Dangerous Attacks on Freedom

April 7th, 2022 by Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

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

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

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

***

 

 

 

 

 

In the give and take at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on President Joseph R. Biden’s nomination of Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, and in commentary about that give and take, a dangerous line of argument emerged from some senators over the role of the court in our lives.

One senator suggested that the lawfulness of interracial marriage should be left up to the states. Another questioned whether privacy is protected by the Constitution. And a third, himself a former state supreme court justice, professed difficulty accepting the court’s protection of certain fundamental rights from government regulation.

None of this had anything to do with Judge Jackson and whether she is qualified to sit on the court. All of it had to do with senators playing to their political bases back home. Some of this play — though, of course, constitutionally protected speech — is dangerous to personal liberty.

Here is the backstory.

In the early 1960s, a gynecologist at Yale Medical School challenged a Connecticut statute that prohibited the distribution of contraceptives to married couples. He gave them to anyone of age who sought them. He was convicted in a state court, and when his conviction was upheld by Connecticut’s highest court, he appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a landmark ruling, the court recognized the right to privacy of all persons in America when making decisions about bodily intimacy and thereby invalidated state laws that purported to tell people how to engage in sexual intercourse.

The 1965 case is called Griswold v. Connecticut, and it is the progenitor of the concept of substantive due process. The court found that the framers of the Constitution guaranteed the right to be left alone by their employment of various phrases in various clauses in the Constitution.

Griswold itself overruled a Depression-era case, U.S. v. Olmstead, in which the Supreme Court had declined to recognize the right to privacy. Effectively, the dissent in Olmstead — famous for its articulation by Justice Louis Brandeis that the “most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men” is the right to be left alone — became the majority opinion in Griswold.

The Griswold case — without using the phrase — began the judicial recognition and employment of the concept of substantive due process

The phrase “due process” connotes two lanes of constitutional protection. The first is procedural due process. This is required of the federal government by the Fifth Amendment and of the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. It is implicated whenever the government wants to take or impair the life, liberty or property of any person. It requires a jury trial at which the government, relying upon principles of law that existed at the time of the behavior in question, must prove fault.

Thus, if the feds or any state wants to restrain a person, take or prevent him from using his property, or take his life, they can only do so after a fair jury trial and the ratification of a guilty verdict on appeal.

Substantive due process protects the exercise of intimate fundamental rights from government intrusion, surveillance or regulation. Thus, the freedom of thought, the use of contraceptives, the choice of a sexual partner and the choice of a mate are all protected by substantive due process because the choices are so substantially integral to human life, personal freedom and individual fulfillment that no amount of procedural due process can justify government interference with them.

Stated differently, substantive due process keeps all government out of the business of regulating intimate voluntary personal choices. Judges and lawyers are supposed to know this.

Now back to the hearings on Judge Jackson’s nomination. For reasons best known to themselves, a few Republican senators offered questions to Judge Jackson as if substantive due process were novel. The implications of their questions were that state government officials can be trusted to regulate personal intimate choices.

But such a view — that personal liberty is subject to regulation by the majority — is contrary to the essence of the Bill of Rights.

That essence, articulated in numerous clauses, is that our rights come from our humanity, not from the government. Thus, their exercise is not subject to the approval of bureaucrats or the majority of voters.

But because elected officials in all states and in the federal government have rejected this Natural Law principle, it was necessary for the courts — the essence of whose job is to protect all rights — to do so, which they did by crafting the concept of substantive due process.

No legislature would craft this protection because legislatures are interested in power and control, not in personal liberty.

All freedom-loving persons should welcome this protection, for without it, one would need the government’s consent to engage in intimate personal activity. When the Supreme Court used substantive due process in 1967 to invalidate state laws prohibiting interracial marriage, 37 states were still enforcing some form of those laws. The same can be said, though the numbers vary, for same-sex marriage and use of contraceptives.

Most troubling at these hearings, and the senatorial statements afterward, was the willingness of some senators to attack the doctrine that keeps the government’s eyes, ears and hands off intimate voluntary choices.

These are areas of human behavior that are none of the government’s business — and they would not have been protected but for a life-tenured judiciary upholding the natural rights of the minority from destruction by the majority.

That’s the whole purpose of an independent judiciary — to be anti-democratic; to protect the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority, which can be worse than the tyranny of a madman.

Without an independent judiciary, and without a doctrine that says to the government “hands off,” we will be spilling the blood of patriots in every generation.

*

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: Jackson on the bench of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0)

Destination Ukraine: The Ignorance of War

April 7th, 2022 by Brett Redmayne-Titley

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 at @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

“Now listen you pundits, you gamblers, you fools.
Don’t you feel that water boiling up all around you?
There’s an absence that I see when I look in to your eyes.
Do you feel that madness way down deep inside?”

In a personal quest to discover the on-scene realities of war-torn Ukraine, it is first essential to ask the most fundamental of questions.

  • Does the presentation of the concept of truth remain a valid argument?
  • Are facts, those established by close investigation and scrutiny, no longer part of one’s God-given faculties of comprehension, critical thinking, inquiry, and self-preservation?
  • And, should the pursuit for knowledge be ignored at the whim of mere personal opinion?
  • The world is closer than ever before to nuclear annihilation. That is one fact that must be considered.  And,… now is not the time for ignorance.

*

At this perilous time in history, as with too many wars previous, it is ignorance that has driven the civilized part of the world to provide the necessary “approval ratings” of war. On the long list of US-inspired wars and colour revolutions globally, each time the “Masters of War” quickly and tightly pulled the mask of propaganda over the eyes, the minds and the heartstrings of good-hearted men and women. It is natural and correct for all of sound conscience to abhor the horrors of war. However, goodness is too easily abused by the evil that drives other men to war.

Ignorance is not stupidity. Far from it. Certainly, the natural reaction to this perceived personal defamation is at best terse. But the charge of ignorance is instead one of a quantification of knowledge only. For, it defies even the deepest ravages of reason for a person to insist that their personal opinion of current events, for which they have very little accumulation of knowledge beyond Main Stream Media, must be considered superior to that of those who aspire to a factually based investigation and historical argument instead.

For years, many journalists who have offered to the public excellent work in establishing the truth of current news events via their own inquiry and investigation have overlooked the role of public ignorance in war.

Quality journalism is increasingly preaching only to the choir. The real horror is that… there are far too few left in the congregation who will even bother to listen to the sermon. It is this ignorance, thus defined, that again drives a world to war in Ukraine. And nuclear destruction.

The stakes at this moment, the survival of mankind, are far too high not to challenge ignorance. There must be a return to a demand for reason, comprehension, debate and critical examination of all facts. If not, we shall surely perish; all the while uselessly pointing fingers at each other.

Is it not time to finally demand public consideration of the most important and fundamental of age-old questions?:

What… the… f**k?!

“I see those bombs drop almost everywhere.
Yet, across this world, it seems that nobody cares.
In a world where fact and truth you believe are lies…
It reveals a madness way down deep inside.”

Recently,  former US congressman and contrarian Ron Paul penned an article titled, “Is Putin the New Coronavirus?”When considering the previous two years plus propaganda juggernaut which similarly ramped up fear of a purportedly “deadly” virus, Ron Paul’s comparison is all the more accurate.

The overnight media switch from Omicron/ Covid fear to Russia fear has been turned up to eleven here in Britain. Sadly, also in Wales: a nation full of warm-hearted people with a love of freedom and where good cheer and laughter fill the air in the pubs every night. This is a lovely country where politeness and courtesy are the rule rather than the exception. Where children are well behaved and education, until recently, was far better than their western contemporaries.

The Welsh well remember the ravages of empire. Family bonds of those from the coal mining valleys almost universally go back to the times when a man’s life was worth far less, literally, than that of a horse. That coal mining history forged a bond between family and friends that is implicit in the cheerful banter of the pubs.

However, the cheerful banter has of late turned away from Corona to Putin and onto war.

*

Image on the right: Kerry Mullis

Two years ago I left Wales barely in front of a Covid-19 propaganda machine of fear akin to a Wehrmachtblitzkrieg.

I had tried to inform my friends about Nobel Prize winner Kerry Mullis, who created the PCR test, and who, before his death, had informed the public that his test is inaccurate for virus testing. I informed them about Dr Robert Malone, one of the creators of the mRNA vaccine technology, and Malone’s own warnings against their use.  And I told them of the similar additional warnings of Michael Yeadon, for eighteen years the Chief Science Officer of Pfizer that rushed those vaccines to market.

Those at the pub had never heard of any of the three men much less read their articles. However, it was the opinion of the pub that my offering of information was merely someone else’s opinion- my own- not science. Therefore their own opinion, they said, was just as valid as any Nobel laureate. Opinion vs. Opinion. And, that’s that!

But at this juncture, ignorant opinion is driving the world to nuclear war. Unlike Covid-19, nuclear war is without question universally deadly for all. Any choice of ignorance regarding the Ukrainian war will affect everyone and without exception. That is not opinion. That’s the reality of thermonuclear war.

*

As the Russian invasion of Ukraine commenced I bit my tongue as the propaganda machine delivered its limited message into the pubs once again as a self-serving, streamlined, palatable but utterly rubbish narrative, merely parroting the pro-war nonsense of the BBC, ITV and Sky News.

Across Wales and too much of the media controlled world that narrative can be summed up as 1) Putin kills women, children and little babies. 2) Putin is a dictator whose countrymen hate him and want to kill him. 3) The Ukrainian Army are freedom fighters. 4) Russia is losing the war to the freedom fighters. 5) The freedom fighters would finish winning the war if NATO would just step in.

That’s a lot to work with.

So, I said nothing, despite receiving vastly different news via my own network of news sources that was multinational, cross-referenced and at the very least an important counter to these many limited opinions. While again listening to this broad brush of BBC reasoning, one evening I succumbed to a momentary demand for reason. I tentatively posed several irrefutable and factual questions that anyone with even a minimal knowledge of post-Maidan Ukraine would, or should know:

Rather than generating the inquiry and debate I had hoped to encourage amongst some of my closest friends, their ad hominem attacks boldly stated that all I had presented was merely my own opinion and unrelated to any facts or edification on my part at all. This surprised me. Their synopsis, as I was told, again and again, was that all my questions were the result merely my own delusional opinion. As were my facts. So, in the minds of those who refused to be informed the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Right Sector and Azov Battalion was not riddled with Nazi influencers and allegiance. The BBC had told them so, or ITV, or Sky News.

Opinion vs. Opinion. And, that’s that!

However, how does that limited media driven opinion wash when confronted with facts about the Ukrainian politician, Andriy Parubiy. He has served as Deputy Speaker and Speaker of the Ukrainian parliament from 2014 to 2019 and has also been the Secretary of National Security and the Defense Council of Ukraine. Andriy Parubiy is a Nazi. He has proudly proclaimed this many times before his parliament, before the Ukrainian military and the public on TV.

That’s a fact.

In a well presented article this past week by Olga Sukharevskaya titled, “Under the Wolfsangel: The uncomfortable truth about radical ideologies in Ukraine,” the author, who is Ukrainian, attempts in great detail to educate the reader about the Right Sector, the Azov battalion, the violations of the Minsk accords and the true popularity of Ukraine’s “hero” president.  Zelensky’s complicity in allowing the ideological holdovers of Nazi Germany to infect the Ukrainian military is not opinion. It is history presented using facts. Except in the minds of those who refuse to read them.

Opinion vs. Opinion is not peculiar to the wonderful people of Wales at all; it is a malady that is certainly worldwide and provided here only as an example to be considered. Like the Welsh, it is fully understandable why the world has not been provided with the full story by their chosen media offerings before developing pro-war opinions.

What was most surprising was that almost no one showed interest or inclination to an inquiry of these new facts presented of the matter. What was shocking was that too many wished to, instead, cast out this inconvenient information wholesale as, again, being merely an opinion, one with the same weight as their own.

Opinion vs. Opinion… and that’s that!

*

Don’t you feel that madness boiling up deep inside
Proving that no man was ever born true.
There’s that mirror that you look in every day before you die.
Do you see that madness there in your own eyes?

The power of memory seems similarly challenged. If it were not the learned amongst us would easily recall the distortions of truth applied to the previous lead up to the wars and US bravado in Panama, Granada, Haiti, Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Mali, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and the colour revolutions of Sudan, Brazil, Venezuela, Egypt, Belarus and of course Ukraine 2014.

But the foremost example of US media propaganda applicable to all these conflicts is one that no one should ever forget: the lead-up to the Iraq war. That US-inspired war destroyed Iraq and caused the deaths of hundreds daily and then in the aftermath tens of thousands more from the resultant sectarian violence.

Image below: U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell holding up vial of simulated anthrax at UN Security Council meeting as he makes the case for the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

At this very moment, it is time to well remember the very public testimony of US four-star General, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and then US Secretary of State Colin Powell just before the invasion of Iraq. Sitting before the UN security council in 2003, all the while waving a small glass vile filled with a deadly yellow something, Powell, looking directly at the assembly in a close-up shot that was broadcast by every media outlet on earth, stated unequivocally to all:

“My colleagues, every statement I make today is backed up by sources, solid sources…These are not assertions. What we’re giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.”

Powell’s assurances were utter rubbish.

A four-star general had been fooled- lied to- by his country’s own CIA and the full breadth of his military intelligence. Powell was not a fool, nor stupid, but his scripted theatrics directly contributed to that war and the deaths of over 200,000 innocent Iraqis. No WMDs were ever found. Powell had been ignorant.

He was supposed to be.

Powell ultimately admitted, after resigning two years later, that his playing that part in the war was “a blot” on his career. He clearly stated in an ABC News interview,

“I’m the one who presented it on behalf of the United States to the world, and [it] will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It’s painful now.”

Judging from the current popular support for increased war in Ukraine, the public would do well to apply this parable to their limited personal opinions today. Regardless of which war of the past twenty years, the lies have always revolved around the same script. Opinion vs. Opinion. And, that’s that!

Now, forevermore silence fills the air.
Not a bird, blade of grass, or child is there.
Gone forever, gone for good, so long to humankind.
You revealed that madness… way down deep inside.

From the song: “The Madness Inside” -Ruben Eldridge (2018)

*

As reported a week ago it is the opinion of 34% of Americans that NATO should risk nuclear destruction and send Americans to die in Ukraine before being vaporized themselves. US faux-president Joe Biden strangely called Russian president Vladimir Putin a “war criminal” yet, using correct history as a judge, this title is certainly more appropriate as the mantle cast upon the shoulders of Clinton, Bush and Obama, or in Britain; Thatcher, Blair, Brown, Cameron and Johnson. All repeatedly and with seeming factual impunity- thanks to their media- orchestrated war and  death using the lie of “national interest.”

However, reports from the other side- the non-western media-indicate that the Ukrainian Army (AFU) is in a shambles, its command and communications centres almost non-existent, its ammunition depots substantially destroyed, re-supply being bombed to impossibility, and almost all the strategic cities of Eastern Ukraine encircled, under siege, or about to be from Kyiv to the Donbas. Reports of the Nazi affiliated Right Sector and Azov battalion forces indiscriminately targeting Russian Ukrainians and mining the safe passages are coming out daily in scores of on-scene videos interviews.

In a sign that this narrative is substantially closer to the mark, this past week, Israeli Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, reportedly told Zelensky to surrender and accept Putin’s  ceasefire terms which have been offered four times before. Presumably, Israeli’s Mossad, Shin Bet and IDF, who have good reason to detest all things Nazi, are of an accurate “opinion” regarding the facts applied to the Right Sector, Azov Battalion, and Mr Zelensky himself.

To further this indictment, in a recent article by Mike Whitney titled, “The Man Who Sold Ukraine,” the author showcases the history behind this little man of a puppet and how and why the president of Ukraine cares not a wit about the Ukrainian people. Certainly, considering the history presented by Whitney applied to further on the ground reports the charge that Zelensky is continuing the war only due to foreign and NATO instructions seems to ring true.

Already media is presenting the horrors of war as solely the fault of an evil Putin, and the AFU as the angelic saviours sans swastika. One only needs to closely examine the recent Mariupol Theatre bombing while remembering the previous cautionary tale by Colin Powell.

Dozens of on-scene interviews attest that it was the AFU, that has publicly called for the killing and castration of Russian separatists of the Donbas, Luhansk and Donetsk, who rounded them up, placed them in the building, and bombed it.

Of course, the western narrative is the opposite, claiming Putin used aircraft to bomb the theatre. Certainly, someone is lying. But when it comes to the atrocities of war only one opinion can be factually correct. The other is rubbish.

Image on the right: Douma false flag chemical attack

Soon, it appears that Zelensky will be forced to accept a cease-fire due to military realities, but a stoppage of hostilities will likely only be temporary.  Beyond Powell’s ignorance of the facts of war and his country’s “false flag” operations past in Iraq, the more recent working example that should also come immediately to mind is the false flag Douma Chemical weapons attack in Syria on April 7, 2018. It happened just as a cease-fire commenced. It was proven that the UK funded White Helmets carried out the attack using Chlorine gas, not Sarin as originally claimed by western media. But the White Helmets were provided with an Academy Award for their crimes and public opinion returned to war.

Opinion vs. Opinion. And, that’s that!

But it is not an opinion that Ukraine has been operating Bio-Weapons labs. Russia provided its presentation of evidence to the UN Security Council last week of the discovery of multiple US/ Ukraine bio-weapons labs. US congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard threw the US congress into an uproar of alternate opinion by confirming this news. Dutifully, all turned truth on its head by accusing Gabbard of “treason.”

So, a Douma-redux in the days to come is certainly plausible.

But just like Iraq, or Syria and the other US-backed wars and revolutions, the charges levelled in the aftermath of Douma did not serve truth, only the ignorance of war. Syria was destroyed, thousands killed… but ignorance got off scot-free.

As challenged by Mike Whitney, Zelensky is doing his real job: ignore any proposed armistice. NATO is hoping that a Douma-like false flag- chemical or otherwise- will do the trick of forcing the minds of the uninformed to insist on approving a NATO entry into Ukraine.

If the Mariopol theatre bombing proves to be any additional example of false flag media, as veteran correspondent Eric Zuesse documents, we have only begun to witness the possible horrors as a desperate AFU resort to a horror campaign against the people of Eastern Ukraine that they have been slaughtering for eight years anyway, killing, by UN reports, at least 14,000.  Media will, of course, lap up and regurgitate the false charges to pull on the heartstrings of the ignorant once again.

However, just like all modern wars, it is high time to place this indictment of willful ignorance in the dock of truth and fact. The enlightened world must now indict the public for their previous complicity.

To these charges, ignorance…will not be a defence!

*

It would of course be the height of professional hypocrisy for this author to insist that his opinion offered here, regardless of the facts and citations provided herein, are beyond further investigation. For any journalist to do so, before providing proper inquisition, would be that of mere opinion thus similarly and blindly consumed in the same manner as MSM and mass public opinion.

However, if there is one small truth that has not met resistance in the conflict zones I have travelled to, it is: Those displaced by war do tell the truth.

When a man has lost his family, a woman has lost a husband or child, and they cannot return to their homes, no longer is that person interested in the personal vagueries of war. Their outrage cuts to the bone and that bone is not opinion,  it is truth, their truth and their facts. Rarely can it be denied. So, I will go to these refugee camps and investigate.

Ignorance must be exposed. All men must be deputized with marshalling that truth,  shouldering that cross before all others, and piercing their lance of investigation directly into the minds of those who would merely tip back another pint before toddling off to enjoy the soothing mental libations of the BBC, ITV, Sky News or MSM. Better known as ignorance.

The world is being rapidly destroyed by Opinion vs. Opinion.

And, that’s that!

So, I will take up my own challenge. Tomorrow… I leave for Ukraine.

*

Dedication: For the boys at the pub.


Read Part II and III:

Destination Ukraine: Will Poland Go Rogue? Warsaw’s Ulterior Motive? The Lviv Connection

By Brett Redmayne-Titley, April 21, 2022

The Lies…and the Eyes…of Ukraine. Reporting from Lviv

By Brett Redmayne-Titley, April 19, 2022

 

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.  

Author’s Note: This is the prelude (Part One) to my multi-part series coming from the conflict zones and refugee camps of Poland,  Russia, Crimea and Ukraine. Please help spread the word by posting each on social media of your choice. Peace!

Brett Redmayne-Titley has spent the last decade travelling and documenting the “Sorrows of Empire.” He has authored over 200 articles all of which have been published and often republished and translated by news agencies worldwide. An archive of his many articles can be found at watchingromeburn.uk. He can be contacted at live-on-scene ((@))gmx.com.

Featured image is from South Front

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Destination Ukraine: The Ignorance of War
  • Tags:

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

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

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

***

 

 

 

 

 

In firsthand accounts, Afghan civilians and U.S. Marines describe the desperate struggle to flee through the Kabul airport’s last open entrance. U.S. officials knew an attack was coming. Then a suicide bomber killed and injured hundreds.

On the afternoon of Aug. 26, 17-year-old Shabir Ahmad Mohammadi huddled with his family by a mosque near the Kabul airport. It was one of the final days of the American evacuation from Afghanistan. Their time to flee was running out.

Shabir volunteered to go to the airport alone. He hoped he could weave his slender frame through the crowds and persuade the American troops to help his family leave.

Once there, he joined thousands of Afghans packed into the last remaining entrance to the airfield, a narrow road surrounded by high walls and barbed wire. Down the middle, a sewage ditch swelled with desperate Afghans jostling for attention. The sun hammered the shadeless corridor. Armed Marines barked at the crowd to stand back.

Shabir held his documents tight and waded into the fetid water at the bottom of the ditch. He flung his arms in the air, crying out until his voice grew hoarse. Dehydrated, he feared he might faint and get trampled.

But if just one Marine would listen to him, he might get his whole family to safety, freedom, a better life.

On the ditch wall above Shabir stood Lance Cpl. Noah Smith, a lanky 20-year-old from Wisconsin wearing dark-rimmed spectacles and camouflage. As Smith looked over the masses below, he could feel the heat rising from their bodies. The air was thick with the smell of feces and sweat. He scanned the crowd intently, looking for documents and lifting out those who appeared to have the right records.

The threat of violence loomed everywhere, for everyone. Smith’s lieutenant had told him the Taliban would execute Afghans left behind. And every few hours, the Marines seemed to get a new warning of an imminent terrorist attack.

Neither Smith nor Shabir noticed Abdul Rahman al-Logari, an engineering student turned Islamic State militant, who had escaped from a prison on an American airbase just days before. Slipping through the crowd, Logari had rigged himself with roughly 20 pounds of military-grade explosives.

At 5:36 p.m., Logari stepped toward the Marines and blew himself up, unleashing a lethal torrent of ball bearings and shrapnel that ripped into the civilians and troops standing around him.

The blast killed 13 American service members, and estimates put the civilian death toll at more than 160. It was one of the most destructive suicide bombings on record and the deadliest day for American troops in Afghanistan in the past 10 years of the war.

ProPublica and Alive in Afghanistan, or AiA, interviewed scores of American troops, Afghan civilians, medical professionals and senior U.S. officials involved in Operation Allies Refuge, the evacuation mission carried out to close the Afghanistan War. The news organizations also reviewed 2,000 pages of materials from an internal military investigation obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, including after-action reports, official timelines and redacted transcripts of interviews with more than 130 military personnel.

Taken together, the interviews and documents offer the most definitive account to date of the largest noncombatant evacuation in American history. From the beginning, the operation was beset by wishful thinking and miscommunication at the highest levels of government. After months of debate, a plan to conduct a large-scale civilian evacuation was not put in motion until just a few days before the country fell.

To be sure, more than 120,000 civilians were rescued through the Hamid Karzai International Airport over the course of about two weeks — a heroic effort involving far more people than initially predicted. But in documents and interviews, senior government officials indicate that this happened despite preparations by American leaders, not because of them.

The shadow of the Afghanistan withdrawal looms large over the administration of President Joe Biden as it navigates the growing conflict in Ukraine. The widely publicized chaos of the evacuation caused an immediate drop in Biden’s approval ratings, and Republican groups have signaled they intend to make it a wedge issue in future elections. The Pentagon has an ongoing investigation that may result in reforms to the intelligence community. U.S. agencies failed to predict the success of the Taliban advance. They failed, too, when it came to protecting troops and civilians waiting at the gate.

Afghans show documents to Marines admitting evacuees outside Abbey Gate on Aug. 25. Credit: Mirzahussain Sadid for Alive in Afghanistan

Military officials knew the airport was difficult to defend and susceptible to attack. But by the time Marines arrived to conduct the evacuation, Kabul was under Taliban control. It was too late to adequately fortify the airfield. Marines told investigators it became nearly impossible to install obstacles to protect troops and control the movement of civilians. It was “extremely dangerous to operate equipment” because of the large crowds, one combat engineer said.

Tens of thousands of civilians had already surrounded the airport, with no infrastructure in place to usher them to safety. Units like Smith’s, suddenly central to the operation, had not been included in the planning process and had not specifically trained for it. Officers made up a system on the fly.

Marines faced immediate obstacles. Food, water and equipment were scarce. They survived on little sleep, bunking on concrete floors or on the dirt near the sewage ditch. A debilitating stomach virus swept through their ranks. At critical airport entrances, Marines said a lack of State Department staff often slowed the evacuation to a crawl.

The threat of attack was constant. On Aug. 26, senior military leaders became all but certain that the Islamic State would attack that day. But in a high-stakes game of telephone, the intelligence got muddled on its way to the front lines. Troops received contradictory information or no information at all.

In their scramble to evacuate as many civilians as possible, local U.S. commanders decided to leave paths to the Abbey Gate airport entrance unguarded so Afghans could bypass Taliban checkpoints. As ProPublica and Alive in Afghanistan have reported, Logari, the bomber, “likely” used one of those routes to carry out his attack. U.S. Central Command spokesman Capt. Bill Urban did not specifically say who was involved in this decision, but he said that commanders on the ground were empowered to make such decisions themselves and that they “typically” informed Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr., head of Central Command. McKenzie, through Urban, declined an interview request.

Outside the airport gates, there was little in the way of aid, shelter or medical treatment for the thousands of Afghans. Some perished from heat exhaustion. Others were crushed to death. By the end, the last chance for escape came by wading into an open-air sewer and clambering through a hole in a chain-link fence.

“It was a humanitarian disaster waiting to happen,” said Brig. Gen. Farrell J. Sullivan, the most senior Marine officer on the ground.

This is the story of that disaster and the weeks that led up to it, as told by the leaders in charge of the mission, the Afghans attempting to flee their country and the troops who risked their lives to help them.

Lots of Talk, Little Action

On the afternoon of Aug. 15, Ross Wilson, acting ambassador to Afghanistan, donned a bulletproof vest and raced from the U.S. Embassy to a nearby helipad. The guards securing the fortified compound had left their posts. Wilson’s colleagues were tossing reams of classified documents into bonfires in the embassy courtyard. Outside, in the city, Taliban fighters went door to door, accepting surrenders from Afghan officials holed up in government buildings. Kabul had fallen.

Wilson boarded a Chinook helicopter to fly him to safety at the Kabul airport. As he waited to take off, he got a message: The president of Afghanistan, Ashraf Ghani, appeared to have fled the country.

“It was shocking, really,” Wilson said in an interview with ProPublica and AiA. Just days before, Ghani had told him he wasn’t going anywhere.

Ghani’s sudden departure was the latest in a series of surprises that blindsided American officials and precipitated a calamitous evacuation effort.

The setbacks began almost as soon as Biden announced on July 8 that the military would leave the country by the end of August. That day, he assured the public that the Afghan army and government would continue to function and provide plenty of protection to ensure a safe withdrawal.

The week before, American forces abandoned Bagram Airfield — the hub of the NATO fight against the Taliban — without notifying the Afghan military ahead of time, Afghan officials said.

The unexpected exit sparked a crisis of confidence for the Afghan military, demoralizing troops and contributing to their decision to lay down their arms, according to Mohammad Hedayat, then the spokesperson for Afghanistan’s Second Vice President Muhammad Sarwar Danish.

“The U.S. forces leaving Bagram was the starting point of the collapse,” Hedayat said. Urban said the U.S. didn’t disclose the specific timing of its departure for safety reasons, but it “took great pains to ensure” that the Afghan military knew it was going to leave.

Soon, the Taliban were taking dozens of districts in provinces across the country. Hungry and low on ammunition, Afghan forces were surrendering without firing a shot.

On Aug. 4, Ghani told American officials he had no confidence the army would fight back.

Around then, 36 Afghan battalions suddenly vanished. “No one had any clue where they were,” one senior officer told military investigators. “No one from the units were answering their phones.”

For weeks, top U.S. officials, from the White House down, discussed whether to arrange a mass evacuation of American citizens and Afghan allies. Perhaps the most difficult question: when to start?

If the U.S. began moving people too early, it could “incite panic,” a senior administration official told ProPublica and AiA. “You lead to the collapse of the security forces. You lead to the collapse of the government.”

But if they waited too long, then the tens of thousands who risked their lives to help the American war effort could be left behind at the mercy of the Taliban.

The decision to evacuate the country kept getting pushed back.

Multiple high-ranking military officials, including Sullivan, blamed the State Department for failing to recognize the gravity of the situation and stalling on decisions about how to react.

“The DOS kept building a narrative supported by half-truths, decoupled from reality,” another military officer embedded with the embassy told investigators.

One senior State Department official, speaking anonymously, acknowledged to ProPublica and AiA that the department didn’t plan for a large-scale evacuation because it never “seriously considered” the Taliban could advance fast enough to necessitate one.

But senior officials in the White House and the State Department said military and intelligence officials failed to raise alarms about the speed of the evacuation and the Taliban takeover.

“No one raised with me concerns that the embassy was not with the program,” Wilson said. “I never heard that.”

Scott Weinhold, the department’s assistant chief of mission in Kabul, told ProPublica and AiA that the timing of the evacuation decision did not hamper military preparations anyway.

“I never once heard anyone say in a meeting or elsewhere that they couldn’t do something because a NEO hadn’t yet been declared,” he said, using the acronym for a noncombatant evacuation operation.

Urban, the Central Command spokesman, declined to make commanders who criticized the State Department available for interviews or to respond to department comments about the evacuation process.

In the end, U.S. agencies essentially planned the operation in just one week, military officials said.

It wasn’t until Aug. 13, after the Taliban captured 14 provincial capitals, that the State Department formally requested help from the Pentagon to begin the evacuation in earnest, according to the investigation. At that point, only about 2,000 Afghans had been evacuated. Only then did the military gain the authority to make security improvements at the Kabul airport, Urban said.

Two days later, when Wilson flew into the airport, it was already surrounded by civilians.

Previously, the military chose not to coordinate with the Afghan army to defend the airport in the event of an evacuation. “We didn’t want to let the cat out of the bag and let them know we were planning for a NEO,” Rear Adm. Peter Vasely, the top military leader on the ground, told investigators. Through Urban, Vasely declined to be interviewed.

But with Ghani’s surprise exit and the Taliban entry into Kabul, Afghan soldiers left their posts at Hamid Karzai International. Soon, terrified Afghans, Americans and other foreigners in the country rushed to the airport. By nightfall, they had breached its walls.

With only about 750 American troops on the ground, commanders worried that the crowd could overrun their command center or provide cover for a bomber. “We were desperate for manning,” one senior officer told investigators. “It got to the point that if you had a rifle, you were out pulling security.”

In what officers refer to as “the night of the zombies,” Marines and soldiers worked through the night trying to contain the crowd. The next day, civilians shoved their way through barbed wire and flooded onto the airstrip.

One officer recounted seeing a jet surrounded by civilians. The pilot signaled he needed to leave and began to taxi. As the plane took off, the officer watched Afghans clinging to it plunge through the air. The images soon rocketed around the globe.

Smith, the lance corporal from Wisconsin, watched it all unfold in amazement via live drone footage in Jordan. His brother had served 20 years in the Marine Corps, but Smith himself had never been to Afghanistan. He was stunned by the ferocity of the crowd.

Even Smith’s company commander, Capt. Geoff Ball, had not planned to go to Kabul. The week before, Ball was told by his superior officers that there was a less than 1% chance his company would deploy; he learned he would be going from a Washington Post reporter’s tweet. In an email exchange with ProPublica and AiA, Ball said his troops were well prepared, but unlike other units, they had not trained for an evacuation mission. Now his battalion, known as the 2-1, was going to be at the center of the most complicated evacuation since the fall of Saigon.

On Aug. 18, Smith boarded a plane packed so tight that troops had to climb over one another. He practically sat on a friend’s lap, a machine gun poking him in the back.

On board, the air crackled with fear and excitement. Almost no one had been in combat. Their adrenaline surged at the possibility. “Be ready for a fistfight,” one Marine remembered being told. He was expecting civilians to come charging onto the plane as soon as it landed.

“If We Stay, We Will Be Killed by the Taliban”

On the afternoon of Aug. 22, Shabir Mohammadi finished his daily English lessons and packed up his books to go home. Growing up in a cramped, concrete compound with plastic sheets for windows, he dreamed of leaving Jalalabad one day and studying abroad to become a doctor.

He biked home to find his family frantically packing to leave. They had decided it was too dangerous to remain in Afghanistan.

Shabir’s father, Ali Mohammadi, had served for more than a decade as an officer for the local Jalalabad Police Department. Shabir’s brother had worked as a driver for the United Nations Human Settlements Program, or UN Habitat, in 2013, taking development workers into Taliban-controlled areas to build homes and water canals. Between the two of them, they thought they might meet the U.S. requirements to get their families out.

The logic for leaving was simple: “If we stay, we will be killed by the Taliban,” Shabir recalled his family telling him.

For years, the Taliban had been at war with the Afghan police, frequently targeting officers in covert and brutal killings.

“When they would catch a guy from the police, they would kidnap him or strangle him or garrote him,” said Nyazmohammad Mohammadi, Shabir’s older brother. “Or shoot him in the head.” Years before, Shabir’s uncle was badly burned when a Taliban suicide bomber attacked a fuel convoy outside Jalalabad as he was commuting to work.

The Mohammadi family pooled their savings and gathered what documents they could — a certificate from UN Habitat, records from their father’s training as a police officer. They took two sets of clean clothes each and set out to find transportation. They were in such a hurry that they left their home unlocked.

Under the best of circumstances, the ride to Kabul could cost 3,500 Afghanis, or roughly $40. But drivers were afraid to take the risk, forcing the Mohammadis to haggle for a fare more than five times the normal cost.

They packed 15 people into a Mercedes minibus, making their way along the hairpin turns and towering cliffs that punctuate the highway to Kabul.

Even for a country locked in a decades long armed conflict, the views out the window were jarring. They saw Afghan army trucks in flames on the side of the road. Long-haired Taliban fighters stood beside them, brandishing weapons and glaring at the passing traffic. The children panicked as the family struggled to comfort them.

“We were all crying and saying, ‘What happened to Afghanistan?’” Nyazmohammad said.

As the Mohammadis neared Kabul, they passed through a Taliban checkpoint where militants searched their car for evidence of allegiance to the American-backed government. By the time they made it into the city, it was near dusk.

Panicked civilians swarmed the streets. Cars drove against traffic on the opposite side of the road. Everyone seemed to be racing toward the airport. Taliban fighters harassed them along the way, screaming that the fleeing civilians were infidels and firing their weapons in the air. In one upscale shopping district, armed men pulled people over and looted cars, stealing cellphones and purses.

“Fear was on every corner of the city,” Nyazmohammad said.

Countless Afghans had packed up their belongings to seek a new life elsewhere. Each had their own reason to run.

Razia and Massood Haidari had married just days before the fall of Kabul. They had met at the Roushd News Agency, where they both worked as journalists. Massood’s family had not approved of their marriage because Razia was a working woman. The rift left them without family or financial support.

Now, with the Taliban in power, the couple worried Razia’s career and independence might put their lives at risk. “I made a decision to get out however possible,” Massood said.

Mujtaba Tahiri, a former electrical engineering student, had recently won a chance to obtain a coveted green card in the U.S. visa lottery with the help of a cousin in Sacramento, California. He still needed to gather more records and complete a few additional steps to finish the process to leave the country. But with Afghan bureaucrats in hiding and the U.S. Embassy closed, his options seemed to have disappeared overnight. So Tahiri rushed to Hamid Karzai International with his family, hoping he had enough documentation to secure safe passage out.

The journeys of each family would intersect over the next several days as they fought desperately to flee a country in freefall.

100 Hours of Hell

On the morning of Aug. 19, Smith woke up from four hours of sleep on a treadmill in a gym at the Kabul airport. He soon learned he would be sent to Abbey Gate.

Smith and his fellow Marines scrambled to find transportation. With almost no military vehicles on the airfield, they hotwired trucks that had been left behind. Spray-painting them to prevent others from stealing what they had stolen for themselves, they packed into trucks tagged with phrases like “2/1 FUCK YOU” and sped off toward the gate.

By midday, Smith was standing in front of two 10-foot-high steel doors, separated by a few inches of space. Looking through the crack, the Marines could see eyes peering back at them. Fingers poked through, as if trying to pry the doors open.

The exact details of their mission were still a mystery to Smith and his company. Their only orders were to push forward: Just clear some space outside the airport walls.

Satellite image taken Aug. 26, 2021, provided by Planet Labs PBC Credit: Lucas Waldron, ProPublica

The doors opened.

For the first time, his unit came face to face with the crowd of thousands outside the airport.

The two sides collided and began pressing against each other, like opposing teams of rugby players locked in a scrum.

Canisters of tear gas flew into the crowd. The Marines scrambled to put on gas masks. The fumes only intensified the mayhem, with Marines and civilians choking on the smoke and vomiting. Troops got sucked into the crowd. Some were knocked to the ground, trampled.

“I’m going to die,” Ball thought.

Realizing they were overmatched, the Marines clambered to shut the doors. They reconvened only to receive a more challenging order: push out 200 yards from the gate to the Baron Hotel, a compound that housed British troops.

To do so, they decided to create a human wedge. The Marines came into formation, each gripping the straps of another’s tactical vest.

Reopening the gate, this time they inched forward in unison, gaining ground a half step at a time.

It took eight hours. But by 2 a.m., they reached the hotel. Ball later told investigators that seven civilians were crushed to death in the chaos of the day.

For the Marines, it was their first real taste of just how desperate and disorganized the evacuation would be. They were improvising the escape of tens of thousands of Afghans. They would need to hold their ground, vet civilian paperwork and patrol for terrorists, all at the same time.

For the first four days, Smith’s company did not rest. Staffing the gate around the clock, they chain-smoked cigarettes and popped caffeine pills to stay awake. Unsanitary conditions spawned a vicious stomach virus that incapacitated Marines up and down the chain of command. They would later refer to that draining stretch of days in the dust as the “100 hours of hell.”

Smith, whose brother had fought the Taliban years before, now saw members of that force watching him through the scopes of their rifles. He tried to stay calm.

The setup made Abbey Gate the most effective entry point to the airport by far, because it gave the Marines space to work while still allowing direct interactions with civilians.

But it also exposed them to attack.

“​​Marines at other gates may have been at risk one at a time, but not 30 people at a time the way they were at Abbey Gate,” Army Command Sgt. Maj. David Pitt told investigators. “What they were being asked to do was not in accordance with what anyone should have been asked. … The risk was so high.”

There was little time for the young Marines to dwell on the danger. Trained to kill, they now had to work as immigration officers. It was not an easy adjustment.

“I don’t know what the fuck a green card’s supposed to look like. I don’t know what the fuck a work visa’s supposed to look like,” said Juan Castillo, a lance corporal from Bakersfield, California. “I don’t know what the fuck an I-9 whatever the fuck is supposed to look like. They were just like, ‘Hey, go figure it the fuck out.’”

The guidance on who qualified for evacuation was murky to begin with and seemed to change by the hour.

For example, the State Department had initially told eligible evacuees they could bring family members with them, but it did not clearly communicate who could be included, Marines said. Fleeing American and Afghan citizens would sometimes bring a dozen relatives along — grandmothers, nephews, cousins.

With no consular officials on the line to ask, it fell to the service members to decide who counted as family.

“Marines at Abbey Gate were forced to play God,” a senior officer later said. (The State Department said it gave eligible evacuees clear guidance on which family members they could bring.)

Civilians with enough paperwork to make it inside the gate then waited, sometimes for days, on sheets of cardboard laid out on the ground. But getting this far didn’t guarantee a flight out. State Department officials might still determine a family didn’t qualify.

In that case, the same Marines who had granted Afghans access to safety now had to escort them out of the airport and back into danger.

For many, that was the hardest part of the mission.

They kicked out families carting elderly relatives in wheelbarrows. They kicked out men shoving crumpled certificates of appreciation from the U.S. military into their hands or photographs of themselves in camouflage, surrounded by troops they’d worked for during the war.

“It got to a point where you had to kind of put your humanity away,” one Marine said. “You couldn’t look at these people as human beings because of the job we were doing.” He tried to imagine that he was moving cattle.

For Castillo, the son of undocumented immigrants, it felt personal. When he looked out at the sea of would-be refugees, he imagined his own family.

“I saw my mother, my father, in these people, and it hurts,” he said. “God knows it hurts.”

Many who had been rejected refused to leave. On the first day, Castillo tried to be polite. “I’m sorry, I can’t do anything,” he’d say. “I can’t even understand you. Please, you have to move.”

But he became desensitized, hardened. If asking didn’t work, he would yell. If yelling didn’t work, he got physical — pushing, dragging, throwing them into the dirt if he needed to. Sometimes he would shove a man into a group of civilians and watch them topple like bowling pins.

A couple of days in, the tragedy overwhelmed him. The State Department had turned down two women in their 20s and their little sister. One of the women got on her knees and pleaded with Castillo in English.

She said she and her sister had been raped by the Taliban; if they went back, it would happen again. They would be killed, she begged. Please.

His resolve broke. His voice cracked. It did not help that they were about his age and “beautiful,” he said. It took 45 minutes for him to escort them out, fighting back tears.

Afterward, Castillo went inside the gate, lit a cigarette and sat on a supply box out of sight from his peers.

He put his face into his hands and wept.

“I did a really good job,” he said later, allowing himself a begrudging kind of pride. “But at what cost? Just lowering your fucking human moral standards.”

“Oh My Child! Oh My Child!”

This was not how Razia and Massood Haidari envisioned their honeymoon.

A day after Ghani fled the country, they joined thousands of other Afghans who were gathering in front of the North Gate, another entrance to the airport.

Afghans crowd the area outside the North Gate of the Kabul airport on Aug. 21. Credit: Mirzahussain Sadid for Alive in Afghanistan

The gate was guarded by a combustible mix of sworn enemies. As Marines processed civilian paperwork, the Taliban provided security along with so-called Zero units, an Afghan paramilitary group backed by the CIA.

Razia jumped up and down at the rear of the crowd, waving her documents in the air. When she finally got close enough to speak to the Americans, they told her to come back in a week.

Suddenly, shots rang out. Terrified and gasping for breath, Razia ran back to her husband. The Zero units had fired into the crowd, she said. (A Marine later told investigators that the military treated multiple civilians a day who had been shot by Afghan forces at the North Gate.)

The Haidaris were determined to stay and plead their case. But by nightfall, they still hadn’t made any progress. Now they had no place to sleep.

A nearby car wash offered old mattresses for rent. But the couple weren’t sure how long their money would hold out. They could barely afford to eat. A twin bed was out of the question.

Instead, the Haidaris rested their heads on each other’s laps, sleeping in shifts beneath the artificial glare of floodlights outside the airport. Massood draped his scarf over his wife to keep her warm. The first night, Razia woke up amazed to find her husband snoring peacefully, almost as if they were back home.

For the next several days, the couple competed with other Afghans to stand out, surviving on flatbreads and pita sandwiches they bought from street vendors. The food got mixed in with dirt, making Razia sick. She tried not to eat too much to avoid relieving herself. There were no toilets. The civilians used abandoned homes and street corners, which quickly turned into revolting open-air latrines.

Even for those who had formally applied to immigrate to the United States, navigating the improvised process could feel futile.

At the same gate, Mujtaba Tahiri, the former engineering student who won the green card lottery, was unable to get his family past the Taliban. Taliban fighters called the civilians traitors and infidels, sometimes beating people over the head with long metal poles.

The crowd around the Tahiris grew so tight that they struggled to breathe. They said they saw infants crushed to death in the mob. “Oh my child! Oh my child!” one mother screamed, clutching her baby to her breast. She ran away from the gate in tears.

Tahiri’s brother, Mustafa, did not want his own small children to meet the same fate. “I was afraid my kids would be trampled,” he said. “So we went home.”

After a few days, the Haidaris had begun to lose hope. They had almost run out of money. Razia was fighting a skull-crushing headache. She grew faint under the August sun.

“If you were lucky, there would be some wind,” she said.

They were inspired by the resilience of one woman who appeared to be about eight months pregnant. As she slipped in and out of consciousness, her husband held a wet scarf to her head.

Massood turned to Razia. “We’re not even as brave as her,” he told her. If that woman could do this, so could they.

The Mohammadis, too, were outside the airport, searching for drinking water. When they managed to secure a bottle, the family shared it between the 15 of them.

“We never had enough water,” one Navy corpsman told investigators. “During high noon there was no shade to be found, and people would start dropping.” Medics were overwhelmed by waves of civilians suffering from heat exhaustion. Another military medical team reported treating over 180 Afghans in those early days of the operation.

Eventually, Razia fainted, crumbling beneath the punishing heat. Massood picked up his wife and carried her to a taxi to take her to a clinic.

On the way, the cab driver gave Massood a tip. “Go to Abbey Gate,” he said, where “foreigners are dealing directly with Afghans.” There were no Zero units in the way.

Doctors at the clinic hooked Razia up to an IV and gave her fluids. Afterward, Massood took her to his aunt’s house near the airport to recover. When she woke up a few hours later, Massood told her about the new gate.

Her eyes widened with optimism. This was their chance. She wanted to leave immediately. Massood tried to persuade his wife to stay, to get well first. But she was adamant.

They left before dawn, making their way through the crowds toward what they hoped would be their best chance at escape.

“I Wasn’t Told Shit”

As Abbey Gate became the entrance of choice for more and more Afghans, the crowd swelled, putting the lives of both civilians and Marines at greater risk.

The State Department checkpoint became a bottleneck. Marines said consular officials there disappeared for 12 hours at a time.

“They would come out and just be like: ‘Gate’s closed. Gate’s closed until further notice,’” one senior staff Marine officer said. “Or they would just leave.” (Wilson, the ambassador, said that the State Department had plenty of staff on the ground and that department and military leaders jointly decided when to send them to the gates.)

Closing the gate could mean death for someone waiting to go through it, Marines said. With no release valve, there was simply no place for the Afghans to go.

During one of these closures, a Marine corporal saw a heavyset man in his late 20s pinned against a retaining wall, screaming. He rushed over to try to help him. But the man was stuck. As the corporal tried to help him out and give him water, the man went limp.

He lost consciousness for 30 seconds, woke up and began thrashing wildly, swinging punches at the crowd engulfing him. “He went down again,” the corporal said. “And then he just never came back up.”

The situation was about to become even more dire. By the end of the day on Aug. 24, the other two main entrances to the airport closed for good.

“We didn’t want to plan to be the last ones operating,” one officer later told investigators, “and having the massive surge of humanity be solely at Abbey Gate.”

But that surge came, and when it did, there was only one way to hold it back. More Marines had to go to the front line. The young troops stood between the masses and the airfield, forming a human wall.

Commanders recognized the dangers immediately. A single terrorist in the crowd could kill dozens. They discussed last-minute security improvements, like installing obstacles to bring order to the line and better protect Marines, but moving heavy equipment through thousands of civilians would be impossible.

“If we’d been there two weeks before, there’d have been sandbags all over the place,” the senior staff officer said. “Shit should’ve been set up.”

As the end of the evacuation drew near, American intelligence determined that Islamic State fighters had holed up in a Kabul hotel, planning an attack.

“We realized on the 25th that they were ready to execute,” Vasely, the top military leader on the ground, later said.

That night, some commanders received a briefing with a description of a possible bomber. But the intelligence got muddled or evaporated altogether on its way to the troops. Some Marines heard the warning from an immediate superior. Some heard about it from a peer. Some heard nothing at all.

“I wasn’t told shit,” one Marine said. “No one around me, at least, was ever briefed about a guy or a bag or anything.” Others recalled a wide array of conflicting descriptions of the person they were supposed to be looking for.

That night, an ambulance was sent to wait at Abbey Gate in case of an attack. With the threat building, Vasely and Sullivan, the Marine general, discussed closing it permanently, according to the military report. Sullivan told the admiral he’d work on it.

Around 10 p.m., Ball sent a message to his subordinates: “Legitimate SVEST threat on Abbey,” referring to a suicide vest. Marines stopped operations but stayed on the line, crouching on one knee behind the concrete retaining walls.

In the dark, Smith and his colleagues took turns sticking their heads out, their headlamps lighting up scared faces in the crowd.

Around 3:15 a.m., Ball received another warning, saying a suicide attack was “imminent.” About 20 minutes later, the State Department issued a warning online: “​​U.S. citizens who are at the Abbey Gate, East Gate, or North Gate now should leave immediately.”

All the Afghan civilians knew was that their chance to get in the airport was coming to an end. Some asked Smith when the line would start moving again. Having no idea, he made up an answer: Everything would go back to normal at sunrise.

In the morning, Sullivan came back to Vasely with bad news. British troops weren’t ready to leave yet. If the gate closed, they would be stranded in the Baron Hotel with no path to safety. They had to stay open until nightfall.

Snipers in a tower overlooking Abbey Gate were told to look for a man with a shaved head and black clothes. Around 8 a.m., they thought they spotted him and passed it up their chain of command.

They never heard back. After a couple hours of waiting, they lost sight of him in the crowd.

For his part, Smith had been told to be on the lookout for a bag with white arrows on it. Given the number of warnings he’d received over the past week, it was hard to tell how seriously he should take it. But he tried his best.

“There were so many people and so many bags,” Smith said. “People were running for their lives. Everyone had a bag with them.”

