the Biden administration and Democratic Party leadership, defending every imperialist effort to exercise U.S. dominance in Africa. The U.S. bombed Somalia on February 22, two days before the Russian Federation began its military operations in Ukraine. Yet Somalia has not become a focus of concern of Meeks and the rest of the Black misleaders, despite years of constant drone bombings by the U.S. having caused an estimated 250,000 deaths and the displacement of 3 million people. Meanwhile, these same CBC members won’t address domestic problems, but will lob billions to wage a proxy war against Russia and to support Nazi groups in Ukraine. The U.S. Black misleadership class demonstrates over and over that they do not care about African people – neither on the continent nor at home.

BAP is firm in its anti-imperialist stance and again says, “U.S. Out of Africa!” “Shut Down AFRICOM!”

No Compromise! No Retreat!

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.

Featured image is from US Air Force

Posted in English
Comments Off on On African Liberation Day, Biden’s Troop Deployment to Somalia Confirms Africa Is Not Free
Tags: Africa, africom, Somalia

Video: US Sees Anti-China Setback after Philippine Elections

May 26th, 2022 by Brian Berletic

Posted in English
Comments Off on Video: US Sees Anti-China Setback after Philippine Elections

Introduction: Re-examining Asia-Pacific War Memories: Grief, Narratives, and Memorials

May 26th, 2022 by Prof. Justin Aukema

Posted in English
Comments Off on Introduction: Re-examining Asia-Pacific War Memories: Grief, Narratives, and Memorials

The 16 Biggest Lies the U.S. Government Tells America About the Ukraine War

May 25th, 2022 by Richard Ochs

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

In any war, the first casualty is truth. Here are the biggest lies:

1. “Ukraine is a democracy”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky banned all opposition parties and banned the use of Russian as a second state language. Why did he violate his 2019 campaign promise to stop the genocidal killing of thousands in Donbas, even though they voted for him? Did he lie because neo-Nazis threatened to kill him if he did not do what they wanted? ^[1] Or is he afraid of the CIA, which has assassinated other leaders, making him their puppet? Are we to trust the judgment of a man who demands a no-fly zone which could cause a global nuclear holocaust? Zelensky oversees torture and assassination of political dissenters.^[2]

2. “National sovereignty is sacred”

When Idi Amin perpetrated genocide in Uganda, the UN violated Ugandan sovereignty to stop it. When Ukraine perpetrated genocide in Donbas and planned to escalate, Russia stopped it. ^[3] The U.S. violated Cuba’s sovereignty to take the planet to the edge of nuclear holocaust. The U.S. has violated lots of sovereignties in recent wars, killing millions. Given Ukraine’s genocide of a national minority, “should Ukraine’s sovereignty be respected”.

3. “Putin is a war criminal”

If he is a war criminal for causing the deaths of civilians, what do we call Ukraine killing 14,000 civilians in Donbas since 2014? ^[4] Is anyone calling Zelensky a war criminal? Millions killed by the U.S. in other recent wars is hundreds of times worse. Calling Putin a war criminal stops Biden from negotiating with him with the excuse “one cannot talk to war criminals.” That makes it very difficult to stop this war. Evidently, the U.S. wants this war to continue to the last Ukrainian. The plan of the Rand Corporation is to “quagmire” Russia just like the U.S. bankrupted the USSR by starting the al-Qaeda opposition in Afghanistan.

Source: wikipedia.org

4. “The world condemns Russia’s invasion”

Actually most of the world does not, including China, India, most of Africa, Israel, half of Latin America and many other countries. The two largest political parties in Russia do not oppose Russia’s intervention, the second largest party being the Communist Party.

5. “Putin has threatened to use nuclear weapons”

Russia has the same policy as the U.S. On March 22, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia would only use nuclear weapons if its very existence were threatened, Tassnews agency reported. ^[5] Russia had a “no first use” policy until the U.S. refused to do the same, so Russia dropped it. U.S. presidents have threatened to use nuclear weapons several times since the end of WWII against countries not a threat to the U.S. ^[6]

6. “With his back against the wall, Putin will resort to chemical warfare, just like in Syria”

Russia did not use chemical weapons in Syria. Russia negotiated Syrian stockpiles to be destroyed or removed. The chemical attacks in Syria were done by rebels supported by Saudi Arabia and the U.S. ^[7] If anyone has their back against the wall, it is the Ukrainians and neo-Nazis who are trained in false-flag tactics by the CIA. Like in Syria, the U.S. media are falsely blaming the Russians with no evidence whatsoever. Like in Syria, any chemicals released in Ukraine will probably be the work of opponents of Russia to blame Russia.

The U.S. gave Iraq chemical weapons which were used to kill thousands of Kurds and Iranians in 1982-83 before stockpiles were destroyed by Iraq. The U.S. is the chemical killer, not Russia which prevented it. History is full of U.S. false flags. ^[8]

FACT CHECK: Did the Daily Mail Delete a Story Reporting the U.S. Planned to Blame Assad for 'False Flag' Chemical Attacks?

Source: snopes.com

7. “Putin may resort to biological warfare”

While this charge was propagated by media during the second week of March, since the embarrassing revelation that the Pentagon funded labs in Ukraine, nothing more has been said about it in the media. It was first reported by the U.S. that hazardous specimens had to be destroyed lest they fall into the hands of Russians; later, it was reported that specimens were not dangerous at all, so as not to incriminate the U.S. Which was it? Any false-flag release of pathogens by Ukraine to blame Russia is now probably precluded. The Pentagon is guilty of funding gain-of-function virus research in China after it was banned in the U.S., posing a possible lab release of COVID-19. The U.S. is the bio-killer using a U.S. Army strain of anthrax in October 2001, not Russia.

8. “Russia is targeting civilians in Ukraine”

According to Newsweek, “Putin is not intentionally attacking civilians…Over the course of almost four weeks, missiles fired at Kyiv have been scarce…The destruction is only a small fraction of what is possible.” ^[9] The alleged massacre of civilians in Bucha, prompting Biden to accuse Putin of war crimes, was perpetrated by Ukrainians who were “cleansing” the town of presumed collaborators after Russian troops had left days before. ^[10]

9. “Russia will make false-flag attacks”

There is no evidence that Russia attacked targets and blamed Ukraine. On the contrary, seven days prior to Russia’s incursion, the OSCE Monitoring Mission gave evidence of a Ukrainian false-flag attack on a kindergarten to blame Donbas separatists. ^[11] None were killed, but Ukrainian shelling of Donetsk increased 100-fold over the next four days, leading to Russia’s incursion to stop it. ^[12] The attacks on a maternity ward, apartments and concert hall may have been false-flag attacks, staged events, or situations where civilians were held hostage by combatants. It was reported that one maternity ward had Ukrainian snipers shooting from there. Residents of Mariupol who got out testified that Ukrainian combatants were preventing civilians from escaping through the humanitarian corridor in order to use them as human shields.^[13]

10. “If Putin prevails in Ukraine, he will attack NATO countries next”

That is patently ridiculous because Russia is already over-extended and not able to attack anyone else. Russia also does not want a nuclear war. Russia’s goal is to protect Donbas, get recognition of Crimea, de-Nazify Ukraine and prevent nuclear missiles close to Russia’s border. By exaggerating Putin’s goals instead of negotiating these goals, the U.S. is prolonging the war and provoking the destruction of Ukraine.