Among them were the Haidaris, who were now traveling with three of Massood’s young cousins. They had received an email from the Italian government, saying Italy would accept them as refugees because journalists were being threatened by the Taliban. Some of their colleagues at the news agency had already made it through that morning. The email instructed them to wear red wristbands to identify themselves to the Italian soldiers.

At 12:50 p.m., the Pentagon received its most alarming piece of intelligence yet. The Islamic State intended to attack that day. The group was preparing a celebratory video to send out afterward. An assailant was traveling from 6 miles to the southwest.

Vasely was notified. At 1:10 p.m., the senior medical officer on the airfield got a call from Vasely’s office, telling him that a mass casualty was coming — possibly within the hour.

Medics had staged stretchers in the rear at Abbey Gate and brought up vehicles to evacuate casualties. Anticipating an attack, one company commander began rehearsing in his head what he would say to his troops after it happened.

At his home in Kabul, Mujtaba Tahiri was taking a shower. He wanted to look presentable for the Americans. This could be his last chance to make it out. He changed into clean clothes and took his family through a route that bypassed the Taliban checkpoint, arriving at Abbey Gate.

Several women lay motionless on the ground. People walked right over them. The Tahiris took a deep breath and waded into the crowd.

Around 2 p.m., Ball issued yet another warning, his most specific yet: A bomb will go off in 10 minutes. Operations ground to a halt. The Marines hid behind concrete barriers and waited.

Ten minutes passed. Half an hour. Nothing happened.

The evacuation resumed.

In the crowds, the Mohammadis grew frustrated. Traveling with 15 people made it impossible to maneuver to the gate. But Shabir had an idea. He spoke a few words of English. If he went alone, maybe he could convince the Americans to let his family in. They agreed to rendezvous at a mosque in the area. Shabir collected their documents and pushed ahead.

Nearby, the Haidaris waited for the Italians, just above the canal. Waving their wristbands and crying out for attention, they searched for someone to help them.

But the crowd had reached a fever pitch. People shoved each other to get closer to the Marines. Troops enlisted an interpreter to help calm them. “Stop pushing,” the interpreter shouted. “Please calm down and give some space. … You are hurting women and children!” When it didn’t work, he broke down in tears, apologizing.

Just then, a Marine saw Tahiri frantically waving his documents and called him over. He took off his shoes, slung them over his shoulder, lifted his pant legs and stepped into the water.

At that moment, Logari detonated himself, sending a cloud of ash, dirt and body parts 20 feet in the air. The wave of heat, ball bearings and shrapnel whipped through the densely packed corridor. Within seconds, hundreds were wounded or dead.

“We Were at the Front Line of a Battlefield”

Satellite image taken Aug. 26, 2021, provided by Planet Labs PBC Credit: Lucas Waldron, ProPublica

For a moment, a deafening silence came over Abbey Gate, as if a vacuum had sucked all the sound out of the air.

In the milliseconds that followed, Massood Haidari thought a flashbang grenade went off. Then he felt something hit him in the gut. It was a decapitated head.

Smith pulled his left pant leg tight against his skin to check for wounds. A dark red stain bloomed through the camouflage.

A tear gas canister, punctured by shrapnel, sent toxic smoke spraying into the air. A Marine ran toward the Baron Hotel with his back on fire. Another, missing the lower half of his face, stood above the ditch. His eyes were vacant. He had not yet realized what happened to him.

Then, the air came alive with bullets snapping overhead as Marines and British forces opened fire.

“It sounded like a shooting range,” said one Marine who was knocked momentarily unconscious by the blast. “An overwhelming amount of gunfire, everywhere.” He hid behind the ditch wall until the tear gas gave him some cover, then sprinted into the airport.

Shabir made it a few steps and collapsed unconscious in the ditch, feeling like he had been shot in the back.

“It was like we were at the front line of a battlefield,” Massood said.

He pulled his cousin Ali Reza out of the canal and grabbed his wife’s hand. Her face was wet with someone else’s blood.

They saw bullets hitting the fence overhead. They kept their heads down and ran north, trying to shield themselves by hiding in the middle of the mob. They made it around the corner. But they lost sight of his cousin.

Soon, hundreds of civilians joined the Haidaris there, frantically searching for their relatives or carrying the wounded in their arms. A wheelbarrow held a man torn to shreds, with only his torso intact. They saw a British passport through the mesh of a bloody fanny pack wrapped around his waist.

Nearby, Maisam Tahiri was looking for his uncle Mujtaba, trying not to panic. But Mujtaba wasn’t picking up his phone.

Maybe he made it to the Americans, Maisam thought. Maybe he showed them his records and they let him through.

Inside the gate, Marines crouched behind concrete barriers with their rifles ready, searching for enemy combatants. A few said they spotted a man with an AK-47 on the roof of a nearby civilian building. They fired at him.

One Marine thought he saw another gunman in a watchtower by the roof. He raised his rifle to take him out, when, suddenly, another Marine practically tackled him.

“It’s a fucking British guy!” someone else yelled, racing down the line to warn others. “Don’t shoot him!”

A Marine later told investigators that she began firing in the same direction as other troops. “I went in and saw a lot of Marines shooting” by a barrier, she said.

“There was a lot of smoke,” she said. “I couldn’t see where they were firing. They grabbed me, and I started firing my weapon as well. I don’t know what I was firing at.”

Castillo’s squad was several hundred yards inside the airport when they heard the thunderous boom of the explosion. They threw on their gear and sprinted toward it. By the time Castillo reached Abbey Gate a minute or so later, the gunfire had subsided.

The ditch was a living nightmare. Human flesh hung from the wall across from the gate. Corpsmen hurriedly operated on Americans bleeding into the dirt. Marines streamed in and out of the airport, using riot shields to carry wounded service members and civilians.

Castillo recognized a sergeant he knew on one of the riot shields. The man’s right arm and left leg were wrapped in bloody tourniquets. His arm was disfigured into the shape of a wet “spaghetti noodle,” Castillo said.

The team carrying the sergeant laid him on the ground and moved him to a stretcher. Then Castillo and three of his squadmates lifted him back into the air. They needed to get him to an operating room on the other side of the airfield, fast. But they couldn’t find a vehicle.

“Fuck it,” one of them barked. “We’ll run.”

They raced as fast as they could before a Marine from another company rolled up to them in an armored truck. He opened the back door. Castillo loaded the sergeant into the car and hopped inside.

The sergeant was writhing in pain. Castillo started holding him down, trying to keep him from worsening his injuries. “I need drugs! I need drugs!” the sergeant shouted. “Are we there yet?!”

“We’re gonna get you real fucking high,” Castillo told him. “You’re gonna be OK. You’re gonna be OK.” He picked up the sergeant’s head and cradled it between his bicep and his forearm, running his hand through the young man’s hair to comfort him. Castillo tried to distract him by talking about their hometowns in California.

The Mohammadi family regrouped at the mosque after the blast. Fourteen of them were accounted for. But Shabir was still missing.

“Oh god, my brother was killed,” Nyazmohammad thought.

The family fanned out across Kabul with the help of a relative who had a car. Driving from one hospital to the next, they asked everywhere for a patient named Shabir.

They searched all night and into the next day. At around 2 p.m. on Aug. 27, a group of them walked into Wazir Akbar Khan, a large public hospital close to the airport. Dozens of corpses lay scattered in the courtyard outside. There was no room in the morgue. The hospital gardeners stood watch, fending off a pack of stray dogs.

The Mohammadis found the body of a slight teenager whose skin tone matched Shabir’s. Only his leg and torso remained. But the resemblance was striking.

“He has that foot. That body,” his uncle thought. Was it Shabir? Should they put him in a coffin and carry him home?

No, another relative said. It couldn’t be. This boy’s foot had a sock on it. Shabir hadn’t been wearing any.

They held onto that morsel of hope and kept looking. If they couldn’t find him, they’d come back to Wazir Akbar Khan, claim the body and bury what was left of their boy.

Epilogue: “We Don’t Expect a Better Life Here”

The night of the blast, Smith boarded a plane with other wounded troops to a hospital in Germany. Out of the 13 service members who died in the attack, nine were in his company. None was over the age of 23.

As the plane flew through the night, Smith labored to walk to the bathroom. His left leg throbbed in pain. He’d taken a large piece of shrapnel to the thigh and another to his left bicep. By the time he returned to his seat, he was dripping in sweat.

“The worst moment of my life was walking 25 feet to the front of the airplane,” Smith said. “I felt like I ran a marathon.” He wondered if he’d ever be able to walk again on his own.

Smith’s notebook that he was carrying in the pocket of his tactical vest. It was pierced by a ball bearing in the bomb blast. Credit: Courtesy of Noah Smith

The rest of his company flew to Kuwait. After a couple days of rest, Ball assembled his troops. The captain wanted to tell them it wasn’t their fault. He said he’d given them an impossible task — that he wasn’t able to give them what they needed to be successful.

If they felt they’d failed in any way, Ball told them, it was on him.

On Sept. 17, the military launched an investigation into the attack at Abbey Gate. The investigative team, led by Brig. Gen. Lance Curtis, spoke to more than 100 military personnel and reviewed drone footage, official communications and GoPro video submitted by Marines.

“The attack was not preventable at the tactical level,” their report concluded. The military had to leave the gate open in order to get the maximum number of civilians out and avoid abandoning the British troops. The investigators commended Ball, Sullivan and other commanders on the ground for their performance.

But the report left key questions unanswered. For one, who decided to leave open the unguarded routes to the gate? State Department and White House officials say they were not included in the decision. Ball told investigators he wanted to block those routes to Abbey Gate, but it was hard to find materials to do so. Ball said that someone, whose name is redacted from the report, “convinced” him the passage was “the only truly safe entrance for people being hunted by the Taliban.”

Another, larger question: Could all those deaths have been avoided with different decisions from top U.S. officials weeks or months before Aug. 26?

That question may be addressed in another, ongoing Pentagon investigation into the entirety of America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan.

The gunfire after the blast also remains a source of controversy. Initially, Pentagon leaders told the public that Islamic State gunmen opened fire on civilians and service members. The investigators later determined that wasn’t true. The only shooters they identified were American and British troops. The investigators said that one group of Marines fired at an individual on a nearby roof who they believed had an AK-47. Two groups of British soldiers fired warning shots into the air. And another Marine fired four bullets over the head of a “suspicious individual.” The investigators said no civilians were hit by NATO forces but acknowledged that a “rogue Taliban member” may have fired at Marines.

Many Afghans, including the Mohammadis, insist that NATO forces shot at civilians after the explosion. Doctors who treated civilians at hospitals around Kabul remain convinced that they saw wounds from bullets, not only ball bearings. Some Marines still believe they saw an enemy on a nearby rooftop firing into the crowd.

Pinpointing the exact cause of all their wounds may never be possible. At least 45 American troops were injured in the attack, and the number of Afghan wounded was estimated to be over 200.

One Marine was left paralyzed. Another had his arm and leg amputated.

Mujtaba Tahiri died in the blast as he tried to get closer to the Marines and show them his records. After days of searching, his family finally found his remains in the morgue at the Wazir Akbar Khan hospital. His surviving relatives are still hoping they can somehow use Mujtaba’s visa documents to come to the U.S. They are barely eating now, surviving mainly on aid deliveries of rice.

The Haidaris are still in Kabul, trying to find work. Massood’s cousin, Ali Reza, was killed in the attack. He was 19 years old.

Living in fear of the Taliban, the couple are constantly reminded of why they took the risk to flee in the first place. “We don’t expect a better life here,” Massood said.

Castillo is back in the United States and out of the Marine Corps. He finished his four-year contract and was working at the front desk of a gym in his hometown, but he recently accepted a seasonal job fighting wildfires in New Mexico. He hopes to eventually make his way up to a municipal fire department.

Smith is stationed at Camp Pendleton, a Marine base near San Diego, where he has been reassigned to a unit for wounded service members. He walked again for the first time on Sept. 4 and is hoping to return to full duty soon.

He often visits the grave of his friend, 20-year-old Kareem Nikoui, who was standing next to him when the bomb went off. Smith still wears the pair of glasses he had in Kabul. A piece of shrapnel is embedded in the right lens.

Wilson, the ambassador, is proud of his contributions to the successful evacuation of so many people. But he can’t help questioning himself.

“I spent the month since leaving, every day, going over what we did and didn’t do,” he said. “That’s a burden we all have to carry for the rest of our lives.”

The afternoon of Aug. 27, Shabir Mohammadi’s uncle Rostam went to the Emergency Surgical Centre, an Italian-run trauma facility in Kabul, to look for Shabir.

A guard outside told him no visitors were allowed because of COVID-19 restrictions, but Rostam begged him to make an exception. The guard relented, telling him he had five minutes.

Inside, Rostam found Shabir hooked up to an oxygen mask. Rostam took his hand and kissed him on the forehead.

“How are you, my dear?” he asked.

Shabir just nodded in return. He couldn’t speak. His spine had been severely injured. He was partially paralyzed from the waist down.

But he was alive.

*

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: Afghans stand in the sewage ditch outside Abbey Gate as they attempt to show documents to Marines processing evacuees on Aug. 25. Credit: Mirzahussain Sadid for Alive in Afghanistan

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Hell at Abbey Gate: Chaos, Confusion and Death in the Final Days of the War in Afghanistan
  • Tags: ,

First published in July 2004

***

I want to give testimony on what are called the “highways of death.” These are the two Kuwaiti roadways, littered with remains of 2,000 mangled Iraqi military vehicles, and the charred and dismembered bodies of tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers, who were withdrawing from Kuwait on February 26th and 27th 1991 in compliance with UN resolutions.

U.S. planes trapped the long convoys by disabling vehicles in the front, and at the rear, and then pounded the resulting traffic jams for hours. “It was like shooting fish in a barrel,” said one U.S. pilot. The horror is still there to see.

On the inland highway to Basra is mile after mile of burned, smashed, shattered vehicles of every description – tanks, armored cars, trucks, autos, fire trucks, according to the March 18, 1991, Time magazine. On the sixty miles of coastal highway, Iraqi military units sit in gruesome repose, scorched skeletons of vehicles and men alike, black and awful under the sun, says the Los Angeles Times of March 11, 1991. While 450 people survived the inland road bombing to surrender, this was not the case with the 60 miles of the coastal road. There for 60 miles every vehicle was strafed or bombed, every windshield is shattered, every tank is burned, every truck is riddled with shell fragments. No survivors are known or likely. The cabs of trucks were bombed so much that they were pushed into the ground, and it’s impossible to see if they contain drivers or not. Windshields were melted away, and huge tanks were reduced to shrapnel.

“Even in Vietnam I didn’t see anything like this. It’s pathetic,” said Major Bob Nugent, an Army intelligence officer. This one-sided carnage, this racist mass murder of Arab people, occurred while White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater promised that the U.S. and its coalition partners would not attack Iraqi forces leaving Kuwait. This is surely one of the most heinous war crimes in contemporary history.

The Iraqi troops were not being driven out of Kuwait by U.S. troops as the Bush administration maintains. They were not retreating in order to regroup and fight again. In fact, they were withdrawing, they were going home, responding to orders issued by Baghdad, announcing that it was complying with Resolution 660 and leaving Kuwait. At 5:35 p.m. (Eastern standard Time) Baghdad radio announced that Iraq’s Foreign Minister had accepted the Soviet cease-fire proposal and had issued the order for all Iraqi troops to withdraw to positions held before August 2, 1990 in compliance with UN Resolution 660. President Bush responded immediately from the White House saying (through spokesman Marlin Fitzwater) that “there was no evidence to suggest the Iraqi army is withdrawing. In fact, Iraqi units are continuing to fight. . . We continue to prosecute the war.” On the next day, February 26, 1991, Saddam Hussein announced on Baghdad radio that Iraqi troops had, indeed, begun to withdraw from Kuwait and that the withdrawal would be complete that day. Again, Bush reacted, calling Hussein’s announcement “an outrage” and “a cruel hoax.”

Eyewitness Kuwaitis attest that the withdrawal began the afternoon of February 26, 1991 and Baghdad radio announced at 2:00 AM (local time) that morning that the government had ordered all troops to withdraw.

The massacre of withdrawing Iraqi soldiers violates the Geneva Conventions of 1949, Common Article III, which outlaws the killing of soldiers who are out of combat. The point of contention involves the Bush administration’s claim that the Iraqi troops were retreating to regroup and fight again. Such a claim is the only way that the massacre which occurred could be considered legal under international law. But in fact the claim is false and obviously so. The troops were withdrawing and removing themselves from combat under direct orders from Baghdad that the war was over and that Iraq had quit and would fully comply with UN resolutions. To attack the soldiers returning home under these circumstances is a war crime.

Iraq accepted UN Resolution 660 and offered to withdraw from Kuwait through Soviet mediation on February 21, 1991. A statement made by George Bush on February 27, 1991, that no quarter would be given to remaining Iraqi soldiers violates even the U.S. Field Manual of 1956. The 1907 Hague Convention governing land warfare also makes it illegal to declare that no quarter will be given to withdrawing soldiers. On February 26,199 I, the following dispatch was filed from the deck of the U.S.S. Ranger, under the by-line of Randall Richard of the Providence Journal:

“Air strikes against Iraqi troops retreating from Kuwait were being launched so feverishly from this carrier today that pilots said they took whatever bombs happened to be closest to the flight deck. The crews, working to the strains of the Lone Ranger theme, often passed up the projectile of choice . . . because it took too long to load.”

New York Times reporter Maureen Dowd wrote,

“With the Iraqi leader facing military defeat, Mr. Bush decided that he would rather gamble on a violent and potentially unpopular ground war than risk the alternative: an imperfect settlement hammered out by the Soviets and Iraqis that world opinion might accept as tolerable.”

In short, rather than accept the offer of Iraq to surrender and leave the field of battle, Bush and the U.S. military strategists decided simply to kill as many Iraqis as they possibly could while the chance lasted. A Newsweek article on Norman Schwarzkopt, titled “A Soldier of Conscience” (March 11,1991), remarked that before the ground war the general was only worried about “How long the world would stand by and watch the United States pound the living hell out of Iraq without saying, ‘Wait a minute – enough is enough.’ He [Schwarzkopf] itched to send ground troops to finish the job.” The pretext for massive extermination of Iraqi soldiers was the desire of the U.S. to destroy Iraqi equipment. But in reality the plan was to prevent Iraqi soldiers from retreating at all. Powell remarked even before the start of the war that Iraqi soldiers knew that they had been sent to Kuwait to die. Rick Atkinson of the Washington Post reasoned that “the noose has been tightened” around Iraqi forces so effectively that “escape is impossible” (February 27, 1991). What all of this amounts to is not a war but a massacre.

There are also indications that some of those bombed during the withdrawl were Palestinians and Iraqi civilians. According to Time magazine of March 18, 1991, not just military vehicles, but cars, buses and trucks were also hit. In many cases, cars were loaded with Palestinian families and all their possessions. U.S. press accounts tried to make the discovery of burned and bombed household goods appear as if Iraqi troops were even at this late moment looting Kuwait. Attacks on civilians are specifically prohibited by the Geneva Accords and the 1977 Conventions.

How did it really happen? On February 26, 1991 Iraq had announced it was complying with the Soviet proposal, and its troops would withdraw from Kuwait. According to Kuwaiti eyewitnesses, quoted in the March 11, 1991 Washington Post, the withdrawal began on the two highways, and was in full swing by evening. Near midnight, the first U.S. bombing started. Hundreds of Iraqis jumped from their cars and their trucks, looking for shelter. U.S. pilots took whatever bombs happened to be close to the flight deck, from cluster bombs to 500 pound bombs. Can you imagine that on a car or truck? U.S. forces continued to drop bombs on the convoys until all humans were killed. So many jets swarmed over the inland road that it created an aerial traffic jam, and combat air controllers feared midair collisions.

The victims were not offering resistance. They weren’t being driven back in fierce battle, or trying to regroup to join another battle. They were just sitting ducks, according to Commander Frank Swiggert, the Ranger Bomb Squadron leader. According to an article in the March 11, 1991 Washington Post, headlined “U.S. Scrambles to Shape View of Highway of Death,” the U.S. government then conspired and in fact did all it could to hide this war crime from the people of this country and the world. What the U.S. government did became the focus of the public relations campaign managed by the U.S. Central Command in Riyad, according to that same issue of the Washington Post. The typical line has been that the convoys were engaged in “classic tank battles,” as if to suggest that Iraqi troops tried to fight back or even had a chance of fighting back. The truth is that it was simply a one-sided massacre of tens of thousands of people who had no ability to fight back or defend themselves.

The Washington Post says that senior officers with the U.S. Central Command in Riyad became worried that what they saw was a growing public perception that Iraqi forces were leaving Kuwait voluntarily, and that the U.S. pilots were bombing them mercilessly, which was the truth. So the U.S. government, says the Post, played down the evidence that Iraqi troops were actually leaving Kuwait.

U.S. field commanders gave the media a carefully drawn and inaccurate picture of the fast-changing events. The idea was to portray Iraq’s claimed withdrawal as a fighting retreat made necessary by heavy allied military pressure. Remember when Bush came to the Rose Garden and said that he would not accept Saddam Hussein’s withdrawal? That was part of it, too, and Bush was involved in this cover up. Bush’s statement was followed quickly by a televised military briefing from Saudi Arabia to explain that Iraqi forces were not withdrawing but were being pushed from the battlefield. In fact, tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers around Kuwait had begun to pull away more than thirty-six hours before allied forces reached the capital, Kuwait City. They did not move under any immediate pressure from allied tanks and infantry, which were still miles from Kuwait City.

This deliberate campaign of disinformation regarding this military action and the war crime that it really was, this manipulation of press briefings to deceive the public and keep the massacre from the world is also a violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the right of the people to know.

Joyce Chediac is a Lebanese-American journalist who has traveled in the Middle East and writes on Middle East issues. Her report was presented at the New York Commission hearing, May 11, 1991.

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

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

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

***

When a military alliance that is headed by the world’s most powerful country (America) makes public that it is hostile against (aiming to control) both of the other two most powerful countries (Russia and China), then it actually exists in order to conquer (include), ultimately, ALL countries, and to replace the United Nations — the current authoritative source of international law[1].

What this implies is to replace the U.N. and its authorized agencies, by the U.S.-proposed “rules-based international order,” whose “rules” come not from FDR’s envisioned U.N., but instead come from the post-WW-II Deep State or Military-Industrial Complex, the billionaires who control the armaments and global extraction and media firms and the U.S. Government itself, which latter Government will become imposed upon the world (all countries except America) by the world’s most powerful country (America), which had created and leads that military alliance (NATO) and is now publicly aiming to conquer (control) the entire world.

This is what has actually just now happened. On April 6th, Al-Mayadeen Media Network, an independent Arab satellite news channel, bannered “NATO chief openly touts targeting China, cites Ukraine stance as excuse”, and reported that on April 5th, Jens Stoltenberg, NATO’s chief, said that (as they reported it):

NATO intends to deepen cooperation with its Asian allies responding to the impending “security challenge” coming from China, which refuses to condemn Russia’s military operation in Ukraine.

Speaking during a press conference on Tuesday, Stoltenberg announced that the alliance will be hosting foreign ministers from NATO states in addition to Finland, Sweden, Georgia and the European Union. Asia-Pacific partners were invited as well, including Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea. He said that the current “security crisis” has “global implications.”

The ministers will be discussing new strategic concepts regarding the war in Ukraine in addition to, for the first time, dealing with China’s “growing influence and coercive policies on the global stage which pose a systemic challenge to our security and to our democracies.”

“We see that China has been unwilling to condemn Russia’s aggression and has joined Moscow in questioning the right of nations to choose their own path,” said Stoltenberg. The NATO general urged the member states, mostly liberal democracies, to stand up against “authoritarian powers.”

According to Freedom House, an organization funded by Washington, 5 of 30 NATO members are not considered to be completely democratic: Turkey, Albania, Hungary, Montenegro and North Macedonia.

Stoltenberg hopes that there will be enhanced cooperation between NATO and Asia-Pacific partners on “arms control, cyber, hybrid and technology.”

Beijing has made it increasingly clear that it will not impose sanctions on Russia and [will be] maintaining an independent stance on Ukraine, that it is not a party in the conflict and will be a force for peace and mediation if and when necessary. (emphasis added)

The crisis in Ukraine has now officially been globalized by the U.S. regime to encompass all nations; and, in effect, “You are either America’s ally, or else you are America’s enemy.”

Here is how the Nobel Peace Prize winner, U.S. President Barack Obama, stated this to America’s graduating cadets at ts elite military academy, West Point, on 28 May, 2014, just three months after his successful coup to overthrow and replace Ukraine’s democratically elected President in February of that year, and at the time of the start of their attempted ethnic-cleansing program to eliminate the residents in areas of Ukraine where the voters had voted overwhelmingly (90% and more) for the just-recently Obama-overthrown democratically elected President of Ukraine:

The United States is and remains the one indispensable nation. That has been true for the century passed and it will be true for the century to come. … Russia’s aggression toward former Soviet states unnerves capitals in Europe, while China’s economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors. From Brazil to India, rising middle classes compete with us, and governments seek a greater say in global forums. … It will be your generation’s task to respond to this new world.

He was telling the military that America’s economic competition, against the BRICS nations, is a key matter for America’s military, and not only for America’s private corporations; that U.S. taxpayers fund America’s military at least partially in order to impose the wills and extend the wealth of the stockholders in America’s corporations abroad; and that the countries against which America is in economic competition are “dispensable” but America “is and remains the one indispensable nation.”

This, supposedly, also authorizes America’s weapons and troops to fight against countries whose “governments seek a greater say in global forums.” In other words: Stop the growing economies from growing faster than America’s. There is another name for the American Government’s supremacist ideology. This term is “fascism.”

The reality, not talked about in public (since America isn’t a democracy), is that the United States Government propagandizes against foreign governments and then perpetrates sanctions, coups, and/or military invasions, against them, in order to impose the U.S. empire’s dictatorial stooges, and then to crush whatever democracy had existed there. This U.S. fascism didn’t happen only in Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, and Chile in 1973, but it happens also today, long after the ‘anti-communist’ excuse for it had ended in 1991.

*

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.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s next book (soon to be published) will be AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change. It’s about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

Notes

[1] The role of the U.N. in creating and enforcing international law is, unfortunately, fundamentally different from what had been the intention of the individual, U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who initially came up with the idea for that organization in 1941, and who then proposed its name, “the United Nations,” at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference, in 1944, near the end of WW II. His intention was to terminate all imperialisms, every single empire, and to replace the entire imperialistic international order, which had created BOTH World Wars — replace it by a democratic federal republic among ALL nations, such that no nation will any longer be an empire, nor be an empire’s vassal-nation (or ‘ally’). However, FDR died on 12 April 1945, and his immediate successor, Harry Truman, whose hero was his secretly neoconservative (i.e., U.S.-global-empire-aspiring) General Dwight Eisenhower, decided (following Eisenhower’s advice), on 25 July 1945, to ditch FDR’s U.N. plan, and Truman’s Administration therefore remade the design of the U.N. into what now exists — so weak that the U.S. Government’s objective now became for the U.S. Government itself to be enabled ultimately to dictate to the entire world what would effectively BE ‘international law’ — which, soon after the Soviet Union’s 1991 termination, started to become, ever-more-publicly, the “rules-based order” (or “rules-based international order”) increasingly replacing the United Nations altogether.

Featured image is from CODEPINK

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

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

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

***

 

 

Mobilizing a population to vilify and hate a targeted enemy is a tactic that leaders have used since before the dawn of human history, and it is being used to demonize Russia and Vladimir Putin in the current conflict. If we want to join the march to war, we can join the hate fest.  But if we want a more objective and honest assessment of events, we must rely upon facts that our government and its cheer-leading mainstream media are not anxious for us to view.

In the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine,  all things Russian are being punished. Russian athletes, including paraplegics, are barred from international sports competition.

Century old Russian writers and musicians such as Tolstoy and Tchaikovsky are being removed from book shelves and concerts. Even Russian bred cats are not exempt.

If such actions are justified, why was there no such banning of US athletes, musicians or writers after the US invasion of Iraq?  Moreover, why are so few people outraged by the bombing and killing of 370,000 Yemeni people?  Why are so few people outraged as thousands of Afghans starve because the United States is seizing Afghanistan’s national assets which were in western banks?

Why Ukraine?

There has been massive and widespread publicity about Ukraine. It is a simple Hollywood script:  Ukraine is the angel, Russia is the devil, Zelensky is the hero and all good people will wear blue and yellow ribbons.

Maintaining this image requires propaganda to promote it, and censorship to prevent challengers debunking it.

This has required trashing some long held western traditions. By banning all Russian athletes from international competition, the International Olympic Committee and different athletic federations have violated the Olympic Charter which prohibits discrimination on the basis of nationality.

Censorship

The West prides itself on free speech yet censorship of alternative viewpoints is now widespread in Europe and North America.  Russia Today and other Russian media outlets are being blocked on the internet as well as cable TV.  Ironically,  numerous programs on RT were hosted by Americans, for example journalist Chris Hedges and comedian Lee Camp.  The US is silencing their own citizens.

Censorship or shadow banning is widespread on social media. On April 6, one of the best informed military analysts, Scott Ritter @realScottRitter, was suspended from Twitter. Why?  Because he  suggested that the victims of Bucha may have been murdered not by Russians, but rather by Ukrainian ultra-nationalists and the US and UK may also be culpable.

The 2015 Netflix documentary titled “Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom” deals with the Maidan (Kiev central square) uprising of 2013-2014.  It ignores the most essential elements of the events: the management provided by the US  and the muscle provided by ultra-nationalists of the Right Sector and Azov Battalion. The attacks and killing of Ukrainian police are whitewashed away.

By contrast, the 2016 documentary “Ukraine on Fire” provides the background and essential elements of the conflict.  It is not available on Netflix and was banned from distribution on YouTube for some time.

 

Ukrainian Soldiers Film Themselves Calling Up Mothers of Russian Soldiers Killed in Action and Mocking Them

By Paul Joseph Watson, April 06, 2022

Footage posted to Twitter shows what appears to be Ukrainian soldiers calling up the mothers of dead Russian soldiers killed in action and mocking them over their loss.

US-NATO False Flags? Ukraine April 2022 vs. Kosovo January 1999

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, April 06, 2022

The April 2022 Bucha tragedy on the outskirts of Kiev is in some regards reminiscent of Ambassador William Walker’s accusation directed against Serbia’s security forces for the January 1999 “massacre of civilians” in Racak, Kosovo.

‘Gods of War’: How the US Weaponized Ukraine Against Russia

By T.J. Coles, April 06, 2022

Since the US-engineered 2013-14 coup in Ukraine, American forces have taught Ukrainians, including neo-Nazi units, how to fight in urban and other civilian areas. Weaponizing Ukraine is part of Washington’s quest for what the Pentagon calls “full spectrum dominance.”

Latest Pfizer Document Dump Shows the Company Had to Hire 2,400 New Employees to Handle Wave of COVID “Vaccine” Adverse Events

By Ethan Huff, April 06, 2022

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has produced another 11,043 pages of Pfizer documents, one of them showing that the company had to hire an additional 2,400 employees to handle the onslaught of adverse reactions caused by its Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “vaccine.”

The Bucha Massacre. Ukraine Fake News

By Rodney Atkinson, April 06, 2022

Film of alleged victims on the roads in Bucha look suspicious, with “bodies” moving (we know this has happened in other staged and acted films provided by Ukraine’s propaganda). It is claimed that civilians had been shot and buried in shallow graves. We know from the behaviour of NATO allies in the Yugoslav war that in Racak dead soldiers were dressed up as civilians and then paraded as the victims of “a massacre” which was later debunked.

New Evidence Sheds Light on Alleged Massacre in Bucha, Kiev Region

By South Front, April 06, 2022

There are more interesting videos from Bucha shared by the Ukrainian military which may help to shed light on what did really happen in the town left by the Russian troops on March 30.

America

Big Pharma Advertising Dollars Are at an All-Time High

By Dr. Joseph Mercola, April 06, 2022

Big Pharma advertising dominates, making up a large portion of a given media outlet’s revenue, and that funding gives Pharma the power to dictate what ends up in the news and what doesn’t.

China: Times Are Changing for a Country that Wanted to Change

By Tom Clifford, April 06, 2022

There is much about modern China to appreciate. Its streets are usually safe. The economy, especially in the populous eastern provinces, has seen incredible growth not witnessed at any other time in history. Extreme poverty has been greatly diminished.

Update: How Both Putin and Biden Bungled in Ukraine. Analysis of the Bucha Tragedy

By Eric Zuesse, April 06, 2022

If Russia’s allegations in that Bucha matter are true, then, of course, the propaganda-value of the ‘news’-reports by CNN and others regarding it will reduce with time, and perhaps even become the enduring scandal here — yet another scandal of U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media being actually instead propaganda-media.

The Financial Elite’s War against Humanity: Covid Tyranny, Robotization and the Restructuring of the Global Economy

By Prof. Anthony J. Hall, April 06, 2022

The crux of the warring assault has to do with the agendas of those seeking to remake the banking system. Who will dominate this process of financial re-engineering and who will be its major beneficiaries?

The Coming Global Financial Revolution: Russia Is Following the American Playbook

By Ellen Brown, April 06, 2022

The trust placed in the U.S. dollar as global reserve currency, backed by “the full faith and credit of the United States,” had finally been fully broken. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a speech on March 16 that the U.S. and EU had defaulted on their obligations, and that freezing Russia’s reserves marks the end of the reliability of so-called first class assets.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Ukrainian Soldiers Film Themselves Calling Up Mothers of Russian Soldiers Killed in Action and Mocking Them

AUKUS in the Hypersonic Missile Wonderland

April 7th, 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 InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

If further clues were needed as to why AUKUS, the security pact comprising the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, was created, the latest announcement on weapons would have given the game away.   Australia, just as it became real estate to park British nuclear weapons experiments, is now looking promising as a site for hypersonic missile testing, development, and manufacture.

In a joint statement from US President Joe Biden, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, a commitment was made “to commence new trilateral cooperation on hypersonics and counter-hypersonics, and electronic warfare capabilities, as well as to expand information sharing and to deepen cooperation on defence innovation.”

To this can be added February efforts of officials from all three countries to, according to the ABC, scour Australia for sites best suited for the nascent nuclear-powered submarine program that seems all but pie in the sky.  To date, the country has no infrastructure to speak of in this field, no skills that merit mention for the development of any such fleet, and a lack of clarity as to when the vessels might make it to sea.  Nor is there any clear sign what model of submarine – UK or US – will be preferred.

Last October, the US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, did his bit to stir the pot of paranoia by suggesting that Beijing had stolen ahead with their hypersonic capabilities.  He took particular interest in a test of a “hypersonic weapon system” described as a “very significant event” and one of deep concern.

Russia has also staked its claim to fame in the hypersonic race.  The Russian military claims that its Avangard system, which entered into service in December 2019, is capable of flying 27 times faster than the speed of sound with dizzying manoeuvrability.  Last month, Moscow announced that its new Kinzhal (Dagger) hypersonic missile was used to target a Ukrainian fuel depot in Kostiantynivka near the Black Sea port of Mykolaiv.

Citizens have not been asked, let alone consulted, about this dotty plan to feed another arms race.  Democracy is treated as a cranky relative who only figures in passing.  In a rather sleazy way, the hypersonic missile venture is being marketed to the Australian public as a wonderful opportunity to show independence, not subservience.

The Morrison government, and various officials, are publicly very appreciative of the latest developments, showing empires past and present what it takes to be a real wallah.  Instead of feeling a sense of shame (are we always doomed to merely serve the drinks?), there was merriment that Australia could be oh so useful to the power projects of others.

Hoping that no one would notice, an emphasis on danger has been made.  The Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce justifies the acceleration of the hypersonic weapons program by claiming that Australia faces an “existential threat” from them.  It would only take “about 14 minutes” for such devices to reach Australia, “so we have to make sure that we are right at the top of our game.”

Presumably, this means doing everything to make Australia attractive, in an existentially doomed way, to other powers in the region.  China’s UN ambassador Zhang Jun has already warned against the provocation of such military arrangements. “As the Chinese saying goes: if you do not like it, do not impose it against others.”

The Morrison government is trying to leave the impression that this will eventually realise the dream of self-sufficiency, a notion repeatedly fed by such think tanks as the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.  It describes this as “a major step in delivering a $1 billion Sovereign Guided Weapons and Explosive Ordnance Enterprise, officially announcing strategic partners Raytheon Australia and Lockheed Martin Australia.”  The Prime Minister also sees such weapons as part of a broader Australia “strategic vision” dealing with long-range strike capabilities.

This is all an eye-poking contradiction in terms, given the role played by US weapons-making giants.  But the Defence Minister Peter Dutton tries to be reassuring about Australia’s chances of being weaned off the teat of empire. “We know we need to work closely with our partners to bolster our self-reliance and this is another major step in delivering that sovereign capability here in Australia.”

Dutton eyes must be going starry at this point.  “This is an incredibly complex undertaking that will see this new manufacturing capability built from the ground up.”  Irritating references follow.  To make the point that some genuine effort will be made by Australians, the Minister speaks of the hypersonic weapons venture as being “a whole-of-nation endeavour.”  Unspecified “opportunities” for Australian companies and workers are mentioned across a number of areas: manufacturing, maintenance, infrastructure, research and development and test and evaluation.  Presumably someone needs to make the tea and coffee.

As this idiotic, servile venture proceeds, Australian territory, sites and facilities will become every more attractive for assault in the fulness of time.  That may well be quite a way off and, judging by any military ventures in Australia of this kind, we can hope that this will be more a case of decades rather than years.

*

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]

This article by Washington Blog was first published by Global Research on December 2017 is relevant to the ongoing crisis in Ukraine.

It confirms that the US Government had contemplated a False Flag Attack “to Start a War with the the Soviet Union” . This was revealed by Newsweek.

In this update we have added reference to declassified documents pertaining to the procurement by the US of Soviet aircraft in the 1960s.

***

Mainstream Media Admits that False Flags Are Real

In October 2017, Newsweek ran an article headlined (all caps in original Newsweek title):

U.S. GOVERNMENT PLANNED FALSE FLAG ATTACKS TO START WAR WITH SOVIET UNION, JFK DOCUMENTS SHOW

The article notes:

The U.S. government once wanted to plan false flag attacks with Soviet aircraft to justify war with the USSR or its allies, newly declassified documents surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy show.

In a three-page memo, members of the National Security Council wrote, “There is a possibility that such aircraft could be used in a deception operation designed to confuse enemy planes in the air, to launch a surprise attack against enemy installations or in a provocation operation in which Soviet aircraft would appear to attack US or friendly installations to provide an excuse for U.S. intervention.”

The memo shows that the department, along with the CIA, considered buying Soviet aircraft to stage the attacks, even getting estimates from the Air Force on how long it would take and how much it would cost to produce the planes domestically and covertly. Costs ranged from $3.5 million to $44 million per plane, depending on the model, most taking several months to build.

The U.S. government once wanted to plan false flag attacks with Soviet aircraft to justify war with the USSR or its allies, newly declassified documents surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy show.

False flag attacks are covert operations that make it look like an attack was carried out by another group than the group that actually carried them out.

Click below to access complete document

 

The mainstream media is finally catching up with what historians have long documented …

After all, influential royal advisors have been advocating false flag attacks for more than 2,000 years … and false flag attacks are so common that U.S. officials commonly discuss them.

Indeed, there are now so many admissions by government officials of false flag terror that only the willfully ignorant still doubt the reality of the concept.

First published on May 21, 2020

Campaigns against Native Americans. The War of 1812. World War I, World War II, Iraq and Afghanistan… The United States has been at war for the vast majority of its history. 

These wars have killed millions of innocent men, women and children around the world. Yet more often than not they have been based on weak evidence, questionable motives, and outright lies. Why, then, do large portions of the public staunchly support the US troops?  Why are so many Americans satisfied with the U.S. bombings of Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan and other Middle Eastern countries, knowing that this is creating starvation and refugee crises of catastrophic proportions?

In his new book, Propaganda, Lies and False Flags: How the U.S. Justifies its Wars (June 2020, Red Pill Press), journalist and human rights activist Robert Fantina explains how the US government has rallied public opinion to support its wars and military objectives since before the American Revolution.  

Through a deep, comprehensive analysis of every war the U.S. or its colonial predecessor has waged from 1755 to the present, Fantina demonstrates a clear pattern that has shaped not only decisions to enter into war, but also the narrative used to rally U.S. citizens’ support of these actions.

The pattern consists, first, of brandishing what Fantina refers to as “false flags”—that is, perceived threats, dangers or human rights violations such as Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction and involvement in 9/11, or alleged chemical attacks by the government of Syria that were never corroborated. Next comes the use of propaganda to manipulate public opinion and enlist widespread buy-in. Quoting and parroting the government, the media helps spread this propaganda. This approach has successfully garnered support for both official warfare and acts of aggression such as plundering other country’s resources and removing left-leaning foreign leaders.

The cost in human life is staggering. Since World War II alone it is estimated that the U.S. has killed at least 20,000,000 people in over 37 nations. In response to the killing of 3,000 U.S. citizens on September 11, 2001, the U.S. killed at least 1,000,000 Iraqis who, along with their government, had nothing to do with the 2001 attacks on the U.S.

The many revelations in Propaganda, Lies and False Flags include:

  • The testimony that sparked the first Gulf War—the Nayirah testimony—was entirely falsified to further the agenda of Citizens for a Free Kuwait, a US-backed organization. And Nayirah? She was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the US, not a hospital volunteer as she claimed in Congressional testimony.  
  • In 2020 the US assassinated Iran’s General Qassam Soleimani, head of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and then considered retaliation from Iran an unprovoked aggression that went to the brink of triggering an invasion. 
  • The US government developed a narrative positioning Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido as the legitimate president despite not being democratically elected by the people of Venezuela, enabling Guaido to stage a bloody albeit unsuccessful coup. Ultimately it was not about democracy, but oil.
  • The 2011 US intervention in Libya for “humanitarian purposes” following Libya’s attempts to quell violent unrest belied resentment for Libya’s support of Palestine and the desire to seize Libya’s rich oil assets.  

Each of the book’s fifty-plus case studies is presented with meticulous research and corroborating primary sources. 

Ultimately, Fantina hopes that by recognizing the ‘big lies’ that the U.S. government tells, people will begin to believe them with less ardor and less frequency–and that this will be the first step toward changing the centuries-long U.S. policy of constant war-making.

***

Praise for Propaganda, Lies and False Flags 

Keep this book on your shelf to quickly lay your hands on the false reasons for each past war, and many of the real reasons too. The latter are always shameful, which is why the former are invented. Included here are wars, coups, and incidents you may not know about. Not only is this a resource for countering new war lies by comparison with old ones, but with a limited number of nations on earth and the Pentagon’s penchant for attacking the same ones repeatedly, you may just find the very lies now on the news already debunked in this book. David Swanson, Nobel Peace Prize Nominee and author of twelve books including War Is A Lie and When the World Outlawed War

Meticulously detailed and thoroughly articulated, Bob Fantina’s latest book, Propaganda, False Flags and US Wars, is an incredibly valuable resource for citizens across the world. The amount I learned while reading this book is staggering and Fantina’s core thesis, that propaganda and false flags are not outliers, but vital and significant aspects of US war making, going back to the Native American wars, is imparted in such a manner readers will return to this book continually as a resource for not just understanding history, but for understanding current and future US wars. —Matthew Hoh, Senior Fellow, Center for International Policy

***

Propaganda, Lies and False Flags: How the U.S. Justifies its Wars Releases June 2020, click here to pre-order.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

US-NATO False Flags? Ukraine April 2022 vs. Kosovo January 1999

April 6th, 2022 by Prof Michel Chossudovsky

What is a false flag?

“A false flag is a political or military action carried out with the intention of blaming an opponent for it. Nations have often done this by staging a real or simulated attack on their own side and saying the enemy did it, as a pretext for going to war.” (BBC).

***

The April 2022 Bucha tragedy on the outskirts of Kiev is in some regards reminiscent of  Ambassador William Walker’s accusation directed against Serbia’s security forces for the January 1999 “massacre of civilians” in Racak, Kosovo. 

US-NATO’s war against Yugoslavia was upheld by the “international community” and the media as a “humanitarian peace-making” undertaking.

The following text was written at the height of the US-NATO bombing campaign in May 1999.

***

The January 1999 Racak Massacre

William G. Walker had been appointed Head of the OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM). A tailor-made assignment: Walker was well-known for his role in the “Iran-Contragate” scandal during the Reagan administration. The KLA insurgency was in many regards a “carbon copy” of the Nicaraguan Contras which had also been funded by drug money with covert support from the CIA.

In Kosovo, William G. Walker applied his skills in covert operations acquired in Central America. As head of the Kosovo Verification Mission (KVM), Walker maintained close links to the KLA military command in the field. From the outset of his mission in Kosovo, he used his position to pursue the interests of the US-NATO Alliance.

The so-called “Racak massacre” occurred shortly before the launching of the Rambouillet “peace initiative” (March 18, 1999),  although it turned out to be a fake [False Flag], the Racak massacre nonetheless played a key role in “setting the stage” for NATO’s air raids against Yugoslavia which commenced on March 23-24, 1999.

William Walker declared (in his capacity as head of KVM) that the Yugoslav police had carried out a massacre of civilians at Racak on January 15th 1999. The Yugoslav authorities retorted that local police had in fact conducted an operation in this village against the Kosovo Liberation Army and that several KLA soldiers had died in cross-fire.

As later reported by several French newspapers (Le Monde, Le Figaro and Liberation), it was confirmed that the “Racak massacre” was indeed “fake” put together with a view to discrediting Belgrade:

“Eventually, even the Los Angeles Times joined in, running a story entitled “Racak Massacre Questions: Were Atrocities Faked?” The theory behind all these was that the KLA had gathered their own dead after the battle, removed their uniforms, put them in civilian clothes, and then called in the observers.”

Excerpt From Chapter III of Michel Chossudovsky’s US-NATO’s War of Aggression against Yugoslavia
.
According to Paul Watson reporting from Pristina for the Los Angeles Times (January 23, 1999)
 .

Cloud of Controversy Obscures Truth About Kosovo Killings

For days now, a thick winter fog has shrouded a stretch of the road to Racak, and there’s no way around it for anyone who goes looking for the truth of how at least 40 ethnic Albanian villagers died there.

A week has passed since U.S. diplomat William Walker, who heads a team of international peace monitors here in separatist Kosovo province, accused Serbian security forces of “an unspeakable atrocity,” and what struck him then as horrific facts are slowly being obscured by a cloud of a different sort.

It is the sort that comes from the mouths of politicians and diplomats, rebels and soldiers, journalists and propagandists. Racak’s truth may yet melt into it and become part of the ugly mystery that is Balkan war.

Several French and British newspapers, with respected names like Le Figaro, Le Monde and the Times of London, have published stories suggesting that Walker and his monitors might have been duped by a conspiracy concocted by ethnic Albanian guerrillas.

The articles cite partial video footage, shot by a Serbian cameraman with Associated Press Television, of the police operation in the village of Racak on Jan. 15. The footage suggests that corpses were moved before peace monitors started investigating the next day, the reports claim.  (emphasis added)

***

The OSCE Role in Relation to the Bucha massacre

It is worth noting that the OSCE representative in Ukraine has been involved in the assessment of the Bucha Tragedy.

Baseless accusations were directed against Russia on April 5, 2022, prior to the conduct of an OSCE investigation on the Bucha massacre.

Russia’s Withdrawal from Bucha?

The withdrawal of Russian troops from the periphery of Kiev had been announced by Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin, who was leading the Russian peace delegation in Istanbul:

“In order to increase mutual trust and create the necessary conditions for further negotiations and achieving the ultimate goal of agreeing and signing an agreement, a decision was made to radically, by a large margin, reduce military activity in the Kyiv and Chernihiv directions.”  (emphasis added)

It is worth noting that the withdrawal of Russian troops (March 30) was confirmed by the Mayor of Bucha on March 31st. See video below.

***

Regarding Evidence: See the following articles 

Massacre in Bucha. Was it a False Flag?

By Jens Bernert, April 05, 2022

Civilians were shot in Bucha, Ukraine, as reported by the Kiev government on April 3, 2022. The Russian army had withdrawn from the village on March 30. On March 31, the mayor of Bucha had reported joyfully and good-humoredly about the Russians‘ withdrawal in a video. There was no talk of deaths yet. They came later.

Video, Youtube (Upload 1. April 2022): „The mayor of Bucha, Anatoliy Fedoruk, confirmed the city’s liberation from Russian troops on March 31.“

 

New Evidences Shed Light on Alleged Massacre in Bucha, Kiev Region

By South Front, April 06, 2022

On April 3, the Ukrainian propaganda machine attempted another attack against Moscow. A few videos showing dozens of civilians who were allegedly killed by the Russian servicemen were widely spread by all the Ukrainian MSM.

The main thesis of the Ukrainian and Western media is that the Russian military left Bucha, causing huge civilian casualties. One of the main pieces of evidence was a video of the AFU driving along the city. Corpses of civilians were shown laying along the road.

The slightest analysis of the footage rose a lot of suspicions on its credibility. You can read more information HERE.

On April 2, a day before Ukrainian “journalists” came to Bucha to stage the horrific scenes on the streets, the National Police of Ukraine published a video of the mop up operation in Bucha.

For Video click here or title of article above

The footage confirmed that:

  • there were no corpses laying on the streets. Not a single civilian confirmed that any mass shootings in the city.
  • Ukrainian demining teams who entered the town right after the Russian withdrawal had no work to do. They are seen walking on the streets along with civilians. Not a single mine left by the Russians was shown on the video.
  • Servicemen of the National Guard asked some of civilians if they need help, none of them replied asking for any immediate assistance, confirming that they are fine.

 

Genocide accusations are, it would seem, the latest fashion spreading out of the Balkans. On December 5, a former minister in the “government” of NATO occupied and administered Kosovo, Ivan Todosijević, who happens to be an otherwise occupation friendly and cooperative ethnic Serb, was sentenced to a two-year prison term.

The court found him guilty of making what it considered the outrageous claim that the so-called genocidal “Račak massacre,” which in 1999 triggered NATO aggression against Yugoslavia, was an imposture.