11. “Russia is threatening nuclear power plants”

Russian soldiers were ordered to “guard and control” these plants to prevent inadvertent or deliberate damage. Photos showed Ukrainians fired the first shot, destroying a Russian tank, whereupon a second tank returned fire. A training building was damaged in the exchange. The fires were not near the reactors. The electricity for cooling was never turned off. But the hype was spun to scare the crap out of Europe so as to get their intervention into the Ukraine war.^[14]

12. “Russia’s invasion threatens the whole world”

If Russia succeeds in keeping U.S. nuclear missiles from being positioned in Ukraine seven minutes’ flight to Moscow, Russia will be doing humanity a big favor. Just as U.S. ICBM fixed missiles are on hair-trigger alert with “launch them or lose them” orders with no cancellations after launch possible, missiles in Ukraine would increase the chance of accident or miscalculation with little warning time to verify. Doomsday would be on pins and needles. That should scare the crap out of everyone. India had an accidental missile launch in March that landed in nuclear-armed Pakistan with no warhead. ^[15] Putin warned in 2019 that any incoming missile would be presumed to be nuclear, requiring a retaliatory launch by Russia before the incoming missile hit so Russia’s deterrent force would not be destroyed. ^[16]

The U.S. and NATO are threatening the planet, not Russia. Here are the facts:

President Reagan rejected President Gorbachev’s offer to give up deployment of a “Star Wars” missile defense system in space as a condition for both countries to eliminate all their nuclear weapons.
President Clinton refused President Putin’s offer to cut our massive nuclear arsenals to 1,500 bombs each, and to call on all of the other nuclear-armed states to negotiate the elimination of all nuclear weapons, in exchange for the U.S. not placing missile sites in Romania.
President George W. Bush walked out of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and put a missile base in Romania. President Trump placed another missile base in Poland.
President Bush in 2008 and President Obama in 2014 blocked any discussion of Russian and Chinese proposals for a space weapons ban in the consensus-bound UN Committee for Disarmament in Geneva.
President Obama rejected President Putin’s offer to negotiate a treaty to ban cyber war.
President Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.
From President Clinton through President Biden, the U.S. has never ratified the 1992 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, while Russia ratified it.

Click to access: “Nuclear Posture Review” by Veterans for Peace. (January 2022)

Should there be any question that it is the U.S., not Russia, that is not only threatening the world, but is threatening the entire human race for all eternity?

A picture containing sky, outdoor, shore, day Description automatically generated

U.S. naval facility in Redzikowo, Poland, where U.S. ballistic missiles that threaten Russia are stationed. [Source: wikipedia.org]

13. “The U.S. has a ‘free press’ while Russia’s news is controlled”

U.S. news outlets are owned by Wall Street billionaire oligarchs who give so-called journalists the script to report, making TV reporters paid actors who know where their bread is buttered. The U.S. media have proven to be more dangerous and warlike than the Pentagon, as shown in past U.S. wars (Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Gaza, Yemen, Afghanistan). Now these billionaires are censoring social media, so we are censored in doing personal research. The U.S. has shut down Russian media like Tass and Russia Today (RT) to prevent Americans from hearing the other side and making up our own minds who is lying and who is telling the truth. What is the U.S. afraid of if they are telling the truth? According to Carl Bernstein, Pulitzer Prize journalist, the CIA has captured The New York Times and The Washington Post.

14. “Russia is planning cyber attacks on the U.S.”

Russia remains open for dialogue and cooperation on information security with all states, and the United States is not an exception,” the Kremlin’s Andrey Krutskikh told Newsweek. “Moscow’s vision of such a multilateral cyber scheme includes a set of obligations not to use ICTs as a weapon.” A potentially key meeting was in April when Krutskikh sought to work with Washington in the digital realm. ^[17]

15. “Russia is killing children.”

The numbers are being exaggerated like all the other exaggerations by Ukraine to get NATO into the war. Any child deaths are accidental, not like the deliberate murder of children by the U.S. and Israel. When Madeleine Albright was asked if the half million children starved to death in Iraq from U.S. sanctions were worth it, she answered “yes.” ^[18]During Israel’s 2014 “Operation Protective Edge,” Israeli military forces killed 2,200 Palestinians, more than 80% of whom were civilians, and nearly one-quarter of whom were children.^[19]

16. “Russia may use tactical nuclear weapons.”

Russia could have flattened Kyiv with conventional explosives, but did not, so why would they use nuclear weapons?

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.

Richard Ochs is a board member of Maryland Peace Action. He has published articles in the Baltimore Sun, Baltimore Chronicle, and the website: www.freefromterror.net.

Notes

Trying to de-Nazify Ukraine, Zelensky knows the biggest threat against him—and from what had always been prohibiting him from complying with the Minsk II accords. “The Nazis had always made clear that they’d kill him if he did any such thing.”
https://www.globalresearch.ca/why-did-vladimir-putin-probably-save-volodymyr-zelenskys-life/5773835
https://thegrayzone.com/2022/04/17/traitor-zelensky-assassination-kidnapping-arrest-political-opposition/
“In recent days, the number and intensity of shelling on the territory of the Republics by the Ukrainian army has sharply increased. The units of the People’s Militia are forced to constantly suppress the firing points of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in order to prevent the death of the civilian population.” Published on February 21, 2022.https://ugetube.com/watch/firefight-ukraine-army-039-s-plan-to-attack-donbass_wmIf7NNHXvOCqNV.html?msclkid=f3d55ab0ab2a11ec9d8c68334c4999d6
The map below shows two-thirds of Donbas was occupied by Kyiv forces before the Russian rescue mission on February 24, 2022. The line of conflict between the blue and brown areas indicates a third of the population of Donbas was in the target zone, suffering 10,000 civilian casualties.
President Vladimir Putin ordered Russia’s nuclear forces to be put on high alert. U.S. nuclear missiles have been on hair-trigger for decades. In line with the order, Russia’s defense ministry said on February 28 that its nuclear missile forces and Northern and Pacific fleets had been placed on enhanced combat duty, the Interfax news agency reported. United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres said on March 14: “The prospect of nuclear conflict, once unthinkable, is now back within the realm of possibility.” Since most Americans seem to have been oblivious to this existential threat, perhaps Putin did us a favor to remind us of the need for universal nuclear disarmament, which the U.S., not Russia, has been sabotaging.
The United States threatened to use nuclear weapons in Korea, Vietnam, China, Russia and Afghanistan after dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
when did US consider using nuclear weaons? – Search (bing.com)
Weapons inspector refutes U.S. Syria chemical claimsWeapons Inspector Refutes U.S. Syria Chemical Claims – Consortium News
History of U.S. false flags for war:
1. Sinking of U.S. battleship Maine in 1898 to start war against Spain for Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico and genocide in Philippines.
2. Deliberately sending the Lusitania to be sunk in war zone despite warnings, creating a preext for the U.S. entry into WWI.
3. “Operation Northwoods” conspiracy proposed by U.S. Joint Chiefs to JFK to crash U.S. plane and blame Cuba.
4. Assassination of JFK by deep state cabal, blaming alleged communist despite evidence of the real gunman.
5. Since 9/11, tons of evidence suggest it was an inside job by Dick Cheney and Saudi Royal Bandar bin Sultan.
6. One month after 9/11, anthrax from a U.S. Army lab with letter falsely blaming Islamic zealot stampeded war.
Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine but He’s Holding Back. Here’s why – Newsweek https://www.newsweek.com/putins-bombers-could-devastate-ukraine-hes-holding-back-heres-why-1690494?fbclid=IwAR1eVGkFmmNgnDLzkUdLXj0BAJpoHDUmqIvegtv2-fFmLVUIgdE24G_q0sE
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/04/04/questions-abound-about-bucha-massacre/https://standpointzero.com/2022/04/07/the-anatomy-of-a-russian-massacre/
Ukraine attacked a kindergarten, blaming Donbas separatists.Report of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)The Monitoring Mission’s report on the kindergarten incident:
“On 17 February, the Mission followed up on reports of damage to a working kindergarten in the north-western part of Stanytsia Luhanska (government-controlled, 16km north-east of Luhansk), located about 4.5km north-west of the north-western edge of the disengagement area near Stanytsia Luhanska.”

Comment by munitions expert:

“So the kindergarten was 4.5 kilometers inside Ukrainian-held territory. The monitors were denied access to the site by Ukrainian authorities and were only able to see it from a distance (very suspicious). Also suspicious is that the mission was told that “20 children had been in the kindergarten at the time of the incident but reported no injuries.” Really? An artillery shell bursts through a classroom wall, and no one was injured? More likely, they had been warned to get out ahead of time and evacuated before the shell was fired.

“But there is no doubt whatsoever about how far away the tank (or artillery piece) was. The impact was dead on, and not from a descending shell. And the surrounding buildings mean that whoever fired at the kindergarten was situated in that very small open space right next to it. And we know it was a dummy shell, because of the unbroken windows. If there had been an explosion, they would have been shattered. Someone took deliberate aim from only a few hundred yards away and carefully fired a single shot on a flat trajectory. They probably weren’t interested in causing “collateral damage,” but just wanted a propaganda photo. How convenient that the damage was to a kindergarten and not to one or another of the anonymous buildings surrounding it.”
The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE)
reports each day on the security situation with daily reports:https://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/reportsWed., Feb. 16 number of explosions: 5 in Donetsk and 71 in Luhansk = 76

Thurs., Feb. 17 Kindergarten hit by Ukraine’s false-flag attack

Thurs., Feb. 17 number of explosions: 128 in Donetsk and 188 in Luhansk = 316

Fri., Feb. 18 number of explosions: 135 in Donetsk and 519 in Luhansk = 654

Sat., Feb. 19 number of explosions: 553 in Donetsk and 860 in Luhansk = 1,413

(An increase in Kyiv’s shelling of Donbas by a factor of 20 within four days of kindergarten false flag)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/28/ukraine-kyiv-russia-civilians/ Increasingly, Ukrainians are confronting an uncomfortable truth: The military’s understandable impulse to defend against Russian attacks could be putting civilians in the crosshairs. Virtually every neighborhood in most cities has become militarized, some more than others, making them potential targets for Russian forces trying to take out Ukrainian defenses. “If there is military equipment there and [the Russians] are saying we are launching at this military equipment, it undermines an assertion that they are attacking intentionally civilian objects and civilians,” said Richard Weir, a researcher in Human Rights Watch’s crisis and conflict division, who is working in Ukraine.
“Over the past month, Washington Post journalists have witnessed Ukrainian antitank rockets, antiaircraft guns and armored personnel carriers placed near apartment buildings. . . Every day, it’s like this,” said Lubov Bura, 73, standing outside the apartment building where she lived that was destroyed two weeks ago.”

The Ukrainian military has “a responsibility under international law” to remove their forces and equipment from civilian-populated areas, and if that is not possible, to move civilians out of those areas, Weir said. “If they don’t do that, that is a violation of the laws of war,” he added. “Because what they are doing is they are putting civilians at risk. Because all that military equipment are legitimate targets.

“Ukraine cannot use civilian neighborhoods as ‘human shields,’” said Schabas, adding that he was not suggesting this is what is happening.

“In other militarized neighborhoods, residents also expressed concern about hearing outgoing rockets and artillery. “It’s scary,” said Ludmila Kramerenko. “It happens three or four times a day.”
The caption under the third photo in the link below says that Ukraine forces fired the first shot. Russians retaliated only after one of their tanks was destroyed. Hence, Ukraine forces started a battle at the nuclear power plant, which was not very smart. https://www.npr.org/2022/03/11/1085427380/ukraine-nuclear-power-plant-zaporizhzhia?utm_campaign=wp_the_daily_202&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_daily202
https://warontherocks.com/2022/03/the-curious-case-of-the-accidental-indian-missile-launch/
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/russia-warns-incoming-missile-nuclear-72232054?msclkid=8fd1c9b6b1e911ecad991b729498b410
See “As Biden Puts U.S. on Alert, Russia Seeks Talks to Help Prevent Cyber War” in Newsweek Magazine. Vladimir Putin had drawn up a four-point proposal for cooperation on cybersecurity in September 2020, one that in many ways echoed the arms control treaties of the Cold War era.
The main tenets of the plan involved creating a “full-scale bilateral and regular interagency dialogue on key questions” of cybersecurity, communicating through existing bodies dealing with nuclear and computer readiness. It also included the establishment of new rules of the road mirroring U.S.-Soviet agreements on avoiding maritime incidents while securing mutual “guarantees of non-intervention into internal affairs of each other.” By Tom O’Connor, March 22, 2022. https://www.newsweek.com/biden-puts-us-alert-russia-seeks-talks-help-prevent-cyber-war-1690673
Then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s quote, calmly asserting that U.S. policy objectives were worth the sacrifice of half a million Arab children.
https://fair.org/extra/we-think-the-price-is-worth-it/
Israel’s 2014 “Operation Protective Edge,” when Israeli military forces killed 2,200 Palestinians, nearly one-quarter of them children and more than 80 percent civilians.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Gaza_War