Since the trial began just two days before, by Balkan standards the swiftly reached verdict was remarkably expeditious, suggesting the importance which the NATO imposed and sustained authorities, as well as their foreign backers, attach to the dubious Račak narrative.

To arrive at such a harsh judgment, the Kosovo court must surely have dug up startling new evidence about what actually happened in Račak that even ICTY failed to produce. In 1999, ICTY amended its initial indictments of Serbian military and political leaders to include the slaughter of Albanian civilians in Račak.

The incident was said to be a cold-blooded, genocidal murder of forty-five helpless Albanian peasants, executed by a unit of the Yugoslav army after it had besieged and captured their village. All well and good, while the NATO attack was in progress and public support needed to be drummed up by publicizing shocking atrocity stories. Later however, when things had calmed down and prosecutors would have been obliged to present some semblance of credible evidence to support their claim, the Račak episode was quietly dropped by ICTY, due to lack of evidence to support the accusation.

The reason Račak is so important to the construction of the mythological narrative in which recent Kosovo history under NATO occupation is enveloped is precisely because it served as a conveniently arranged “humanitarian catastrophe” to justify unleashing the military campaign against Yugoslavia that had already been decided on before that.

The principal actor in that operation was a certain William Walker, officially billed as a “US diplomat,” at the time head of the Kosovo Verification Mission. His dramatic arrival in Račak and public asseveration that he was shocked by the horror of the crime scene he found there set the propaganda stage for what was to follow. Ironically, Walker had plenty of experience earlier in his career arranging genuine massacres of El Salvadorean peasants during their rebellion against the pro-Western, neo-colonial regime that had been imposed in that country.

However, he was quite sloppy and turned a dismal failure when it came to staging the phony massacre in Račak. Since the alleged victims were members of the KLA terrorist outfit killed in a legitimate police operation, they quickly had to be refurbished for public display, while covering up as much tell-tale forensic information as possible.

In the process, some mix-ups occurred that gave the game away. In the gully where the victims’ bodies were laid out to be photographed by the foreign media, there curiously was no evidence of blood around the corpses (watch 00:25 – 00:41 seconds). The suspicion that the bodies were hastily dressed up in a different set of civilian clothes not their own, to mask the fact that they were soldiers, was also corroborated by the fact that holes in the victims’ clothing generally did not correspond to the entry wounds of the bullets that killed them.

But none of these details apparently bothered the Kosovo court when it issued its stern judgment against Todosijević for “incitement to ethnic, racial, and religious hate, disorder and intolerance,” just for pointing out some of these incongruities.

Both the court’s procedural swiftness and the categorical nature of its conclusions are understandable in light of the importance of Račak in the historical mythology earlier referred to. The ultimate objective was not to just sentence some poor chap for a thought crime, but something much larger than that. Račak is symbolically the corner-stone of the Kosovo Albanians’ own emerging “genocide” narrative. Never mind that this vacuous charge, raised during the NATO assault on Yugoslavia in 1999, was discarded shortly after peace was restored. It has recently been boldly reinstated, thus successfully questioning Račak would further undermine whatever scant credibility the protected narrative may have.

As the perennial source and model – at least in recent times – of the Balkan “genocide” epidemic, Srebrenica predictably could not long remain outside this picture.

Professor Raphael Lemkin may be turning in his grave, but the Bosnia-Herzegovina High Representative Valentin Inzko seems determined not to be outdone by Kosovo Albanians. Just as in Pristina the hapless Todosijević was being court martialed for his incautious remark, in Sarajevo this month Inzko solemnly announced that he would at long last use his mythical “Bonn Powers” to impose a Srebrenica genocide denial law in that unlucky country. The reason such a measure was not enacted long ago was a quirk in the Dayton Agreement requiring consensus on vital interest issues and the Serb entity Republika Srpska’s adamant refusal to be a willing party in the suppression of scholarly research and public discussion of the dubious grounds for the “Srebrenica genocide” accusation leveled against it.

Interestingly, the “Bonn Powers” to override and impose laws and procedures in Bosnia, which Inzko invoked in order to circumvent the legal deadlock which prevents the passage of genocide denial legislation, are just as spurious as the “Srebrenica genocide” itself. The self-serving charade was utterly demolished by Dr. John Laughland several years ago.

Such powers are not mentioned anywhere in the Dayton Agreement which ended the war in Bosnia and set up the current constitutional arrangements in that country. Nevertheless, these puzzling powers, whose origins remain unexplained on the website of the Office of the High Representative in Bosnia, were successfully invoked several times in the past by Inzko’s predecessors to punish and dismiss elected officials who refused to toe the line prescribed by NATO powers, greatly raising tensions and often causing havoc in the country’s political system.

The claim of genocide in July of 1995 in Srebrenica is just as vacuous as the assertion of “Bonn Powers” which may soon be used in Bosnia to prohibit questioning it. The Srebrenica narrative would have collapsed long ago but for the respectability conferred upon it by its corrupt enabler, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), whose dishonorable role in perpetuating the fraud has been conclusively unmasked by a team of international scholars. Oddly for a “genocide,” in Srebrenica there is no evidence whatsoever of dolus specialis, or prior intent to annihilate a group protected under the Genocide Convention (also here). As for the physical evidence, even the heavily manipulated ICTY autopsy reports support a finding of just under 2,000 deaths in Srebrenica, far short of 8,000, as officially claimed. But even those deaths were from a variety of causes, execution accounting for several hundred of the aggregate total.

And as if that were not enough to make Prof. Lemkin’s stomach churn, in 2012 ICTY formally ruled that in the Bosnian village of Zepa another, hitherto unnoticed “genocide” had occurred and that the grand total of just three victims (mayor, military commander, and local religious leader) was quite sufficient to prove it. The feature which, in the Chamber’s preposterous opinion, raised the matter to the coveted status of genocide was that the three individuals were key leaders without whom the local community would collapse and become unsustainable. Unsustainability equals extinction, and extinction equals – genocide. (See also Tolimir Judgment Summary, p. 7.) In a scathing dissenting opinion, Judge Prisca Nyambe, a member of the trial panel, protested vigorously against this absurdity, but to no avail.

With childlike simplicity, most Balkan contenders seemingly would love to be “genocided” by their local enemies provided, however, that they survived to tell the tale to the tabloid media. It is a pity that there appear to be no adults in the room to restrain their exuberance.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Stephen Karganovic is President of the Srebrenica Historical Project.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Balkan ‘Genocides’ Are Not to be Questioned in NATO Occupied Kosovo

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

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

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

***

Since the US-engineered 2013-14 coup in Ukraine, American forces have taught Ukrainians, including neo-Nazi units, how to fight in urban and other civilian areas. Weaponizing Ukraine is part of Washington’s quest for what the Pentagon calls “full spectrum dominance.”

“[I]f you can learn all modalities of war, then you can be the god of war,” so said a Ukrainian artillery commander in 2016 while receiving training from the US Army.

The unnamed commander was quoted by Lt. Claire Vanderberg, a mortar platoon leader training soldiers as part of the Pentagon’s Joint Multinational Training Group-Ukraine. The training has taken place at the absurdly named International Peacekeeping and Security Center, which sits close to the border with Poland near the Ukrainian town of Yavoriv. Western media reported Russia’s recent cruise missile attack on the base, but chose not to mention what has taken place inside.

The relationship described above is a snapshot of a decades-long US-NATO effort to not only pull Ukraine from Russia’s orbit, but to actively weaponize the country against Moscow.

US national security state acknowledges “Russia is pushing back,” not pushing first

In their internal documents, the Pentagon and other arms of the US national security state reiterate the same arguments the anti-war left does when it explains how Ukraine has been used to provoke Russia into a military escalation. The principal difference is that the Pentagon speaks from an unabashedly imperialist perspective in which such provocations are seen as an important component of US power projection.

Recently, the US Director of National Intelligence’s Annual Threat Assessment reported: “Russia is pushing back against Washington where it can—locally and globally—employing techniques up to and including the use of force.” Note: Russia is “pushing back,” not pushing first.

A report from 2021 by the National Intelligence Council concedes of Russia and China: “Neither has felt secure in an international order designed for and dominated by democratic powers,” with “democratic” meaning the US and friends. Both Russia and China “have promoted a sovereignty-based international order that protects their absolute authority within their borders and geographic areas of influence.”

In October 2017, US Army Field Artillery School Assistant Commandant, Col. Heyward Hutson, who is responsible for training Ukrainians, explained: “Ukraine wants to become a NATO nation, but Russia doesn’t want them to be a NATO nation. Russia wants to have a buffer zone.” He added that another “problem is a lot of Eastern Ukraine is pro-Russia so the civilian population there is divided.” A 2016 US Army War College report reiterated: “Russia’s basic national security strategy is to keep its ‘neighboring belt stable’, NATO weak, China close, and the United States focused elsewhere.”

Another, from 2007, explains that the “pro-reform forces in power since the Orange Revolution” (read: pro-US forces) “would like to move Ukraine squarely into the Euro-Atlantic community with only limited deference to Russia.”

The document goes on to note that, at the time, the “Ukrainian political and military leadership has remained divided over the question of whether Ukraine should pursue a collective security approach or retain its neutral status.” It concluded that, while “[m]ost senior [Ukrainian] commanders have pro-reform credentials… there are still large numbers of senior leaders within the Main Defense Forces who have no or only limited exposure to Western training and operations.”

The US-sponsored coup of 2013-14 enabled Washington to smooth over that contradiction by launching an extensive program to train units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

President Bill Clinton signs NATO enlargement legislation, May 21, 1995

NATO is “not an exercise in diplomacy and deterrence as before”

When the Soviet Union collapsed, so too did its military alliance, the Warsaw Pact. But the West not only refused to disband its alliance—the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)—it expanded up to Russia’s borders.

NATO’s own records state that in 1992:

“Just four months after Ukraine’s declaration of independence” from the USSR, “NATO invited its representative to an extraordinary meeting of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council, the body set up to shape cooperation between NATO and the states of the former Warsaw Pact.”   

Russia did not propose a similar pact with America’s neighbors.

In 1994, Ukraine joined the so-called Partnership for Peace (PFP). Citing the UN Charter, the PFP states that signatories agree “to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, to respect existing borders and to settle disputes by peaceful means.” A US State Department primer reveals that the PFP had an ulterior motive. Its real aim was not neutrality but to move Ukraine and other signatories closer to NATO.

“Participation in PFP does not guarantee entry into NATO, but it is the best preparation for states interested in becoming NATO members.”

The primer also lists the 52 actual and planned military exercises in which PFP members initially engaged on or near Russia’s borders.

Bill Clinton-era policymakers explained that “NATO is not merely an exercise in preventive diplomacy and deterrence as before.” NATO expansion had a political agenda. They considered “NATO enlargement [a]s a democratization policy.” As above, “democratization” means pro-US. Citing President Clinton’s 1996 campaign speeches, the report notes that in their minds NATO “will provide the stability needed for greater economic development in Central and Eastern Europe.” In other words, post-USSR NATO was designed, in part, to guarantee US led-“free markets” (which are often neither free nor markets, but monopolies,) in ex-Soviet nations where state-ownership of businesses was the norm.

In 1997, NATO and Ukraine signed the Charter on a Distinctive Partnership. The Charter was a prima facie violation of the PFP in that it compromised Ukraine’s political independence. It proposed several areas of NATO-Ukraine cooperation, “including civil emergency planning, military training and environmental security.” NATO brags: “cooperation between NATO and Ukraine quickly developed” in the form of “retraining for former military officers … and invit[ing] Ukraine to participate in NATO-led exercises.”

Making Ukraine a “military partner of the US”

The US Army says: “Ukraine has been a military partner of the U.S. dating back to the mid 1990s.” In 1998, America’s Special Operations Command Europe hosted a Special Operations Forces (SOF) conference in Stuttgart, Germany. The US Army reports: “This benchmark even brought military personnel from Moldova, Georgia, and the Ukraine together to view U.S. SOF demonstrations and discuss opportunities for future Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) and Joint Contact Team Program (JCTP) events.”

In June 2000, the US Marines reported that the Navy’s amphibious warship, the USS Trenton, had sailed from the Aegean to the Black Sea and had docked in Odessa (Ukraine). The 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) “got to experience some of Odessa’s history first hand when they climbed the Prymorsky, or ‘Maritime’, Stairs.” In addition to the pleasantries, “the focus for MEU personnel and USS Trenton crew [was] NATO’s next exercise – Cooperative Partner 2000 (CP00) – of which Ukraine is the host nation.”

In addition to Ukraine’s participation in the US-led NATO training and exercises, Ukrainian soldiers fought in American-led wars. After 9/11, they participated in the occupation of Afghanistan via NATO’s so-called International Security Assistance Force. Ukrainian troops also aided the US-British-occupation of Iraq. In 2008, the Army lauded their comrades: “More than 5,000 Ukrainian troops have served in Iraq during Ukraine’s five years of service in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.”

After backing 2014 coup, US provides “lethal security assistance”

Established in 2014 during the US-backed coup, the Ukraine component of the US State Department and Pentagon’s Global Security Contingency Fund (GSCF) provides tens of millions of dollars-worth of training and equipment to “develop the tactical, operational, and institutional training capacities of its Ministry of Defense and National Guard.” The State Department says: “The GSCF has also supported Ukrainian Special Operations Forces in developing tactical and institutional capabilities that are compatible with Western models.”

According to one Pentagon-linked journal: “Arsen Avakov, the Minister of Internal Affairs from 2014 to 2021[, …] enabled the expansion and later integration of paramilitary forces into the National Guard,” including the nazi Azov Battalion.

From 2015, the Pentagon’s European Command oversaw the Joint Multinational Task Force-Ukraine (JMTF-U), in which the US Army and National Guard trains the Ukrainian Armed Forces. In addition, officers were trained in the US through the International Military Education and Training program. The Congressional Research Service reports that, “[s]eparately, U.S. Special Operations Forces have trained and advised Ukrainian special forces.” In addition, the US participates in the annual NATO Partnership for Peace exercise, Rapid Trident.

In November 2015, supposedly at the request of the new pro-US regime, the Obama administration sent two AN/TPQ radar systems to Ukraine. “President Petro Poroshenko had the opportunity to review the equipment, and was briefed by U.S. military personnel on its capabilities.”

The US Army later revealed that the radar system was not purely defensive. A team from US Army Europe, Fort Sill’s Fires Center of Excellence (FCoE), and the Army Security Assistance Training Management Organization (SATMO) “conducted four weeks of operator training.”

Since the initial delivery, “Ukraine received four additional Q-36 radars … and training by U.S. Army Communications-Electronics Command with support from the FCoE and USSATMO.” The publication quoted one trainer as saying that “the U.S. team showed their brigade, battalion and platoon commanders how to tactically employ the radar system to support fire and maneuver efforts.”

Since 2016, SATMO’s Doctrine Education Advisory Group (DEAG) “has advised Ukrainian Security Forces at the operational level to revise doctrine, improve professional military education, enhance NATO interoperability and increase combat readiness.” In January this year, DEAG brought the first load of $200m-worth of “lethal security assistance, including ammunition for the frontline defenders of Ukraine.”

US trains Ukrainians to “blend into the local populace” waging warfare in civilian-heavy areas

One of the more immoral US actions in Ukraine has been the training of armed forces to fight in civilian areas, goading Russia to fight in densely-populated locations with the effect of scoring anti-Russia propaganda points when Russians kill Ukrainian civilians.

In 2015, the US Marines implied that American service personnel would travel to Ukraine to fight. “Unofficial travel (leave or liberty) to any country in Africa or the following European countries [including Ukraine and its neighbors] requires command O-6 level approval … The countries are subject to change based on the Foreign Clearance Guide (FCG), Department of State (DOS), Combatant Command, and/or Intelligence threat notifications.” This suggests preparation for “irregular” warfare.

An undated document published by the US Special Operations Center of Excellence (SOCE), apparently from around 2017, states that “the United States should learn from the Chechnya rebels’ reaction” to Russia’s invasion of Chechnya in the ‘90s. It explains that the “rebels” engaged in “decentralized operations,” using social media to “blend into the local populace.” Russia’s enemies used “misinformation” to manipulate Russians into killing the rebels’ enemies.

The SOCE paper goes on to note that the Army Special Operation Forces “are trained to thrive in these environments.” The document explicitly advocates for the US to train irregular forces to provoke Russia: “The United States should form an interagency working group with the Department of State, members of the intelligence community and SOCOM,” the Special Operations Command, which would “serv[e] as the DoD lead/representative.” It suggests that such a working group “understand that SOCOM actions will need to be unconventional and irregular in order to compete with Russian modern warfare tactics.”

By bolstering Ukraine’s armed forces and goading Russia, US elites have openly used Ukrainian civilians as pawns. For many years, Ukrainian forces were trained in urban combat by US personnel: i.e., to fight Russians in densely-populated civilian areas. “Task Force Illini” is comprised of 150 soldiers from the 33rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team of the Illinois Army National Guard.

In September 2020, the US Army reported that Armed Forces Ukraine soldiers “honed their urban operations skills as Task Force Illini advisors lent their expertise at Combat Training Center in Yavoriv” – the Western Ukrainian de facto NATO base near Poland’s border.

“Thunderbirds” train Ukrainian in full-scale vehicular combat

The Oklahoma-based “Thunderbirds” have gone through several incarnations over the last century. The army unit was originally known as the 45th Infantry Division and is now the 45th Infantry Brigade Combat Team. By early-2017, the JMTG-U mission fell under the 7th Army Training Command and US Army Europe, which paired Thunderbirds from the 1st Battalion, 179th Infantry Regiment with soldiers from the Ukrainian 28th Mechanized Brigade and 79th Airborne Brigade. Their goal was to prepare Ukrainians for full-on vehicular combat.

Putin claims that Ukraine is a pawn of NATO. US propaganda rejects the notion, attempting to prove it by publicly ruling out Ukraine’s membership in the Alliance. But in April 2017, the US Army admitted that under the JMTG-U, the Thunderbirds’ mission was “to train the Ukrainian army to NATO standards, develop their noncommissioned officer corps, and help them to establish a combat training center, so that in the future, they can continue to train themselves.” So, if the Ukrainian military is trained to NATO standards and is overseen by a US puppet president, it might as well be part of NATO, minus the US obligation to come to its defense.

The proposed center became the Yavoriv Combat Training Center. The US Army reported that in October 2017, “a new grenade range was opened. Maj. Montana Dugger said: “We’ve helped them build long-range maintenance plans so they’ll be able to use these facilities for the next 20, 30-plus years.”

Seemingly ignorant of the comical doublespeak, the US Army also explained that Ukrainian’s Combat Training Center “is being established at the International Peacekeeping and Security Center near Yavoriv.” Also ironic is that while the Thunderbirds train a military incorporating neo-Nazi units to fight Russians in Ukraine, its pre-1930s insignia was a swastika, which its Oklahoma-based museum describes as “an Ancient American Indian symbol of good luck.”

From the 45th Infantry Division Museum, the unit’s original pre-1930’s swastika patch

CIA covert operations’ goal: “kill Russians”

In addition to the overt but under- or non-reported events outlined above, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has run a covert, eight-year training program. Why the need for covert ops in the face of extensive overt projects? The CIA specializes in assassination, proxy warfare, psychological operations, and false flags. This suggests that their efforts include tactics prohibited by the Geneva Conventions.

Yahoo! News reported that in 2014, under a doctrine called “covert action funding,” “a small, select group of veteran CIA paramilitaries made their first secret trips to the frontlines to meet with Ukrainian counterparts.” The training was conducted by the CIA’s Special Activities Center, which suggests that even if the officers were “ex-CIA” and Special Forces, they were given access to Langley at high-levels, making it a de facto official mission.

One operative is quoted as saying that the officers attempted to Talibanize the Ukrainian paramilitaries in the sense that the Afghan Taliban had no sophisticated hardware that was vulnerable to enemy blinding. Ergo, basic, non-tech warfare training was required. The report says that the trainers:

“taught their Ukrainian counterparts sniper techniques; how to operate U.S.-supplied Javelin anti-tank missiles and other equipment; how to evade digital tracking the Russians used to pinpoint the location of Ukrainian troops, which had left them vulnerable to attacks by artillery; how to use covert communications tools; and how to remain undetected in the war zone while also drawing out Russian and insurgent forces from their positions, among other skills, according to former officials.”

In addition, one former senior source said (paraphrased by the reporter): “The agency needed to determine the ‘backbone’ of the Ukrainians … The question was, ‘Are they going to get rolled, or are going to stand up and fight?”

So who tends to have “backbone,” i.e., a ruthless and psychopathic fighting spirit? Fascists and ultra-nationalists. Indeed, it has been widely reported by even US corporate media that the Ukrainian Armed Forces and paramilitary units were infested with Nazis. Today, the same media refer to the Nazis as mere nationalists.

Beginning 2015, the CIA’s Ground Department arranged for Ukrainians to be trained in the US south. The operations continue to the present and have been expanded under the Biden administration. “The multiweek, U.S.-based CIA program has included training in firearms, camouflage techniques, land navigation, tactics like ‘cover and move,’ intelligence and other areas.” One senior officer is quoted as saying: “The United States is training an insurgency … to kill Russians.”

In February this year, shortly before the Russian invasion, it was reported that the CIA had been “preparing Ukrainians to mount an insurgency against a Russian occupation.” Against an occupation? Or an insurgency to provoke an occupation?

In addition to the CIA, the US military has its own covert operations. Under the Resistance Operating Concept started in 2018, the Pentagon appears to have been training territorial defense units comprised of Ukrainian civilians. This seems to have led to the creation by Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces creating a National Resistance Center that teaches civilians guerrilla tactics.

Ukraine military build-up brings the world to the brink

After Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, pro-Russian eastern protests erupted in Donetsk and Luhansk. The Congressional Research Service (CRS) noted: “The government in Kyiv responded with military force and employed local militias to help push back the separatists.” The CRS added that the US leads Britain, Canada, and Lithuania in the Multinational Joint Commission on Defense Reform and Security Cooperation. The Pentagon’s European Command had a European Reassurance Initiative at the time, which is now called the European Deterrence Initiative. Under this program, dozens of Ukrainians were trained in Huntsville, Alabama, in RQ-11B, hand-launched Raven drone operations. Seventy-two drones were sent to Ukraine in 2016.

A January 2016 UK House of Commons Library research briefing states: “Fighting between Ukrainian government forces and Russian-backed separatists has killed more than 9,000 people since April 2014 and injured more than 20,000.” The briefing goes on to note that after the UN Security Council-backed Minsk II agreement, which called for a ceasefire and the withdrawal of frontline forces on both sides, the Ukrainian parliament granted special status and enhanced autonomy to parts of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions.

The Royal United Services Institute is a UK Ministry of Defense-linked think-tank. One of its reports concedes that Russia had a largely “defensive policy” when it came to Ukraine. It says: “Russian officials have become alarmed by expanding and overlapping Western alliances from an enlarged NATO and EU, to AUKUS and the Coalition of Democracies promoted by both the US and the UK.”

Part of Russia’s strategy has its roots in the US-led destruction of Libya in 2011, the report explains. The NATO bombing of Libya and overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi “underscored how strong Western alliances were able to bypass or manipulate the [UN Security Council] UNSC, essentially circumventing a forum where Russian interests could be protected.”

Indeed, on February 27th, 2022, the UNSC adopted Resolution 2623, which states: “the lack of unanimity of its permanent members at the 8979th meeting has prevented it from exercising its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.”

The absence of international diplomacy, the weakness of a domestic anti-war movement in the US, and the cheerleading for war by many leftists and liberals under the doctrine that Putin is an evil villain has pushed the world as close to terminal nuclear disaster as it has been since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis; perhaps even closer. Many Russians have taken to the streets to clamor for a ceasefire. After looking the other way as their leaders spent the past 8 years weaponizing Ukraine against Russia, Western publics have yet to demand the same.

*

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.

T.J. Coles is a postdoctoral researcher at Plymouth University’s Cognition Institute and the author of several books, the latest being We’ll Tell You What to Think: Wikipedia, Propaganda and the Making of Liberal Consensus.

Featured image: US Maj. John Alan Gavrilov (right) trains commanders of the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion as part of a November 2017 foreign delegation (Source: The Grayzone)

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

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

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

***

Wenn ein Grundsatz der antiken Rechtsprechung, der auch in modernen Rechtsordnungen ein zentrales Verfahrensgrundrecht darstellt, keine Geltung mehr hat, dann outet sich ein demokratisches Staatswesen – von bösen Zungen auch als „stille Diktatur“ bezeichnet – als „offene Diktatur“. Bereits in den vergangenen zwei Jahren galt nur eine, die sogenannte wissenschaftliche und medizinische Meinung über die weltweite Bedrohung durch ein neu geschaffenes, vermeintlich tödliches Virus und deren „Ausrottung“ mittels einer genverändernden Behandlung. Nun kommt die Berichterstattung über einen schrecklichen Krieg im Herzen Europas hinzu. Und wieder wird der Rechts-Grundsatz „Audiatur et altera pars – gehört werde auch der andere Teil“ missachtet: Mündliche und schriftliche Berichte der anderen Seite werden unterbunden oder gar verboten. Wie lange will sich das ein Volk freier Bürger, das bereits fühlt, dass sich in der Gesellschaft dringend etwas ändern muss, noch bieten lassen? Die Bürger wollen wieder in Ruhe leben, arbeiten, schlafen und der Jugend in die Augen schauen zu können.

Gewaltlose Veränderung bestehender Machtverhältnisse scheint unausweichlich

Das Wort „Revolution“ wird niemand in den Mund nehmen, weil damit individuelle und kollektive Gewalt assoziiert wird. Doch eine Veränderung der bestehenden Machtverhältnisse scheint unausweichlich. Und die neu zu gestaltende Gesellschaftsordnung muss von den Bürgern selbst entwickelt werden – in absoluter Freiheit, ohne jeglichen Zwang von außen. Freie Bürger sind durchaus in der Lage, gemeinsam auszuhandeln, wie sie sich das Leben einrichten wollen, um in Frieden, Ruhe und Gleichheit zusammenleben zu können.

Ein bewaffneter Kampf in Form von individuellem Terror oder kollektiver bewaffneter Gewalt kommt nicht in Frage! Davon hat die Welt bereits genug:

Deshalb muss ein „Revolutionsprozess“ gewaltlos sein!

Die Geschichte zeigt jedoch, dass es in den meisten Fällen nicht möglich ist, die Mitbürger direkt für eine humane, friedliche und freiheitliche Gesellschaft in Bewegung zu setzen. Die anerzogene Angst vor den harmlosen Mitmenschen und das Misstrauen gegenüber den Aufklärern ist nur schwer zu überwinden. Wurden bestehende Machtverhältnisse irgendwo umgestürzt, so errichteten die „Rebellen“ meistens Kopien der früheren Herrschaftsformen, nur mit anderen Namen und anderen ideologischen Verbrämungen.

Aufklärung und das Problem der Erziehung

Folglich muss man die Menschen weiterhin aufklären und überzeugen. Der Sinn der aufklärerischen Bemühungen ist die Reinigung des menschlichen Bewusstseins von individuellen und kollektiven Vorurteilen. Darüber hinaus müssen ihnen die anerzogenen Ängste vor harmlosen Mitmenschen und vermeintlichen Autoritäten genommen werden. Die Psychologie mit einer psychologisch geführten „Volksuniversität“ wäre das geeignete Werkzeug, das den Menschen in die Lage versetzt, sich selbst, die politische Situation und die notwendigen gesellschafts- und kulturverändernden Maßnahmen angemessen beurteilen zu können. Dies kann auch zu kollektiven Aktionen des „zivilen Ungehorsams“ und zu Streiks führen.

Wichtiger noch als Aufklärung aber ist das Problem der Erziehung. Die tiefenpsychologische Einsicht machte deutlich, welch ungeheure Tragweite die Erziehung für die Entstehung einer humanen Welt hat. Die Erziehungsmethoden der Vergangenheit schufen den Menschentypus, der die Tragödie der Geschichte verursachen konnte. Das autoritäre Prinzip, jahrhundertelang als fraglos-gültige Grundlage des erzieherischen Verhaltens angesehen, drosselte bereits in den Kindheitsjahren das Gemeinschaftsgefühl der Menschen und stattete sie mit jener Aggressionsbereitschaft aus, durch die eine gewalttätige Welt im Zustande der Gewalttätigkeit verharren konnte.

Wenn die Pädagogik in Elternhaus und Schule auf das autoritäre Prinzip und auf Gewaltanwendung verzichtet, wird sie Menschen heranbilden können, die keine „Untertanen-Mentalität“ besitzt und darum für die Machthaber in unserer Welt kein gefügiges Werkzeug sein wird. Die Demokratisierung der Erziehung und die freundschaftliche und verständnisvolle Zuwendung des Erziehers zu seinem Zögling wird einen der wertvollsten Beiträge zum Aufbau einer humanen Gesellschaftsordnung leisten.

Die gestellte Aufgabe ist schwierig, aber lösbar!

*

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.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

  • Posted in Deutsch
  • Comments Off on Man höre auch die andere Seite („Audiatur et altera pars“). Grundsatz römischen Rechts und moderner Rechtsordnungen gilt nicht mehr

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

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

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

***

Almost 60 years after Kenya’s independence from Britain, the former colonial power is paying white landowners so it can conduct dangerous military exercises in East Africa. But the cost of these payments is shrouded in secrecy.

A Kenyan judge recently ruled that the country’s courts have the authority to hear a compensation claim against the British army. The decision paves the way for nearly 1,500 Kenyans to sue UK troops for starting a huge fire near Mount Kenya last March.

One man was killed while trying to fight the fire on the privately-owned Lolldaiga conservancy. Another person, Murage Gitonga, developed breathing difficulties and has since died.

Britain’s Ministry of Defence (MOD) is trying to claim ‘sovereign immunity’ from this litigation in Kenya.

The court case shines a rare light on places like Lolldaiga, which is one of eight estates the MOD pays a secret and “commercially sensitive” sum of money for its troops to train on.

Many of these ranches were established in colonial times, when European settlers took over some of Kenya’s most fertile land around Laikipia County. This area in north central Kenya became dubbed ‘the White Highlands’.

Pastoralists and other indigenous communities who occupied Laikipia before colonisation, especially the Maasai, were relegated to the driest part of Laikipia or reserves in southern Kenya.

In the 1950s, an uprising by the Kikuyu Land and Freedom Army (“Mau Mau”) was brutally suppressed by British troops. Pastoralists did not recover their land with the end of colonial rule in 1963. Instead, Kenya’s first president encouraged white settlers to remain after independence.

Today, some of the descendants of those settlers, who decided to make Kenya their permanent home, still occupy vast swathes of land and often allow British troops to train there.

Map of ranches available for UK military training (Source: Laikipia County Government Geo-Spatial Lab, January 2022)

Map of ranches available for UK military training (Source: Laikipia County Government Geo-Spatial Lab, January 2022)

Fertile ground

Stretching from Laikipia to Samburu counties, these estates cover a wide range of climatic conditions from arid savannah to upland forest.

During the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the British army found Kenya’s training grounds offered great similarities in climate and terrain.

They are also hubs for wildlife conservation, making them a magnet for western tourists who want to go on safari.

Yet climate change and more frequent droughts are forcing displaced pastoralists to try to graze their animals on these valuable lands.

This inevitably leads to conflicts with ranchers. In May 2000, pastoralists drove their livestock into Lolldaiga farm. That time the government intervened and found a temporary compromise.

But since 2009 such confrontations have become more violent. The proliferation of small arms among both pastoralists and ranchers has added to the insecurity.

Armed rangers are often employed to guard against poachers. Since 1990, British troops have given extensive support to the Kenya Wildlife Service, which has a controversial shoot-kill-policy.

Laikipia’s large estate owners and the British army claim that they contribute to Kenya’s local economy by creating as many as 900 jobs.

They also provide services from education to health care. The Laikipia Wildlife Forum estimated in 2010 that the British military contributed over £17 million a year to the area.

However, the exact amount of UK taxpayer money going to the Laikipia landowners remains totally opaque. Here’s a survey of these eight estates:

1. Lolldaiga

Lolldaiga Hills is a cattle ranch and wildlife conservancy located 20km north west of Mount Kenya.

Official records show 20,000 hectares of the estate were made available for UK military exercises by its previous owner, Robert Wells. His grandfather settled the land during colonialism.

Last March, British soldiers accidentally torched nearly 50 square kilometres of the estate.

A conservancy worker, Linus Murangiri, was crushed to death by a vehicle while trying to put the fire out. He left behind a wife, Karen Gatwiri, and two young boys.

A representative for Robert Wells told Declassified: “The family of Linus Murangiri, including his parents, and his wife and their two children, were paid compensation in August 2021 equivalent to 10 years’ of Mr. Murangiri’s salary.

“This process was overseen by the Laikipia County Government labour office. Further private payments were made in addition.”

Declassified has seen documents confirming that 1.7 million Kenyan shillings was paid to Murangiri’s family in compensation for his death at work. The amount is equivalent to around £11,350.

Following the fire, Wells sold much of Lolldaiga ranch, retaining 3,500 acres for tree planting and habitat restoration. Meanwhile, almost £5 million worth of land and property has been purchased in rural England under his wife’s name.

Declassified understands that a trust – Nature Custodians Kenya – bought the majority of Lolldaiga from the Wells family, after donor funds were raised by The Nature Conservancy, a US-based nonprofit foundation.

In November 2021, Nature Custodians Kenya handed the management of Lolldaiga to Africa Nature Investors, whose directors include Michael Dyer. His grandfather came to Kenya in 1907 during the colonial period and acquired land.

2. Ole Naishu

Ole Naishu is a livestock ranch approximately 30km from Nanyuki where British troops in Kenya are headquartered.

The farm, located in an area of rolling low hills, conducts ecotourism and conservation activities. Some 12,000 hectares at Ole Naishu are available for UK troop training.

The ranch was owned for a long time by Jeremy Block, a white Kenyan coffee magnate. Block bought the ranch in 2000 and called it Ole Naisho, which is a Maasai term for honey. Previously, the property had been owned for a long time by a Dane of British origin.

Staff at Ole Naishu, who asked not to be named, told Declassified the estate was recently purchased by the family of Kenya’s current President, Uhuru Kenyatta.

However, no records indicating a change of ownership are available at the Ministry of Lands and Settlement Offices in Nanyuki.

Like Loldaiga, it is understood Africa Nature Investors are taking over the management of Ole Naishu.

3. Mpala

Mpala ranch is a swath of savanna and woodland habitat in Laikipia, with large numbers of elephants, zebras and hippos.

It was purchased by Sam Small, a British settler, in the 1950s. He bequeathed it to his brother George who in 1989 established a wildlife foundation.

Mpala is also used as a farm for raising cattle, camels, sheep and goats. The British army is permitted to train on 4,000 hectares of the Mpala estate.

Its rugged hills intertwined with valleys with a dense canopy of acacia provide a unique environment for military exercises.

In February 2021, British troops caused a fire on the farm that damaged a 40,000 square metre area of grassland. Mpala staff, who requested anonymity, told Declassified that Britain pays an annual training fee of £1 million pounds.

The UK military also grades all roads in the ranch, constructing houses and a research centre. In addition, British troops support community health outreach programmes and provide medicines for livestock.

Mpala was asked to comment.

4. Suyian

Suyian is a ranch in north west Laikipia County named after a rare breed of African wild dog.

The current owners of Suyian are direct descendants of an English farmer, William Ernest Powys, who moved to Kenya in 1914.

British troops are allowed to train on nearly 2,000 hectares of Suyian’s land twice a year, between March to May and October to November.

The military camps are pitched high in the escarpment while the personnel conduct their military manoeuvres in deep valleys and along the Ewaso Narok river.

When asked how much the UK military pays for this access, Anne Powys from Suyian ranch told Declassified: “I’m afraid we are unable to disclose this kind of information to the public.”

5. Ol Maisor

Ol Maisor is a ranch located in Laikipia County, with space for farming, conservation and tourism.

Various species of wildlife roam the ranch including elephants, zebras and gazelles. There are 12,000 hectares available for British military exercises.

Records show UK troops sparked two fires at Ol Maisor in February and March 2021, damaging 100,000 and 160,000 square metres on each occasion.

The farm is owned and run by Martin Evans, whose family have occupied the land for three generations. Ol Maisor has been hit by local land disputes with intruders killing several staff.

Ol Maisor Farm was asked to comment.

6. Sosian

Sosian is a working beef and dairy ranch in the centre of the Laikipia plateau. It has some of the most luxurious tourist lodges in Kenya and a wide variety of wildlife species.

British troops can train on nearly 5,000 hectares of land at Sosian twice a year. The land was settled by a British general during colonial rule in 1920.

It was later taken over by Tristan Voorspuy, a former UK army officer. Voorspuy was shot dead by pastoralist herders in 2017, as part of the wider conflict over land in Laikipia County.

The ranch is currently managed by Sean Outram, whose “great grandfather was one of the first European men to explore the Masai Mara”.

Sosian was asked to comment.

7. Ol Doinyo Lemboro 

Ol Doinyo Lemboro (ODL) neighbours Mpala, Sosian and Suyian ranches, forming a long circuit for British troops to move around.

There are 7,000 hectares at ODL available for UK military exercises. The terrain is rugged with valleys and dense acacia trees, providing a unique environment.

In March 2021, British soldiers caused a fire that damaged around 40,000 square metres of grassland.

The ranch is managed by Ivan Tomlinson who is of mixed African and British heritage.

8. Chololo

Chololo is a ranch located on the far eastern part of the huge Laikipia plateau. It is one of the four ranches owned by the Jessel family which is of mixed African and European heritage.

Chololo, the most famous of the family’s ranches, is owned by Sammy Jessel. In 2018, Prince William met Jessel on a visit to see British soldiers training in Kenya.

There are 6,000 hectares available for UK military exercises at Chololo, mostly on the lower part of the ranch towards the Ewaso Nyiro river, neighbouring Mpala ranch.

The proximity of the two ranches creates a corridor for soldiers to cross between.

Declassified was not able to contact ODL or Chololo for comment about how much the British army pays to use their land.

*

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 Letai is a land consultant based in Nanyuki, Kenya. He has undertaken research with the University of Sussex and written for The Elephant.

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The “Former Empire” on Which “The Sun Never Sets”: British Army’s Secret Payments to Kenya Colonial-era Farms
  • Tags: ,

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

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

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

***

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has produced another 11,043 pages of Pfizer documents, one of them showing that the company had to hire an additional 2,400 employees to handle the onslaught of adverse reactions caused by its Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “vaccine.”

Page 6 of FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000059 clearly states:

“Due to the large numbers of spontaneous adverse event reports received for the product, the MAH [marketing authorization holder] has prioritized the processing of serious cases, in order to meet expedited regulatory reporting timelines and ensure these reports are available for signal detection and evaluation activity.”

The document goes on to reveal that Pfizer did “multiple actions to help alleviate the large increase of adverse event reports.”

“This includes significant technology enhancements and process and workflow solutions, as well as increasing the number of data entry and case processing colleagues. To date, Pfizer has onboarded approximately 600 additional full-time employees (FTEs). More are joining each month with an expected total of more than 1,800 additional resources by the end of June 2021.”

Remember when Albert Bourla denied these adverse effects and said that people who talk about them are “criminals?”

Company CEO Albert Bourla, meanwhile, has condemned anyone who dares to speak up about these revelations.

Any person who even suggests that Pfizer’s Fauci Flu shot is dangerous should be designated as a “criminal,” Bourla insisted. According to him, saying anything “negative” about the injections constitutes “misinformation” – this being a common sociopathic trait.

The Pfizer document ends with nine full pages of reported adverse events – you know, the ones that Bourla does not want any “criminals” talking about. Many of them are autoimmune-related, which makes sense in the context of vaccination.

Thousands, if not millions, of people were punished for just saying no to these deadly injections. For the “crime” of refusing to have their immune systems damaged, the non-jabbed lost their jobs, were removed from school, and in some cases, became homeless simply for trying to protect themselves.

Many are calling this whole jab situation the greatest conspiracy of our lifetime, and it really looks like it. And the sad part is that it is still not over, as people continue to face the ultimatum of either obeying Big Pharma or sacrificing their freedoms.

“While everyone’s eyes have been on Ukraine, the World Health Organization (WHO) has quietly moved forward with a ‘pandemic treaty,’” warned Strange Sounds. “This law will supersede state law for any countries who sign into it. And Republicans joined with Democrats to pass the national digital vaccine registry.”

This registry, in case you missed hearing about it, will log every American’s vaccination status with the government, that way the authorities will know who to round up for disobedience at some later date.

So, while it might seem like COVID is mostly over at this point, do not be fooled. It is far from over. The plan is to birth a new global infrastructure out of the sham that will eventually force all human beings to either take whatever injections they are told or be punished.

“The Great Reset is in full swing!” Strange Sounds further warned. “Get ready!”

In the comment section, someone wrote that people should be reminded that the government has repeatedly stated that there are too many people on the planet.

“They also believe that you are one of those too many people,” this person added.

Another wrote that the government continues to “serve up ‘goolash’ and everyone thinks it’s just awesome when no one knows the long-term effects,” referring to the injections.

*

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 Vaccines.news

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

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

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

***

Footage posted to Twitter shows what appears to be Ukrainian soldiers calling up the mothers of dead Russian soldiers killed in action and mocking them over their loss.

Yes, really.

“Pro-Ukraine accounts on Twitter translated the videos and celebrated the heinous acts with glee,” writes Chris Menahan.

A translation of the exchange reveals that the soldier tells the mother “this fucking moron is no more,” informing her that all that was left of him was “his ass and a leg.”

The Ukrainian appeared to be using the phone that belonged to the dead Russian to call his mother.

An alleged neo-nazi Azov Battalion member named Ivan Zaliznyak uploaded the video and five others to his Telegram channel.

The clips hardly do much to bolster the narrative, relentlessly amplified by the legacy media, that the Ukrainians are the ‘good guys’.

Over the weekend, horrific footage emerged of Ukrainian fighters committing literal war crimes by shooting captured Russian soldiers in the knees and watching them die in agony.

However, that doesn’t seem to have deterred the ‘Ukrainian flag in my Twitter bio’ crowd, who seem more hopped up on signaling their virtue than ever before.

*

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 above

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

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

First published on December 28, 2021

“The PCR is a Process. It does not tell you that you are sick”. Dr. Kary Mullis, Nobel Laureate and Inventor of the RT-PCR, passed away in August 2019.

This misuse of the RT-PCR technique is applied as a relentless and intentional strategy by some governments to justify excessive measures such as the violation of a large number of constitutional rights, … under the pretext of a pandemic based on a number of positive RT-PCR tests, and not on a real number of patients.Dr. Pascal Sacré, Belgian physician specialized in critical care and renowned public health analyst.

***

Summary

The PCR Smoking Gun? The CDC acknowledges (with innuendos) that the PCR test does not effectively differentiate between Covid-19 and Seasonal Influenza. 

Amply documented and analyzed by numerous scientists, the RT-PCR test does not detect or identify SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.

While the CDC does not officially acknowledge that the RT-PCR test is invalid, it nonetheless calls for it to be withdrawn. 

It is worth noting that almost a year ago, in January 2021, the WHO also questioned the validity of the PCR test which it had itself put forth at the very outset of the covid crisis.

If the PCR test is invalid as intimated both by the CDC and the WHO, the 260 Million so-called “Confirmed Covid-19 Cases” collected and tabulated Worldwide since the outset of the alleged pandemic are meaningless.

There is no Pandemic. 

***

Will the RT-PCR Test in the US will be Declared Invalid?

In a bombshell decision, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have withdrawn the insidious PCR test as a valid method for detecting and identifying SARS-CoV-2. 

“After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only.”

In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test.

CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season. Laboratories and testing sites should validate and verify their selected assay within their facility before beginning clinical testing. (emphasis added)

It has taken them almost two years to recognize that the PCR test is flawed and invalid.

Read carefully, what this CDC directive tacitly admits is that the PCR test does not effectively differentiate between “SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses”. We have known this from the outset.

This advisory by the CDC issued in July 2021 is to be enforced in the course of the next couple of weeks leading up to the January 1st, 2022 deadline.

Will it be carried out?? Visibly there is no transition towards “another authorized Covid-19 test”.

 .

The Covid-19 Omicron Christmas Lockdown

WHY has the CDC waited until December 31, 2021 to enforce the suspension of the invalid and flawed PCR test?  

Seasonal influenza which starts in October has contributed to driving up the number of so-called “Confirmed Covid-19 Cases”.

And in recent developments, these PCR positive cases are routinely being categorized as  “Confirmed Covid-19 Omicron Variant Cases”. It’s also a period of the year when people catch a common cold (e.g. triggered by a corona virus) which often results in a PCR positive.

This upward movement of PCR positive cases is now being used by corrupt politicians to sustain the Omicron fear campaign as well as impose the “The Covid-19 Christmas and New Year Lockdown”. 

Millions of people Worldwide are lining up to be tested as well as vaccinated to “protect themselves” against SARS-CoV-2 (which cannot under any circumstances be identified by the PCR test).

The evidence is overwhelming: It’s a killer vaccine

 

What this means is a Mea Culpa: A tacit recognition by the CDC and the FDA that the entire data base generated by the PCR test is invalid.

Almost a year ago, in January 2021, the WHO questioned the validity of the PCR test which it had itself put forth as a means to detecting and identifying SARS-CoV-2 at the outset of the alleged pandemic in early 2020.


See:

The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky


The Data Base of the Alleged Covid-19 Pandemic

Several billion people in more than 190 countries have been tested (as well as retested) for Covid-19 using the PCR test which is flawed and invalid.

We are talking about approximately 260 million alleged “Confirmed Covid-19 Cases” (PCR positives) Worldwide.  

The pandemic is said to have resulted in more than 5 million Covid-19 related deaths.

These are nonsensical and meaningless numbers. It’s a Big Lie. 

And this data base is being used to justify the imposition of the Covid-19 mRNA “killer vaccine”, not to mention the “vaccine passport”. 

.

Bear in mind, in recent developments, the PCR test is being routinely used to allegedly “identify” the variants including Delta and Omicron, which is an impossibility as well as a lie.

Scientific nonsense. PCR positive cases (which according to the CDC could be the result of seasonal influenza) are now being routinely assigned to the Omicron Variant:

“The decision by the government to reimplement the need for a PCR test from all individuals arriving in the UK from abroad on day two, with self-isolation until a negative [PCR] test is reported, while frustrating for those travelling, is essential in order to rapidly identify cases of infection with the Omicron variant and implement prompt isolation and targeted contact tracing to limit the spread of the variant in the UK. (emphasis added, Guardian, November 27, 2021)

Health officials in New South Wales, Australia, have begun urgent testing after two people who arrived on a flight from southern Africa overnight tested positive to the coronavirus, [PCR test] (Reuters 27 November, 2021, emphasis added).

The RT-PCR Test is Flawed and Invalid: the Covid Christmas and New Year Mandates Do Not have a Leg to Stand On

  • The CDC Intimates that the PCR Test is Invalid. 
  • Does not differentiate between Covid-19 and Seasonal Influenza. 
  • Does not detect or identify SARS-CoV-2 and its variants.

If the PCR test is invalid as confirmed by the “Horse’s Mouth” (aka the CDC), the 260 Million so-called “Confirmed Covid-19 Cases” collected and tabulated Worldwide since the outset of the alleged pandemic are meaningless.

The official “covid-19 consensus” collapses like a house of cards.

There is no Pandemic. 

And what the ongoing PCR Covid-19 testing does is to drive up the numbers and spearhead the fear campaign with a view to justifying the killer vaccine and the Christmas Lockdown.

Crimes against Humanity

Video: Imagine All the People: The Covid-19 Omicron Christmas and New Year Lockdown

Add a comment. Spread the Word. Link to Bitchute 

***

For further details see:

***

Video:

on the Killer Vaccine, see Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi’s Analysis

Video

click the lower right corner to access full-screen .

Video: An Overview of the Covid-19 Crisis

.

 

About the Author

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

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

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

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

See Michel Chossudovsky, Biographical Note

Michel Chossudovsky’s Articles on Global Research

  • Posted in English, Mobile, NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Bombshell: CDC No Longer Recognizes the PCR Test As a Valid Method for Detecting “Confirmed Covid-19 Cases”?

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

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

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

***

In the spirit of apparent “reconciliation and multilateralism” defining the Biden administration’s approach to conducting international diplomacy, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken handed over the “power of attorney” to the Ukrainian president to offer Russia relief from international sanctions in exchange for ending its military offensive in Ukraine.

On Sunday, April 3, confirming in an NBC News interview that Zelensky—one of the most ambitious emerging new leaders in Central Europe, not to be mistaken for an imperialist stooge—had the ability to negotiate sanctions relief for peace, Blinken, while assuming the air of magnanimity and rapprochement, revealed that President Joe Biden’s administration would support whatever the Ukrainian people wanted to do to bring the war to an end.

“We’ll be looking to see what Ukraine is doing and what it wants to do,” Blinken said. “And if it concludes that it can bring this war to an end, stop the death and destruction and continue to assert its independence and its sovereignty – and ultimately that requires the lifting of sanctions – of course, we will allow that.”

Blinken argued with overtones of diplomatic sophistry that although Putin had allegedly “failed to accomplish his objectives” in Ukraine – “subjugating Kyiv, demonstrating Russia’s military prowess and dividing NATO members” – he said it still made sense to pursue a negotiated settlement.

“Even though he’s been set back, even though I believe this is already a strategic defeat for Vladimir Putin, the death and destruction that he’s wreaking every single day in Ukraine … are terrible, and so there’s also a strong interest in bringing those to an end.”

Lending credence to ostensible “American neutrality” and “hands-off approach” to the Ukraine crisis, the Wall Street Journal—the official voice of establishment Republicans, owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch, that has taken the lead in publishing insider scoops during the tenure of the Biden administration while the Democratic shills, the New York Times and Washington Post, have taken a backseat out of deference for self-styled “progressives” in the White House—published a misleading report on April Fools’ Day that German chancellor Olaf Scholz had offered Volodymyr Zelensky a chance for peace days before the launch of the Russian military offensive, but the Ukrainian president turned it down.