Posted in English
Comments Off on The 16 Biggest Lies the U.S. Government Tells America About the Ukraine War
Tags: America, Ukraine war, war propaganda

Is Russia to Blame for the Looming Global Food Crisis?

May 25th, 2022 by Dr. Mathew Maavak

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

A recent White House Joint Statement by US President Joe Biden and EU President Ursula von der Leyen clearly singled out the new culprit:

“We are deeply concerned by how Putin’s war in Ukraine has caused major disruptions to international food and agriculture supply chains, and the threat it poses to global food security. We recognize that many countries around the world have relied on imported food staples and fertilizer inputs from Ukraine and Russia, with Putin’s aggression disrupting that trade.”

The concept of global food security these days appear as fleeting as Biden’s mnemonic prowess. It has been 12 years since the world was shaken by a hunger-fuelled Arab Spring which was marked by violent uprisings and yet-unresolved civil wars in Libya, Yemen and Syria. Big Tech, Western officials and influencers fuelled this mayhem in the name of “freedom and democracy” but never proffered any concrete solutions to prevent another episode. Instead, global hunger grew unabated with its root causes explicated through the lens of “climate change” and “global governance”.

In the meantime, right at the doorsteps of Big Tech, the streets of San Francisco were increasingly strewn with the homeless, human faeces and discarded needles from drug abuse. Even a new urban art genre emerged in the form of poop graffiti! Nothing better represents the disconnect between the lofty promises and septic realities of Silicon Valley.

Here is something else for the reader to ponder: Contact-tracing technologies that were used to lock down societies were never trialled to connect the poor to nearby farmers markets, food banks and soup kitchens. A rational person cannot be blamed for suspecting that the intention all along was to eviscerate small-scale farmers, grocers and traders during lockdowns and thereby render citizens prostrate before governments and Big Business. As for technocrats who lap up the smarmy fantasies of the World Economic Forum (WEF), what lessons have they learnt since the fateful Arab Spring?

Here we look at two inexpiable failings of the purveyors of global governance. These are linked to the very issues which Biden and von der Leyen are using to scapegoat Russia.

National Granaries

The Arab Spring and its bloody aftermath should have informed governments on the criticality of establishing new national granaries. Well-maintained granaries can store wheat and corn, amongst others, for more than 10 years. Individuals can extend this shelf-life to a whopping 31 years under proper conditions.

Grain stats worldwide also raise questions over government commitments to food security. Global wheat production, for instance, steadily increased during the last decade. According to a Statista.com brief on Jan 27: “The global production volume of wheat came to about over 772 million metric tons in the marketing year of 2020/21. This was an increase of about ten million tons compared to the previous year. Wheat stocks is (sic) also estimated to increase to about 294 million metric tons worldwide by 2021.”

Although these figures are constantly updated as newer data pour in, there was indeed record wheat output in the face of relentless global lockdowns. However, most governments did little to build or expand their food stockpiles.

Granaries were an indispensable feature of ancient civilizations. The Bible recounts how Joseph had guided Egypt through seven years of famine by establishing imperial granaries during seven years of abundance. Thousands of years later, our modern-day sages are mesmerized by the WEF mantra of “you’ll will own nothing and you’ll be happy” by 2030. Does that include ownership of real food? I ask this because the WEF is currently promoting synthetic meat and insect gourmet as one of the wonders of the Great Reset.

If your government had failed to set up a strategic food stockpile in the aftermath of the Arab Spring, do not blame Russia (or Ukraine) when the proverbial hits the fan.

Fertilizer Stockpiles

Unfortunately, our Gosplan-styled world is overly-centralized, bringing with it attendant risks to the global supply chain. An acute fertilizer shortage is now one of them. Sanctions, and the freezing of $300 billion in Russian assets worldwide, led to export bottlenecks on grain and fertilizers. The escalating energy war between Russia and Europe is also pushing the price of natural gas and essential downstream products through the roof.

Fertilizers are primarily made from nitrogen, phosphorus and/or potassium. Nitrogen and ammonia (another fertilizer compound consisting of nitrogen and hydrogen) are extracted from natural gas. Our food security therefore is inextricably linked to fossil fuel production. This is an immutable reality which eco-warriors love to forget.

As the military operation in Ukraine drags on, few dare speculate the end game. Bloomberg warns that for the “first time ever, farmers the world over — all at the same time — are testing the limits of how little chemical fertilizer they can apply without devastating their yields come harvest time.” Global agricultural output is therefore expected to plummet – in both qualitative and quantitative terms – over the coming months.

Astrophysicist David Friedberg paints a more alarming picture. The ongoing West-Russia standoff may likely result in the starvation of hundreds of millions of additional people — over and above the 800 million people who already face daily hunger. Our centralized Just-in-Time (JIT) global production system only allows for a 90-day food supply for the planet. More ominously, fertilizer-producing factories worldwide number in the paltry hundreds. The ongoing baby-formula shortage in the US is directly linked to the pitfalls of centralized JIT production.

Could this catastrophe have been avoided? The West and Russia were on a collision course since Moscow’s reincorporation of Crimea in 2014. The world has had eight-long years to game out any escalation of the new West-Russia cold war. As Russia steadily built its gold reserves, the West could have likewise studied, identified and stored up items it needed from Russia in the event of a geopolitical escalation. Right on top of that list should have been fertilizers and storable food. Instead, the West treated the world to a Pussy Riot show and an unremitting Woke saturnalia.

At the end of the day, there are absolutely no excuses for the criminal lack of foresight among governments. For those who wonder about the longevity of stored fertilizer, here are some facts from a gardening website: Liquid chemical fertilizers can be stored for a decade while liquid organic fertilizers have a shelf-life of 5-8 years. Dry granular or crystalized fertilizer can be stored indefinitely.

Where are the fertilizer storage facilities that could have buffered our farms for years?

Replacing Chemical Fertilizers

Over the coming months, Europe may be tempted to substitute Russian-origin chemical fertilizers with human waste sludge. However, as a recent Mongabay article cautions, “human waste — including pharmaceuticals and microplastics contained in faeces and urine — is a major public health hazard, causing disease outbreaks, and putting biodiversity at risk.” They contain a variety of contaminants and hazardous pathogens that may affect the entire food chain. Contaminants like nanoplastics cannot be filtered out using conventional means.

Despite the evident risks, the UK reportedly imported 27,500 tonnes of Dutch sewage sludge for its agricultural needs in 2020. European farms, by extension, have now become the biggest global reservoir of microplastics due to its use of sewage sludge. The degradation of European farmland may exacerbate as the Russia-Ukraine conflict drags on.

Whether famine will ravage the world by Christmas is anyone’s guess. But make no mistake: it will be poorer societies — primarily in Africa, Middle East and South Asia — that will suffer first and foremost. Even if Russia and Ukraine sign a truce tomorrow and normality returns to the region, many parts of China are facing unprecedented lockdowns. The nuts and bolts of the global economy are now bobbing aimlessly inside countless vessels along the coastlines of China. These include items essential to agriculture. The WHO slammed China’s zero-Covid policy as being “unsustainable” which was a marked departure from earlier praises heaped on New Zealand for doing the same thing.

In this cauldron of madness, our collective future was summed up this way: “The whole planet is a pot, and we’re all frogs.” The tiny few who stir the pot are the ones who will ultimately benefit from the Great Reset.

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.

This article was originally published on RT.com.

Dr. Mathew Maavak is a Malaysian expert on risk foresight and governance. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Posted in English
Comments Off on Is Russia to Blame for the Looming Global Food Crisis?
Tags: food crisis, Russia, Ukraine war

Devastated by a Typhoon, Community Foresters in the Philippines Find Little Support

May 25th, 2022 by Keith Anthony S. Fabro

Posted in English
Comments Off on Devastated by a Typhoon, Community Foresters in the Philippines Find Little Support

Former Virginia State Senator Richard H. Black: Ukraine, NATO Expansionism, US Proxy Wars in Ukraine, Syria, China May be Next

May 25th, 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.

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Former Virginia State Senator Richard H. Black was recently interviewed by Mike Robinson. In the video, Black discusses the conflict in Ukraine, his views on NATO expansionism, and draws parallels with the conflict in Syria. Black said the US has a strategic policy of using proxies to engage in war to overthrow existing governments. He said the decision for war in Ukraine was made in Washington, DC.

Black said that Ukraine is meaningless to Americans, and yet American lives are affected by paying billions of dollars for weapons for Ukraine. A similar case in Syria, where Radical Islamic terrorists were used for a proposed regime change, failed. According to Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani, former Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Qatar, the US-sponsored regime change project in Syria cost billions of dollars and was administered by the US through the CIA office in Turkey.

“NATO’s arrogance prevents a serious response to Russia’s reasonable request that Ukraine never is accepted into the alliance,” said Black.

On Feb 19, Black urged Washington to seriously consider Russia’s call not to expand NATO. He said, “NATO and the United States refused to respond in the affirmative to Russia’s request to abandon a further expansion of the alliance and withdraw foreign troops from countries adjacent to Russia.” He noted that this proposal deserved serious consideration, and refusal to negotiate could put Russia in a national security crisis.

Earlier, Black told Sputnik that the recognition of the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics (LPR, DPR) by Russian President Vladimir Putin is an indication that he intends to take further action in the east of Ukraine while expressing hope that the United States and the European Union will work to resolve the crisis peacefully.

“By signing the decree, President Putin has made clear his seriousness and willingness to take further action,” Black said. “Hopefully this will cause the US and European powers to work toward resolving matters in a way that avoids bloodshed for both Russians and Ukrainians.”

Black was not surprised by the Russian lower house’s recognition of the breakaway republics in the Donbas region, and said that it was “morally justified because Ukraine had abrogated its responsibilities under the Minsk agreements, conducted artillery shelling of the region, and imposed an economic blockade on the population.”

“Until now, they have been dismissive of Russia’s genuine apprehensions,” he stressed. “The US had 200 Florida National Guard troops deployed inside of Ukraine, and Canada had its troops deployed there too. Actions such as those were an unacceptable threat to Russia. That should have been obvious to anyone. Yet until now, politicians have seemed oblivious to the danger that NATO’s reckless eastward advance caused for both Russia and even Western nations too.”

Black believes that an independent non-aligned Ukraine would provide stability in the region. “Ideally, Ukraine would be treated as Austria was during the Cold War, when the Soviet Union permitted it to become a sovereign, non-aligned, demilitarized buffer between East and West,” he explained recalling the 1955 Austrian Declaration of Neutrality incorporated into its constitution.

Who is Senator Black?

Richard H. Black is a Republican, and he served as a member of the Virginia State Senate, from 2012 to 2020, retiring at the end of his term. Previously he served as a member of the Virginia House of Delegates from 1998 to 2006.

Black was a career military officer, having served in both the US Marines and in the US Army JAG Corps. He served a total of 31 years active and reserve, rising from the rank of private to full colonel. He was a pilot in the US Marines during the Vietnam War, earning the Purple Heart medal, while flying 269 combat helicopter missions.

Black has faced criticism from mainstream media in the US because he offers views that are divergent from the institutionalized biased media, which has covered the war in Syria by glorifying the rebels and demonizing the Syrian government. The media fails to report that the so-called rebels are following the same Radical Islam political ideology that ISIS, Al Qaeda, and the Muslim Brotherhood expound.

Black on Syria

In April 2014, Black sent a letter to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad thanking “the Syrian Arab Army for its heroic rescue of Christians in the Qalamoun Mountain Range”, and for “treating with respect all Christians and the small community of Jews in Damascus.” Black stated it was obvious that the rebel side of the war was largely being fought by “vicious war criminals linked to Al Qaeda.”

In 2015 ISIS included Black in a list of its enemies, calling him “The American Crusader.” ISIS quoted the following statement by Black, “One thing is clear, if Damascus falls, the dreaded black and white flag of ISIS will fly over Damascus. … Within a period of months after the fall of Damascus, Jordan will fall and Lebanon will fall. … I think you will automatically see a beginning of a historic push of Islam towards Europe and I think, ultimately, Europe will be conquered.”