The newly elected chancellor told Zelensky in Munich on February 19

“that Ukraine should renounce its NATO aspirations and declare neutrality as part of a wider European security deal between the West and Russia,” the Journal revealed. The newspaper also claimed that “the pact would be signed by Mr. Putin and Mr. Biden, who would jointly guarantee Ukraine’s security.”

However, Zelensky rejected the offer to make the concession and avoid confrontation, saying that “Russian President Vladimir Putin couldn’t be trusted to uphold such an agreement and that most Ukrainians wanted to join NATO.”

Following the announcement of partial drawdown of Russian forces in Ukraine, specifically scaling back Russian offensive north of the capital, by the Russian delegation at the Istanbul peace initiative on March 29, the Ukrainian delegation, among other provisions, demanded “security guarantees in terms similar to Article 5,” the collective defense clause of the transatlantic NATO military alliance.

CNN reported on April Fools’ Day that Western officials were taken aback by “the surprising Ukrainian proposal.”

“We are in constant discussion with Ukrainians about ways that we can help ensure that they are sovereign and secure,” White House communications director Kate Bedingfield said. “But there is nothing specific about security guarantees that I can speak to at this time.”

“Ukraine is not a NATO member,” Deputy Prime Minister Dominic Raab told the BBC when asked whether the UK is prepared to become a guarantor of Ukrainian independence. “We’re not going to engage Russia in direct military confrontation,” he added.

While noting that Russian peace negotiations were “nothing more than a smokescreen,” Western diplomats contended that an Article 5-type commitment to Ukraine was unlikely given that the US and many of its allies, including the UK, were not willing to put their troops in direct confrontation with Russian forces. The theory that Russia would not attack Ukraine if it had Western security guarantees appears to still be a bigger risk than the US and its allies are willing to take.

As a way for Russia to “save face in the negotiations,” the Ukrainians even went to the extent of suggesting that any such security guarantees would not apply to the separatist territories in the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine. However, a number of US and Western officials have taken a skeptical approach to potential security guarantees, with many saying it is still premature to discuss any contingencies as the negotiations proceed.

Contradicting the misleading reports hailing Ukraine’s imperialist stooges as purported “masters of their own destinies,” President Joe Biden told the EU leaders at a summit last month in Brussels that “any notion that we are going to be out of this in a month is wrong”, and that the EU needed to prepare for a long-term pressure campaign against Russia.

US and European officials voiced skepticism over Russia’s “sincerity and commitment” towards the peace talks, underlining that only a full ceasefire, troop withdrawal and return of captured territory to Ukraine would be enough to trigger discussions over lifting sanctions on Russia’s economy.

“The notion that you would reward Putin for occupying territory doesn’t make sense … it would be very, very difficult to countenance” a senior EU official confided to the Financial Times. “There’s a disconnect between these negotiations, what really happens on the ground, and the total cynicism of Russia. I think we need to give them a reality check,” the official added.

Western countries were discussing both “enforcement of existing sanctions” and drawing up “potential additional measures” to increase pressure on Russian president Vladimir Putin, senior EU and US officials told the British newspaper. They were not discussing a possible timeframe for easing sanctions, they said.

Advising Ukrainians to hold out instead of rushing for securing peace deal with Russia, the Sunday Times reported, senior British officials were urging Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to instruct his negotiators to refuse to make concessions during peace negotiations with Russian counterparts.

A senior government source said there were concerns that allies were “over-eager” to secure an early peace deal, adding that a settlement should be reached only when Ukraine is in the strongest possible position.

In a phone call, Boris Johnson warned President Zelensky that President Putin was a “liar and a bully” who would use talks to “wear you down and force you to make concessions.” The British prime minister also told MPs it was “certainly inconceivable that any sanctions could be taken off simply because there is a ceasefire.” London was making sure there was “no backsliding on sanctions by any of our friends and partners around the world,” he added.

Speaking to CNN’s Dana Bash on Sunday, April 3, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that

“NATO allies have supported Ukraine for many, many years,” adding that military aid has been “stepped up over the last weeks since the invasion.” The official clarified that “NATO allies like the United States, but also the United Kingdom and Canada and some others, have trained Ukrainian troops for years.”

According to Stoltenberg’s estimates, “tens of thousands of Ukrainian troops” had received such training, and were now “at the front fighting against invading Russian forces.” The secretary general went on to credit the Brussels-based alliance with the fact that the “Ukrainian armed forces are much bigger, much better equipped, much better trained and much better led now than ever before.”

In addition to a longstanding CIA program aimed at cultivating an anti-Russian insurgency in Ukraine, Canada’s Department of National Defense revealed on January 26, two days following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, that the Canadian Armed Forces had trained “nearly 33,000 Ukrainian military and security personnel in a range of tactical and advanced military skills.” While The United Kingdom, via Operation Orbital, had trained 22,000 Ukrainian fighters, as noted by NATO’s informed secretary general.

A “prophetic” RAND Corporation report titled “Overextending and Unbalancing Russia” published in 2019 declares the stated goal of American policymakers is “to undermine Russia just as the US subversively destabilized the former Soviet Union during the Cold War,” and predicts to the letter the crisis unfolding in Ukraine. RAND Corporation is a quasi-US governmental think tank that receives three-quarters of its funding from the US military.

While designating Russia as an “intractable adversary,” the report notes that “Russia has deep seated anxieties” about Western interference and potential military attack. These anxieties are deemed to be “a vulnerability to exploit.”

The RAND report lists several “provocative measures” to insidiously “destabilize and undermine” Russia. Some of the steps include: repositioning bombers within easy striking range of key Russian strategic targets; deploying additional tactical nuclear weapons to locations in Europe and Asia; increasing US and allied naval force posture and presence in Russia’s operating areas (Black Sea); holding NATO war exercises on Russia’s borders; and withdrawing from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty.

Almost all the provocative actions recommended in the RAND report have practically been implemented by the successive Obama, Trump and Biden administrations since the 2014 Maidan coup, toppling Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and consequent annexation of the Crimean Peninsula by Russia.

The full RAND report says: “While NATO’s requirement for unanimity makes it unlikely that Ukraine could gain membership in the foreseeable future, Washington’s pushing this possibility could boost Ukrainian resolve while leading Russia to redouble its efforts to forestall such a development.”

In November 2021, the US and Ukraine signed a Charter on Strategic Partnership. The agreement confirmed “Ukraine’s aspirations for joining NATO” and “rejected the Crimean decision to re-unify with Russia” following the 2014 Maidan coup.

In December 2021, Russia proposed a peace treaty with the US and NATO. The central Russian proposal was a written agreement assuring that Ukraine would not join the NATO military alliance. When the proposed treaty was contemptuously rebuffed by Washington, it appeared the die was cast.

The Intercept reported on March 11 that despite staging a massive military buildup along Russia’s border with Ukraine for nearly a year, “Russian President Vladimir Putin did not make a final decision to invade until just before he launched the attack on February 24,” senior current and former US intelligence officials told the Intercept. “It wasn’t until February that the agency and the rest of the US intelligence community became convinced that Putin would invade,” the senior official added.

Last April, US intelligence first detected that “the Russian military was beginning to move large numbers of troops and equipment to the Ukrainian border.” Most of the Russian soldiers deployed to the border at that time were later “moved back to their bases,” but US intelligence determined that “some of the troops and materiel remained near the border.”

In June 2021, against the backdrop of rising tensions over Ukraine, Biden and Putin met at a summit in Geneva. The summer troop withdrawal brought a brief period of calm, but “the crisis began to build again in October and November,” when US intelligence watched as Russia once again “moved large numbers of troops back to its border with Ukraine.”

Extending the hand of friendship, Russia significantly drawdown its forces along the western border before the summit last June. Instead of returning the favor, however, the conceited leadership of supposedly world’s sole surviving super power turned down the hand of friendship and haughtily refused to concede reasonable security guarantees demanded by Russia at the summit that would certainly have averted the likelihood of the war.

Considering this backdrop of the Russo-Ukraine War deliberately orchestrated by NATO powers to insidiously destabilize and internationally isolate Russia, it stretches credulity that the Ukrainian president “wields veto power” over NATO’s decision offering Russia relief from international sanctions in exchange for ending its military offensive in Ukraine, as contended by the charismatic albeit devious secretary of state.

Are readers gullible enough to assume the Ukrainian proposals for a peace treaty with Russia were put forth without prior consultation with NATO patrons and the latter cannot exercise enough leverage to compellingly persuade the impervious Ukrainian leadership to reach a negotiated settlement with Russia, particularly after the Russian peacemaker has unilaterally offered a major concession to Kyiv, focusing on liberating Russian-majority Donbas region in east Ukraine and scaling back Russian offensive in the rest of the embattled country?

*

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.

Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based geopolitical and national security analyst focused on geo-strategic affairs and hybrid warfare in the Af-Pak and Middle East regions. His domains of expertise include neocolonialism, military-industrial complex and petro-imperialism. He is a regular contributor of diligently researched investigative reports to Global Research.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

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

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

***

First published on March 31, 2022

Do the Ukraine war and the action of the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom spell the end of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency? Even if the peace talks between Russia and Ukraine reach a 15-point plan, as the Financial Times has reported, there will be fallout for the dollar. For the first time, Russia, a major nuclear power and economy, was treated as a vassal state, with the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom seizing its $300 billion foreign exchange reserves. Where does this leave other countries that hold their foreign exchange reserves mainly in dollars—or the Euro?

The threat to dollar hegemony is only one part of the fallout. Complex supply chains built on the premise of a stable trading regime under WTO principles are also threatening to unravel. The United States is discovering that Russia is not simply a petrostate as they had thought but supplies many of the critical materials its industry and military need. This is apart from Russia being a major supplier of wheat and fertilisers.

Seizing Russia’s funds means that faith in the United States as the world’s banker and the dollar as the global reserve currency are in question. Why should countries maintain a trade surplus and bank it abroad if it can get seized at will? The promise of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency was that all surpluses in dollars were safe. With the seizure of the Afghan central bank’s 9.5 billion dollars, the United States has shown that it considers dollars held by another country with the US central bank fair game. It may be an economic asset in the books of a country. But it is effectively a political liability, as the United States government can seize this asset at will. The United States showed this earlier with Iraq, Libya and Venezuela. The seizure of Russia’s foreign exchange reserves by a handful of western countriesex-colonial and settler-colonial states—means that the so-called rules-based order is now based on weaponising the dollar and the west’s control over the global financial system.

Economists Prabhat Patnaik and Michael Hudson and financial experts such as Zoltan Pozsar of Credit Suisse are now predicting a new regime in which the Chinese Yuan or its variant will emerge as the world’s new reserve currency. Why? After World War II, the Bretton Woods agreement led to the dollar becoming the world’s reserve currency. It replaced the British pound and was pegged $35 to an ounce of gold. In 1971, President Nixon removed the US dollar from the gold standard, which meant the dollar was now only backed by the United States government (Treasury) guarantees.

The dollar as reserve currency had three things going for it in post-war years. It was backed by the United States, the largest industrial producer and pre-eminent military power, even if challenged by the Soviet Union. And it was backed by West Asian oil, the largest traded commodity, priced in dollars.

The denomination of West Asian oil, particularly Saudi Arabian oil, was critical to the United States and determined by its military power. Once we understand the importance of oil for the United States, we can also understand the coup in Iran against Mohammad Mosaddegh, the 1953 coup in Iraq, and many other political events there, far more easily. Oil was the basis of the Carter doctrine, extending the Monroe doctrine equivalent to the Persian Gulf region. As cartoonists wrote, “Our oil is under their sand.” The United States’ control over West Asian oil combined with its industrial and military power ensured that the dollar remained the world’s reserve currency.

The fall of the United States as the world’s industrial power has gone hand in hand with the rise of China. A measure of China’s industrial rise can be seen from a simple statistic from the Lowy Institute based on IMF global trade data. In 2001, over 80% of countries had the United States as their major trading partner. By 2018, that figure dropped to just over 30%—128 out of 190—who had China as their major trading partner, not the United States. This dramatic change happened in less than 20 years! The reason for this change is industrial production: China overtook the United States in 2010 to become the largest industrial producer in the world. India is the fifth-largest but produces only 3.1% against 28.7% of world industrial production in China and 16.8% in the United States. It is not surprising that trade follows industrial production.

Two recent events are important in this context. China and the Eurasian Economic Union comprising Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and Armenia seem to be moving towards a new international and monetary system. India and Russia also seem to be working out a rupee-rouble exchange based on India’s need to import Russian arms, fertiliser, and oil. India had already created a similar system earlier for buying Iranian oil. This newly emerging system might also give a fillip to India’s exports to Russia. Two, Saudi Arabia has recently indicated it might designate its oil sales to China in the yuan and not the dollar. After 1974, this would be the first time Saudi Arabia would sell any oil in a currency other than the dollar. It means an immediate fillip to the yuan, as 25% of Saudi Arabia’s oil is sold to China.

The United States dominates the services, intellectual property (IP) and information technology (IT) markets. But markets for physical goods, unlike services, IP and IT, are based on a complex network of suppliers and, therefore, complex global supply chains. If the western economic war means taking out Russia’s supplies from the global market, many supply chains are in danger of unravelling. I have written about the energy war and how the European Union depends on gas piped from Russia to Europe. Many other commodities are critical for those sanctioning Russia—and those who may find it difficult to trade with Russia due to the west’s sanctions.

Strangely enough, one key element in the supply chain for manufacturing chips depends on Russia. It is a major supplier of sapphire substrates (using artificial sapphires) that go into chips. The other critical item is neon gas supplies to chip makers, whose major suppliers are in southern Ukraine. Two suppliers, one in Mariupol and one in Odessa, produce about 50% of the global neon supply and 75% of Ukraine’s supplies to the world’s chipmakers.

I earlier highlighted the danger to the European Union’s climate change plans and its shift to gas as a bridge fuel. Using batteries as the key storage element in the renewable energy route also has a substantial Russian weakness. Nickel is critical for electric batteries, and Russia is the third-largest supplier of nickel in the world. With the United States and European Union imposing sanctions, it may lead to China, already emerging as the world’s largest battery supplier, creating an even more dominant position.

The other issue that could create supply chain bottlenecks worldwide relates to palladium, platinum, titanium, and rare earth elements, which advanced industries require. These materials are on the list of fifty strategic minerals the United States needs. If we remember how the supply chains seized up during Covid-19, the coming crisis could be a lot worse. Sanctions are easy to impose, much harder to lift. And even after they are gone, supply chains will not come together seamlessly to how they were before. Remember, these supply chains have been incrementally configured over decades. Undoing them using the wrecking ball of sanctions is easy; redoing them is far more challenging.

Food supplies to the world will be hit even harder. Russia, Ukraine and Belarus produce significant quantities of fertilisers that farmers everywhere need. Russia and Ukraine are among the biggest exporters of wheat. If Russian wheat is sanctioned and Ukraine’s harvest is hit due to war, the world will not find it easy to thwart a severe food shortage.

There is no question the world is on a cusp. It will either lead to the complete destruction of the Russian economy, even if Russia achieves a quick peace in Ukraine and there is no NATO-Russia War. Or it will reconfigure a new economic order, which has been in the offing—a world order where cooperative solutions are found instead of undertaking military and economic wars for resolution.

*

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 Silent Crow News

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

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

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

***

On April 3, the Ukrainian propaganda machine attempted another attack against Moscow. A few videos showing dozens of civilians who were allegedly killed by the Russian servicemen were widely spread by all the Ukrainian MSM.

The main thesis of the Ukrainian and Western media is that the Russian military left Bucha, causing huge civilian casualties. One of the main pieces of evidence was a video of the AFU driving along the city. Corpses of civilians were shown laying along the road.

The slightest analysis of the footage rose a lot of suspicions on its credibility. You can read more information HERE.

COMPARE THE TWO VIDEOS

Today, there are more interesting videos from Bucha shared by the Ukrainian military which may help to shed light on what did really happen in the town left by the Russian troops on March 30.

On April 2, a day before Ukrainian “journalists” came to Bucha to stage the horrific scenes on the streets, the National Police of Ukraine published a video of the mop up operation in Bucha.

New Evidences Shed Light On Alleged Massacre In Bucha, Kiev Region (Video, Photo)

The footage confirmed that:

  • there were no corpses laying on the streets. Not a single civilian confirmed that any mass shootings in the city.
  • Ukrainian demining teams who entered the town right after the Russian withdrawal had no work to do. They are seen walking on the streets along with civilians. Not a single mine left by the Russians was shown on the video.
  • Servicemen of the National Guard asked some of civilians if they need help, no of them replied asking for any immediate assistance, confirming that they are fine.

Only one man is seen killed in his car. It is not clear how did his death happen. Another victim was obviously a servicemen of one of the warring sides killed in clashes, whose corps is laying near a destroyed military equipment.

One of Ukrainian “patriots” made a comment on behaviour of the “Russian invaders”. After his own compatriots told Russian servicemen about his acute social awareness, Russian military checked his apartment but found only flags and a bunch of Ukrainian symbols. To add some drama to his case, the man claimed that the Russian soldier took him out “to kill him”, but suddenly changed his mind and brought the man to the military commander. The brave patriot only had a short peaceful conversation with Russian servicemen, with no tortures.

New Evidences Shed Light On Alleged Massacre In Bucha, Kiev Region (Video, Photo)

This video of the National Police of Ukraine, shot presumably on April 1 or earlier, does not really correspond to what the Ukrainian media published on April 3, trumpeting to the whole world that the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation allegedly carried out a “mass massacre” of civilians.

As more photos are shared from the spot, more proves that the scene was staged appear.

New Evidences Shed Light On Alleged Massacre In Bucha, Kiev Region (Video, Photo)

As the main video proof from Bucha raised a lot of suspicions and was quickly disclaimed, it was accompanied by more fake photos allegedly made in the town.

Unfortunately, these attempts are even less effective and are evident lies. For example, notorious Advisor to the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Arestovich published the photo of a woman tortured in Mariupol last week by Ukrainian Azov militants, claiming that she was a victim tortured by the Russians.

The photo was later deleted but was widely spread by the Ukrainian MSM, who even did not come together if it was in Gostomel or in Bucha. The Ukrainian media are trying their best to gain as much hype as possible, lying on any matter.

New Evidences Shed Light On Alleged Massacre In Bucha, Kiev Region (Video, Photo)

New Evidences Shed Light On Alleged Massacre In Bucha, Kiev Region (Video, Photo)

New Evidences Shed Light On Alleged Massacre In Bucha, Kiev Region (Video, Photo)

New Evidences Shed Light On Alleged Massacre In Bucha, Kiev Region (Video, Photo)

Photos of alleged Russian soldiers who staged the “genocide in Bucha” was spread in Ukrainian telegram channels.

New Evidences Shed Light On Alleged Massacre In Bucha, Kiev Region (Video, Photo)

In fact, Ukrainian media used a random photo of Yakut conscript soldiers, which was found in social networks.

These soldiers were demobilized a year ago. Now they were advised to hide their army photos so as not to be exposed in Ukrainian fakes.

Some of the victims in Bucha are people who were killed by the so-called Ukrainian territorial defense. This is confirmed by the Ukrainians themselves. The rest of the victims were killed in the shelling conducted by the AFU after the departure of Russian troops — this is indicated by a large number of craters from artillery strikes on the video.

On April 3, the Russian Defense Ministry confirmed that Kiev’s information about the mass killings in the Ukrainian Butcha was not true, and the footage was staged.

The Russian Defense Ministry stated that all the facts irrefutably confirm that the photos and video frames from Bucha are another staging of the Kiev regime for the Western media, as it was a case in Mariupol with the maternity hospital, as well as in other cities.

It was added that:

  • All units of the Russian troops completely withdrew from Bucha on March 30, and these shots appeared on the 4th day after that, when SBU officers and representatives of Ukrainian TV arrived there;
  • During the stay of Russian soldiers in Bucha, not a single civilian was injured;
  • 452 tons of humanitarian aid were delivered and issued to civilians by Russian servicemen in the settlements of the Kiev region.

On April 4, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov claimed that Russia sees a direct threat to international security in such provocations as in the Butchs. In turn, spokesperson of the Russian President Peskov claimed that Russia categorically rejects any accusations of involvement in the deaths of people in the Ukrainian Butcha, the topic should be discussed at the international level.

Peskov added that the videos distributed by Ukraine cannot be trusted, experts of the Russian Ministry of Defense have revealed signs of video forgery and fakes, facts and time lane also undermine the reliability of the statements of the Ukrainian side.

“We would demand that international leaders not rush into sweeping accusations and listen to Russia’s arguments.” -Peskov said.

In turn, the European Union has already claimed that its readiness to tighten sanctions against Russia and strengthen Kiev’s support in defense issues, according to German Foreign Minister Anna Lena Berbock on Twitter. European officials attribute this decision to the reports of the Ukrainian authorities about the events in Bucha. London followed their example.

Surprisingly, on April 4, London has not agreed to hold a meeting of the UN Security Council on the events in Bucha in Ukraine. This was stated by the official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry Maria Zakharova in Telegram.

*

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.

SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT:

PayPal: [email protected], http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront

Big Pharma Advertising Dollars Are at an All-Time High

April 6th, 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 InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

The drug industry influences and manipulates media through advertising dollars. In 2021, drug companies spent an aggregate $6.88 BILLION on direct-to-consumer advertising (DCTA), up slightly from $6.86 billion in 2020

The U.S. and New Zealand are the only two countries that permit DCTA, making media in these countries more likely to have pro-pharma bias

The Will Smith-Chris Rock drama during the Oscars may have been nothing more than a subliminal publicity stunt for Pfizer’s upcoming alopecia drug

Over the past year, the U.S. government spent $1 billion of U.S. taxpayers’ money to advertise the COVID jab, which is the most dangerous and least proven drug ever marketed, while simultaneously calling for the censorship of anyone who dared to address the risks of this novel treatment

By law, drug ads must not be false or misleading, must present a “fair balance” of information describing both the risks and benefits of a drug, must include facts that are “material” to the product’s advertised uses, and must include a “brief summary” that mentions every risk described in the product’s labeling. Few if any ads for the COVID jab have fulfilled these requirements

*

How do you control major media? The short answer — illustrated in the video above — is: through advertising dollars. Big Pharma advertising dominates, making up a large portion of a given media outlet’s revenue, and that funding gives Pharma the power to dictate what ends up in the news and what doesn’t.

While Big Pharma has frequently spent more on advertising than on research and development, over the past couple of years, ad spending has increased to new heights.1

In 2021, drug companies spent an aggregate $6.88 BILLION on direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA), up slightly from $6.86 billion in 2020.2 And, remember, DTCA is only permitted in two countries in the world, the U.S. and New Zealand, so media tend to be particularly biased in favor of Big Pharma those two countries.

Did Will Smith Smack Chris Rock on Behalf of Sponsors?

Pfizer, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Incyte and Exact Sciences even sponsored the 2022 Academy Awards, which was “an unusual turn for the industry,” according to some biopharma professionals.3 Chances are you heard about how Will Smith smacked Chris Rock across the face. Smith supposedly took offense over a comment about his wife’s lack of hair.

Jada Pinkett Smith has alopecia areata, which is believed to be an autoimmune disorder. Isn’t it amazing, then, that Pfizer, a primary sponsor of this year’s Oscars,4 is working on an alopecia drug? They announced “top-line results” from a Phase 2b/3 trial in August 2021.5

It’s especially curious since three of the other sponsors — Eli Lilly, Incyte (partnering with Lilly) and Novartis — also have alopecia drugs nearly ready to go.6,7,8 Coincidence? Or a cleverly disguised publicity stunt for soon-to-be-released drugs? If the latter, it would put a whole new spin on the concept of subliminal advertising.

Taxpayer Money Used to Advertise Most Dangerous Drug Ever

Even more egregiously, over the past year, the U.S. government used your tax dollars to advertise the COVID jab, which is the most dangerous and least proven drug ever marketed in the history of the world. How do we know this? Well, there’s:

  • An unprecedented number of adverse reports after the COVID jab filed with the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS)
  • Insurance companies are reporting unprecedented death rates. For example, OneAmerica reported the death rate among working-age Americans in the third quarter of 2021 was 40% higher than prepandemic levels;9 the Hartford Insurance Company found mortality in 2021 was 32% higher than 2019 and 20% higher than 2020, and Lincoln National reports that claims were 54% higher in the fourth quarter of 2021 compared to 2019 (compare that to an average year-over-year increase of 13.7%)10
  • Funeral homes are reporting an increase in burials and cremations in 2021 compared to 2020, when the pandemic was at its peak11
  • In Germany, a large health insurance company found the death rate after the rollout of the COVID jabs was 14 times higher than what was being reported by the German government,12,13and according to a British government report, 9 out of 10 COVID deaths have occurred in people who were fully vaccinated14,15

So, the U.S. government purchased favorable media coverage for a novel and poorly tested gene transfer injection that is now killing and disabling hundreds of thousands of Americans, while simultaneously calling for the censorship of anyone who dared to address the risks of this novel treatment.

As reported by The Blaze:16

“In response to a FOIA request filed by TheBlaze, HHS [Health and Human Services] revealed that it purchased advertising from major news networks including:

ABC, CBS, and NBC, as well as cable TV news stations Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC, legacy media publications including the New York Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post, digital media companies like BuzzFeed News and Newsmax, and hundreds of local newspapers and TV stations.

These outlets were collectively responsible for publishing countless articles and video segments regarding the vaccine that were nearly uniformly positive about the vaccine in terms of both its efficacy and safety …

The Biden administration purchased ads on TV, radio, in print, and on social media to build vaccine confidence, timing this effort with the increasing availability of the vaccines … Though virtually all of these newsrooms produced stories covering the COVID-19 vaccines, the taxpayer dollars flowing to their companies were not disclosed to audiences …”

In all, the U.S. government spent $1 BILLION of U.S. taxpayers’ dollars to “strengthen vaccine confidence in the United States” and “combat misinformation about vaccines,” all with “the goal of increasing rates of vaccination across all ages.” Government also collaborated with celebrities, social media influencers and “expert” interviewees such as Dr. Anthony Fauci. As noted by The Daily Exposé:17

“In other words, Fauci, the man who has been the ‘face’ of COVID-19 in 2020 and 2021, who publicly disparaged anyone who questioned the data he was using to support his recommendations, and who blithely referred to himself as ‘the science,’ was, in fact, a shill.”

The Level of Manipulation of Information Is Immense

While newsrooms claim to be completely independent from the advertising department, history and the personal experience of insiders tells us this simply isn’t true.

Take Sharyl Attkisson, for example, a five-time Emmy Award-winning network anchor, producer and reporter whose television career spans more than three decades. In 2009, she blew the lid off the swine flu media hype, showing the hysteria was manufactured and completely unfounded.

In 2014, she wrote “Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington.” It’s a tell-all exposé on what really goes on behind the media curtain, and it’s not pretty. The extent to which information is manipulated is far greater than most people suspect, and this is particularly true when it comes to COVID.

Years before the pandemic, Attkisson explained how false “consensus” was being created: Let’s say you hear about a new drug for an ailment you have, and you decide to do your own due diligence. Ultimately, you conclude it is safe and effective because everywhere you look, the information seems to support this conclusion. You feel good knowing you’ve done your homework, and fill the prescription. But what you don’t know is that:

In short, the “consensus” you see has been cleverly manufactured by the most effective propaganda campaign in the history of the world, in an effort to convince you of what the corporate cartels want you to conclude at the end of doing “your own research.” This way, they can sell you more of their expensive and dangerous products.

Over the past two years, this manipulation has become far more obvious and easy for people to see. Before the pandemic, it was pretty well disguised. Today, most can rattle off dozens of examples of how COVID information was manipulated and controlled, through the examples above and others, both by Big Pharma and the U.S. government.

Government Media Manipulation Has Been Routine for Years

For years, the U.S. government, regulatory agencies and public health organizations have colluded with media to control what gets reported and what doesn’t. This, too, is something that has become blatantly obvious during this pandemic, but it’s not a new phenomenon.

For example, back in 2016, a Scientific American investigation revealed how the U.S. Food and Drug Administration routinely manipulated mainstream media, stripping them of their independence:18

“It was a Faustian bargain … The deal was this: NPR, along with a select group of media outlets, would get a briefing about an upcoming announcement by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration a day before anyone else.

But in exchange for the scoop, NPR would have to abandon its reportorial independence. The FDA would dictate whom NPR’s reporter could and couldn’t interview … NPR reporter Rob Stein wrote back to the government officials offering the deal. Stein asked for a little bit of leeway to do some independent reporting but was turned down flat. Take the deal or leave it.”

As it turns out, NPR accepted the deal and Stein joined reporters from a dozen other media organizations to get the scoop. “Every single journalist present had agreed not to ask any questions of sources not approved by the government until given the go-ahead,” Scientific American wrote.

Considering the U.S. government’s many power grabs over the past two years, there’s no reason to assume it hasn’t been using this kind of manipulation to control media coverage of COVID-19 and the injections. Bill Gates, whose influence rivals that of nation states through his funding of the World Health Organization, has also poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the COVID campaign. As reported by The Daily Exposé:19

“Using more than 30,000 grants, Gates has contributed at least $319 million to the media … Recipients included CNN, NPR, BBC, The Atlantic and PBS. Gates has also sponsored foreign organizations that included The Daily Telegraph, the Financial Times, and Al Jazeera. More than $38 million has also been funneled into investigative journalism centers.

Gates’ influence within the press is far-reaching, from journalism to journalistic training. This ultimately makes true objective reporting about Gates or his initiatives virtually impossible.”

DTCA Known to Produce Negative Public Health Effects

In 2006, experts warned that DTCA could trigger “placebo effects” and result in “negative economic, social and political consequences,”20 and in 2011, an article in Pharmacy and Therapeutics noted that the rules governing drug ads to the public were “too relaxed and inadequately enforced.”21

As reported by Forbes in 2019,22 “While DTCA has some positive effects, these commercials tend to mislead patients and can result in the breakdown of the doctor-patient relationship … According to an FDA survey, 65% of physicians said that DTCA for drugs sent confusing messages to the patients …” Importantly, drug ads must:23

  1. not be false or misleading
  2. present a “fair balance” of information describing both the risks and benefits of a drug
  3. include facts that are “material” to the product’s advertised uses, and
  4. include a “brief summary” that mentions every risk described in the product’s labeling

Have you ever seen an ad for the COVID jab that held true to these four requirements? I can’t think of one. People who have been injured by the COVID jab are now also starting to speak out, saying they feel betrayed and misled, as they were never told about the potential dangers of the shot.

One excellent example is the Substack writer Joomi’s story, “I Was Deceived About COVID Vaccine Safety.”24 Has mainstream media become too corrupted to serve its intended function? I believe so. At bare minimum, the likelihood of getting the truth on anything related to government or health, specifically, is virtually nil these days.

*

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 Statista February 25, 2022

2 End Points March 22, 2022

3 End Points March 28, 2022

4 Fierce Pharma March 28, 2022

5 Pfizer August 4, 2021

6 Incyte Press Release September 30, 2021

7 Clinical Trials. Novartis Secukinumab. March 11, 2021

8 Eli Lilly. Press Release March 26, 2022

9 The Center Square, January 1, 2022

10, 11 Zero Hedge, February 5, 2022

12 Health Impact News, February 23, 2022

13 Greater Mountain Publishing, February 27, 2022

14 UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) Covid-19 Vaccine Surveillance Report, February 24, 2022

15 The Exposé, March 1, 2022

16 The Blaze March 3, 2022

17, 19 Daily Expose March 26, 2022

18 Scientific American October 1, 2016

20 PLOS Medicine March 2006; 3(3): e145

21, 23 P&T October 2011; 36(10): 669-674, 681-684

22 Forbes May 14, 2019

24 Joomi Substack January 15, 2022

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Big Pharma Advertising Dollars Are at an All-Time High
  • Tags:

The Kremlin Never Learns

April 6th, 2022 by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

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

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

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

***

Thinking that Ukraine had agreed, or was about to agree, to be a neutral country, Russia pulled its troops out of the Kiev area.  These troops had surrounded Kiev and occupied its suburbs. When the Russians left, a propaganda blitz erupted in the Western media and government councils that the Russians had been defeated and, angry at their defeat, slaughtered civilians, thus committing war crimes like the US committed in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Vietnam, etc.

The difference is that Washington is permitted to commit war crimes, because they are not really war crimes, just acts of promoting democracy.

Another difference is that Washington’s war crimes are real, whereas Russia’s are propaganda creations.

Nevertheless, although innocent, the Russians deserve their beating, because they are so foolish as to continually set themselves up for demonization. 

How is it possible that after all that has happened, the Kremlin did not comprehend that Russia’s withdrawal, meant as an encouragement to negotiations, would be reported as a defeat and a war crime?  Does the Kremlin have any competent advisors? The Kremlin, despite all statements to the contrary, evidentially still thinks the West is honest and will report truthfully the facts and respect Russia’s effort to find a peaceful solution. It is mind blowing that no one in the Kremlin understood that once the Russians withdrew, bodies, dead or play-acting, would be shown on Western media as proof of Putin’s war crimes. 

I don’t know why Bloomberg News is so fiercely Russophobic, but here is Bloomberg’s totally false report of Russia’s withdrawal from Bucha. The rest of the Western media is the same or worse:

“President Joe Biden said Vladimir Putin should be tried for war crimes as the U.S. and European Union consider more sanctions to further punish Russia—this time for an alleged mass killing of civilians that’s fueled global outrage. The EU condemned atrocities committed against Ukrainian civilians that were discovered as Russia withdrew from around Kyiv, including allegations of torture and executions. Ukraine said more than 400 dead civilians have been found in the towns around Kyiv. In a statement on behalf of the 27-nation bloc, EU chief foreign envoy Josep Borrell blamed the occupying Russian forces for the dead bodies seen strewn across the streets of Bucha. ‘The Russian authorities are responsible for these atrocities, committed while they had effective control of the area,’ Borrell said. ‘The massacres in the town of Bucha and other Ukrainian towns will be inscribed in the list of atrocities committed on European soil.’”  

Ukraine, allegedly considering its surrender terms in negotiations, declared the Russian withdrawal to be a Ukrainian military victory with Russian forces driven out by victorious Ukrainian freedom fighters. This is not a narrative that puts pressure on Ukraine to agree to Russia’s demands.

The Russian government has demanded that the UN Security Council investigate the real situation in Bucha, thus setting Russia up for another propaganda blow from the US dominated UN. 

There is not a single statement by Washington’s puppet, Ukraine president Zelensky, that supports the negotiations that the Kremlin is conducting.  The Kremlin prefers to lose its wars in pointless negotiations. Why doesn’t the Kremlin just go ahead and surrender?

The Russian intervention in Ukraine, had it been properly conducted, could have ended the provocations of Russia that could eventually end in a nuclear war. 

But the Kremlin, determined to show its goodness, failed to recognize that the West could not care less about facts and good intentions. What Putin’s well-intentioned and limited intervention in Ukraine has achieved is the total demonization of Putin and Russia with the President of the United States calling for Putin to be tried as a war criminal just as were German officers and officials following World War II at Nuremberg.

Real evidence is not required. In the Western  media assertion alone rules.

The war underway is a propaganda war, and the Kremlin has lost.  The Kremlin’s inability at psyops makes Russian military superiority almost pointless. 

Washington’s wars are conducted ruthlessly. Everything is bombed and blown to pieces, including weddings, funerals, kids’ soccer games. The West doesn’t understand war that doesn’t blow everything up.  What Russia could have accomplished in 3 days is now in its 41st day. 

The narrative of Russian aggression is set in stone, and the Russian military has been made to look ineffective.  The chance to end the provocations with quick and decisive action was lost.  

Will the next provocation be Finland’s entry into NATO, will it be another go at color revolution in Central Asia, or will it be a war crime tribunal with Putin, Lavrov, and Shoigu tried and convicted in absentia?

In the midst of all of this, the Kremlin continues to keep the economies of its NATO enemies alive by exporting its gas.

*

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. Paul Craig Roberts is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Sputnik News/Alexey Nikolsky

Russland Ist Ein Dorn im Auge des Kapitalistischen Systems

April 6th, 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 InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

An die Politikerinnen und Politiker Deutschlands,

Meine Damen, meine Herren,

Als deutscher Wissenschaftler und Psychologe, der bereits vor zweieinhalb Jahren Deutschland verlassen hat, schaue ich heute mit Entsetzen auf die neue Politiker-Sekte – und  ihre Massenmedien – in meinem ehemaligen Heimatland.

Im Sommer 1941 überfiel das Deutsche Reich die Sowjetunion. Die Bilanz des Schreckens: 13 Millionen tote Soldaten, 14 Millionen tote Zivilisten, 3 Millionen tote Kriegsgefangene! Der kirgisisch-russische Schriftsteller Tschingis-Aitmatow beschreibt in seinen Erzählungen und Novellen, wie dieser Krieg über sein Heimatland hereinbrach und das Leben der Menschen total verändert hat.

Nur drei Generationen später erdreistet sich eine scheinbar geschichtsvergessene Sekte von relativ jungen deutschen Politikerinnen und Politiker, die nachvollziehbare Opposition gegen den Krieg in der Ukraine in eine antirussische Hysterie, in eine offene Feinseligkeit gegenüber dem russischen Volk und allem was russisch ist, zu verwandeln. Auch die Literatur einzigartiger russischer Schriftsteller wird inzwischen geächtet.

Diese Dämonisierung eines Volkes weckt speziell bei einem Deutschen Erinnerinngen an die schlimme Dämonisierung der Juden und aller jüdischen Dinge. Heinrich Heine schrieb bereits 1823 in seiner Tragödie „Almansor“: „Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man auch am Ende Menschen.“

Meine Damen, meine Herren! Ich bitte Sie eindringlich, zur Vernunft zu kommen. Als Wissenschaftler und Psychologe, der sich intensiv mit der Literatur reifer und freiheitlich gesinnter Menschen auseinandergesetzt hat, bin ich zu der Überzeugung gekommen:

Russland ist ein Dorn im Auge des kapitalistischen Systems.

Gerne empfehle ich Ihnen meinen Artikel aus der „Neuen Rheinische Zeitung“ (NRhZ) vom 9. März 2016: “Können die Menschen leben ohne Krieg“. Er enthält viele wörtliche Textpassagen aus Aitmatows Novelle „Goldspur der Garben“ und wurde in mehrere Sprachen übersetzt.

 

Rudolf Hänsel
Dr. paed., Rektor a.D., Erziehungswissenschaftler,  Dipl.-Psychologe
11040 Belgrad / Serbien

*

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.

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

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

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

***

More evidence has emerged to suggest that not only are the Pentagon-run biolabs in Ukraine real, but that the Pentagon is planning to use them to attack Russia.

Moscow says that records and other proof show that the U.S.-funded biolabs, which are linked to EcoHealth Alliance, the Biden crime family, and others, were going to be used for sending bioweapon-filled drones into Russia.

Russia’s Defense Ministry claims to have discovered the names of specific U.S. personnel who have been engaged in bioweapons development in the Eastern European country, though no tangible proof, according to Great Game India, has yet been presented.

“Documents testifying to the plans of the Kiev regime to use unmanned aerial vehicles capable of carrying and spraying deadly substances” are of special importance to Russian authorities, announced military spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov during a recent conference.

Konashenkov went on to state that information now held by the Russian military “prove[s] that the Kiev regime was seriously considering the possibility of using biological weapons against the population of the Donbas and the Russian Federation.”

Hunter Biden directly involved in developing bioweapons at Ukraine biolabs, says Russia

Konashenkov also claims that Russia has uncovered the names of “specific officials who took part in the creation of components of biological weapons,” though he did not name any of them.

All he would say is that they are “the heads of divisions and employees of the U.S. Department of Defense, as well as its main subcontractors.”

These bioweapons campaigns, Konashenkov went on to say, are “directly related to the son of the current U.S. president, Hunter Biden.”

This claim corroborates with revelations that came forward last week about how the Biden crime family has connections to the Pentagon contractor Metabiota, which specializes in investigating potential pandemic-causing pathogens that could be used as bioweapons.

In another conference, Lt. Gen. Igor Kirillov, commander of the Russian Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Protection Forces, called out Biden as well for his alleged participation in financing these Ukrainian biolabs with American tax dollars.

“In the near future at a special briefing,” Konashenkov promised, more details about the investigation and the biolabs will be released.

Western media and governments are still claiming that this is all just an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory and “Russian disinformation,” but it is increasingly proving to be true.

We know from the recent admissions of U.S. diplomat Victoria Nuland, who testified before the Senate earlier this month, that the Ukrainian biolabs do, in fact, exist, and are not just a conspiracy theory.

She told Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), however, upon him prompting her to say such, that if anything goes wrong at the labs, it is automatically Russia’s fault.

Nuland also claimed that these “biological research laboratories in Ukraine” exist as part of a collaboration with Kiev “to ensure that the materials of biological research do not fall into the hands of Russian forces.”

“This is not a war against the Ukrainian people, but is rather Putin’s dismantling (in a hostile manner) of the ‘Deep State’s Toy Factory,’ a.k.a. the Nation of Ukraine,” suggested someone at Great Game India about the situation.

“This explains all the rage of State Department, the CIA, & deep state politicians / media who are against Putin.”

Another wrote that he has personally spoken with Dr. Alan Zabrosky, who used to be the education director at the Pentagon War College, who told him that almost every general and admiral still on duty was hand-picked by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld going all the way back to 1969.

“Cheney was only 27 years old and Don Rumsfeld was 32,” this person added. “These two picked generals.”

*

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 NaturalNews.com

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

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

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

***

 

There is much about modern China to appreciate. Its streets are usually safe. The economy, especially in the populous eastern provinces, has seen incredible growth not witnessed at any other time in history. Extreme poverty has been greatly diminished. Just under 800 million people have been lifted out of the classification in China in the last three decades. There is widespread wealth inequality but China, according to the World Bank, is an upper-middle-income country. These are metrics of success that will be highlighted when Xi Jinping goes for an unprecedented third presidential term, later this year, to cement his reputation close to Mao Zedong’s and ahead of Deng Xiaoping, the architect of modern China.

But there is another narrative that keeps the lights burning at night at the leadership compound off Tiananmen Square.

The property sector, a key engine of growth accounting for about 25 percent of the economy, has seen it foundations crumble under the weight of billions of dollars of debt. Big tech companies have bled trillions of dollars as Beijing tried to curb their excess profits and make sure the party retained influence over them.

Xi’s rule has come at a price. What little political dissent there was has been crushed, political rivals jailed, the Uighurs  in Xinjiang are being persecuted and the Taiwanese are threatened with forceful re-unification. Xi’s targeting of corruption is in reality a ploy to silence political enemies. The gutted party hierarchy, from provincial leaders up, is unable to launch any obvious challenge.

Covid has seen Shanghai, the country’s commercial heart, go into lockdown.China prides itself on its management of the pandemic but that seems more than a touch premature. The economy was meant to emerge stronger as the rest of the world struggled with outbreaks of new strains of the virus. Now China’s economy is facing headwinds never before experienced. Most of its citizens have no memory of an economy doing anything other than growing spectacularly. Those days are over.

And the very system for the transfer of power is being upended. A conference in either October or November, the date has not been decided yet, will see Xi hail his achievements but ignore the two-term presidential limit.

This clears a path for him to stay in power until he decides to step down. The power of paramount leaders, firmly entrenched in office with the barrel of the gun pointing at their opponents, can survive tremendous buffeting, as proven by Mao.

Before Xi became leader, in 2012, the party had a workable system for the peaceful transfer of power. The two leaders who preceded Xi in office, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, strictly adhered to it. After the horrors of the cultural revolution, stability was prized. Those days, too, are over. This is how it’s meant to work. At the National Congress, a meeting normally held every five years, members to the party’s central committee are elected by carefully chosen and reliable delegates.

This committee then elects the general secretary (the president) and a body called the Politburo Standing Committee (seven currently, but can have eleven) to lead the nation for the next five years. Two five-year terms was, before Xi, considered the limit.

It’s cumbersome but it has provided stability. In 1980 Deng, then 75, said: “We must take the long-term interest into account and solve the problem of the succession in leadership.” He did not mean one man to remain leader for life.

Globally, the country’s image has been tarnished. China is trying to ride two horses on Ukraine. Refusing to condemn Russia and calling for peace. Sanctions will be imposed on China, the US threatens, if it supplies military aid to Russia or tries to help it evade the West’s sanctions. China is the glaringly obvious market for Russia’s energy and commodity exports that are being mostly, though not entirely, shunned by the West. China signed a $188 billion long-term oil and gas deal with Russia just ahead of the Ukraine invasion. Much of that money will be spent by Russia on improving its pipeline infrastructure.

But what should be a momentous year for Xi and China is not going according to script. Too many surprises. And in the leadership compound off Tiananmen Square, surprises are viewed with a great deal of suspicion.

*

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.

Geopolitical analyst Tom Clifford reporting from Beijing. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Future of Freedom Foundation

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on China: Times Are Changing for a Country that Wanted to Change
  • Tags: ,

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

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

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

***

An update to

How Both Putin and Biden Bungled in Ukraine

By Eric Zuesse, April 04, 2022

***

On April 4th, Russia’s RT headlined “Russia and Ukraine trade accusations over Bucha civilian deaths (TIMELINE): After footage of dead civilians in the Ukrainian city of Bucha emerged, the West immediately pointed the finger at Moscow”, and included such items as, on April 2nd,

One clip published and later deleted by Ukrainian military commander Sergey Korotkih showed Ukrainian troops in Bucha discussing engagement rules. Korotkih, formerly a citizen of Belarus, is an open neo-Nazi who went to Ukraine back in 2014 to fight in the ranks of the notorious Azov Battalion. In Russia, Korotkih is wanted on multiple murder charges. One of the fighters can be heard asking if it was OK to shoot at “guys not wearing blue armbands” identifying Ukrainian soldiers. The response was an affirmative “you bet”.

This links through to this uploaded cellphone video evidence recording that conversation, physically onsite at Bucha, as Ukraine’s forces were coming into the area to inspect and evaluate the situation and to record and display the extent of their victory there.

Furthermore, on April 4th, Russia’s Ministry of Defense alleged that:

“All units of Russian troops completely withdrew from Bucha on March 30, and these shots [videos about Bucha that were distributed to the press] appeared on the 4th day after that, when SBU officers and representatives of Ukrainian TV arrived in the area”

If this statement is true, this would prove (even without there having been the necessary independent international investigation into Ukraine’s allegations on the matter) that Ukraine’s accusations were, in fact, bald-faced lies.

If Russia’s allegations in that Bucha matter are true, then, of course, the propaganda-value of the ‘news’-reports by CNN and others regarding it will reduce with time, and perhaps even become the enduring scandal here — yet another scandal of U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media being actually instead propaganda-media. Trusting Western reports regarding Russia might then turn out to be even stupider than it was before.

Putin’s reputation in the U.S.-and-allied countries might then not suffer long-term harm from the Bucha matter. Putin’s approval-rating within Russia, itself, has risen from his low of around 60% in August 2021 to above 80% now, mainly as a result of soaring from 71% just before the February 24th invasion.

However, what’s far more important going forward will be the public opinion of him outside Russia, in the countries that never really stopped their Cold War against Russia after the Soviet Union’s 1991 end. America’s regime-change-in-Russia campaign will almost certainly not succeed by driving Putin’s approval-rating inside Russia down to where, say, Joe Biden’s in America is. But if America takes an alternative approach, such as a military coup, or a blitz invasion of Russia, perhaps the people who rule in America might ultimately succeed (in which case what happened to Ukraine after Obama conquered it in 2014 might happen, some day, to Russia itself).

The South Front Report

Then, later on April 4th, the best news-site on the war, South Front, bannered “NEW EVIDENCES SHED LIGHT ON ALLEGED MASSACRE IN BUCHA, KIEV REGION (VIDEO, PHOTO)”, and reported that,

Today, there are more interesting videos from Bucha shared by the Ukrainian military which may help to shed light on what did really happen in the town left by the Russian troops on March 30.

On April 2, a day before Ukrainian “journalists” came to Bucha to stage the horrific scenes on the streets, the National Police of Ukraine published a video of the mop up operation in Bucha.

Video Player

00:00

07:48

The footage confirmed that:

  • there were no corpses laying on the streets. Not a single civilian confirmed that any mass shootings [had occurred] in the city.
  • Ukrainian demining teams who entered the town right after the Russian withdrawal had no work to do. They are seen walking on the streets along with civilians. Not a single mine left by the Russians was shown on the video.
  • Servicemen of the National Guard asked some civilians if they needed help, none of them replied asking for any immediate assistance, confirming that they are fine.

Only one man is seen killed in his car. It is not clear how did his death happen. Another victim was obviously a servicemen of one of the warring sides killed in clashes, whose corps[e] is laying [lying] near a destroyed military equipment.

One of [the] Ukrainian “patriots” made a comment on behaviour of the “Russian invaders”. After his own compatriots told Russian servicemen about his acute social awareness, Russian military checked his apartment but found only flags and a bunch of Ukrainian symbols. To add some drama to his case, the man claimed that [a] Russian soldier took him out “to kill him”, but suddenly changed his mind and brought the man to the military commander. The brave patriot only had a short peaceful conversation with Russian servicemen, with no tortures. …

This video of the National Police of Ukraine, shot presumably on April 1 or earlier, does not really correspond to what the Ukrainian media published on April 3, trumpeting to the whole world that the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation allegedly carried out a “mass massacre” of civilians.

As more photos are shared from the spot, more proves [proofs], that the scene was staged, appear.

As the main video proof from Bucha raised a lot of suspicions and was quickly disclaimed, it was accompanied by more fake photos allegedly made in the town.

Unfortunately, these attempts are even less effective and are evident lies. For example, notorious Advisor to the Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Arestovich published the photo of a woman tortured in Mariupol last week by Ukrainian Azov militants, claiming that she was a victim tortured by the Russians. The photo was later deleted but was widely spread by the Ukrainian MSM, who even did not come together if it was in Gostomel or in Bucha. The Ukrainian media are trying their best to gain as much hype as possible, lying on any matter. …

The Al Jazeera Report

However, at around the same time, Al Jazeera, which is owned by the Thani family of U.S.-allied Qatar, headlined “Bucha killings: ‘The world cannot be tricked anymore’,” and showed Ukraine-government-supporting alleged “witnesses” who alleged that Russian soldiers had perpetrated a “massacre” there, and urged international war-crimes trials against Russia’s leaders (and nothing against America’s leaders).