On April 27, 2016, Black began a three-day trip to Syria and explained his trip in a series of Twitter exchanges with The Washington Post. Black wrote that the US was “allied with two of the most vile nations on earth, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, which are intent on imposing a [Wahhabi] fundamentalist government on the Syrian people.”

On April 28, 2016, while visiting a hospital in Damascus treating soldiers who had lost limbs fighting terrorists, Black expressed concern over the US sanctions which had prevented Syrian hospitals from importing the materials to manufacture artificial limbs, and to provide other medical care. He described the US sanctions as a crime against humanity, in a country that had provided free medical to all in public hospitals. He said, “We should stop this dirty war and lift the economic siege.”

Black viewed the Syrian conflict as a plot by foreign powers to destroy the country and utilize false news in mainstream media.

Senator John McCain’s trip to Syria

While Black entered Syria legally, the Republican Senator from Arizona, John McCain, entered Syria in May 2013 illegally, without any visa or border controls. Illegal entry by foreigners into Arizona was a major issue to McCain domestically, but he broke the law himself deliberately. McCain entered Idlib illegally from Turkey and was hosted by the terrorists employed by the US. McCain was later accused of meeting with terrorists in the US media after one of the men he posed with in a photo op there was identified as an international kidnapper. Another man in the photo was identified by some as the future leader of ISIS, Baghdadi, who was later killed in Idlib, where the McCain photo was taken.

In 2017 President Trump shut down the CIA program which supported the terrorists in Syria.

Poll in the US about Ukraine

“There was a time when an international crisis would unite the country behind both the federal government’s response as well as its leaders,” said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. “That time is gone.”

Only 18 percent of Republicans surveyed by Monmouth approve of Biden’s handling of the Ukraine crisis as compared to 77 percent of Democrats. 69 percent of those surveyed for the Monmouth University poll released on May 11 support sending more US military troops to Eastern Europe to deter Russian President Vladimir Putin from further stepping up the conflict, but only 41 percent support putting American military boots on Ukrainian soil.

Biden on Taiwan

The Taiwanese are following US army basic training videos online as they practice drills preparing for a possible war against China. The US has warned Taiwan for decades of the possible threat from China. The recent conflict in Ukraine has been used by the US to ratchet up fear in Taiwan.

Beijing claims Taiwan as a Chinese province and has sworn to “unify” it. Taiwan has spent billions on weapons purchases from the US, and last week the defense minister ordered a return to a full year of conscription for young Taiwanese men and ended a non-military public service alternative.

Admiral Lee Hsi-ming, the former navy chief and chief of the general staff, has called for a government-backed territorial defense force. Lee’s proposal was written with Michael Hunzeker, a military expert at George Mason University.

While speaking in Japan recently, US President Joe Biden has warned China is “flirting with danger” over Taiwan, vowed to intervene militarily to protect the island if it is attacked, and drew a parallel between Taiwan and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This is the second time in recent months he has unequivocally stated the US would defend Taiwan if China attacked.

When the press asked if the US would defend Taiwan militarily, even though the US has not done so in the invasion of Ukraine, he responded, “Yes… that’s the commitment we made.”

During the term of Clinton, there was the US-NATO attack on Yugoslavia, under Bush there was the US attack on Iraq and Afghanistan, under Obama there was the US-NATO attack on Libya and Syria, and all of those projects were for regime change. Now there is Biden at the helm, and he has started a proxy war in Ukraine to weaken Russia. The Ukrainian conflict is only a few months old and Biden is already threatening an attack on China.

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.

This article was originally published on Mideast Discourse.

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

Featured image is from MD

Posted in English
Comments Off on Former Virginia State Senator Richard H. Black: Ukraine, NATO Expansionism, US Proxy Wars in Ukraine, Syria, China May be Next
Tags: China, proxy war, United States

US Strategists Should Consider Kissinger’s Wise Advice About China

May 25th, 2022 by Andrew Korybko

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Former US Secretary of State and National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, who’s globally renowned for his realpolitik during the Old Cold War, strongly advised his country not to let Taiwan become the core of its relations with China. He warned that doing so risks a “World War I-type situation … where people slide into a conflict.” His wisdom about this issue of global concern should be seriously considered by US strategists, especially in the aftermath of US President Joe Biden’s provocative comments.

The American leader said during a press conference that his country will get involved militarily if China is resorts to forceful means for reunifying with Taiwan. The White House later walked back the same comments that the president spent a couple sentences elaborating on but the damage was already done. The US’ so-called “strategic ambiguity” towards that scenario, which was already in and of itself a violation of its One China policy, has now been clarified from the perspective of many observers.

In the event of a military conflict between those two parts of the People’s Republic, the US will most likely replicate the Ukrainian model of waging a proxy war on that major country via the emergency dispatch of unprecedented amounts of military, financial, and other forms of aid. Put another way, one can conceptualize the NATO-led proxy war on Russia through Ukraine as being the testing ground for waging an AUKUS-led proxy war on China through its Taiwan region sometime in the future.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley told West Point graduates over the weekend that they must prepare for countering what he claimed were China’s attempts to change the post-World War II international order. Biden’s first trip to the Republic of Korea and Japan as president is meant to solidify the US’ existing treaty alliances in Northeast Asia in possible preparation of the scenario that he scandalously discussed.

All of this very strongly suggests that a disaster of epic proportions is slowly in the making, one which many feel powerless to stop since it appears as though the grand strategic inertia is irreversibly moving in that direction. That’s why Kissinger’s wise comments are so important for US strategists to pay attention to. It’s only by preventing Taiwan from becoming the core of Chinese-American relations can the worst-case scenario of those two clashing over that region possibly be averted.

The US cannot claim to support a so-called “rules-based order” when it’s de facto violating its own One China policy and going against its official recognition of Taiwan as an integral part of the People’s Republic. America’s facilitation of approximately $20 billion in arms sales to Taiwan since 2017, as revealed by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken during his testimony before the Senate late last month, shows that the Pentagon is preparing for a proxy war against China exactly as Biden hinted.

This is occurring in parallel with Japan’s increasingly destabilizing role in the Asia-Pacific as a result of its illegal militarization in contravention of that country’s pacifist constitution that’s being carried out under the unconvincing pretext of bolstering its so-called “Self-Defense Forces”. Coupled with AUKUS, it’s clear that America is creating an “Asian NATO” whose undeclared purpose is to “contain” China and most likely militarily support Taiwan in the event of a future conflict between those two.