No one has — at least in any prominent ‘news’-medium — urged any war-crimes trial against any American leader: not against George W. Bush, nor against Obama, nor against Biden: no American leader at all.

Washington Post and AP Reports

Yet later in the day, America’s AP bannered “Biden: Putin should face war crimes trial for Bucha killings”, and an editorial in Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post headlined “The Bucha massacre should prompt a forceful response” and said that “Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called the civilian executions ‘genocide,’ and President Biden declared that Mr. Putin is ‘a war criminal.’ Those words will find meaning only with a determined prosecution.”

As-of day’s-end on the 4th, it seemed that there were corpses in Bucha, but there was no public information yet on the identities of the dead, nor on how many were civilians, how many were Ukrainian soldiers, and how many were Russian soldiers, and the ways in which each of those individuals had become killed — much less on whether any legal grounds yet existed for asserting that any “war crimes” had been perpetrated by anyone there.

And the Ukrainian account of the Bucha matter was full of faked ‘interpretations’ of the ‘evidence’ they were providing.

Nonetheless, on the morning of April 4th, Washington’s The Hill had bannered “Macron, EU official join calls for further sanctions over ‘clear’ indications of war crimes in Bucha”.

*

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.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s next book (soon to be published) will be AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change. It’s about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image: Bucha massacre (Source: 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 InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

As spring blooms and the sun rises higher in the sky, we are going through a number of crucial transformations requiring thoughtful analysis from those of us fixated on resisting the new kind of war being waged on life as we have known it. With every passing day it becomes increasingly clear that, at its highest level, this warfare is meant to radically transform the worldwide structures of political economy. 

The crux of the warring assault has to do with the agendas of those seeking to remake the banking system. Who will dominate this process of financial re-engineering and who will be its major beneficiaries?

How will the intensification of multipolar conflicts between power blocs affect the future of how economic relations are conducted? Might this development carry with it the possibility of a reprieve from the tyranny being prepared for the largest part of the global population?

We Are Coming for You 

Those leading the assault on our way of life were able to manipulate the COVID crisis they manufactured in order to harness both media and governments to their radical agenda.

An original key to bringing about this outcome was the COVID lockdowns. The lockdowns were deliberately designed to scare and demoralize the public, discourage organized political opposition, and to attack small business and the middle class.

In this fashion the old economy was purposely set into a tailspin from which it was never intended to recover. The aim was to advance the “creative destruction” in the socio-economic sphere in order to clear the way for what “madmen” like Klaus Schwab and his lead protégé, Justin Trudeau, regularly describe as the “Great Reset.”

In this altered realm, human beings are to be genetically modified even as nanotechnology and bionic elements are to be added to some human bodies engineered to perform very specific industrial functions. The remaking of economic relationships is thus to be enhanced by the transhuman features built into the survivors of large-scale medical experimentation underway on human subjects. The precedent for the further widening of such experimentation is already established with the massive administration of mRNA injections.

The new system will allow for much greater latitude for the application of robotization and Artificial Intelligence in the operation of a depopulated society. One goal is to make the transhuman survivors of depopulation better suited to a new matrix in property relations. The ownership of property and other forms of wealth is to be even more tightly concentrated in fewer and fewer hands.

The plan is to make ownership of real estate and chattel more and more restrictive as renting and leasing become even more pervasive.

In the areas where purchases are to be allowed, individuals and corporate entities will probably become subject to a wide array of very specific regulations. These regulations will dictate what can or cannot be purchased, how much can be bought and sold, and so forth. The role of free choice in the workings of the marketplace will be dramatically circumscribed. Property rights and titles will be even more closely aligned than is already the case with the interests of power.

Similarly, in the envisaged reset the connection between payment and work is to be downgraded in favor of payment connected to the outcomes of social credit scoring in heavily monitored surveillance states. A key to instituting this social credit system is to institute a so-called guaranteed universal income that will not actually be guaranteed.

The process of social credit scoring will be largely based on observed behavior with a heavy emphasis on rewarding compliance with authority and punishing non-compliance.

With the imposition of a universal regime of standardized digital ID combined with cashless Central-Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC), those in control will acquire the capacity to facilitate or prevent the full array of financial transactions right down to the capacity to purchase food. The absence of cash will facilitate the making of comprehensive records covering every monetary transaction.

In Canada Justin Trudeau and his Deputy Prime Minister gave a sneak preview of what the makers of the Great Reset have in mind when it comes to the connection between finances and politics. The federal authorities revealed a great deal when they ordered financial institutions to freeze the bank accounts of targeted Truckers. Trudeau and Chyrstia Freeland disclosed more of their strategizing when they went on to discuss shutting down the business licenses, driving licenses and insurance of their political opponents.

Extensions of these same tactics of economic warfare are being replicated on a global scale. Russian President Vladimir Putin became a major catalyst for the intensification of the contest of economic sanctions and counter-sanctions among competing economic blocs. Putin kicked off this change with his announcement of his government’s intention to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine.

Downgrading Markets and Upgrading Political Determinants of Business Success

The favored treatment afforded especially to Pfizer and Moderna corporations by governments throughout the manufactured COVID crisis can be taken as a prototype of the kind of economic policies that can be expected in the future. The so-called private sector will remain in operation although success in business will be determined more by government dictate rather than by successful competition in free and open markets.

The advantages extended to the injection companies have been numerous and large. For instance the US government extended to these pharmaceutical firms major financial backing in order to develop their injections at Warp Speed. Most of the world’s governments eliminated and bypassed their safety regulations in order to allow companies to get their injections to the public over a period of months rather than years.

In the midst of even short and half-hearted medical trials, double-blind procedures were abandoned in the middle of tests. In spite of the fast rate of product development, the injection companies in all countries were extended indemnification from being sued for problems in their products.

Then governments went on to allocate funds for advertising campaigns to promote the new medical products as if they were “safe and effective” while they were really nothing of the sort. The government regulators turned the other way in order not to take notice of evidence amassed by the injection manufacturers that the medical products were known from their inception to be dangerous. Only a court ruling prevented Pfizer and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from hiding damning evidence from the public for 55 years.

See this.

The deep secrecy attending many facets of this genetic modification of the human genome in the name of fighting COVID-19 is a pre-eminent attribute of the current plunge into medical experimentation on human subjects. The precedent now established is probably intended to make medical experiments on human beings a major feature of the Great Reset.  

Once the offering of carrots had run its course, many governments along with their corporate patrons and clients resorted to the stick. Many governments mandated the injections by twisting the law to make employment, education, business contracts, and various licensing arrangements dependent on whether groups of workers and students took the required jabs.

The whole time the myth was maintained that the throwing away of the rule book for the protection of public health was the result of some sort of benevolent public-private partnership. The mantra of public-private relationship forms the gospel as preached by Bill Gates’ GAVI and Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum. The big problem with this model is that we have been robbed of public representation by corrupt officials such as Justin Trudeau who take their directions from the corporate sector as represented by lobbies such those in and around the WEF.

The COVID injection fiasco demonstrates the irrelevance of market forces in the Great Reset.  Supposedly the so-called private sector has some say in the process where governments make the call of who should be considered winners and losers in the realm of business. Since 2008 the corporate leviathan, BlackRock, has come to play a significant role as a proxy for the privately-owned Federal Reserve in the United States.

In the name of meeting the requirements of providing expanded credit to smooth over the financial devastation initiated by the nonsensical lockdowns, BlackRock was called upon by governments to determine what businesses and corporate sectors were to receive preferred treatment.

The Truckers and the expert witnesses they brought with them to Ottawa exposed to a worldwide audience the ignorance and hubris of WEF initiate, Justin Trudeau.

Trudeau has since become an embodiment of the kind of opportunistic politicians that are robbing the public of genuine representation. This loss of any capacity for average people to affect national policies  illustrates the emptiness of the claim we live in democracies.

In the Parliament of Australia two Senators from Queensland have taken the discourse beyond the level of the exchange that exposed Justin Trudeau and the Canadian NDP as such enemies of working-class people. Senator Garard Rennick explained that “the COVID vaccines don’t work. They don’t provide immunity and they don’t prevent transmission, hospitalization and death.”

Senator Rennick continued by illuminating the insidious cover up of vaccine injuries through “the gagging of medical professionals.” He concluded it is time to “stop vaccine rollouts, vaccine mandates and vaccine discrimination.”

Senator Malcolm Roberts named the Australian Select Committee in COVID-19 as a “protection racket for the pharmaceutical industry.” He called for some reckoning with all the fraud and murder that has combined to create the basis of monumental crimes perpetuated by the administration of the dangerous injected remedy for COVID-19.  Senator Roberts concludes,

“To the Prime Minister, to the Health Minister and the Health Department and all of those in the Senate and House of Representatives— all of you who have perpetrated this crime I direct one question: How the hell do you expect to get away with it? We are coming for you. We won’t let you get away with it. We have the stamina to hunt you down and we damn well will.”

These same sentiments are percolating to the surface in many jurisdictions where the gene modifying injections are killing and injuring many.

What Narrative Should Prevail?

Just as news about the scandalously high rates of death and injury from the COVID injections started to get major public attention, the confrontation in Ukraine dramatically shifted the focus of worldwide news coverage. 

See this.

Public attention was dramatically drawn away from the manufactured COVID crisis to other areas of conflict seemingly on the far side of the earth.

Some, including Alberta Premier Jason Kenney, have argued that the time has come to put behind us COVID controversies, including mandate issues. Others, however, argue that it is more important than ever to remain vigilant and expect the delivery of new horrors coming from the same cabal who for two years have overturned life as we have known it.

This kind of renewed assault is probably inevitable unless we can bring about some means of realizing the objectives sought by Senator Roberts. We need a method of requiring legal accountability on the part of the perpetrators of the COVID crimes including those arising from the unprecedentedly high rates of injection deaths and injuries.

The manufactured COVID crisis created the basis for the assault on the economy, small business, and middle class through lockdowns. The ongoing economic assault on our way of life continues to take us into unknown territory with growing inflation and ever increasing signs that the value of the dollar is about to collapse.

These developments should not be blamed on COVID-19. The same crew who lied to us so consistently about viral infection and spread, are now telling us that we are headed into many new storms of upheaval all because of the supposedly unprovoked Russian assertions in Ukraine. Without a careful assessment of the historical genesis of the current conflict, no sound analysis is possible.

Dr. Robert W. Malone Takes Centre State

In a speech he gave in the Washington DC area as part of the US Truckers’ movement, Dr. Robert Malone presented an overview combining analysis of the ongoing COVID restrictions combined with a geopolitical assessment of what is going on in the world. News of the convergence of the US Truckers in the US capital was largely overshadowed by the torrent of news from Ukraine. Nevertheless the inventor of the mRNA process at the basis of the Moderna and Pfizer shots gave a very impassioned and thoughtful account combining hard science and social science, domestic affairs and international issues.

Dr. Malone emphasized that the two years of round-the-clock lies to justify COVID restrictions, injections and mandates are just early “skirmishes” in an ongoing push to radically remake society along the lines being pushed by the World Economic Forum and the International Monetary Fund.

With literally thousands of WEF graduates from its young leaders program now in the upper echelons of governments, media and business, it is becoming increasingly clear that Klaus Schwab’s organization is a major factor in the assault on our way of life. The WEF’s golden boy, it seems, is Justin Trudeau. More than half of Trudeau’s cabinet members are WEF insiders. The true headquarters of the Canadian government is thus Davos Switzerland, not Ottawa.

See video below.

Dr. Malone put an intense analytical spotlight on Justin Trudeau. He explained how Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland let the cat out of the bag when they went after the bank accounts of the Truckers and also those who contributed money to their cause. This approach to warfare against the most effective political opponents of those in power presents in microcosm a pattern being replicated on a much larger scale at the highest level of international affairs.

COVID Manipulations and Election Rigging

My effort since I began writing about COVID issues in February of 2020 has been to attempt to see as a single complex narrative, the totality of news concerning the attempted transformation of our way of life. At the highest level this push for depopulation, total information control, unlimited Artificial Intelligence and transhumanism is coming from the top echelons of the world’s primary bankers’ cartel. 

See this and this. 

While news about the celebrity virus remains at the core of this narrative, the unfolding story of our life and times often meandered into seemingly unrelated areas like cancel culture and the destruction of statues, Black Lives Matter and the burning down of city centres, as well as the controversy over election fraud in the United States. By seeing events in a broad way one can readily see that a single structure of command and control is pulling the strings and directing public attention to maximize public confusion and disorientation. 

The story of election fraud in the United States, for instance, was very much connected to how the COVID plandemic was manipulated by the likes of Mark Zukerberg to transform rules for voting. The system was rigged to allow the flooding of the system with mail-in ballots that can easily be fabricated and manipulated to bring about fraudulent outcomes.

Then the media piled on to control the story by dictating what could or could not be reported. This very aggressive version of “information censorship” essentially misrepresented any effort to expose what had really taken place. The courts continued the fraud by simply refusing to adjudicate conflicting accounts of what had happened.

Another element of the fraud was to clamp down in reporting the news in ways that favoured candidate Joe Biden over President Donald Trump. A big part of the rigged election in the United States was the suppression of coverage on Hunter Biden’s so-called LapTop from Hell. Hunter Biden is, of course, the drug-addled wayward son of current Election Fraud President, Joe Biden.

Elections cannot be legitimate if the media conspire as a regimented pack to repress information in ways that advantage one candidate over another. And yet that wrongful manipulation of the public record is exactly what transpired in the prelude to the rigged US election of November 2020.

See this.

The Laptop from Hell Helps Expose US Bioweapon Operations in Ukraine

Now the contents of Hunter Biden’s LapTop from Hell are finally being given serious attention in the US media and in the US criminal justice system. Hunter Biden was paid big money in Ukraine by Igor Kolomoisky. Kolomoisky is the same Ukrainian oligarch who sponsored the electoral campaign of current Ukrainian President, Vladimir Zelensky.

Part of Hunter Biden’s business involvements in Ukraine have taken place through Metabiota Inc., a company active in financing a number of Ukrainian bioweapons facilities that fit in the same circle of intrigue involving the Pentagon, the Wuhan Lab, and the Deep State culprits Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak’s Eco-Health Alliance.

Trunews has given this story close coverage as breaking news. See this and this. 

The long and short of these revelations is that Operation COVID-19 and the breaking news coming out of Russia, Washington and Ukraine and all is very much interconnected.

Once again, the pace of strategic revelations and disclosures is overwhelming in depth and scale in spite of the extent of the coordinated censorship by Big Tech and the big media conglomerates.

A New Media Whistle Blower 

One area in bad need of whistle blowers concerns the media cartels. Martin Sharman, a British Executive of Sky News and ITV, has come forward with some important revelations on the intimidation of media outlets to create a single monopoly of uniform interpretation.


See this.

Sharman points to the British media regulator, Ofcom, as a key culprit that led the sabotage of evidence-based reporting in the big broadcasting systems. Sharman’s voice is one of many pointing to the BCC as the main global point operation in making sure a single narrative dominated worldwide coverage at every stage of the manufactured COVID crisis.

It seems the BBC is a very active propaganda operation with many channels and international outlets in many different languages. These attributes make the BBC an obvious nexus for black ops in coordinating the worldwide flow of mass communications.  Apparently criminal suspect Bill Gates was one of the operation chiefs feeding the news into the BBC nexus of global reportage.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. 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 is from Dreamstime

Russia Is a Thorn in the Eye of the Capitalist System.

April 6th, 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 InstagramTwitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

***

To the politicians of Germany, 

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As a German scientist and psychologist who left Germany two and a half years ago, I now look with horror at the new politician sect – and its mass media – in my former homeland.

In the summer of 1941, the German Reich invaded the Soviet Union. The balance of the horror: 13 million dead soldiers, 14 million dead civilians, 3 million dead prisoners of war! In his stories and novellas, the Kyrgyz-Russian writer Chingiz-Aitmatov describes how this war broke out in his homeland and completely changed the lives of the people.

Only three generations later, a seemingly history-forgetting sect of relatively young German politicians dares to turn the understandable opposition to the war in Ukraine into anti-Russian hysteria, into open hostility towards the Russian people and everything Russian. Even the literature of unique Russian writers is now being ostracised.

This demonisation of a people awakens memories, especially in a German, of the terrible demonisation of the Jews and all things Jewish. Heinrich Heine wrote as early as 1823 in his tragedy “Almansor”: “Where they burn books, they end up burning people.”

Ladies and gentlemen! I urge you to come to your senses. As a scientist and psychologist who has studied intensively the literature of mature and free-minded people, I have come to the conclusion:

Russia is a thorn in the eye of the capitalist system.

I am happy to recommend my article from the “Neue Rheinische Zeitung” (NRhZ) of 9 March 2016: “Can people live without war”. It contains many verbatim text passages from Aitmatov’s novella “Goldspur der Garben” and has been translated into several languages.

 

Rudolf Hänsel
Dr. paed., retired rector, educationalist, qualified psychologist
11040 Belgrade / Serbia

*

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.

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

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

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

***

On January 30, 1972, British military forces opened fire on a peaceful demonstration of 15,000 in Derry, Northern Ireland leaving 14 dead and many others wounded.

This massacre became known as Bloody Sunday where the Catholic residents of Derry were protesting against the discrimination and oppression instituted by a British occupation of the territory which extended back several centuries.

Paul Doherty of the Bloody Sunday Justice Campaign, whose father Patrick was killed on fateful day, and Ciara O’Connor, Project Coordinator of the Museum of Free Derry, were in the Detroit area to speak and meet with local organizers. Both of these activists and scholars are committed to preserving the legacy of the civil rights and liberation movements of Northern Ireland against British occupation.

An event held on April 2 at the First Unitarian Universalist Church in Detroit’s Midtown District heard Doherty and O’Connor lecture on the events surrounding the 1972 massacre. The program was jointly sponsored by the Moratorium NOW! Coalition, the Detroit MLK Committee and EMEAC.

Since the 1960s, there has been striking similarities between the African American movement demanding quality education, fair housing, universal suffrage and self-determination and the campaigns in Northern Ireland for the same objectives. There were those who preferred nonviolent resistance to discrimination and others that embarked upon an armed struggle drawing inspiration from the 1916 Easter Rising led by Irish Republican nationalist and socialist leaders such as James Connelly and the subsequent War of Independence which lasted up until 1921-22.

During 1967, the Civil Rights Association was formed in Northern Ireland. They carried out demonstrations during the period and in 1968 were met with stiff opposition from the Protestant community whose allegiance remained with the British government. Therefore, the Civil Rights Association was fighting the British Loyalists and the security forces occupying the country.

The Derry Housing Action Committee was established in early 1968 to fight discrimination and substandard conditions. These demands parallel those in the U.S. when mass demonstrations and rebellions erupted between 1964 and 1970 over the deplorable conditions of African Americans and Puerto Ricans living in various cities such as New York, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, among many more.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was martyred on April 4, 1968. The visit by Doherty and O’Connor coincided with the 54th anniversary of the assassination of King in Memphis, Tennessee. King and his Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) were in Memphis to assist over one thousand predominantly African American sanitation workers who were on strike seeking recognition under the banner of the American Federation of State and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

Irish march on Westland Street in Bogside, January 1972 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

After the assassination of King, the Fair Housing Act was passed and signed into law by the U.S. Congress and then President Lyndon B. Johnson. Nonetheless, in the U.S. this measure, considered the last of the Civil Rights Acts passed from the late 1950s through the 1960s, has never been fully enforced since African Americans, People of Color Communities and the working poor have never enjoyed any semblance of a guarantee for quality housing.

Doherty and O’Connor noted that:

“There remains a polarization between the Catholic community in Northern Ireland and the Protestants who are seen as settlers and loyal to the British crown. We want them included as a part of the Irish culture and nation. However, no one should be forced to accept British culture. Sometimes we cannot understand our working class protestant people maintaining their allegiance to the Democratic Unionist Party. A recent census may indicate that there is a Catholic majority in Northern Ireland which could prompt a referendum on the status of the area in relationship to its continued ties with London.”

In the U.S., People of Color communities are rapidly approaching a combined majority over the European Americans. The African American, Latin American, Asian, Indigenous and Middle Eastern population groups are therefore under extreme pressure by successive Democratic and Republican administrations viewing this emerging majority as a potential threat to the racist status-quo.

Compounding the problems in Northern Ireland is the recent withdrawal by Britain from the European Union (EU). Most people in the Republic of Ireland in the South and the Northern region did not agree with many British Conservatives and other forces which voted in favor of severing ties with the EU. The question of the border between Ireland and the EU countries is still an unresolved issue in the United Kingdom.

Historic Links from the Abolitionist Movement to the Irish Liberation Struggle

This author chaired the session on April 2 and began the discussion on the role of Ireland in the struggle to end African enslavement in the U.S. Frederick Douglass, one of the leading proponents of abolition and the total freedom of African people in the U.S. travelled to Ireland in 1845. While there he gained tremendous support for the abolitionist cause and was able to reprint his Slave Narrative which was widely distributed internationally.

A review of a book entitled “Frederick Douglass in Ireland, In His Own Worlds” by Christine Kinealy, was partially read at the beginning of the program. The review was published by the Irish Times and was written by Brendan Kelly in 2018, says that:

“While Douglass’s work was unfinished at the time of his death – and remains incomplete today – his contribution to the abolition of slavery was inestimable and his personal story full of unexpected turns. In 1845, he published the memoir for which he is best known, ‘Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave,’ which placed him at risk of recapture. He fled to the United Kingdom and spent several months campaigning in Ireland, speaking at events in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Wexford, Waterford, Celbridge, Belfast, Lisburn, Hollywood and Bangor. Douglass heard (Daniel) O’Connell speak at a public meeting in Dublin on September 29th, 1845 and was immediately entranced: ‘It seems to me that the voice of O’Connell is enough to calm the most violent passion, even though it were already manifesting itself in a mob. There is a sweet persuasiveness in it, beyond any voice I ever heard. His power over an audience is perfect.’”

Since the U.S. Civil War and the ascendancy of the Civil Rights and Black Liberation Movements, the work of the African American people still remains unfinished. With respect to Northern Ireland, O’Connor and Doherty recognized the progress which has been made since the 1960s and 1970s, although Ireland remains partitioned between the North and South.

As in the U.S. and other geo-political regions, many activists took up arms after repressive institutions of the colonial and racist states closed all avenues of nonviolent resistance and change. In Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Angola, Guinea-Bissau, Vietnam, and other formerly colonial territories won their independence through mass action and guerrilla warfare.

Detroit event to commemorate Bloody Sunday (Photo by Paul Jackson) 

In Ireland, the Citizen’s Army and the Republican Army (IRA) of the early 20th century waged an armed struggle to break the colonial yoke imposed by Britain and to unite the country. James Connelly, the co-founder of the Irish Citizen’s Army, was captured and executed by the British military in 1916 after the Easter Rising. Later an Irish War of Independence began which was able to liberate vast swaths of territory inside the country. Eventually, during the early 1920s, the country was partitioned by Britain and is still divided today.

The reemergence of the Irish Republican Army (IRA), later known as the Provisional IRA, which originally grew out of the period leading up to the War of Independence (1919-1921), was a cause for concern by the British. However, the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 resulted in a ceasefire between the IRA and the British government. A referendum on a power-sharing agreement was approved by the majority of voters in Northern Ireland and the Republic in the South.

Nonetheless, these developments have not resolved all of the outstanding issues related to a complete break with Britain and unification with the Republic of Ireland. In the U.S., despite the passage of numerous Civil Rights Bills and other measures, institutional racism and state repression remain major factors in the character of relations between African Americans and the majority white population.

The discussions on April 2 in Detroit illustrated once again the convergence of the struggles for civil rights and national liberation on an international scale. Ireland and the oppressed peoples of the globe will inevitably continue their organizing work until their strategic objectives are completely achieved.

*

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: Detroit Rebellion of July 1967 (Source: Abayomi Azikiwe)

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

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

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

***

Foreign critics have long chafed at the “exorbitant privilege” of the U.S. dollar as global reserve currency. The U.S. can issue this currency backed by nothing but the “full faith and credit of the United States.” Foreign governments, needing dollars, not only accept them in trade but buy U.S. securities with them, effectively funding the U.S. government and its foreign wars. But no government has been powerful enough to break that arrangement – until now. How did that happen and what will it mean for the U.S. and global economies?

The Rise and Fall of the PetroDollar

First, some history: The U.S. dollar was adopted as the global reserve currency at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, when the dollar was still backed by gold on global markets. The agreement was that gold and the dollar would be accepted interchangeably as global reserves, the dollars to be redeemable in gold on demand at $35 an ounce. Exchange rates of other currencies were fixed against the dollar.

But that deal was broken after President Lyndon Johnson’s “guns and butter” policy exhausted the U.S. kitty by funding war in Vietnam along with his “Great Society” social programs at home. French President Charles de Gaulle, suspecting the U.S. was running out of money, cashed in a major portion of France’s dollars for gold and threatened to cash in the rest; and other countries followed suit or threatened to.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon ended the convertibility of the dollar to gold internationally (known as “closing the gold window”), in order to avoid draining U.S. gold reserves. The value of the dollar then plummeted relative to other currencies on global exchanges. To prop it up, Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger made a deal with Saudi Arabia and the OPEC countries that OPEC would sell oil only in dollars, and that the dollars would be deposited in Wall Street and City of London banks. In return, the U.S. would defend the OPEC countries militarily. Economic researcher William Engdahl also presents evidence of a promise that the price of oil would be quadrupled. An oil crisis triggered by a brief Middle Eastern war did cause the price of oil to quadruple, and the OPEC agreement was finalized in 1974.

The deal held firm until 2000, when Saddam Hussein broke it by selling Iraqi oil in euros. Libyan president Omar Qaddafi followed suit. Both presidents wound up assassinated, and their countries were decimated in war with the United States. Canadian researcher Matthew Ehret observes:

We should not forget that the Sudan-Libya-Egypt alliance under the combined leadership of Mubarak, Qadhafi and Bashir, had moved to establish a new gold-backed financial system outside of the IMF/World Bank to fund large scale development in Africa. Had this program not been undermined by a NATO-led destruction of Libya, the carving up of Sudan and regime change in Egypt, then the world would have seen the emergence of a major regional block of African states shaping their own destinies outside of the rigged game of Anglo-American controlled finance for the first time in history.

The Rise of the PetroRuble

The first challenge by a major power to what became known as the petrodollar has come in 2022. In the month after the Ukraine conflict began, the U.S. and its European allies imposed heavy financial sanctions on Russia in response to the illegal military invasion. The Western measures included freezing nearly half of the Russian central bank’s 640 billion U.S. dollars in financial reserves, expelling several of Russia’s largest banks from the SWIFT global payment system, imposing export controls aimed at limiting Russia’s access to advanced technologies, closing down their airspace and ports to Russian planes and ships, and instituting personal sanctions against senior Russian officials and high-profile tycoons. Worried Russians rushed to withdraw rubles from their banks, and the value of the ruble plunged on global markets just as the U.S. dollar had in the early 1970s.

The trust placed in the U.S. dollar as global reserve currency, backed by “the full faith and credit of the United States,” had finally been fully broken. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a speech on March 16 that the U.S. and EU had defaulted on their obligations, and that freezing Russia’s reserves marks the end of the reliability of so-called first class assets. On March 23, Putin announced that Russia’s natural gas would be sold to “unfriendly countries” only in Russian rubles, rather than the euros or dollars currently used. Forty-eight nations are counted by Russia as “unfriendly,” including the United States, Britain, Ukraine, Switzerland, South Korea, Singapore, Norway, Canada and Japan.

Putin noted that more than half the global population remains “friendly” to Russia. Countries not voting to support the sanctions include two major powers – China and India – along with major oil producer Venezuela, Turkey, and other countries in the “Global South.” “Friendly” countries, said Putin, could now buy from Russia in various currencies.

On March 24, Russian lawmaker Pavel Zavalny said at a news conference that gas could be sold to the West for rubles or gold, and to “friendly” countries for either national currency or bitcoin.

Energy ministers from the G7 nations rejected Putin’s demand, claiming it violated gas contract terms requiring sale in euros or dollars. But on March 28, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia was “not engaged in charity” and won’t supply gas to Europe for free (which it would be doing if sales were in euros or dollars it cannot currently use in trade). Sanctions themselves are a breach of the agreement to honor the currencies on global markets.

Bloomberg reports that on March 30, Vyacheslav Volodin, speaker of the lower Russian house of parliament, suggested in a Telegram post that Russia may expand the list of commodities for which it demands payment from the West in rubles (or gold) to include grain, oil, metals and more. Russia’s economy is much smaller than that of the U.S. and the European Union, but Russia is a major global supplier of key commodities – including not just oil, natural gas and grains, but timber, fertilizers, nickel, titanium, palladium, coal, nitrogen, and rare earth metals used in the production of computer chips, electric vehicles and airplanes.

On April 2, Russian gas giant Gazprom officially halted all deliveries to Europe via the Yamal-Europe pipeline, a critical artery for European energy supplies.

U.K. professor of economics Richard Werner calls the Russian move a clever one – a replay of what the U.S. did in the 1970s. To get Russian commodities, “unfriendly” countries will have to buy rubles, driving up the value of the ruble on global exchanges just as the need for petrodollars propped up the U.S. dollar after 1974. Indeed, by March 30, the ruble had already risen to where it was a month earlier.

A Page Out of the “American System” Playbook

Russia is following the U.S. not just in hitching its national currency to sales of a critical commodity but in an earlier protocol – what 19th century American leaders called the “American System” of sovereign money and credit. Its three pillars were (a) federal subsidies for internal improvements and to nurture the nation’s fledgling industries, (b) tariffs to protect those industries, and (c) easy credit issued by a national bank.

Michael Hudson,  a research professor of economics and author of “Super-Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire” among many other books, notes that the sanctions are forcing Russia to do what it has been reluctant to do itself – cut reliance on imports and develop its own industries and infrastructure. The effect, he says, is equivalent to that of protective tariffs. In an article titled “The American Empire Self-destructs,” Hudson writes of the Russian sanctions (which actually date back to 2014):

Russia had remained too enthralled by free-market ideology to take steps to protect its own agriculture or industry. The United States provided the help that was needed by imposing domestic self-reliance on Russia (via sanctions). When the Baltic states lost the Russian market for cheese and other farm products, Russia quickly created its own cheese and dairy sector – while becoming the world’s leading grain exporter.

Russia is discovering (or is on the verge of discovering) that it does not need U.S. dollars as backing for the ruble’s exchange rate. Its central bank can create the rubles needed to pay domestic wages and finance capital formation. The U.S. confiscations thus may finally lead Russia to end neoliberal monetary philosophy, as Sergei Glaziev has long been advocating in favor of MMT [Modern Monetary Theory]. …

What foreign countries have not done for themselves – replacing the IMF, World Bank and other arms of U.S. diplomacy – American politicians are forcing them to do. Instead of European, Near Eastern and Global South countries breaking away out of their own calculation of their long-term economic interests, America is driving them away, as it has done with Russia and China.

Glazyev and the Eurasian Reset

Sergei Glazyev, mentioned by Hudson above, is a former adviser to President Vladimir Putin and the Minister for Integration and Macroeconomics of the Eurasia Economic Commission, the regulatory body of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). He has proposed using tools similar to those of the “American System,” including converting the Central Bank of Russia to a “national bank” issuing Russia’s own currency and credit for internal development. On February 25, Glazyev published an analysis of U.S. sanctions titled “Sanctions and Sovereignty,” in which he stated:

[T]he damage caused by US financial sanctions is inextricably linked to the monetary policy of the Bank of Russia  …. Its essence boils down to a tight binding of the ruble issue to export earnings, and the ruble exchange rate to the dollar. In fact, an artificial shortage of money is being created in the economy, and the strict policy of the Central Bank leads to an increase in the cost of lending, which kills business activity and hinders the development of infrastructure in the country.

Glazyev said that if the central bank replaced the loans withdrawn by its Western partners with its own loans, Russian credit capacity would greatly increase, preventing a decline in economic activity without creating inflation.

Russia has agreed to sell oil to India in India’s own sovereign currency, the rupee; to China in yuan; and to Turkey in lira. These national currencies can then be spent on the goods and services sold by those countries. Arguably, every country should be able to trade in global markets in its own sovereign currency; that is what a fiat currency is – a medium of exchange backed by the agreement of the people to accept it at value for their goods and services, backed by the “full faith and credit” of the nation.

But that sort of global barter system would break down just as local barter systems do, if one party to the trade did not want the goods or services of the other party. In that case, some intermediate reserve currency would be necessary to serve as a medium of exchange.

Glazyev and his counterparts are working on that. In a translated interview posted on The Saker, Glazyev stated:

We are currently working on a draft international agreement on the introduction of a new world settlement currency, pegged to the national currencies of the participating countries and to exchange-traded goods that determine real values. We won’t need American and European banks. A new payment system based on modern digital technologies with a blockchain is developing in the world, where banks are losing their importance.

Russia and China have both developed alternatives to the SWIFT messaging system from which certain Russian banks have been blocked. London-based commentator Alexander Mercouris makes the interesting observation that going outside SWIFT means Western banks cannot track Russian and Chinese trades.

Geopolitical analyst Pepe Escobar sums up the plans for a Eurasian/China financial reset in an article titled “Say Hello to Russian Gold and Chinese Petroyuan.” He writes:

It was a long time coming, but finally some key lineaments of the multipolar world’s new foundations are being revealed.

On Friday [March 11], after a videoconference meeting, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and China agreed to design the mechanism for an independent international monetary and financial system. The EAEU consists of Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and Armenia, is establishing free trade deals with other Eurasian nations, and is progressively interconnecting with the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

For all practical purposes, the idea comes from Sergei Glazyev, Russia’s foremost independent economist ….

Quite diplomatically, Glazyev attributed the fruition of the idea to “the common challenges and risks associated with the global economic slowdown and restrictive measures against the EAEU states and China.”

Translation: as China is as much a Eurasian power as Russia, they need to coordinate their strategies to bypass the US unipolar system.

The Eurasian system will be based on “a new international currency,” most probably with the yuan as reference, calculated as an index of the national currencies of the participating countries, as well as commodity prices. …

The Eurasian system is bound to become a serious alternative to the US dollar, as the EAEU may attract not only nations that have joined BRI … but also the leading players in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as well as ASEAN. West Asian actors – Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon – will be inevitably interested.

Exorbitant Privilege or Exorbitant Burden?

If that system succeeds, what will the effect be on the U.S. economy? Investment strategist Lynn Alden writes in a detailed analysis titled “The Fraying of the US Global Currency Reserve System” that there will be short-term pain, but, in the long run, it will benefit the U.S. economy. The subject is complicated, but the bottom line is that reserve currency dominance has resulted in the destruction of our manufacturing base and the buildup of a massive federal debt. Sharing the reserve currency load would have the effect that sanctions are having on the Russian economy – nurturing domestic industries as a tariff would, allowing the American manufacturing base to be rebuilt.

Other commentators also say that being the sole global reserve currency is less an exorbitant privilege than an exorbitant burden. Losing that status would not end the importance of the U.S. dollar, which is too heavily embedded in global finance to be dislodged. But it could well mean the end of the petrodollar as sole global reserve currency, and the end of the devastating petroleum wars it has funded to maintain its dominance.

*

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 first posted on ScheerPost.

Ellen Brown is an attorney, chair of the Public Banking Institute, and author of thirteen books including Web of DebtThe Public Bank Solution, and Banking on the People: Democratizing Money in the Digital Age. She also co-hosts a radio program on PRN.FM called “It’s Our Money.” Her 300+ blog articles are posted at EllenBrown.com

She is a regular contributor to Global Research.

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

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

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

***

Lebanon Central Bank Governor Riad Salameh has denied statements made that the bank was bankrupt.  Salameh has led the bank for 30 years and claims it is going about its legally-mandated role despite losses in the financial sector.

“Despite the losses sustained by Lebanon’s financial sector, which are being addressed in the recovery plan that is currently being prepared by the Lebanese government in cooperation with the International Monetary Fund, the Banque du Liban is still exercising its role entrusted to it under Article 70 of the Monetary and Credit Law, and will continue to do so,” he said.

His denial came after Deputy Prime Minister Saade Shami said, “Unfortunately, the state is bankrupt, as is the central bank, so we have a problem … the loss has occurred.”  He had been speaking about the state’s inability to contribute significantly to bridging financial sector losses, “which means it has no liquidity.” He added that the losses will be distributed among the state, the Banque du Liban, banks, and depositors. Cash withdrawals in foreign currency in Lebanon have been strictly limited since 2019 due to the ongoing economic crisis.

Riad Salameh refused to appear before Judge Ghada Aoun to answer questions about his possible money laundering activities. According to France24, the investigation rests on several apartments owned by Riad Salameh in Paris. He is also accused of smuggling money out of Lebanon. Salameh’s brother, Raja, and his Ukrainian business partner, Anna Kosakova, are also accused of money laundering. The Judge has referred the case against both Salamehs to Judge Noula Mansour of the 1st court of Mt. Liban.  The Swiss have frozen Riad Salameh’s accounts and accused him of stealing $300 million of Lebanese money. He also faces accusations of money laundering, stealing, and tax evasion from the UK, France, Belgium, Germany, and Luxembourg, while those countries have frozen his accounts.

Since 2019, Lebanon has been experiencing the worst economic crisis since the end of the civil war (1975-1990).  The financial collapse incurred by the banking system is estimated by the government at about $69 billion.

Lebanon’s economic crisis ranks among the world’s top three crises since the mid-19th century, according to the World Bank’s Regional Director, Saroj Kumar Jha, who on Monday described the current crisis as the worst in Lebanese history.

In March 2020, Lebanon’s economy collapsed after it defaulted on about $31 billion of Eurobonds, with its currency sinking more than 90 percent against the dollar on the black market.  Talks with the International Monetary Fund continue as inflation in the country soared an annual 215 percent in February.

Lebanon’s gross domestic product plummeted to $21.8 billion in 2021 from about $52bn in 2019, while the economy contracted about 58 percent between 2019 and 2021, making it the largest contraction in a list of 193 countries.

About 80% of Lebanon’s population now lives under the poverty line, with 36% in extreme poverty, according to the UN, and people can’t access basic goods, including food, water, healthcare, and education, while widespread power outages are common due to fuel shortages.

The financial implosion was caused by decades of political corruption and bad banking policies. The wealthy ruling elite has become richer, while the citizens have become poorer. This social inequity caused violent street riots as protesters demanded the government step down.  Lebanon is ruled by a sectarian political system by which various religious sects control power and money.

On Monday, the ‘Lebanon Reform, Recovery, and Reconstruction Framework’ meeting were chaired by Prime Minister, Najib Mikati, and in joint coordination between the UN, EU, and the World Bank in Beirut.  Jha, of the World Bank, said, “the national reform program led by Mikati, but if this program does not do well, it will lead to a greater deflation of the economy and will lead to a crisis in economic and social conditions.” He believes that “there is a need for a reform plan that includes a financial program, debt repayment, restructuring the financial and banking sector, and developing social protection systems.”

Mikati said,

“The government is working through the relevant authorities in the public sector to unify a single and comprehensive vision for development, recovery, and reform among those concerned, and we are close to completing the unification of this vision to implement the necessary reforms.”

Lebanon needs to carry out various reforms and measures to secure financial assistance and unlock billions of dollars of aid from donor countries and institutions, such as the International Monetary fund.

Lebanon applied for a $10bn IMF bailout package in May 2020 but stalled due to internal bickering among the various political factions in the country and a lack of consensus on the size of the debt and losses on the balance sheet of the central bank. A proposed government financial rescue plan earlier this year estimated a roughly $70 billion hole in the financial sector.

On Saturday, a Turkish ship carrying 58 truckloads of humanitarian aid arrived in Tripoli under the coordination of the Turkish Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency carrying 960 tons of food.

On hand to greet the arriving aid was Turkish Ambassador Ali Baris Ulusoy, head of Lebanon’s High Relief Committee Maj. Gen. Muhammad al-Khayr, and Tripoli Port manager Ahmet Tamir.  Ulusoy confirmed 524 tons of food have arrived last week, and 80 tons of food were delivered to the Lebanese Armed Forces at the Port of Beirut on Friday.

Maronite Patriarch Beshara al-Rahi said,

“I had previously said that there should be a probe into the central bank governor and all ministries and funds, but the prosecution of a single person exclusively is rejected and this is not justice.”

He stressed that President Michel Aoun’s term should not be extended, and he called for “reevaluating” the 1989 Taef Accord, which was a plan to eliminate the sectarian political system in Lebanon, which many feel is the root cause for much of Lebanon’s ills.

Many experts feel sectarianism will not end until religious groups stay out of politics, and political parties are formed and run based on a political ideology.

“The constitution stipulates that the President cannot renew his term and this is what I advocate. We must elect a new president two months before the end of President Michel Aoun’s tenure,” al-Rahi said in an interview on LBCI television. He added, “We want a president who can unify the Lebanese and who can carry the constitution and implement it without fear.”

“In the presence of new faces, we can achieve change. The era of blocking roads has ended. Elect those whose loyalty is for Lebanon, not for foreign forces; elect those who are not running after money,” the patriarch urged.

*

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

Selected Articles: Massacre in Bucha. Was It a False Flag?

April 6th, 2022 by Global Research News

Massacre in Bucha. Was It a False Flag?

By Jens Bernert, April 05, 2022

Civilians were shot in Bucha, Ukraine, as reported by the Kiev government on April 3, 2022. The Russian army had withdrawn from the village on March 30. On March 31, the mayor of Bucha had reported joyfully and good-humoredly about the Russians‘ withdrawal in a video. There was no talk of deaths yet. They came later.

Is the US on a Course to Replace Putin and Crash the Russian Economy? Biden, Zelensky and the Neocons

By Philip Giraldi, April 06, 2022

News on April 1st, admittedly April Fools’ Day, suggests that Ukraine has staged helicopter launched missile attacks on a fuel storage depot inside Russia, which, if true, could produce a massive escalation from the Kremlin. It would be a typical neocon maneuver to dramatically increase the level of the fighting and draw the United States into the conflict.

Falsification of Images, Incoherent Information? Russia Willing to Investigate Bucha’s Tragedy

By Lucas Leiroz de Almeida, April 05, 2022

According to the official Kremlin’s position, the Russian government categorically denies any involvement by its forces in operations that killed civilians in Bucha. Spokesperson Dmistry Peskov stated on Monday, April 4, about the case, making it clear that Moscow, in addition to denying participation in the massacre, supports the immediate launch of high-level investigations on the occurrence.

Foreign Cash Flow into Russia to Hit Record Despite Sanctions

By Paul Antonopoulos, April 06, 2022

Considering the price levels, especially for oil, Russia’s revenue from oil sales in March reached historic highs, something that was not expected when the West launched its economic war against Moscow. None-the-less, it appears that the yuan, China’s currency, will be the biggest winner during this crisis between Russia and the West.

Russiagate: The Smoking Gun. “The FBI was an active participant in the conspiracy to destroy Trump.”

By Peter Van Buren, April 05, 2022

Following Hillary’s exoneration over her emails and mishandling of classified information, the FBI launched its Crossfire Hurricane investigation into Trump-Russia, based in whole or large part on the infamous Christopher Steele dossier. The public now knows the dossier was paid for and stocked with falsehoods by the Clinton campaign.

Fake News in Kiev Heralds Cruel April. A Major Battle Is Approaching.

By M. K. Bhadrakumar, April 05, 2022

An indignant Moscow has angrily demanded a United Nations Security Council meeting on Monday over the allegations of atrocities by Russian troops in areas around Kiev through the past month. Prima facie, this allegation is fake news but it can mould misperceptions by the time it gets exposed as disinformation. 

Concerns as India Relaxes Rules Around Gene-edited Crops

By Bharat Dogra, April 05, 2022

The Indian government relaxed regulations around gene-edited crops on March 30 – despite scientists’ warnings about the ‘largely unknown’ environmental impact and health impacts. Only last year, hundreds of thousands of rural workers took to the streets by foot, horses, and tractors.  Three controversial farm bills implemented were successfully overturned.

US Military Doctor Testifies She Was Ordered to ‘Cover Up’ Vaccine Injuries

By Baxter Dmitry, April 05, 2022

Dr. Theresa Long, a medical officer with the United States military, has testified in court that she was ordered by a superior to suppress Covid-19 vaccine injuries following the Biden regime’s mandate. The DoD downplayed Dr. Long’s conclusions, saying the increase in vaccine injuries was caused by a “glitch in the database.”

The War in Ukraine: Understanding and Resisting the Global Elite’s Deeper Agenda

By Robert J. Burrowes, April 05, 2022

As I have explained previously, since the dawn of human civilization 5,000 years ago, ‘ordinary’ people have been engaged in an ongoing struggle against elites, whether local, imperial, religious, economic, national or, now, global. See Why Activists Fail’. But whatever the context, the elite intention is always the same: to kill undesired populations and/or control the lives of everyone else by depriving them of their fair share of political, economic, social and ecological resources.

The WHO as a “Proxy World Government”? Abolition of the Nation State? Say NO to “Global Tyranny”

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel and Peter Koenig, April 05, 2022

In the shadow of the Ukraine war, the WHO is preparing – unnoticed by the public – an “international agreement on the prevention and control of pandemics” binding under international law. The negotiations in Geneva have already begun. Originally, the “transfer of power” was planned for 1 May 2022, i. e. all 194 member states of the WHO would then be forced to implement the measures decided by the WHO, such as lockdowns or general compulsory vaccination.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Massacre in Bucha. Was It a False Flag?

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

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

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

***

The Food and Drug Administration last week authorized Americans 50 and over to get a fourth Covid vaccine dose. Some of the FDA’s own experts disagree with the decision, but the agency simply ignored them. It will convene its advisory committee this Wednesday to discuss future vaccine needs. That’s like having lawyers present arguments to a judge who’s already issued a verdict.

Eric Rubin, editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, sits on the advisory committee. Hey told CNN last month that he hadn’t seen enough data to determine whether anyone needs a fourth dose whose immune system isn’t seriously deficient.

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 from Children’s Health Defense

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

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

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

***

The Institute of International Finance believes that Russia’s current account surplus is likely to reach $200-240 billion this year. Experts note that Moscow’s balance of payments has historically been determined by the export of energy resources, raw materials and import of goods. Considering the price levels, especially for oil, Russia’s revenue from oil sales in March reached historic highs, something that was not expected when the West launched its economic war against Moscow. None-the-less, it appears that the yuan, China’s currency, will be the biggest winner during this crisis between Russia and the West.

Banks are now asking customers to open accounts in China’s national currency and this trend is being observed not only in Russia, but across the world. As early as 2019, Moscow and Beijing adopted the decision to gradually abandon the dollar in trading with each other. But, at the time, these were just the intentions and the first step: overall, Chinese banks still have large reserves of American dollars.

Now, China’s Foreign Ministry has raised the topic of switching to payments with Russia to the ruble or yuan. Discussions about transferring payments in the national currency of energy commodities are already underway. Beijing is pushing for a similar strategy in Southeast Asia and in its dealings with Arab countries. For example, Saudi Arabia is unhappy with Washington’s policies and calls the dollar a black hole. As a result, Riyadh and Beijing could change the payment currency of oil from dollars to yuan

Ten years ago, China began promoting the use of the yuan internationally and has achieved some limited success. It is recalled that Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said that events in Ukraine could change China’s financial trajectory and that Beijing can take advantage of the situation and start expanding the yuan.

According to the IMF, the yuan is the fifth largest reserve currency in the world, with central banks holding the equivalent of about $319 billion in reserves. Within the global economy, this figure is not so large: the yuan accounts for only about 2.5% of the total reserves of central banks. By comparison, the dollar accounts for more than 50% of reserves and the euro 19%. At the beginning of the year, Bloomberg reported that the Chinese currency had become the fourth most popular means of payment in the world.

Currently the yuan is used as a reserve currency in about 75 countries. The yuan could become the new international currency because China has a strong economy and the country produces everything from simple goods to high tech weapons.

In effect, it is Western policies that led Russia to expand trade with the East. For example, India and Russia are discussing the creation of a payment mechanism in rubles and rupees.

One way or another, Russia-China bilateral trade will quickly grow under the current circumstances. China has one of the largest reserves of rubles, with the Russian currency accounting for 13.8% of its foreign exchange reserves. In addition, China is Russia’s main trading partner, with the volume of transactions between the two countries exceeding $148 billion last year.

However, on a number of important issues – for example, the supply of parts for aircraft, Beijing has so far not adopted a specific decision. According to Reuters, China has reportedly recommended that its four largest oil and gas companies reduce their participation in Russian projects. China’s Foreign Ministry denied the report.

Although experts say the reason the yuan is so unpopular in international trade is because the Chinese government does not have a positive global image, this ignores the fact that China’s multilateralization and diversification of economic relations are still underdeveloped. In this way, so long as China’s economy goes strength to strength, the Russian economy and ruble will be able to weather the full effects of the West’s economic siege, something that was unlikely anticipated when sanctions were enthusiastically imposed.

For a long time, the maintenance of a cheap national currency was beneficial to Beijing thanks to the large volume of exports of goods valued in US dollars. However, the role of the Chinese currency in foreign trade with Russia will depend on its will and most importantly on Beijing’s ability to operate independently and autonomously from the West. Both Russia and China appear to be on the correct and accelerated path towards de-Dollarization.

*

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.

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

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

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

***

 

There are many backstories surfacing from what is going on in Ukraine and Washington that have been largely ignored amid the drumbeat of casualty counts combined with claims and counter-claims from the two sides. Two stories that I believe have received insufficient attention are the US government’s three decades long obsession with weakening and de facto destroying the Russian state and the dominant neocon plus associate liberal democracy promoter role in what has become American foreign policy.

To be sure, anyone who doubts that the US is currently on a course to not only replace President Vladimir Putin but also to crash the Russian economy is delusional. Washington has been trying to deconstruct the former Soviet Union ever since 1991, beginning with President Bill Clinton’s expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe in spite of a pledge not to do so and his unleashing the oligarchs who looted the country’s natural resources under President Boris Yeltsin. The pressure continued under the beatified President Barack Obama, who appointed as Ambassador Michael McFaul, who saw his mission as connecting with dissidents and opposition forces inside Russia, a role incompatible with his promotion of US interests and protecting US persons.

And then we had the redoubtable President Donald Trump undoing confidence building agreements with Russia followed by the current disaster that is unfolding before our very eyes. One should not ignore the fact that the fighting in Ukraine came about largely because the Biden Administration refused to negotiate seriously regarding the mostly reasonable demands that the Kremlin was making to enhance its own security. Former US arms inspector Scott Ritter cites a reported comment by a senior Biden Administration official which sums up the current policy, such as it is:

“The only end game now is the end of Putin regime. Until then, all the time Putin stays, [Russia] will be a pariah state that will never be welcomed back into the community of nations.”

Indeed, President Joe Biden’s recent disastrous trip to Europe can likely be characterized as one wishes to see it and the media has certainly done considerable spinning, but Biden left behind a legacy of various gaffes and lapsus linguae that made clear that the US is in the game to defeat Russia however long it will take to play out. And Biden has considerable support from brain dead congressmen like Republican Senator Lindsey Graham who has called for someone to murder Putin, lamenting “Is there a Brutus in Russia?”

On his trip, Biden revealed that he expects US combat troops to go to Ukraine’s assistance and he has also taken delight in denouncing Putin as a “killer,” a “thug,” a “murderous dictator” and a “man who cannot remain in power.” In so doing, he has openly called for Putin’s removal from office, i.e. regime change, while also opening the door to an obvious false flag operation in his unwillingness to reveal when questioned by a reporter how the US might respond if Russia were to use chemical weapons in Ukraine. That he has taken those positions means that it will be impossible to restore manageable relations with Moscow post Ukraine. It is a heavy price to pay for something that is little more than posturing.

The chemical weapon issue is particularly important as President Donald Trump bombed Syria with cruise missiles in the wake of a fabricated report that Bashar al-Assad had used such weapons in an attack on Khan Shaykhun in 2017. It turned out that the anti-regime terrorists who were occupying the city at the time had themselves staged the attack and deliberately blamed it on the Syrian government to produce an expected US response.

Based on what I am seeing and hearing, I would conclude that the neoconservatives and their liberal democracy promoting friends are working hard from the inside to make something like a war with Russia happen. Note in particular that we are talking about war with shooting and deaths, not just a reincarnation or extension of the Cold War of yore. News on April 1st, admittedly April Fools’ Day, suggests that Ukraine has staged helicopter launched missile attacks on a fuel storage depot inside Russia, which, if true, could produce a massive escalation from the Kremlin. It would be a typical neocon maneuver to dramatically increase the level of the fighting and draw the United States into the conflict.

In addition to that, I know I am not the only one who has noticed the pace and focus of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskys’ widely promoted appeals to groups and world governments to come to his country’s aid, to include establishment of a no-fly zone. The appeals are slick, convincing and carefully focused, with Zelensky being framed as a “hero” fighting valiantly against savage invaders. To put it mildly they are way beyond the capabilities and experience level of a former comedian, whose performances featured erotic dancing and playing a piano with his penis, corruptly placed on the presidential hotseat by a billionaire oligarch Israeli citizen.

The US media is, of course, lavishly praising Zelensky, but I would bet that he has a cadre of American and possibly Israeli neoconservatives working diligently behind him to get it right, coaching him on what to say and do. There might be US government players also in on the act, to include NED (National Endowment for Democracy), CIA information specialists, State Department media consultants and observers from the National Security Council. Indeed, there is as much a war going on over the airwaves and internet to influence thinking internationally as there is fighting taking place on the ground.

One should conclude that the CIA is playing the central role in the “Russia Project” because of its ability to shield what it is doing from scrutiny. Based on previous operations to overthrow governments in various places, one might assume that the so-called covert action approach is multi-level. It consists of media placements that are intended to sway opinion both inside and outside Russia and produce unrest, the identification and recruitment of Russian government officials when they travel overseas, and the support of dissidents both internally and externally who share a negative view of Moscow and its policies. A major component in the approach is to obtain Western liberal support for harsh sanctions and other repressive measures against the Kremlin based on the fraudulent proposition that Putin and his associates are out to destroy “democracy” and “freedom.” Ironically, Americans are less “free” and also poorer because of the actions of their own government since 2001, not because of Vladimir Putin.

As was the case with Iraq, Afghanistan and the long list of American interventions, it is the neocons who are in front demanding a powerful military response, both to Russia and, inevitably, to Iran. What is particularly noticeable is how the neocons and their liberal democracy promoting counterparts have in several areas dominated the foreign policies of both parties. Leading neocon Bill Kristol, who called the Biden speech “a historic call to action on par with Ronald Reagan[‘s] ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall speech,’” recently also contributed “There would be no real prospect of an awakening in the United States and Europe were it not for the stand the Ukrainians have made. We would still be denying the threats we face. We would still be turning away from the urgency of the task we face. We would even, I daresay, still fail to appreciate the preciousness of the freedom and decency we have the obligation—and the honor—to defend. It is the Ukrainians who have shown us what free men and women can do, and what they are sometimes required to do, in defense of that freedom. It is the Ukrainians who have shown the world that we are in a new period of consequences. It is the Ukrainians who have given us the example of what it means today to fight back against brutality, and to fight for freedom.”

Kristol is, as so often, full of flag waving, chest puffing nonsense, peddling the notion that the United States has an obligation to police the world. Another leading neocon and regular Washington Post and The Atlantic contributor Anne Applebaum puts it this way and in so doing expands the playing field to include much of the world: “Unless democracies defend themselves together, the forces of autocracy will destroy them. I am using the word forces, in the plural, deliberately. Many American politicians would understandably prefer to focus on the long-term competition with China. But as long as Russia is ruled by Putin, then Russia is at war with us too. So are Belarus, North Korea, Venezuela, Iran, Nicaragua, Hungary, and potentially many others.”

It would be nice, for a change, to end an article on a high note, but high notes are hard to find these days. If there is anything beyond Ukraine to demonstrate the insanity of US foreign policy it would have to be, inevitably, recent news out of Israel. US Secretary of State Tony Blinken was recently in Israel trying in part to sell the possibility that the Biden Administration might actually come to a non-proliferation agreement with Iran over its nuclear program. Israel strongly opposes any such move and its lobby in the US led by various neocon think tanks has been working hard to kill any deal. So, what did Blinken do? He asked Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett for suggestions of what might be done in lieu of an actual agreement. Naftali reportedly suggested harsher sanctions on Iran. Cut it any way you want, but the renewal of 2015’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is beneficial for both the United States and all of Iran’s neighbors, and here the US senior-most representative involved in the negotiations is asking the head of a foreign government to tell him what to do. Something is very wrong in Washington.

*

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 Unz Review.

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

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from TUR

In Canada the CBC has suffered a tremendous loss of audience and credibility by making itself a publicity operation for the COVID officialdom whose key figure heads include Justin Trudeau. Seeking the votes of Ukrainian nationalists in Canada, many of whom are apparently quite comfortable with the Nazi elements in the current Ukrainian government, some members of Trudeau’s WEF cabinet are busy designing Canada’s version of anti-Russian war propaganda. See this.

Mélanie Joly, a young leadership graduate of the WEF and Canada’s current Minister of Foreign Affairs, is prominent among those preparing the basis for Canada’s propaganda blitz to lionize Zelensky and demonize Putin. Not surprisingly she characterizes her work misleadingly as a counter-propaganda initiative.

Minister Joly is quoted in the following citation under the title, “Demand Wartime Censorship.” Blacklock’s Reporter explains,

“Cabinet must regulate the internet in Canada to curb Russian disinformation, says Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly. A federal ban on Kremlin-funded TV is not enough, said Joly: “My mandate as foreign minister is really to counter propaganda online.”  (emphasis added)

See this.

In aid of my continuing emphasis on the Honourable A. Brian Peckford’s efforts to restore the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to its function as a beacon national inspiration in our failing polity, I wrote the following open letter to Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly

The Honourable Mélanie Joly,

Foreign Affairs Minister of Canada
5  April, 2022

Dear Minister Joly;

I concur with Eva Lyman and The Honourable A. Brian Peckford that the federal government of Canada must put its own house in order by living within the rule of law including through adherence to our pre-eminent national law, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  As the former Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador observed in his letter of 30 March, 

“The truth is being suppressed. The Charter is being violated and cannot be excused with using Section 1. It’s intent was not for use in a circumstance like a virus with a 99% recovery rate and less than a 1% fatality rate, but rather in a circumstance where the country was in peril.”

After two years the Charter violations continue by, for instance, federal travel bans that have made Canada a national prison for those who have opted not to take mandated injections that have been shown to be notoriously unsafe and ineffective.

In a recent speech you made at the United Nations Human Rights Commission, you emphasized, Minister Joly, that human rights are universal. You also emphasized that the protection of human rights is a key aspect of international law. The protection of human rights is also a key domestic function of national governments. In Canada the primary legal means for implementing this protection is the enforcement of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a key part of Canada’s constitution that the Trudeau Liberals violate every day.

Canada’s growing reputation as a human rights violator was recently highlighted at the European Parliament where Prime Minister Trudeau was recently asked to “spare” the assembled parliamentarians of “his presence.” He was diplomatically asked to leave. 

A Member of the European Parliament declared that Trudeau’s invasive violations of the human rights of his own citizens has “made him a disgrace to any democracy.” Another MEP, who, like Eva Lyman, has lived under Soviet tyranny, called the current Liberal government of Canada “a dictatorship of the worst kind.” The MEP continued, under Prime Minister Trudeau’s “quasi-liberal boot… Canada is becoming a symbol of civil rights violations.”

Clearly these comments in the European Parliament resonated widely throughout the international community in a way that will certainly harm the credibility of Canada when your government tries to present itself as a champion of international human rights. The widening awareness that Canada’s federal government is facing growing internal criticisms for violating human rights and civil liberties, will no doubt be noticed outside the country as well as inside. 

It will not go unnoticed that one of those leading the criticism is a former Canadian Premier who helped draft and enact the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1981-82. Indeed, the Honourable A. Brian Peckford is backing up his position by heading up a legal case whose objective is to restore the role of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to its proper status as the lead embodiment of national authority in the Canadian rule of law.      

In my 71 years of life I do not remember any other time when Canada has been the target of this level of harsh criticism from elected officials in an important international body. It is not a big stretch to surmise that the unwillingness of the Trudeau Liberals to place the federal government within the framework of the Canadian Charter of Rights set a course leading to such a harsh rebuke in an important arena of international affairs. 

It must be quite shocking for you to find Canada placed in such a position of international infamy during your watch as Minister of Foreign Affairs. Your government could send an encouraging signal to the world and to Canadian citizens generally by voluntarily dropping mandates to re-enter adherence to the requirements of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

I believe the restoration of the Charter as a leading beacon in the enactment of laws and policies by the Canadian government would lead you away from your apparent preoccupation with censoring freedom of speech and expression in promoting your government’s approach to the conflict in Ukraine. I don’t recall seeing any genuine debate in Parliament about what Canada’s policy should be in this conflict. There can be no doubt that the period of severe decline in the integrity of Parliamentary governance in Canada has been accompanied by the period when parliamentarians have failed to uphold the role of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canadian governance.  

You are quoted as declaring Minister Joly, “My mandate as foreign minister is really to counter propaganda online.”

See this.

Who do you believe entrusted you with such a mandate? Who appointed you arbiter of what constitutes propaganda and what constitutes honest reporting. How much honest reporting do we see these days in Canada now that our country is seen by some as a symbol of civil liberties violations and a dictatorship of the worst kind?

I humbly suggest that, under the present circumstances, you would serve yourself, the Canadian government, the Canadian people, and the international community best by setting yourself the task of safeguarding freedom of the press, freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and freedom of movement in these difficult times. Please, Minister Joly, use your considerable influence to restore the rule of law in Canada especially by elevating the role of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to its proper status as a beacon of Canada’s national values and priorities.

Yours respectfully

Anthony J. Hall

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. 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.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Canada’s War Propaganda, Censorship and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Massacre in Bucha. Was it a False Flag?

April 5th, 2022 by Jens Bernert

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

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

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

According to CNN: 

“Lviv, Ukraine (CNN) The lifeless bodies of at least 20 civilian men line a single street in the town of Bucha near the Ukrainian capital. Some lie face down on the pavement while others are collapsed on their backs, mouths open in a tragic testament to the horrors of Russian occupation.

.

The hands of one man are tied behind his back with a piece of white cloth. Another man lies alone, tangled up in a bicycle by a grassy bank. A third man lies in the middle of the road, near the charred remains of a burned-out car.
The shocking images of the carnage in Bucha were captured by Agence France-Presse on Saturday, the same day Ukraine declared the town liberated from Russian troops. Accounts of alleged Russian atrocities are emerging as its forces retreat from areas near Kyiv following a failed bid to encircle the capital.
.
The town of Bucha has endured five weeks of near-constant firefights. Now officials and human rights groups are blaming the civilian deaths on the departed Russian forces.
 .
“Corpses of executed people still line the Yabluska street in Bucha. Their hands are tied behind their backs with white ‘civilian’ rags, they were shot in the back of their heads. So you can imagine what kind of lawlessness they perpetrated here,” Bucha mayor Anatoliy Fedoruk told Reuters on Saturday.”

***

In contrast, the following report points to a false flag, which is yet to be verified.

At this stage the matter requires  further investigation as to what actually happened.

***

Civilians were shot in Bucha, Ukraine, as reported by the Kiev government on April 3, 2022. The Russian army had withdrawn from the village on March 30. On March 31, the mayor of Bucha had reported joyfully and good-humoredly about the Russians‘ withdrawal in a video. There was no talk of deaths yet. They came later.

Video, Youtube (Upload 1. April 2022): „The mayor of Bucha, Anatoliy Fedoruk, confirmed the city’s liberation from Russian troops on March 31.“

Many of those killed wore white armbands, like those apparently worn by the Russian soldiers who occupied the site as a distinguishing mark.

It is speculated that many of those killed were people who had put on a white armband in solidarity with these Russian soldiers. Some of the people may also have been specifically branded as “traitors“ with an armband during the massacre, which was apparently perpetrated by Ukrainian units.

The murdered people were then abused on April 3 as part of a false flag operation by attributing their deaths to the Russians who had previously occupied this place. That the massacre was carried out only after the Russians had left, by Kiev-Ukrainian units, is shown by the already mentioned video with the mayor, who was in a good mood one day after the Russian withdrawal and had no dead to mourn in his place.

The fact that “traitors“ in Ukraine are going down the tubes, unfortunately, was already known a month ago by the BILD journalist Julian Röpcke, a great supporter of the Kiev government as well as a friend of the Azov battalion, from Ukraine. The propaganda with the dead themselves is reminiscent of the approach in the Syrian war.

Translation of Bild’s Journalist’s Statement:

“Phew … what can I say … Ukrainians do gruesome things with captured Russian soldiers & traitors. But I won’t post that here. It’s fundamentally wrong, but it happens and anyone who criticizes it should ask themselves what they would do in such a situation.“

Addendum:

A video released by the Ukrainian National Police (April 2, 6:52 p.m.) purported to show the “cleansing of the city from the occupiers.“

Russian troops had already left by that time (compare also the March 31 video of the mayor mentioned above).

There are no civilian corpses in this video.

One would expect the (alleged) Russian atrocities announced on April 3 to be shown or addressed there.

*

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 Blauer Bote Magazin.

Featured image is from Wikimedia Commons

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

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

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

***

The alleged massacre of civilians in Bucha is one of the most talked about topics around the world in recent hours. Russia has been repeatedly accused by Western governments and mainstream media, and there are already calls for Russian President Vladimir Putin to be prosecuted for war crimes and human rights violations. However, there is a series of controversies in the case, from possible falsifications in the images released by Ukrainian forces to incoherent information about the dates of the massacre, which demands a deep investigation.

According to the official Kremlin’s position, the Russian government categorically denies any involvement by its forces in operations that killed civilians in Bucha. Spokesperson Dmistry Peskov stated on Monday, April 4, about the case, making it clear that Moscow, in addition to denying participation in the massacre, supports the immediate launch of high-level investigations on the occurrence. The Russian authorities also committed to take the discussion forward to the UN Security Council in order conduct an international investigation in the grave tragedy.

Furthermore, Peskov made it clear that the Russian government does not trust the veracity of all the information contained in the videos and photos of dead civilians released by the Ukrainian government. There are reports from Russian experts pointing out possible forgeries and frauds in the content of the videos.

Other Russian officials also commented on the case, pointing out that there is evidence that the videos were forged or performed. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, for example, claimed during a meeting with UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Martin Griffiths that the Ukrainian press had released fake videos about Russian operations in Bucha, and that there had been a staging organized by Kiev’s forces in the region days after the departure of Russian troops.

In the same vein, the official representative of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Maria Zakharova, said that the videos and photos released by the Ukrainian press and the Western statements about them appear to be a “custom-made story”. Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu also spoke out, claiming that the case is a production by the Kiev regime for Western media that sounds like a provocation against Russia. Finally, the head of the Russian Investigative Committee, Alexander Bastrykin, also expressed distrust about the veracity of the material released by Kiev and requested a procedural assessment on the possible massacre of civilians.

Despite the distrust, which seems justified in the face of a long history of fake news and information warfare on the part of the NATO-Kiev axis, Moscow seems open to hearing contrary opinions, which is precisely why the government seems so interested in launching an investigation, both using its official experts and international agents convoked by the UNSC. It is possible that, in addition to the obviously fake and staged videos, there is also real material, with actual images of dead people. The Kremlin’s main point is that, regardless of whether the videos and photos are real or not, there is no Russian involvement in cases of massacre of civilians.

Considering the evident victory of the Special Operation in Bucha region, there would be no strategic advantage for the Russian military to shoot civilians, which would cause unnecessary harm to the country. Now, Zelensky, Biden and other Western leaders are calling for Putin to be condemned by international courts and planning an increase in sanctions. So, it does not seem at all reasonable that Russian forces would have deliberately planned and carried out a massacre of civilians, considering that these would be the obvious consequences of such acts.

Another point that needs to be mentioned is that there is an evident time lapse in the case. The Russians withdrew from Bucha on 30 March. The Ukrainians entered Bucha on March 31, and the “retake” of the city was announced by the mayor on the same day. Azov’s paramilitaries entered the city only on April 1. So how were the “bodies in the streets” found only on April 3?

If international society is really interested in the truth, it must heed the Russian request for an investigation at the UNSC. If Western governments refuse to cooperate with the investigation, it will be possible to conclude that they have something to hide. The UN must remain neutral and commit itself to the search for the truth of the facts, even if this truth is unpleasant for the West.

*

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.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.

Featured image: Destroyed car in Bucha with a dead person inside, 2 April 2022 (Licensed under CC BY 4.0)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Falsification of Images, Incoherent Information? Russia Willing to Investigate Bucha’s Tragedy
  • Tags: , ,

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

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

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

***

Biden’s recent European tour left a trail of miscalculations and missteps. And he was not helped by the travels of Secretary of State Antony Blinken either.

If Biden and Blinken are trying to convince the world that the battle against Russia is a generational battle between democracy and autocracy – childishly framed as a Manichean battle between good and evil – then the clumsiest step may have been the least reported. Unlike Biden’s unscripted mistakes, Blinken was acting from the script.

On March 27, Secretary of State Blinken attended a foreign ministers’ meeting in Israel. There he met with his counterparts from Egypt, the United Arab Emirate, Bahrain and Morocco: hardly a meeting of democracies that condemn autocracy. Most of these countries are autocracies: sometimes brutally repressive ones.

Most ironically, perhaps, is sitting at the table with Morocco. One of the core principles the US says it is defending in Ukraine is that countries cannot change the borders of others by force and cannot annex territory. Morocco should not be invited to that table. Morocco changed borders by force and annexed Western Sahara. Though the UN and the International Court of Justice have ruled in favor of Western Sahara’s right to self-governance, the US has endorsed the annexation and officially recognized Western Sahara as part of Morocco.

Biden made of series of mistakes that were unscripted and dangerous. It is worrisome if they were mistakes; it is more dangerous still if they were not.

The US continues to warn that Russia is considering using chemical weapons despite the little reported revelation by the Pentagon that “There’s no indication that there’s something imminent in that regard right now.” On March 24, Biden drew a red line: if Russia uses chemical weapons in Ukraine, it “would trigger a response” from NATO. As Obama proved in Syria, red lines are dangerous. Knowing the red line that would bring NATO into the war can motivate US allies to stage false flag chemical attacks to finally bring the US to their aid.

But that may not have been the biggest danger in Biden’s mistaken language. Answering questions – so, on his own without a script – Biden said “The nature of the response would depend on the nature of the use.” Then, elaborating, he said “It would trigger a response in kind,” seemingly announcing that the US would respond to a Russian chemical weapons attack with a chemical weapons attack of their own: worrisome if it was a mistake; dangerous if it was not.

The second mistake came the very next day. Speaking to the 82nd Airborne Division in Poland, Biden said,

“And you’re going to see when you’re there. And you – some – some of you have been there. You’re going to see – you’re going to see women, young people standing – standing the middle of – in front of a damn tank, just saying, ‘I’m not leaving. I’m holding my ground.’ They’re incredible. But they take a lot of inspiration from us.”

With that mistake, Biden seemed to undo war saving guarantees that the US was not sending troops into Ukraine to fight Russia. Without explaining what Biden did mean, the White House explained that that’s not what he meant. A White House spokesperson clarified,

“The president has been clear we are not sending U.S. troops to Ukraine and there is no change in that position.”

Again, if it was a mistake, that is worrisome; if it was not, that is dangerous. And maybe it was not. Or, at least, not exactly. When asked about the comment, Biden accusingly answered, “You interpret the language that way.” He went on to claim that he was talking about “helping train the troops in – that are – the Ukrainian troops that are in Poland.”

With that off script explanation, Biden seemed to admit that the US was currently, not only arming Ukrainian soldiers, but training them in Poland to use those weapons to kill Russians in Ukraine. From the Russian perspective, that may be a very provocative admission that Biden went off script to make.

So, the script writers and fixers had to be brought in again. This time, they had to clean up the word “train.” It turns out they’re not training them, they are only “liaising” with them. Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby was brought out to de-escalate Biden’s remarks. In a master class on euphemism, Kirby explained that US troops were “liaising” with Ukrainian troops in Poland:

“It’s not training in the classic sense that many people think of training. I would just say it’s liaising.”

The next day, the third mistake came. And it was the biggest. This time Biden called for a coup in Russia. Before he ended his speech that day, Biden added the call,

“For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.”

The White House speech writers and fixers struggled with this one because the meaning was too clear to accuse commentators of misinterpreting the language. Biden “was not discussing Putin’s power in Russia, or regime change,” the White House translated.

“The President’s point was that Putin cannot be allowed to exercise power over his neighbors or the region.”

But, demonstrating the disconnect between the President and his staff – and that you cannot trust the clarifications of his staff – Biden held his ground and said that that’s not what his point was. During a press conference, a reporter asked, “Do you believe what you said – that Putin can’t remain in power?  Or do you now regret saying that?  Because your government has been trying to walk that back.” Biden responded,

“I’m not walking anything back.  The fact of the matter is I was expressing the moral outrage I felt toward the way Putin is dealing, and the actions of this man – just – just the brutality of it.” He then added that “I wasn’t then, nor am I now, articulating a policy change.”

Biden is right to express moral outrage over the war in Ukraine. But, by the same moral principle, he should express outrage at Truman for dropping two atomic bombs on civilian populations in Japan. And he should express outrage at a series of presidents for the war that killed between 1.2 and 3.2 million Vietnamese. He should express moral outrage at Reagan for his murderous Central American wars, at Clinton for Yugoslavia and at Bush for Iraq. He should express moral outrage at his own vote in support of Iraq and at the Obama-Biden administration for the continuation of Iraq and Syria, not to mention Libya and the support of the war in Yemen. In fact, if he does not express moral outrage at every president since he was born, then he is expressing a principle, not of morality, but of exceptionalism and hypocrisy.

And it should not be surprising that Biden is personally calling for a coup. He has an extensive track record with coups while in the White House. The Obama-Biden administration occupied the White House during the June 2009 coup in Honduras and the 2010 attempted coup in Ecuador. It financed and supported the 2010 Haitian elections. They knew about and supported the 2012 coup in Paraguay, interfered repeatedly in Venezuela and were, at best, silent in Brazil when Dilma Rouseff was removed from office. Most importantly in the current context, Biden approved of the 2014 coup in Ukraine. In the intercepted call between Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland and American ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt that demonstrates the US role in the coup, when Pyatt says the West needing to “midwife this thing,” Nuland says that Biden, himself, would be willing to do the midwifery.

So, the largest in a series of mistakes should come as no surprise: Biden has a long history of supporting US efforts at regime change.

*

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 Snider has a graduate degree in philosophy and writes on analyzing patterns in US foreign policy and history.

Featured image is from OneWorld

World Hunger and the War in Ukraine

April 5th, 2022 by No Cold War

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

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

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

***

The war in Ukraine, along with sanctions imposed by the United States and Western countries against Russia, have caused global food, fertiliser, and fuel prices to ‘skyrocket’ and endanger the world food supply. This conflict is exacerbating the existing crisis of global hunger and imperils the living standards and well-being of billions of people – particularly in the Global South. 

War in the ‘breadbasket of the world’

Russia and Ukraine together produce nearly 30 percent of the world’s wheat and roughly 12 percent of its total calories. Over the past five years, they have accounted for 17 percent of the world’s corn, 32 percent of barley (a critical source of animal feed), and 75 percent of sunflower oil (an important cooking oil in many countries). On top of this, Russia is the world’s largest supplier of fertilisers and natural gas (a key component in fertiliser production), accounting for 15 percent of the global trade of nitrogenous fertilisers, 17 percent of potash fertilisers, 20 percent of natural gas.

The current crisis threatens to cause a global food shortage. The United Nations has estimated that up to 30 percent of Ukrainian farmland could become a warzone; in addition, due to sanctions, Russia has been severely restricted in exporting food, fertiliser, and fuel. This has caused global prices to surge. Since the war began, wheat prices have increased by 21 percent, barley by 33 percent, and some fertilisers by 40 percent.

The Global South is ‘getting pummelled’

The painful impact of this shock is being felt by people around the world, but most sharply in the Global South. ‘In a word, developing countries are getting pummelled,’ United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres recently remarked.

According to the UN, 45 African and ‘least developed’ countries import at least a third of their wheat from Russia or Ukraine – 18 of those countries import at least 50 percent. Egypt, the world’s largest wheat importer, obtains over 70 percent of its imports from Russia and Ukraine, while Turkey obtains over 80 percent.

Countries of the Global South are already facing severe price shocks and shortages, impacting both consumption and production. In Kenya, bread prices have risen by 40 percent in some areas and, in Lebanon, by 70 percent. Meanwhile, Brazil, the world’s largest producer of soybeans, is facing a major reduction in crop yields. The country purchases close to half of its potash fertiliser from Russia and neighbouring Belarus (which is also being sanctioned) – it has only a three month supply remaining with farmers being instructed to ration.

‘The United States has sanctioned the whole world’

The situation is being directly exacerbated by U.S. and Western sanctions against Russia. Although sanctions have been justified as targeting Russian government leaders and elites, such measures hurt all people, particularly vulnerable groups, and are having global ramifications.

‘They’re preventing fertilisers from getting to producing countries,’ said Antonio Galvan, president of the Brazilian national soybean farmers association, Aprosoja. ‘How many millions are going to starve to death because of the lack of these fertilisers?’

Nooruddin Zaker Ahmadi, director of an Afghan import company, made the following diagnosis: ‘The United States thinks it has only sanctioned Russia and its banks. But the United States has sanctioned the whole world.’

‘A catastrophe on top of a catastrophe…’

The war in Ukraine and associated sanctions are exacerbating the already existing crisis of world hunger. The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation found that ‘nearly one in three people in the world (2.37 billion) did not have access to adequate food in 2020.’ In recent years, the situation has worsened as food prices have risen due largely to the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change, and related disruptions.

‘Ukraine has only compounded a catastrophe on top of a catastrophe,’ said David M. Beasley, the executive director of the UN World Food Program. ‘There is no precedent even close to this since World War II.’

‘If you think we’ve got hell on earth now, you just get ready,’ Beasley warned.

Regardless of the different opinions on Ukraine, it is clear that billions of people around the world will suffer from this hunger crisis until the war and sanctions come to an end.

*

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 InfoBrics

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

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

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

***

An indignant Moscow has angrily demanded a United Nations Security Council meeting on Monday over the allegations of atrocities by Russian troops in areas around Kiev through the past month. Prima facie, this allegation is fake news but it can mould misperceptions by the time it gets exposed as disinformation. 

A Tass report says: “The Russian Defense Ministry said on Sunday that the Russian Armed Forces had left Bucha, located in the Kiev region, on March 30, while “the evidence of crimes” emerged only four days later, after Ukrainian Security Service officers had arrived in the town. The ministry stressed that on March 31, the town’s Mayor Anatoly Fedoruk had confirmed in a video address that there were no Russian troops in Bucha. However, he did not say a word about civilians shot dead on the street with their hands tied behind their backs.” 

Even more surprising is that within minutes of the “breaking news”, western leaders — heads of state, foreign ministers, former politicians — popped up with statements duly kept ready and only based on the videos, seconds-long videos and a clutch of photos, ready to pour accusations. No expert opinion was sought, no forensic work was done, no opportunity given to the accused to be heard. 

French President Emmanuel Macron broke his election campaign where he’s in a dead heat with Marine Le Pen for reelection in next Sunday’s poll to brand the alleged Russian atrocities as “war crime”. So did German Chancellor Olaf Scholz who is in big trouble too as Germany is posting inflation at +7.3 percent in March. 

There’s nothing unusual about beleaguered politicians catching hold of bogeymen. Intelligent minds like Macron and Scholz’s must be realising by now their flawed policies leading inexorably to such a strategic defeat at the hands of Russia. But the big question is: Why such theatrics just at this point? 

The fake news surfaced even as the Phase 2 of Russia’s special operation is slated to begin within the  week in the eastern Donbass region. Something like 60-80000 Ukrainian troops, rated to be the best units of the armed forces, have been encircled in Donbass. 

The Russian feint paid off in pinning down the Ukrainian forces in Kiev through past month. By the time the truth dawned on the Kiev set-up ( and their western “advisors), the damage was done. The enormity of the resultant situation needs some explanation. 

The above map reproduced from the Novosti (unfortunately, in Russian language) on the exact ground situation as of April 3 and the commentary by Ivan Andreev, an experienced war correspondent who covered the Russian operations in Syria, gives the salience of the cauldron in Donbass where the crème de la crème of the Ukrainian forces numbering several divisions are entrapped, isolated by opposing forces from their logistical base and other friendly forces. 

The cauldron is fairly large, marked in blue and black stripes on the map in the upper reaches of the Donbass region in the direction of Kharkiv. The massive Russian column that retreated from the Kiev region a week ago is manoeuvring in a big arc toward that cauldron bypassing Chernihiv in the north and the cities of Sumy and Kharkiv (near the Russian border in the northeast). 

The Ukrainian forces are well-armed and have fortified themselves heavily but are unable to escape from the entrapment. Nor is it feasible for Kiev to send reinforcements as the countryside to the west through consists of largely open farmlands (all the way to the Dniepr River). The Russians have air supremacy and it is impossible to hide any enemy movements from their roving eyes.

The Russian forces have put out of action all nearby airports and destroyed the nearby Ukrainian oil reserves systematically through Phase 1 of the operation. As I wrote in a previous blog, three days ago, Russian forces dealt a devastating blow: “Notably, the Mirgorod military airfield in central Poltava Region, a strategically important hub, has been taken out of action and several Ukrainian combat helicopters and aircraft found in its camouflaged car parks, as well as fuel and aviation weapons depots have been destroyed.” 

Equally, Kharkiv has been surrounded and “in a high-precision strike with the Iskander operational-tactical missiles on the defence headquarters in the city on Thursday, “more than 100 nationalists and mercenaries from Western countries” were confirmed as killed.” 

Nonetheless, the Ukrainian forces are expected to put up a good fight rather than surrender — although surrounded, without air cover, and having no scope to rotate forces or enough fuel to engage in maneuver warfare and with ammunition running out. 

To be sure, a major battle is approaching, the most decisive in the entire Russian special operation so far. The catch is, the cauldron also has plentiful settlements of ethnic Russian population (including Russian passport holders) and the offensive will be a long grind patiently executed to avoid civilian casualty or destruction of civilian infrastructure.

That is to say, Phase 2 may last anywhere up to a month or so to be completed. Make no mistake, the Russians have to win here (which they will) as they will also be breaking the back of the Ukrainian armed forces. Despite all the bluster by Zelensky, Kiev will realise the enormity of the defeat and his western mentors will see the writing on the wall too. 

To be sure, a whole month lies ahead where the western strategy will be to incessantly manufacture fake news, intensify the information war. Even some false flag operation may be staged under the supervision of western intelligence operatives. 

In a worst case scenario, Kiev may even play its last card — chemical weapons. Russia has publicised details of locations where Ukraine has kept stockpiles of chemical weapons. The US is known to have supplied as military aid special gear (gas masks, protective clothing, etc.) to cope with chemical weapons and given special training for collective protection.

The alacrity with which Macron and Scholz consumed the fake news is a harbinger of a new phase in the information war. Succinctly put, there is a sober awakening in Paris and Berlin that the Russian operation is successfully meeting the set objectives. 

“April”, TS Eliot wrote in his masterpiece The Wasteland, “is the cruellest month, breeding Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing Memory and desire, stirring Dull roots with spring rain.” But the dark irony of this year’s “Aprilness” is going to be that the fecundity and renewal here will be about Russia’s regeneration in a world of both history and the myths spawned by quarantined western minds.  

*

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: Ukrainian troops prepare to fight Russian forces in Donbass (Source: Indian Punchline)

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

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

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

***

 

President Biden’s 5.8 trillion dollars fiscal year 2023 budget increases “discretionary” spending to 1.6 trillion dollars. The remaining 4.2 trillion dollars of spending consists of “mandatory” spending, including on Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the national debt. The discretionary spending is divided between 813 billion dollars for “defense” and 769 billion dollars for the rest.

Since Biden’s budget increases military spending and does not call for major new government programs, some have described it as “centrist.”  Calling a 5.8 trillion dollars tax-and-spend monstrosity “centrist” shows how far the center of American politics is from the principles of limited government.

Little of Biden’s proposed defense budget will be spent to defend the American people, although it will defend the ability of defense contractors, lobbyists, and war party propagandists to continue littering Northern Virginia with “McMansions.” Biden wants to spend yet more to continue the US’s counterproductive intervention in Ukraine, as well as on NATO and other programs aimed at challenging Russia. Biden’s budget also proposes spending 1.8 billion dollars to “support a free and open, connected, secure and resilient Indo-Pacific Region” and another 400 million dollars for the Countering the People’s Republic of China Malign Influence Fund. How would Biden react if China started spending money to challenge the US’s influence in the Western Hemisphere?

Biden’s budget spends 33.2 billion dollars to support law enforcement. Federal spending on local law enforcement violates the Tenth Amendment and takes a step toward nationalizing the police. A national police force would be a grave danger to liberty.

Biden also proposes spending 1.7 billion dollars on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives so it can, among other activities, crack down on gun trafficking. A crackdown on gun trafficking allows the agency to harass gun owners and firearms dealers. Biden’s “centrist” budget also provides funding to crack down on hate crimes. Criminalizing thoughts has no place in a free society.

Biden claims he has reduced spending. However, the only reason spending is down is because Congress has stopped passing multitrillion dollar covid relief bills. Biden’s budget proposes reducing the deficit by raising taxes. Among Biden’s tax proposals is a new 20 percent tax. Biden’s “billionaires tax” breaks new ground in theft by taxing unrealized capital gains — in other words, taxing income that taxpayers did not actually receive!

Biden’s budget estimates an increase in the federal debt to 44.8 trillion dollars in ten years. Of course, the final spending bill approved by Congress will likely spend more on welfare and warfare then Biden is proposing. The spending will force the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates low, further eroding the dollar’s purchasing power and thus increasing demand for welfare and yet more government spending.

America may soon pay the price for attempting to fund a massive welfare-warfare state with fiat currency, America’s ham-fisted intervention in the Ukraine-Russian conflict has caused more countries to seek alternatives to the dollar. This increases pressure for the dollar to lose its world reserve currency status. When that happens, the US will face a major economic crisis featuring hyperinflation, massive unemployment, and the growth of authoritarian political movements. The only way these problems can be avoided is if the people demand the federal government stop trying to run their lives, run the economy, and run 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.

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

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

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

***

Read Part I:

Russiagate: The Smoking Gun

By Peter Van Buren, April 04, 2022


Part I of this article showed a conspiracy to smear Donald Trump with false allegations of collusion with Russia took place, with Hillary Clinton at its head. Part II today will show the FBI was an active participant in the conspiracy to destroy Trump. The facts are not in dispute. We are left only to decide if the FBI acted incompetently and unprofessionally, or as part of a conspiracy.

The first part of the smoking gun may have been hiding in plain sight for some time now. In June 2018 Inspector General for the Department of Justice Michael Horowitz released his report on the FBI’s Clinton email investigation, including FBI Director Comey’s drafting of a press release announcing no prosecution for Clinton, written before the full investigation was even complete. In a damning passage, Horowitz found it was “extraordinary and insubordinate for Comey to conceal his intentions from his superiors… for the admitted purpose of preventing them from telling him not to make the statement, and to instruct his subordinates in the FBI to do the same.”

Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Comey’s boss, is criticized for meeting privately with Bill Clinton as the FBI investigation into Hillary unfolded. “Lynch’s failure to recognize the appearance problem… and to take action to cut the visit short was an error in judgment.” Lynch then doubled-down, refusing to recuse herself from the Clinton case, creating “public confusion.”

The report also criticizes FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who exchanged texts disparaging Trump before moving from the Clinton email to the Russiagate investigation. Those texts sowed public doubt about the investigation, including one exchange that read, “Page: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Strzok: “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.” Another Strzok document stated “we know foreign actors obtained access to some Clinton emails, including at least one secret message,” thought that was never prosecuted.

Page and Strzok also discussed cutting back the number of investigators present for Clinton’s in-person interview in light of the fact she might soon be president, and thus their new boss. Someone identified only as Agent One went on to refer to Clinton as “the President” and in a message told a friend “I’m with her.” The FBI also allowed Clinton’s lawyers to attend her interview, even though they were also witnesses to  possible crimes committed by Clinton.

If that does not add up to a smoking gun that the FBI conspired pre-dossier to help Hillary Clinton, how about this?

Following Hillary’s exoneration over her emails and mishandling of classified information, the FBI launched its Crossfire Hurricane investigation into Trump-Russia, based in whole or large part on the infamous Christopher Steele dossier. The public now knows the dossier was paid for and stocked with falsehoods by the Clinton campaign. The unanswered questions from that investigation themselves comprise a second smoking gun of FBI conspiracy. For example:

  • Why did the FBI not inquire into Steele’s sources and methods, which would have quickly revealed the information was wholly false? Why was the FBI unable to discover Steele (and later, Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann, who gave false info to the FBI about Trump and Alfa Bank) were double agents working for and paid by the Clinton campaign?
  • When the FBI found the target of its first FISA warrant out of the dossier, Carter Page, was actually a paid CIA asset, why did they hide this information from the FISA court instead of dropping Page? Why did this not cause them to question the credibility of Steele, a master spy who couldn’t even identify his source was actually a CIA asset? Steele claimed the Russians offered Page an insanely huge bribe, billions of dollars, to end U.S. sanctions if Trump became president. Page clearly could never have played a significant role in ending sanctions. Why did the FBI find those statements credible enough to pursue the warrant?
  • Why did the FBI cite an open-source press article by Michael Isikoff claiming Trump had Russian ties as part of its FISA warrant application against Page without finding out who Isikoff’s source was? The source of course was Christopher Steele, who was interviewed in a hotel room booked by Fusion GPS who was paid by Clinton. The FBI nonetheless claimed an article from Yahoo! corroborated the dossier, a cite unlikely to pass muster on an undergrad term paper. Were they really fooled?
  • Why did the FBI not discover the dossier’s false claim Trump lawyer Michael Cohen visited Prague to meet with Russians? Robert Mueller was able to conclusively dismiss the report. Confirming Cohen in Prague would have been a cornerstone of the FBI’s larger case, but the matter was left open until Mueller.
  • Why did the FBI not question Sussmann about the source of his DNS data, some of which came directly from inside the White House? Why would a private citizen have such information?
  • When Sussmann, claiming to be a concerned citizen with White House DNS data, first approached the FBI, why was he assigned to meet with the FBI’s General Counsel, its lawyer, and not a case agent? Was something other than his information, such possibly FBI collusion with fraud, being validated?
  • Why was the CIA investigation referral saying Hillary was behind Russiagate ignored by the FBI? The memo was addressed to Director James Comey, who claims he has no knowledge of it, and Peter Strzok, who should have been the action officer but did nothing?
  • Why did Kevin Brock, the FBI’s former intelligence chief, say “The fact pattern that John Durham is methodically establishing shows what James Comey and Andrew McCabe likely knew from day one, that the Steele dossier was politically-driven nonsense created at the behest of the Clinton campaign. And yet they knowingly ran with its false information.”
  • Despite the investigation being run by the FBI, why was it CIA Director John Brennan who briefed (LINK) Obama on the Hillary connection in July 2016 and not Comey?

If any of those questions seem kind of obvious, that is the point. The cover stories only had to hold for a short time, enough to infect the media, enough to make things seem plausible for the FBI. Team Clinton and its co-conspirators were so certain they would win the election they felt none of their tricks needed to stay hidden much past victory. The story is waist-deep rotten.

At this point you can believe the multiple ops paid for and run by Clinton people were uncoordinated events, or that they were part of the broad campaign Hillary was an active participant in, and about which John Brennan warned Barack Obama, and which the CIA warned the FBI, not knowing they were in on it. You can believe the FBI acted incompetently and unprofessionally (yet consistently, no breaks went Trump’s way), or as part of a conspiracy.

What you cannot do any more is pretend this did not happen, and that the person most involved came close to being elected president because of it. If you worry about democracy, worry about that.

*

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.

In preparing this article, it was fascinating to review the many shameful articles written in 2016 and 2017, the crazy days when every hinted rumor was worth a Breaking! designator. But one piece stood out, from Forbes in 2017. Hillary denied paying for the dossier, and the truth — the campaign paid the law firm Perkins and Coie who paid Fusion GPS who paid Orbis who paid Steele — was not known. The Forbes journalist wrote “If ordered and paid for by Hillary Clinton associates, Russia Gate is turned on its head as collusion between Clinton operatives (not Trump’s) and Russian intelligence. Russia Gate becomes Hillary Gate.” The article went on to say how James Comey refused to comment on Fusion GPS and the dossier in May 2017. Comey by then knew the real story and remained silent, even as the press was still running with the idea the dossier had been paid for by anonymous Democratic donors. If only we’d known.

The Late-Deceased Paradigm on Russia/China

April 5th, 2022 by Ray McGovern

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

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

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

***

The sooner the geniuses of the Washington Swamp get it through their ivy-mantled brains that driving a wedge between Russia and China is not going to happen, the better the chances the world can survive the fallout (figurative and literal) from the war in Ukraine.

Today’s Swamp geniuses read their textbooks about how Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger were adroit in taking advantage of the seething hostility between Russia and China a half-century ago. They leveraged that mutual loathing, and the fear that their rival might draw the U.S. onto its side, into a triangular paradigm that brought tangible benefits to the world. It was a balance of terror. But it was an insurable (“trust but verify”), strategic balance.

One benefit facilitated by the Nixon/Kissinger policies toward China and Russia was the 1972 U.S.-Soviet Anti-Ballistic-Missile (ABM) Treaty of 1972, which remained the cornerstone of strategic stability for three decades until Bush junior quit the treaty. Amb. Chas Freeman (from the Chinese side) and I (from the Soviet side) were deeply involved in all this.

When less ideological, more enlightened leaders emerged in Beijing and Moscow, they began to recognize how mutually debilitating their rivalry was, and the hostility started to wane. Nevertheless, little did we imagine that as soon as October 2004 Russian President Putin would visit Beijing to finalize an agreement on border issues. Putin also signed an agreement to jointly develop Russian energy reserves and crowed that relations had reached “unparalleled heights.”

That’s right; 2004. Putin’s strong initiative to cultivate close ties with China is hardly new. Years later, it has paid off handsomely, and has been facilitated by the inept “diplomacy” of the rising Juniors that President Biden has working for him. The Antony Blinkens and Jake Sullivans of this world – out off a mix of arrogance and ignorance – have greased the skids for the Russia-Chinese united front the US now faces on the explosive situation in Ukraine. Wet-behind-the-ears though they were, I was still amazed to see this dynamic duo talk down to their Chinese counterparts a year ago in Anchorage, and then brief Biden on how Russia had a huge problem with China.

After the Biden-Putin summit in Geneva on June 16, Biden’s team could not hustle him onto the plane before he gave the media these bon mots:

“Without quoting him [Putin] – which I don’t think is appropriate – let me ask a rhetorical question: You got a multi-thousand-mile border with China. China is … seeking to be the most powerful economy in the world and the largest and the most powerful military in the world. … let me choose my words. Russia is in a very, very difficult spot right now. They are being squeezed by China. …”

At Putin’s post-summit presser he was asked if he had reached “a new level of trust with the US president”. Putin quoted Leo Tolstoy in response:

“Tolstoy once said, there is no happiness in life, only lightening flashes (зарницы) of it – cherish them. I believe that in this situation some kind of family trust is not possible. However, it seems to me we have seen “lightening flashes” (“зарницы” промелькнули) of it.”

Putin and Xi Try Giving Biden a Tutorial

In the wake of the June summit, the presidents of Russia and China spared no effort to demonstrate that their strategic relationship “in its closeness and effectiveness, exceeds an alliance.” See, for example, the video they released of the first minute of their virtual summit on Dec. 15) They were at pains to demonstrate that the triangular relationship has become isoscolese, with the US on the short end – in effect, two-against-one. As if to make things even clearer, Dec. 15 was also the day Moscow chose to give the US a draft treaty embracing Moscow’s far-reaching proposals for European security.

In the weeks that followed, the Biden administration reacted more positively than I had expected – both in its alacrity in moving so rapidly to begin negotiations (as Moscow had pretty much demanded) and in its willingness to discuss reinstating key provisions of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty abandoned by President Trump in 2019. Taking into account Putin’s many warnings that the deployment of missile-sites in Romania and Poland could threaten Russia’s ICBM force, I thought he might take “half a loaf,” especially since it had become clear that Ukraine was not destined for NATO membership anytime soon). In short, I thought Putin would see some of Tolstoy’s “flashes of light” toward resolving at least some of his security concerns.

‘Misunderestimating’

By invading Ukraine, Putin proved that reasoning wrong; he went for the whole nine yards, so to speak. In retrospect, I can identify three factors to which I failed to give sufficient weight:

  1. The bulk of Ukrainian forces were deployed in positions from which they could attack Donetsk and Luhansk with little or no warning. There were unconfirmed reports that they planned to attack in March, and Putin has mentioned this as a factor.
  2. I underestimated the reaction of top Russian officials at watching for eight years their compatriots – thousands of them also Russian citizens – being shelled by Ukrainians led by the likes of the Neo-Nazi Azov battalion. There is an understandable emotional element here. Every sentient Russian knows that the Nazi’s killed 26 million Soviet citizens during WWII, and that the Stepan Bandura-led Ukrainian Nazis did Hitler’s dirty work in Ukraine.
  3. But I believe most important was my reluctance to give full credibility to Chinese-Russian claims that their strategic relationship “exceeds in closeness and effectiveness” a traditional alliance; that, indeed, it has “no limits”. It was a mistake to see this as primarily rhetoric – and to avoid giving weight to how things looked from Beijing – as in, “after Russia, we’re next.”

The Chinese government-controlled Global Times took strong umbrage at Biden’s gran gaffe in Poland, which seemed to invite the Russian people to overthrow Putin, and accused Washington of trying to similarly overthrow the Chinese Communist Party.

“Just as the US has tried to separate Russians from Putin, it has also tried to separate the Chinese people from the Chinese leader of the Communist Party of China, and has always failed because Washington’s decision-makers just don’t understand that their hegemonic ambitions and hostile moves toward Russia and China threaten the peoples of Russia and China, not just any specific individual or political group, said experts.”

Certainly not lost on the Chinese was the recent release of the Pentagon’s updated National Defense Strategy, which identifies China as Enemy No. 1, not Russia. And Chinese officials have certainly been briefed on this remarkable article by the deputy director of The Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Matthew Kroenig: Washington Must Prepare for War With Both Russia and China: Pivoting to Asia and forgetting about Europe isn’t an option.

What Did Xi Know and When Did He Know It?

Given the critical importance of how united Russia and China really are when push comes to shove, this question seems of transcendent importance – not least for any assessment of President Putin’s frame of mind. Is he still cool, calculating? Or does the invasion of Ukraine suggest the opposite; that he has lost it? Among the Chinese specialists from whom I seek counsel, there is resistance to the thought that Putin forewarned Xi (perhaps during his Feb. 4 visit to Beijing) of his plan to invade Ukraine shortly after the Beijing Olympics. Many experts on China are reluctant to conclude that Xi was told in advance, and that he gave Putin a waiver from Westphalia, so to speak.

Clearly, the implications are serious. In my view, were Putin not to have been assured of Xi’s support, he would have been unhinged to attack Ukraine on Feb. 24. In other words, were Putin to have blindsided Xi, that would bespeak dangerous recklessness.