Kissinger is correct in assessing that the grand strategic trajectory is dangerously moving towards a “World War I-type situation”, but it’s not too late to stop it. The American economy is being crushed by a combination of the consequences stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, Biden’s disastrous policies, and blowback from the US-led West’s unprecedented sanctions against Russia. The US objectively has a much more pressing interest in refocusing its efforts towards the home front than against China.

“Containing” China only generates profits for the US’ powerful military-industrial complex within which many political figures are speculated to have invested. It doesn’t benefit the American people, those in the Asia-Pacific, nor anyone across the world for that matter. To the contrary, it risks sparking another world war by miscalculation exactly as Kissinger fears. The first step towards preemptively averting that worst-case scenario is for the US to return to sincerely practicing its One China policy.

This entails suspending arms shipments to the island and associated training of its forces as well as no longer agitating for Taiwan to be treated separately from China at international fora like the World Health Organization (WHO). Those steps would signal to Beijing that Washington is sincere in avoiding a conflict with it over that region. Only then can those two return to talks for improving their troubled relations and exploring opportunities for mutually beneficial cooperation that would stabilize the world.

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.

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

Posted in English
Comments Off on US Strategists Should Consider Kissinger’s Wise Advice About China
Tags: China, Henry Kissinger, United States

Biden in Tokyo: Killing Strategic Ambiguity: The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979

May 25th, 2022 by Dr. Binoy Kampmark

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

Could it have been just another case of bumbling poor judgment, the mind softened as the mouth opened? A question was put to US President Joe Biden, visiting Tokyo and standing beside Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida: “You didn’t want to get involved in the Ukraine conflict militarily for obvious reasons. Are you willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if it comes to that?” The answer: “Yes. That’s a commitment we made.”

Biden was again flatly committing the US to a conflict over Taiwan should China deploy its forces. He has done so on two previous occasions, showing either a degree of ignorance, or a willingness to throw caution to the wind. The first took place during an interview with ABC News in August, when he equated Taiwan’s status to those of other allies such as South Korea. The second, in a CNN town hall, took place in October, when he stated that the US had “a commitment to do that”.

In doing so a third time, he was helping no one in particular, and taking the hammer to the strategic ambiguity that has marked US-Taiwan policy for decades. The only thing that could have been taken away from it is a reminder to Beijing that they are not facing a cautious superpower steered by a sage, but a government not unwilling to shed blood over Taiwan.

Biden has expressed this view before, and grates against a policy Washington has had for 43 years. It is a policy characterised by two key understandings. The first is the One China policy, which the Biden administration affirmed in Tokyo. Beijing, accordingly, remains the sole legitimate authority representing China.

The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 is the other pillar that guides US policy towards Taiwan. The Act declares it the policy of the United States “to preserve and promote extensive, close, and friendly commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people of Taiwan, as well as the people of the China mainland and all other people in the Western Pacific area.”

The Act facilitates the provision of arms to Taiwan “of a defensive character” and maintains “the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or social or economic system, of the people of Taiwan.” It does not impose an obligation on the US to intervene militarily in the event of an attack, or to compel the use of forces in defence of the island.

The first pertinent question was whether an actual change had been heralded in Tokyo. The National Review certainly thought so. “Biden’s remarks signal a big shift in US foreign policy regarding Taiwan.” The New York Times also suggested that, unlike his previous, seemingly incautious remarks on the subject, this could not be treated as a simple gaffe. Sebastian Smith, White House correspondent for Agence France-Presse, thought that Biden’s response “really raised the adrenaline levels in that palace briefing room”.

Taiwan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs was overjoyed, expressing “sincere welcome and gratitude to President Biden of the United States for reiterating its rock solid commitment to Taiwan.”

For his part, Biden was having a bit each way, suggesting that strategic ambiguity was still being retained in some modest form. “We agree with the One China policy and all the attendant agreements we made. But the idea that it can be taken by force, would just not be appropriate.” His Defense Secretary, Lloyd Austin was even more adamant that there had been no change to speak of on the part of the president. “As the president said, our One China policy has not changed,” he stated at the Pentagon. “He reiterated that policy and our commitment to peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. He also highlighted our commitment under the Taiwan Relations Act to help provide Taiwan the means to defend itself. So, again, our policy has not changed.”

On being asked by a journalist what potential risks would rise as part of a US military defence of Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion, General Mark A. Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was unwilling to elucidate. A “variety of contingency plans” were held by the military applicable to the Pacific, Europe “and elsewhere”, all classified. “And it would be very inappropriate for me on a microphone to discuss the risk associated with those plans relative to anything with respect to Taiwan or anywhere else in the Pacific.” Reassuring.

As often tends to come to pass, when the potential for war lurks in cupboards and around corners, there are those less than unwilling to repel it. The chance to exercise muscle, especially indulged vicariously, brings out the inner war monger. Bret Stephens uses the New York Times to promote the popular view held by many in the US and amongst its allies that Biden was quite right not to stick to “diplomatic formulas of a now-dead status quo”. President Xi Jinping, that sly devil, had “changed the rules of the game” by crushing protests in Hong Kong, repudiating the “one country, two systems” formula and blithely ignored the ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration on Chinese claims on the South China Sea.

Stephens sees opportunity in this statement from Biden, a thankful slaying of ambiguity. For one, the US can sell more arms to Taiwan while incorporating Taipei into its broader strategic approach. The administration should also convince Taipei to increase its “scandalously low” military budget. Washington, for its part, can increase the small component of US Special Operations and Marine personnel already deployed to train local forces. Biden’s stumble, in short, was a shift; and the shift moves one step closer to inciting war.

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.

Featured image is from The White House Facebook Page

Posted in English
Comments Off on Biden in Tokyo: Killing Strategic Ambiguity: The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979
Tags: Biden in Japan, China, Taiwan, US-Japan

Western Attempts to Blame Russia for Global Food Crisis

May 25th, 2022 by Paul Antonopoulos

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

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

With the globe potentially on the brink of a food crisis caused by the lack of wheat exports from Ukraine, the West is attempting to blame Russia for this situation whilst ignoring Kiev’s culpability. Frustratingly for the West though, it is Russia that holds the key in ensuring that the world is not gripped in a food crisis.

With war waging in Ukraine and India suffering in a severe heatwave, the World Bank has warned that the world could face its biggest food crisis since the 1970’s because of grain shortages. The price of agricultural products is soaring as Ukraine cannot sow its fields to its maximum potential and Indian crops have been destroyed by the severe heat. The price of wheat has now risen to 456 euros per ton.

Before the Russian military operation began, Ukraine ranked fifth in grain exports, with their biggest customers being African and Middle Eastern countries. Most grain is shipped by sea. However, as Ukraine lost access to the Azov Sea, and with Odessa being blockaded, ships being impounded and sea mines planted near the coast, about 25 million tons of Ukrainian grain is stranded.