A Waiver on Westphalia: We Now Do ‘On the Merits’

I think it has become clear that Xi did give Putin a waiver on Westphalia, despite China’s bedrock “principled stand” on non-interference in the affairs of other countries per the Treaty of Westphalia. I know a lot less about China than about Russia, but I find it hard to believe that China’s recent support – so far, at least – for what Putin has done would be as strong and unwavering, were Xi to have been blindsided.

One straw in the wind flew into a Global Times report on Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s Wednesday meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi last Wednesday. Not surprisingly, both sides used the in-person meeting to “highlight the continuing efforts to strengthen the strategic partnership, amid the Ukraine crisis and other ongoing crises such Afghanistan”. What caught my eye was the the sentence that followed:

There have been frequent meetings and communications between the Chinese and Russian foreign ministers in 2022. The two held a phone conversation on February 24 when they exchanged views on the Ukraine issue.

February 24, of course, was invasion day. There is no sign that Wang took Lavrov to the woodshed for Putin’s invasion, or complained at having been kept in the dark. The Global Times continued:

On April 1, President Xi told EU leaders that “China’s position on the Ukraine issue is consistent and clear-cut. China always stands on the side of peace and draws its conclusion independently based on the merits of each matter. China calls for upholding international law and universally recognized norms governing international relations, acts in accordance with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, and advocates the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security.”

I added the bold above for emphasis. One might have expected a reference to Westphalia rather than “the merits of each matter.”

Bottom line: Rapprochement between Russia and China has grown to entente. Someone needs to tell Biden. Proceeding on the assumption that the “world correlation of forces” has not undergone a sea change tips the balance still more in Washington’s disfavor.

*

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.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. His 27-year career as a CIA analyst includes serving as Chief of the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and preparer/briefer of the President’s Daily Brief. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

Featured image is from OneWorld

 

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

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

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

***

The Indian government relaxed regulations around gene-edited crops on March 30 – despite scientists’ warnings about the ‘largely unknown’ environmental impact and health impacts. 

Only last year, hundreds of thousands of rural workers took to the streets by foot, horses, and tractors.  Three controversial farm bills implemented were successfully overturned.

But the fight for India’s food sovereignty is now up against multinational cooperations pushing advances in gene manipulating technology, such as CRISPR or ‘gene-silencing pesticides‘ – which could open a pandora’s box of unintended consequences to the health and the environment.

Conflict 

Dr. Pushpa M. Bhargava, is the founder of the Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology and the Vice-Chairperson of the National Knowledge Commission says: 

“There are over 500 research publications by scientists of indisputable integrity, who have no conflict of interest, that establish harmful effects of GM crops on human, animal, and plant, health, and on the environment and biodiversity.”

A recent paper by Indian scientists showed that the Bt gene in both cotton and brinjal leads to inhibition of growth and development of the plant. On the other hand, virtually every paper supporting GM crops is by scientists who have a declared conflict of interest or whose credibility and integrity can be doubted.

Developers have previously been able to avoid regulations around gene-silencing crops by branding the products as “transient” or providing only “temporary genetic modification”, though this has been refuted by a number of scientific studies that have shown the RNAi pesticides can last up to 80 generations – warned a previous report by Friends of the Earth.  

Irreversible 

“The central government departments that have been acting as peddlers of GM technology-probably in collusion with MNCs marketing GM seeds—have shown little respect for the law.” his report says.

In a recent review called Food Without Choice published in the Tribune, Prof. Pushpa M. Bhargava warned:

“The ultimate goal of this attempt in India of which the leader is Monsanto is to obtain control over Indian agriculture and thus food production. With 60 percent of our population engaged in agriculture and living in villages, this would essentially mean not only control over our food security but also over our farmer security, agricultural security, and security of the rural sector.”

Dr. Bhargava’s strong stance against GM crops is supported by other eminent scientists in various parts of the world. A group of eminent scientists organized under the Independent Science Panel has stated in very clear terms:

“GM crops have not been proven safe. On the contrary, sufficient evidence has emerged to raise serious safety concerns. If ignored, could result in irreversible damage to health and the environment. GM crops should be firmly rejected now.”

Bioweapons 

The Independent Science Panel (ISP) is a panel of scientists from many disciplines and countries, committed to the promotion of science for the public good. In a document titled ‘The case for a GMO-free Sustainable World,’ the ISP has stated further:

“By far the most insidious dangers of genetic engineering are inherent to the process itself, which greatly enhances the scope and probability of horizontal gene transfer and recombination, the main route to creating viruses and bacteria that cause disease epidemics.”

This was highlighted in 2001 by the ‘accidental’ creation of a killer mouse virus in the course of an apparently innocent genetic engineering experiment.

New techniques such as DNA shuffling, are allowing geneticists to create in a matter of minutes in the laboratory. This opens up the possibility of releasing millions of recombinant viruses that have never existed in billions of years of evolution.

Rejected 

Disease-causing viruses and bacteria and their genetic material are the predominant materials and tools for genetic engineering, as much as for the intentional creation of bioweapons.

Several scientists involved in studying the implications and impacts of genetic engineering got together at the International Conference on ‘Redefining of Life Sciences’ organised in Penang, Malaysia, by the Third World Network. They issued a statement (the Penang Statement, or PS) that questioned the scientific basis of genetic engineering.

This statement said: “The new biotechnology-based upon genetic engineering makes the assumption that each specific feature of an organism is encoded in one or a few specific, stable genes so that the transfer of these genes results in the transfer of a discrete feature.

“This extreme form of genetic reductionism has already been rejected by the majority of biologists and many other members of the intellectual community. Largely because it fails to take into account the complex interactions between genes and their cellular extracellular, and external environments that are involved in the development of all traits.

Risks 

The report continued: “It has thus been impossible to predict the consequences of transferring a gene from one type of organism to another in a significant number of cases.

“The limited ability to transfer identifiable molecular characteristics between organisms through genetic engineering does not constitute the demonstration of any comprehensive or reliable system for predicting all the significant effects of transposing genes.”

The world is becoming increasingly concerned about the serious health risks and numerous other adverse impacts of genetically modified crops and genetically modified organisms. Yet billion-dollar GMO multinationals have tried once again to evoke confusion and uncertainty in order to avoid regulation.

Their claim that gene-edited crops should not be subject to the same restrictions as GM crops is an attempt to find a loophole in-laws that are put in place to protect against the risks and dangers related to GMOs.

Mutagenesis 

In July 2018, the highest court in Europe ruled that gene-edited crops using CRISPR should be subject to the same strict rules and restrictions as GMOs. 

The court ruled: “Considering that the risks linked to the use of these new mutagenesis techniques might prove to be similar to those that result from production and release of a GMO through trans-genesis, since the direct modification of the genetic material of an organism through mutagenesis.

“These new techniques make it possible to introduce genetically modified varieties at a rate out of all proportion to those resulting from the application of conventional methods of mutagenesis.

“The European Commission and the European governments must now ensure that all new GMOs are fully tested and labeled and that any field trials are brought under GMO rules.”

Illegal 

A review of the legal and scientific facts surrounding this debate by Dr. Janet Cotter and Dr. R. Steinbrecher had concluded:

“It is clear that gene-edited crops and animals need to be assumed as GMOs in the same way as current GM crops.”

With gene-editing, researchers can add, delete or modify bits of an organism’s genome. Welcoming the court verdict. Franziska Achterberg, Greenpeace EU’s food policy director stated:

“Releasing these new GMOs into the environment without proper safety measures is illegal and irresponsible, particularly given that gene-editing can lead to unintended side-effects.”

Despite this growing recognition of the risks of gene-edited crops, attempts have been speeded up in India by powerful lobbyists to gain backdoor entry for GM crops using gene-editing.

Their attempts appear to be succeeding as the central government and ministry of environment issued a notification on March 30 exempting some gene-edited crops and organisms from earlier rules framed for GM crops.

Future 

SND1 and SND2 genome-edited products, free from exogenous introduced DNA, are to be exempted from 1988-89 rules for GM organisms and will be taken out of the existing approval processes for these.

Those involved in protecting Indian agriculture from the onslaught of GM crops have already stated that these changes made recently are risky and unscientific and that these should be challenged legally.

Another view is that the existing 1988 rules should in fact be strengthened in such a way that such arbitrary changes are not possible in the future.

Without thorough regulations in place to assess and protect against the potential risks of gene-manipulating technologies, the government’s decision to relax laws around gene-editing will do little more than further entrench its role as a major driver of biodiversity loss and health problems.

*

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.

Bharat Dogra is an Honorary Convener and Campaigner with Save Earth Now. His recent books include Man over Machine (Gandhian Ideas for Our Times) and India’s Quest for  Sustainable Farming and Healthy Food. 

Featured image is from Pixhive

Ukraine and the Empire of Lies

April 5th, 2022 by Kurt Nimmo

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

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

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

This article was first published on April 5, 2022

***

The United States government and its unofficial state media—Fox, ABC, CBS, NYT, The Washington Post, etc.—are pushing war propaganda to enflame the situation in Ukraine. The corporate media is megaphoning government lies, fake news, misinformation, and irrational fear-mongering of anything Russian.

Truth is squashed in the Empire of Lies and paved over with official narratives.

Russia is determined to destroy Ukraine, mass murder its civilians, assassinate its president, and gobble up the entire country like its communist predecessor.

We hear this every day.

Putin is Hitler and the Russians are barbarians looking to re-establish the Soviet Union’s hold over Eastern European territory.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Jacques Baud isn’t an armchair warrior. He is a former colonel of the General Staff in Switzerland, an ex-member of Swiss strategic intelligence, and a specialist on Eastern countries. He served as Policy Chief for United Nations Peace Operations; in addition, he served with NATO and was assigned to work on stopping the proliferation of small arms in Africa. Baud was trained in the techniques of US and British intelligence services.

“He was involved in discussions with the highest Russian military and intelligence officials just after the fall of the USSR. Within NATO, he followed the 2014 Ukrainian crisis and later participated in programs to assist the Ukraine,” Baud’s bio posted on the Centre Français de Recherche sur le Renseignement website states.

Baud’s account of the military situation in Ukraine and the political motivation of the Russian Duma, or parliament—and not specifically Vladimir Putin—in regard to Ukraine are at complete odds with the sensationalistic propaganda put out by corporate-state media.

Thanks to an English translation of the original French of Baud’s “La Situation Militaire en Ukraine,” we learn that the US, France, Canada, and the UK, are indeed interested in a new Cold War (and the massive profit such murderous ventures accumulate for the elite and stockholder without a conscience). The fulcrum of this new “cold” war is the ethnic conflict in Ukraine, the poorest country in Europe.

Screenshot from cf2r.org

The central issue of Ukraine in the wake of the US State Department’s engineered “color revolution” regime change in 2014 is the status of autonomy for the two proclaimed Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk (referred to “Luhansk” in the West). The corporate media narrative, a bald-face lie, states that these two republics are demanding separation from Ukraine.

“In fact,” writes Baud, “these Republics were not seeking to separate from Ukraine, but to have a status of autonomy, guaranteeing them the use of the Russian language as an official language—because the first legislative act of the new government resulting from the American-sponsored overthrow of [the democratically-elected] President Yanukovych, was the abolition, on February 23, 2014, of the Kivalov-Kolesnichenko law of 2012 that made Russian an official language in Ukraine.”

This decision caused a storm in the Russian-speaking population. The result was fierce repression against the Russian-speaking regions (Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkov, Lugansk and Donetsk) which was carried out beginning in February 2014 and led to a militarization of the situation and some horrific massacres of the Russian population (in Odessa and Mariupol, the most notable).

Another lie cooked up by the neolibs and their warmongering compatriots, the neocons (the Democrat version is rife within the Biden administration), was that Russia was arming the “terrorists” (as the Ukrainian government calls them).

The rebels were armed thanks to the defection of Russian-speaking Ukrainian units that went over to the rebel side. As Ukrainian failures continued, tank, artillery and anti-aircraft battalions swelled the ranks of the autonomists. This is what pushed the Ukrainians to commit to the Minsk Agreements.

Following the Minsk 1 Agreements to end the conflict in Donbas, then president, Petro Poroshenko, turned around and brazenly “launched a massive ‘anti-terrorist operation’ (ATO/Антитерористична операція) against the Donbass. Poorly advised by NATO officers, the Ukrainians suffered a crushing defeat in Debaltsevo, which forced them to engage in the Minsk 2 Agreements,” Baud writes.

Minsk 2 “did not provide for the separation or independence of the Republics, but their autonomy within the framework of Ukraine. Those who have read the Agreements (there are very few who actually have) will note that it is written that the status of the Republics was to be “negotiated between Kiev and the representatives of the Republics, for an internal solution within Ukraine.”

That is why since 2014, Russia has systematically demanded the implementation of the Minsk Agreements while refusing to be a party to the negotiations, because it was an internal matter of Ukraine.

On the other side, the West—led by France—systematically tried to replace Minsk Agreements with the “Normandy format,” which put Russians and Ukrainians face-to-face. However, let us remember that there were never any Russian troops in the Donbass before 23-24 February 2022. Moreover, OSCE [Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe] observers have never observed the slightest trace of Russian units operating in the Donbass before then. For example, the U.S. intelligence map published by the Washington Post on December 3, 2021 does not show Russian troops in the Donbass.

If you scan the headlines in the US, you get the picture of brave Ukrainian soldiers and citizens fighting against the advancing Russians, led by the mad autocrat Putin determined to wipe Kyiv off the map. In fact, as Baud points out, the Ukrainian military has long been in shambles, “undermined by the corruption of its cadres and no longer enjoy[ing] the support of the population.”

According to a British Home Office report, in the March/April 2014 recall of reservists, 70 percent did not show up for the first session, 80 percent for the second, 90 percent for the third, and 95 percent for the fourth. In October/November 2017, 70% of conscripts did not show up for the “Fall 2017” recall campaign. This is not counting suicides and desertions (often over to the autonomists), which reached up to 30 percent of the workforce in the ATO area. Young Ukrainians refused to go and fight in the Donbass and preferred emigration, which also explains, at least partially, the demographic deficit of the country. (See links to sources in original.)

Because of this situation, the government resorted to using its nationalist and racist militias to wage war against the people in Donbas and elsewhere in eastern and southern Ukraine. NATO attempted to clean up the violent and fascist nature of the nationalist militias—and presumably cover up their terror activities against ethnic Russians—but this was a mission impossible.

In 2020, the militias comprised around 40 percent of Ukraine’s military forces and numbered about 102,000 men, according to Reuters. “They were armed, financed and trained by the United States, Great Britain, Canada and France. There were more than 19 nationalities.”

These militias had been operating in the Donbass since 2014, with Western support. Even if one can argue about the term “Nazi,” the fact remains that these militias are violent, convey a nauseating ideology and are virulently anti-Semitic…[and] are composed of fanatical and brutal individuals. The best known of these is the Azov Regiment, whose emblem is reminiscent of the 2nd SS Das Reich Panzer Division, which is revered in the Ukraine for liberating Kharkov from the Soviets in 1943, before carrying out the 1944 Oradour-sur-Glane massacre in France. [….]

The war propaganda media has avoided or played down the fact the nearly half of the forces fighting in the Donbas are avowed racist nationalists determined to ethnically cleanse all Russians from Ukraine. When Putin talked about the “de-nazification” of Ukraine, he was talking about these militias.

Minsk 1 and 2 were thrown in the dustbin of history. On March 24, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the current president, a former actor and comedian, “issued a decree for the recapture of the Crimea, and began to deploy his forces to the south of the country,” Jacques Baud continues, mapping the outbreak of the war.

Both NATO and Russia conducted large military exercises. The war propaganda media in the West portrayed the Russian exercises as a preparation for an invasion of Ukraine. At the same time, in direct violation of the Minsk Agreements, “Ukraine was conducting air operations in Donbass using drones, including at least one strike against a fuel depot in Donetsk in October 2021. The American press noted this, but not the Europeans; and no one condemned these violations.”

During a February trip to Moscow, the French leader, Emmanuel Macron, said he would relay Russian concerns to Zelenskyy the following day.

But on February 11, in Berlin, after nine hours of work, the meeting of political advisors to the leaders of the “Normandy format” ended without any concrete result: the Ukrainians still refused to apply the Minsk Agreements, apparently under pressure from the United States. Vladimir Putin noted that Macron had made empty promises and that the West was not ready to enforce the agreements, the same opposition to a settlement it had exhibited for eight years.

A few days later, the enfeebled president of the United States, Joe Biden, declard Russia would most certainly invade Ukraine. “How did he know this?” Baud asks.

It is a mystery. But since the 16th, the artillery shelling of the population of Donbass had increased dramatically, as the daily reports of the OSCE observers show. Naturally, neither the media, nor the European Union, nor NATO, nor any Western government reacted or intervened. It would be said later that this was Russian disinformation. In fact, it seems that the European Union and some countries have deliberately kept silent about the massacre of the Donbass population, knowing that this would provoke a Russian intervention.

“On 18 January, Donbass fighters intercepted saboteurs, who spoke Polish and were equipped with Western equipment and who were seeking to create chemical incidents in Gorlivka. They could have been CIA mercenaries, led or “advised” by Americans and composed of Ukrainian or European fighters, to carry out sabotage actions in the Donbass Republics,” Baud notes. (Emphasis mine.)

For many, the documented involvement of the CIA and its commandeered US Army special forces represents a red flag something is fishy about the narrative coming out of Washington and Langley. (See “Exclusive: Secret CIA training program in Ukraine helped Kyiv prepare for Russian invasion.” Yahoo News, March 16, 2022.)

“As the battle lines hardened in Donbas, a small, select group of veteran CIA paramilitaries made their first secret trips to the frontlines to meet with Ukrainian counterparts there, according to former U.S. officials,” Yahoo reported. In other words, the CIA had direct contact with ethnic cleansing nationalist fanatics, same as a previous administration had direct contact with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan during the Soviet presence in that country.

“The Ukrainian military has [allegedly] claimed to have killed three Russian generals, including at least one reportedly eliminated by sniper fire. Yahoo News could not independently verify whether the Russian commanders were killed by CIAtrained troops. (Emphasis added.)

Prior to the “invasion,” during a period of escalated shelling of civilians, the Russian Duma recognized the independence of the two Donbas Oblast republics, and this resulted in the republics asking for assistance against the ethnic cleansing and terror operation by the Neo-Nazi militias and a reluctant, conscription evading regular army.

The Empire of Lies, guilty of unheard of murder and sabotage unleashed around the world after the end of WWII, has pushed its false narrative fast and hard, as it did with its offensive operations against Iraq, Syria, and Libya. The corporate propaganda media excels at the art of war propaganda, misinformation, and outright lies.

In order to make the Russian intervention seem totally illegal in the eyes of the public, Western powers deliberately hid the fact that the war actually started on February 16. The Ukrainian army was preparing to attack the Donbass as early as 2021, as some Russian and European intelligence services were well aware…

In fact, as early as February 16, Joe Biden knew that the Ukrainians had begun intense shelling the civilian population of Donbass, forcing Vladimir Putin to make a difficult choice: to help Donbass militarily and create an international problem, or to stand by and watch the Russian-speaking people of Donbass being crushed.

Baud goes on to explain how the Russian military is going about demilitarizing the country—one of Russia’s main objectives, the second being “de-nazification,” that is to say military action against fanatical Ukrainian nationalists attempting to ethnically cleanse Ukraine of its ethnic Russian minority. Much of the Ukrainian army was deployed to the south in preparation for military action to retake the Crimea. Due to this, the Russians were able to encircle much of Ukraine’s military and its ideologically rabid nationalist militias.

Image on the right: The bombing of Maternity Hospital in Mariupol (Source: OneWorld)

The author explains in detail the de-nazification plan and the bombing of the Maternity Hospital in Mariupol. “According to CNN, 17 people were wounded, but the images do not show any casualties in the building and there is no evidence that the victims mentioned are related to this strike. There is talk of children, but in reality, there is nothing. This does not prevent the leaders of the EU from seeing this as a war crime. And this allows Zelensky to call for a no-fly zone over Ukraine.”

According to Baud’s report, the militias had occupied the building, ran off the staff at gunpoint, and used the hospital as an observation post and anti-tank firing position (likely using US-supplied Javelin missiles).

The problem is that the paramilitary militias that defend the cities are encouraged by the international community not to respect the rules of war. It seems that the Ukrainians have replayed the scenario of the Kuwait City maternity hospital in 1990, which was totally staged by the firm Hill & Knowlton for $10.7 million in order to convince the United Nations Security Council to intervene in Iraq for Operation Desert Shield/Storm.

Western politicians have accepted civilian strikes in the Donbass for eight years without adopting any sanctions against the Ukrainian government. We have long since entered a dynamic where Western politicians have agreed to sacrifice international law towards their goal of weakening Russia.

Baud is correct to conclude the US and its “partners” in Europe are deliberately distorting the picture for ideological reasons. The plan is very similar to what was used in the past.

Some Western politicians obviously wanted there to be a conflict. In the United States, the attack scenarios presented by Anthony Blinken to the UN Security Council were only the product of the imagination of a Tiger Team working for him—he did exactly as Donald Rumsfeld did in 2002, who “bypassed” the CIA and other intelligence services that were much less assertive about Iraqi chemical weapons. (Emphasis in original.)

Saddam Hussein did have chemical and biological weapons—provided by US corporations, as I documented two decades ago. However, he had no intention of targeting the United States, and instead concentrated on restless Kurds. As for the fallaciously touted weapons of mass destruction, George W. Bush made a comedy routine out of the widely debunked claims that resulted in the extermination of more than a million Iraqis.

“What makes the conflict in Ukraine more blameworthy than our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya?” Jacques Baud finally asks of complicit politicians and a tone-deaf and ignorant public.

What sanctions have we adopted against those who deliberately lied to the international community in order to wage unjust, unjustified and murderous wars?… Have we adopted a single sanction against the countries, companies or politicians who are supplying weapons to the conflict in Yemen, considered to be the “worst humanitarian disaster in 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.

Kurt Nimmo is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Countercurrents

The Detectives: Hunting Toxic Chemicals in the Arctic

April 5th, 2022 by Nancy Bazilchuk

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

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

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

***

At first, it was a simple question: what exactly did oil pollution do to grey seals off the coast of Norway?

It was the early 1980s, and a young Norwegian ecotoxocologist, Bjørn Munroe Jenssen, was asked by Conoco Philips to find the answer.

The oil company was just beginning to look for oil in an area of the North Sea called the Halten Bank, off the coast of mid-Norway.

Jenssen and his colleagues knew that oil spills could contaminate seal fur, especially the pups.

“And actually more than 50% of them were polluted by these small tar balls, when they lie and rest, their fur gets contaminated. But we don’t think there are any large effects of that because it’s external contamination,” Jenssen said in the newest episode of 63 Degrees North, NTNU’s English-language podcast.

But Jenssen and his colleagues wondered if there were other contaminants getting into the bodies of the animals. So they did some blood tests. And what they found shocked them.

The poison book

Humans have been making and using chemicals for millennia, but their production skyrocketed in the 20th century. One chemical in particular, DDT, was discovered to be a potent insecticide by a Swiss chemist, Paul Herman Müller, in 1939. Its use during the Second World War saved many lives, by killing insects that carried malaria and typhus. Muller won the Nobel Prize in 1948 for his discovery.

But as the use of these and other chemicals increased, biologists began to see that they could have unintended and potentially Earth-shattering consequences.

In September, 1962, an American marine biologist and author Rachel Carson
Carson published a book documenting just how damaging pesticides were to the environment. She privately called it “the Poison Book.” This work would help spawn the environmental movement across the Western world. It was called Silent Spring.

In spite of Carson’s work, chemical use continued to grow. They were used for everything from controlling insects and weeds to making materials fire-resistant. DDT had been banned, but many other chemicals were in widespread use.

Rachel Carson’s book made national news. This clip is from The New York Times from 22 July 1962, page 86.

Blood and blubber

The blood and tissue tests that Jenssen and his colleagues did contained an alphabet soup of substances.

We found that there were associations between blood levels of contaminants and levels of thyroid hormones, which are hormones that are very important for growth, for thermal regulation, for producing energy, and so on.

“We started to look for other contaminants like the PCBs, polychlorinated biphenols, and pesticides, like the old DDT, which was used a lot, and they were regulated in Norway at that time, but not globally,” he said. “And we found actually quite high concentrations of these compounds in the seals…. in their blood or in their blubber we examined. We even found levels in the brains of these small newborn pups.”

Then it was just a question of determining if the chemicals were affecting the contaminated animals.

The answer turned out to be: Yes.

“We found that there were associations between blood levels of contaminants and levels of thyroid hormones, which are hormones that are very important for growth, for thermal regulation, for producing energy, and so on,” Jenssen said. “So we thought that that might be a very important effect that could affect the survival or the health of the pups.”

Riding the wind

Jenssen didn’t just find these chemicals in seal pups. When he subsequently did tests on animals in arctic Norway, he found a huge spectrum of chemicals in them too — in everything from polar bear milk to Greenland shark blood.

But were all these chemicals coming from? They weren’t being generated in the Arctic, because there’s almost no industrial activity there.

What researchers gradually came to understand was that many of these pollutants can ride the wind or travel in ocean currents. If they are spilled or released somehow, some can vaporize and get carried into the atmosphere, where they ride the prevailing winds north. They might condense on their journey, and get deposited on the ground again, only to be vaporized when it’s warm enough.

And once they arrive in the Arctic, they tend to stay there, trapped in the snow, or as we now know, contained in the fat or blubber of the animals that live there.

And as Jenssen and other researchers have found, they have significant effects on the hormones of the animals that are contaminated.

Native populations and health problems

Jon Øyvind Odland is a gynaecologist and global health researcher at NTNU and at UiT — the Arctic University of Norway.

As Bjørn Munroe Jenssen was documenting the kinds of chemicals that were accumulating in animals, particularly in the Arctic, Odland thought he would look at what was happening with native peoples in the far north.

Native people living in the far north who eat a traditional diet typically eat foods that are high in fat. And many of these substances concentrate in fats.

So when Odland studied native peoples in Chukotka, in eastern Russia, he found that they too, had high levels of contaminants in their blood. What’s more, they found a clear association between these high levels of contaminants and the effectiveness of childhood vaccines.

This posed a difficult challenge: Traditional diets are in many ways much healthier for people living in these most northerly areas. If native people switch to a more Western diet, they can develop other health problems, such as type II diabetes and heart disease.

“It’s the Arctic dilemma,” Odland said in the podcast. “The pollutants follow the food, the best nutrition you can get.”

Zooplankton on painkillers

Ida Beathe Øverjordet was one of Jenssen’s graduate students, studying mercury in the Arctic. Now she’s working at SINTEF, Scandinavia’s largest independent research institute, and continuing her work on pollutants in the Arctic.

Ida Beathe Øverjordet takes samples as part of her work studying where and how pharmaceuticals are found in the Arctic. Photo: Lacie Setsaas, SINTEF Ocean

Recently, she and her colleagues decided to see if they might pharmaceuticals in arctic creatures like tiny zooplankton in samples they took in Svalbard, the Norwegian archipelago at 79 degrees North latitude.

It’s well known that pharmaceuticals find their into rivers, streams and lakes from treated wastewater in industrialized countries, but Øverjordet wondered if pharmaceuticals might somehow have also found a way to hitchhike to the north.

And they found them.

“We found quite high levels actually of painkillers, like ibuprofen and diclofenac. And also antibiotics and antidepressants we found in these tiny creatures living in the Arctic,” she said.

Listen to 63 Degrees North to learn more about the fate of these chemicals — and how science is helping policymakers do the right thing.

*

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.

Sources

Bourgeon, Sophie; Riemer, Astrid Kolind; Tartu, Sabrina; Aars, Jon; Polder, Anuschka; Jenssen, Bjørn Munro; Routti, Heli Anna Irmeli. (2017) Potentiation of ecological factors on the disruption of thyroid hormones by organo-halogenated contaminants in female polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from the Barents Sea. Environmental Research. vol. 15

Ciesielski, Tomasz Maciej; Hansen, Ingunn Tjelta; Bytingsvik, Jenny; Hansen, Martin; Lie, Elisabeth; Aars, Jon; Jenssen, Bjørn Munro; Styrishave, Bjarne. (2017) Relationships between POPs, biometrics and circulating steroids in male polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from Svalbard. Environmental Pollution (1987). vol. 230.

Nuijten, RJM; Hendriks, AJ; Jenssen, Bjørn Munro; Schipper, AM. (2016) Circumpolar contaminant concentrations in polar bears (Ursus maritimus) and potential population-level effects. Environmental Research. vol. 151.

Treskina, Natalia Albertovna; Postoev, Vitaly; Usynina, Anna A.; Grjibovski, Andrej; Odland, Jon Øyvind. (2021) Sociodemographic factors influencing the health of pregnant women: Changes in the arctic countries over the past decades. Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya. vol. 2021 (6).

Chashchin, Valery; Kovshov, Aleksandr A.; Thomassen, Yngvar; Sorokina, Tatiana; Gorbanev, Sergey A.; Morgunov, Boris; Gudkov, Andrey B.; Chashchin, Maxim; Sturlis, Natalia V.; Trofimova, Anna; Odland, Jon Øyvind; Nieboer, Evert. (2020) Health risk modifiers of exposure to persistent pollutants among indigenous peoples of Chukotka. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH). vol. 17 (1).

Featured image: Bjørn Munro Jenssen nets a grey seal pup. Photo: Private

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

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

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

***

Joe Bidensparked a global uproar” on March 26, declaring Russian President Vladimir Putin “cannot remain in power.” He also said “this battle will not be won in days or months, either. We need to steel ourselves for the long fight ahead.”

This was public confirmation that the U.S. goal in Ukraine is “regime change” in Russia, no matter how long, or how many Ukrainian and Russian lives it may take—or how many people become refugees, or how the world economy will be damaged.

“The words of a president matter,” Biden said. “They can move markets. They can send our brave men and women to war. They can bring peace.” In this case Biden’s words helped move markets for the military-industrial complex and big U.S. energy companies. They were not intended to bring peace.

Biden’s remarks came after a triple summit in Brussels of NATO, the European Union and the G7 big capitalist countries. There he “coaxed a display of unity” among U.S. allies, but “limited practical outcomes… underlined the limited options,” according to Agence France Presse-AFP. European powers stopped short of sanctions against Russian gas supplies, the report said, “fearing the consequences for their own energy security.”

“Why I asked for this NATO meeting,” Biden said, “is to be sure that, after a month, we will sustain what we’re doing, not just next month, the following month, but for the remainder of this entire year,” according to the AFP report. Speaking afterwards in Warsaw, Poland, Biden expressed the aggressive tone he hoped for in Brussels – to fire up his most militant NATO ally, and chat with members of the U.S. 82nd Airborne Division stationed there.

PR War “Off Message”

Biden’s statement “went further than even U.S. presidents during the Cold War,” according to a Washington Post report: It “immediately reverberated around the world as world leaders, diplomats, and foreign policy experts sought to determine what Biden said, what it meant—and, if he didn’t mean it, why he said it.” White House aides “were adamant the remark was not a sign of a policy change.” But “they did concede it was… off message,” the report said.

Message control is a key weapon for U.S. war planners and their Ukrainian clients. CIA Director William Burns testified March 3 that “we have had a great deal of effect in… demonstrating to the entire world that this is premeditated and unprovoked aggression…” The effort involves a super-professional message management operation, described by Dan Cohen, that “has produced a steady stream of sophisticated propaganda aimed at stirring up public and official support.” The international effort is led by PR Network of the UK.

The PR campaign helped the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry produce a set of “key messages.” It ruled out use of the terms “civil war in Donbas,” “internal conflict,” “conflict in Ukraine” and “Ukrainian crisis” to describe the Ukrainian government’s war against the secessionist republics of the Donbas region. The UN Human Rights Office estimates that 14,200 people, including 3,404 civilians, have been killed in combat in eastern Ukraine since 2014.

The estimated death toll also includes 4,000 members of Ukrainian forces (illustrative photo)

Ukrainian army shelling Donetsk (Source: Shutterstock)

Recent U.S. Regime Change Wars

U.S. message managers try to avoid comparison to recent U.S. regime change wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Yugoslavia. It was 23 years ago that NATO countries, without UN Security Council authorization, ordered attacks on Yugoslavia—NATO’s first target in Europe after the collapse of the USSR. The air strikes lasted 78 days, from March 24 to June 10, 1999.

About 1,000 NATO aircraft hit Serbia and Montenegro with thousands of cruise missiles and 80,000 tons of bombs, killing thousands and destroying countless buildings, hundreds of miles of roads, railroads and airfields, bridges, schools and hospitals. It also bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, killing three Chinese citizens.

The Chinese government protested vigorously without escalating the crisis, getting a U.S. apology and several million dollars of reparations.

NATO bombing of Yugoslavia - Wikipedia

The Yugoslav city of Novi Sad on fire after U.S.-NATO bombing in 1999. [Source: wikipedia.org]

“This war did not come out of nowhere,” commented Serbian filmmaker Emir Kusturica. “This is a continuation of something sown long before. You can see the continuity of Russophobia in the West.” He added that NATO’s military intervention was followed by a color revolution that led to the overthrow of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. The same coup strategy was then used in Ukraine in 2004 and 2014. NATO’s objective was the disintegration of the Yugoslav state. This is happening now against Russia, Kusturica said.

Biden’s message includes intense demonization of the Russian President, calling him a war criminal and a “butcher,” among other things—not likely to facilitate peace talks. That has not been the top priority for Washington, which has used Poland as a prime staging area for countless tons of military hardware, as well as mercenaries recruited from around the world.

A picture containing snow, sky, outdoor, day Description automatically generated

Tanks and other weapons in Poland destined for Ukraine. [Source: defensenews.com]

New Round of Peace Talks

Russian and Ukrainian delegations will hold a new round of face-to-face negotiations between March 28 and 30, reported China’s Xinhua news agency. Since February 28, the two sides have held three rounds of face-to-face peace talks and a series of online discussions, failing to reach a major agreement.

The new round of talks will take place after the Russian military announced on March 26 that “the main tasks of the first stage of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine had been completed.” That stage focused on securing eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region, demilitarizing and denazifying Ukraine as Russia’s priorities—not taking Kyiv or other cities outside eastern Ukraine. The U.S. has interpreted the Russian message as a “scaling back” of its original war objectives. It could also be interpreted as a new opportunity for peace.

Some observers have said China could play an effective mediator role in peace talks, since it has substantial trade with all parties—Russia and Ukraine, the EU countries and the U.S. China has “Belt and Road” projects in numerous European countries, including Ukraine, giving it an interest in an early resolution to the conflict. But U.S. pressure on China to “switch sides” against Russia complicates the issue.

The Chinese newspaper Global Times editorialized March 27 that “NATO, under the leadership of Washington, is the real initiator and driving force behind the conflict between Russia and Ukraine… What the U.S. really needs is tense and conflicting Russia-Europe relations,” the editorial said. “It is NATO’s eastward expansion that has triggered Ukraine’s desire to join NATO and greatly triggered Russia’s concerns over territorial security, which directly led to the current Russia-Ukraine conflict…”

Global Times raises the question: “do major European countries like Germany and France ‒ also NATO members—really hold a stance over the Russian-Ukrainian conflict that is in line with Washington’s interests? Unlike the past security crises in Europe, the EU will become the biggest victim of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. It will have to bear the brunt of the conflict. Therefore, as the Ukraine crisis develops, the differences between the U.S. and Europe will become inevitable once the public opinion in major EU countries changes.”

NATO leaders at the Brussels summit called on all states, including China, to abstain from supporting Russia’s “war effort,” Global Times reported, “and to refrain from any action that helps Russia circumvent sanctions. They also said China is engaged in spreading lies and misinformation to support Russia.” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said “We oppose groundless accusations and suspicion against China, and will not accept any pressure or coercion.”

A “Permanent State of Precarity”

Economist Michael Hudson agrees with the Chinese analysis, adding that U.S. policy is to control the world, and “to sort of repeat in Ukraine and Europe what it was doing in Syria and Libya.” John Mearsheimer, the noted exponent of the realist school of international relations, says “the West bears primary responsibility” for the disaster in eastern Europe, which “will cause a wrecked global economy.” In the global south, with much of the world’s population, many countries rely on grain imports from Ukraine and Russia, and worry about major shortages caused by supply chain disruptions.

South Africa’s ANC Youth League spokesperson, Sizophila Mkhize, told Breakthrough News on March 25 that “Our countries were invaded, led by the western countries, led by NATO itself; and we did not hear anyone say ‘pray for Libya,’ for instance… They could have avoided this war, like the president of South Africa said. But they’re arrogant, they’re self-serving and they’re selfish. And they don’t care about many of the lives that are going to be lost.” She added that “we have also realized the racism with which the people of Africa who were trapped in Ukraine were treated.” South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has offered to help mediate the crisis.

Ajamu Baraka of Black Agenda Report says

“The war being waged against global humanity by the U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination is a hybrid war that utilizes all the tools it has at its disposal—sanctions, mass incarceration, coups, drugs, disinformation, culture, subversion, murder, and direct military engagement to further white power.”

He adds that on the heels of the 2008 financial crash and the crisis of the Covid pandemic, today millions “are experiencing a permanent state of precarity with evictions, the continued loss of medical coverage, unaffordable housing and food costs, and a capitalist-initiated inflation.” He says U.S. rulers hope that “with the daily bombardment of war images, U.S. workers and the poor will embrace rising costs of gas and even more increases in the cost of food.”

The Brown University Costs of War Project estimates that the wars waged by the United States in this century have cost millions of lives, at least $8 trillion and counting, with another $8 trillion that will be spent over the next ten years on the military budget if costs remain constant from the $778 billion just allocated. The Costs of War Project also notes that “38 million people have been displaced by the post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and the Philippines.” Are the architects of NATO expansion ready to accept responsibility for more huge numbers of Ukrainian refugees?

Source: codepink.org

CodePink’s Open Letter

The anti-war group CodePink says “The U.S., which played a major role in exacerbating the conflict that led up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, must now play a major role in the negotiations between Ukraine and Russia to achieve a ceasefire.” It adds that the United States must be ready to make compromises and support negotiations between Ukraine and Russia by committing to the following:

  • Rejection of a no-fly zone over Ukraine;
  • No NATO expansion;
  • Recognition of Ukraine as a neutral country;
  • Sanctions on Russia to be lifted;
  • Support for an international security agreement to protect the interests of all people on the European continent to remain free from war and occupation;
  • Support for Ukrainian demilitarization to the degree that missiles would be banned;
  • Supply humanitarian aid to Ukraine and support Ukrainian refugees.

*

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.

Dee Knight is a member of the DSA International Committee’s Anti-War Subcommittee. He is the author of My Whirlwind Lives: Navigating Decades of Storms, soon to be published by Guernica World Editions. Dee can be reached at: [email protected].

Featured image: A Ukrainian servicemen stands by a burned military vehicle near Sytniaky, Ukraine, March 3, 2022. Photo courtesy General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine/Facebook.

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

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

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

***

Dr. Theresa Long, a medical officer with the United States military, has testified in court that she was ordered by a superior to suppress Covid-19 vaccine injuries following the Biden regime’s mandate.

The DoD downplayed Dr. Long’s conclusions, saying the increase in vaccine injuries was caused by a “glitch in the database.”

On March 10, Liberty Counsel, the law firm representing thirty members of the military who are fighting the military vaccine mandate, returned to federal court to defend the preliminary injunction Judge Steven Merryday granted two military plaintiffs that allowed them to skirt the military vaccine mandate.

The Department of Defense (DoD) asked the judge to set aside the injunction while the case was on appeal.

Judge Merryday is a United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida.

Per DailyExpose: During the all-day hearing, Liberty Counsel presented compelling testimony from the Navy Commander of a surface warship and three military flight surgeons, Lt. Col. Peter Chambers, Lt. Col. Teresa Long and Col. (Ret.) Stewart Tankersley, M.D. In contrast, the DOD declined to present witnesses.

Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel Mat Staver said in an interview with the Blaze’s Daniel Horowitz on Monday that there have been three hearings now in this case, and the DoD has not yet offered a single witness. Instead of witnesses, the government “sends these declarations,” Staver explained. He said the judge has urged them to bring live witnesses to court so they can be cross examined, but they just refuse to do it. “So they send these declarations that some JAG attorney writes, and somebody in the military signs off on them.”

Staver said that the information the DoD has been presenting in court is “outdated, wrong, and would really be subject to dismantling under cross examination.” He added that cross examinations of his witnesses have only made their case stronger. “So they really don’t have anything to cross examine our witnesses with,” he said.

Staver told Horowitz that Judge Merryday has chastised the DoD lawyers during the hearings, telling them they have “a frail case,” and are “acting as though they are above the law.”

Dr. Theresa Long, a flight surgeon who holds a master’s degree in Public Health and is specially trained in the DMED, gave emotional testimony on March 10.

She and two other flight surgeons reviewed DMED last year and made some stunning discoveries about the high incidence of apparent vaccine injuries among members of the military.

According to the whistleblowers, certain disorders spiked after the vaccine mandate went into effect, including miscarriages and cancers, and neurological problems which increased by 1000 percent.

Dr. Long testified that she was contacted by high level officer the night before the hearing, and told not to discuss her findings regarding the explosive military medical data in court. The whistleblower reportedly said she felt threatened after she tried to get her superiors to address the findings, “fearing for her life and for the safety of her children.”

Since the whistleblowers came forward with the DMED data, the DoD has thrown cold water on their conclusions, saying the increase in vaccine injuries was caused by a “glitch in the database.”

Politifact contacted Peter Graves, spokesperson for the Defense Health Agency’s Armed Forces Surveillance Division, who said the data for 2021 is correct, but for some reason, the data for the five years prior was inaccurate. Graves told PolitiFact by email that the division reviewed data in the DMED “and found that the data was incorrect for the years 2016-2020.”

In other words, for five straight years, the data was seriously corrupted and none of the DoD’s data analysts figured this out, and then it fixed itself on its own in 2021. The DoD has since put out new numbers showing more illnesses among the troops for the years prior to 2021.

Staver asked Long a question about the DMED data during the hearing, and she answered: “I have been ordered not to answer that question.”

Judge Merryday reportedly asked Long: “Ordered by who?,” and the doctor explained what happened the night before the hearing.

Staver then asked Long if the information the military ordered her to withhold was relevant and helpful for the court and the public to know. She said, “yes,” and Staver asked her why.

Long reportedly paused and choked back tears as she told the judge: “I have so many soldiers being destroyed by this vaccine. Not a single member of my senior command has discussed my concerns with me … I have nothing to gain and everything to lose by talking about it. I’m OK with that because I am watching people get absolutely destroyed.”

Dr. Long also testified that the data shows that deaths of military members from the vaccines exceed deaths from COVID itself.

Staver later told Horowitz that the DoD’s order for her not to discuss DMED amounted to witness tampering, especially since Long has whistleblower protections.

“They not only violated the Whistleblower Act, they potentially intimidated a witness and tried to change that witness’ testimony,” he said during the Conservative Review podcast on Monday.

The doctor said she is constantly contacted by people who have been injured by the genetic vaccines, and that many of those injured are pilots, who are expected to meet high fitness standards. Long told Staver that in just one afternoon she heard from four pilots who had just gotten MRIs back showing that they had myocarditis.

Morale is tanking in the military, she testified, with soldiers are in despair over the pressure to get the vaccine, and some are even having suicidal thoughts.

Long said she was aware of at least two people who have committed suicide over the pressure, and the threat of punishment for refusal.

She said the current regime’s policies are undermining “good order and discipline.”

In addition to Dr. Long, an unnamed Navy commander testified about his commander’s attempts to punish him for refusing the experimental injections.

On February 2, Judge Merryday issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Navy from punishing the Commander because of his vaccination status. Judge Merryday ruled the Navy violated the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

When the court ordered the Commodore to comply with the law, he filed an affidavit saying he had “lost confidence” in the Commander because the Commander had not taken the COVID shots.

The judge then entered a preliminary injunction, and the DOD and the Navy filed a motion asking the court to set aside his injunction, arguing that due to their “lost confidence” in the commander, his ship could not deploy.

However, at the time the ship was allegedly unable to be deployed, the commander was actually far out to sea testing the ship and training the crew.

While many Commanders fail to complete these operations timely, the Commander completed the mission early and the ship deemed “safe and ready.”

In a dramatic moment, the Commander said he should not have to be there in court defending religious freedom. “Generals and admirals should be here saying what I am saying today to uphold religious freedom. Our religious freedoms are being attacked.”

Also testifying last week was Dr. Pete Chambers, a Purple Heart recipient who is in the Texas National Guard defending the southern border where 10,000-20,000 illegal immigrants are flooding through every week. “My job is to keep our soldiers safe,” Chambers said.

Chambers was hoping to retire from the military in 2023 after nearly 40 years of service, but his adverse reaction to the Moderna shot derailed his plans.

Trusting the military that the shots are “safe and effective,” and not knowing at the time that aborted fetal cells were used in the testing and/or development, he took the shot. He now suffers from demyelination, a condition affecting the central nervous system caused by the injection.

After his Moderna injury, Dr. Chambers met Lt. Col. Long. They reviewed the DOD’s Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), the military equivalent to the federal government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), where he discovered other military members also developed a demyelination disease after the COVID shots.

Chambers, a military flight surgeon and one of only six Green Beret surgeons, was told that his job was to get soldiers to vaccinated. His superiors told him that religious exemptions would be automatically denied. “Soldiers will try. Soldiers will fail,” this commanders said.

He pointed out that shots are not effective in preventing infection, and estimated that about 75-80% of soldiers getting infected are “double vaxxed” compared to only about 15% of soldiers who are not vaccinated.

Like Long, Chambers also testified that many soldiers are being injured by the COVID shots, and that “this is not normal.”

Dr. Stewart Tankersley, a flight surgeon who retired in September 2021 at the rank of Colonel, testified that the injections are neither safe nor effective.

Tankersley said he has personally treated over 200 COVID patients with no fatalities, and the group of doctors with whom he is associated has treated over 18,000 COVID patients with deaths only in the single digits.

“I’ve never seen anything like this in the military or civilian world, the lack of dialogue, the suppression of scientific dialogue.” Tankersley said on the stand.

Dr. Tankersley explained one of several reasons there are so many injuries from the COVID shots. The mRNA vaccines require a Lipid Nanoparticle (LNP) as a delivery mechanism because the RNA quickly degrades without being encased in the LNP. The combination bypasses the natural immune system and creates inflammation that can inhibit the body’s innate immunity.

Dr. Tankersley testified that the shots are neither safe nor effective. He also testified that there are safe and effective treatments for COVID, including nasal rinsing and ivermectin.

Liberty Counsel argued that the DOD’s position that the only one way to combat COVID and ensure military readiness is to force the injections and kick out the unvaccinated is “untenable,” and that the mandate is undermining military readiness and harming morale.

Staver said: “I am honored to serve the brave men and women of the military. I am dismayed by the abuse and propaganda forced upon them from the White House and the Department of Defense. The truth will prevail, and freedom will win.”

*

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 TEUT

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

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

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

***

When a principle of ancient jurisprudence, which is also a central procedural right in modern legal systems, is no longer valid, then a democratic state system – also referred to as a “silent dictatorship” by evil tongues – outs itself as an “open dictatorship”. Already in the past two years, only one opinion was valid, the so-called scientific and medical opinion about the worldwide threat of a newly created, supposedly deadly virus and its “eradication” by means of a gene-modifying treatment.

Now come the news coverage of a terrible war in the heart of Europe. And again the legal principle “Audiatur et altera pars – let the other part be heard” is disregarded: Oral and written reports from the other side are prevented or even banned. How long will a nation of free citizens, who already feel that something urgently needs to change in society, put up with this? The citizens want to live, work, sleep and look the youth in the eye in peace again.

Non-violent change of existing power relations seems inevitable

No one will use the word “revolution” because it is associated with individual and collective violence. But a change in the existing power relations seems inevitable. And the new social order to be shaped must be developed by the citizens themselves – in absolute freedom, without any coercion from outside. Free citizens are perfectly capable of negotiating together how they want to arrange their lives in order to live together in peace, tranquillity and equality.

Armed struggle in the form of individual terror or collective armed violence is out of the question! The world already has enough of that: Therefore, a “revolutionary process” must be non-violent!

However, history shows that in most cases it is not possible to directly set fellow citizens in motion for a humane, peaceful and free society. The instilled fear of harmless fellow citizens and the distrust of enlightened people is difficult to overcome. If existing power relations were overthrown somewhere, the “rebels” usually set up copies of the earlier forms of rule, only with other names and other ideological dressings.

Enlightenment and the problem of education

Consequently, one must continue to enlighten and convince people. The purpose of enlightenment efforts is to purify human consciousness of individual and collective prejudices. In addition, their acquired fears of harmless fellow human beings and supposed authorities must be removed. Psychology with a psychologically guided “people’s university” would be the appropriate tool to enable people to adequately assess themselves, the political situation and the necessary social- and culture-changing measures. This can also lead to collective actions of “civil disobedience” and strikes.

More important than enlightenment, however, is the problem of education. The insight of depth psychology made clear the immense significance of education for the emergence of a humane world.

The educational methods of the past created the type of human being that could cause the tragedy of history.

The authoritarian principle, for centuries regarded as the unquestionably valid basis of educational behaviour, throttled people’s sense of community already in their childhood years and endowed them with that readiness for aggression through which a violent world could remain in a state of violence.

If pedagogy in the parental home and school renounces the authoritarian principle and the use of violence, it will be able to educate people who do not have a “subject mentality” and will therefore not be a docile tool for those in power in our world.

The task set is difficult, but it can be solved!

*

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

Dr. Rudolf Lothar Hänsel is a teacher (retired headmaster), doctor of education (Dr. paed.) and a graduate psychologist (specialising in clinical, educational and media psychology). As a retiree, he worked for many years as a psychotherapist in his own practice. In his books and educational-psychological articles, he calls for a conscious ethical-moral values education and an education for public spirit and peace.

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from OneWorld

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on The Democratic State System. The “Silent Dictatorship” Has Become An “Open Dictatorship”. The “Revolutionary Process” must be Non-violent!
  • Tags: ,

It is Illegal to Recruit Canadians to Fight for Ukraine

April 5th, 2022 by Hamilton Coalition to Stop the War

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

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

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

***

It’s reprehensible that the Trudeau government is failing to enforce its own laws on the recruitment of Canadians to fight in foreign wars. Here is the law.

  1. 11(1) Foreign Enlistment Act:

Recruiting

  • 11(1) Any person who, within Canada, recruits or otherwise induces any person or body of persons to enlist or to accept any commission or engagement in the armed forces of any foreign state or other armed forces operating in that state is guilty of an offence.

In Hamilton, a portal has been set up to “Fight For Ukraine.” Its creator, businessman Chris Ecklund, stated in an interview with the Hamilton Spectator, “This is not a recruiting tool.” However, the website contains a direct link to the International Legion of the Defence of Ukraine, a body set up by Ukrainian President Zelensky to recruit foreigners for combat in Ukraine. By his own admission in the article, Ecklund admits to aiding and counselling those who intend to fight for Ukraine and to help the wounded return to Canada.

In addition, Ecklund’s portal lists the Ukrainian Embassy and two consulates in Canada, in Toronto and Edmonton, for Canadians to contact who wish to join the Ukrainian International (Foreign) Legion. According to the Foreign Enlistment Act, embassies are limited as well to recruiting their own nationals for foreign wars.[1]

The conflict in Ukraine is a very serious crisis, that has the potential of spreading into a wider European and even world war. It’s important, therefore, that Canada play a useful role in de-escalating the conflict, rather than fuelling the fighting, as it is now, with funding, lethal arms, and mercenaries.

The Hamilton Coalition To Stop The War calls for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine through de-escalation, dialogue, and international diplomacy.

We note that, in the wake of the war hysteria over Ukraine that is gripping this country, respect for the rule of law is being over-ridden by government officials and is escalating the conflict. Therefore, we call on the Government of Canada to enforce its own laws preventing the recruitment and enlisting of Canadians in the International Legion of the Defence of Ukraine.

*

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] (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to the action of foreign consular or diplomatic officers or agents in enlisting persons who are nationals of the countries they represent and not Canadian nationals, in conformity with the regulations of the Governor in Council.

Featured image is from FAIR

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

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

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

***

A Wayne County judge on March 29 granted a motion by Treasurer Eric Sabree extending the ban on owner-occupied homes being placed in jeopardy of seizure and public auction.

This decision came in the aftermath of a campaign by the Moratorium NOW! Coalition (MNC) and other housing groups in the city of Detroit.

A resolution was passed on March 29 by the Detroit City Council in favor of an extension after numerous people spoke out at the municipal legislative meeting calling on people to participate in the demonstration the following day at the Wayne County Treasurer’s Office in the Greektown district of Downtown. Although this resolution was passed without opposition, the MNC is calling for a permanent solution to the housing crisis in Detroit and throughout the county.

Detroit Moratorium NOW! Coalition demonstration outside Wayne County Treasurer on March 30, 2022 (photo by Roslyn Ogburn)

Activists gathered outside at 400 Monroe, the Wayne County Treasurer, on March 30 welcoming the extension of the halt to foreclosures and auctions of owner-occupied homes, however, emphasizing that renters and those owing taxes prior to 2017, are also in dire need of protection from homelessness. Auctioning of owner-occupied homes among other properties in Detroit has not resulted in any revitalization of neighborhoods where people are still leaving in the thousands every year.

MNC has been waging a struggle against property tax foreclosures since 2015 when it was announced that tens of thousands of households were being threatened with home seizures. A citywide effort in 2015-2016 ushered in the current period where homeowners were allowed to make arrangements for paying property tax arrearages.

Later in 2016, a class action lawsuit was filed by the Michigan American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and Covington & Burling, a private law firm. Although an out-of-court settlement was agreed upon in 2018, the ruling did not provide any real relief for those who had lost their homes years before due to the role of the financial institutions, real estate firms, the failure of city, state and federal agencies to protect homeowners and the general population which suffered due to the lost of population and tax incomes. Homeowners were over assessed at least $600 million due to the actions of the banks and the municipal administration. The City of Detroit agreed to publicize existing housing assistance programs. Nonetheless, the fact that the residents of the overwhelming majority African American population in Detroit are facing once again a property tax foreclosure crisis indicates clearly that the legal agreement did not encompass any permanent solutions to the crisis. (See this)

In fact, the MNC demanded that the deadline for applying for assistance under the 2018 agreement be extended. This served to save the homes of over 1000 households. The offices of the MNC served as a base where over 100 people volunteered to knock on doors and publicize the fact that those eligible for housing relief receive the assistance they needed. Even though the corporate-imposed Mayor Mike Duggan and Wayne County took credit for the saving of these homes for working class and poor residents, there has not been any serious effort to genuinely address the housing crisis in Detroit and Wayne Country.

Next Steps in the Housing Crisis

Wayne County Treasurer Eric R. Sabree issued a statement on March 29 saying:

“Our number one priority remains keeping people in their homes and to many Wayne County taxpayers are still suffering significant economic hardship due to the COVID-19 crisis. We also know that while many have applied for property tax relief from certain programs, they needed more time to compile the appropriate paperwork. So, we continue to make some allowances considering the pandemic.”

This language could have easily been lifted from the MNC press release issued the previous week and years before. However, the point is to deal with the broader crisis of housing and economic underdevelopment across the U.S.

The so-called Great Recession of 2008-2010 can be viewed as the modern-day manifestation of the housing crisis, although the actual problems extend back many decades to the inherent racist character of the Federal Housing Act and the Federal Highway Act enacted from the 1930s to the 1960s. In Detroit, tens of thousands of African Americans, Latin Americans and Asian Americans had been dislocated from the areas now known as Downtown and Midtown.

Since the beginning of the 2000s, predatory lending, overinflated property values and consequent property tax assessment padding has exacerbated the institutional discrimination against nationally oppressed peoples. During the period after 2008, African Americans throughout the U.S. lost up to half or more of their household wealth which was derived from home ownership. The subsequent economic collapse in 2008-2009 impacting the banks, automotive companies, insurance firms and the demographic composition of urban areas, has never been adequately addressed by successive administrations in the White House. Therefore, the crisis remains and with the COVID-19 pandemic and its economic fallout, this question will remain for the unforeseeable future.

In the ruling issued by the Wayne County Third Judicial Circuit Court on March 29 notes:

“The parcels of property previously removed from foreclosure by Court Order of February 22, 2022 are no longer in forfeiture for the reason that the delinquent taxes, interest, penalties and fees have been paid, and the properties have been redeemed are owned by persons who qualify for and have been granted a hardship extension in which to pay the forfeited taxes, interest, penalties and fees…. Are subject to other considerations which in the judgment of the Treasurer are best not foreclosed at this time.”

These words from Wayne County Circuit Judge Timothy M. Kenny are important in the present period. However, residents of Detroit voted by an 81% margin in the 2021 municipal elections to establish a Reparations Commission to propose compensation for historical discrimination. The housing crisis and the dislocation of more than a million people over the last seven decades could serve as a beginning point in paying reparations to African Americans and other people of color communities.

A National Problem: Housing is a Human Right

The situation involving housing rights are acute in cities like Detroit where homeowners are being threatened with foreclosures and renters are subjected to higher rates and threats of evictions. The Eviction Lab at Princeton University, which tracks these issues on a national level, reveals that the crisis remains despite the statistics indicating that the problem has not accelerated to the anticipated levels of increase.

Princeton Eviction Lab graph on COVID-19 evictions

This is undoubtedly related to the anticipated worsening social crisis in municipalities if evictions are allowed to proceed at astronomical levels. Housing advocacy groups have not relented in their demands for moratoriums on evictions and promoting the notion that housing is indeed a human right.

According to Eviction Lab in a recent report:

“Eviction filings have increased since the end of the CDC moratorium but remain well below normal levels in nearly all jurisdictions we monitor. Why might this be? It is too soon to say definitively, but several plausible explanations bear investigation. First, emergency rental assistance (ERA) may be deterring filings. The scale and pace of ERA distribution increased markedly over the summer of 2021. The Treasury Department reported that state and local ERA programs delivered approximately $1.6 billion in June. By October, that was up to $2.86 billion, an increase of nearly 80%. The Department of the Treasury expects that $25–$30 billion of ERA funds will be spent or obligated by the end of 2021. Improvements in the distribution of these funds may have helped to encourage landlord participation in these programs and prevented eviction cases from being filed.”

In Detroit MNC intervened beginning on September 1, 2021 with press conferences and rallies along with direct pressure on those agencies designated to distribute housing assistance funding through the COVID Emergency Rental Assistance (CERA) and the American Rescue Plan (ARP). These funds belong to the poor and working people in need.

Moreover, housing within any modern industrialized society should be considered a fundamental right. Until this is accepted by the political institutions governing the U.S., there will continue to be a crisis in housing and other essential services for people across the country.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @globalresearch_crg and Twitter at @crglobalization. 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: Detroit hunger striker over property tax foreclosure and lack of support, Tamira Kemet speaks out against housing crisis (Photo by Abayomi Azikiwe)

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on Foreclosures Moratorium Extended for One Year in Detroit and Wayne County
  • Tags: ,

Reawakening of Consciences: “The threat of a Third World War is weighing on all of us”. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

By His Excellency Carlo Maria Viganò, April 04, 2022

They have told us that President Putin invaded Ukraine to support his expansionist ambitions, but in reality the main purpose of Russia’s military operation is to prevent the aggression of the deep state and NATO. Putin is fighting against the same globalist elite that holds us all hostage.

New Study Finds Persistent Heart Abnormalities Among COVID-19 Vaccinated Children

By Guy Hatchard, April 04, 2022

A follow up study conducted at the Seattle Children’s Hospital of children suffering myocarditis following their second dose of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine was published in the Journal of Pediatrics on 25 March 2022. The study followed up 16 male children, with an average age of 15 years, 3 to 8 months after their initial diagnosis with myocarditis within a short time frame following mRNA vaccination.

Frontline Doctor Says Fetal Deaths Up Nearly 2,000 Percent Since COVID Jab Rollout

By Emily Mangiaracina, April 04, 2022

Dr. Peterson Pierre is warning expecting mothers to “look out” for their own kids, since the CDC is not changing their COVID shot recommendations, despite the spike in preborn deaths.

“The withdrawal from Kiev is Russian escalation. It’s the…transformation from a psychological operation to a textbook war”

By Marko Marjanović and Mike Whitney, April 04, 2022

It is undeniable that how the Russians were prosecuting the war at the start and how they are prosecuting it now is entirely different. Not just in the way they fight (small detachments vs combined arms) or advance (mad dash vs deliberate) but also on the map itself. Where before they were pouring forces into six different axes of advance they have now pulled back along many of them or even abandoned them entirely to focus on just the two Donbass axes.

Israeli Apartheid: It Is Time for the Canadian Government to Take Action

By Jim Miles, April 04, 2022

Michael Lynk is the UN Special Rapporteur for the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied after the 1967 nakba.  He is Associate Professor of Law at Western University in London, Ontario, where he teaches labour law, constitutional law and human rights law. His report, “Israel’s 55-year occupation of Palestinian Territory is apartheid – UN human rights expert”, was published recently.

Gearing Up for the Big Reveal: HHS Releases FDA Gene Editing Guidance, May Soon Admit mRNA COVID Shots Are Actually Gene Therapy Products

By Kevin Hughes, April 04, 2022

Medical professional and veteran pharmaceutical drug development expert Dr. Jane Ruby told host Stew Peters during a recent episode of “The Stew Peters Show” that the FDA has been actually creating guidance documents since 2015 and that these documents tell pharmaceutical companies how they want them to run studies and look at safety and efficacy in gene editing or human genome editing.

Bucha Massacre and Genocide of Ethnic Russians in Ukraine

By Nauman Sadiq, April 04, 2022

The Russian defense ministry said earlier on Sunday that all Russian troops had left the city of Bucha in the Kyiv region as far back as March 30, while the “evidence of crimes” surfaced four days later, when Ukrainian security forces and allied ultra-nationalist militias arrived in the city.

When Is mRNA Not Really mRNA?

By Dr. Robert Malone, April 04, 2022

What is pseudouridine, why is it being injected into you, and why should you care.

Russia Would be ‘Blown Off the Face of the Earth’ if It Used WMDs Against Ukraine. Fox News Sean Hannity

By Timothy Alexander Guzman, April 04, 2022

War propaganda by the mainstream media whether by CNN, FOX news, the BBC or the New York Times all follow a narrative, a script produced by the Military-Industrial complex (MIC) for endless conflicts around the world.  A perfect example was recently demonstrated by long time FOX news TV host Sean Hannity who is clearly a propagandist for the MIC and Israel had recently threatened Russia with annihilation if it used any sort of weapons of mass destruction in its war on Ukraine, a war that was instigated by the US and its NATO allies.

Russiagate: The Smoking Gun

By Peter Van Buren, April 04, 2022

We are looking for two smoking guns now in connection with Russiagate. Today’s Part I will show Hillary Clinton herself sat atop a large-scale conspiracy to use the tools of modern espionage to create and disseminate false information about Trump.

  • Posted in NO READ MORE LINK
  • Comments Off on Selected Articles: Reawakening of Consciences: “The threat of a Third World War is weighing on all of us”.

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

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

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

***

Mike Whitney: You think that the Russian Army was spread-too-thin to achieve its strategic objectives in Ukraine, and you point to the (Russian) army’s withdrawal around Kiev to make your point. (“Russia’s effort was very clearly too diluted over too many axes and sectors.”) But, now, you think that things have changed and Russia has started to make the correct military decisions. How have Russia’s plans changed and how will it​ affect upcoming clashes with the Ukrainian Army?

Marko Marjanović: It is undeniable that how the Russians were prosecuting the war at the start and how they are prosecuting it now is entirely different. Not just in the way they fight (small detachments vs combined arms) or advance (mad dash vs deliberate) but also on the map itself. Where before they were pouring forces into six different axes of advance they have now pulled back along many of them or even abandoned them entirely to focus on just the two Donbass axes.

There are two possibilities why that is so. One is that they always intended to start by doing A and then shift to B. The other is that they tried A, saw that it wasn’t working, and came up with B that would solve the problems of A.

I think the second is the correct explanation. They are trying something else now because what they tried first didn’t succeed. Yes, they had spread themselves too thin along too many axes. You could see that in the south for example where the relatively small force breaking out from Crimea then spread itself between storming Mariupol, trying to envelop Donbass from the south, and advancing across the Dnieper into southwestern Ukraine. I am not singling out the south because of its significance but because it was such a blatant example of overstretch. You have a force that already represents just 20% of the Russian maneuver strength in the theater and this force then additionally splits itself between three competing objectives. That’s crazy. It is also here that you saw the very first adjustments with much of the territory across the Dnieper abandoned to free up more units for Donbass.

The reason Donbass was crying out for units so badly was that so many were headed to Kiev. Russia has five Military Districts but the Northern one is based around the Northern Fleet so only four have large land forces. All the units from two of these Districts, the Eastern and Central, were tied up in the Kiev operation as well as the premier 1st Guards Tank Army of the Western District covering their southern flank around Sumy. Fully 50% of the Russian strength was in the drive on Kiev. Now, it is true that these forces tied down Ukrainian units that could conceivably be used elsewhere, but I do not think so little of Russian generals that I think they would have sent 50% of their force on a mission no more ambitious than to “tie down” enemy forces. Especially after seeing how insanely ambitious goals were assigned to the depleted southern forces.Also, since the Russian withdrawal from Kiev is now in full swing before Donbass has even been encircled it doesn’t look like Russian generals value “tying down” enemy forces all that much.

What the outcome of concentrating everything against the large Ukrainian army in Donbass will be I can not say, but I can give you some parameters. If the Russians are able to encircle it and capture thousands that will be a big victory for them. But if the Ukrainians can only be pushed out gradually and slowly that will be a victory for their side. An inconclusive outcome would be if the Ukrainians are able to flee and reposition as it would mean they had preserved their force but had not won time or inflicted attrition.

What I can tell you is what the consolidation means for Twitter and the footage coming out of the war. There will be no more videos of burned Russian supply convoys or of Russians catastrophically defeated because they were sent too far ahead in a too-small package.

The key takeaway is that until now the Russian military was failing because the military-political leadership was having it prosecute a bad and poorly prepared plan. It is only now that its plan is actually a good one that we will get to see how good or bad this military is at the tactical level. It may still fail but it now won’t be because of bad generalship.

MW: You say Russia kicked-off the fighting under the misguided belief that they could minimize the amount of damage and death but still prevail in the conflict. I find this analysis very persuasive, especially when you say: “The initial plan was focused on testing if the Ukrainian state could be made to unravel without having to go after its military and killing tens of thousands of Ukrainian servicemen.” That plan seems to have failed illustrated by the fact that the war continues to drag on with no end in sight. Now that Russia has changed its military approach, do you think they need to change their overall objectives as well? (Demiliterisation and DeNazification) These goals seem more aspirational than realistic, or do you disagree?

MM: A month into this war Russian-Ukrainian bloodshed on a large scale now seems normal to us, inevitable even, but we mustn’t lose sight of what the world was like before February 24. Just a month before, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs had declared the idea of a Russo-Ukrainian war “unacceptable” and a “medical diagnosis”. A war between these two intertwined peoples seemed unthinkable, including because Moscow kept insisting there was a taboo on fratricidal war between East Slavs.

We would err to dismiss this as entirely hypocritical and insincere. There are good reasons to believe this taboo was a real thing for Moscow and a real hang-up for the Russian leadership. In this context launching the “special military operation” as a full-on war with tens of thousands of dead Ukrainians already baked into the plan was something the Russian leadership couldn’t force itself to do. In such a context, to be able to make a move against Kiev at all you would almost have to talk yourself into believing there was at least a small chance that it could be done in a way that avoided any major fighting.

So, we can deem the initial plan misguided, but possibly for the Russian leadership it was the crutch they needed to embark on this enterprise at all. They could not justify full-on war to themselves from the get-go. To get over the hangup they needed to package the chance of war with the chance of success without major bloodshed. Incidentally, waging the kind of operation that might somehow shock the Ukrainian state into collapse demanded a totally different arrangement of forces than would a conventional military campaign. Whereas a by-the-books military campaign would have dictated focus on the enemy military, concentration of forces, and movement as a combined-arms mass, the needs of the psychological operation demanded prioritizing Kiev, a broad front, and lighting speed. So that is how the Russians started.

Now why they weren’t better prepared to more quickly and more skillfully switch from waging psychological shock to conducting a war if the need arose is a different question.

I don’t know what de-militarization or de-Nazification mean. I don’t know that Russia knows what they mean. I think these alleged demands are aired to give voice to Russian wrath. They are not practical demands for Ukraine to meet. They are slogans meant to ensure the war continues.

I see no evidence as of yet that Russia has given up on any war goals it entered into the war with. People do not understand that the withdrawal from Kiev is Russian escalation. It’s the final step in the transformation from waging a dreamy psychological operation to waging textbook war. So far when Russia has hit a wall in Ukraine it has always escalated to the next order of business. I don’t mean just in this war but looking at it holistically since 2014.

If the war stalls again Moscow will be at another crossroads. Whether to wind down the fighting or escalate again by placing the homefront on a war footing and issuing a call to arms.

I don’t know which of the two Putin would or will pick. I don’t know why he has been reluctant to mobilize the Russian society for the war so far. But I do think that if he does so the nature of his regime will have to change. There can be no more of this ‘enigmatic tsar’ business where he springs a massive “special military operation” as a surprise on the Russian public. It is a very monarchical, almost pre-modern way of doing things. A situation where the King’s wars are his own private affairs that he owes nobody an explanation for. But that also nobody not in his employ is called to sacrifice for. If the Russian volunteer and conscript will be asked to pull his chestnuts out of the fire, then the payback will have to be far greater transparency from now on.

Not having placed Russia on a war footing would seem to offer the option to Putin to trade away captured territory sans Donetsk and Lugansk for some weak assurances and declare victory. However, I think that would place his rule on rather shaky ground. The economic warfare that the Empire and its vassal swarm have unleashed has preempted that possibility. Putin has already lost the economics camp. Have so little to show for everything the war triggered or sped up, and he will have lost the patriotic camp as well.

I don’t think a peace treaty with Ukraine is possible. I think Putin made sure of that when he recognized Donetsk and Lugansk. At most there could be an armistice and a frozen conflict, which in practice would mean partition. Regime change would be preferable to Moscow as it would solve a lot of legal problems, but either outcome is acceptable to the patriot camp in Russia. Especially if the captured territory includes Odessa.

That leaves the problem of governing the captured territories. Where are the pro-Russians? Has the war soured them on Russia, or are they keeping their heads down because they don’t know if the Russian presence is permanent? However, I would caution against reading too much into the “pro-Russian” label. Just because you are a Ukrainian who finds that an Iron Curtain running between Ukraine and Russia is unnatural and a travesty does not mean that you favor an Iron Curtain running halfway across Ukraine splitting you off from your brethren on that side either. Put these “pro-Russian” Ukrainians under Moscow and they will be pro-Ukrainian Russians.

Ukrainians are also the reigning world champions in protest and unarmed insurrection. They are quite ungovernable. Even for Kiev. Additionally win or lose, this war will have provided them with a very useful national myth. In launching the “special military operation” Vladimir Putin has quite likely completed their national formation. Can Russia even run southern Ukraine without having its administrative buildings permanently besieged by unruly crowds?

After the American Civil War, the US successfully reintegrated the South after over 300,000 Southerners perished in a brutal war. However, the US was reintegrating the South into a project that was visibly on the up and up. Are we so sure that Russia is on the up and up? Economically it is not. I think many are naive about what Russia’s banishment from the global division of labor will mean for its living standards and productivity. Many are also too optimistic about how eager first-tier Chinese companies will be to cooperate with the Russians.How eager were Russian companies to work with sanctioned Iran? Quite possibly the Chinese will be no more eager to risk secondary sanctions than had been the Russians. Robbed of its economic prospects Russia could go back to being the austere militaristic Sparta it was from 1945 to 1991. That however is a project that Russians (of a more naive generation) already got fed up with once. Also, this time around there isn’t even the ideology of radical egalitarianism and the cult of the ordinary working man to tie it all together. What Southerners were being drafted into after 1865 is not similar to what the Ukrainians would be inducted to.

So then is everything already lost for Russia? No, I don’t think so. Not at all. If there is enough will, if there is enough endurance then anything is possible. The Empire has given Russia the green light to swallow Ukraine if it can, the rest is up to her. Perhaps Ukraine and Ukrainians can eventually be re-assimilated into an all-Russian nation after all. However, that is a project that is going to take decades. At 69 and probably without fully realizing it, Vladimir Putin on February 24 opened an entirely new chapter in Russian history. One that he is not going to be around to see how it ends.

*

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 interview was originally published on The Unz Review.

Special thanks to Riley Waggaman at Edward Slavsquat, Substack and his excellent post; “I am in awe of the sheer ruthlessness of Russia’s withdrawals”, Edward Slavsquat, Substack

Marko Marjanović is the editor of Anti-Empire.com.

Mike Whitney, renowned geopolitical and social analyst based in Washington State. He initiated his career as an independent citizen-journalist in 2002 with a commitment to honest journalism, social justice and World peace. He is Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Featured image is from TUR

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on “The withdrawal from Kiev is Russian escalation. It’s the…transformation from a psychological operation to a textbook war”
  • Tags: , ,

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

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

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

***

A follow up study conducted at the Seattle Children’s Hospital of children suffering myocarditis following their second dose of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine was published in the Journal of Pediatrics on 25 March 2022.

The study followed up 16 male children, with an average age of 15 years, 3 to 8 months after their initial diagnosis with myocarditis within a short time frame following mRNA vaccination.

The authors used Electrocardiograms and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) to examine abnormalities in the heart such as myocardial scarring, fibrosis, strain, and reduced ventricular muscle extension which can be associated with reduced capacity to pump blood and increased risk of heart attack.

The authors found that although there was some measure of resolution after 3 – 8 months most subjects still had some persistent abnormalities.

“Although (initial) symptoms (such as chest pain, and exercise intolerance) were transient and most patients appeared to respond to treatment (solely with NSAIDS such as ibuprofen), we demonstrated persistence of abnormal findings on CMR at (3-8 months) follow up in most patients, albeit with improvement in extent of LGE (a measure of the heart’s capacity to pump efficiently).”

The authors warned:

“The presence of LGE is an indicator of cardiac injury and fibrosis and has been strongly associated with worse prognosis in patients with classical acute myocarditis. A meta-analysis including 8 studies found that presence of LGE is a predictor of all cause death, cardiovascular death, cardiac transplant, rehospitalization, recurrent acute myocarditis and requirement for mechanical circulatory support.”

For those who wish to review a detailed evaluation of this study by a medical expert, you can watch this video

Wider implications for New Zealand

The latest Medsafe Adverse Effects Report #41 lists 12,000 people who have experienced chest discomfort and 6,000 shortness of breath (all ages) following mRNA vaccination, both classic symptoms of myocarditis. The authors of the small study reported above concluded:

“In the cohort of adolescents with COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-related myopericarditis, a large portion have persistent LGE abnormalities, raising concerns for potential longer-term effects.”

It is clear that little has been done in New Zealand to follow up those affected by adverse effects. Many reporting to EDs or GPs with chest pain, tachycardia, or shortness of breath have been told that everything will be OK without clinical assessment. In many cases these symptoms were not even registered with CARM.

Even though the Seattle study had few participants, it red flags the possibility of subsequent cardiac events. It raises the possibility that sub clinical adverse effects of mRNA vaccination may have serious longer term impacts on health. Until now these have been classified as non-serious in NZ. Persistent reports of cardiac events in the weeks and months following mRNA vaccination among ostensibly fit and healthy people of all age groups and genders, but especially men, can no longer be ignored or dismissed as unrelated. They need to be investigated.

This underlines the fact that the Pfizer mRNA vaccination roll out has been undertaken in the absence of long term follow up testing which often requires the use of sophisticated equipment such as CMR and MRI. Moreover heart disease is not the only category of serious illness whose incidence may be increased by mRNA vaccination as other recent studies suggest. Possible long term adverse effects include cancer, kidney and liver disease, and neurological conditions. A recent court-ordered document release shows Pfizer and probably our government is aware of cases.

But our government is still persisting with advertising suggesting that mRNA vaccination is safe and effective. This is not supported by research. mRNA vaccination comes with some serious risks. Moreover the government was well aware of the risks from the start. In an internal document released under OIA dated 10th February 2021 and signed by Ashley Bloomfield, Director General of Health and Chris Hipkins, Covid Response Minister discussing provisions for the vaccination of border workers, point 57 says:

“current data suggests severe adverse reactions are less than 1.1%”

Following 10 million injections, as we have had in NZ, that would amount to more than 100,000 adverse reactions (a figure not inconsistent with the grossly under reported 55,000 adverse reactions registered with CARM). Did either Ashley Bloomfield, Jacinda Ardern, or Chris Hipkins ever hint to the public or the media that this was the expected outcome? No they did not. They told the public the vaccine was completely safe and effective. They hid facts. More than this, Jacinda Ardern deleted the 33,000 reports of adverse effects that were posted on her FB page. She gaslighted the public.

Shocking deficiencies in advice given to government

In the light of the study at Seattle Children’s Hospital and other recent findings of potential long term health issues associated with mRNA vaccination, we will now look at the very recent official advice given to the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

A letter dated 13 March 2022 (attached) has been sent by the Strategic COVID-19 Public Health Advisory Group (the David Skegg committee) to The Hon Dr. Ayesha Verrall Associate Minister of Public Health. The letter is entitled Vaccine Mandates and aims to review the government’s strategy for minimising harms caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, to health, society and the economy. The Committee assured the Minister: “we have been able to take a completely fresh look at the evidence.”

The signatories to the letter are Dr David Skegg an epidemiologist, Dr Maia Brewerton a clinical immunologist, allergist, and immunopathologist, Professor Philip Hill an epidemiologist and public health expert, Dr. Ella Iosua a biostatistician, Professor David Murdoch a clinical microbiologist, Dr Nikki Turner an immunologist interested in preventive child health. All are vaccine advocates.

Point 29 calls for more measures to encourage children to be vaccinated.

Point 12 of their letter asserts: “As we now deal with a large Omicron outbreak, vaccination is undoubtedly reducing the numbers of people who are becoming seriously ill and require hospital treatment.”

However current NZ data discussed in articles at the Hatchard Report reveal that the rates of hospitalisation are equivalent for vaxxed and unvaxxed.

Not a single scientific reference is included in this letter. 

Not a single reference is made to adverse effects of vaccination (currently running at 30-50 times higher than that of any previous vaccine).

Not a single reference is made to any need for informed consent prior to vaccination. The theme running throughout the letter is a need to normalise the use of vaccination mandates when they are needed in New Zealand going into the future.

The right of employers to enforce vaccine mandates is described as common.

High vaccination rates are said to reduce absenteeism and the collapse of public services and commercial businesses.

The letter admits that the protection provided by the Covid-19 vaccines wanes after a few months and says the term booster should be avoided. It recommends the needed number of mRNA vaccinations should be described as a course, and raises the imminent desirability of a fourth vaccine dose for at least some people.

Point 28 says: “For some cases, it would be appropriate for vaccination to be a condition for new employment.” This clause recommends the broad use and normalisation of vaccine requirements in New Zealand for many illnesses and in many service sectors.

Unaccountably the letter says “Encouraging vaccination in the general population was not one of the specific objectives of vaccine mandates.” It also says that vaccine hesitancy has been much less in New Zealand than other countries and that people “have been prepared to accept redeployment and redundancy”. In essence denying the obvious coercion involved in mandates.

The letter recommends that mandates continue in use for health care workers, aged and disabled caregivers, corrections workers, and border staff. There will be a review in six months time.

The overall content of the letter appears to suggest that vaccines have been the key element ensuring low Covid-19 incidence. It completely fails to discuss the obvious point that this success has been achieved through border controls and contact tracing, NOT mRNA vaccination.

Conclusion

The long term health effects of mRNA vaccination are becoming more obvious through published research findings. Meanwhile the government advisors have their heads in the sand. Their careers have been built upon vaccination and now it seems they are prepared to ignore the obvious deficiencies of mRNA vaccination to save the government.

*

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 Children’s Health Defense

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

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

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

***

The United State’s top commander in Europe called for establishing a permanent land and air NATO presence on its eastern front and also stepping up the alliance’s air policing and its maritime presence in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Air Force Gen. Tod Wolters, testifying Wednesday before the House Armed Services Committee, said the alliance’s rotational policy to deter the Kremlin has “got to change” to meet the challenges posed by Russia’s unprovoked attack on Ukraine.

Poland, the Baltic nations and members bordering the Black Sea “are very willing” to accept permanent NATO ground and air forces “from Tallinn to Sofia” and an increased naval presence “from the Arctic to the Aegean,” Wolters said.

Speaking Tuesday at an Atlantic Council forum, the presidents of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia also called for an end to rotating “trip-wire” NATO forces to defend its eastern front. They too called for permanent stations from the Baltic to the Black Sea.

“This is a pivotal moment in Europe with generational implications,” Wolters said.

As he did before the Senate Armed Services Committee Tuesday, Wolters told the House committee he expected other allies and partners to follow Germany’s lead in meeting the NATO threshold of spending 2 percent of gross domestic product on national security.

This is happening “from Turkey in the southeast to Norway and Finland in the north,” he said. Germany’s, Canada’s and Finland’s decision to buy the F-35 Lighting II Strike Fighters provides the alliance with a “tremendous improvement” in aircraft capability to defend Europe, he added.

Terming Russia’s attack on Ukraine as an “unconscionable and illegal use of force,” Celeste Wallander, the Pentagon’s assistant secretary for international security affairs, said the administration is committed to bolstering Ukraine’s security through “months of sustainment.”

She told the House panel “this fight is going to extend” and the Biden administration is drawing down weapons stocks to ship to Kyiv and working with Congress to buy more weapons.

When asked, Wolters said anti-armor, anti-tank and surface-to-air missiles were Ukraine’s most pressing needs to stop and roll back the invasion, but “conditions change constantly.” Wolters said so far necessary supplies are flowing “by, with and through” Poland and Romania, but there are challenges that are being dealt with.

“This is America’s effort,” he added.

Like the directors of the Defense Intelligence Agency and the top general of Cyber Command, Wolters called the sharing of intelligence with Ukrainian counterparts and NATO allies bordering it “revolutionary” in its breadth and speed. “I’m comfortable, and I will always say that, but I want it to speed up. …It needs to continue to get faster.

Quoting Army Gen. Paul Nakasone, head of Cyber Command and the National Security Agency, Wolters said, “a great cyber offense starts with a great cyber defense.” That sentiment is at the heart of apparent Russian failures to successfully use cyber against the Ukrainians before the invasion and after.

Wallander and Wolters praised Transportation Command for delivering U.S. forces and equipment rapidly to Europe. Wolters said the command was able to move an entire armored combat brigade from Georgia to Germany in a week.

“That speed is unmatched,” he said.

Wallander said there were now 100,000 American service members either stationed or deployed to Europe or its waters. Washington is committed “to defend every inch of allied territory,” she said.

She said in addition this was the first time NATO implemented its strategic defense plan, moving large number of forces on and to the continent in response to a crisis.

Wolters added aircraft carriers in the Mediterranean Sea have played a critical role in the air defense architecture of the continent.

“We have seen NATO, EU and global partners unite to collectively push back against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and efforts to undermine the rules-based international order,” Wolters said in his opening statement.

Wallander said even on the information front Moscow is suffering setbacks. “This is in contrast to 2014” when the Kremlin annexed Crimea and sent men, equipment and other aid to separatists in eastern Ukraine.

“The Russian narrative is non-plausible to the international community,” she said.

“Everything we’re doing in the information sphere needs to continue” and be strengthened, Wolters added.

Wallander said the administration is continuing to work with Slovakia and other former Warsaw Pact countries now in NATO on sending Russian-built S-300 air defense systems to Kyiv and having spare parts and additional systems shipped to Bratislava as replacements.

On sending Polish-owned MiG-29s to Ukraine, Wolters aid, “nations still continue to look at the issue.”

*

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 Grady, a former managing editor of Navy Times, retired as director of communications for the Association of the United States Army. His reporting on national defense and national security has appeared on Breaking Defense, GovExec.com, NextGov.com, DefenseOne.com, Government Executive and USNI News.

Featured image: U.S. Air Force Gen. Tod D. Wolters, U.S. Air Forces in Europe-Air Forces Africa commander, speaks during an all-call at Incirlik Air Base, Turkey on Dec. 6, 2018. US Air Force Photo

  • Posted in English
  • Comments Off on EUCOM Commander Calls for Permanent Land, Air Presence on NATO’s Eastern Front
  • Tags:

How Both Putin and Biden Bungled in Ukraine

April 4th, 2022 by Eric Zuesse

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

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

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

***

Vladimir Putin’s repeatedly pre-announced goals for Ukraine, and for his invasion of Ukraine, consistently contained two main points:

(1) to permanently block Ukrainian membership for Ukraine in the anti-Russian military alliance NATO; and, (2) to “denazify” Ukraine.

On 21 March, AP reported that “Zelenskyy said that Kyiv will be ready to discuss the status of Crimea and the eastern Donbas region held by Russian-backed separatists after a cease-fire and steps toward providing security guarantees.”

This milestone was the very first time that Ukraine’s President Zelensky said that there might be circumstances under which “the status of Crimea and the eastern Donbas region held by Russian-backed separatists” could even possibly be negotiated by Ukraine’s government.

All Ukrainian-government leaders, after U.S. President Barack Obama perpetrated in Ukraine a violent coup which overthrew Ukraine’s democratically elected and neutralist President, and installed a U.S.-controlled rabidly anti-Russian government in Ukraine, in February 2014, have said that Ukraine will never consider the status of those two former regions of Ukraine to be negotiable — that they’re both parts of Ukraine, regardless of what the residents there want (which, clearly and overwhelmingly, after that coup, has been NOT to be ruled by that regime). (It definitely was a coup — NOT an authentic revolution — that installed it.)

So: Zelensky was now saying that “after a cease-fire and steps toward providing security guarantees,” Zelensky would negotiate “the status of Crimea and the eastern Donbas region held by Russian-backed separatists.”

This was the first major change-in-position by EITHER side in the present conflict; and the fact that it was being made by Ukraine was indisputable proof that militarily Russia was winning the war, up to that moment in time. (Subsequently, however, the war-situation is far less clear; Ukraine might be winning it.)

The deeper, and continuing, deadlock is (2) denazification of Ukraine.

In my news-report on March 21, “Why The Question Of Which Side Is ‘nazi’ Blocks Any Peace Settlement”, was explained WHY that issue is so extremely unlikely to be able to be agreed-upon between Zelensky and Putin — and, therefore, why Russia will either have to accept defeat in this war, or else defeat Ukraine 100% militarily before there will be any capitulation by Ukraine in this conflict.

However, even if  Russia defeats Ukraine in this war, Russia’s own national-security situation (which is the ultimate reason that can justify ANY nation’s participation in any war) will be substantially reduced by the war, for the following reasons:

On March 14th, Chris Hedges very realistically summed up the war-situation (both present and future) as follows:

The decision [by Biden) to destroy the Russian economy, to turn the Ukrainian war into a quagmire for Russia and topple the regime of Vladimir Putin will open a Pandora’s box of evils. Massive social engineering — look at Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya or Vietnam — has its own centrifugal force. It destroys those who play God.

The Ukrainian war has silenced the last vestiges of the Left. Nearly everyone has giddily signed on for the great crusade against the latest embodiment of evil, Vladimir Putin, who, like all our enemies, has become the new Hitler.

The United States will give $13.6 billion in military and humanitarian assistance to Ukraine, with the Biden administration authorizing an additional $200 million in military assistance. The 5,000-strong EU rapid deployment force, the recruitment of all Eastern Europe, including Ukraine, into NATO, the reconfiguration of former Soviet bloc militaries to NATO weapons and technology have all been fast tracked.

Germany, for the first time since World War II, is massively rearming. It has lifted its ban on exporting weapons. Its new military budget is twice the amount of the old budget, with promises to raise the budget to more than 2 percent of GDP, which would move its military from the seventh largest in the world to the third, behind China and the United States.

NATO battlegroups are being doubled in size in the Baltic states to more than 6,000 troops. Battlegroups will be sent to Romania and Slovakia. Washington will double the number of U.S. troops stationed in Poland to 9,000. Sweden and Finland are considering dropping their neutral status to integrate with NATO.

This is a recipe for global war.

On April 2nd, Russia’s RT bannered “Finland can join NATO without referendum – president”, and reported:

The president of Finland, which borders Russia, has claimed that the widespread support for NATO membership expressed in recent opinion polls could pave the way for joining the US-led military bloc without a referendum. The attitude of the Finns towards NATO membership took a U-turn following Moscow’s attack on Ukraine. …

Support for NATO membership reached a record-high 62% in Finland this month, according to a poll by Yle. A poll commissioned by Helsingin Sanomat and released this week shows that 61% of Finns want their country to join the bloc.

This indicates a complete reversal of public opinion after Moscow sent its forces into Ukraine – according to Yle, previous polls showed that Finns were against NATO membership.

Putin’s goal to block Ukrainian membership for Ukraine was part of his broader goal to shrink NATO (its membership) by reversing NATO’s inclusion of the half of its member-countries that were added after 1991, which was when the Cold War ended on the Soviet Union’s side but secretly continued on the American side, and NATO therefore has expanded (even after the supposed end of the Cold War on — also —America’s side) to include in NATO virtually all European countries right up to Russia’s western border. (This produces a Cuban-Missile-Crisis-in-reverse crisis now, but one which will be far longer and more drawn-out.)

On April 3rd, NATO invited not only Finland but also Sweden (both being officially neutral during the Cold War till now) to become members.

Consequently: Russia’s precipitate invasion of Ukraine, which was intended by Putin to shrink NATO, might instead lead to further expansion of NATO — even if  Russia will win the war in Ukraine.

This is not, however, to say that Putin made the wrong decision to invade Ukraine, but that he did it at the wrong time. Biden had forced him to invade in order for Putin to prevent American nuclear missiles from ultimately becoming installed into Ukraine just a 5-minute flight-time away from nuking Moscow and thereby (in post-2006 U.S. strategic thinking) able to ‘win’ a U.S.-planned World War III by blitz-invading Russia so fast as to disable Russia’s entire retaliatory capability.

I had therefore expected Putin to invade Ukraine, but not before Zelensky would finally unleash the 60,000 Ukrainian troops on the Ukraine-Donbass contact-line (border) for them to race into its former Donbass region in order to slaughter its people (who had voted over 90% for the democratically elected and internationally neutralist Ukrainian President whom Obama had overthrown) and to retake its land — restore it to Ukraine. If Putin had done that (waited, in order NOT to have started this war), then though many of the residents in Donbass would have been killed, and the war there would have been devastating, Russia would have been able to respond immediately and send its troops in within no more than a week to conquer and destroy almost all of those 60,000 invading Ukrainian troops (plus their civilian hostages or “human shields” in Donbass), and the international “optics” of the situation would then have been vastly less bad for Russia than has resulted from Russia’s having invaded first — invaded “preemptively.” Perhaps, in that situation, NATO’s own future would be its shrinkage, instead of (as now seems to be not only possible but even likely) its accelerated expansion. (In addition, the international image then of Zelensky would now be vastly worse, because he would have been the first to invade.)

Consequently, Putin invaded at the wrong time.

He clearly was scared by what Biden and NATO were doing in this matter, by their backing Ukraine all the way, rushing weapons into Ukraine — continuing the Obama-installed coup-regime of Ukraine as being an American vassal-nation. On December 9th of 2021, Reuters headlined “Russia keeps tensions high over Ukraine” and (styled as a news-report no commentary) said “Moscow has an interest in keeping tensions high.” On December 15th they bannered “Russia hands proposals to U.S. on security guarantees”, which were demands (Putin’s “red lines”), not ‘proposals’.

On December 17th IBT bannered “EU threatens Russia sanctions as NATO backs Ukraine”, and reported that NATO and almost all of the EU rejected Russia’s demands. NATO’s chief emphasized Russia would have no say, whatsoever, on whether or not Ukraine becomes a NATO member. RT headlined December 20th, “Russia promises ‘military response’ to any further NATO expansion.” Then, on the 26th, it was a “‘life-and-death’ issue for Russia”. (It was — and is — an “existential” issue, as viewed by the Russian people, and has been referred-to as such by Putin.)

However, Biden himself has likewise vastly miscalculated in this matter, because of reasons that were well-described by Alasdaire Macleod in his March 31st article “Edging Towards A Gold Standard”. The response by Biden (and by the leaders of all of America’s vassal-nations) to impose upon Russia the sanctions that now have been imposed, will harm the entire world’s economy — not ONLY Russia’s — and could very well turn out to benefit greatly Russia’s economy; but, definitely, NOT the economies of the nations that are cooperating with those sanctions.

On the other hand, if the allegations that were published in CNN’s April 3rd “Bodies of ‘executed people’ strewn across street in Bucha as Ukraine accuses Russia of war crimes” turn out to be true, then Putin’s own reputation will be so negatively affected that he will lose this global conflict personally, even if Russia itself turns out to have won it. If that article is true, then he might even end up being prosecuted as an international war-criminal (as George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden — and Ukraine’s post-coup leaders Yatsenyuk, Poroshenko, and Zelensky — definitely ought to be, but never will be).

Read updates:

Update: How Both Putin and Biden Bungled in Ukraine. Analysis of the Bucha Tragedy

By Eric Zuesse, April 06, 2022

*

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 Duran.

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s next book (soon to be published) will be AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change. It’s about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public. 

He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from Zero Hedge

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

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

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

***

One of America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) is warning pregnant women that the COVID jab rollout has coincided with a nearly 2,000 percent increase in fetal deaths, as compared to the rate during previous vaccines.

In a “Frontline Flash” segment entitled “Huge Preborn Death Spike” released Monday, Dr. Peterson Pierre presented statistics showing that the rate of fetal death per vaccine administered in the U.S. had, in fact, massively increased since the COVID shots were made available.

Pierre noted that according to the CDC, since the COVID shot rollout, there have been 550,000,000 shots administered, and 3,725 fetal deaths. This means, he pointed out, that for every 147,651 shots, there has been one fetal death.

He contrasted this with statistics from the period between 2006 and 2019. During this time, there were reportedly “4 billion shots administered,” and “1,369 fetal deaths, which equals to” one fetal death for about every 3 million shots.

“So if you do the math, you realize that since the COVID shots have been available, there’s been a 1,925 percent increase in fetal deaths,” he continued.

Pierre then urged expecting mothers to take heed of these numbers, for the sake of their children.

“Now, expecting moms, it doesn’t matter what the FDA or the CDC says. It doesn’t even matter what your doctor says,” he went on. “Because in spite of this data, the recommendation to get [COVID] shots has not changed.”

“You need to look out for your own kids. You are their protector. You have a lot to think about. That decision rests with you, not with anyone else.”

A stunning 23 of 32 pregnancies during which mothers received a Pfizer COVID shot resulted in “spontaneous abortions” (miscarriages), according to Pfizer and the FDA’s forced response to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (32 is the number of pregnancies with known outcomes according to reports given to Pfizer), as was reported last year.

Regarding the effect of the COVID shots on “fertility problems,” the CDC has acknowledged that “results from ongoing long-term studies are not yet available.”

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 Shutterstock

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

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

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

***

Michael Lynk is the UN Special Rapporteur for the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied after the 1967 nakba.  He is Associate Professor of Law at Western University in London, Ontario, where he teaches labour law, constitutional law and human rights law.[1]  His report, “Israel’s 55-year occupation of Palestinian Territory is apartheid – UN human rights expert”, was published recently.[2] In the report he stated,

“a political regime which so intentionally and clearly prioritizes fundamental political, legal and social rights to one group over another within the same geographic unit on the basis of one’s racial-national-ethnic identity satisfies the international legal definition of apartheid.”

The report identifies the many facets of the apartheid system, ranging from the “wall”, checkpoints, an over riding military presence through to “to arbitrary and extra-judicial killings, torture, the denial of fundamental rights, an abysmal rate of child deaths, collective punishment, an abusive military court system, periods of intensive Israeli military violence in Gaza and home demolitions.” Gaza is identified appropriately as an “open air prison”.

The perspective of most Canadians supports this idea as seen through a series of polls conducted through Independent Jewish Voices (IJV – Canada) and Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East.[3] In contrast to the opinions of ‘regular’ Canadians, the main political parties and their leaders do not acknowledge the apartheid status as indicated by their own native son, and by several international human rights groups.

All the mainstream political parties in Canada still support the defunct two state solution, the result of the secret negotiations of the Oslo Peace Process which ultimately resulted in the creation of a quisling Palestine Authority under Abbas and a ‘process’ leading towards more and more settlements on Palestinian land.  The socialist NDP come closest to recognizing Palestinian concerns as NDP Foreign Affairs critic Jack Harris said of Israel’s recent Sheikh Jarrah demolitions and the subsequent protests,

“Escalating violence in East Jerusalem as a result of the ongoing illegal occupation is deeply troubling. The demolitions, forced removal of Palestinians from their homes, and blocking access to popular gathering spots must end. Israel needs to put a stop to the illegal evictions and de-escalate, and Canada must increase efforts to seek a peaceful resolution to the ongoing conflict.” [4]

The only follow through was a call to limit arms sales to Israel, a small step in the right direction but still wholly insufficient to change the apartheid system.

The other political parties continue to use the language of the mainstream media, ranging from the mild verb ‘clash’ to describe the overwhelming force of the Israeli military, to the extreme use of the old reliable terrorist designation for a people defending not just their native land, but their very homes.   There are several reasons these stale views remain embedded in the Canadian political landscape at the top levels.

One of the simplest reasons is that when it comes to elections, most Canadians are concerned only with short term domestic items that have been sensationalized by one party against another, the most common being as usual the economy – and within that – jobs.  The main parties have their set lines for the few questions on foreign policy, most of which support the agenda of NATO, the Five Eyes, and all aspects of U.S. foreign policy.

The majority of debate concerns the economy, even having environmental concerns, social concerns, and foreign wars all subsumed under that category.   The average voter is led by the media to express their concerns about jobs and wages over any other category – although the recent “truck convoy” – that was not supported by a clear majority of Canadians – may bring false tirades about “freedom” to the next election.

Speaking of which, the NDP very recently signed an agreement with the minority Liberal government of Justin Trudeau to not allow a non-confidence motion  to succeed in parliament, nor to bring one forward for the next three years.  As they usually do the Liberals are copying some of the NDP’s easier social policies while the NDP support the government in order to engage those policies – but they do not extend to any benefits for foreign policy concerning the apartheid nature of Israel and the subjugation of the Palestinian people.

Other aspects, mostly unseen by the average voter, are issues relating to power and control.  Canada and Israel have economic and military/security agreements with Canada being on the receiving end of Israel’s field tested methodology and materials.  The domestic Jewish vote is not large on a percentage basis, but has power financially and more importantly emotionally with the familiar canard about calling out anti-semitism anytime anyone criticizes Israel.

The IHRA definition of anti-semitism, readily criticized, has been formally adopted by the Canadian federal government in a non-binding vote.  Many larger city centers and provinces have not adopted the definition (Vancouver, Montreal, Calgary, Toronto) along with many  universities.

While the majority of Canadians want to have stronger actions taken against Israel, including tasking them with war crimes (see note 3), the Canadian political hierarchy remains stuck in its decades old media wash about “terrorists” versus “civilization” while the real conflict is about a colonial settler society (of which Canada’s settlement is a prime example) militarily dominating an indigenous population within an apartheid regime.

Canada’s UN Special Rapporteur Michael Lynk has it right.  It is about time the Canadian government gets it right, on side with Lynk and the majority of Canadians.

*

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.

Jim Miles is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Notes

[1] see: https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-palestine

[2]  https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2022/03/israels-55-year-occupation-palestinian-territory-apartheid-un-human-rights

[3] https://www.ijvcanada.org/survey2020-3/ and https://www.cjpme.org/survey2020

[4] https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/ndp-takes-major-turn-by-condemning-israeli-attacks-on-palestine