Russian envoy at the United Nations Vasily Nebenzya highlighted on May 20 that the West does not refute the “grains-for-weapons” proposal:

“We asked our Western colleagues to publicly refute this version that many experts are inclined to believe nowadays right at the meeting. Of course, nobody did this. Just as nobody explained how these deliveries facilitate the bolstering of global food security which the Western states are so concerned about verbally.”

The EU is effectively preparing a safety net of grain at the expense of the global south. The EU will first supply grains to the domestic market and then the rest will be sent to third countries. Delivery via the Danube helps increase the amount of grain supplied to Europe, but this volume is still not enough as the ability of river ports to transport goods is not more than 10% of goods transported by sea.

Another problem is that planting in Ukraine has not yet been completed. It is likely that harvest will be 20-30% smaller than usual, keeping in mind that 84 million tons of grain was harvested last year.

In addition to wheat, Ukraine ranks 4th in the world in terms of corn supply. Last year, Ukraine exported about 23 million tons of corn, with about 55% of exports going to the EU and about 30% to China and South Korea.

Although the G7 accuses Moscow of manufacturing a food crisis by preventing Ukrainian food barges from running through Russian territory, thus increasing prices, they remained silent on the fact that Ukraine is blockading foreign vessels in various ports and that the country’s military planted sea mines along the coast. Ukraine’s planting of sea mines has made most shipowners unwilling to navigate such dangerous waters, and in this way, Kiev has sabotaged its own export capabilities.

Blaming Russia for increased food prices could be the establishment of a new pretext to sanction Moscow. Such a pretext overlooks the crisis in India, China’s restriction of grain exports and Ukraine mining its Black Sea coastline.

The US, Canada, France and Germany, as key exporters, will present themselves as being capable of saving the world from famine, which they are evidently preparing to blame Russia for. However, these countries are also facing major crises, partly because of the knock-on effects of anti-Russia sanctions and the war in Ukraine.

In the US, the price of diesel, agricultural machinery, diesel-powered trucks and industrial equipment have skyrocketed. The price of diesel reached a record $5.50 per gallon. At the same time, US stockpiles fell sharply — nationwide, they have fallen 43% since 2020. Food prices are also rising.

The situation is exacerbated by sanctions, such as the EU’s ban on the import of fertilizers from Russia. This is despite the fact that Russia is one of the three largest suppliers of carbide, ammonia and ammonium nitrate.

This has not stopped the EU from restricting imports, but now they can expect half of a usual yield this harvest season. Because of this, it is likely that Western countries will not prioritize a potential global famine as they focus on their own domestic market instead.

French newspaper LeFigaro recalled that in 2007, problems with wheat provoked food riots in 37 countries. The consequences of this partially led to the so-called Arab Spring. At that time, the price of cereal was 240 euros per ton, now it is more than 450 euros.

Russia could serve as an alternative source of grain to plug the gap caused by Ukraine’s inability to sow, harvest and transport at full capacity. Russia is expecting a bumper crop this year, with grain harvests likely to reach 130 million tons, including 87 million tons of wheat. Russia remains a reliable supplier of grain and if it is not wanted in the West, there will be no shortage of buyers in the global market, especially as its largest shipments are already sent to non-Western countries such as Turkey, Egypt and the South Asia region.

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.

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

Featured image is from InfoBrics

Posted in English
Comments Off on Western Attempts to Blame Russia for Global Food Crisis
Tags: food crisis

Background

Note

History of World War II: Operation Barbarossa, the Allied Firebombing of German Cities and Japan’s Early Conquests

By Shane Quinn

A Legal Framework for a “Mutant Apocalypse”?

What Could Potentially Cause an Excessive Amount of Genetic Impairment?

Not so Fast?

The Question of Ownership

The War on Everything Natural

The Fear of Missing Out

Conclusion

69,053 Covid-19 injection related deaths and 10,997,085 injuries for the EU, US and UK Combined for a population of 830 million people

As Von Braun Would Have Wanted

False Threat Inflation

Planning for Interplanetary War?

“Have We Visitors From Space?”

Project Bluebird

CIA’s Robertson Report

Roswell

Concealing Military Experiments

WHO responds with emergency meeting — just prior to its World Health Assembly

Monkeypox response described as ‘gaslighting’

Smallpox outbreak: a new windfall for vaccine manufacturers and Big Pharma?

Confusion over who — or what — to blame for the monkeypox outbreak

Is the current monkeypox outbreak related to gain-of-function research?

Is monkeypox outbreak a tool of intentional warfare?

Are monkeypox symptoms similar to COVID vaccine side effects?

Palestinian Militants?

Toeing the Line

Life Goes On

Managua, Nicaragua, 30 May 2018

Maidan Square, Kyiv, Ukraine, 20 February 2014

Douma, Syria, 7 April 2018

Conclusion: What credibility should we give to “virtual crime scenes”?

Covid “vaccines” are medical fraud

‘Aim to kill’

Can the Top Culprits in Operation COVID-19 be Brought to Justice?

Explaining the Most Sweeping Round of Medical Deregulation Ever

Dangerous Precedents

Increased Distrust of Our Core institutions and Those That Lead Them

Premeditated Murder?

The COVID Injections Don’t Work

Will There Be Public Show Trials of Nurses and Doctors?

Gates’ Book Chapter by Chapter

Gates GERM Team

Gates’ Destructive Greed

The Globalists’ Double-Prong Attack on National Sovereignty

Summary of Proposed IHR Amendments

Attack No. 2: The WHO Pandemic Treaty

Are You Ready to Cede All Authority to Gates-Led Group?

Join the Global #StopTheWHO Campaign

Support for the Open Balkan initiative

Improving relations

‘Something very odd here’

Prologue: Mountie 019

1. No Face, No Service

What Readers Are Saying…

Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story

By John C. A. Manley

Africa and the Imperialist War in Ukraine

Hohe „Suggestibilität“ im Kindesalter unterstützt religiöse Glaubensbereitschaft

Das Problem der Gewalt in der autoritären Erziehung

High “suggestibility” in childhood supports religious readiness to believe

The problem of violence in authoritarian education

National Granaries

Fertilizer Stockpiles

Replacing Chemical Fertilizers

Who is Senator Black?

Black on Syria

Senator John McCain’s trip to Syria

Poll in the US about Ukraine

Biden on Taiwan

Global Research Publishers

Books Available From Clarity Press

Global Research E-Books

Global Research Authors